Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Airtel Offers Nigerians Free Access to Wikipedia

[rupert THURNER]

Hi yana,

You are right, there is no hostility in my message. You know that
wikimedians are very sensitive to follow existing law (especially
copyright), and to provide and ask references all the time :)

@labs
Could you please provide a reference why labs can be misused?

@understanding wikimedians needs
Would you mind providing a reference for your wikipedia contributions?

@negotiating future wp zero deals
What is the basic problem that you are not able to negotiate a "first 300
mb free for wikimedians", unrestricted to contents ?

Rupert
Am 01.06.2014 22:06 schrieb "Yana Welinder" :

> Gerard: Labs is not currently considered for zero-rating because it can be
> misused. But it may be added over time if we figure out how to work around
> that and there is demand for it.
>
> Rupert: Your comment seems unnecessarily hostile to me, but I'm going to
> try to assume good faith. I have of course edited Wikipedia articles in my
> spare time, though I may not do it as much given that I spend most of my
> time defending the projects legally and creating a safer environment for
> other editors.
>
> To address your substantive point: that people need full Internet access to
> do research for Wikipedia articles. I do think there are ways the community
> could work with editors that have limited access to the Internet rather
> than dismissing them outright. The fact that people can't afford to pay for
> full Internet access should not exclude them from contributing to the
> projects.
>
> Best,
> Yana
>
> --
> Yana Welinder
> Legal Counsel
> Wikimedia Foundation
> 415.839.6885 ext. 6867
> @yanatweets 
>
> NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical
> reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community
> members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more
> on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer
> .
>
> On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 8:45 AM, rupert THURNER 
> wrote:
>
> > Yana, may i suggest that you try at least one time in your life edit a
> > wikipedia article so you experience how much bandwith is consumed to do a
> > proper research of verifyable sources? Or just read an article and try to
> > verify the contents? Yana, there is only one type of internet, please
> leave
> > it up to the reader what is good and what is bad, and please let the
> > wikipedia zero contracts reflect this.
> >
> > Rupert
> > Am 01.06.2014 09:57 schrieb "Yana Welinder" :
> >
> > > As the Quartz article from Jens's email discusses, the decision in
> Chile
> > is
> > > very unfortunate.[1] It's an example of when net neutrality — which is
> an
> > > important principle for the free and open internet — is poorly
> > implemented
> > > to prevent free dissemination of knowledge. Although Wikipedia Zero is
> > not
> > > yet available in Chile, it is a country of interest for the program, so
> > we
> > > are thinking about what options are available in light of this
> decision.
> > >
> > > That said, I would like to clarify a couple of points about the
> > > implementation of Wikipedia Zero that were raised in this thread:
> > >
> > > 1. The newer Wikipedia Zero partnerships have provided the full
> Wikipedia
> > > sites (m.wikipedia) free of data charges for some time now and we are
> > > phasing out the reduced version (zero.wikipedia) from the older
> > > partnerships.
> > >
> > > 2. While earlier Wikipedia Zero partnerships only zero-rated Wikipedia,
> > we
> > > are working on getting carriers to zero-rate all the Wikimedia
> projects.
> > >
> > > 3. We are also working on getting editing functions zero-rated, though
> > > there are some technical hurdles for that right now. But, eventually,
> > > Wikipedia Zero will not only make knowledge more accessible, but also
> > > empower more people in the Global South to contribute to the projects.
> > >
> > > 4. Finally, WMF does *not* pay carriers to zero-rate Wikipedia under
> > > Wikipedia Zero. Carriers zero-rate the sites because they want to make
> a
> > > commitment to access to knowledge as a corporate social
> > responsibility.[2]
> > > I believe this question has already been answered in this thread since
> > > Scott raised it earlier, but I just wanted to confirm that Wikipedia
> Zero
> > > does not involve payments.
> > >
> > > Hope this is helpful!
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Yana
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://qz.com/215064/when-net-neutrality-backfires-chile-just-killed-free-access-to-wikipedia-and-facebook/
> > > [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_social_responsibility
> > >
> > > --
> > > Yana Welinder
> > > Legal Counsel
> > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > > 415.839.6885 ext. 6867
> > > @yanatweets 
> > >
> > > NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical
> > > reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for,
> > community
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Signpost is (sort of) published

[Isarra Yos]

On 02/06/14 20:14, Andy Mabbett wrote:

On 2 June 2014 19:39, Ed Erhart  wrote:


There is one person in charge of making the final calls of every issue—me.

This is troubling, Wikipedia is supposed to be an open,
community-driven initiative.

We've seen problems in the past with single-person gatekeepers; at
TFA, for instance.

Not that I'm casting aspersions, but you may be indisposed, and a
future "keyholder" may turn out to be rogue.


It was an unfortunate error that I did not give the password to
other trusted Signposters, but as Pine says, that is no longer the case.

That, at least, is reassuring.





Wikipedia is exactly that, an open, community-driven initiative. This is 
why when something needs doing, in many cases any random bloke can come 
in and do it - the {{sofixit}} narrative. Of course, as a result, things 
are also often not necessarily as well-organised as they perhaps could 
be, and there may only be a single person involved, but why should this 
be a problem when such is only the beginning?


Most nothing will be well-organised at first, but as time goes on, as a 
project matures and others join in, problems come to light and are 
fixed. If an initial lack of organisation or a potentiality for issues 
down the road were considered a barrier to doing stuff, nothing would 
ever get done. We certainly wouldn't have a Wikipedia.


I'd say that what has happened here has if anything been a good example 
of that the process really does work, and I'd like to thank those 
involved for taking the initiative to keep things running smoothly. This 
is what keeps all the projects running, when you get right down to it.


-I

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funds Dissemination Committee seeking nominations for new members

[Katy Love]

Greetings, all:

Here's a reminder that the FDC staff will be doing an IRC office hours in
12 minutes time (and counting!) about the FDC nominations on the
#wikimedia-office channel. [1] We'll hold another office hours later today
(though it might be "tomorrow," depending on your timezone) at 16:00 UTC,
Wednesday June 4.

Looking forward to speaking with you and answering questions you may have
about FDC membership and nominations!

Katy Love

[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours


On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Anasuya Sengupta 
wrote:

> tl;dr Self-nominations invited for four Board-appointed members of the FDC.
> Nominate here.[3]
>
>
> Dear members of the Wikimedia community,
>
> The Funds Dissemination Committee Advisory Group (FDC AG) met recently in
> Frankfurt to recommend to the Executive Director (ED) of the Wikimedia
> Foundation whether the FDC - the nine member volunteer committee reviewing
> annual plan grants or allocations for Wikimedia and allied organisations -
> should continue or not, after the first two years of its existence.[1] The
> detailed recommendations of the FDC AG will be shared with the Executive
> Director and the community shortly, but we are happy to announce that the
> AG recommends that the FDC continues to exist with some suggested
> improvements to the process.
>
> The final decision on the FDC will be taken by the ED and the Board of WMF
> over the next few months (the FDC Framework’s timeline suggests August),
> but the AG’s overall recommendation is a testimony to the deep commitment
> and energy of the current FDC and the community members who have
> participated in this unique peer-review grantmaking process. Thank you.
>
> Without anticipating the ED and Board’s decision, we would like to move
> forward with the process of renewing the current FDC with four
> Board-appointed members of the FDC so that a full FDC is in place by August
> 2014. As per the Framework,[2] four of the current committee members will
> be ending their two year terms in July, and four new members will be
> appointed by the WMF Board to fill these vacancies.
>
> I write to ask those of you interested in joining the FDC to signal your
> interest on Meta by self-nominating by end of day UTC June 15.[3]  The
> schedule for the nominations process is as follows:
>
> * May 30 - June 15: Self nominations to join the FDC. Candidates indicate
> their interest through a short paragraph about themselves, and respond to
> an initial set of questions from the FDC staff
>
> * June 1 - June 30:  Public question and answer [4] from community members
> to candidates
>
> * June 24 - July 3: FDC staff in consultation with the FDC Board
> representatives (Bishakha Datta and Patricio Lorente) interview a sub-set
> of nominated candidates
>
> * July 3: Shortlist of candidates announced
>
> * July 4 - 10: Decision on final four FDC candidates by the Board reps in
> consultation with the full Board
>
> * July 11: Public announcement to community of the four new members
>
> * August: Based on the ED and Board’s decision on the FDC’s existence,
> orientation of the new FDC at Wikimania
>
> To be eligible to join the FDC, members need to meet the requirements
> below, as outlined by the Framework.[5] They must:
>
> * have sufficient time and dedication to commit to this time-heavy process,
> including attending two 4-6 day face-to-face meetings (likely in mid-May
> and mid-November) and be able to meet the expectations outlined in more
> detail on the nominations page
>
> * have a track record of constructive engagement in community discussions
> and an orientation toward collaborative problem solving
>
> * be able to set aside any conflicts of interest and work towards the
> mission goals of the Wikimedia movement without considering individual or
> organizational interests
>
> * be over 21 years in age and over the age of majority in their home
> country
>
> * be able to work effectively in English (note that full fluency is not
> required)
>
> * present to WMF appropriate personal identification
>
> * Staff / board members of entities requesting funds from the FDC may serve
> on the FDC;
>
> however, they must recuse themselves from deliberations pertaining to their
> entity's application.
>
> The *skills and attributes* being sought for in FDC members include:
>
> * Experience directing or evaluating programs;
>
> * Grant-making expertise (either as a grantee or grantor of funds);
>
> * Exposure to, understanding of, and personal credibility in the Wikimedia
> movement (experience across different Wikimedia projects as well as
> experience in programs, chapters, or administrative roles within the
> Wikimedia movement);
>
> * Gender, geographic and linguistic diversity.
>
> There are no term limits for FDC members, and current members may choose to
> re-apply for the FDC. The members whose terms end this July are Anders
> Wennersten, Arjuna Rao Chavala, Mike Peel (current Secretary), and Yuri
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)

[???]

On 04/06/2014 00:06, Nathan wrote:

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 6:54 PM, ???  wrote:


On 03/06/2014 22:35, Nathan wrote:



Interesting. Can you link me to a biography where a school detention is
the
main feature of the article?



How about this 8 yo?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Emmanuel_of_Belgium#Biography

What about these other kids?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Louise_Windsor#Early_life
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanta_Sof%C3%ADa_of_Spain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Hisahito_of_Akishino
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Elisabeth,_Duchess_of_Brabant

...



Thanks! I was unable to locate any mention of school detentions in any of
the articles you linked.

I was able to determine that one is the heir to the throne of Belgium,
another the granddaughter of the Queen of England, another the daughter of
the soon-to-be King of Spain, one will likely become Emperor of Japan and
lastly Prince Emmanuel is the son of the King of Belgium and the younger
sibling of the eventual Queen.

So I do not yet see your point, which I think is that WP processes trivial
personal information about non-notable individuals in whom few people have
any interest. Perhaps you neglected to include the articles you mentioned
where school detentions are one of the few things extant about the
subjects?



These are pre-teen kids, the information that is being collated is 
trivia and intrusive. Fell and broke arm, taken out of main stream 
education, went to a Science Museum, able to change his own clothes, 
went to see a musical.


And if you can't see that this is equivalent to "didn't do hos homework" 
all one can say is Oh dear!




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)

[Nathan]

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 6:54 PM, ???  wrote:

> On 03/06/2014 22:35, Nathan wrote:
>
>>
>> Interesting. Can you link me to a biography where a school detention is
>> the
>> main feature of the article?
>>
>
> How about this 8 yo?
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Emmanuel_of_Belgium#Biography
>
> What about these other kids?
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Louise_Windsor#Early_life
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanta_Sof%C3%ADa_of_Spain
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Hisahito_of_Akishino
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Elisabeth,_Duchess_of_Brabant
>
> ...
>
>
Thanks! I was unable to locate any mention of school detentions in any of
the articles you linked.

I was able to determine that one is the heir to the throne of Belgium,
another the granddaughter of the Queen of England, another the daughter of
the soon-to-be King of Spain, one will likely become Emperor of Japan and
lastly Prince Emmanuel is the son of the King of Belgium and the younger
sibling of the eventual Queen.

So I do not yet see your point, which I think is that WP processes trivial
personal information about non-notable individuals in whom few people have
any interest. Perhaps you neglected to include the articles you mentioned
where school detentions are one of the few things extant about the
subjects?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)

[???]

On 03/06/2014 22:35, Nathan wrote:


Interesting. Can you link me to a biography where a school detention is the
main feature of the article?


How about this 8 yo?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Emmanuel_of_Belgium#Biography

What about these other kids?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Louise_Windsor#Early_life
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanta_Sof%C3%ADa_of_Spain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Hisahito_of_Akishino
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Elisabeth,_Duchess_of_Brabant

...




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quarterly reviews of high priority WMF initiatives

[Tilman Bayer]

Minutes and slides from last week's quarterly review of the
Foundation's Mobile Contributions team are now available at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Mobile_contributions/May_2014
.

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Erik Moeller  wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> to increase accountability and create more opportunities for course
> corrections and resourcing adjustments as necessary, Sue's asked me
> and Howie Fung to set up a quarterly project evaluation process,
> starting with our highest priority initiatives. These are, according
> to Sue's narrowing focus recommendations which were approved by the
> Board [1]:
>
> - Visual Editor
> - Mobile (mobile contributions + Wikipedia Zero)
> - Editor Engagement (also known as the E2 and E3 teams)
> - Funds Dissemination Committe and expanded grant-making capacity
>
> I'm proposing the following initial schedule:
>
> January:
> - Editor Engagement Experiments
>
> February:
> - Visual Editor
> - Mobile (Contribs + Zero)
>
> March:
> - Editor Engagement Features (Echo, Flow projects)
> - Funds Dissemination Committee
>
> We’ll try doing this on the same day or adjacent to the monthly
> metrics meetings [2], since the team(s) will give a presentation on
> their recent progress, which will help set some context that would
> otherwise need to be covered in the quarterly review itself. This will
> also create open opportunities for feedback and questions.
>
> My goal is to do this in a manner where even though the quarterly
> review meetings themselves are internal, the outcomes are captured as
> meeting minutes and shared publicly, which is why I'm starting this
> discussion on a public list as well. I've created a wiki page here
> which we can use to discuss the concept further:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews
>
> The internal review will, at minimum, include:
>
> Sue Gardner
> myself
> Howie Fung
> Team members and relevant director(s)
> Designated minute-taker
>
> So for example, for Visual Editor, the review team would be the Visual
> Editor / Parsoid teams, Sue, me, Howie, Terry, and a minute-taker.
>
> I imagine the structure of the review roughly as follows, with a
> duration of about 2 1/2 hours divided into 25-30 minute blocks:
>
> - Brief team intro and recap of team's activities through the quarter,
> compared with goals
> - Drill into goals and targets: Did we achieve what we said we would?
> - Review of challenges, blockers and successes
> - Discussion of proposed changes (e.g. resourcing, targets) and other
> action items
> - Buffer time, debriefing
>
> Once again, the primary purpose of these reviews is to create improved
> structures for internal accountability, escalation points in cases
> where serious changes are necessary, and transparency to the world.
>
> In addition to these priority initiatives, my recommendation would be
> to conduct quarterly reviews for any activity that requires more than
> a set amount of resources (people/dollars). These additional reviews
> may however be conducted in a more lightweight manner and internally
> to the departments. We’re slowly getting into that habit in
> engineering.
>
> As we pilot this process, the format of the high priority reviews can
> help inform and support reviews across the organization.
>
> Feedback and questions are appreciated.
>
> All best,
> Erik
>
> [1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Vote:Narrowing_Focus
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings
> --
> Erik Möller
> VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



-- 
Tilman Bayer
Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
Wikimedia Foundation
IRC (Freenode): HaeB

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)

[Nathan]

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:23 PM, ???  wrote:

> On 03/06/2014 12:53, Mark wrote:
>
>> On 6/2/14, 10:55 PM, ??? wrote:
>>
>>> There is no public interest in how many time celeb X got a detention
>>> at school for not doing their homework at junior high.
>>>
>>
>> Isn't that the kind of information you would in fact expect to find in a
>> biography of any kind of public figure? If I were reading a biography of
>> Winston Churchill or Louis Armstrong or Neil Armstrong or anyone else
>> prominent enough to have a book-length biography written about them, I
>> would typically expect it to include a chapter about their childhood,
>> and that would normally include some details of how they did at school,
>> if such details are known. That's precisely the kind of information that
>> biographers search for when putting together a comprehensive biography.
>>
>>
> WP is not creating books, and it is mostly NOT creating articles about
> major figures of the 20th century. It is not constructing comprehensive
> biographies. It is mostly creating short articles about people of slight
> notability from scant sources, where perhaps their school detention is the
> one of the few things extant about them.


Interesting. Can you link me to a biography where a school detention is the
main feature of the article?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)

[???]

On 03/06/2014 12:53, Mark wrote:

On 6/2/14, 10:55 PM, ??? wrote:

There is no public interest in how many time celeb X got a detention
at school for not doing their homework at junior high.


Isn't that the kind of information you would in fact expect to find in a
biography of any kind of public figure? If I were reading a biography of
Winston Churchill or Louis Armstrong or Neil Armstrong or anyone else
prominent enough to have a book-length biography written about them, I
would typically expect it to include a chapter about their childhood,
and that would normally include some details of how they did at school,
if such details are known. That's precisely the kind of information that
biographers search for when putting together a comprehensive biography.



WP is not creating books, and it is mostly NOT creating articles about 
major figures of the 20th century. It is not constructing comprehensive 
biographies. It is mostly creating short articles about people of slight 
notability from scant sources, where perhaps their school detention is 
the one of the few things extant about them.




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cost of Wikimedia Conference 2014

[geni]

On 2 June 2014 14:38, Jon Davies  wrote:

> £2600, our current estimate, seems good value. Some bloke is charging me
> £120 to come and tell me my dishwasher is broken
>
>
>
These things are hard to calculate. You could however get a Canon EF 180mm
f/3.5L Macro  and a Tamron 150-600mm for that price.

(incidentally the macro lens could be used to get a better version of this
pic
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Domitianus_II_obverse_ashmolean.JPG
I don't have anything long enough)



-- 
geni
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia

[Keegan Peterzell]

Hey Risker, Pine, David, all,


On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Risker  wrote:

> On 3 June 2014 12:25, David Gerard  wrote:
>
> > On 3 June 2014 16:37, Risker  wrote:
> >
> > > Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an
> > RFC,
> > > we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so
> > > that there is some evidence on which people can base their decisions.
> >  This
> > > is what I would suggest.
> >
> > [snip a possible user test scenario]
> >
> >
> > +1. Some sort of user testing like this would be fantastic.
> >
> > We might even be able to set it up so the Internet will do it for us,
> > which will save WMF paying testers ... could do some serious A/B work
> > too. There must be frameworks for this sort of thing ...
> >
> > VE team (cc James): so. How do you think this thing is now, getting to
> > a year later? Performance? Robustness? Stability of code?
> >
> >
> > -
>
>
> David, one of the most important features of this proposed test is that
> people who *know* what the results ought to look like are carrying out the
> testing.  It is probably a good idea to have parallel testing with new or
> inexperienced users, but at the end of the day, it's
> experienced Wikipedians who are going to make the decision whether or not
> to open up availability of VisualEditor to an expanded user group, and they
> are the ones who have to believe that it is fit for purpose, at least for
> basic editing skills required by new users.  I suspect that
> most Wikipedians will give much more regard to the documented experiences
> of editors whose reputations they know as compared to those who are brand
> new - and I include myself in that group.  I've seen ringers sent in too
> often in different kinds of user tests (not necessarily Wikimedia-specific)
> to fully assume good faith.
>
> Risker/Anne


If anyone would like to have a look at what usability testing is being done
for simple tasks, it's over on mediawiki[1]. Compare notes, use the talk
page, feel free to discuss what's going on there.

What is clear to me is that the community needs to spend some time
discussing about how they would like to have the discussion. There have
been various proposals on this mailing list and on-wiki about how to
reintroduce VisualEditor for the new user, all of which have been quite
interesting and diverse in approach. It's vital that a path going forward
can be agreed upon by all of us, and community leadership and community
lead discussion is key to this. The events of last year make this a
delicate discussion to have; and I think a good place to start would be
slow, deliberate brainstorming on-wiki. There were hundreds of participants
in the last RfC and it's important that we take the time to think it though
together rather than having competing formats, if you will

Another thing that would be very useful would be better promotion from
within the community to use Beta Features[2]. Conversations about
developing features are what make products better :)

1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Design/User_testing
2.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures


-- 
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Product
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia

[Andy Mabbett]

On 3 June 2014 08:02, ENWP Pine  wrote:

> I have started to draft an RfC about re-enabling VE on English Wikipedia

URL?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia

[Risker]

On 3 June 2014 12:25, David Gerard  wrote:

> On 3 June 2014 16:37, Risker  wrote:
>
> > Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an
> RFC,
> > we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so
> > that there is some evidence on which people can base their decisions.
>  This
> > is what I would suggest.
>
> [snip a possible user test scenario]
>
>
> +1. Some sort of user testing like this would be fantastic.
>
> We might even be able to set it up so the Internet will do it for us,
> which will save WMF paying testers ... could do some serious A/B work
> too. There must be frameworks for this sort of thing ...
>
> VE team (cc James): so. How do you think this thing is now, getting to
> a year later? Performance? Robustness? Stability of code?
>
>
> -


David, one of the most important features of this proposed test is that
people who *know* what the results ought to look like are carrying out the
testing.  It is probably a good idea to have parallel testing with new or
inexperienced users, but at the end of the day, it's
experienced Wikipedians who are going to make the decision whether or not
to open up availability of VisualEditor to an expanded user group, and they
are the ones who have to believe that it is fit for purpose, at least for
basic editing skills required by new users.  I suspect that
most Wikipedians will give much more regard to the documented experiences
of editors whose reputations they know as compared to those who are brand
new - and I include myself in that group.  I've seen ringers sent in too
often in different kinds of user tests (not necessarily Wikimedia-specific)
to fully assume good faith.

Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia

[Edward Saperia]

Sounds like your suggestion would be a perfect contribution to some kind of
community discussion to try and decide a framework to decide if or when we
might want to re-deploy visual editor, much like Pine was suggesting in the
first place :-)

*Edward Saperia*
Chief Coordinator Wikimania London 

On 3 June 2014 16:37, Risker  wrote:

> On 3 June 2014 09:05, Risker  wrote:
> > On 3 June 2014 03:02, ENWP Pine  wrote:
>
> >> Because VE has repeatedly been mentioned in this list as something that
> >> is improving and may help us with acquisition of editors and their
> >> knowledge, I have started to draft an RfC about re-enabling VE on
> English
> >> Wikipedia.
> >>
> >> I am not proposing any specific outcome in the RfC. My goal is to set up
> >> a framework which the community can use to decide which of several
> paths we
> >> would like to take.
>
> Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an RFC,
> we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so
> that there is some evidence on which people can base their decisions.  This
> is what I would suggest.
>
>- Create a "sample article" that includes an infobox, an image or two,
>some references, a template or two, and at least three editable
> sections.
>Editors will be asked to copy/paste this page into a personal sandbox to
>carry out the experiment, so that their individual results can be
> observed
>through the page history, and problems can be more easily identified.
>- Identify about 15-20 *basic* editing tasks that an inexperienced
>editor would be likely to try.  Some that come to mind:
>   - Remove a word
>   - Add a word
>   - change spelling of a word
>   - add a link to another article
>   - remove a link to another article
>   - move a sentence within a section
>   - move a sentence across sections
>   - add a [new] reference (multiple tests for website, newspaper, book
>   references)
>   - edit an existing reference
>   - re-use an existing reference
>   - edit existing information in the infobox
>   - add a reference to the infobox
>   - add a new parameter to the infobox
>   - add an image
>   - remove an image
>   - add an image description
>   - modify an image description
>   - add a commonly used template (such as {{fact}})
>   - remove a template
>   - add several symbols and accented characters that are not available
>   on their standard keyboard (e.g., Euro and GBP symbols for US
> keyboards,
>   accented characters commonly used in German or French)
>- Ask the "testers" to complete a chart outlining their results for each
>of the editing tasks being tested, and any comments they have about
> each of
>these editing features.
>
> If we can persuade even 25 people to work through these basic tasks, and
> the results are aggregated well, the community will have some useful data
> on which to base next-steps decisions.  It will also provide the
> VisualEditor team with comparatively unbiased information about their
> progress.  The key emphasis in the experiment is that it should focus on
> straightforward, elementary editing activities rather than complex tasks,
> and the purpose is to see whether or not these features work in an expected
> way or not.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ASBS results

[Alice Wiegand]

Thanks to the organizers and facilitators for setting up the process.
And congratulations to Frieda and Patricio. I wish both of you every
success, strength and support for your work on the Board!

Alice.



On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Frieda Brioschi  wrote:

> Wow, I'm breathless :-
>
> ..I've many to thank:
> * thank you voters for your choice, I'll do my best
> * thank you Wikimedia Italia for your support, it was really important to
> me
> * thank you Patricio, Alice and Anders, it was great sharing this
> experience with you
> * thank you Chris, Lorenzo and James for your work
>
> I'm looking forward to begin and I'll need your feedback, input and idea to
> make this adventure perfect.
>
> Frieda
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia

[David Gerard]

On 3 June 2014 16:37, Risker  wrote:

> Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an RFC,
> we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so
> that there is some evidence on which people can base their decisions.  This
> is what I would suggest.

[snip a possible user test scenario]


+1. Some sort of user testing like this would be fantastic.

We might even be able to set it up so the Internet will do it for us,
which will save WMF paying testers ... could do some serious A/B work
too. There must be frameworks for this sort of thing ...

VE team (cc James): so. How do you think this thing is now, getting to
a year later? Performance? Robustness? Stability of code?


- d.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia

[Risker]

Thanks Ed.  The point I am trying to make is that the community can't make
a good decision on this unless they understand the VisualEditor product as
it exists today.  I think pretty much everyone agrees it wasn't ready for
default editing on 1 July 2013, but absent recent data most people would
naturally base their opinions on their personal experiences from that very
early period.

Risker/Anne


On 3 June 2014 12:15, Edward Saperia  wrote:

> Sounds like your suggestion would be a perfect contribution to some kind of
> community discussion to try and decide a framework to decide if or when we
> might want to re-deploy visual editor, much like Pine was suggesting in the
> first place :-)
>
> *Edward Saperia*
> Chief Coordinator Wikimania London 
>
> On 3 June 2014 16:37, Risker  wrote:
>
> > On 3 June 2014 09:05, Risker  wrote:
> > > On 3 June 2014 03:02, ENWP Pine  wrote:
> >
> > >> Because VE has repeatedly been mentioned in this list as something
> that
> > >> is improving and may help us with acquisition of editors and their
> > >> knowledge, I have started to draft an RfC about re-enabling VE on
> > English
> > >> Wikipedia.
> > >>
> > >> I am not proposing any specific outcome in the RfC. My goal is to set
> up
> > >> a framework which the community can use to decide which of several
> > paths we
> > >> would like to take.
> >
> > Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an
> RFC,
> > we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so
> > that there is some evidence on which people can base their decisions.
>  This
> > is what I would suggest.
> >
> >- Create a "sample article" that includes an infobox, an image or two,
> >some references, a template or two, and at least three editable
> > sections.
> >Editors will be asked to copy/paste this page into a personal sandbox
> to
> >carry out the experiment, so that their individual results can be
> > observed
> >through the page history, and problems can be more easily identified.
> >- Identify about 15-20 *basic* editing tasks that an inexperienced
> >editor would be likely to try.  Some that come to mind:
> >   - Remove a word
> >   - Add a word
> >   - change spelling of a word
> >   - add a link to another article
> >   - remove a link to another article
> >   - move a sentence within a section
> >   - move a sentence across sections
> >   - add a [new] reference (multiple tests for website, newspaper,
> book
> >   references)
> >   - edit an existing reference
> >   - re-use an existing reference
> >   - edit existing information in the infobox
> >   - add a reference to the infobox
> >   - add a new parameter to the infobox
> >   - add an image
> >   - remove an image
> >   - add an image description
> >   - modify an image description
> >   - add a commonly used template (such as {{fact}})
> >   - remove a template
> >   - add several symbols and accented characters that are not
> available
> >   on their standard keyboard (e.g., Euro and GBP symbols for US
> > keyboards,
> >   accented characters commonly used in German or French)
> >- Ask the "testers" to complete a chart outlining their results for
> each
> >of the editing tasks being tested, and any comments they have about
> > each of
> >these editing features.
> >
> > If we can persuade even 25 people to work through these basic tasks, and
> > the results are aggregated well, the community will have some useful data
> > on which to base next-steps decisions.  It will also provide the
> > VisualEditor team with comparatively unbiased information about their
> > progress.  The key emphasis in the experiment is that it should focus on
> > straightforward, elementary editing activities rather than complex tasks,
> > and the purpose is to see whether or not these features work in an
> expected
> > way or not.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Risker/Anne
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> 
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia

[Risker]

On 3 June 2014 09:05, Risker  wrote:

>
>
> On 3 June 2014 03:02, ENWP Pine  wrote:
>
>> Because VE has repeatedly been mentioned in this list as something that
>> is improving and may help us with acquisition of editors and their
>> knowledge, I have started to draft an RfC about re-enabling VE on English
>> Wikipedia.
>>
>> I am not proposing any specific outcome in the RfC. My goal is to set up
>> a framework which the community can use to decide which of several paths we
>> would like to take.
>>
>> This is not my personal RfC, I just happen to think that with recent
>> discussions trending positively about VE's improvement over the past
>> several months and with the comments in this list about its possible value
>> to acquiring new editors, I'm willing to put in some time to draft a
>> framework for a discussion on-wiki. I am providing this note to let the
>> community know that someone (me) is drafting a framework for on-wiki
>> discussion. If someone else wants to start an RfC before I get around to
>> starting one, that's completely ok.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Pine
>>
>
>
> Without denigrating your considerable contributions to the project, Pine,
> I'd suggest that anyone setting up an RFC on this issue should have more
> recent experience with the product than you have, and I'd also suggest that
> an RFC is premature until there is an indication from the WMF that *they*
> feel the product might be ready for broader access.  I don't think that a
> fair discussion can be had when it is happening without, for example, a
> clear understanding of what issues existed before and whether or not they
> have been resolved.  I hope you will reconsider - or perhaps actually test
> the product for a couple of weeks before proceeding, so that the RFC can be
> based on factual information rather than "well, some people think it should
> be enabled".  There have always been some people who thought it should be
> enabled.  There have always been some people who think it is a waste of
> engineering time and energy.  But factual information about the current
> status of the tool, complete with intelligent assessment of its features,
> is what is really needed for the community to make a considered decision.
>
> Risker/Anne
>

Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an RFC,
we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so
that there is some evidence on which people can base their decisions.  This
is what I would suggest.


   - Create a "sample article" that includes an infobox, an image or two,
   some references, a template or two, and at least three editable sections.
   Editors will be asked to copy/paste this page into a personal sandbox to
   carry out the experiment, so that their individual results can be observed
   through the page history, and problems can be more easily identified.
   - Identify about 15-20 *basic* editing tasks that an inexperienced
   editor would be likely to try.  Some that come to mind:
  - Remove a word
  - Add a word
  - change spelling of a word
  - add a link to another article
  - remove a link to another article
  - move a sentence within a section
  - move a sentence across sections
  - add a [new] reference (multiple tests for website, newspaper, book
  references)
  - edit an existing reference
  - re-use an existing reference
  - edit existing information in the infobox
  - add a reference to the infobox
  - add a new parameter to the infobox
  - add an image
  - remove an image
  - add an image description
  - modify an image description
  - add a commonly used template (such as {{fact}})
  - remove a template
  - add several symbols and accented characters that are not available
  on their standard keyboard (e.g., Euro and GBP symbols for US keyboards,
  accented characters commonly used in German or French)
   - Ask the "testers" to complete a chart outlining their results for each
   of the editing tasks being tested, and any comments they have about each of
   these editing features.

If we can persuade even 25 people to work through these basic tasks, and
the results are aggregated well, the community will have some useful data
on which to base next-steps decisions.  It will also provide the
VisualEditor team with comparatively unbiased information about their
progress.  The key emphasis in the experiment is that it should focus on
straightforward, elementary editing activities rather than complex tasks,
and the purpose is to see whether or not these features work in an expected
way or not.

Thoughts?

Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)

[Mike Godwin]

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Nathan  wrote:

> Does the ECJ need to establish jurisdiction over Wikimedia or specific users
> (presumably only those users directly involved in creating or curating the
> content in dispute)? We've seen in some situations in the past (e.g. with
> the DCRI and frwp) where governments have targeted users within their
> jurisdiction to demand information or actions. Could that happen here?

Clearly, the EU doesn't need to establish jurisdiction over EU
citizens who happen to be Wikimedians, since it already has it. The
same is true with regard to affiliated organizations in the EU.  Plus,
and this is something that bears repeating, there is no particular
reason to think that the EU might not claim it has jurisdiction over
Wikimedia Foundation, even if it might have a hard time imposing it.

Even claims of jurisdiction without merit can be problematic, as I
explain here; http://youtu.be/wqQOvxyj66w.

> Should the WMF choose to refuse to implement the directive, could the ECJ
> pursue penalties against the income stream of donations, or grant funding
> disbursed to WMF-related entities in the EU? Could the WMF seek exemptions
> under Article 9, or would we run into jurisdictional risks by doing that?

I wouldn't think any funds given to, or disbursed from, WMF in the EU
would be immune.

> In Article 23, it reads "The controller may be exempted from this liability,
> in whole or in part, if he proves that he is not responsible for the event
> giving rise to the damage." Does this, perhaps in conjunction with the
> Section 230 status of the WMF, provide some cover?

Article 23's language would not be interpreted as providing
Section-230-like protection, if I read EU law correctly.


--Mike

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)

[Nathan]

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Mike Godwin  wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Todd Allen  wrote:
> > Would WMF, being in the US, need to worry about this to any greater
> degree
> > than it worries about, say, Chinese publishing restrictions, or UK
> > "superinjunctions"?
>
> First, WMF operates globally, and while I took pains as general
> counsel, just as the WMF legal team does now, to limit exposure around
> the world, it is a mistake to suppose that jurisdictional protections
> are invariably impenetrable. See my discussion here on YouTube:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqQOvxyj66w .
>
> Second, the ECJ decision can be used to go after editors individually,
> or organized WMF-affiliated groups.



Does the ECJ need to establish jurisdiction over Wikimedia or specific
users (presumably only those users directly involved in creating or
curating the content in dispute)? We've seen in some situations in the past
(e.g. with the DCRI and frwp) where governments have targeted users within
their jurisdiction to demand information or actions. Could that happen
here?

Should the WMF choose to refuse to implement the directive, could the ECJ
pursue penalties against the income stream of donations, or grant funding
disbursed to WMF-related entities in the EU? Could the WMF seek exemptions
under Article 9, or would we run into jurisdictional risks by doing that?

In Article 23, it reads "The controller may be exempted from this
liability, in whole or in part, if he proves that he is not responsible for
the event giving rise to the damage." Does this, perhaps in conjunction
with the Section 230 status of the WMF, provide some cover?

CC'd to the advocacy advisory list.

~Nathan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)

[Mike Godwin]

On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Chris Keating
 wrote:
>>
>> > I don't believe Wikipedia could be a data controller as it has no legal
>> > personality, and legal personality is quite difficult to acquire when
>> > you
>> > set out to avoid acquiring it.
>>
>> On this point I must disagree.

WMF is a legal entity. The editors are legal entities. The affiliated
groups are legal entities. And there is nothing in the EU directive
that requires what you are calling "a legal personality."

> I think also though that if editors are potentially liable, then so are
> legal persons that engage in similar activity. Say for instance a European
> Wikimedia chapter engaged with a national archive to update Wikidata with a
> few million records, including some on living people. Arguably both of them
> could be acting as data controllers on those records for the rest of the
> duration of Wikidata. Hm.

Now you are beginning to glimpse the scope of the ECJ opinion.

>> Google has a clear purpose too, and it was no defense. Plus, there is
>> a public-interest argument in favor of eschewing the erasure of true,
>> accurate public data that happens to be old.
>
>
> This is all the case, but the decision makes it clear that this is a
> question in striking a balance between the interests of the data subject
> (the "right to be forgotten", i.e. the ability to enjoy a private life), and
> the interests of others. This derives from Article 7(f) of the original
> directive.

Not exactly. The case "makes it clear" that it is *asserting* that it
is striking a balance, but when you read the specific language as a
lawyer, it's clear that, regardless of what the ECJ says, there is no
limiting principle regarding the scope of application.

> It also makes it clear that this balance may be struck in different places
> in different situations; for instance at Paragraph 81, talking about the
> balance of public interest in people who have taken a role in public life[1]
> who are arguably the sort we cover in our articles.

There's that "makes it clear" language again. Do you really suppose
Wikipedia information about individuals is limited to those who have
(presumably voluntarily) "taken a role in public life"?

When did this person --
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dannielynn_Birkhead_paternity_case --
volunteer to take a role in public life?

> I'd agree that there is no clarity about what would happen if someone
> pursued this course of action with Wikipedia, but there are many differences
> between our case and Google's...

Not really, if you read the precise language of the decision.
Certainly, every other lawyer I've asked about this agrees with me
that Wikipedia fits the definition of "controller" under the directive
and the ECJ decision.


--Mike

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)

[Mike Godwin]

On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Todd Allen  wrote:
> Would WMF, being in the US, need to worry about this to any greater degree
> than it worries about, say, Chinese publishing restrictions, or UK
> "superinjunctions"?

First, WMF operates globally, and while I took pains as general
counsel, just as the WMF legal team does now, to limit exposure around
the world, it is a mistake to suppose that jurisdictional protections
are invariably impenetrable. See my discussion here on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqQOvxyj66w .

Second, the ECJ decision can be used to go after editors individually,
or organized WMF-affiliated groups.


--Mike

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia

[Risker]

On 3 June 2014 03:02, ENWP Pine  wrote:

> Because VE has repeatedly been mentioned in this list as something that is
> improving and may help us with acquisition of editors and their knowledge,
> I have started to draft an RfC about re-enabling VE on English Wikipedia.
>
> I am not proposing any specific outcome in the RfC. My goal is to set up a
> framework which the community can use to decide which of several paths we
> would like to take.
>
> This is not my personal RfC, I just happen to think that with recent
> discussions trending positively about VE's improvement over the past
> several months and with the comments in this list about its possible value
> to acquiring new editors, I'm willing to put in some time to draft a
> framework for a discussion on-wiki. I am providing this note to let the
> community know that someone (me) is drafting a framework for on-wiki
> discussion. If someone else wants to start an RfC before I get around to
> starting one, that's completely ok.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pine
>


Without denigrating your considerable contributions to the project, Pine,
I'd suggest that anyone setting up an RFC on this issue should have more
recent experience with the product than you have, and I'd also suggest that
an RFC is premature until there is an indication from the WMF that *they*
feel the product might be ready for broader access.  I don't think that a
fair discussion can be had when it is happening without, for example, a
clear understanding of what issues existed before and whether or not they
have been resolved.  I hope you will reconsider - or perhaps actually test
the product for a couple of weeks before proceeding, so that the RFC can be
based on factual information rather than "well, some people think it should
be enabled".  There have always been some people who thought it should be
enabled.  There have always been some people who think it is a waste of
engineering time and energy.  But factual information about the current
status of the tool, complete with intelligent assessment of its features,
is what is really needed for the community to make a considered decision.

Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ASBS results

[Frieda Brioschi]

Wow, I'm breathless :-

..I've many to thank:
* thank you voters for your choice, I'll do my best
* thank you Wikimedia Italia for your support, it was really important to me
* thank you Patricio, Alice and Anders, it was great sharing this
experience with you
* thank you Chris, Lorenzo and James for your work

I'm looking forward to begin and I'll need your feedback, input and idea to
make this adventure perfect.

Frieda
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ASBS results

[Anders Wennersten]

Congratulations to you Patricio and Frieda!

I am very glad to see the thorough support you Patricio got. Having met 
you during our last three FDC sessions I know that you are worthy of the 
full confidence the chapters have in you.


I am also looking forward to see the renewed Board getting into action. 
With more experience built up in the Board, new fresh insights from 
Frieda and with our new wonderful ED, I have high expectations that old 
problems  will be quickly resolved and focus will be evolving our 
mission and movement  by utilizing the the many opportunities and 
possibilities of cooperations in our drive for our vision- free 
knowledge for all humankind!


Anders


Patricio Lorente skrev 2014-06-03 13:43:

Thank you, chapters and thorgs! I take your decision as a vote of
confidence that encourages me to work harder and better.

Congratulations, Frieda! I'm really happy to share with you this
responsability and I'm looking forward to work with you in the Board.

I also need to thank Alice for her work and commitment. I have the
privilege to be her friend and I've learnt a lot from her in these two
years. I will miss you in the Board.

Last, but not least, thanks to Anders for having the courage to nominate
himself and bringing his views and his opinion to this process.

  Patricio

PS: Thanks to Chris, Lorenzo and James for your work in the selection
process.


2014-06-03 4:50 GMT-03:00 Jon Davies :


Yes well done, and thanks to all who stood making this a really difficult
choice for us all!


On 3 June 2014 08:42, Santi Navarro 
wrote:


Felicidades Patricio / Auguri Frieda

--
Santiago Navarro Sanz
Wikimedia España
http://www.wikimedia.org.es/


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,





--
*Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK*.  Mobile (0044) 7803 505 169
tweet @jonatreesdavies

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
Telephone (0044) 207 065 0990.

Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,








___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)

[Mark]

On 6/2/14, 10:55 PM, ??? wrote:
There is no public interest in how many time celeb X got a detention 
at school for not doing their homework at junior high.


Isn't that the kind of information you would in fact expect to find in a 
biography of any kind of public figure? If I were reading a biography of 
Winston Churchill or Louis Armstrong or Neil Armstrong or anyone else 
prominent enough to have a book-length biography written about them, I 
would typically expect it to include a chapter about their childhood, 
and that would normally include some details of how they did at school, 
if such details are known. That's precisely the kind of information that 
biographers search for when putting together a comprehensive biography.


-Mark


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ASBS results

[Patricio Lorente]

Thank you, chapters and thorgs! I take your decision as a vote of
confidence that encourages me to work harder and better.

Congratulations, Frieda! I'm really happy to share with you this
responsability and I'm looking forward to work with you in the Board.

I also need to thank Alice for her work and commitment. I have the
privilege to be her friend and I've learnt a lot from her in these two
years. I will miss you in the Board.

Last, but not least, thanks to Anders for having the courage to nominate
himself and bringing his views and his opinion to this process.

 Patricio

PS: Thanks to Chris, Lorenzo and James for your work in the selection
process.


2014-06-03 4:50 GMT-03:00 Jon Davies :

> Yes well done, and thanks to all who stood making this a really difficult
> choice for us all!
>
>
> On 3 June 2014 08:42, Santi Navarro 
> wrote:
>
> > Felicidades Patricio / Auguri Frieda
> >
> > --
> > Santiago Navarro Sanz
> > Wikimedia España
> > http://www.wikimedia.org.es/
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK*.  Mobile (0044) 7803 505 169
> tweet @jonatreesdavies
>
> Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
> Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
> Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
> United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
> movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
> operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
> Telephone (0044) 207 065 0990.
>
> Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Patricio Lorente
Blog: http://www.patriciolorente.com.ar
Identi.ca // Twitter: @patriciolorente
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ASBS results

[Jon Davies]

Yes well done, and thanks to all who stood making this a really difficult
choice for us all!


On 3 June 2014 08:42, Santi Navarro 
wrote:

> Felicidades Patricio / Auguri Frieda
>
> --
> Santiago Navarro Sanz
> Wikimedia España
> http://www.wikimedia.org.es/
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
*Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK*.  Mobile (0044) 7803 505 169
tweet @jonatreesdavies

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
Telephone (0044) 207 065 0990.

Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ASBS results

[Santi Navarro]

Felicidades Patricio / Auguri Frieda

--
Santiago Navarro Sanz
Wikimedia España
http://www.wikimedia.org.es/

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia

[ENWP Pine]

Because VE has repeatedly been mentioned in this list as something that is 
improving and may help us with acquisition of editors and their knowledge, I 
have started to draft an RfC about re-enabling VE on English Wikipedia. 

I am not proposing any specific outcome in the RfC. My goal is to set up a 
framework which the community can use to decide which of several paths we would 
like to take.

This is not my personal RfC, I just happen to think that with recent 
discussions trending positively about VE's improvement over the past several 
months and with the comments in this list about its possible value to acquiring 
new editors, I'm willing to put in some time to draft a framework for a 
discussion on-wiki. I am providing this note to let the community know that 
someone (me) is drafting a framework for on-wiki discussion. If someone else 
wants to start an RfC before I get around to starting one, that's completely ok.

Cheers,

Pine
  
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,