Re: [Wikimedia-l] Freedom of panorama today approved by Belgian parliament

2016-06-16 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
So can an image of Atomium be finally posted to Commons? :)
בתאריך 17 ביוני 2016 02:39,‏ "Romaine Wiki"  כתב:

> Hi all,
>
> Great news!
>
> Freedom of panorama has been voted today in the Belgian parliament.
> A mayority voted in favour of freedom of panorama, including commercial
> use.
>
> Soon images of artworks and modern buildings in Belgium can be restored on
> Commons.
>
> But first the law needs to be published in the Staatsblad, and ten days
> later it will be official, but that is just a formality. (Will keep you
> updated on that.)
>
>
> Article in the news in Dutch:
> http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/politiek/1.2685852
>
>
> In the past weeks, as well as since the campaign in Europe last year, we
> from Wikimedia Belgium have worked hard on this subject and communicated
> with the members of the parliament informing what this subject means for
> Wikipedia.
>
> With the founding of Wikimedia Belgium in 2014, this subject was a priority
> for us.
>
> Thanks all for the support!
>
> Let's get this implemented elsewhere too!
>
> Greetings from Belgium,
> Romaine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Commons-l] Freedom of panorama today approved by Belgian parliament

2016-06-16 Thread Ryan Kaldari
Congratulations! I can't wait to see next year's Wiki Loves Monuments
calendar from Belgium!

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Asaf Bartov  wrote:

> Fantastic news!  Kudos to Dimi and everyone else who worked hard to
> promote this. :)
>
>A.
>
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Romaine Wiki 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Great news!
>>
>> Freedom of panorama has been voted today in the Belgian parliament.
>> A mayority voted in favour of freedom of panorama, including commercial
>> use.
>>
>> Soon images of artworks and modern buildings in Belgium can be restored
>> on Commons.
>>
>> But first the law needs to be published in the Staatsblad, and ten days
>> later it will be official, but that is just a formality. (Will keep you
>> updated on that.)
>>
>>
>> Article in the news in Dutch:
>> http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/politiek/1.2685852
>>
>>
>> In the past weeks, as well as since the campaign in Europe last year, we
>> from Wikimedia Belgium have worked hard on this subject and communicated
>> with the members of the parliament informing what this subject means for
>> Wikipedia.
>>
>> With the founding of Wikimedia Belgium in 2014, this subject was a
>> priority for us.
>>
>> Thanks all for the support!
>>
>> Let's get this implemented elsewhere too!
>>
>> Greetings from Belgium,
>> Romaine
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Commons-l mailing list
>> common...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Asaf Bartov
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
> 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
>
> ___
> Commons-l mailing list
> common...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fresh data on the gender gap in content

2016-06-16 Thread Florence Devouard
I think the project evolved over time. It may be that this page did not 
exist in the first version.


Clearly, the site has been modified recently because the name changed 
from WIGI to WHGI. And I see the main four pages has been updated.


If you look at "Gender by language" for example, it mentions "As of 
January 2016 about 98% of biographies were attached to at least one 
Wikipedia site, so this data is mostly complete."


Gender by date of birth and death mentions "As of January 2016, only 
about 72% and 36% of biographies, had date of birth and date of death 
data, respectively, so this data is incomplete."


Gender by country mentions "As of January 2016, only about 30% of 
biographies, had place of birth, so this data is incomplete."


and "As of January 2016, only about 65% of biographies, had culture, so 
this data is incomplete."


Recently, these dates were much further in the past. I know because I 
noticed and ask Max for fresher data

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/wigi-project/CCLSKN2tmQE
A small table published there may answer part of your questions.

Ant

Le 17/06/16 à 00:22, Asaf Bartov a écrit :

Thanks, Florence!

I was aware of the WIGI research project (and have linked to it in the
==See Also== section of my page), but I was not aware of this page.  Neat!
So I won't need to update my own page. :)

   A.

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:


Hello Asaf

Just making sure that you knew about WHGI :
http://whgi.wmflabs.org/gender-by-language.html

Do you know if there are differences in analysis between the two analysis ?

I checked a few figures and it fits pretty well.

Flo


Le 16/06/16 à 21:14, Asaf Bartov a écrit :


Hullo everyone.

I was asked by a volunteer for help getting stats on the gender gap in
content on a certain Wikipedia, and came up with simple Wikidata Query
Service[1] queries that pulled the total number of articles on a given
Wikipedia about men and about women, to calculate *the proportion of
articles about women out of all articles about humans*.

Then I was curious about how that wiki compared to other wikis, so I ran
the queries on a bunch of languages, and gathered the results into a
table,
here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ijon/Content_gap

(please see the *caveat* there.)

I don't have time to fully write-up everything I find interesting in those
results, but I will quickly point out the following:

1. The Nepali statistic is simply astonishing! There must be a story
there.  I'm keen on learning more about this, if anyone can shed light.

2. Evidently, ~13%-17% seems like a robust average of the proportion of
articles about women among all biographies.

3. among the top 10 largest wikis, Japanese is the least imbalanced.  Good
job, Japanese Wikipedians!  I wonder if you have a good sense of what
drives this relatively better balance. (my instinctive guess is pop
culture
coverage.)

4. among the top 10 largest wikis, Russian is the most imbalanced.

5. I intend to re-generate these stats every two months or so, to
eventually have some sense of trends and changes.

6. Your efforts, particularly on small-to-medium wikis, can really make a
dent in these numbers!  For example, it seems I am personally
responsible[2] for almost 1% of the coverage of women on Hebrew Wikipedia!
:)

7. I encourage you to share these numbers with your communities.  Perhaps
you'd like to overtake the wiki just above yours? :)

8. I'm happy to add additional languages to the table, by request.  Or you
can do it yourself, too. :)

   A.

[1] https://query.wikidata.org/
[2] Yay #100wikidays :) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/100wikidays





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










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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Freedom of panorama today approved by Belgian parliament

2016-06-16 Thread attolippip
WOW, wonderful news indeed!

Best regards,
antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv
Wikimedia Ukraine

2016-06-17 1:38 GMT+02:00 Romaine Wiki :

> Hi all,
>
> Great news!
>
> Freedom of panorama has been voted today in the Belgian parliament.
> A mayority voted in favour of freedom of panorama, including commercial
> use.
>
> Soon images of artworks and modern buildings in Belgium can be restored on
> Commons.
>
> But first the law needs to be published in the Staatsblad, and ten days
> later it will be official, but that is just a formality. (Will keep you
> updated on that.)
>
>
> Article in the news in Dutch:
> http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/politiek/1.2685852
>
>
> In the past weeks, as well as since the campaign in Europe last year, we
> from Wikimedia Belgium have worked hard on this subject and communicated
> with the members of the parliament informing what this subject means for
> Wikipedia.
>
> With the founding of Wikimedia Belgium in 2014, this subject was a priority
> for us.
>
> Thanks all for the support!
>
> Let's get this implemented elsewhere too!
>
> Greetings from Belgium,
> Romaine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Commons-l] Freedom of panorama today approved by Belgian parliament

2016-06-16 Thread Asaf Bartov
Fantastic news!  Kudos to Dimi and everyone else who worked hard to promote
this. :)

   A.

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Romaine Wiki 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Great news!
>
> Freedom of panorama has been voted today in the Belgian parliament.
> A mayority voted in favour of freedom of panorama, including commercial
> use.
>
> Soon images of artworks and modern buildings in Belgium can be restored on
> Commons.
>
> But first the law needs to be published in the Staatsblad, and ten days
> later it will be official, but that is just a formality. (Will keep you
> updated on that.)
>
>
> Article in the news in Dutch:
> http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/politiek/1.2685852
>
>
> In the past weeks, as well as since the campaign in Europe last year, we
> from Wikimedia Belgium have worked hard on this subject and communicated
> with the members of the parliament informing what this subject means for
> Wikipedia.
>
> With the founding of Wikimedia Belgium in 2014, this subject was a
> priority for us.
>
> Thanks all for the support!
>
> Let's get this implemented elsewhere too!
>
> Greetings from Belgium,
> Romaine
>
>
>
> ___
> Commons-l mailing list
> common...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
>


-- 
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation 

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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] User session reset due to security issue

2016-06-16 Thread Darian Anthony Patrick
Due to a programming error, users who logged in to a Wikimedia project
wiki between 2016-06-07 and 2016-06-14 may have had the "Keep me logged
in (for up to 30 days)” setting inadvertently selected, despite the
checkbox not having been checked. In order to prevent unauthorized
access to user accounts in instances of shared computer use, the
Foundation is resetting user sessions for all users who logged in within
the aforementioned timeframe. Users who have their session reset will
need to log in again.

We apologize for the inconvenience this causes, but we want to reduce
the possibility of unintended access to user accounts by unauthorized
parties.

Additional information may be found at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_session_reset.

-- 
Darian Anthony Patrick
App. Security Engineer
IRC:   dapatrick
Wikis: DPatrick (WMF)
--
5304 CF26 E373 AEEF 6855  07AA 5F3E B709 00D4 11A4
--



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] Freedom of panorama today approved by Belgian parliament

2016-06-16 Thread Romaine Wiki
Hi all,

Great news!

Freedom of panorama has been voted today in the Belgian parliament.
A mayority voted in favour of freedom of panorama, including commercial use.

Soon images of artworks and modern buildings in Belgium can be restored on
Commons.

But first the law needs to be published in the Staatsblad, and ten days
later it will be official, but that is just a formality. (Will keep you
updated on that.)


Article in the news in Dutch:
http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/politiek/1.2685852


In the past weeks, as well as since the campaign in Europe last year, we
from Wikimedia Belgium have worked hard on this subject and communicated
with the members of the parliament informing what this subject means for
Wikipedia.

With the founding of Wikimedia Belgium in 2014, this subject was a priority
for us.

Thanks all for the support!

Let's get this implemented elsewhere too!

Greetings from Belgium,
Romaine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fresh data on the gender gap in content

2016-06-16 Thread Asaf Bartov
Hi, Giuseppe.

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Giuseppe Profiti 
wrote:

> Thanks Asaf, it is quite interesting.
> I have a couple of questions and one comment:
> - why is Italian wikipedia missing? Is there a problem with wikidata links?
>

Just an oversight -- I accidentally overwrote that line when posting.  Now
added. (~14.6%)

- is this kind of analysis possible also to the average user?
>

Sure!  Here's a query for number of article about women on ITWP:
http://tinyurl.com/hzrdfub

And here's one about men:
http://tinyurl.com/h7obnnq

And you can just change the language code to get other languages.  The
queries are split by gender even though it's possible to get both counts in
one query, to decrease the odds of running out of time for the query (an
unfortunate limitation due to lacking hardware, which also makes it
impossible to count articles about men on ENWP without help from a WMF
engineer.)


> The comment is about measuring such ratio in other similar products
> (encyclopedia, books with biographies etc) to see how wel we fare
> compared to others.
>

That would indeed be interesting, but I'm leaving that as an exercise for
someone else. :)

   A.
-- 
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation 

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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fresh data on the gender gap in content

2016-06-16 Thread Asaf Bartov
Thanks, Florence!

I was aware of the WIGI research project (and have linked to it in the
==See Also== section of my page), but I was not aware of this page.  Neat!
So I won't need to update my own page. :)

   A.

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:

> Hello Asaf
>
> Just making sure that you knew about WHGI :
> http://whgi.wmflabs.org/gender-by-language.html
>
> Do you know if there are differences in analysis between the two analysis ?
>
> I checked a few figures and it fits pretty well.
>
> Flo
>
>
> Le 16/06/16 à 21:14, Asaf Bartov a écrit :
>
>> Hullo everyone.
>>
>> I was asked by a volunteer for help getting stats on the gender gap in
>> content on a certain Wikipedia, and came up with simple Wikidata Query
>> Service[1] queries that pulled the total number of articles on a given
>> Wikipedia about men and about women, to calculate *the proportion of
>> articles about women out of all articles about humans*.
>>
>> Then I was curious about how that wiki compared to other wikis, so I ran
>> the queries on a bunch of languages, and gathered the results into a
>> table,
>> here:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ijon/Content_gap
>>
>> (please see the *caveat* there.)
>>
>> I don't have time to fully write-up everything I find interesting in those
>> results, but I will quickly point out the following:
>>
>> 1. The Nepali statistic is simply astonishing! There must be a story
>> there.  I'm keen on learning more about this, if anyone can shed light.
>>
>> 2. Evidently, ~13%-17% seems like a robust average of the proportion of
>> articles about women among all biographies.
>>
>> 3. among the top 10 largest wikis, Japanese is the least imbalanced.  Good
>> job, Japanese Wikipedians!  I wonder if you have a good sense of what
>> drives this relatively better balance. (my instinctive guess is pop
>> culture
>> coverage.)
>>
>> 4. among the top 10 largest wikis, Russian is the most imbalanced.
>>
>> 5. I intend to re-generate these stats every two months or so, to
>> eventually have some sense of trends and changes.
>>
>> 6. Your efforts, particularly on small-to-medium wikis, can really make a
>> dent in these numbers!  For example, it seems I am personally
>> responsible[2] for almost 1% of the coverage of women on Hebrew Wikipedia!
>> :)
>>
>> 7. I encourage you to share these numbers with your communities.  Perhaps
>> you'd like to overtake the wiki just above yours? :)
>>
>> 8. I'm happy to add additional languages to the table, by request.  Or you
>> can do it yourself, too. :)
>>
>>A.
>>
>> [1] https://query.wikidata.org/
>> [2] Yay #100wikidays :) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/100wikidays
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation 

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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fresh data on the gender gap in content

2016-06-16 Thread Vitor Mazuco
So interesting this list Asaf.

2016-06-16 16:14 GMT-03:00, Asaf Bartov :
> Hullo everyone.
>
> I was asked by a volunteer for help getting stats on the gender gap in
> content on a certain Wikipedia, and came up with simple Wikidata Query
> Service[1] queries that pulled the total number of articles on a given
> Wikipedia about men and about women, to calculate *the proportion of
> articles about women out of all articles about humans*.
>
> Then I was curious about how that wiki compared to other wikis, so I ran
> the queries on a bunch of languages, and gathered the results into a table,
> here:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ijon/Content_gap
>
> (please see the *caveat* there.)
>
> I don't have time to fully write-up everything I find interesting in those
> results, but I will quickly point out the following:
>
> 1. The Nepali statistic is simply astonishing! There must be a story
> there.  I'm keen on learning more about this, if anyone can shed light.
>
> 2. Evidently, ~13%-17% seems like a robust average of the proportion of
> articles about women among all biographies.
>
> 3. among the top 10 largest wikis, Japanese is the least imbalanced.  Good
> job, Japanese Wikipedians!  I wonder if you have a good sense of what
> drives this relatively better balance. (my instinctive guess is pop culture
> coverage.)
>
> 4. among the top 10 largest wikis, Russian is the most imbalanced.
>
> 5. I intend to re-generate these stats every two months or so, to
> eventually have some sense of trends and changes.
>
> 6. Your efforts, particularly on small-to-medium wikis, can really make a
> dent in these numbers!  For example, it seems I am personally
> responsible[2] for almost 1% of the coverage of women on Hebrew Wikipedia!
> :)
>
> 7. I encourage you to share these numbers with your communities.  Perhaps
> you'd like to overtake the wiki just above yours? :)
>
> 8. I'm happy to add additional languages to the table, by request.  Or you
> can do it yourself, too. :)
>
>A.
>
> [1] https://query.wikidata.org/
> [2] Yay #100wikidays :) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/100wikidays
> --
> Asaf Bartov
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
> 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
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fresh data on the gender gap in content

2016-06-16 Thread Giuseppe Profiti
Thanks Asaf, it is quite interesting.
I have a couple of questions and one comment:
- why is Italian wikipedia missing? Is there a problem with wikidata links?
- is this kind of analysis possible also to the average user?

The comment is about measuring such ratio in other similar products
(encyclopedia, books with biographies etc) to see how wel we fare
compared to others.

Best,
Giuseppe

2016-06-16 21:14 GMT+02:00 Asaf Bartov :
> Hullo everyone.
>
> I was asked by a volunteer for help getting stats on the gender gap in
> content on a certain Wikipedia, and came up with simple Wikidata Query
> Service[1] queries that pulled the total number of articles on a given
> Wikipedia about men and about women, to calculate *the proportion of
> articles about women out of all articles about humans*.
>
> Then I was curious about how that wiki compared to other wikis, so I ran
> the queries on a bunch of languages, and gathered the results into a table,
> here:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ijon/Content_gap
>
> (please see the *caveat* there.)
>
> I don't have time to fully write-up everything I find interesting in those
> results, but I will quickly point out the following:
>
> 1. The Nepali statistic is simply astonishing! There must be a story
> there.  I'm keen on learning more about this, if anyone can shed light.
>
> 2. Evidently, ~13%-17% seems like a robust average of the proportion of
> articles about women among all biographies.
>
> 3. among the top 10 largest wikis, Japanese is the least imbalanced.  Good
> job, Japanese Wikipedians!  I wonder if you have a good sense of what
> drives this relatively better balance. (my instinctive guess is pop culture
> coverage.)
>
> 4. among the top 10 largest wikis, Russian is the most imbalanced.
>
> 5. I intend to re-generate these stats every two months or so, to
> eventually have some sense of trends and changes.
>
> 6. Your efforts, particularly on small-to-medium wikis, can really make a
> dent in these numbers!  For example, it seems I am personally
> responsible[2] for almost 1% of the coverage of women on Hebrew Wikipedia!
> :)
>
> 7. I encourage you to share these numbers with your communities.  Perhaps
> you'd like to overtake the wiki just above yours? :)
>
> 8. I'm happy to add additional languages to the table, by request.  Or you
> can do it yourself, too. :)
>
>A.
>
> [1] https://query.wikidata.org/
> [2] Yay #100wikidays :) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/100wikidays
> --
> Asaf Bartov
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
> 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
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fresh data on the gender gap in content

2016-06-16 Thread Florence Devouard

Hello Asaf

Just making sure that you knew about WHGI : 
http://whgi.wmflabs.org/gender-by-language.html


Do you know if there are differences in analysis between the two analysis ?

I checked a few figures and it fits pretty well.

Flo


Le 16/06/16 à 21:14, Asaf Bartov a écrit :

Hullo everyone.

I was asked by a volunteer for help getting stats on the gender gap in
content on a certain Wikipedia, and came up with simple Wikidata Query
Service[1] queries that pulled the total number of articles on a given
Wikipedia about men and about women, to calculate *the proportion of
articles about women out of all articles about humans*.

Then I was curious about how that wiki compared to other wikis, so I ran
the queries on a bunch of languages, and gathered the results into a table,
here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ijon/Content_gap

(please see the *caveat* there.)

I don't have time to fully write-up everything I find interesting in those
results, but I will quickly point out the following:

1. The Nepali statistic is simply astonishing! There must be a story
there.  I'm keen on learning more about this, if anyone can shed light.

2. Evidently, ~13%-17% seems like a robust average of the proportion of
articles about women among all biographies.

3. among the top 10 largest wikis, Japanese is the least imbalanced.  Good
job, Japanese Wikipedians!  I wonder if you have a good sense of what
drives this relatively better balance. (my instinctive guess is pop culture
coverage.)

4. among the top 10 largest wikis, Russian is the most imbalanced.

5. I intend to re-generate these stats every two months or so, to
eventually have some sense of trends and changes.

6. Your efforts, particularly on small-to-medium wikis, can really make a
dent in these numbers!  For example, it seems I am personally
responsible[2] for almost 1% of the coverage of women on Hebrew Wikipedia!
:)

7. I encourage you to share these numbers with your communities.  Perhaps
you'd like to overtake the wiki just above yours? :)

8. I'm happy to add additional languages to the table, by request.  Or you
can do it yourself, too. :)

   A.

[1] https://query.wikidata.org/
[2] Yay #100wikidays :) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/100wikidays





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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fresh data on the gender gap in content

2016-06-16 Thread Shani
This is so cool! Thanks. :-)

(CCing some wiki-women from He-Wiki).

Shani.
On 16 Jun 2016 23:29, "Alex Wang"  wrote:

> Thanks, Asaf!
>
> This is very useful and interesting. There is much work to be done.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alex
>
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Anna Stillwell 
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you for this, Asaf. Very useful.
> > /a
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Asaf Bartov 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hullo everyone.
> > >
> > > I was asked by a volunteer for help getting stats on the gender gap in
> > > content on a certain Wikipedia, and came up with simple Wikidata Query
> > > Service[1] queries that pulled the total number of articles on a given
> > > Wikipedia about men and about women, to calculate *the proportion of
> > > articles about women out of all articles about humans*.
> > >
> > > Then I was curious about how that wiki compared to other wikis, so I
> ran
> > > the queries on a bunch of languages, and gathered the results into a
> > table,
> > > here:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ijon/Content_gap
> > >
> > > (please see the *caveat* there.)
> > >
> > > I don't have time to fully write-up everything I find interesting in
> > those
> > > results, but I will quickly point out the following:
> > >
> > > 1. The Nepali statistic is simply astonishing! There must be a story
> > > there.  I'm keen on learning more about this, if anyone can shed light.
> > >
> > > 2. Evidently, ~13%-17% seems like a robust average of the proportion of
> > > articles about women among all biographies.
> > >
> > > 3. among the top 10 largest wikis, Japanese is the least imbalanced.
> > Good
> > > job, Japanese Wikipedians!  I wonder if you have a good sense of what
> > > drives this relatively better balance. (my instinctive guess is pop
> > culture
> > > coverage.)
> > >
> > > 4. among the top 10 largest wikis, Russian is the most imbalanced.
> > >
> > > 5. I intend to re-generate these stats every two months or so, to
> > > eventually have some sense of trends and changes.
> > >
> > > 6. Your efforts, particularly on small-to-medium wikis, can really
> make a
> > > dent in these numbers!  For example, it seems I am personally
> > > responsible[2] for almost 1% of the coverage of women on Hebrew
> > Wikipedia!
> > > :)
> > >
> > > 7. I encourage you to share these numbers with your communities.
> Perhaps
> > > you'd like to overtake the wiki just above yours? :)
> > >
> > > 8. I'm happy to add additional languages to the table, by request.  Or
> > you
> > > can do it yourself, too. :)
> > >
> > >A.
> > >
> > > [1] https://query.wikidata.org/
> > > [2] Yay #100wikidays :) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/100wikidays
> > > --
> > > Asaf Bartov
> > > Wikimedia Foundation 
> > >
> > > 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
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Anna Stillwell
> > Director of Culture and Collaboration
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> > 415.806.1536
> > *www.wikimediafoundation.org *
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Alexandra Wang
> Program Officer
> Community Resources
> Wikimedia Foundation 
> +1 415-839-6885
> Skype: alexvwang
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fresh data on the gender gap in content

2016-06-16 Thread Alex Wang
Thanks, Asaf!

This is very useful and interesting. There is much work to be done.

Cheers,

Alex

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Anna Stillwell 
wrote:

> Thank you for this, Asaf. Very useful.
> /a
>
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Asaf Bartov 
> wrote:
>
> > Hullo everyone.
> >
> > I was asked by a volunteer for help getting stats on the gender gap in
> > content on a certain Wikipedia, and came up with simple Wikidata Query
> > Service[1] queries that pulled the total number of articles on a given
> > Wikipedia about men and about women, to calculate *the proportion of
> > articles about women out of all articles about humans*.
> >
> > Then I was curious about how that wiki compared to other wikis, so I ran
> > the queries on a bunch of languages, and gathered the results into a
> table,
> > here:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ijon/Content_gap
> >
> > (please see the *caveat* there.)
> >
> > I don't have time to fully write-up everything I find interesting in
> those
> > results, but I will quickly point out the following:
> >
> > 1. The Nepali statistic is simply astonishing! There must be a story
> > there.  I'm keen on learning more about this, if anyone can shed light.
> >
> > 2. Evidently, ~13%-17% seems like a robust average of the proportion of
> > articles about women among all biographies.
> >
> > 3. among the top 10 largest wikis, Japanese is the least imbalanced.
> Good
> > job, Japanese Wikipedians!  I wonder if you have a good sense of what
> > drives this relatively better balance. (my instinctive guess is pop
> culture
> > coverage.)
> >
> > 4. among the top 10 largest wikis, Russian is the most imbalanced.
> >
> > 5. I intend to re-generate these stats every two months or so, to
> > eventually have some sense of trends and changes.
> >
> > 6. Your efforts, particularly on small-to-medium wikis, can really make a
> > dent in these numbers!  For example, it seems I am personally
> > responsible[2] for almost 1% of the coverage of women on Hebrew
> Wikipedia!
> > :)
> >
> > 7. I encourage you to share these numbers with your communities.  Perhaps
> > you'd like to overtake the wiki just above yours? :)
> >
> > 8. I'm happy to add additional languages to the table, by request.  Or
> you
> > can do it yourself, too. :)
> >
> >A.
> >
> > [1] https://query.wikidata.org/
> > [2] Yay #100wikidays :) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/100wikidays
> > --
> > Asaf Bartov
> > Wikimedia Foundation 
> >
> > 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
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
>
> --
> Anna Stillwell
> Director of Culture and Collaboration
> Wikimedia Foundation
> 415.806.1536
> *www.wikimediafoundation.org *
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Alexandra Wang
Program Officer
Community Resources
Wikimedia Foundation 
+1 415-839-6885
Skype: alexvwang
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fresh data on the gender gap in content

2016-06-16 Thread Anna Stillwell
Thank you for this, Asaf. Very useful.
/a

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Asaf Bartov  wrote:

> Hullo everyone.
>
> I was asked by a volunteer for help getting stats on the gender gap in
> content on a certain Wikipedia, and came up with simple Wikidata Query
> Service[1] queries that pulled the total number of articles on a given
> Wikipedia about men and about women, to calculate *the proportion of
> articles about women out of all articles about humans*.
>
> Then I was curious about how that wiki compared to other wikis, so I ran
> the queries on a bunch of languages, and gathered the results into a table,
> here:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ijon/Content_gap
>
> (please see the *caveat* there.)
>
> I don't have time to fully write-up everything I find interesting in those
> results, but I will quickly point out the following:
>
> 1. The Nepali statistic is simply astonishing! There must be a story
> there.  I'm keen on learning more about this, if anyone can shed light.
>
> 2. Evidently, ~13%-17% seems like a robust average of the proportion of
> articles about women among all biographies.
>
> 3. among the top 10 largest wikis, Japanese is the least imbalanced.  Good
> job, Japanese Wikipedians!  I wonder if you have a good sense of what
> drives this relatively better balance. (my instinctive guess is pop culture
> coverage.)
>
> 4. among the top 10 largest wikis, Russian is the most imbalanced.
>
> 5. I intend to re-generate these stats every two months or so, to
> eventually have some sense of trends and changes.
>
> 6. Your efforts, particularly on small-to-medium wikis, can really make a
> dent in these numbers!  For example, it seems I am personally
> responsible[2] for almost 1% of the coverage of women on Hebrew Wikipedia!
> :)
>
> 7. I encourage you to share these numbers with your communities.  Perhaps
> you'd like to overtake the wiki just above yours? :)
>
> 8. I'm happy to add additional languages to the table, by request.  Or you
> can do it yourself, too. :)
>
>A.
>
> [1] https://query.wikidata.org/
> [2] Yay #100wikidays :) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/100wikidays
> --
> Asaf Bartov
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
> 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
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Anna Stillwell
Director of Culture and Collaboration
Wikimedia Foundation
415.806.1536
*www.wikimediafoundation.org *
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] Fresh data on the gender gap in content

2016-06-16 Thread Asaf Bartov
Hullo everyone.

I was asked by a volunteer for help getting stats on the gender gap in
content on a certain Wikipedia, and came up with simple Wikidata Query
Service[1] queries that pulled the total number of articles on a given
Wikipedia about men and about women, to calculate *the proportion of
articles about women out of all articles about humans*.

Then I was curious about how that wiki compared to other wikis, so I ran
the queries on a bunch of languages, and gathered the results into a table,
here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ijon/Content_gap

(please see the *caveat* there.)

I don't have time to fully write-up everything I find interesting in those
results, but I will quickly point out the following:

1. The Nepali statistic is simply astonishing! There must be a story
there.  I'm keen on learning more about this, if anyone can shed light.

2. Evidently, ~13%-17% seems like a robust average of the proportion of
articles about women among all biographies.

3. among the top 10 largest wikis, Japanese is the least imbalanced.  Good
job, Japanese Wikipedians!  I wonder if you have a good sense of what
drives this relatively better balance. (my instinctive guess is pop culture
coverage.)

4. among the top 10 largest wikis, Russian is the most imbalanced.

5. I intend to re-generate these stats every two months or so, to
eventually have some sense of trends and changes.

6. Your efforts, particularly on small-to-medium wikis, can really make a
dent in these numbers!  For example, it seems I am personally
responsible[2] for almost 1% of the coverage of women on Hebrew Wikipedia!
:)

7. I encourage you to share these numbers with your communities.  Perhaps
you'd like to overtake the wiki just above yours? :)

8. I'm happy to add additional languages to the table, by request.  Or you
can do it yourself, too. :)

   A.

[1] https://query.wikidata.org/
[2] Yay #100wikidays :) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/100wikidays
-- 
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation 

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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community survey to support the WMF ED search starts right now

2016-06-16 Thread
Thank you! Hopefully there will be a good range of viewpoints!

I look forward to reading a summary of the feedback!

Fae

On 16 June 2016 at 11:25, Alice Wiegand  wrote:
> Update: The survey is still open!
> In order to hear from more people, the search team decided to hold the ED
> search survey [1] open until Friday, June 17. If you haven’t already,
> please take a few minutes to fill it out before then.
>
> Thank you for your participation!
>
> [1] - ED Search Survey:
> https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_5hVS2mJTcJNCxBX
>
> Alice.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Nikola Kalchev 
> wrote:
>
>> As a patroller on my homewiki I can say that 15 of the 50 most active
>> editors according to stats.wikimedia.org would be capable of answering the
>> questions in one of the ten languages. Those are the people who translate
>> articles from the ten languages of the survey (13 from English, 2 from
>> Russian). Ask a few more patrollers from other communities, multiply by the
>> number of very active editors on those wikis and divide by the number of
>> asked patrollers :). It is not impossible to get a rough estimate.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> User:Lord Bumbury / Nikola Kalchev
>> Wikimedians of Bulgaria, a Wikimedia CEE Spring international organiser
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Nikola Kalchev > >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Dariusz, thank you for your clarification. I understand that
>> translations
>> >> take time.
>> >>
>> >> Would you please elaborate on the assumption that the most important
>> >> principle of the ED search committee was speed and not, e.g.
>> participation
>> >> of a larger part of the community? What would the bad effects of a 2
>> months
>> >> longer search on the WMF be?
>> >>
>> >
>> > The assumption is that any organization under an interim leader is
>> > basically frozen. An interim leader is unlikely to make any change. Also,
>> > one of the gripes of the past was a long (way over a year) process of ED
>> > searching. The ED search team wants to avoid repeating this.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> I fear that user groups will be underrepresented again (another notable
>> >> example is the number of representatives at the WMCON with chapters
>> having
>> >> up to four participants and user groups exactly one). There are 59 user
>> >> groups and (as well as I could count) only 10 of them will be able to
>> >> participate at the survey in their own language. Why was the opinion of
>> 49
>> >> user groups considered less worth that a delay of two months?
>> >>
>> >
>> > I think the main assumption may have been that there will be decreasing
>> > differences - that is, the differences between the views expressed in the
>> > 10 major languages will not be big in general. Of course, we will see
>> > whether there are significant differences within these 10.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter 
>> >  wrote:
>> >
>> >> Whereas I fully understand and partially share the sentiment, may I
>> >> please repeat the question I asked on this list in relation to a similar
>> >> topic some time ago. Could we estimate a number of active community
>> members
>> >> (whom we would reasonably expect to participate in the survey) who do
>> not
>> >> speak any of the languages to which the survey was translated, to the
>> point
>> >> that their ability to fill in the survey would depend on the others? If
>> >> this is a considerable number, or if it is less significant but
>> >> considerably compromises on the representation, which languages do these
>> >> community members speak?
>> >>
>> >>
>> > Yaroslav's question is a good one - I don't know from the top of my head
>> > how to estimate this easily. However, let me repeat: we are asking
>> general
>> > questions, and the results are not binding. It is not an issue of
>> > representation. I doubt if there will be huge cultural differences to the
>> > extent that the questionnaire would bring different results if 10 more
>> > languages were added, mainly because I think that wiki-world is quite
>> > hermetic and has a culture of its own.
>> >
>> >
>> > cheers,
>> >
>> > dj
>> >
>> >
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alice Wiegand
> Board of Trustees
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community survey to support the WMF ED search starts right now

2016-06-16 Thread Alice Wiegand
Update: The survey is still open!
In order to hear from more people, the search team decided to hold the ED
search survey [1] open until Friday, June 17. If you haven’t already,
please take a few minutes to fill it out before then.

Thank you for your participation!

[1] - ED Search Survey:
https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_5hVS2mJTcJNCxBX

Alice.



On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Nikola Kalchev 
wrote:

> As a patroller on my homewiki I can say that 15 of the 50 most active
> editors according to stats.wikimedia.org would be capable of answering the
> questions in one of the ten languages. Those are the people who translate
> articles from the ten languages of the survey (13 from English, 2 from
> Russian). Ask a few more patrollers from other communities, multiply by the
> number of very active editors on those wikis and divide by the number of
> asked patrollers :). It is not impossible to get a rough estimate.
>
> Best regards,
> User:Lord Bumbury / Nikola Kalchev
> Wikimedians of Bulgaria, a Wikimedia CEE Spring international organiser
>
> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Nikola Kalchev  >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Dariusz, thank you for your clarification. I understand that
> translations
> >> take time.
> >>
> >> Would you please elaborate on the assumption that the most important
> >> principle of the ED search committee was speed and not, e.g.
> participation
> >> of a larger part of the community? What would the bad effects of a 2
> months
> >> longer search on the WMF be?
> >>
> >
> > The assumption is that any organization under an interim leader is
> > basically frozen. An interim leader is unlikely to make any change. Also,
> > one of the gripes of the past was a long (way over a year) process of ED
> > searching. The ED search team wants to avoid repeating this.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> I fear that user groups will be underrepresented again (another notable
> >> example is the number of representatives at the WMCON with chapters
> having
> >> up to four participants and user groups exactly one). There are 59 user
> >> groups and (as well as I could count) only 10 of them will be able to
> >> participate at the survey in their own language. Why was the opinion of
> 49
> >> user groups considered less worth that a delay of two months?
> >>
> >
> > I think the main assumption may have been that there will be decreasing
> > differences - that is, the differences between the views expressed in the
> > 10 major languages will not be big in general. Of course, we will see
> > whether there are significant differences within these 10.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter 
> >  wrote:
> >
> >> Whereas I fully understand and partially share the sentiment, may I
> >> please repeat the question I asked on this list in relation to a similar
> >> topic some time ago. Could we estimate a number of active community
> members
> >> (whom we would reasonably expect to participate in the survey) who do
> not
> >> speak any of the languages to which the survey was translated, to the
> point
> >> that their ability to fill in the survey would depend on the others? If
> >> this is a considerable number, or if it is less significant but
> >> considerably compromises on the representation, which languages do these
> >> community members speak?
> >>
> >>
> > Yaroslav's question is a good one - I don't know from the top of my head
> > how to estimate this easily. However, let me repeat: we are asking
> general
> > questions, and the results are not binding. It is not an issue of
> > representation. I doubt if there will be huge cultural differences to the
> > extent that the questionnaire would bring different results if 10 more
> > languages were added, mainly because I think that wiki-world is quite
> > hermetic and has a culture of its own.
> >
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > dj
> >
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Alice Wiegand
Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,