Re: [Wikimedia-l] Not all pixels are created equals: introducing brand new Wikimedia France's metrics
Le Thu, 02 Apr 2015 01:26:07 +0200, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com a écrit: Dear Pierre-Selim, I look forward to discussing this new metric at the Wikimedia Conference. I might even take photographs of the deliberations and upload them to Commons in order to improve my personal pixel metric. Have you figured out a way to translate pixels into multiple languages? Just walk accross streets or countries and show the pixels to different native speakers: you have translated the pixels. Be aware not to lost some pixels during the translation. ~ Seb35 I hope you will document the new pixel metric, and the methods for measuring it, in the Learning Patterns Library. Regards, Pine On Apr 1, 2015 12:59 PM, Pierre-Selim pierre-se...@huard.info wrote: Dear movement fellows, Impact is crucial for our movement, and although metrics will always be imperfect, we must strive to reinvent ourselves and always come up with new innovative ways of measuring what we bring to the Wikimedia projects, to free knowledge, and to human society. Measuring impact regarding collections of media holds its own challenges and although we have been focusing on this for a while now, much work still lies ahead. We were inspired by the “bytes added” metric, one of the pinnacles of written content expansion measurement, which goes beyond mere edit count. The same reasoning holds true for media:a puny upload count cannot come close to the real awesomeness. This is why, as we appreciate that size matters, Wikimedia France quality commitee is proud to introduce its brand new set of metrics: the pixel count and the quality pixel count − since quality is of firstmost importance. You may query the Pixel count metric for your FDC reports as part of our wm-metrics webapp [1] Furthermore, an implementation of these new metrics will also ship with our new new (teasing!) product [2] As of April 1st 2015 Wikimedia France has supported the upload on Wikimedia Commons of: - 1 229 694 933 639 pixels [3] - among those pixels, 22 407 932 851 are quality pixels (18,223512%) [4] This is only the beginning: next step is the measurement of cute pixels, encyclopedic pixels and amazing pixels. Confident in the relevance of these new indicators, we would be delighted and honored to see the Pixel count integrated in the Global Metrics. As always we welcome feedback, hugs and pull requests. Sincerely, For the quality committee of Wikimedia France Caroline, Jean-Fred, Pierre-Selim and Petit Tigre [1] https://tools.wmflabs.org/wm-metrics/fdc [2] https://github.com/Commonists/MediaCollectionDB/commit/4c2ab42f83e894c9dd317038ad025abdeb946f6e [3] http://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/2882 [4] http://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/2886 -- 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 ___ 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] New Wikimedia Foundation report on activities in 2014
Hi all, Today the Wikimedia Foundation published a report on its activities in calendar year 2014. This State of the Wikimedia Foundation https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation.pdf report provides a snapshot view of the Foundation’s major initiatives and considerations during that period. It also offers a baseline assessment of key efforts made by internal Foundation departments, with an emphasis on data-based results, project impact, challenges, and how our work supports our mission. Last December, the Wikimedia Foundation entered into the beginning of a strategy planning exercise. As we progressed, we found people had differing familiarities with the work, needs, and concerns of other departments -- the proverbial Blind Men and an Elephant.[1] In response, we began pulling together information as a baseline reference so we would better understand each others’ work. This report is the outcome of that research.[2] Although the information in the report was originally gathered in response to an internal Foundation need, we planned to make it public as a report from the very beginning. It is intended to be relatively candid, sharing insight into where teams feel they have strengths and where they feel there are development areas. The report also offers the first look at the Foundation’s internal Call to Action for 2015 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation#2015_Call_to_Action. The Call to Action is a set of actions for the 2015 calendar year to focus the staff of the Foundation on our core functions. These include improving the processes by which we do our work, building stronger community relationships, and exploring new ways to expand free knowledge. Terry, our new COO https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/20/wmf-welcomes-coo/, will manage its implementation over the coming year. Finally, a note: the report is a standalone product designed to aide the strategy development process, and does not substitute for the Quarterly Reports, Annual Report, or Annual Plan process. It is scoped only against the Foundation’s existing workflows in 2014, and not against the work of the Wikimedia movement overall. We have not committed to making it an annual exercise. The full State of the Wikimedia Foundation report is available as a wiki here https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation and as a PDF on Wikimedia Commons here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation.pdf . You can also find more information in our blog post: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/04/02/new-wikimedia-foundation-report/. We hope you find it interesting, and welcome your feedback. Thanks, Katherine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant [2] Thanks to everyone at the Foundation who contributed so much great information to their various teams sections. And a special thanks to Juliet Barbara and Heather Walls who wrote and produced the whole thing! -- Katherine Maher Chief Communications Officer Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94105 +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635 +1 (415) 712 4873 kma...@wikimedia.org ___ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] New Wikimedia Foundation report on activities in 2014
Risker: For your convenience: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ainali/sandbox *Med vänliga hälsningar,Jan Ainali* Verksamhetschef, Wikimedia Sverige http://wikimedia.se 0729 - 67 29 48 *Tänk dig en värld där varje människa har fri tillgång till mänsklighetens samlade kunskap. Det är det vi gör.* Bli medlem. http://blimedlem.wikimedia.se 2015-04-02 22:22 GMT+02:00 Risker risker...@gmail.com: On 2 April 2015 at 15:31, Katherine Maher kma...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, Today the Wikimedia Foundation published a report on its activities in calendar year 2014. This State of the Wikimedia Foundation https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation.pdf report provides a snapshot view of the Foundation’s major initiatives and considerations during that period. It also offers a baseline assessment of key efforts made by internal Foundation departments, with an emphasis on data-based results, project impact, challenges, and how our work supports our mission. Last December, the Wikimedia Foundation entered into the beginning of a strategy planning exercise. As we progressed, we found people had differing familiarities with the work, needs, and concerns of other departments -- the proverbial Blind Men and an Elephant.[1] In response, we began pulling together information as a baseline reference so we would better understand each others’ work. This report is the outcome of that research.[2] Although the information in the report was originally gathered in response to an internal Foundation need, we planned to make it public as a report from the very beginning. It is intended to be relatively candid, sharing insight into where teams feel they have strengths and where they feel there are development areas. The report also offers the first look at the Foundation’s internal Call to Action for 2015 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation#2015_Call_to_Action . The Call to Action is a set of actions for the 2015 calendar year to focus the staff of the Foundation on our core functions. These include improving the processes by which we do our work, building stronger community relationships, and exploring new ways to expand free knowledge. Terry, our new COO https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/20/wmf-welcomes-coo/, will manage its implementation over the coming year. Finally, a note: the report is a standalone product designed to aide the strategy development process, and does not substitute for the Quarterly Reports, Annual Report, or Annual Plan process. It is scoped only against the Foundation’s existing workflows in 2014, and not against the work of the Wikimedia movement overall. We have not committed to making it an annual exercise. The full State of the Wikimedia Foundation report is available as a wiki here https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation and as a PDF on Wikimedia Commons here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation.pdf . You can also find more information in our blog post: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/04/02/new-wikimedia-foundation-report/. We hope you find it interesting, and welcome your feedback. Thanks, Katherine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant [2] Thanks to everyone at the Foundation who contributed so much great information to their various teams sections. And a special thanks to Juliet Barbara and Heather Walls who wrote and produced the whole thing! -- Katherine Maher Chief Communications Officer Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94105 +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635 +1 (415) 712 4873 kma...@wikimedia.org Thank you very much for telling us about this, Katherine. I am unable to read the file on Commons (the print is far too faint, and also quite small), and I really don't want to download it. Is there an alternative? I am looking forward to reading this. 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, 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] New Wikimedia Foundation report on activities in 2014
Actually, it appears it is also published here: https://meta.wikimedia. org/wiki/Communications/State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation (Heather Walls sent me the link). This is good - but the document on Commons points to a serious usability issue; the combination of faint print and small font made it unreadable for me, a person with fairly normal vision. The Commons page should probably also have a link to the Meta page. Risker/Anne On 2 April 2015 at 16:35, Jan Ainali jan.ain...@wikimedia.se wrote: Risker: For your convenience: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ainali/sandbox *Med vänliga hälsningar,Jan Ainali* Verksamhetschef, Wikimedia Sverige http://wikimedia.se 0729 - 67 29 48 *Tänk dig en värld där varje människa har fri tillgång till mänsklighetens samlade kunskap. Det är det vi gör.* Bli medlem. http://blimedlem.wikimedia.se 2015-04-02 22:22 GMT+02:00 Risker risker...@gmail.com: On 2 April 2015 at 15:31, Katherine Maher kma...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, Today the Wikimedia Foundation published a report on its activities in calendar year 2014. This State of the Wikimedia Foundation https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation.pdf report provides a snapshot view of the Foundation’s major initiatives and considerations during that period. It also offers a baseline assessment of key efforts made by internal Foundation departments, with an emphasis on data-based results, project impact, challenges, and how our work supports our mission. Last December, the Wikimedia Foundation entered into the beginning of a strategy planning exercise. As we progressed, we found people had differing familiarities with the work, needs, and concerns of other departments -- the proverbial Blind Men and an Elephant.[1] In response, we began pulling together information as a baseline reference so we would better understand each others’ work. This report is the outcome of that research.[2] Although the information in the report was originally gathered in response to an internal Foundation need, we planned to make it public as a report from the very beginning. It is intended to be relatively candid, sharing insight into where teams feel they have strengths and where they feel there are development areas. The report also offers the first look at the Foundation’s internal Call to Action for 2015 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation#2015_Call_to_Action . The Call to Action is a set of actions for the 2015 calendar year to focus the staff of the Foundation on our core functions. These include improving the processes by which we do our work, building stronger community relationships, and exploring new ways to expand free knowledge. Terry, our new COO https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/20/wmf-welcomes-coo/, will manage its implementation over the coming year. Finally, a note: the report is a standalone product designed to aide the strategy development process, and does not substitute for the Quarterly Reports, Annual Report, or Annual Plan process. It is scoped only against the Foundation’s existing workflows in 2014, and not against the work of the Wikimedia movement overall. We have not committed to making it an annual exercise. The full State of the Wikimedia Foundation report is available as a wiki here https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation and as a PDF on Wikimedia Commons here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation.pdf . You can also find more information in our blog post: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/04/02/new-wikimedia-foundation-report/ . We hope you find it interesting, and welcome your feedback. Thanks, Katherine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant [2] Thanks to everyone at the Foundation who contributed so much great information to their various teams sections. And a special thanks to Juliet Barbara and Heather Walls who wrote and produced the whole thing! -- Katherine Maher Chief Communications Officer Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94105 +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635 +1 (415) 712 4873 kma...@wikimedia.org Thank you very much for telling us about this, Katherine. I am unable to read the file on Commons (the print is far too faint, and also quite small), and I really don't want to download it. Is there an alternative? I am looking forward to reading this. Risker/Anne ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] New Wikimedia Foundation report on activities in 2014
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Katherine Maher kma...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, Today the Wikimedia Foundation published a report on its activities in calendar year 2014. [...] Although the information in the report was originally gathered in response to an internal Foundation need, we planned to make it public as a report from the very beginning. It is intended to be relatively candid, sharing insight into where teams feel they have strengths and where they feel there are development areas. [...] We hope you find it interesting, and welcome your feedback. Thanks, Katherine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant [2] Thanks to everyone at the Foundation who contributed so much great information to their various teams sections. And a special thanks to Juliet Barbara and Heather Walls who wrote and produced the whole thing! Thanks. This looks indeed like a candid report. If it's an indication of a change in communication style, I like it. Good to have it available on Meta as well as in pdf format (I think the pdf is very nicely done). Best, Andreas ___ 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] This week on the Wikimedia Blog
Hi folks, Here are some of the stories featured this week on the Wikimedia Blog: • Share a fact with friends on the Wikipedia Android app https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/04/02/share-a-fact-with-friends-on-android-app/ • New Wikimedia Foundation report on activities in 2014 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/04/02/new-wikimedia-foundation-report/ • 15 women who made a difference http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/31/15-women-who-made-a-difference/ • Wikimedia Research Newsletter, March 2015 http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/29/research-newsletter-march-2015/ • Discovering a community through cryptology: Elonka Dunin http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/27/community-through-cryptology-elonka-dunin/ • Wikimedia Foundation welcomes Kourosh Karimkhany as VP of Strategic Partnerships http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/27/wmf-welcomes-vp-partnerships/ More stories on the Wikimedia Blog: https://blog.wikimedia.org/ Best regards, Fabrice ___ Fabrice Florin Movement Communications Manager Wikimedia Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF)___ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] New Wikimedia Foundation report on activities in 2014
On Apr 2, 2015 4:39 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Actually, it appears it is also published here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CommunicationsState_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation (Heather Walls sent me the link). This is good - but the document on Commons points to a serious usability issue; the combination of faint print and small font made it unreadable for me, a person with fairly normal vision. The Commons page should probably also have a link to the Meta page. Risker/Anne On 2 April 2015 at 16:35, Jan Ainali jan.ain...@wikimedia.se wrote: Risker: For your convenience: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ainali/sandbox *Med vänliga hälsningar,Jan Ainali* Verksamhetschef, Wikimedia Sverige http://wikimedia.se 0729 - 67 29 48 *Tänk dig en värld där varje människa har fri tillgång till mänsklighetens samlade kunskap. Det är det vi gör.* Bli medlem. http://blimedlem.wikimedia.se 2015-04-02 22:22 GMT+02:00 Risker risker...@gmail.com: On 2 April 2015 at 15:31, Katherine Maher kma...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, Today the Wikimedia Foundation published a report on its activities in calendar year 2014. This State of the Wikimedia Foundation https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation.pdf report provides a snapshot view of the Foundation’s major initiatives and considerations during that period. It also offers a baseline assessment of key efforts made by internal Foundation departments, with an emphasis on data-based results, project impact, challenges, and how our work supports our mission. Last December, the Wikimedia Foundation entered into the beginning of a strategy planning exercise. As we progressed, we found people had differing familiarities with the work, needs, and concerns of other departments -- the proverbial Blind Men and an Elephant.[1] In response, we began pulling together information as a baseline reference so we would better understand each others’ work. This report is the outcome of that research.[2] Although the information in the report was originally gathered in response to an internal Foundation need, we planned to make it public as a report from the very beginning. It is intended to be relatively candid, sharing insight into where teams feel they have strengths and where they feel there are development areas. The report also offers the first look at the Foundation’s internal Call to Action for 2015 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation#2015_Call_to_Action . The Call to Action is a set of actions for the 2015 calendar year to focus the staff of the Foundation on our core functions. These include improving the processes by which we do our work, building stronger community relationships, and exploring new ways to expand free knowledge. Terry, our new COO https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/20/wmf-welcomes-coo/, will manage its implementation over the coming year. Finally, a note: the report is a standalone product designed to aide the strategy development process, and does not substitute for the Quarterly Reports, Annual Report, or Annual Plan process. It is scoped only against the Foundation’s existing workflows in 2014, and not against the work of the Wikimedia movement overall. We have not committed to making it an annual exercise. The full State of the Wikimedia Foundation report is available as a wiki here https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation and as a PDF on Wikimedia Commons here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation.pdf . You can also find more information in our blog post: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/04/02/new-wikimedia-foundation-report/ . We hope you find it interesting, and welcome your feedback. Thanks, Katherine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant [2] Thanks to everyone at the Foundation who contributed so much great information to their various teams sections. And a special thanks to Juliet Barbara and Heather Walls who wrote and produced the whole thing! -- Katherine Maher Chief Communications Officer Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94105 +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635 +1 (415) 712 4873 kma...@wikimedia.org Thank you very much for telling us about this, Katherine. I am unable to read the file on Commons (the print is far too faint, and also quite small), and I really don't want to download it. Is there an alternative? I am looking forward to reading this.
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] New Wikimedia Foundation report on activities in 2014
On 2 April 2015 at 15:31, Katherine Maher kma...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, Today the Wikimedia Foundation published a report on its activities in calendar year 2014. This State of the Wikimedia Foundation https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation.pdf report provides a snapshot view of the Foundation’s major initiatives and considerations during that period. It also offers a baseline assessment of key efforts made by internal Foundation departments, with an emphasis on data-based results, project impact, challenges, and how our work supports our mission. Last December, the Wikimedia Foundation entered into the beginning of a strategy planning exercise. As we progressed, we found people had differing familiarities with the work, needs, and concerns of other departments -- the proverbial Blind Men and an Elephant.[1] In response, we began pulling together information as a baseline reference so we would better understand each others’ work. This report is the outcome of that research.[2] Although the information in the report was originally gathered in response to an internal Foundation need, we planned to make it public as a report from the very beginning. It is intended to be relatively candid, sharing insight into where teams feel they have strengths and where they feel there are development areas. The report also offers the first look at the Foundation’s internal Call to Action for 2015 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation#2015_Call_to_Action . The Call to Action is a set of actions for the 2015 calendar year to focus the staff of the Foundation on our core functions. These include improving the processes by which we do our work, building stronger community relationships, and exploring new ways to expand free knowledge. Terry, our new COO https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/20/wmf-welcomes-coo/, will manage its implementation over the coming year. Finally, a note: the report is a standalone product designed to aide the strategy development process, and does not substitute for the Quarterly Reports, Annual Report, or Annual Plan process. It is scoped only against the Foundation’s existing workflows in 2014, and not against the work of the Wikimedia movement overall. We have not committed to making it an annual exercise. The full State of the Wikimedia Foundation report is available as a wiki here https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation and as a PDF on Wikimedia Commons here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:State_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation.pdf . You can also find more information in our blog post: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/04/02/new-wikimedia-foundation-report/. We hope you find it interesting, and welcome your feedback. Thanks, Katherine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant [2] Thanks to everyone at the Foundation who contributed so much great information to their various teams sections. And a special thanks to Juliet Barbara and Heather Walls who wrote and produced the whole thing! -- Katherine Maher Chief Communications Officer Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94105 +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635 +1 (415) 712 4873 kma...@wikimedia.org Thank you very much for telling us about this, Katherine. I am unable to read the file on Commons (the print is far too faint, and also quite small), and I really don't want to download it. Is there an alternative? I am looking forward to reading this. 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA
Article in Eurasianet today: Wikipedia Founder Distances Himself from Kazakhstan PR Machine http://www.eurasianet.org/node/72831 ---o0o--- [...] On March 20, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales hosted an Ask Me Anything http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2zpkxx/we_are_jameel_jaffer_of_the_aclu_wikipedia/cpl4maq conversation (AMA) on Reddit, a social-networking platform. Before long the audience was questioning Wales’s and Wikipedia’s roles in helping to improve Kazakhstan’s image. Back in 2011, Wales awarded http://www.eurasianet.org/node/66343 a once-and-future Kazakh government employee, Rauan Kenzhekhanuly, the inaugural “Wikipedian of the Year” for his work with WikiBilim, a Kazakh-language platform criticized both for receiving state funds and for publishing multiple articles toeing the authoritarian government’s line. At the time, Wales told EurasiaNet.org, “As far as I know, the WikiBilim organization is not politicized.” But during the AMA, Wales backpedaled on his decision to name Kenzhekhanuly the first Wikipedian of the Year. Wales was on the receiving end of a fresh round of criticism last year when Kenzhekhanuly was named deputy governor of Kazakhstan’s Kyzylorda region. During the AMA, a commenter asked Wales if he would have bestowed the award had he known Kenzhekhanuly would go on to serve as deputy governor. “If I had known in 2011 that someone would get a job that I disapprove of in 2014, would I refuse to give them an award in 2011?” Wales responded. “Yes, I would have refused to give that award.” Wales also clarified that Kenzhekhanuly “was not a government official” at the time of the award – which is, technically, true. However, according to Kenzhekhanuly’s LinkedIn profile https://www.linkedin.com/pub/rauan-kenzhekhanuly/24/8b7/b16, before receiving the award he had served both as a policy adviser to the governor in Kazakhstan’s Mangystau region, as well as first secretary at Kazakhstan’s embassy in Moscow. After the AMA, Wales said by email that he was “not aware” Kenzhekhanuly had held those positions. [...] ---o0o--- ___ 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 Announcements] New Wikimedia Foundation report on activities in 2014
On 2 April 2015 at 17:48, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Katherine Maher kma...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, Today the Wikimedia Foundation published a report on its activities in calendar year 2014. [...] Although the information in the report was originally gathered in response to an internal Foundation need, we planned to make it public as a report from the very beginning. It is intended to be relatively candid, sharing insight into where teams feel they have strengths and where they feel there are development areas. [...] We hope you find it interesting, and welcome your feedback. Thanks, Katherine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant [2] Thanks to everyone at the Foundation who contributed so much great information to their various teams sections. And a special thanks to Juliet Barbara and Heather Walls who wrote and produced the whole thing! Thanks. This looks indeed like a candid report. If it's an indication of a change in communication style, I like it. Good to have it available on Meta as well as in pdf format (I think the pdf is very nicely done). I agree, pretty much. This is probably the best 'big picture look at the WMF I have seen: accomplishments, plans, honest assessments of challenges. Thanks very much! 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Kourosh Karimkhany, Vice President of Strategic Partnerships
Hi Kourosh! The Wikimedia Foundation's vision is of a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Knowledge, not unreliable assertions. Presently we offer unreliable assertions. I would be grateful for any support you can offer us in fostering partnerships that improve the reliability of Wikipedia's articles. Welcome aboard. It's great to have you here. Anthony Cole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthonyhcole On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: I can agree on the dilemma you present. But would not a better solution then the close down on Wikipedia Zero, be to close down the projects that is not run compatible with the values underlying the idea of a free and open web?. I am (still) of the opinion that is is of utmost importance for the movement and our brand that we start closing down projects. And not only the 20-30 which are hijacked by unserious people but also the 50-100 which are not properly managed and infested with vandalism and unserious articles Anders This reminds me of a slide shown at Wikimania.[1] It read as follows: ---o0o--- Reality check 3: 284 Wikipedias 12 dead (locked) 53 zombies (open, no editors) 94 struggling (open, 5 editors) 125 in good or excellent health ---o0o--- And I would disagree with the judgement implied in these figures that a Wikipedia with 5 or 6 editors is in good or excellent health. The Croatian Wikipedia had considerable more contributors than that, and still turned into a disaster.[2] I suspect the Foundation will be reluctant to close down projects for which there is any hope. However, I would very much like to see the Foundation provide the public with honest, realistic and transparent information and consumer advice on the quality of these various Wikipedias, both in terms of political freedom, as mentioned earlier, and in more general terms terms of content reliability. [1] https://twitter.com/JaredZimmerman/status/498102860459302912 [2] http://www.dailydot.com/politics/croatian-wikipedia-fascist-takeover-controversy-right-wing/ ___ 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] Fwd: Introducing Kourosh Karimkhany, Vice President of Strategic Partnerships
Mike, With all due respect to your longstanding work on internet issues, you said there were no facts to support an argument that zero-rating one product, when all others are subject to a consumer charge, suppresses competition. I pointed out that Lohninger, AccessNow and EFF consider it obvious that there is such an effect. You cannot seriously argue that there are no facts available to demonstrate this. It's business studies 101. Competition is driven by cost, service and quality. Wikipedia's own growth, and the demise of its paid-for competitors like Encarta, is in large part due to the fact that Wikipedia's users occurred no cost for accessing it, other than the cost of being online. Removing that cost in developing markets for Wikipedia, while imposing it on everyone else aiming to serve the public, is a strategy aimed at creating a monopoly. Monopolies are ultimately harmful to freedom. You may call that an opinion, too, but history presents us with a wealth of evidence demonstrating the truth of that assertion. I presented examples earlier in this thread of how restricting users to a Walled Wikipedia can do real-world harm. And I agree with Jens when he voices the opinion that it is hubristic to believe that Wikipedia is the sum of all human knowledge. At the most basic level, Wikipedia content is always dependent on sources generated outside Wikipedia itself, whose combined volume dwarfs Wikipedia. Speaking more generally, I would like to see a humbler Wikimedia Foundation: less in love with its own carefully cultivated image, more interested in quality, more interested in serving the public than in taking over the world, more aware, honest and transparent about its projects' failings. Wikipedia should have nothing to sell, not even itself. It should just be helpful to the consumer. The degree to which Wikipedia realised that ideal is what originally attracted me to it. I also believe it is a wiser long-term strategy for Wikimedia itself. In your post, Mike, you acknowledge the heterodoxy of your position, and that you haven't been ostracised for it. That's great, but it is important to remember that yours is a minority view, and that your more orthodox peers aren't participants on this mailing list. Perhaps we should make them aware of this discussion, and invite them to participate. Andreas On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:06 AM, Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com wrote: [Resubmitted with some HTML stuff removed, I hope.] Andreas writes: Prominent organisations campaigning for a free and open web very strongly disagree with your view. I said there are no facts, and you responded by citing opinion pieces. That's cool, but opinions are not themselves facts. Furthermore, in some circles, I've been considered from time to time to be someone prominent whose entire career has been dedicated to a free and open web. If you're suggesting that everyone -- or even everyone prominent -- who believes in a free and open web very strongly disagrees with me, then you are misinformed. There is an honest difference of opinion about what the developing world needs first. And, in my experience, it is only individuals in developed, industrialized countries with very little direct knowledge about the infrastructural and access challenges in developing countries who imagine that zero-rated services are categorically a threat to a free and open web. I've actually written about this issue at length, and will be publishing another article on the issue next week. I'll post the link here when I have it. Whether the U.S. government's Federal Communications is not itself a prominent organization that has committed itself to a free and open web is a proposition worth challenging is, of course, up to you. But I hope you don't expect such a challenge to be taken seriously. I know the FCC's new Report and Order on net neutrality is a very long (400-page) document, and there is of course no requirement that you actually have read it (much less some appreciable fraction of the comments that led to it). But I've done so. The FCC expressly refused to adopt the categorical, simplistic, binary approach you have posted here. My friends and colleagues at EFF, Access Now, and elsewhere -- as well as individual scholars and commentators like Marvin Ammori -- know me, and they know why I differ with them about this stuff. What I have explained to them is that my experiences of working with in-country NGOs in the developing world (who don't, in fact, disagree with me about this) have shaped my opinion. If your own experience in working on access issues in (say) Africa or Southeast Asia is stronger than my own, I'd be more likely to be persuaded by your, uh, original research than by your effort to selectively adduce footnotes in support of your assertions. At least that's my inclination after a quarter of a century of working for internet freedom. (I was the first employee at EFF, where I
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Introducing Kourosh Karimkhany, Vice President of Strategic Partnerships
2015-04-02 15:16 GMT+02:00 Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com: I pointed out that Lohninger, AccessNow and EFF consider it obvious that there is such an effect. Not so obvious, in my opinion. The EFF says about Wikipedia zero that it is a laudable effort[1] even acknowledging that it may harm competition even in the non-profit world. In another article the EFF says that Wikipedia Zero is an exception[2] among Zero rating services because his procedures are more transparent. This is very different from asking to stop or shut down Wikipedia Zero. You cannot seriously argue that there are no facts available to demonstrate this. It's business studies 101. I keep hearing this argument, but what myself (and I think also Mike) am contesting is this automatic implication that Wikipedia Zero brings behind itself Facebook Zero, Twitter Zero and all the others zero rating services. I don't see this automatism, and I would like therefore see some evidence for it, with dates possibly. (I have already demanded it in the past[3]) I do not consider it obvious at all. Please note that I am not saying that this effect can not exist /a priori/, I am completely agnostic about it and for this exact reason I would like it to be tested (it is also worth pointing out that since you are making the claim you are the one with the burden of proof). About Thomas Lohninger's opinion, he stated in the talk that you linked previously [4a] that WMF and Wikimedia Chile ask to withdraw or amend the Chilean net neutrality law, but if you read the letter sent (see [4b] for the letter, [4c] has context) the letter asked to confirm that Wikipedia Zero is not covered by this order [the circular from Chilean government implementing the Net Neutrality law][*]. Again, this is different: asking that Wikipedia Zero could continue running in the framework of the net neutrality law is different from demanding an amendment to the law, in the fact that it is asking to consider Wikipedia an exception. From what I can gather from the discussions on the advocacy advisors list I think that this is an opinion held by several Wikimedians (including myself). I think, Andreas, that your view (or Jens' or Thomas') is a legitimate position, but taking a really materialistic stance this is not a zero sum game. IMHO the exception approach is the only one, at least the only one I can think of, that may have a net positive outcome (i.e. giving access to Wikipedia to people and having a very wide-covering net neutrality protection), your proposition has the negative effect of eliciting the access to Wikipedia to people (and I very much understand Josh's reaction in this respect). Always taking this materialistic approach, I think it is legitimate to weight competing values, i.e. it is not automatic that Net Neutrality is a value that has a greater weight than access to knowledge (even if mediated through the in-many-ways-imperfect Wikipedia). Cristian [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/07/net-neutrality-and-transparency-principles-must-extend-mobile-internet-access-too [2] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/07/net-neutrality-and-global-digital-divide [3] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/2014-September/000758.html [4a] http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2014/31c3_-_6170_-_en_-_saal_g_-_201412282145_-_net_neutrality_days_of_future_past_-_rejo_zenger_-_thomas_lohninger.html#video (from 40.45) [4b] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Carta_a_SUBTEL_ref_Wikipedia_Zero.pdf [4c] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/2014-September/000752.html ___ 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] Fwd: Introducing Kourosh Karimkhany, Vice President of Strategic Partnerships
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-04-02 15:16 GMT+02:00 Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com: I pointed out that Lohninger, AccessNow and EFF consider it obvious that there is such an effect. I keep hearing this argument, but what myself (and I think also Mike) am contesting is this automatic implication that Wikipedia Zero brings behind itself Facebook Zero, Twitter Zero and all the others zero rating services. I don't see this automatism, and I would like therefore see some evidence for it, with dates possibly. As mentioned previously, what I have seen is recent additions to Internet.org, describing Internet.org app launches bundling Wikipedia Zero and Facebook Zero (along with a small and varying number of other sites) in the following countries: Zambia (31 Jul 2014) https://internet.org/press/introducing-the-internet-dot-org-app Tanzania (29 Oct 2014) https://internet.org/press/internet-dot-org-app-launches-in-tanzania Kenya (14 Nov 2014) http://internet.org/press/internet-dot-org-app-comes-to-kenya Colombia (14 Jan 2015) https://internet.org/press/internet-dot-org-app-launches-in-colombia Ghana (22 Jan 2015) https://internet.org/press/internet-dot-org-app-available-in-ghana India (10 Feb 2015) http://internet.org/press/internet-dot-org-app-now-available-in-india A few months prior to the start of these bundles, Jimmy Wales was asked on Quora What does Jimmy Wales think about Mark Zuckerberg's Internet.org project, especially in light of Wikipedia Zero? Is there a chance for it to become a collaborative project between Facebook and the Wikimedia Foundation?, He replied: ---o0o--- I like what they are doing. I have spoken to both Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg about it, and the internet.org team is in contact with our Wikipedia Zero team. Because Wikipedia/Wikimedia is somewhat the Switzerland of the Internet (i.e. with a strong tendency to be very vendor neutral) we are always going to be supportive of efforts like this, which are broad industry coalitions to do something useful particularly relating to broad access to knowledge, our core value. But we won't generally be tied up in any one thing per se. But we'll work with them where it makes sense, of course. In my personal capacity, I am a big fan of what they are trying to do and support it fully. ---o0o--- http://www.quora.com/What-does-Jimmy-Wales-think-about-Mark-Zuckerbergs-Internet-org-project-especially-in-light-of-Wikipedia-Zero-Is-there-a-chance-for-it-to-become-a-collaborative-project-between-Facebook-and-the-Wikimedia-Foundation I am less convinced of Facebook's altruistic motives. Note that Facebook actually seems to contain a complete mirror of Wikipedia, judging by the presence of even fairly obscure Wikipedia articles on its pages (selected using Random article). See e.g. https://www.facebook.com/pages/FIS-Alpine-World-Ski-Championships-2007-Mens-giant-slalom-qualification/639330712814390?fref=ts# https://www.facebook.com/pages/Hopf-algebra/110243959027029?fref=ts https://www.facebook.com/pages/Minimum-alveolar-concentration/132648116773162?fref=ts https://www.facebook.com/pages/Brian-Luighnech-Ua-Conchobhair/124597054293418?fref=ts Given the limitations Wikipedia Zero users labour under, it is actually fairly immaterial to users whether they see the Wikipedia article in Facebook Zero or Wikipedia Zero. The key difference is that in Facebook Zero, they will not see Wikipedia's logo and fundraising banners. (They also can't see the talk pages in Facebook.) They will have a less clear impression of Wikipedia's brand, and the whole thing will still primarily be a Facebook experience to them. So, in the context of Facebook Zero/Wikipedia Zero bundles, it seems to me the Wikipedia Zero deal is to a large extent there to ensure that Wikipedia becomes part of the telco's advertising. Access to Wikipedia articles is already a given in Facebook Zero. (I have already demanded it in the past[3]) I do not consider it obvious at all. Please note that I am not saying that this effect can not exist /a priori/, I am completely agnostic about it and for this exact reason I would like it to be tested (it is also worth pointing out that since you are making the claim you are the one with the burden of proof). About Thomas Lohninger's opinion, he stated in the talk that you linked previously [4a] that WMF and Wikimedia Chile ask to withdraw or amend the Chilean net neutrality law, but if you read the letter sent (see [4b] for the letter, [4c] has context) the letter asked to confirm that Wikipedia Zero is not covered by this order [the circular from Chilean government implementing the Net Neutrality law][*]. Thanks for the link. The Spanish text in the linked document bears you out, though I would assume the correspondence went on a bit after that. Regards, Andreas Again, this is different: asking that Wikipedia Zero could continue running in the
