It seems the whole world is full of spreading lies nowadays.
I feel very sad that now even we are following this trend
If we stated we would stop when the target was met, so we should stop
when the target was met
who are commited to spread correct facts through Wikipedia, as a
If you wanted to continue past the target, the message should NOT imply that
you would stop at the target.
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Sent: Friday, 16 December 2016 8:05 PM
Thanks for the update - it's great to hear that the target has been achieved so
Continuing the English fundraiser as part of reaching the global fundraising
target makes sense to me. Continuing the fundraiser after the global target has
been reached is rather more concerning
In the second round of Project Grants, 21 eligible proposals were submitted
for review. The committee recommended 12 projects for a total of $194,490
in funding. WMF has now approved all 12 grants. Here’s what we’re funding.
Thanks for passing that along.
As it turns out, we spent some time at the NYPL talking about strategy at
the Board retreat this November. The Board sat down with Tony Ageh, their
new Chief Digital Officer, to have an informal conversation about how
Wikimedia, the NYPL, and other
Yes, for sure. We don't want to impose anything on wikis that don't want or
can't use it.
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 7:21 AM, pi zero wrote:
> Just a general observation: Making things "global" can be good or bad for
> non-wikipedia projects depending on how it's done;
> Regarding the external expert for inclusive process you are looking for,
> maybe this article is of help:
What did the New York Public Library do that the Foundation doesn't
already do in their ordinary
As most of you know, we run our English-language online fundraiser on
Wikipedia every year in December. It’s our biggest fundraiser of the year.
During this time we raise the bulk of funds to support our operating budget
to support the projects, fund community efforts around the
Just a general observation: Making things "global" can be good or bad for
non-wikipedia projects depending on how it's done; spreading uniformity
across projects could also damage non-wikipedia projects by imposing
inappropriate infrastructure. I'm not totally cynical about the idea, just
Hi Katherine, thanks for the email.
Regarding the external expert for inclusive process you are looking for,
maybe this article is of help:
I'm posting here for everyone to see because I think is interesting for
Mail list logo