Re: [Wikimedia-l] New AffCom members

2014-11-04 Thread Pierre-Selim
Congrats \o/

2014-11-04 8:50 GMT+01:00 Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com:

 Congratulations!

 C
 ___
 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,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Pierre-Selim
___
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, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Algeria Wikimedians User Group

2014-11-04 Thread Cristian Consonni
Congratulazioni! Benvenuti!

Cristian

___
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, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata-l] Birthday gift: Missing Wikipedia links (was Re: Wikidata turns two!)

2014-11-04 Thread Andrea Zanni
Hi Denny, great tool!

I really like this kind of human computation tools, as they are quick to
grasp and easy to perform.
The Wikidata Game from Magnus is a great example too, IMO.

I wonder: could it be hard to find a way to count how many merging one
accomplishes?
This would work both for an individual and to a list of usernames.

I feel it would be really good in Wikidata presentations or editathons or
outreach events:
you can let many people merge articles, and have a sort of counter
displayed which says how many are done, in real time. It's a sort of a
race/game, and it could be fun especially for young people.

I don't know, it's just an idea, but gamification kinda works :-)

Aubrey

On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:43 AM, Santi Navarro 
santiagonava...@wikimedia.org.es wrote:

 James, I have a question. Should you merge the items or the tool will do
 it?

 El 2014-10-29 19:10, James Forrester escribió:

 On Wed Oct 29 2014 at 10:56:42 Denny Vrandečić vrande...@google.com
 wrote:

  There’s a small tool on WMF labs that you can use to verify the links (it
 displays the articles side by side from a language pair you select, and
 then you can confirm or contradict the merge):

 https://tools.wmflabs.org/yichengtry


 This is really fun, and so useful too. Thank you so much, Denny, Jiang
 Bian, Si Li, and Yicheng Huang – Denny and the Googlers is a new band
 name if ever there was one.
 ___
 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,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 --
 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,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

___
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, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Algeria Wikimedians User Group

2014-11-04 Thread Patricio Lorente
Bienvenidos!!

Enviado desde mi teléfono celular
Disculpe la brevedad.
El 04/11/2014 06:56, Pierre-Selim pierre-se...@huard.info escribió:

 Félicitations \o/
 Congrats

 2014-11-04 10:26 GMT+01:00 Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com:

  Congratulazioni! Benvenuti!
 
  Cristian
 
  ___
  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,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 



 --
 Pierre-Selim
 ___
 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,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
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, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New AffCom members

2014-11-04 Thread Nurunnaby Hasive
Congratulations!

--
Nurunnaby Chowdhury Hasive
User: Nhasive | @nhasive
Sent from my iPhone 5s device
On Nov 4, 2014 2:00 PM, Pierre-Selim pierre-se...@huard.info wrote:

 Congrats \o/

 2014-11-04 8:50 GMT+01:00 Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com:

  Congratulations!
 
  C
  ___
  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,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 



 --
 Pierre-Selim
 ___
 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,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
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, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wayback machine

2014-11-04 Thread Luis Villa
Offlist, I've put John directly in touch with some folks at IA who were
working on citations (related to John's project).

FYI-
Luis

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 10:49 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com
wrote:

 John, 03/11/2014 22:54:

 Does anyone have contact information for the wayback machine? I am trying
 to improve one of my tools for wikipedia, and am wondering if we can get a
 minor change/feature request implemented.


 Usually I recommend:
 * #internetarchive on EFNet for quick sanity check,
 * the forum for generic or lenghty/complex stuff
 https://archive.org/details/web#forum (you can see Jeff is active here),
 * the issue tracker for self-contained issues (of all websites).
 https://webarchive.jira.com/browse/HER

 Of course, read the FAQ first.
 https://archive.org/about/faqs.php#The_Wayback_Machine

 Nemo

 P.s.: Everyone give a look, https://archive.org/index.php?ui3=1


 ___
 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,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Luis Villa
Deputy General Counsel
Wikimedia Foundation
415.839.6885 ext. 6810

*This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have
received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the
mistake. 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
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.*
___
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, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Finance Fellows to develop first-ever movement-wide financial report and metrics

2014-11-04 Thread Richard Symonds
Thanks for the replies. They've calmed my fears a fair bit, but I'm still a
little concerned - even simple questions like* of your administrative
costs, **how much were your travel costs* don't really make a lot of sense
to us, because some of our travel costs aren't administrative - and we
don't track administrative expenditure because that term isn't a
definition we use, and it's not clearly defined.

This is why we've been having trouble with understanding some
Grantmaking/FDC reports in the past - our method of reporting our financial
information differs from the way that teams at the WMF would like it to be
presented, because our key definitions differ (not to criticise the
grantmaking team, who are very helpful in this regard!)

I think that this project is trying to fix these problems, and it's a
commendable effort - but:

   1. Your team can't create entirely new definitions for organisations to
   report to (because we simply can't afford to increase our finance team to
   report to another definition - we already report to three different
   definitions). There is very little appetite in the movement for bigger or
   more professional finance teams and any big changes to reporting
   requirements simply won't be possible without more resources going that way.
   2. Your team may not be able to get all the information they need from
   participants because participants are simply too busy - in which case, the
   results of the report will go ahead and be used by the movement even though
   it may not be accurate or indeed fit for purpose. If the FDC process then
   goes ahead and uses the report outcomes to ask for financial information,
   then it means that the inaccurate report will have a direct effect on the
   metrics we're marked against, and thus a direct effect on movement funding.
   3. As WMUK, I fear that the less effort we put into involving ourselves
   in the process, the greater the chance that the final outcome will be a
   poor one for us. This in turn means that this actually has to be something
   that WMUK put a fair amount of effort into influencing, to ensure that our
   views are listened to and that the final report is something we can
   actually report against! I worry about how smaller chapters, like Ghana,
   Ukraine or Hungary - or the fledgling user groups - will manage, if the
   final definitions don't reflect their views at all.
   4. You say that if an organisation can't give your team the information
   they want, a phrase will appear in the final report along the lines of
   there are concerns about the quality of the data provided by Wikimedia
   UK... which won't be true, and will be read into by the community as WMUK
   has been audited and found wanting!
   5. The report is intended to make data* consistent, meaningful and
   comparable among the chapters, thematic organizations, and the
Foundation *-
   a laudable goal and one I fully support - but it appears that the
   Foundation aren't being consulted by the Finance Fellows at all. Where will
   their views and date be taken into account - will they be using the same
   process as everyone else, or a different process? I am not a cynic and I
   don't think that the WMF will use this process to dictate what reporting
   requirements should be, but I do worry that unless the WMF go through the
   same process, the end result will be relatively easy for the WMF teams to
   accomplish and rather harder for the rest of us! This increases our
   back-office costs and makes thorgs appear less efficient when that won't
   necessarily be the case.

I trust the team - they are a group of keen, young, idealistic people - and
I know that this is going to be done in good faith, but I don't see how it
can be done fairly without a lot of work from the organisations involved -
if they don't get involved, their views won't be reflected.

In order for this to be successful, his has to be a* team effort*, from all
the financial and project teams (and individuals!) across the world, and at
present it isn't - and given that this is the first the rest of the
movement has heard of the report, it will be very difficult for the rest of
us to help at such short notice.

I really, really appreciate what you're doing - but I want to be part of
this endeavour, and I hope you see my worries!

Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992

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).

*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*

On 31 October 2014 20:46, Michael Guss mg...@wikimedia.org wrote:

 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Finance Fellows to develop first-ever movement-wide financial report and metrics

2014-11-04 Thread Sydney Poore
Richard, I appreciate your view and understand your concerns. But even if
all of your worries are true, which I'm not sure is the case, the
alternative of not doing anything or putting it off seems worse. A group of
people taking a run at sorting this out seems like a good first approach.

And an alternative approach of having all of this work be done by a formal
group of representatives of chapters/thematic organizations with the
assistance a WMF staff like the Fiance Fellows doesn't really seem to
answer the concerns that you raise. And in fact puts more of a burden on
the groups.

Sydney

Sydney Poore
User:FloNight
Wikipedian in Residence
at Cochrane Collaboration

On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Richard Symonds 
richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:

 Thanks for the replies. They've calmed my fears a fair bit, but I'm still a
 little concerned - even simple questions like* of your administrative
 costs, **how much were your travel costs* don't really make a lot of sense
 to us, because some of our travel costs aren't administrative - and we
 don't track administrative expenditure because that term isn't a
 definition we use, and it's not clearly defined.

 This is why we've been having trouble with understanding some
 Grantmaking/FDC reports in the past - our method of reporting our financial
 information differs from the way that teams at the WMF would like it to be
 presented, because our key definitions differ (not to criticise the
 grantmaking team, who are very helpful in this regard!)

 I think that this project is trying to fix these problems, and it's a
 commendable effort - but:

1. Your team can't create entirely new definitions for organisations to
report to (because we simply can't afford to increase our finance team
 to
report to another definition - we already report to three different
definitions). There is very little appetite in the movement for bigger
 or
more professional finance teams and any big changes to reporting
requirements simply won't be possible without more resources going that
 way.
2. Your team may not be able to get all the information they need from
participants because participants are simply too busy - in which case,
 the
results of the report will go ahead and be used by the movement even
 though
it may not be accurate or indeed fit for purpose. If the FDC process
 then
goes ahead and uses the report outcomes to ask for financial
 information,
then it means that the inaccurate report will have a direct effect on
 the
metrics we're marked against, and thus a direct effect on movement
 funding.
3. As WMUK, I fear that the less effort we put into involving ourselves
in the process, the greater the chance that the final outcome will be a
poor one for us. This in turn means that this actually has to be
 something
that WMUK put a fair amount of effort into influencing, to ensure that
 our
views are listened to and that the final report is something we can
actually report against! I worry about how smaller chapters, like Ghana,
Ukraine or Hungary - or the fledgling user groups - will manage, if the
final definitions don't reflect their views at all.
4. You say that if an organisation can't give your team the information
they want, a phrase will appear in the final report along the lines of
there are concerns about the quality of the data provided by Wikimedia
UK... which won't be true, and will be read into by the community as
 WMUK
has been audited and found wanting!
5. The report is intended to make data* consistent, meaningful and
comparable among the chapters, thematic organizations, and the
 Foundation *-
a laudable goal and one I fully support - but it appears that the
Foundation aren't being consulted by the Finance Fellows at all. Where
 will
their views and date be taken into account - will they be using the same
process as everyone else, or a different process? I am not a cynic and I
don't think that the WMF will use this process to dictate what reporting
requirements should be, but I do worry that unless the WMF go through
 the
same process, the end result will be relatively easy for the WMF teams
 to
accomplish and rather harder for the rest of us! This increases our
back-office costs and makes thorgs appear less efficient when that won't
necessarily be the case.

 I trust the team - they are a group of keen, young, idealistic people - and
 I know that this is going to be done in good faith, but I don't see how it
 can be done fairly without a lot of work from the organisations involved -
 if they don't get involved, their views won't be reflected.

 In order for this to be successful, his has to be a* team effort*, from all
 the financial and project teams (and individuals!) across the world, and at
 present it isn't - and given that this is the first the rest of the
 movement has heard of the report, it 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Finance Fellows to develop first-ever movement-wide financial report and metrics

2014-11-04 Thread Richard Symonds
You're right Sydney - not all of them are going to happen. They're worries
- hypothetical worries in some cases - but they impact directly on the work
I do and it would be wrong of me to not raise them.

In answer to your other points:

   - You are right that the alternative of not doing anything or putting it
   off seems worse. It *is* worse to not do anything. Indeed, this is
   something I've wanted to do for years (I simply haven't had the time) and I
   am 100% behind it happening. It is sensible and I will do everything I can
   to support it.
   - However, when you say a group of people taking a run at sorting this
   out seems like a good first approach - it is a good first approach, but I
   worry that the first approach will become the only approach, and that the
   results will be used even if they're too rough to use. This is a huge
   task and it needs to be right or it runs the risk of damaging the movement.
   - I don't think this should be done by a formal group of representatives
   - in my experience committees aren't an amazing way of doing things like
   this. The team who have been put together seem to be bright young things
   and I have no doubt that they will do the best job they can - but I think
   that the first version can be improved with a lot more buy-in from the rest
   of the movement :-)


Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992

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).

*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*

On 4 November 2014 19:03, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com wrote:

 Richard, I appreciate your view and understand your concerns. But even if
 all of your worries are true, which I'm not sure is the case, the
 alternative of not doing anything or putting it off seems worse. A group of
 people taking a run at sorting this out seems like a good first approach.

 And an alternative approach of having all of this work be done by a formal
 group of representatives of chapters/thematic organizations with the
 assistance a WMF staff like the Fiance Fellows doesn't really seem to
 answer the concerns that you raise. And in fact puts more of a burden on
 the groups.

 Sydney

 Sydney Poore
 User:FloNight
 Wikipedian in Residence
 at Cochrane Collaboration

 On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Richard Symonds 
 richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:

  Thanks for the replies. They've calmed my fears a fair bit, but I'm
 still a
  little concerned - even simple questions like* of your administrative
  costs, **how much were your travel costs* don't really make a lot of
 sense
  to us, because some of our travel costs aren't administrative - and we
  don't track administrative expenditure because that term isn't a
  definition we use, and it's not clearly defined.
 
  This is why we've been having trouble with understanding some
  Grantmaking/FDC reports in the past - our method of reporting our
 financial
  information differs from the way that teams at the WMF would like it to
 be
  presented, because our key definitions differ (not to criticise the
  grantmaking team, who are very helpful in this regard!)
 
  I think that this project is trying to fix these problems, and it's a
  commendable effort - but:
 
 1. Your team can't create entirely new definitions for organisations
 to
 report to (because we simply can't afford to increase our finance team
  to
 report to another definition - we already report to three different
 definitions). There is very little appetite in the movement for bigger
  or
 more professional finance teams and any big changes to reporting
 requirements simply won't be possible without more resources going
 that
  way.
 2. Your team may not be able to get all the information they need from
 participants because participants are simply too busy - in which case,
  the
 results of the report will go ahead and be used by the movement even
  though
 it may not be accurate or indeed fit for purpose. If the FDC process
  then
 goes ahead and uses the report outcomes to ask for financial
  information,
 then it means that the inaccurate report will have a direct effect on
  the
 metrics we're marked against, and thus a direct effect on movement
  funding.
 3. As WMUK, I fear that the less effort we put into involving
 ourselves
 in the process, the greater the chance that the final outcome will be
 a
 poor one for us. This in turn means that this actually has to be
  something
 that WMUK put a fair amount of effort into influencing, to 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Finance Fellows to develop first-ever movement-wide financial report and metrics

2014-11-04 Thread Liam Wyatt
On 4 November 2014 20:49, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk
wrote:

 I don't think this should be done by a formal group of representatives
- in my experience committees aren't an amazing way of doing things like
this. The team who have been put together seem to be bright young things
and I have no doubt that they will do the best job they can - but I
 think
that the first version can be improved with a lot more buy-in from the
 rest
of the movement :-)


This.

The concept behind the 'finance fellows' is a great one: dedicated contact
people for the Chapters to help coordinate, standardise, streamline,
clarify the financial information among a variety of very diverse Wikimedia
Organisations.
Something like this is something that many people have wanted for a long
time. Newer or smaller chapters can feel 'left out' and overwhelmed by what
kind of information they need to report, when, how... especially for the
majority of Chapters that have no dedicated financial administration
professional.

However, by keeping the team's formation a secret, and not involving the
Chapters' financial staff in the conceptualisation stage (even as advanced
warning), does not start the concept off with good will. In fact, what
could/should have been a great day for the movement in helping to support
and coordinate its various parts, makes the very people who are going to be
working closest with the Finance Fellows (e.g. Richard, above) skeptical
and wary of being 'audited'. This is a great shame.
___
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, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Finance Fellows to develop first-ever movement-wide financial report and metrics

2014-11-04 Thread Pine W
Hi all,

As you may have heard, I've started temporary contract work for WMF as an
intern in Learning and Evaluation. [1] My work will focus on the Learning
Patterns Library. [2] One of the goals for the internship is to enable
easier and better reporting about grants, including financial reports. When
grantees spend countless hours writing reports, that drains resources that
could be invested in designing and producing more and better programs, and
I've heard that grantees prefer designing and producing programs over
tedious accounting and reporting tasks. You can expect to hear more from me
about learning patterns in the next few months, and I am hoping to hear
constructive ideas from community members and grantees that can be included
in the Learning Patterns Library.

Generally I will use my current Pine accounts for my community roles, and I
will save my WMF accounts for official WMF work.

I didn't know about these Finance Fellows either until I saw their profiles
appear on the WMF staff page, and I emailed Garfield to ask about them. A
community consultation in advance about this project would have been
helpful. The goals of these Fellows make sense to me; I've previously had
discussions with Grantmaking about trying to get comparable data across
programs. I too am interested in hearing how WMF Finance will implement
this program, and in particular how it will affect the Cascadia Wikimedians
User Group which I am helping to coordinate. It does worry me a little that
Wikimedia has a famously complicated social, financial, and legal
environment, and there are lots of ways for things to go wrong, especially
when people who have never before worked in this kind of environment are
brought into a role like global finance for the movement. That said, I hope
that Garfield will continue to address the concerns that are being
discussed in this thread, and that the work of the Finance Fellows will be
a net positive for everyone in the long run.

To the Finance Fellows: I hope that you are not discouraged by this
discussion. I've been in this global community for years in a variety of
roles, and I'm still learning. I hope that you have a good experience with
us.

Regards,

Pine

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Bgibbs_(WMF)
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Learning_patterns


*This is an Encyclopedia* https://www.wikipedia.org/






*One gateway to the wide garden of knowledge, where lies The deep rock of
our past, in which we must delve The well of our future,The clear water we
must leave untainted for those who come after us,The fertile earth, in
which truth may grow in bright places, tended by many hands,And the broad
fall of sunshine, warming our first steps toward knowing how much we do not
know.**—Catherine Munro*
___
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, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Finance Fellows to develop first-ever movement-wide financial report and metrics

2014-11-04 Thread Chris Keating


 However, by keeping the team's formation a secret, and not involving the
 Chapters' financial staff in the conceptualisation stage (even as advanced
 warning), does not start the concept off with good will.


While completely understanding the point you're making, I would mainly
suggest not worrying about this. Many things going on in among Wikimedia
movement organisations are imperfect steps in the right direction and it's
more important to focus on the step in the right direction bit.

In many ways it's all so new and diverse that we currently are one level of
abstraction beyond sharing learning and information. We are still in the
process of learning how to share learning and of gathering information
about what information there is.

I suspect the Finance Fellows may make a very valuable contribution even if
their results are a bit less concrete than they anticipate. Hopefully the
dialogue here will be helpful in shaping their approach.

Chris
(Wikimedia UK trustee, though speaking personally as usual)
___
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, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Finance Fellows to develop first-ever movement-wide financial report and metrics

2014-11-04 Thread Samuel Klein
Walter, Arda, Lene  Seyi: welcome!  Thank you for tackling this
project, I hope you will share further thoughts about it.

On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Richard Symonds
richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
 They're worries - hypothetical worries in some cases - but they impact 
 directly on the work
 I do and it would be wrong of me to not raise them.

They are worth raising, thank you.

 it is a good first approach, but I worry that the first approach will become
 the only approach, and that the results will be used even if they're too
 rough to use.

An important point.  This happens regularly despite the best
intentions of all involved.  (And not only at the organizational level
-- e.g., we all still rely on 'edit count' for so many things, despite
persistent vocal attention to its weaknesses and subvertability as a
metric since the start.)

 I think that the first version can be improved with a lot more buy-in from 
 the rest
 of the movement :-)

This is likely :)  I've added your concerns to the wiki discussion
about the report:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement-wide_Financial_Report

(Also cc:ing the low-traffic treasurers mailing list.  I believe some
org treasurers who don't have time to follow all of Wikimedia-l
nevertheless read that list.)

SJ

___
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, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference[1] 2015

2014-11-04 Thread Asaf Bartov
Reminder: We'd like to finalize the Wikimedia Conference 2015 Program Team
by Nov 10th.  If you'd like to help craft a high-quality program to make
sure we make the most of this important (and expensive) face-to-face
opportunity, do sign up!

Details here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2015/Programme_team

In particular, at least one team member from a smaller or newer chapter
would be great!

   A.

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com
wrote:

 2014-10-21 3:40 GMT+02:00 Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org:
  Neither I nor WMF are trying to exert undue control over this process;
  rather, I am moving this forward in good faith and relying on other
 people
  to be equally bold in editing (or reverting!) anything I've stated there.
 
  Looking forward to making this the most productive WMCON[1] ever! :)

 [...]

  [1] I remain entirely uninterested in what this event gets called.  Feel
  free to advocate for calling it The Great Platypus Appreciation Society
  Gathering of 2015 or anything else, here:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Conference_2015

 Speaking of appreciation, thank you Asaf and Ad for caring about this.

 C

 ___
 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,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




-- 
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation http://www.wikimediafoundation.org

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.wikimedia.org
___
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, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe