On 1 April 2014 16:22, MZMcBride wrote:
> Sue Gardner wrote:
> >For everyone: following up on Erik's e-mail, the WMF has done a
> >postmortem of the Belfer situation, which I've just posted at the link
> >from Erik above. Suffice to say here that we implemented the Belfer
> >Wikipedian-in-Residen
Sue Gardner wrote:
>For everyone: following up on Erik's e-mail, the WMF has done a
>postmortem of the Belfer situation, which I've just posted at the link
>from Erik above. Suffice to say here that we implemented the Belfer
>Wikipedian-in-Residence project with editing as a core activity of the
>W
From the NYPL's blog - http://www.nypl.org/blog/2014/03/28/open-access-maps
"The Lionel Pincus & Princess Firyal Map Division is very proud to announce
the release of more than 20,000 cartographic works as high resolution
downloads. We believe these maps have no known US copyright restrictions.
To
On 21 March 2014 13:23, Erik Moeller wrote:
> We will update the wiki page at
> https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedian_in_Residence/Harvard_University_assessment
> with more information and details. I encourage others to participate
> in this as a collaborative process.
Thanks Erik.
For
Hey folks,
The purpose of this note is to remind you that the WMF will be
participating in the FDC Process Round 2, which begins tomorrow. I'd
like to invite you to comment on the plan-in-progress, which will be
at this URL within about 24 hours:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Proposal
Thank you, Samuel! As you know, without the involvement of the Catalan
Wikip(m)edia community, these results would not be possible.
David Parreño Mont
2014-03-21 20:16 GMT+01:00 Samuel Klein :
> Thanks David, this is really lovely as usual. SJ
>
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 2:41 PM, David Parreño
This is totally surprise for me. I checked the last years participation
lists, and none of the chapters sent more than 2+1 representatives. The
idea all this years was very simple: to keep the conference small as
possible in order to have effective discussions, and to allow all the
chapter to be eq
1st April 23h59 UTC/GMT. So you have plenty of time ! :)
--
Christophe
On 31 March 2014 21:20, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> Christophe Henner, 31/03/2014 19:59:
>
>> If anyone has the courage to help us proofread our proposal, your help
>> will be much appreciated.
>
>
> How much time left befo
Christophe Henner, 31/03/2014 19:59:
If anyone has the courage to help us proofread our proposal, your help
will be much appreciated.
How much time left before the text is frozen and typofixes become
strictly forbidden? I'd rather not be slapped by the staff for excessive
helpfulness as happe
On our internal wiki. Though now it might be out of date as we're only
proof readin the english version.
Sorry :(
--
Christophe
On 31 March 2014 20:52, Cristian Consonni wrote:
> 2014-03-31 19:59 GMT+02:00 Christophe Henner :
>> As you might know, or not, tomorrow nght the round 2 of this year
2014-03-31 19:59 GMT+02:00 Christophe Henner :
> As you might know, or not, tomorrow nght the round 2 of this year FDC
> proposal will close.
>
> Our proposal is on meta :
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/Wikim%C3%A9dia_France/Proposal_form
> and we're copy ed
Hi everyone,
As you might know, or not, tomorrow nght the round 2 of this year FDC
proposal will close.
Our proposal is on meta :
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014_round2/Wikim%C3%A9dia_France/Proposal_form
and we're copy editing it.
In the past it has been brought
Thanks for all your hard work Ziko. It has always been appreciated.
Fae
--
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listin
Dear Wikimedians,
I am glad to share with you the detailed work plan of CIS-A2K for the
period July 2014-July 2015 [1] . This work plan consists of 21 plans
across 6 verticals.
These are:
* 7 Language Area Plans
* 3 Community Strengthening Initiatives
* 8 Stand-alone Wikimedia Projects
* Crea
I hope it is just a "goodbye" chapter-wise and will be happy to share a
beer with you in London (not an English one ;))
Flo
On 30/03/14 19:59, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
Dear colleagues, collaborators and friends of free knowledge,
After three eventful years I left the board of Wikimedia Nederland;
The additional trustee is also talking so Jon's points stand. It's great that
Wikimania representatives will be there, and that a WMUK member will also be
there as part of the FDC. However, while I certainly hope those individuals are
happy to represent WMUK, they're really not relevant to your
You are right - eight. as Chris is going as well. The reasons remain the
same.
On 31 March 2014 17:00, Fæ wrote:
> On 31 March 2014 16:23, Jon Davies wrote:
> ...
> > For the record we have people going for four reasons:
> >
> >- CEO and Chair as standard
> >- Two staff and one truste
On 31 March 2014 16:23, Jon Davies wrote:
...
> For the record we have people going for four reasons:
>
>- CEO and Chair as standard
>- Two staff and one trustee who are invited to do presentations on areas
>of strength in the chapter.
>- Two trustees (we are guessing KR might actu
A few points.
There is no policy to restrict participation to three representatives.
Indeed, many chapters are sending more than three delegates as has been the
case in previous years.
For the record we have people going for four reasons:
- CEO and Chair as standard
- Two staff and one tru
Gerard, et al
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
>
> My point is very much that it is for the chapter to decide if they
> spend their money wisely. It is for members of a chapter to question this
> at an appropriate time and at an appropriate place.
Might I make a point her
On 31 March 2014 14:59, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
...
> Really Fae, as you are no longer the chair, why rule "from the grave"?
> Thanks,
Thanks Gerard, I'll return to being dead and buried now.
Fae
--
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
___
Just to be clear, there was no "only 2 representatives plus an ED" rule
mentioned in the registration process.
If there had been, then Wikimedia UK would have respected it.
Given that there wasn't, we thought it was useful to send more than 2
trustees, as we have many new Board members and it is
Hoi,
Fae what I object to is assuming going to a conference with " too big" a
delegation is a waste of money by definition. In your reply you mention *
you were a chair of the chapter and, * you do not know Katherine Ruth.
Given that you were the chair of the chapter, you should be happy new
people
Please note that this year the invitation to the conference states
"Organizations
who would like to send more than two persons will have to book and pay for
all their travel and accommodation themselves." -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2014/Registration -
There is no more a
Hi Cristian,
Yes. I sort of expected WMDE to be the ones implementing the 2+1
'rule' and if there was to be any exceptions for this to be discussed
before they added names to the registration page.
Anyway, I've already posted quite a bit on this thread, so I'll step
back a little - it's not like
2014-03-31 11:47 GMT+02:00 Fæ :
> This seems to not be the case
> looking at the proposed attendee list[1] with the UK sending a massive
> party of 8 people (excluding Wikimania representatives), significantly
> larger than any other Chapter or Thorg.
Well, the question then is "can WM-UK explain
On 31 March 2014 14:08, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> When there is enough money to go around, efficacy should be the primary
> consideration. When charitable funds are available and they are not spend
> because of misplaced frugality, it is obvious to me that priorities are out
> of kilter.
>
>
I don't think the costs are the issue here, neither if there is streaming
or not (and I don't think we need to have one. It's WMCconf, not Wikimania).
But we have strict rule - two representatives, 3 if you have ED. I also saw
that some chapters have more than that, and I really don't know why. If
Hoi,
When there is enough money to go around, efficacy should be the primary
consideration. When charitable funds are available and they are not spend
because of misplaced frugality, it is obvious to me that priorities are out
of kilter.
Your second arguments makes more sense but also up to a poin
On 31 March 2014 12:02, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> Video conferencing is ok-ish.. at best. It does not give you the
> opportunity that face to face communications gives you. It does not allow
> you to get through the fog of misunderstanding, Really, when the right
> people go for the right re
I guess it is just a Q&A session with someone ready to answer
potentially difficult questions from the audience :-)
2014-03-31 11:38 GMT+02:00 Cristian Consonni :
> Hi all,
>
> I am probably missing some page somewhere but I would really like to
> know if there is adescription of the different f
On 03/31/2014 08:23 AM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> That seems niether all that surprising nor all that costly
Oh, D'oh! Wrong conference!
Ignore me, and move along. :-)
-- Marc
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscrib
On 03/31/2014 05:47 AM, Fæ wrote:
> with the UK sending a massive
> party of 8 people
That seems niether all that surprising nor all that costly; obviously
the cost of sending UK members to London will be considerably cheaper
than from anywhere else (and, indeed, some of those may well be local to
Hoi,
Video conferencing is ok-ish.. at best. It does not give you the
opportunity that face to face communications gives you. It does not allow
you to get through the fog of misunderstanding, Really, when the right
people go for the right reasons, it pays its dividents.
Cost is only one criteria t
Re: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2014
I had thought that to ensure the cost of the conference was kept to a
healthy level that organizations would send no more than 2
representatives plus one optional guest. This seems to not be the case
looking at the proposed attendee lis
Hi all,
I am probably missing some page somewhere but I would really like to
know if there is adescription of the different formats for the
presentations/submission, i.e. discussion, hot seat, panel,
presentation, tutorial, workshop.
In particular, what is the "hot seat" format?
(besides that bei
Dear Ziko,
Let me take the opportunity to thank you for all the efforts over the past
years. While we do not always agree on everything it was pleasure exchanging
ideas with you and I felt that the leadership of the Dutch chapter was in great
hands while you where the chair of the Dutch board.
Thank you Ziko for your huge contribution to WMNL, to the chapters, and to
the movement in general.
בהצלחה (Good luck) on whatever you going to do next.
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 8:59 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
> Dear colleagues, collaborators and friends of free knowledge,
>
> After three eventful
Ziko,
Although as Presidents of chapters located on the opposite sides of the
world I never had that much to do with you, when I *did* have cause to
interact I always found you unfailingly polite, approachable, and
unfailingly dedicated to our shared mission. Thankyou for your service,
and I wish
Farewell and good luck Ziko! You have the dubious notability of being the
first Wikimedian I met outside my home country! Hopefully you'll still be
active in the community and I'll see you around again!
Charles / User:Chuq
Hobart, Australia
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Jon Davies wrote:
Very sad to hear this - you have done so well. Hie to see you in London.
On 30 March 2014 18:59, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
> Dear colleagues, collaborators and friends of free knowledge,
>
> After three eventful years I left the board of Wikimedia Nederland;
> yesterday was the General Assembly in U
41 matches
Mail list logo
