Anna
I'm glad to hear that everything is all right and that you don't need our
help after all. When you return from your break, it would be of value to
the community for you to let them know what those "actual changes" were.
That way we can help you even better next time.
"Rogol"
On Sat, Mar 4,
Hello Rogol,
I think the process on this particular count already took place.
We wrote a report in good faith.
We responded to critique in good faith.
We're making actual changes in good faith.
Have a lovely weekend. I really need a break.
Warmly,
/a
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Rogol Domedo
Nice question, James. Head over to Meta and ask. They'll be able to tell
you their sources, and if you have better sources, they'll update it.
Warmly,
/a
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 7:19 PM, James Salsman wrote:
> Hi Katherine,
>
> Where did the projections on the "Internet penetration by 2030"
> sl
Hi Katherine,
Where did the projections on the "Internet penetration by 2030"
slide[1] on the process briefing[2] come from? They look very low. The
file summary description says they came from the UN Department of
Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division[3] but they aren't
anywhere in tha
I want to express respect for this discussion and re-iterate two favorite
points:
Erik says:
"I haven't done an extensive survey, but I suspect all the major
Wikipedia languages largely agree in their presentation on climate
change. If so, that is itself a notable fact, given the amount of
politi
Hi all!
Happy March! This week I was in Barcelona at the Mobile World Congress
conference to support the efforts of the Iraqi Wikimedians User Group. The
community, led by Sarmad Saeed Yaseen and Ravan Jafaar al-Taie, led the
development of a partnership with a local mobile network operator to bri
Anna,
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:46 AM, you wrote:
> [...]
> And I'm struggling with a process problem (not one of substance) that I
> don't know how to solve. I truly don't. And it's kind of killing me.
>
> We (people who work and volunteer at the WMF) need a way to get feedback.
> We need a way t
They were probably caught on this range block:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=User%3A105.168.0.0%2F16&type=block
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 99707 6409Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator *
*at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- Member of Wikime
Sure, and I suspect most reasonable people will agree with that.
However, in the current legal construct, the author can decide whether to
apply that principle or not.
The question remains: if people apply principles that go way beyond that,
what do we do? I think question that was put in the Ger
This is probably best for a separate topic, but it was raised a couple of
times on this thread, so I respond here.
Concerning the better engagement of WMF with community, not calling any
names here, the best way to engage is, well, you know, to edit Wikimedia
projects. Not to just make two edits p
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> If the format was compiled before Trump was elected, then this argument is
> either irrelevant or becomes that the foundation must avoid offending
> politicians in power by changing public statements to be unc
11 matches
Mail list logo
