Re: [Wikimedia-l] Initial eligibility announced for 2015-2016 Round 2 of the APG process

Greetings, colleagues! We are pleased to report that all five organizations that have submitted Letters of Intent are confirmed as eligible to submit applications for annual plan grants, pending their continued compliance

[Wikimedia-l] Wiki maps news and updates

The quest to bring maps to Wikipedia continues: * Kartographer has launched for WikiVoyage * Julien Girault will help maps with his UI expertise * Talk to us at the FreeNode IRC channel #wikipedia-interactive https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Kartographer Last week we enabled Kartographer

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Arbital, another Wikipedia competitor/complement

Le 14/03/2016 02:03, David Gerard a écrit : Being put together by Eliezer Yudkowsky of LessWrong. Content is cc-by-sa 3.0, don't know about the software. https://arbital.com/p/arbital_ambitions/ Rather than the "encyclopedia" approach, it tries to be more pedagogical, teaching the reader at

[Wikimedia-l] Open call for Individual Engagement Grant proposals

Hi everyone, The Wikimedia Foundation Individual Engagement Grants (IEG) program is accepting proposals from March 14th to April 12th for new ideas to improve Wikimedia projects. Funds are available (up to $30,000 USD) to support individuals or teams

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

On 14 March 2016 at 22:12, Marc A. Pelletier wrote: > On 16-03-14 05:01 PM, Vi to wrote: >> Ignoring a wide community >> consensus is *always* a mistake. > > It is. I never advocated otherwise. > > That old RfC, however, does not show a wide community consensus, let > alone a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cross-wiki notifications beta feature now available on all wikis

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > > Cross-wiki notifications > > This is great, thank you. > > Two requests: > > Please could we have two icons, one for local notifications, another for > those from elsewhere? > > I've pinged you in the existing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cross-wiki notifications beta feature now available on all wikis

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Fæ wrote: > Is this change related to the standard notifications pop-up window no > longer working in Chrome (it just sits waiting to get painted), or was > that an existing bug? > > Thanks, > Fae > Hi Fae, I've just tested, and the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

Hi folks, Please, please, please put pieces of this discussion that are important to you on the transparency practices page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Transparency/Practices There are a lot of ideas floating around and its important to have them in one place. Thanks all! Edward On Mon,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

In case anybody believes Wikimedia Foundation personnel have entirely forgotten this issue, please be assured that is not the case. https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T119595 Speaking for myself, I'm not convinced that taking action on a two year old RFC at Commons is the most pressing component

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

Oh I missed dates, this is a good point then. Ignoring a wide community consensus is *always* a mistake. Final decisions might even diverge from consensus but *ignoring* is the worst way. Vito 2016-03-14 21:31 GMT+01:00 Michael Peel : > That's a good point. I've started a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

Luis, The original announcement of your departure[1], posted on Feb. 8, said, Quote: "Later this month, Luis will transition out of his current position with the Wikimedia Foundation to pursue other opportunities. He will remain in a consulting role with the Foundation over the next few months,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cross-wiki notifications beta feature now available on all wikis

This is an example, in my opinion (as is most of the echo feature) an example of the WMF doing an extremely fine implementation of a feature that the community has dreamed of for years. This is really fine. Well done to all involved. pb On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Fæ

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

That's a good point. I've started a discussion on Commons' VP about this at: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#2014_RfC_for_the_Media_Viewer Thanks, Mike > On 14 Mar 2016, at 17:03, Anthony Cole wrote: > > That RFC is 20 months old. That media viewer

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

I won't take a position on this particular issue, since I rarely visit Commons, but "Ignore all rules" should categorically not be taken as "Ignore consensus" or "Ignore other editors". That way lies madness. On Mar 14, 2016 2:11 PM, "Philippe Beaudette" wrote: > Consensus

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

Consensus can and should be ignored when it is detrimental to improving the end product. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ignore_all_rules is an applicable cite, I think. It's even categorized as global. On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Vi to wrote: > Same with

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

Same with consensus from logged-out users to implement MV. I have no strong feelings about the issue (anons shouldn't be affected by MV side effects but also MV is almost useless on Commons) but well, consensus cannot be ignored. Vito 2016-03-14 15:28 GMT+01:00 Marc A. Pelletier

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

I should narrow the scope of my statement a bit. I understand a need for, and support, carefully crafted NDAs that protect information like credit card numbers and personally identifiable information. I am skeptical of overly broad or vague NDAs, as well as non-disparagement clauses. I am

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

Well, Pete, I certainly interpreted Nathan's question as being specific enough to require that a number be given. On 14 March 2016 at 14:28, Pete Forsyth wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Risker wrote: > > > There's a difference between

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Risker wrote: > There's a difference between "does the WMF generally include > non-disparagement and non-disclosure clauses in separation agreements" and > "how many separation agreements include non-disparagement and > non-disclosure

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

I'm looking at this issue from a few angles. 1. If an initial employment contract has a provision that employees who voluntarily resign and provide X amount of notice will be paid out something like their accrued vacation time (I believe that some jurisdictions require this) and a certain amount

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

There's a difference between "does the WMF generally include non-disparagement and non-disclosure clauses in separation agreements" and "how many separation agreements include non-disparagement and non-disclosure clauses". One is general, and the other is specific; the first can likely be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

We need to distinguish between the personal and private details of individuals and the policies of the WMF around management of employees. It should be clear to everyone that employee satisfaction, retention, dispute management and other issues of personnel management are central to the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

That RFC is 20 months old. That media viewer is not today's media viewer. Anthony Cole On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote: > On 16-03-14 10:59 AM, Nathan wrote: > > the non-participation of > > non-participants can't render all decisions invalid. > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cross-wiki notifications beta feature now available on all wikis

Is this change related to the standard notifications pop-up window no longer working in Chrome (it just sits waiting to get painted), or was that an existing bug? Thanks, Fae On 11 March 2016 at 07:07, Roan Kattouw wrote: > In late 2015 and early 2016, the Collaboration

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

Actually, no, you probably can't ask that question either - because the names of the individuals who have departed are pretty much all publicly known. (There's even a timeline in which all their names are mentioned, linked from news articles and other "external" locations.) In many jurisdictions,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

It's an easy question to ask in a non-specific way: In the last six months, has the WMF approved severance agreements with departing employees with language that, in effect, prevented them from publicly criticizing the WMF, its management or the Board on matters of public interest?

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

On 14 March 2016 at 09:40, Risker wrote: > I think it is probably best that human resources issues (including the > reasons for people leaving the organization) are not included in this list, > unless expressly disclosed by the individuals. > And, in particular, wild

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

I think it is probably best that human resources issues (including the reasons for people leaving the organization) are not included in this list, unless expressly disclosed by the individuals. Risker On 14 March 2016 at 12:14, Pine W wrote: > Um. Luis, if you were offered

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

On 3/14/2016 9:14 AM, Pine W wrote: Um. Luis, if you were offered a severance agreement that included a financial payment from WMF, that would be... very interesting. And potentially very problematic. Or it could be a relatively routine business practice. For example, in many cases an employer

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

Um. Luis, if you were offered a severance agreement that included a financial payment from WMF, that would be... very interesting. And potentially very problematic. Pine On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Luis Villa wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:44 PM Oliver Keyes

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia.org portal page update!

Wow! Cool. Thanks! :-) --Steinsplitter > Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 09:01:34 -0700 > From: astillw...@wikimedia.org > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > CC: wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org; discov...@lists.wikimedia.org; > wikitech-ambassad...@lists.wikimedia.org > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l]

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia.org portal page update!

Thank you. Great work. /a On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Deborah Tankersley < dtankers...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > Hello! > > I'm very pleased to announce that we've updated the Wikipedia.org > portal page with a brand new search box that is > more prominent and will now

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

While this might be a valid request, I'm a bit concern about the % of the participants in the RFC. I don't think it's a good idea for this % of participant to make a binding decision for an entirely disjoint community many hundred if not thousand times it size with neither participation nor

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote: > On 16-03-14 10:33 AM, Steinsplitter Wiki wrote: > > Per commons Policy's the RFC is valid. > > Then the policy is broken. It seems more than a little insane to me > that an opinion poll having had participation of a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

Per commons Policy's the RFC is valid. > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > From: m...@uberbox.org > Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 10:28:25 -0400 > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and > logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons > > On 16-03-14 10:24 AM,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:44 PM Oliver Keyes wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Luis Villa wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 1:08 PM Antoine Musso > wrote: > > > >> > >> To the best of my knowledge such agreements are not public, but

[Wikimedia-l] Disabe Media Viewer for non-logged-in users and logged-in users on Wikimedia Commons

To whom it may concern, Pursuant to consensus at Commons:Requests for comment/Media Viewer software feature the Media Viewer must be switches off for logged in users and logged out users. The current status is that the feature has been only disabled for logged in user. This tool is not needed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] World Mime Day Wiki edit-a-thon

Hi all, I'm forwarding this mail from Sherry Snyder regarding read-only moments on wikis. It will happen on 22nd of March but I hope it won't affect World Mime Day edit-a-thon, cause it will be during low-traffic period. From: *Whatamidoing (WMF)/Sherry Snyder* Date:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses

Hi Andreas, Thanks for your email. A few wmf staff have worked on a page on meta to invite anyone to post their thoughts about transparency at https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Transparency/Practices. Would you be able to post your idea there? I'd be happy to post it there for you if you have