Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of Raju Narisetti to Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2017-10-16 Thread Subhashish Panigrahi
Welcome Raju!

I could only see you from far during the recent ONA 17 but missed the
opportunity to meet and say hi.

The Wikimedia community has a lot to gain from your long journalistic
experience. Look forward to getting your advice for our communities.

Love,
Subhashish
Odia Wikimedians User Group

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 10:35 AM, James Alexander 
wrote:

> Welcome Raju!
>
> *James Alexander*
> Manager, Trust & Safety
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Biyanto Rebin <
> biyanto.re...@wikimedia.or.id> wrote:
>
> > Welcome to Wikimedia movements, Raju!
> >
> > Best regards from Indonesia,
> >
> > 2017-10-17 1:19 GMT+07:00 Christophe Henner :
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > Over the past year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has been
> > > reviewing and evolving our appointment and onboarding process for new
> > Board
> > > members. While that has resulted in some lingering vacancies, we knew
> it
> > > was important to update these processes to help maintain a cordial and
> > > productive Board.
> > >
> > > The updated appointment process provides the entire board with more
> > > detailed (albeit private) information about each candidate’s
> background,
> > > public profile, past professional and volunteer work, and ability to
> > > contribute to the Board. The updated onboarding process is meant to
> help
> > > Board members learn about the processes and expectations of our Board
> > more
> > > quickly to help reduce productivity lost to transitions. Special thanks
> > to
> > > everyone serving on the Board Governance Committee and Nataliia for the
> > > work they have put into these improvements!
> > >
> > > I am also incredibly excited to share that these efforts have helped us
> > > identify and appoint an amazing addition to the Wikimedia Foundation
> > Board
> > > of Trustees! At our October meeting, the Board appointed and welcomed
> > Raju
> > > Narisetti to fill one of the vacant expert seats.
> > >
> > > Raju is a veteran media executive and journalist and brings a wealth of
> > > communications experience to the board. He is also a veteran of
> nonprofit
> > > governance and currently serves on the board for the International
> Center
> > > for Journalists and Institute for International Education. I am
> confident
> > > he will be a very valuable addition to the board and thrilled that he
> has
> > > agreed to join us!
> > >
> > > We will continue to make improvements to our governance processes, for
> > > example with the learnings from the on-going governance review, and
> apply
> > > what we have learned to future appointments and filling our remaining
> > > vacancy. Thank you for everyone’s patience as we took a pause and
> worked
> > on
> > > recruiting the best possible candidates, rather than simply rushing to
> > fill
> > > the seats.
> > >
> > > In the meantime, below (and on the Wikimedia Blog) you will find the
> > > official announcement about Raju Narisetti and please join me in warmly
> > > welcoming him to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and to the
> > > Wikimedia movement!
> > >
> > > Christophe
> > > Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> > >
> > > Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> > >
> > > Media veteran brings nearly three decades of global strategic
> experience
> > in
> > > digital media and audience development to the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board
> > >
> > >
> > > Image:
> > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raju_Narisetti_-_
> > > International_Journalism_Festival_2015.JPG
> > >
> > > San Francisco, CA, October 16, 2017 — The Wikimedia Foundation today
> > > announced the appointment of Raju Narisetti, a veteran media executive
> > and
> > > journalist, to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
> > >
> > > Raju brings more than 29 years of media experience across three
> > continents.
> > > He is currently CEO of Univision Communications Inc’s Gizmodo Media
> > Group,
> > > the publisher of websites including Gizmodo, Jezebel, Lifehacker and
> The
> > > Root.
> > >
> > > “Raju has dedicated his life’s work to information as a public service.
> > His
> > > commitment to editorial integrity, independence, and inclusion is
> deeply
> > > aligned with Wikimedia values. His passion and expertise in digital
> > > strategy and international growth will be invaluable to our movement’s
> > > future as we advance our global free knowledge mission,” said Wikimedia
> > > Foundation Executive Director, Katherine Maher.
> > >
> > > Prior to joining the Gizmodo Media Group, Raju served as Senior Vice
> > > President, Strategy, at News Corp, one of the largest media companies
> in
> > > the world and the publisher of The Wall Street Journal and The Times of
> > > London. In that role, Raju was responsible for identifying new digital
> > > growth opportunities globally for News Corp.
> > >
> > >
> > > “There has never been more urgency in 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of Raju Narisetti to Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2017-10-16 Thread James Alexander
Welcome Raju!

*James Alexander*
Manager, Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Biyanto Rebin <
biyanto.re...@wikimedia.or.id> wrote:

> Welcome to Wikimedia movements, Raju!
>
> Best regards from Indonesia,
>
> 2017-10-17 1:19 GMT+07:00 Christophe Henner :
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Over the past year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has been
> > reviewing and evolving our appointment and onboarding process for new
> Board
> > members. While that has resulted in some lingering vacancies, we knew it
> > was important to update these processes to help maintain a cordial and
> > productive Board.
> >
> > The updated appointment process provides the entire board with more
> > detailed (albeit private) information about each candidate’s background,
> > public profile, past professional and volunteer work, and ability to
> > contribute to the Board. The updated onboarding process is meant to help
> > Board members learn about the processes and expectations of our Board
> more
> > quickly to help reduce productivity lost to transitions. Special thanks
> to
> > everyone serving on the Board Governance Committee and Nataliia for the
> > work they have put into these improvements!
> >
> > I am also incredibly excited to share that these efforts have helped us
> > identify and appoint an amazing addition to the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board
> > of Trustees! At our October meeting, the Board appointed and welcomed
> Raju
> > Narisetti to fill one of the vacant expert seats.
> >
> > Raju is a veteran media executive and journalist and brings a wealth of
> > communications experience to the board. He is also a veteran of nonprofit
> > governance and currently serves on the board for the International Center
> > for Journalists and Institute for International Education. I am confident
> > he will be a very valuable addition to the board and thrilled that he has
> > agreed to join us!
> >
> > We will continue to make improvements to our governance processes, for
> > example with the learnings from the on-going governance review, and apply
> > what we have learned to future appointments and filling our remaining
> > vacancy. Thank you for everyone’s patience as we took a pause and worked
> on
> > recruiting the best possible candidates, rather than simply rushing to
> fill
> > the seats.
> >
> > In the meantime, below (and on the Wikimedia Blog) you will find the
> > official announcement about Raju Narisetti and please join me in warmly
> > welcoming him to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and to the
> > Wikimedia movement!
> >
> > Christophe
> > Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> >
> > Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> >
> > Media veteran brings nearly three decades of global strategic experience
> in
> > digital media and audience development to the Wikimedia Foundation Board
> >
> >
> > Image:
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raju_Narisetti_-_
> > International_Journalism_Festival_2015.JPG
> >
> > San Francisco, CA, October 16, 2017 — The Wikimedia Foundation today
> > announced the appointment of Raju Narisetti, a veteran media executive
> and
> > journalist, to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
> >
> > Raju brings more than 29 years of media experience across three
> continents.
> > He is currently CEO of Univision Communications Inc’s Gizmodo Media
> Group,
> > the publisher of websites including Gizmodo, Jezebel, Lifehacker and The
> > Root.
> >
> > “Raju has dedicated his life’s work to information as a public service.
> His
> > commitment to editorial integrity, independence, and inclusion is deeply
> > aligned with Wikimedia values. His passion and expertise in digital
> > strategy and international growth will be invaluable to our movement’s
> > future as we advance our global free knowledge mission,” said Wikimedia
> > Foundation Executive Director, Katherine Maher.
> >
> > Prior to joining the Gizmodo Media Group, Raju served as Senior Vice
> > President, Strategy, at News Corp, one of the largest media companies in
> > the world and the publisher of The Wall Street Journal and The Times of
> > London. In that role, Raju was responsible for identifying new digital
> > growth opportunities globally for News Corp.
> >
> >
> > “There has never been more urgency in Wikipedia's 16-year history than
> now,
> > for upholding the values of free exchange of information and knowledge,”
> > said Raju. “Despite mounting challenges around the world, rapid
> innovation
> > is creating tremendous opportunities for the Wikimedia Foundation. I have
> > much to learn, but am also looking forward to lending my nearly three
> > decades of global media experiences to the movement, to help engage more
> > digital and mobile audiences, particularly diverse young people, and
> > harness their energy to benefit from—and support—the vital values that
> > underpin all Wikimedia initiatives.”
> >
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of Raju Narisetti to Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2017-10-16 Thread Biyanto Rebin
Welcome to Wikimedia movements, Raju!

Best regards from Indonesia,

2017-10-17 1:19 GMT+07:00 Christophe Henner :

> Hi everyone,
>
> Over the past year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has been
> reviewing and evolving our appointment and onboarding process for new Board
> members. While that has resulted in some lingering vacancies, we knew it
> was important to update these processes to help maintain a cordial and
> productive Board.
>
> The updated appointment process provides the entire board with more
> detailed (albeit private) information about each candidate’s background,
> public profile, past professional and volunteer work, and ability to
> contribute to the Board. The updated onboarding process is meant to help
> Board members learn about the processes and expectations of our Board more
> quickly to help reduce productivity lost to transitions. Special thanks to
> everyone serving on the Board Governance Committee and Nataliia for the
> work they have put into these improvements!
>
> I am also incredibly excited to share that these efforts have helped us
> identify and appoint an amazing addition to the Wikimedia Foundation Board
> of Trustees! At our October meeting, the Board appointed and welcomed Raju
> Narisetti to fill one of the vacant expert seats.
>
> Raju is a veteran media executive and journalist and brings a wealth of
> communications experience to the board. He is also a veteran of nonprofit
> governance and currently serves on the board for the International Center
> for Journalists and Institute for International Education. I am confident
> he will be a very valuable addition to the board and thrilled that he has
> agreed to join us!
>
> We will continue to make improvements to our governance processes, for
> example with the learnings from the on-going governance review, and apply
> what we have learned to future appointments and filling our remaining
> vacancy. Thank you for everyone’s patience as we took a pause and worked on
> recruiting the best possible candidates, rather than simply rushing to fill
> the seats.
>
> In the meantime, below (and on the Wikimedia Blog) you will find the
> official announcement about Raju Narisetti and please join me in warmly
> welcoming him to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and to the
> Wikimedia movement!
>
> Christophe
> Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
>
> Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
>
> Media veteran brings nearly three decades of global strategic experience in
> digital media and audience development to the Wikimedia Foundation Board
>
>
> Image:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raju_Narisetti_-_
> International_Journalism_Festival_2015.JPG
>
> San Francisco, CA, October 16, 2017 — The Wikimedia Foundation today
> announced the appointment of Raju Narisetti, a veteran media executive and
> journalist, to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
>
> Raju brings more than 29 years of media experience across three continents.
> He is currently CEO of Univision Communications Inc’s Gizmodo Media Group,
> the publisher of websites including Gizmodo, Jezebel, Lifehacker and The
> Root.
>
> “Raju has dedicated his life’s work to information as a public service. His
> commitment to editorial integrity, independence, and inclusion is deeply
> aligned with Wikimedia values. His passion and expertise in digital
> strategy and international growth will be invaluable to our movement’s
> future as we advance our global free knowledge mission,” said Wikimedia
> Foundation Executive Director, Katherine Maher.
>
> Prior to joining the Gizmodo Media Group, Raju served as Senior Vice
> President, Strategy, at News Corp, one of the largest media companies in
> the world and the publisher of The Wall Street Journal and The Times of
> London. In that role, Raju was responsible for identifying new digital
> growth opportunities globally for News Corp.
>
>
> “There has never been more urgency in Wikipedia's 16-year history than now,
> for upholding the values of free exchange of information and knowledge,”
> said Raju. “Despite mounting challenges around the world, rapid innovation
> is creating tremendous opportunities for the Wikimedia Foundation. I have
> much to learn, but am also looking forward to lending my nearly three
> decades of global media experiences to the movement, to help engage more
> digital and mobile audiences, particularly diverse young people, and
> harness their energy to benefit from—and support—the vital values that
> underpin all Wikimedia initiatives.”
>
> Before joining News Corp, Raju spent nearly 25 years as a journalist and
> editor. He started at The Economic Times in India before moving to The
> Dayton Daily News (Ohio), The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), and The Washington
> Post. Starting out as a summer intern at WSJ, he eventually became Editor
> of The Wall Street Journal Europe and later Managing Editor of WSJ’s
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of Raju Narisetti to Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2017-10-16 Thread Lodewijk
Welcome to the movement, Raju!

Your profile seems, with my limited understanding of the current
functioning of the board, a valuable complement to the current board. I
hope that you feel able and encouraged to also share your wisdom directly
with the community.
While some of us can be a little more direct and harsh than is appreciated
by many, there is usually a large (quiet) majority that appreciates to hear
from its board members, especially when they have unique perspectives to
bring to the table. Engage early, engage often - and like we say in the
Netherlands: barking dogs don't bite.

Warmly,
Lodewijk Gelauff

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Victoria Coleman 
wrote:

> Raju welcome! You bring much expertise & wisdom to us!
>
> Victoria
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 2017, at 2:48 PM, Katherine Maher 
> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you, Christophe, for sharing this wonderful news.
> >
> > I have had the opportunity to get to know Raju during this appointments
> > process, and am very excited that he is joining our Wikimedia family as a
> > Foundation Trustee. It is clear to me that his values are closely aligned
> > with those of our movement, and that he brings wisdom and expertise
> > attained throughout his varied professional experiences. As Executive
> > Director, I have the distinct pleasure of working closely with our Board,
> > and I share Christophe's confidence that Raju will make an excellent
> > addition.
> >
> > Raju, welcome and thank you for joining one of the world's largest
> > volunteer movements, and generously offering your time, talent, and
> wisdom
> > to the advancement of our mission. I look forward to working with and
> > learning from you in the years to come.
> >
> > Katherine
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Bishakha Datta  >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Excellent news!
> >> Bishakha
> >>
> >> On 17 Oct 2017 00:11, "Anna Stillwell" 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Welcome, Raju.
> >>> /a
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Christophe Henner <
> >> chen...@wikimedia.org
> 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  Hi everyone,
> 
>  Over the past year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has
> been
>  reviewing and evolving our appointment and onboarding process for new
> >>> Board
>  members. While that has resulted in some lingering vacancies, we knew
> >> it
>  was important to update these processes to help maintain a cordial and
>  productive Board.
> 
>  The updated appointment process provides the entire board with more
>  detailed (albeit private) information about each candidate’s
> >> background,
>  public profile, past professional and volunteer work, and ability to
>  contribute to the Board. The updated onboarding process is meant to
> >> help
>  Board members learn about the processes and expectations of our Board
> >>> more
>  quickly to help reduce productivity lost to transitions. Special
> thanks
> >>> to
>  everyone serving on the Board Governance Committee and Nataliia for
> the
>  work they have put into these improvements!
> 
>  I am also incredibly excited to share that these efforts have helped
> us
>  identify and appoint an amazing addition to the Wikimedia Foundation
> >>> Board
>  of Trustees! At our October meeting, the Board appointed and welcomed
> >>> Raju
>  Narisetti to fill one of the vacant expert seats.
> 
>  Raju is a veteran media executive and journalist and brings a wealth
> of
>  communications experience to the board. He is also a veteran of
> >> nonprofit
>  governance and currently serves on the board for the International
> >> Center
>  for Journalists and Institute for International Education. I am
> >> confident
>  he will be a very valuable addition to the board and thrilled that he
> >> has
>  agreed to join us!
> 
>  We will continue to make improvements to our governance processes, for
>  example with the learnings from the on-going governance review, and
> >> apply
>  what we have learned to future appointments and filling our remaining
>  vacancy. Thank you for everyone’s patience as we took a pause and
> >> worked
> >>> on
>  recruiting the best possible candidates, rather than simply rushing to
> >>> fill
>  the seats.
> 
>  In the meantime, below (and on the Wikimedia Blog) you will find the
>  official announcement about Raju Narisetti and please join me in
> warmly
>  welcoming him to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and to the
>  Wikimedia movement!
> 
>  Christophe
>  Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> 
>  Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> 
>  Media veteran brings nearly three decades of global strategic
> >> experience
> >>> in
>  digital media and audience development to the Wikimedia Foundation
> >> Board
> 

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2017-10-16 Thread Samantha Lien
This press release is available online here:  https://wikimediafoundation.
org/wiki/Press_releases/Raju_Narisetti_joins_Wikimedia_
Foundation_Board_of_Trustees

And also as a blog post on the Wikimedia blog here:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/10/16/raju-narisetti-new-foundation-trustee/

Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

Media veteran brings nearly three decades of global strategic experience in
digital media and audience development to the Wikimedia Foundation Board

San Francisco, CA, October 16, 2017 — The Wikimedia Foundation today
announced the appointment of Raju Narisetti, a veteran media executive and
journalist, to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.

Raju brings more than 29 years of media experience across three continents.
He is currently CEO of Univision Communications Inc’s Gizmodo Media Group,
the publisher of websites including Gizmodo, Jezebel, Lifehacker and The
Root.

“Raju has dedicated his life’s work to information as a public service. His
commitment to editorial integrity, independence, and inclusion is deeply
aligned with Wikimedia values. His passion and expertise in digital
strategy and international growth will be invaluable to our movement’s
future as we advance our global free knowledge mission,” said Wikimedia
Foundation Executive Director Katherine Maher.

Prior to joining the Gizmodo Media Group, Raju served as Senior Vice
President, Strategy, at News Corp, one of the largest media companies in
the world and the publisher of The Wall Street Journal and The Times of
London. In that role, Raju was responsible for identifying new digital
growth opportunities globally for News Corp.


“There has never been more urgency in Wikipedia's 16-year history than now,
for upholding the values of free exchange of information and knowledge,”
said Raju. “Despite mounting challenges around the world, rapid innovation
is creating tremendous opportunities for the Wikimedia Foundation. I have
much to learn, but am also looking forward to lending my nearly three
decades of global media experiences to the movement, to help engage more
digital and mobile audiences, particularly diverse young people, and
harness their energy to benefit from—and support—the vital values that
underpin all Wikimedia initiatives.”

Before joining News Corp, Raju spent nearly 25 years as a journalist and
editor. He started at The Economic Times in India before moving to The
Dayton Daily News (Ohio), The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), and The Washington
Post. Starting out as a summer intern at WSJ, he eventually became Editor
of The Wall Street Journal Europe and later Managing Editor of WSJ’s
digital newsrooms. At The Washington Post, he was the Managing Editor who
led the Post’s rethinking of its separate digital and print newsrooms and
operations.

A native of Hyderabad, India, Raju is also the founder of Mint, currently
India’s second-largest daily business newspaper by circulation.

“Raju's extensive international and journalistic experience will add
valuable perspective to the Board as we look to bring new voices from
around the world into our movement. I am impressed by his willingness to
learn about and embrace the values behind the Wikimedia movement, and look
forward to working with him to support our free knowledge mission,” said
Nataliia Tymkiv, Governance Chair for the Board.

Raju is currently the Vice-chair for the Board of Directors of the
International
Center for Journalists
, as
well as a member of the Board of Trustees for the Institute of
International Education
, which
administers the Fulbright Scholarship
 programmes. He lives
in Brooklyn, New York.

Raju joins eight other Foundation Trustees
 who collectively
bring expertise in the Wikimedia community, financial oversight,
governance, and organizational development; and a commitment to advancing
Wikimedia’s mission of free knowledge for all.

He was approved unanimously by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
His term is effective October 2017 and will continue for three years.
Please see the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
 for complete
biographies.

About the Wikimedia Foundation

The Wikimedia Foundation is the non-profit organization that supports and
operates Wikipedia and its sister free knowledge projects. Wikipedia is the
world’s free knowledge resource, spanning more than 45 million articles
across nearly 300 languages. Every month, more than 200,000 people edit
Wikipedia and the Wikimedia projects, collectively creating and improving
knowledge that is accessed by more than 1 billion unique devices every
month. This all makes Wikipedia one of the most popular web properties in
the world. Based in 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia Library User Group is being renamed!

2017-10-16 Thread UY Scuti
*Hello! In the past few months, the Wikipedia Library User Group[1] has
been undergoing some major planning and developments. We just finished our
very first open call with the user group members, which was a great success
(see the meeting minutes [2]). If you joined us during the meeting, we’d
like to thank you for your interest. If not, not to worry, we have lots of
things planned for the user group in which you can participate.We'd like to
inform you that based on the input received from the user group members and
the founding members, it was agreed that the Wikipedia Library User Group’s
name be reconsidered by a voting process. We’d like to invite you to vote
on the list of potential names. You can vote by following this link[3]. The
poll will run for a timeframe of two weeks. Thank you. On behalf of the
founding members,Aaron[1] -
>[2] -
>[3]
- >*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] July 2017 Board of Trustees meeting minutes

2017-10-16 Thread Charles M. Roslof
Hi all,

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees have approved and published
minutes from their meeting on July 21, 2017:
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2017-07-21

Best,

Charles M. Roslof
Legal Counsel
Wikimedia Foundation
cros...@wikimedia.org
(415) 839-6885

NOTICE: This message might have confidential or legally privileged
information in it. If you have received this message by accident, please
delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the
Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice
to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff
members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see
our legal disclaimer
.
___
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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of Raju Narisetti to Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2017-10-16 Thread Victoria Coleman
Raju welcome! You bring much expertise & wisdom to us! 

Victoria


> On Oct 16, 2017, at 2:48 PM, Katherine Maher  wrote:
> 
> Thank you, Christophe, for sharing this wonderful news.
> 
> I have had the opportunity to get to know Raju during this appointments
> process, and am very excited that he is joining our Wikimedia family as a
> Foundation Trustee. It is clear to me that his values are closely aligned
> with those of our movement, and that he brings wisdom and expertise
> attained throughout his varied professional experiences. As Executive
> Director, I have the distinct pleasure of working closely with our Board,
> and I share Christophe's confidence that Raju will make an excellent
> addition.
> 
> Raju, welcome and thank you for joining one of the world's largest
> volunteer movements, and generously offering your time, talent, and wisdom
> to the advancement of our mission. I look forward to working with and
> learning from you in the years to come.
> 
> Katherine
> 
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Bishakha Datta 
> wrote:
> 
>> Excellent news!
>> Bishakha
>> 
>> On 17 Oct 2017 00:11, "Anna Stillwell"  wrote:
>> 
>>> Welcome, Raju.
>>> /a
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Christophe Henner <
>> chen...@wikimedia.org
 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 Hi everyone,
 
 Over the past year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has been
 reviewing and evolving our appointment and onboarding process for new
>>> Board
 members. While that has resulted in some lingering vacancies, we knew
>> it
 was important to update these processes to help maintain a cordial and
 productive Board.
 
 The updated appointment process provides the entire board with more
 detailed (albeit private) information about each candidate’s
>> background,
 public profile, past professional and volunteer work, and ability to
 contribute to the Board. The updated onboarding process is meant to
>> help
 Board members learn about the processes and expectations of our Board
>>> more
 quickly to help reduce productivity lost to transitions. Special thanks
>>> to
 everyone serving on the Board Governance Committee and Nataliia for the
 work they have put into these improvements!
 
 I am also incredibly excited to share that these efforts have helped us
 identify and appoint an amazing addition to the Wikimedia Foundation
>>> Board
 of Trustees! At our October meeting, the Board appointed and welcomed
>>> Raju
 Narisetti to fill one of the vacant expert seats.
 
 Raju is a veteran media executive and journalist and brings a wealth of
 communications experience to the board. He is also a veteran of
>> nonprofit
 governance and currently serves on the board for the International
>> Center
 for Journalists and Institute for International Education. I am
>> confident
 he will be a very valuable addition to the board and thrilled that he
>> has
 agreed to join us!
 
 We will continue to make improvements to our governance processes, for
 example with the learnings from the on-going governance review, and
>> apply
 what we have learned to future appointments and filling our remaining
 vacancy. Thank you for everyone’s patience as we took a pause and
>> worked
>>> on
 recruiting the best possible candidates, rather than simply rushing to
>>> fill
 the seats.
 
 In the meantime, below (and on the Wikimedia Blog) you will find the
 official announcement about Raju Narisetti and please join me in warmly
 welcoming him to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and to the
 Wikimedia movement!
 
 Christophe
 Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
 
 Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
 
 Media veteran brings nearly three decades of global strategic
>> experience
>>> in
 digital media and audience development to the Wikimedia Foundation
>> Board
 
 
 Image:
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raju_Narisetti_-_
 International_Journalism_Festival_2015.JPG
 
 San Francisco, CA, October 16, 2017 — The Wikimedia Foundation today
 announced the appointment of Raju Narisetti, a veteran media executive
>>> and
 journalist, to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
 
 Raju brings more than 29 years of media experience across three
>>> continents.
 He is currently CEO of Univision Communications Inc’s Gizmodo Media
>>> Group,
 the publisher of websites including Gizmodo, Jezebel, Lifehacker and
>> The
 Root.
 
 “Raju has dedicated his life’s work to information as a public service.
>>> His
 commitment to editorial integrity, independence, and inclusion is
>> deeply
 aligned with Wikimedia values. His passion and expertise in digital
 strategy and international growth will be 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of Raju Narisetti to Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2017-10-16 Thread Katherine Maher
Thank you, Christophe, for sharing this wonderful news.

I have had the opportunity to get to know Raju during this appointments
process, and am very excited that he is joining our Wikimedia family as a
Foundation Trustee. It is clear to me that his values are closely aligned
with those of our movement, and that he brings wisdom and expertise
attained throughout his varied professional experiences. As Executive
Director, I have the distinct pleasure of working closely with our Board,
and I share Christophe's confidence that Raju will make an excellent
addition.

Raju, welcome and thank you for joining one of the world's largest
volunteer movements, and generously offering your time, talent, and wisdom
to the advancement of our mission. I look forward to working with and
learning from you in the years to come.

Katherine

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Bishakha Datta 
wrote:

> Excellent news!
> Bishakha
>
> On 17 Oct 2017 00:11, "Anna Stillwell"  wrote:
>
> > Welcome, Raju.
> > /a
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Christophe Henner <
> chen...@wikimedia.org
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > Over the past year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has been
> > > reviewing and evolving our appointment and onboarding process for new
> > Board
> > > members. While that has resulted in some lingering vacancies, we knew
> it
> > > was important to update these processes to help maintain a cordial and
> > > productive Board.
> > >
> > > The updated appointment process provides the entire board with more
> > > detailed (albeit private) information about each candidate’s
> background,
> > > public profile, past professional and volunteer work, and ability to
> > > contribute to the Board. The updated onboarding process is meant to
> help
> > > Board members learn about the processes and expectations of our Board
> > more
> > > quickly to help reduce productivity lost to transitions. Special thanks
> > to
> > > everyone serving on the Board Governance Committee and Nataliia for the
> > > work they have put into these improvements!
> > >
> > > I am also incredibly excited to share that these efforts have helped us
> > > identify and appoint an amazing addition to the Wikimedia Foundation
> > Board
> > > of Trustees! At our October meeting, the Board appointed and welcomed
> > Raju
> > > Narisetti to fill one of the vacant expert seats.
> > >
> > > Raju is a veteran media executive and journalist and brings a wealth of
> > > communications experience to the board. He is also a veteran of
> nonprofit
> > > governance and currently serves on the board for the International
> Center
> > > for Journalists and Institute for International Education. I am
> confident
> > > he will be a very valuable addition to the board and thrilled that he
> has
> > > agreed to join us!
> > >
> > > We will continue to make improvements to our governance processes, for
> > > example with the learnings from the on-going governance review, and
> apply
> > > what we have learned to future appointments and filling our remaining
> > > vacancy. Thank you for everyone’s patience as we took a pause and
> worked
> > on
> > > recruiting the best possible candidates, rather than simply rushing to
> > fill
> > > the seats.
> > >
> > > In the meantime, below (and on the Wikimedia Blog) you will find the
> > > official announcement about Raju Narisetti and please join me in warmly
> > > welcoming him to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and to the
> > > Wikimedia movement!
> > >
> > > Christophe
> > > Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> > >
> > > Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> > >
> > > Media veteran brings nearly three decades of global strategic
> experience
> > in
> > > digital media and audience development to the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board
> > >
> > >
> > > Image:
> > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raju_Narisetti_-_
> > > International_Journalism_Festival_2015.JPG
> > >
> > > San Francisco, CA, October 16, 2017 — The Wikimedia Foundation today
> > > announced the appointment of Raju Narisetti, a veteran media executive
> > and
> > > journalist, to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
> > >
> > > Raju brings more than 29 years of media experience across three
> > continents.
> > > He is currently CEO of Univision Communications Inc’s Gizmodo Media
> > Group,
> > > the publisher of websites including Gizmodo, Jezebel, Lifehacker and
> The
> > > Root.
> > >
> > > “Raju has dedicated his life’s work to information as a public service.
> > His
> > > commitment to editorial integrity, independence, and inclusion is
> deeply
> > > aligned with Wikimedia values. His passion and expertise in digital
> > > strategy and international growth will be invaluable to our movement’s
> > > future as we advance our global free knowledge mission,” said Wikimedia
> > > Foundation Executive Director, Katherine 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election

2017-10-16 Thread Chris Keating
Thanks Joe (and Matanya) for the speedy replies. I’ve added a comment on the 
talk page of the report. 

Chris

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Joe Sutherland
Sent: 16 October 2017 19:25
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 
2017Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election

A great question. And I have an easy answer!

I wrote up the feedback we received into a report that you can read here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Post_mortem/Report

The committee will be working on taking the feedback onboard ahead of the
next election cycle, which is (at the time of writing) the FDC elections in
2019.

Let me know if you have any questions about the report. :)

best,
Joe

--
*Joe Sutherland* (he/him or they/them)
Community Advocate
Wikimedia Foundation
joesutherland.rocks

On 16 October 2017 at 11:14, Chris Keating 
wrote:

> Hello all and particularly the Elections Committee!
>
> I just wondered what is happening in terms of post-mortem on the elections.
> There was a call for comments on Meta - is there any kind of active review
> by the Election Committee happening? I know in previous years the EC has
> often made extensive comments to shape future years!
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
>
> On 21 May 2017 01:33, "matanya moses"  wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> >
> > The certified results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> > election are now available on Meta-Wiki: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Results
> >
> > Congratulations to María Sefidari (User:Raystorm), Dariusz Jemielniak
> > (User:pundit), and James Heilman (User:Doc James) for receiving the most
> > community support. Subject to a standard background check, they will be
> > appointed by the Board at their August meeting at Wikimania.
> >
> > These results have been certified by the elections committee, the
> > Wikimedia Foundation staff advisors to the committee, and the Board of
> > Trustees.
> >
> > There were 5,581 votes cast, with 5,120 of those being valid. The
> 461-vote
> > difference comes from recast ballots, where eligible voters recast
> ballots
> > to change their votes, and struck votes, of which there were 34. (Some of
> > the recast votes were also struck.)
> >
> > Additional information is available on the Wikimedia Blog:
> > https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/05/20/board-of-trustees-elections-2017/
> >
> > More statistics on the elections and a post-mortem from the committee
> will
> > be published in the coming days. In the meantime, we would appreciate
> your
> > input—what went well for you in this election?  What could we do better
> > next time?  These reports are crucial to helping future elections be even
> > more successful, and we hope that you will offer your feedback and ideas:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > elections/2017/Post_mortem
> >
> > The committee would like to thank everyone that participated in this
> > year’s election for helping make it, again, one of the most diverse and
> > representative in the movement’s history.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > – Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee
> >
> > ___
> > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread quiddity
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland
 wrote:
> As far as i know, it is the only project that the initiative Women in red
> contribute to, which is the initial subject of this thread.
>

Sidenote: the WikiProject itself does exist on other languages/projects:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q23875215
but this particular contribution drive is only focused on English
Wikipedia. I imagine it would be significantly harder to coordinate an
equivalent endeavor across multiple languages/communities
simultaneously. Perhaps other languages could set up something similar
for themselves?


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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Sydney Poore
Hello Todd,

This particular grant request is here on meta.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Dr._Blofeld/Contest_toolkits_and_prize_funds

The talk page has details about the review by the community committee and
also an explanation of the funding that was actually give.

There is background information about WMF grants here.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Dr._Blofeld/Contest_toolkits_and_prize_funds

And an evaluation of contests in general. It is several years old and
doesn't include some of the newer contest.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Learning_and_Evaluation/Evaluation_reports/2013/On-wiki_writing_contests

Sydney Poore
User:FloNight
Co-founder Kentucky Wikimedians,
Co-founder WikiWomen User Group,
Co-founder WikiConference North America
Board member of Wiki Project Med Foundation






On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Todd Allen  wrote:

> Are those applications published anywhere? I'd be curious to see it. I'm
> not really familiar with the grant process.
>
> Todd
>
> On Oct 16, 2017 12:47 PM, "Jean-Philippe Béland" 
> wrote:
>
> > My opinion is that such projects should be supported, we should encourage
> > 'be bold'. That being said, people planning projects at a large scale
> > should communicate with the concerned communities first. As such, the
> > concerns raised in this thread for example would have been raised during
> > the planning phase of that project and hopefully addressed. There is a
> > place in the application forms for grants for projects that asks to list
> > "Community Notification". The Grant Committee should look more closely at
> > that section and ensure that the communities have been notified before
> > granting any fund.
> >
> > JP
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Lodewijk 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on
> > the
> > > fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to
> > pull
> > > that leverage.
> > >
> > > The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are
> > > considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only
> > > pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how
> much
> > > of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat
> larger
> > > scale.
> > >
> > > While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
> > >
> > > Lodewijk
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> > > jpbel...@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > > There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
> > > Wikipedia
> > > > like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able
> to
> > > > keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
> > > >
> > > > Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > > Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> > > > list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether
> a
> > > > > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary
> > transmasculine
> > > > > people like myself.
> > > > >
> > > > > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this
> thread:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of
> Emily's/Keilana's
> > > > >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns
> > that
> > > > this
> > > > >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for
> in
> > > the
> > > > >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
> > > project
> > > > >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including
> not
> > > > >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
> > > > >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
> > sexist.
> > > I
> > > > >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's
> said
> > > can
> > > > >> be
> > > > >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism
> of
> > > > poor
> > > > >> wording.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
> > > >  > > > >> gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through
> to
> > > > this
> > > > >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
> > with
> > > > her
> > > > >> email address.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle
> some
> > > > >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to
> AFD
> > > > >> everything that comes out of this contest as it 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Yes it's all on Meta. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Start.

JP

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:21 PM Todd Allen  wrote:

> Are those applications published anywhere? I'd be curious to see it. I'm
> not really familiar with the grant process.
>
> Todd
>
> On Oct 16, 2017 12:47 PM, "Jean-Philippe Béland" 
> wrote:
>
> > My opinion is that such projects should be supported, we should encourage
> > 'be bold'. That being said, people planning projects at a large scale
> > should communicate with the concerned communities first. As such, the
> > concerns raised in this thread for example would have been raised during
> > the planning phase of that project and hopefully addressed. There is a
> > place in the application forms for grants for projects that asks to list
> > "Community Notification". The Grant Committee should look more closely at
> > that section and ensure that the communities have been notified before
> > granting any fund.
> >
> > JP
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Lodewijk 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on
> > the
> > > fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to
> > pull
> > > that leverage.
> > >
> > > The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are
> > > considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only
> > > pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how
> much
> > > of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat
> larger
> > > scale.
> > >
> > > While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
> > >
> > > Lodewijk
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> > > jpbel...@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > > There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
> > > Wikipedia
> > > > like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able
> to
> > > > keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
> > > >
> > > > Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > > Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> > > > list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether
> a
> > > > > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary
> > transmasculine
> > > > > people like myself.
> > > > >
> > > > > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this
> thread:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of
> Emily's/Keilana's
> > > > >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns
> > that
> > > > this
> > > > >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for
> in
> > > the
> > > > >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
> > > project
> > > > >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including
> not
> > > > >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
> > > > >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
> > sexist.
> > > I
> > > > >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's
> said
> > > can
> > > > >> be
> > > > >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism
> of
> > > > poor
> > > > >> wording.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
> > > >  > > > >> gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through
> to
> > > > this
> > > > >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
> > with
> > > > her
> > > > >> email address.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle
> some
> > > > >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to
> AFD
> > > > >> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about
> > women
> > > > to a
> > > > >> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia
> isn't
> > > > going
> > > > >> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a
> > bunch
> > > > of
> > > > >> stubs.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women?
> It's
> > > > better
> > > > >> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
> > > > shouldn't
> > > > >> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
> > > > >>
> > > > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > - Pax aka Funcrunch
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Todd Allen
Are those applications published anywhere? I'd be curious to see it. I'm
not really familiar with the grant process.

Todd

On Oct 16, 2017 12:47 PM, "Jean-Philippe Béland" 
wrote:

> My opinion is that such projects should be supported, we should encourage
> 'be bold'. That being said, people planning projects at a large scale
> should communicate with the concerned communities first. As such, the
> concerns raised in this thread for example would have been raised during
> the planning phase of that project and hopefully addressed. There is a
> place in the application forms for grants for projects that asks to list
> "Community Notification". The Grant Committee should look more closely at
> that section and ensure that the communities have been notified before
> granting any fund.
>
> JP
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Lodewijk 
> wrote:
>
> > I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on
> the
> > fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to
> pull
> > that leverage.
> >
> > The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are
> > considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only
> > pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how much
> > of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat larger
> > scale.
> >
> > While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
> >
> > Lodewijk
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> > jpbel...@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
> > Wikipedia
> > > like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to
> > > keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
> > >
> > > Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> > > list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
> > > > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary
> transmasculine
> > > > people like myself.
> > > >
> > > > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
> > > >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
> > > >>
> > > >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns
> that
> > > this
> > > >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in
> > the
> > > >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
> > project
> > > >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
> > > >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
> > > >>
> > > >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
> > > >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
> sexist.
> > I
> > > >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said
> > can
> > > >> be
> > > >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
> > > poor
> > > >> wording.
> > > >>
> > > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
> > >  > > >> gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
> > > this
> > > >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
> with
> > > her
> > > >> email address.
> > > >>
> > > >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
> > > >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
> > > >> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about
> women
> > > to a
> > > >> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
> > > going
> > > >> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a
> bunch
> > > of
> > > >> stubs.
> > > >>
> > > >> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
> > > better
> > > >> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
> > > shouldn't
> > > >> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
> > > >>
> > > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > - Pax aka Funcrunch
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Is that still going on?
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
> > Wikipedia.
> > > >> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned
> > out
> > > >> pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on
> > > women
> > > >> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of
> them.
> > > >>
> > > >> But I'm 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of Raju Narisetti to Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2017-10-16 Thread Bishakha Datta
Excellent news!
Bishakha

On 17 Oct 2017 00:11, "Anna Stillwell"  wrote:

> Welcome, Raju.
> /a
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Christophe Henner  >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Over the past year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has been
> > reviewing and evolving our appointment and onboarding process for new
> Board
> > members. While that has resulted in some lingering vacancies, we knew it
> > was important to update these processes to help maintain a cordial and
> > productive Board.
> >
> > The updated appointment process provides the entire board with more
> > detailed (albeit private) information about each candidate’s background,
> > public profile, past professional and volunteer work, and ability to
> > contribute to the Board. The updated onboarding process is meant to help
> > Board members learn about the processes and expectations of our Board
> more
> > quickly to help reduce productivity lost to transitions. Special thanks
> to
> > everyone serving on the Board Governance Committee and Nataliia for the
> > work they have put into these improvements!
> >
> > I am also incredibly excited to share that these efforts have helped us
> > identify and appoint an amazing addition to the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board
> > of Trustees! At our October meeting, the Board appointed and welcomed
> Raju
> > Narisetti to fill one of the vacant expert seats.
> >
> > Raju is a veteran media executive and journalist and brings a wealth of
> > communications experience to the board. He is also a veteran of nonprofit
> > governance and currently serves on the board for the International Center
> > for Journalists and Institute for International Education. I am confident
> > he will be a very valuable addition to the board and thrilled that he has
> > agreed to join us!
> >
> > We will continue to make improvements to our governance processes, for
> > example with the learnings from the on-going governance review, and apply
> > what we have learned to future appointments and filling our remaining
> > vacancy. Thank you for everyone’s patience as we took a pause and worked
> on
> > recruiting the best possible candidates, rather than simply rushing to
> fill
> > the seats.
> >
> > In the meantime, below (and on the Wikimedia Blog) you will find the
> > official announcement about Raju Narisetti and please join me in warmly
> > welcoming him to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and to the
> > Wikimedia movement!
> >
> > Christophe
> > Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> >
> > Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> >
> > Media veteran brings nearly three decades of global strategic experience
> in
> > digital media and audience development to the Wikimedia Foundation Board
> >
> >
> > Image:
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raju_Narisetti_-_
> > International_Journalism_Festival_2015.JPG
> >
> > San Francisco, CA, October 16, 2017 — The Wikimedia Foundation today
> > announced the appointment of Raju Narisetti, a veteran media executive
> and
> > journalist, to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
> >
> > Raju brings more than 29 years of media experience across three
> continents.
> > He is currently CEO of Univision Communications Inc’s Gizmodo Media
> Group,
> > the publisher of websites including Gizmodo, Jezebel, Lifehacker and The
> > Root.
> >
> > “Raju has dedicated his life’s work to information as a public service.
> His
> > commitment to editorial integrity, independence, and inclusion is deeply
> > aligned with Wikimedia values. His passion and expertise in digital
> > strategy and international growth will be invaluable to our movement’s
> > future as we advance our global free knowledge mission,” said Wikimedia
> > Foundation Executive Director, Katherine Maher.
> >
> > Prior to joining the Gizmodo Media Group, Raju served as Senior Vice
> > President, Strategy, at News Corp, one of the largest media companies in
> > the world and the publisher of The Wall Street Journal and The Times of
> > London. In that role, Raju was responsible for identifying new digital
> > growth opportunities globally for News Corp.
> >
> >
> > “There has never been more urgency in Wikipedia's 16-year history than
> now,
> > for upholding the values of free exchange of information and knowledge,”
> > said Raju. “Despite mounting challenges around the world, rapid
> innovation
> > is creating tremendous opportunities for the Wikimedia Foundation. I have
> > much to learn, but am also looking forward to lending my nearly three
> > decades of global media experiences to the movement, to help engage more
> > digital and mobile audiences, particularly diverse young people, and
> > harness their energy to benefit from—and support—the vital values that
> > underpin all Wikimedia initiatives.”
> >
> > Before joining News Corp, Raju spent nearly 25 years as a journalist and
> > editor. He started at 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
My opinion is that such projects should be supported, we should encourage
'be bold'. That being said, people planning projects at a large scale
should communicate with the concerned communities first. As such, the
concerns raised in this thread for example would have been raised during
the planning phase of that project and hopefully addressed. There is a
place in the application forms for grants for projects that asks to list
"Community Notification". The Grant Committee should look more closely at
that section and ensure that the communities have been notified before
granting any fund.

JP



On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Lodewijk 
wrote:

> I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on the
> fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to pull
> that leverage.
>
> The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are
> considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only
> pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how much
> of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat larger
> scale.
>
> While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> jpbel...@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
>
> > There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
> Wikipedia
> > like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to
> > keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
> >
> > Jean-Philippe Béland
> > Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> > list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
> > > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
> > > people like myself.
> > >
> > > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
> > >
> > >
> > > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
> > >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
> > >>
> > >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
> > this
> > >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in
> the
> > >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
> project
> > >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
> > >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
> > >>
> > >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
> > >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist.
> I
> > >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said
> can
> > >> be
> > >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
> > poor
> > >> wording.
> > >>
> > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
> >  > >> gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
> > this
> > >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
> > her
> > >> email address.
> > >>
> > >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
> > >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
> > >> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
> > >>
> > >> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
> > to a
> > >> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
> > going
> > >> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch
> > of
> > >> stubs.
> > >>
> > >> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
> > better
> > >> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
> > shouldn't
> > >> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
> > >>
> > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > >>
> > >
> > > - Pax aka Funcrunch
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
> > >
> > >> Is that still going on?
> > >>
> > >> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
> Wikipedia.
> > >> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned
> out
> > >> pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on
> > women
> > >> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
> > >>
> > >> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in
> > >> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration
> of
> > >> quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist.
> The
> > >> same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian
> > >> literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
> > because
> > >> of what the subject happens to be.
> > >>
> > >> I think that needs to be 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of Raju Narisetti to Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2017-10-16 Thread Anna Stillwell
Welcome, Raju.
/a

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Christophe Henner 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Over the past year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has been
> reviewing and evolving our appointment and onboarding process for new Board
> members. While that has resulted in some lingering vacancies, we knew it
> was important to update these processes to help maintain a cordial and
> productive Board.
>
> The updated appointment process provides the entire board with more
> detailed (albeit private) information about each candidate’s background,
> public profile, past professional and volunteer work, and ability to
> contribute to the Board. The updated onboarding process is meant to help
> Board members learn about the processes and expectations of our Board more
> quickly to help reduce productivity lost to transitions. Special thanks to
> everyone serving on the Board Governance Committee and Nataliia for the
> work they have put into these improvements!
>
> I am also incredibly excited to share that these efforts have helped us
> identify and appoint an amazing addition to the Wikimedia Foundation Board
> of Trustees! At our October meeting, the Board appointed and welcomed Raju
> Narisetti to fill one of the vacant expert seats.
>
> Raju is a veteran media executive and journalist and brings a wealth of
> communications experience to the board. He is also a veteran of nonprofit
> governance and currently serves on the board for the International Center
> for Journalists and Institute for International Education. I am confident
> he will be a very valuable addition to the board and thrilled that he has
> agreed to join us!
>
> We will continue to make improvements to our governance processes, for
> example with the learnings from the on-going governance review, and apply
> what we have learned to future appointments and filling our remaining
> vacancy. Thank you for everyone’s patience as we took a pause and worked on
> recruiting the best possible candidates, rather than simply rushing to fill
> the seats.
>
> In the meantime, below (and on the Wikimedia Blog) you will find the
> official announcement about Raju Narisetti and please join me in warmly
> welcoming him to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and to the
> Wikimedia movement!
>
> Christophe
> Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
>
> Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
>
> Media veteran brings nearly three decades of global strategic experience in
> digital media and audience development to the Wikimedia Foundation Board
>
>
> Image:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raju_Narisetti_-_
> International_Journalism_Festival_2015.JPG
>
> San Francisco, CA, October 16, 2017 — The Wikimedia Foundation today
> announced the appointment of Raju Narisetti, a veteran media executive and
> journalist, to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
>
> Raju brings more than 29 years of media experience across three continents.
> He is currently CEO of Univision Communications Inc’s Gizmodo Media Group,
> the publisher of websites including Gizmodo, Jezebel, Lifehacker and The
> Root.
>
> “Raju has dedicated his life’s work to information as a public service. His
> commitment to editorial integrity, independence, and inclusion is deeply
> aligned with Wikimedia values. His passion and expertise in digital
> strategy and international growth will be invaluable to our movement’s
> future as we advance our global free knowledge mission,” said Wikimedia
> Foundation Executive Director, Katherine Maher.
>
> Prior to joining the Gizmodo Media Group, Raju served as Senior Vice
> President, Strategy, at News Corp, one of the largest media companies in
> the world and the publisher of The Wall Street Journal and The Times of
> London. In that role, Raju was responsible for identifying new digital
> growth opportunities globally for News Corp.
>
>
> “There has never been more urgency in Wikipedia's 16-year history than now,
> for upholding the values of free exchange of information and knowledge,”
> said Raju. “Despite mounting challenges around the world, rapid innovation
> is creating tremendous opportunities for the Wikimedia Foundation. I have
> much to learn, but am also looking forward to lending my nearly three
> decades of global media experiences to the movement, to help engage more
> digital and mobile audiences, particularly diverse young people, and
> harness their energy to benefit from—and support—the vital values that
> underpin all Wikimedia initiatives.”
>
> Before joining News Corp, Raju spent nearly 25 years as a journalist and
> editor. He started at The Economic Times in India before moving to The
> Dayton Daily News (Ohio), The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), and The Washington
> Post. Starting out as a summer intern at WSJ, he eventually became Editor
> of The Wall Street Journal Europe and later Managing Editor of WSJ’s
> digital newsrooms. At The Washington Post, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Vi to
2017-10-16 20:03 GMT+02:00 Lodewijk :


>
>
> While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.


Definitely

The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are
> considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only
> pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how much
> of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat larger
> scale.


I think projects with a serious plan to improve contents or expanding
userbase are worth funding. I don't think monetary prizes are the right way
to do it, also I think projects related to contents should focus on quality
rather than quantity, or, at least, they shoul set some decent (and
measurable) quality target.

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
As far as i know, it is the only project that the initiative Women in red
contribute to, which is the initial subject of this thread.

It certainly is the only project where "Many of the competition articles
will just get tagged CSD - A1, A7, A9 even G2" makes any sense. I am a
sysop on several Wikimedia projects and participate in deletion regularly
and I have no clue what CSD, A1, A7, A9 and even G2 are, which are part of
the initial email of this thread, proving that it applies to only the
English Wikipedia.

So my point stands. This is not a thread about "misogyny and
under-representation of female editors" in general, even if it may
have derived that way. The initial email and the few that followed clearly
show that the authors were talking only about the English Wikipedia and
showed zero interest in including the other projects in a meaningful
general discussion about that issue, if not why using obscure terms that
only pertain to that project?

That being said, I now thank Lodewijk for making it general and inclusive.
It should have been the way this discussion was opened if it was really
meant to be a more generic theme and wanted to be inclusive of the
community as a whole.

JP



On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Robert Fernandez 
wrote:

> Is the English Wikipedia the only Wikipedia which has problems with
> misogyny and under-representation of female editors and articles? I am
> relieved to hear that!
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
> > wrote:
>
> > There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
> Wikipedia
> > like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to
> > keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
> >
> > Jean-Philippe Béland
> > Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> > list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
> > > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
> > > people like myself.
> > >
> > > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
> > >
> > >
> > > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
> > >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
> > >>
> > >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
> > this
> > >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in
> the
> > >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
> project
> > >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
> > >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
> > >>
> > >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
> > >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist.
> I
> > >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said
> can
> > >> be
> > >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
> > poor
> > >> wording.
> > >>
> > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
> >  > >> gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
> > this
> > >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
> > her
> > >> email address.
> > >>
> > >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
> > >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
> > >> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
> > >>
> > >> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
> > to a
> > >> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
> > going
> > >> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch
> > of
> > >> stubs.
> > >>
> > >> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
> > better
> > >> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
> > shouldn't
> > >> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
> > >>
> > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > >>
> > >
> > > - Pax aka Funcrunch
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
> > >
> > >> Is that still going on?
> > >>
> > >> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
> Wikipedia.
> > >> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned
> out
> > >> pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on
> > women
> > >> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
> > >>
> > >> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in
> > >> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration
> of
> > >> quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist.
> The
> > >> same question would 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Vi to
2017-10-16 18:27 GMT+02:00 Robert Fernandez :

> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
>

I wrote a pretty different thing: those who use label as "sexist" anyone
who doesn't *completely* agree with them share a rethorical mean with
sexism.


>
> Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping
> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's
> considered just fine,


You're perfectly describing Ori Livneh's statement against me.


2017-10-16 19:11 GMT+02:00 Todd Allen :

>
> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in
> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of
> quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The
> same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian
> literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because
> of what the subject happens to be.


\o/

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] : [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 WikimediaFoundation Board of Trustees election

2017-10-16 Thread Matanya
Hi Chris,

This is actually a very good point!

I will try to find out with the other members of ec where we stand on this. 
Stay tuned for updates.

Thanks and sorry for the delay

On 16 באוקטובר 2017 21:14:33 GMT+03:00, wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org 
wrote:
>Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
>   wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>   wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Women in red (Peter Southwood)
>   2. Re: Women in red (Robert Fernandez)
>   3. Re: Women in red (Lodewijk)
>   4. Re: [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 Wikimedia
>  Foundation Board of Trustees election (Chris Keating)
>
>
>--
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 19:53:01 +0200
>From: "Peter Southwood" 
>To: "'Wikimedia Mailing List'" 
>Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
>Message-ID: <000901d346a7$9e49dd40$dadd97c0$@telkomsa.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="utf-8"
>
>Why?
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
>Behalf Of Pax Ahimsa Gethen
>Sent: Monday, 16 October 2017 7:21 PM
>To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
>
>The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
>comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
>people like myself.
>
>I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
>
>> Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's 
>> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
>>
>> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
>
>> this will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for
>
>> in the document outlining the competition, and editors involved in 
>> this project will be subject to all expectations of normal editors 
>> (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
>>
>> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between 
>> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist.
>
>> I believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's
>said 
>> can be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid 
>> criticism of poor wording.
>>
>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare 
>>  wrote:
>>
>> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to 
>> this list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
>
>> with her email address.
>>
>> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some 
>> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD 
>> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
>>
>> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
>
>> to a higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia 
>> isn't going to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies 
>> write a bunch of stubs.
>>
>> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's 
>> better than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as
>I 
>> shouldn't have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently
>stands."
>>
>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>
>- Pax aka Funcrunch
>
>
>On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
>> Is that still going on?
>>
>> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
>Wikipedia.
>> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned 
>> out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, 
>> on women involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities
>because of them.
>>
>> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in 
>> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration
>
>> of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is 
>> sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were 
>> about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the 
>> question just because of what the subject happens to be.
>>
>> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people
>
>> sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all 
>> for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in 
>> this thread.
>>
>> Todd
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" 
>wrote:
>>
>>> So those who call out 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election

2017-10-16 Thread Joe Sutherland
A great question. And I have an easy answer!

I wrote up the feedback we received into a report that you can read here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Post_mortem/Report

The committee will be working on taking the feedback onboard ahead of the
next election cycle, which is (at the time of writing) the FDC elections in
2019.

Let me know if you have any questions about the report. :)

best,
Joe

--
*Joe Sutherland* (he/him or they/them)
Community Advocate
Wikimedia Foundation
joesutherland.rocks

On 16 October 2017 at 11:14, Chris Keating 
wrote:

> Hello all and particularly the Elections Committee!
>
> I just wondered what is happening in terms of post-mortem on the elections.
> There was a call for comments on Meta - is there any kind of active review
> by the Election Committee happening? I know in previous years the EC has
> often made extensive comments to shape future years!
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
>
> On 21 May 2017 01:33, "matanya moses"  wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> >
> > The certified results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> > election are now available on Meta-Wiki: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Results
> >
> > Congratulations to María Sefidari (User:Raystorm), Dariusz Jemielniak
> > (User:pundit), and James Heilman (User:Doc James) for receiving the most
> > community support. Subject to a standard background check, they will be
> > appointed by the Board at their August meeting at Wikimania.
> >
> > These results have been certified by the elections committee, the
> > Wikimedia Foundation staff advisors to the committee, and the Board of
> > Trustees.
> >
> > There were 5,581 votes cast, with 5,120 of those being valid. The
> 461-vote
> > difference comes from recast ballots, where eligible voters recast
> ballots
> > to change their votes, and struck votes, of which there were 34. (Some of
> > the recast votes were also struck.)
> >
> > Additional information is available on the Wikimedia Blog:
> > https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/05/20/board-of-trustees-elections-2017/
> >
> > More statistics on the elections and a post-mortem from the committee
> will
> > be published in the coming days. In the meantime, we would appreciate
> your
> > input—what went well for you in this election?  What could we do better
> > next time?  These reports are crucial to helping future elections be even
> > more successful, and we hope that you will offer your feedback and ideas:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > elections/2017/Post_mortem
> >
> > The committee would like to thank everyone that participated in this
> > year’s election for helping make it, again, one of the most diverse and
> > representative in the movement’s history.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > – Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee
> >
> > ___
> > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] Appointment of Raju Narisetti to Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

2017-10-16 Thread Christophe Henner
Hi everyone,

Over the past year, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has been
reviewing and evolving our appointment and onboarding process for new Board
members. While that has resulted in some lingering vacancies, we knew it
was important to update these processes to help maintain a cordial and
productive Board.

The updated appointment process provides the entire board with more
detailed (albeit private) information about each candidate’s background,
public profile, past professional and volunteer work, and ability to
contribute to the Board. The updated onboarding process is meant to help
Board members learn about the processes and expectations of our Board more
quickly to help reduce productivity lost to transitions. Special thanks to
everyone serving on the Board Governance Committee and Nataliia for the
work they have put into these improvements!

I am also incredibly excited to share that these efforts have helped us
identify and appoint an amazing addition to the Wikimedia Foundation Board
of Trustees! At our October meeting, the Board appointed and welcomed Raju
Narisetti to fill one of the vacant expert seats.

Raju is a veteran media executive and journalist and brings a wealth of
communications experience to the board. He is also a veteran of nonprofit
governance and currently serves on the board for the International Center
for Journalists and Institute for International Education. I am confident
he will be a very valuable addition to the board and thrilled that he has
agreed to join us!

We will continue to make improvements to our governance processes, for
example with the learnings from the on-going governance review, and apply
what we have learned to future appointments and filling our remaining
vacancy. Thank you for everyone’s patience as we took a pause and worked on
recruiting the best possible candidates, rather than simply rushing to fill
the seats.

In the meantime, below (and on the Wikimedia Blog) you will find the
official announcement about Raju Narisetti and please join me in warmly
welcoming him to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and to the
Wikimedia movement!

Christophe
Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

Raju Narisetti joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

Media veteran brings nearly three decades of global strategic experience in
digital media and audience development to the Wikimedia Foundation Board


Image:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raju_Narisetti_-_International_Journalism_Festival_2015.JPG

San Francisco, CA, October 16, 2017 — The Wikimedia Foundation today
announced the appointment of Raju Narisetti, a veteran media executive and
journalist, to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.

Raju brings more than 29 years of media experience across three continents.
He is currently CEO of Univision Communications Inc’s Gizmodo Media Group,
the publisher of websites including Gizmodo, Jezebel, Lifehacker and The
Root.

“Raju has dedicated his life’s work to information as a public service. His
commitment to editorial integrity, independence, and inclusion is deeply
aligned with Wikimedia values. His passion and expertise in digital
strategy and international growth will be invaluable to our movement’s
future as we advance our global free knowledge mission,” said Wikimedia
Foundation Executive Director, Katherine Maher.

Prior to joining the Gizmodo Media Group, Raju served as Senior Vice
President, Strategy, at News Corp, one of the largest media companies in
the world and the publisher of The Wall Street Journal and The Times of
London. In that role, Raju was responsible for identifying new digital
growth opportunities globally for News Corp.


“There has never been more urgency in Wikipedia's 16-year history than now,
for upholding the values of free exchange of information and knowledge,”
said Raju. “Despite mounting challenges around the world, rapid innovation
is creating tremendous opportunities for the Wikimedia Foundation. I have
much to learn, but am also looking forward to lending my nearly three
decades of global media experiences to the movement, to help engage more
digital and mobile audiences, particularly diverse young people, and
harness their energy to benefit from—and support—the vital values that
underpin all Wikimedia initiatives.”

Before joining News Corp, Raju spent nearly 25 years as a journalist and
editor. He started at The Economic Times in India before moving to The
Dayton Daily News (Ohio), The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), and The Washington
Post. Starting out as a summer intern at WSJ, he eventually became Editor
of The Wall Street Journal Europe and later Managing Editor of WSJ’s
digital newsrooms. At The Washington Post, he was the Managing Editor who
led the Post’s rethinking of its separate digital and print newsrooms and
operations.

A native of Hyderabad, India, Raju is also the founder of Mint, currently
India’s second-largest daily business newspaper by circulation.

“Raju's 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election

2017-10-16 Thread Chris Keating
Hello all and particularly the Elections Committee!

I just wondered what is happening in terms of post-mortem on the elections.
There was a call for comments on Meta - is there any kind of active review
by the Election Committee happening? I know in previous years the EC has
often made extensive comments to shape future years!

Regards,

Chris

On 21 May 2017 01:33, "matanya moses"  wrote:

> Greetings,
>
> The certified results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> election are now available on Meta-Wiki: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Results
>
> Congratulations to María Sefidari (User:Raystorm), Dariusz Jemielniak
> (User:pundit), and James Heilman (User:Doc James) for receiving the most
> community support. Subject to a standard background check, they will be
> appointed by the Board at their August meeting at Wikimania.
>
> These results have been certified by the elections committee, the
> Wikimedia Foundation staff advisors to the committee, and the Board of
> Trustees.
>
> There were 5,581 votes cast, with 5,120 of those being valid. The 461-vote
> difference comes from recast ballots, where eligible voters recast ballots
> to change their votes, and struck votes, of which there were 34. (Some of
> the recast votes were also struck.)
>
> Additional information is available on the Wikimedia Blog:
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/05/20/board-of-trustees-elections-2017/
>
> More statistics on the elections and a post-mortem from the committee will
> be published in the coming days. In the meantime, we would appreciate your
> input—what went well for you in this election?  What could we do better
> next time?  These reports are crucial to helping future elections be even
> more successful, and we hope that you will offer your feedback and ideas:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> elections/2017/Post_mortem
>
> The committee would like to thank everyone that participated in this
> year’s election for helping make it, again, one of the most diverse and
> representative in the movement’s history.
>
> Sincerely,
> – Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee
>
> ___
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Lodewijk
I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on the
fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to pull
that leverage.

The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are
considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only
pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how much
of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat larger
scale.

While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.

Lodewijk

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
jpbel...@wikimedia.ca> wrote:

> There is so many threads on this list that are only about English Wikipedia
> like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to
> keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
>
> Jean-Philippe Béland
> Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
>
> > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
> > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
> > people like myself.
> >
> > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
> >
> >
> > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
> >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
> >>
> >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
> this
> >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the
> >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project
> >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
> >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
> >>
> >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
> >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I
> >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can
> >> be
> >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
> poor
> >> wording.
> >>
> >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> >>
> >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
>  >> gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
> this
> >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
> her
> >> email address.
> >>
> >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
> >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
> >> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
> >>
> >> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
> to a
> >> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
> going
> >> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch
> of
> >> stubs.
> >>
> >> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
> better
> >> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
> shouldn't
> >> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
> >>
> >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> >>
> >
> > - Pax aka Funcrunch
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
> >
> >> Is that still going on?
> >>
> >> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia.
> >> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out
> >> pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on
> women
> >> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
> >>
> >> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in
> >> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of
> >> quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The
> >> same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian
> >> literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
> because
> >> of what the subject happens to be.
> >>
> >> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people
> >> sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for
> >> shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this
> >> thread.
> >>
> >> Todd
> >>
> >> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
> >>>
> >>> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these
> >>> issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping
> >>> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's
> >>> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest
> tones
> >>> it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
> apologies
> >>> are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even
> the
> >>> way we talk about sexism is sexist.
> >>>
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Robert Fernandez
Is the English Wikipedia the only Wikipedia which has problems with
misogyny and under-representation of female editors and articles? I am
relieved to hear that!


On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland  wrote:

> There is so many threads on this list that are only about English Wikipedia
> like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to
> keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
>
> Jean-Philippe Béland
> Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
>
> > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
> > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
> > people like myself.
> >
> > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
> >
> >
> > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
> >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
> >>
> >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
> this
> >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the
> >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project
> >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
> >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
> >>
> >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
> >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I
> >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can
> >> be
> >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
> poor
> >> wording.
> >>
> >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> >>
> >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
>  >> gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
> this
> >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
> her
> >> email address.
> >>
> >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
> >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
> >> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
> >>
> >> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
> to a
> >> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
> going
> >> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch
> of
> >> stubs.
> >>
> >> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
> better
> >> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
> shouldn't
> >> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
> >>
> >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> >>
> >
> > - Pax aka Funcrunch
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
> >
> >> Is that still going on?
> >>
> >> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia.
> >> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out
> >> pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on
> women
> >> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
> >>
> >> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in
> >> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of
> >> quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The
> >> same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian
> >> literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
> because
> >> of what the subject happens to be.
> >>
> >> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people
> >> sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for
> >> shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this
> >> thread.
> >>
> >> Todd
> >>
> >> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
> >>>
> >>> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these
> >>> issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping
> >>> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's
> >>> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest
> tones
> >>> it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
> apologies
> >>> are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even
> the
> >>> way we talk about sexism is sexist.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to 
> wrote:
> >>>
> 
>  But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to
>  contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
>  To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing*
>  about
>  their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally,
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Peter Southwood
Why?

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Pax Ahimsa Gethen
Sent: Monday, 16 October 2017 7:21 PM
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a comment is 
sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine people like myself.

I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:

> Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's 
> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
>
> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that 
> this will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for 
> in the document outlining the competition, and editors involved in 
> this project will be subject to all expectations of normal editors 
> (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
>
> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between 
> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. 
> I believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said 
> can be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid 
> criticism of poor wording.
>
> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare 
>  wrote:
>
> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to 
> this list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue 
> with her email address.
>
> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some 
> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD 
> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
>
> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women 
> to a higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia 
> isn't going to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies 
> write a bunch of stubs.
>
> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's 
> better than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I 
> shouldn't have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
>
> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)

- Pax aka Funcrunch


On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
> Is that still going on?
>
> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia.
> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned 
> out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, 
> on women involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of 
> them.
>
> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in 
> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration 
> of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is 
> sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were 
> about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the 
> question just because of what the subject happens to be.
>
> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people 
> sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all 
> for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in 
> this thread.
>
> Todd
>
> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez"  wrote:
>
>> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
>>
>> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these 
>> issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping 
>> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's 
>> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest 
>> tones it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and 
>> apologies are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so much 
>> that even the way we talk about sexism is sexist.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to  wrote:
>>>
>>> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying 
>>> to contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
>>> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* 
>>> about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, 
>>> incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.

--
Pax Ahimsa Gethen | p...@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org | Pronouns: 
they/them/their


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


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


___
Wikimedia-l mailing 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Chandres Wikipedia
+1 

> Le 16 oct. 2017 à 19:34, Jean-Philippe Béland  a écrit 
> :
> 
> There is so many threads on this list that are only about English Wikipedia
> like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to
> keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
> 
> Jean-Philippe Béland
> Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
> 
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
> 
>> The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
>> comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
>> people like myself.
>> 
>> I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
>> 
>> 
>> Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
>>> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
>>> 
>>> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that this
>>> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the
>>> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project
>>> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
>>> mass-producing poor-quality content).
>>> 
>>> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
>>> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I
>>> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can
>>> be
>>> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of poor
>>> wording.
>>> 
>>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare >> gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to this
>>> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with her
>>> email address.
>>> 
>>> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
>>> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
>>> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
>>> 
>>> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women to a
>>> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't going
>>> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch of
>>> stubs.
>>> 
>>> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's better
>>> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I shouldn't
>>> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
>>> 
>>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>>> 
>> 
>> - Pax aka Funcrunch
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
>> 
>>> Is that still going on?
>>> 
>>> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia.
>>> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out
>>> pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on women
>>> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
>>> 
>>> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in
>>> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of
>>> quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The
>>> same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian
>>> literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because
>>> of what the subject happens to be.
>>> 
>>> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people
>>> sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for
>>> shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this
>>> thread.
>>> 
>>> Todd
>>> 
>>> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
 
 I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these
 issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping
 generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's
 considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones
 it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies
 are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the
 way we talk about sexism is sexist.
 
 On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to  wrote:
 
> 
> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to
> contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing*
> about
> their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally,
> one
> the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
> 
 
>> --
>> Pax Ahimsa Gethen | p...@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org | Pronouns:
>> they/them/their
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
There is so many threads on this list that are only about English Wikipedia
like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to
keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?

Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President, Wikimedia Canada

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:

> The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
> comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
> people like myself.
>
> I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
>
>
> Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
>> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
>>
>> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that this
>> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the
>> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project
>> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
>> mass-producing poor-quality content).
>>
>> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
>> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I
>> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can
>> be
>> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of poor
>> wording.
>>
>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare > gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to this
>> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with her
>> email address.
>>
>> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
>> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
>> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
>>
>> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women to a
>> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't going
>> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch of
>> stubs.
>>
>> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's better
>> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I shouldn't
>> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
>>
>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>>
>
> - Pax aka Funcrunch
>
>
>
> On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
>
>> Is that still going on?
>>
>> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia.
>> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out
>> pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on women
>> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
>>
>> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in
>> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of
>> quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The
>> same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian
>> literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because
>> of what the subject happens to be.
>>
>> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people
>> sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for
>> shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this
>> thread.
>>
>> Todd
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" 
>> wrote:
>>
>> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
>>>
>>> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these
>>> issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping
>>> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's
>>> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones
>>> it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies
>>> are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the
>>> way we talk about sexism is sexist.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to  wrote:
>>>

 But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to
 contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
 To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing*
 about
 their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally,
 one
 the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.

>>>
> --
> Pax Ahimsa Gethen | p...@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org | Pronouns:
> they/them/their
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Pax Ahimsa Gethen
The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a 
comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine 
people like myself.


I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:


Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.

I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that this
will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the
document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project
will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
mass-producing poor-quality content).

As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I
believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can be
described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of poor
wording.

– Molly (GorillaWarfare)

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare  wrote:

Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to this
list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with her
email address.

"This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
everything that comes out of this contest as it is?

I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women to a
higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't going
to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch of
stubs.

And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's better
than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I shouldn't
have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."

– Molly (GorillaWarfare)


- Pax aka Funcrunch


On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:

Is that still going on?

I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia.
I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out
pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on women
involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.

But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in
exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of
quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The
same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian
literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because
of what the subject happens to be.

I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people
sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for
shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this
thread.

Todd

On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez"  wrote:


So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?

I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these
issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping
generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's
considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones
it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies
are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the
way we talk about sexism is sexist.

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to  wrote:


But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to
contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about
their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one
the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.


--
Pax Ahimsa Gethen | p...@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org | Pronouns: 
they/them/their


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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Todd Allen
Is that still going on?

I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia.
I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out
pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on women
involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.

But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in
exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of
quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The
same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian
literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because
of what the subject happens to be.

I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people
sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for
shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this
thread.

Todd

On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez"  wrote:

> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
>
> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these
> issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping
> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's
> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones
> it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies
> are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the
> way we talk about sexism is sexist.
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to  wrote:
> >
> >
> > But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to
> > contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
> > To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about
> > their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one
> > the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Robert Fernandez
So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?

I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these
issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping
generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's
considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones
it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies
are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the
way we talk about sexism is sexist.

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to  wrote:
>
>
> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to
> contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about
> their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one
> the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Vi to
How can someone rebut such absolute and perfect theorems?
My weak doubts, hypothesis and views must surely surrend to such a bright
parade of Eternal Thruth™.

But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to
contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing* about
their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, incidentally, one
the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.

Apart of rethorics there are several logical fallacies in your statement:
*criticism I've seen here focuses on means rather than aims
*gaps (both gender and geographical) are caused by our behavioral norms?
That's a great news! I always feared it was an enormous series of deep
social problems while it's just a bunch of rules on a website!
*the topic hardly meets the definition of *effort to make this community
kinder and more welcoming*
*finally, the importance of the topic dictates higher quality requirement
in process, not lower.

Seriously all of this recalls me when I read suggestions about decreasing
gender gap with "less complex graphical interfaces".

Vito

2017-10-16 16:47 GMT+02:00 Ori Livneh :

> Gnangarra admitted to deliberately using a provocative tone to get
> attention ("I chose my tone intentionally to draw attention to the
> competition"). Acting surprised that people were aggrieved is disingenuous.
>
> On the topic of sexism: the underrepresentation in the Wikimedia community
> of every demographic that is not white men is such a stain on the moral
> character of the projects and a threat to their long-term survival. The
> ways in which this lack of diversity is reinforced and perpetuated by
> behavioral norms are by now so well-documented that ignorance and lack of
> malice are not excusable. In my opinion, if you are not making a conscious,
> deliberate effort to make this community kinder and more welcoming, you are
> part of the problem. All the more so when the topic under discussion is an
> initiative to engage women editors and improve the breadth of coverage of
> topics relating to women.
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 6:19 AM, Vi to  wrote:
>
> > +1 to your email Yaroslav.
> >
> > I'd just underline Gnangarra's original email wasn't sexist, it's so
> unfair
> > to vilify criticism towards contests as sexism.
> >
> >
> > Vito
> >
> > 2017-10-16 9:33 GMT+02:00 Yaroslav Blanter :
> >
> > > My (rejected) message below anyway.
> > > [CUT because of boring filter rule]
> > > Cheers
> > > Yaroslav
> > > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > 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/wik
> > i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread pi zero
Based on my own experience on en.wn, I believe copyright/plagiary detection
cannot be fully automated without introducing horrific errors, for the same
reason translation can't be:  doing the task properly requires knowing what
the text means.

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:47 AM, James Heilman  wrote:

> Correction:
>
> There is a tool that automatically checks for copyright infringement.
> It is called CopyPatrol
>
> https://tools.wmflabs.org/copypatrol/en
>
> James
>
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> > I cant believe this
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_
> in_Red/The_World_Contest
> > has
> > got WMF funding, the idea of trying to create 100,000 stub articles on
> > english wikipedia without any thought to how it'll impact on the
> > community.
> >
> > I find it ironic that a competition is being funded to encourage current
> > contributors to do what we wont accept from new editors.  If a new editor
> > was to create an article it wouldnt pass through the Articles for
> Creation
> > process because its half the size of the minimum set there. Many of the
> > competition articles will just get tagged CSD - A1, A7, A9 even G2
> >
> > While there is a nice bot that will count the size of the prose, there is
> > no automated process for checking copyright violations, checking for
> > notability and most importantly checking for BLP with the aim of 100,000
> > the community will years to clean up the mess that is about to be
> created.
> >
> > we are 15 days from this disaster commencing
> >
> > --
> > G
> > nangarra
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Ori Livneh
Gnangarra admitted to deliberately using a provocative tone to get
attention ("I chose my tone intentionally to draw attention to the
competition"). Acting surprised that people were aggrieved is disingenuous.

On the topic of sexism: the underrepresentation in the Wikimedia community
of every demographic that is not white men is such a stain on the moral
character of the projects and a threat to their long-term survival. The
ways in which this lack of diversity is reinforced and perpetuated by
behavioral norms are by now so well-documented that ignorance and lack of
malice are not excusable. In my opinion, if you are not making a conscious,
deliberate effort to make this community kinder and more welcoming, you are
part of the problem. All the more so when the topic under discussion is an
initiative to engage women editors and improve the breadth of coverage of
topics relating to women.

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 6:19 AM, Vi to  wrote:

> +1 to your email Yaroslav.
>
> I'd just underline Gnangarra's original email wasn't sexist, it's so unfair
> to vilify criticism towards contests as sexism.
>
>
> Vito
>
> 2017-10-16 9:33 GMT+02:00 Yaroslav Blanter :
>
> > My (rejected) message below anyway.
> > [CUT because of boring filter rule]
> > Cheers
> > Yaroslav
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > 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/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Open Foundation West Africa

2017-10-16 Thread Anna Stillwell
Congratulations.
/a

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:17 AM, Vi to  wrote:

> Good neews, I hope they can help with saving WP0 from abusers, as Wikimedia
> Bangladesh already did.
>
> Vito
>
> 2017-10-14 14:37 GMT+02:00 Isaac Olatunde :
>
> > Good news. Congratulations!!
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > Isaac
> >
> > On Oct 14, 2017 12:24 PM, "shola ishola" 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Congratulations to the team!!!
> > >
> > > This is long overdue.
> > >
> > > Best Regards
> > > Olushola
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Olaniyan Ishola Olushola|MD, Data Access Systems
> > > Ltd|Treasurer,FOSSFA|Skype:ozo734
> > > Tweeter:@oluwanishola73|www.facebook.com/olaniyan.shola|Alt email :
> > > treas...@fossfa.net|Team Leader Wikimedia Community User Group,
> Nigeria
> > > (WCUGN)|
> > > Phone: 2348154876844;2348167352512
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > > On Sat, 10/14/17, Nurunnaby Hasive  wrote:
> > >
> > >  Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Open Foundation West Africa
> > >  To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" 
> > >  Cc: "Wikimedia Movement Affiliates discussion list"
> > > 
> > >  Date: Saturday, October 14, 2017, 10:31 AM
> > >
> > >  Great! Congratulations Open
> > >  Foundation West Africa!
> > >
> > >
> > >  Hasive
> > >  WMBD
> > >
> > >  On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kirill Lokshin
> > >  
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > >  > Hi
> > >  everyone!
> > >  >
> > >  > I'm
> > >  very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
> > >  recognized
> > >  > Open Foundation West Africa
> > >  [1] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group aims
> > >  > to extend the reach of Wikimedia movement
> > >  activities in West Africa through
> > >  > open
> > >  education programs, digitizing open resources, preserving
> > >  cultural and
> > >  > heritage items for
> > >  educational purposes, and promoting content about the
> > >  > West African region.
> > >  >
> > >  > Please join me in
> > >  congratulating the members of this new user group!
> > >  >
> > >  > Regards,
> > >  > Kirill Lokshin
> > >  > Chair,
> > >  Affiliations Committee
> > >  >
> > >  > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Foundation_West_Africa
> > >  >
> > >  ___
> > >  > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > >  https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > >  > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > >  > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > >  > New
> > >  messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >  > Unsubscribe:
> > >  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > >  >  unsubscribe>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  --
> > >  *Nurunnaby
> > >  Chowdhury (Hasive) **:: **নুরুন্নবী
> > >  চৌধুরী (হাছিব)*
> > >  User:
> > >  Hasive 
> > >  |
> > >  GSM/WhatsApp/Viber: +8801712754752
> > >  ​
> > >  Administrator | Bengali
> > >  Wikipedia 
> > >  Board Member | Wikimedia Bangladesh 
> > >  fb.com/Hasive  | @nhasive
> > >   |
> > >  www.nhasive.com
> > >  ___
> > >  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > >  and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > >  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
> > > and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Emerging Communities: a proposed new definition

2017-10-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Where does the number 750,000 speakers come from? And what is the rationale
to exclude smaller linguistic communities?

I think emerging communities can have less speakers than that. A language
can be viable and alive with less speakers than that, so we are not talking
about preserving a language even if there are less speakers than that. If
the language is used in day to day life and to teach at schools, why
wouldn't it be considered for a Wikipedia and a Wiktionary even if there
are less than 750,000 speakers?

Thank you,

Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President, Wikimedia Canada

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 04:29 Balázs Viczián, 
wrote:

> Hi Asaf et All,
>
> Hope I won't get skipped because I barely talk on this list or in general
> on an international level but this proposal could have a long term effect
> on my chapter.
>
> Happy to see WMF is ready to start giving up at least a bit on geography or
> census numbers and shift focus to existing communities based on their
> actual state and health.
>
> I would suggest not stopping here but going forward by completely
> abandoning geography and such overgeneralization where the entire world can
> be described by 3 (that is three) labels.
>
> Instead evaluate each community topic by topic.
>
> Say one: governance. Even WMF itself had such a crisis, not to say the
> British, German and now the French "developed" chapters. For them, better
> organized but ever labeled "emerging" communities might have been able to
> provide support, if their category would not be discouraging them from
> stepping in.
>
> Discouraging, yup. Put your hands on your hearts and be honest. We all
> think that at least on a general level the "developed" should teach and
> support the "emerging" and not the other way around, right?
>
> Yet said governance as an example appears to be a lot more problematic for
> the ever "developed" than the ever "emerging".
>
> This proposal does not recognize such patterns but it is a big step forward
> nevertheless as it shifts more focus on the existing communities. The
> labels are in my subjective opinion are somewhat patronizing as per above.
>
> Balazs,
> from an ever "emerging" community
>
> On Sep 27, 2017 19:30, "Asaf Bartov"  wrote:
>
> > Dear Wikimedians,
> >
> > Years ago, as part of the first Strategy process of 2009-2010, a
> > distinction entered our lives, between Global North and Global South
> > countries.  That distinction was borrowed from a United Nations agency
> > named ITU, and it was used as shorthand to refer to communities the
> > Foundation considered to need additional resources and help to achieve
> > impact on our mission of creating and sharing free knowledge.
> >
> > However, the distinction was never a very good fit for us.  It was based
> on
> > UN notions like the Human Development Index, and gave much weight to
> > nation-wide economic conditions.  Its binary nature did not allow for
> > distinguishing between countries where Wikimedia work is possible and
> > happening, albeit with difficulty, and ones where no Wikimedia work, or
> > next to none, is happening, or possible.  It also looked only at
> geography,
> > whereas much of our work is defined by language communities and not by
> > geographies.  And it was political and alienating to many people.
> >
> > In short, it was both not as useful as we needed it to be as well as
> > unloved and rejected by many.
> >
> > The Community Resources team at the Wikimedia Foundation has been
> thinking
> > about replacing that distinction with a more nuanced one, that would be a
> > much better fit with our needs, would take into account the actual state
> of
> > editing communities, would consider multiple axes beyond geography, and
> > would be less controversial.
> >
> > We began using the term "emerging communities" two years ago, first as a
> > replacement for the term Global South, but it has always been our
> intention
> > to define Emerging Communities ourselves.  Finishing the proposed
> > definition took a back seat for a while due to other priorities, but we
> are
> > ready to share the proposed definition today:
> >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement/
> > Defining_Emerging_Communities
> >
> >
> > We welcome your thoughts, on the talk page (ideally) or on this thread.
> > The definition is already our working definition, but we are open to
> > incorporating changes to both wording and substance through October 31st.
> >
> > Be sure to take a look at the FAQ supplied at the bottom of the page,
> too.
> > :)
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Asaf
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Vi to
+1 to your email Yaroslav.

I'd just underline Gnangarra's original email wasn't sexist, it's so unfair
to vilify criticism towards contests as sexism.


Vito

2017-10-16 9:33 GMT+02:00 Yaroslav Blanter :

> My (rejected) message below anyway.
> [CUT because of boring filter rule]
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Open Foundation West Africa

2017-10-16 Thread Vi to
Good neews, I hope they can help with saving WP0 from abusers, as Wikimedia
Bangladesh already did.

Vito

2017-10-14 14:37 GMT+02:00 Isaac Olatunde :

> Good news. Congratulations!!
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Isaac
>
> On Oct 14, 2017 12:24 PM, "shola ishola"  wrote:
>
> > Congratulations to the team!!!
> >
> > This is long overdue.
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Olushola
> >
> >
> >
> > Olaniyan Ishola Olushola|MD, Data Access Systems
> > Ltd|Treasurer,FOSSFA|Skype:ozo734
> > Tweeter:@oluwanishola73|www.facebook.com/olaniyan.shola|Alt email :
> > treas...@fossfa.net|Team Leader Wikimedia Community User Group, Nigeria
> > (WCUGN)|
> > Phone: 2348154876844;2348167352512
> >
> >
> > 
> > On Sat, 10/14/17, Nurunnaby Hasive  wrote:
> >
> >  Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Open Foundation West Africa
> >  To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" 
> >  Cc: "Wikimedia Movement Affiliates discussion list"
> > 
> >  Date: Saturday, October 14, 2017, 10:31 AM
> >
> >  Great! Congratulations Open
> >  Foundation West Africa!
> >
> >
> >  Hasive
> >  WMBD
> >
> >  On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kirill Lokshin
> >  
> >  wrote:
> >
> >  > Hi
> >  everyone!
> >  >
> >  > I'm
> >  very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
> >  recognized
> >  > Open Foundation West Africa
> >  [1] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group aims
> >  > to extend the reach of Wikimedia movement
> >  activities in West Africa through
> >  > open
> >  education programs, digitizing open resources, preserving
> >  cultural and
> >  > heritage items for
> >  educational purposes, and promoting content about the
> >  > West African region.
> >  >
> >  > Please join me in
> >  congratulating the members of this new user group!
> >  >
> >  > Regards,
> >  > Kirill Lokshin
> >  > Chair,
> >  Affiliations Committee
> >  >
> >  > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Foundation_West_Africa
> >  >
> >  ___
> >  > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >  https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >  > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >  > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >  > New
> >  messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >  > Unsubscribe:
> >  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >  > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  --
> >  *Nurunnaby
> >  Chowdhury (Hasive) **:: **নুরুন্নবী
> >  চৌধুরী (হাছিব)*
> >  User:
> >  Hasive 
> >  |
> >  GSM/WhatsApp/Viber: +8801712754752
> >  ​
> >  Administrator | Bengali
> >  Wikipedia 
> >  Board Member | Wikimedia Bangladesh 
> >  fb.com/Hasive  | @nhasive
> >   |
> >  www.nhasive.com
> >  ___
> >  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >  and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >  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
> > and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Gnangarra
WereSpielCheckers... point taken noting that the minimum figure has shifted
from 0.75k to 1k, let leave it at that

On 16 October 2017 at 17:30, WereSpielChequers 
wrote:

> Hi Gnangarra
>
> I've heard bad things about the articles for creation process, but a
> minimum of either 1.5 kb  or 2,000 bytes of prose is a new one on me. Can
> you link to that part of the AFC rules? I have reread things such as
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/
> Reviewing_instructions and found one perfectly sensible comment about
> deleting single sentence "articles". But 1,000 bytes would be a jolly long
> sentence. AFC has its flaws, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, but is
> it really as flawed as you assert?
>
> As for the women in red contest, you might want to read the rules, and if
> you have concerns there is a currently redlinked talkpage.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_
> talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules&
> action=edit=1
>
> I've made a couple of bold tweaks to the competition rules myself, but they
> did already cover notability and of course copyvio. Though a contest aimed
> at existing editors is less likely to hit problems in those areas as an
> outreach editathon targeted at new editors - there we do need to explain
> our notability rules and sadly often teach people about copyright and
> plagiarism.
>
> As for criticising a project for aiming for 100,000 articles when they only
> have 4 judges and 108 participants, it is two weeks until it starts and
> they have a watchlist notice up to recruit more people either as
> participants or judges note
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_
> in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules
> -* "If you want to help judge the contest or help out with running it
> please ensure that you add your name in the judges section on the main
> page"* I could understand at the end of a project having that sort of
> criticism if they had got ambitious but not tried to recruit enough
> participants. However at this stage such criticism is premature and
> probably misdirected. A more nuanced view would be to look at the end and
> check whether they succeeded in their objective and whether they achieved
> sufficient participation both of editors and judges. Criticising a project
> that doesn't start for another two weeks for having insufficient judges and
> participants when it currently in a major site wide recruitment drive for
> judges and participants seems premature to me.
>
> Alternatively one could look at the objective and ask whether creating
> 100,000 articles on women was sufficient, insufficient or excessive to deal
> with the known gender gap in our coverage. The 100,000 target looks about
> right to me and it will be interesting to see how much progress people can
> make on it in a one month contest, but if someone is uncomfortable about it
> it would be sensible to go through the figures and check if that is an
> appropriate target for the problem. Treating such an ambitious target as a
> problem without acknowledging that Wikipedia has coverage gaps on that
> scale comes across almost as denial of the problem.
>
>
>
> --
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 22:02:50 +0800
> > From: Gnangarra 
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
> > Message-ID:
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Yaroslav Blanter
My understanding is they target 10K articles, not 100K.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:30 AM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Gnangarra
>
> I've heard bad things about the articles for creation process, but a
> minimum of either 1.5 kb  or 2,000 bytes of prose is a new one on me. Can
> you link to that part of the AFC rules? I have reread things such as
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/
> Reviewing_instructions and found one perfectly sensible comment about
> deleting single sentence "articles". But 1,000 bytes would be a jolly long
> sentence. AFC has its flaws, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, but is
> it really as flawed as you assert?
>
> As for the women in red contest, you might want to read the rules, and if
> you have concerns there is a currently redlinked talkpage.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_
> talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules&
> action=edit=1
>
> I've made a couple of bold tweaks to the competition rules myself, but they
> did already cover notability and of course copyvio. Though a contest aimed
> at existing editors is less likely to hit problems in those areas as an
> outreach editathon targeted at new editors - there we do need to explain
> our notability rules and sadly often teach people about copyright and
> plagiarism.
>
> As for criticising a project for aiming for 100,000 articles when they only
> have 4 judges and 108 participants, it is two weeks until it starts and
> they have a watchlist notice up to recruit more people either as
> participants or judges note
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_
> in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules
> -* "If you want to help judge the contest or help out with running it
> please ensure that you add your name in the judges section on the main
> page"* I could understand at the end of a project having that sort of
> criticism if they had got ambitious but not tried to recruit enough
> participants. However at this stage such criticism is premature and
> probably misdirected. A more nuanced view would be to look at the end and
> check whether they succeeded in their objective and whether they achieved
> sufficient participation both of editors and judges. Criticising a project
> that doesn't start for another two weeks for having insufficient judges and
> participants when it currently in a major site wide recruitment drive for
> judges and participants seems premature to me.
>
> Alternatively one could look at the objective and ask whether creating
> 100,000 articles on women was sufficient, insufficient or excessive to deal
> with the known gender gap in our coverage. The 100,000 target looks about
> right to me and it will be interesting to see how much progress people can
> make on it in a one month contest, but if someone is uncomfortable about it
> it would be sensible to go through the figures and check if that is an
> appropriate target for the problem. Treating such an ambitious target as a
> problem without acknowledging that Wikipedia has coverage gaps on that
> scale comes across almost as denial of the problem.
>
>
>
> --
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 22:02:50 +0800
> > From: Gnangarra 
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
> > Message-ID:
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread WereSpielChequers
Hi Gnangarra

I've heard bad things about the articles for creation process, but a
minimum of either 1.5 kb  or 2,000 bytes of prose is a new one on me. Can
you link to that part of the AFC rules? I have reread things such as
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/
Reviewing_instructions and found one perfectly sensible comment about
deleting single sentence "articles". But 1,000 bytes would be a jolly long
sentence. AFC has its flaws, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, but is
it really as flawed as you assert?

As for the women in red contest, you might want to read the rules, and if
you have concerns there is a currently redlinked talkpage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_
talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules=edit=1

I've made a couple of bold tweaks to the competition rules myself, but they
did already cover notability and of course copyvio. Though a contest aimed
at existing editors is less likely to hit problems in those areas as an
outreach editathon targeted at new editors - there we do need to explain
our notability rules and sadly often teach people about copyright and
plagiarism.

As for criticising a project for aiming for 100,000 articles when they only
have 4 judges and 108 participants, it is two weeks until it starts and
they have a watchlist notice up to recruit more people either as
participants or judges note
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/The_World_Contest/Rules
-* "If you want to help judge the contest or help out with running it
please ensure that you add your name in the judges section on the main
page"* I could understand at the end of a project having that sort of
criticism if they had got ambitious but not tried to recruit enough
participants. However at this stage such criticism is premature and
probably misdirected. A more nuanced view would be to look at the end and
check whether they succeeded in their objective and whether they achieved
sufficient participation both of editors and judges. Criticising a project
that doesn't start for another two weeks for having insufficient judges and
participants when it currently in a major site wide recruitment drive for
judges and participants seems premature to me.

Alternatively one could look at the objective and ask whether creating
100,000 articles on women was sufficient, insufficient or excessive to deal
with the known gender gap in our coverage. The 100,000 target looks about
right to me and it will be interesting to see how much progress people can
make on it in a one month contest, but if someone is uncomfortable about it
it would be sensible to go through the figures and check if that is an
appropriate target for the problem. Treating such an ambitious target as a
problem without acknowledging that Wikipedia has coverage gaps on that
scale comes across almost as denial of the problem.



--
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2017 22:02:50 +0800
> From: Gnangarra 
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
> Message-ID:
> 

[Wikimedia-l] Bhubaneswar Heritage Edit-a-thon

2017-10-16 Thread Sailesh Patnaik
Dear Wikimedians,

I am happy to announce that  Bhubaneswar Heritage Edit-a-thon

has started with great enthusiasm and will continue till 10 November 2017.
The Odia Wikipedia community and the CIS-A2K have partnered with
Bhubaneswar Development Authority with the purpose to improve Wikipedia
articles and establish Bhubaneswar as a QRpedia city.

I invite Wikipedians to add the heritage sites of Bhubaneswar by creating
or improving articles in their language Wikipedias. You can see some
suggestions here

and report
your contribution *here
*
.

If you are an experienced Wikimedian and want to lead this initiative, become
an ambassador

and
help to make the event a bigger success.

I would like to thank Odia Wikimedia User Group, CIS-A2K, Wikimedia Sweden
and WikiProject India (Wikidata) for supporting the event.

Please help us spread the word!
---
*Sailesh Patnaik*  "*ଶୈଳେଶ ପଟ୍ଟନାୟକ "*
*LinkedIn* : https://www.linkedin.com/in/sailesh-patnaik-551a10b4
*Twitter*: @saileshpat
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Yaroslav Blanter
My (rejected) message below anyway.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:

> Why is my message to this thread getting rejected? It says "Message
> rejected by filter rule match"?
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Yaroslav Blanter 
> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I guess we are discussing this contest:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in
>> _Red/The_World_Contest
>>
>> because this is the one which starts in two weeks.
>>
>> For the full disclosure, I have absolutely no relation to the contest and
>> will likely not participate.
>>
>> First, this is an internal affair of the English Wikipedia. I am not sure
>> why it should be discussed on wikimedia-l.
>>
>> Second, we have seen many writing contests and drives and personal
>> initiatives on Wikipedia. Some were successful, some were complete
>> disaster. Whether the contest/drive is successful depends on the
>> organizers, and, in particular, on whether the goals are set properly.
>>
>> This one aims at 10K (not 100K) new articles in two months. This is
>> realistic and, even if some articles are substandard, will not disturb the
>> flow of Wikipedia. I recognize a lot of people who signed up as established
>> editors who certainly know how to source articles. The rules of the contest
>> establish 1K of pure prose (it indeed stated in one place 0.75K, which I
>> changed to align with what is written in the  rules of the contest.) They
>> also specify that the articles must be properly sourced. A fully sourced 1K
>> prose is a solid stub, and I do not see how it could harm Wikipedia. The
>> organizer is Dr. Blofeld, who previously organized events of similar scope
>> which were successful. (I for example participated in the Arfica destubaton
>> last year and won a prize; I closely monitored the quality and I saw how
>> Dr. Blofeld handled the quality control, I have no issues with that).
>>
>> To summarize, at this point I do not see any reasons for alarm.
>>
>> I would like, however, to address two more points which were raised in
>> this topic. First, the monetary prizes. I personally oppose giving monetary
>> prizes for writing Wikipedia articles. When I participated in the Africa
>> destubaton I mentioned above, I made it very clear that I am not going to
>> accept a monetary prize. After I won the contest in the nomination of the
>> articles on Mozambique, I had an Amazon voucher sent to me, which I spent
>> to buy an article on the history of Mozambique. So I am definitely not a
>> fan of monetary prizes, on the other hand, this is not the first contest
>> which offers monetary prizes, the prizes are of a scope comparable to what
>> what offered at similar contests previously, and if the issue has to be
>> discussed, it has to be discussed in a broader scope, not in relation to
>> this particular contest.
>>
>> Second, I am not sure how I should interpret the opinions that the
>> articles about women should be sourced worse than the articles about men,
>> but currently there is consensus on the English Wikipedia on how the
>> notability and verifiability policies should be implemented (I guess this
>> could be different in other projects). The community is currently not
>> accepting unsourced and poorly sourced articles, we have the trial running
>> for autoconfirmed article creation, and the queue of new page patrol, which
>> is now 13K articles, slowly goes down. (We actually struggled a lot to get
>> it going down, for several years). Any unsourced article about living
>> people gets PRODded within hours. No action which would attempt to revert
>> this trend is going to be accepted. It is not about woman vs man or Africa
>> vs Europe, it is about verifiability.
>>
>> Having said this, if there is a competition suddenly up in the air, aimed
>> at 100K articles, poorly organized and with unrealistically weak
>> requirements, I would definitely call it a road to disaster. It is just
>> what I referenced is not this.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Yaroslav
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
>>
>>> This has nothing to do with Gender,
>>>
>>> The issue is the standards required and the aim of the event not the
>>> subjects of the content
>>>
>>> The event set a minimum standard at 0.75k per article created, new
>>> editors
>>> going through articles for creation are required to have 1.5k of prose
>>> which is twice the requirement  for this competition.
>>>
>>> I'll repeat we should not expect more from new editors than we do from
>>> existing editors, regardless of the subject.  With any competition we
>>> should be expecting a higher amount than the minimum from existing
>>> community members, mass creation of stubs is not the best way to address
>>> to
>>> encourage those editors to take an interest in developing subjects.
>>>
>>> Any competition of this magnitude should also have the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Yaroslav Blanter
Why is my message to this thread getting rejected? It says "Message
rejected by filter rule match"?

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I guess we are discussing this contest:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_
> in_Red/The_World_Contest
>
> because this is the one which starts in two weeks.
>
> For the full disclosure, I have absolutely no relation to the contest and
> will likely not participate.
>
> First, this is an internal affair of the English Wikipedia. I am not sure
> why it should be discussed on wikimedia-l.
>
> Second, we have seen many writing contests and drives and personal
> initiatives on Wikipedia. Some were successful, some were complete
> disaster. Whether the contest/drive is successful depends on the
> organizers, and, in particular, on whether the goals are set properly.
>
> This one aims at 10K (not 100K) new articles in two months. This is
> realistic and, even if some articles are substandard, will not disturb the
> flow of Wikipedia. I recognize a lot of people who signed up as established
> editors who certainly know how to source articles. The rules of the contest
> establish 1K of pure prose (it indeed stated in one place 0.75K, which I
> changed to align with what is written in the  rules of the contest.) They
> also specify that the articles must be properly sourced. A fully sourced 1K
> prose is a solid stub, and I do not see how it could harm Wikipedia. The
> organizer is Dr. Blofeld, who previously organized events of similar scope
> which were successful. (I for example participated in the Arfica destubaton
> last year and won a prize; I closely monitored the quality and I saw how
> Dr. Blofeld handled the quality control, I have no issues with that).
>
> To summarize, at this point I do not see any reasons for alarm.
>
> I would like, however, to address two more points which were raised in
> this topic. First, the monetary prizes. I personally oppose giving monetary
> prizes for writing Wikipedia articles. When I participated in the Africa
> destubaton I mentioned above, I made it very clear that I am not going to
> accept a monetary prize. After I won the contest in the nomination of the
> articles on Mozambique, I had an Amazon voucher sent to me, which I spent
> to buy an article on the history of Mozambique. So I am definitely not a
> fan of monetary prizes, on the other hand, this is not the first contest
> which offers monetary prizes, the prizes are of a scope comparable to what
> what offered at similar contests previously, and if the issue has to be
> discussed, it has to be discussed in a broader scope, not in relation to
> this particular contest.
>
> Second, I am not sure how I should interpret the opinions that the
> articles about women should be sourced worse than the articles about men,
> but currently there is consensus on the English Wikipedia on how the
> notability and verifiability policies should be implemented (I guess this
> could be different in other projects). The community is currently not
> accepting unsourced and poorly sourced articles, we have the trial running
> for autoconfirmed article creation, and the queue of new page patrol, which
> is now 13K articles, slowly goes down. (We actually struggled a lot to get
> it going down, for several years). Any unsourced article about living
> people gets PRODded within hours. No action which would attempt to revert
> this trend is going to be accepted. It is not about woman vs man or Africa
> vs Europe, it is about verifiability.
>
> Having said this, if there is a competition suddenly up in the air, aimed
> at 100K articles, poorly organized and with unrealistically weak
> requirements, I would definitely call it a road to disaster. It is just
> what I referenced is not this.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
>
>> This has nothing to do with Gender,
>>
>> The issue is the standards required and the aim of the event not the
>> subjects of the content
>>
>> The event set a minimum standard at 0.75k per article created, new editors
>> going through articles for creation are required to have 1.5k of prose
>> which is twice the requirement  for this competition.
>>
>> I'll repeat we should not expect more from new editors than we do from
>> existing editors, regardless of the subject.  With any competition we
>> should be expecting a higher amount than the minimum from existing
>> community members, mass creation of stubs is not the best way to address
>> to
>> encourage those editors to take an interest in developing subjects.
>>
>> Any competition of this magnitude should also have the resources to ensure
>> that in the process we dont do more damage
>>
>>
>>
>> On 16 October 2017 at 13:57, Natacha Rault  wrote:
>>
>> > Dear All,
>> >
>> > I can only agree with GorillaWarfare. I am also tired of having to
>> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Gnangarra
This has nothing to do with Gender,

The issue is the standards required and the aim of the event not the
subjects of the content

The event set a minimum standard at 0.75k per article created, new editors
going through articles for creation are required to have 1.5k of prose
which is twice the requirement  for this competition.

I'll repeat we should not expect more from new editors than we do from
existing editors, regardless of the subject.  With any competition we
should be expecting a higher amount than the minimum from existing
community members, mass creation of stubs is not the best way to address to
encourage those editors to take an interest in developing subjects.

Any competition of this magnitude should also have the resources to ensure
that in the process we dont do more damage



On 16 October 2017 at 13:57, Natacha Rault  wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I can only agree with GorillaWarfare. I am also tired of having to proove
> anything concernig gender has to be perfect, when the whole principle of
> Wikipedia is that everything is always perfectible.
> I think we should assume good faith and avoid  comments.
> Doing nothing about the gender gap would not bring a positive image of our
> movement. The gap is huge and we do need quantity. Readers noticing
> mistakes sometimes become contributors (dont we need new contributors?).
> Chosing such a tone “intentionally” (citing Gnangarra) is something I find
> shocking. I think criticism is good to make progress, one does not need to
> fuel resentmemt by making it .
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Nattes à chat / Natacha
>
>
> > Le 16 oct. 2017 à 05:51, GorillaWarfare  gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
> > message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
> >
> > I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
> this
> > will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the
> > document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project
> > will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
> > mass-producing poor-quality content).
> >
> > As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
> > describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I
> > believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can
> be
> > described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of poor
> > wording.
> >
> > – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
>  > gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
> this
> >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
> her
> >> email address.
> >>
> >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
> >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
> >> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
> >>
> >> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
> to a
> >> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
> going
> >> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch
> of
> >> stubs.
> >>
> >> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
> better
> >> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
> shouldn't
> >> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
> >>
> >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> >>
> >>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Gnangarra 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> No worries Keegan I read it as sarcastic, given the amount of noise on
> >>> here
> >>> I chose my tone intentionally to draw attention to the competition,
> yes it
> >>> looks like a wonderful idea until to look at the mechanics of
> comeptition
> >>> given it has a start time in 2 weeks, people are being encourage to
> start
> >>> now in sandboxes, its being advertised on banners yet it has very
> obvious
> >>> under lying issues
> >>>
> >>>   - unrealistic targets
> >>>   - quantity not quality
> >>>   - an expectation that competitors are required to do half of what is
> >>>   expected from new editors , we should hold ourselves and expect of
> >>> higher
> >>>   standards than that we expect from new comers
> >>>   - no methodology for notability. blp, copyright issues arent weeded
> out
> >>>   during the event or judging
> >>>   - judging is done by a bot just doing a count
> >>>
> >>> To win this event all you need is a list, a script, and reliable
> internet
> >>> connection, despite having so many signed up well experience good
> editors
> >>> on the list.Sadly one person using a Wikidata script to
> >>> create
> >>> articles could be the winner,  just imagine the unimaginable
> >>> frankenstienian horror that would create 
> >>>
> >>> Any competition that relies