Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright enforcement?

[The Cunctator]

Thanks. I've added entries for Google Knowledge Graph and various Google
derivative products, which have varying quality of attribution and license
information and license. None appear to be fully compliant.

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 9:29 PM, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> Editors used to do plenty by hand, if you recall. The on-wiki list of
> mirrors and forks had compliance info, and individuals would reach out and
> ask for license changes or takedowns.
>
> Since having a legal team I don't know how these have happened, or which
> individuals have made such claims & requests.
>
> On Jan 29, 2018 10:19 AM, "The Cunctator"  wrote:
>
> > Related, has there ever been any copyright enforcement for Wikipedia, or
> is
> > its copyleft a joke and it's functionally purely public domain?
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:42 AM, Renée Bagslint  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Does the Foundation have any standing to enforce the copyright, since
> > that
> > > belongs to the individual contributors?
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 12:12 AM, James Salsman 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Attribution is often considered impractical, but providing the source
> > > > date along with e.g. the article name can be used to derive the
> > > > attribution, so it should be required. It's not just a good idea to
> > > > require this information from content re-users like Amazon, Apple,
> and
> > > > Google, but doing so will help encourage those who find issues to
> > > > edit.
> > > >
> > > > If the Foundation doesn't make attribution or at least article date a
> > > > requirement, then they are actively opposing editor recruitment.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 7:34 PM, The Cunctator 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > The copyright requirement isn't attribution; it's attribution and
> > > > copyleft
> > > > > retention for derived works.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:28 AM, James Heilman 
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> It search result only contains a snippet (and thus is fair use).
> > Plus
> > > > >> Google provide attribution in a lot of their results.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> J
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:03 PM, geni  wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > On 5 June 2017 at 18:32, The Cunctator 
> > wrote:
> > > > >> > > Both Google and Graphiq are using pretty much the entire
> > Wikipedia
> > > > >> corpus
> > > > >> > > for their results.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > However due to the way their output is structured it falls under
> > > "you
> > > > >> > can't copyright facts".
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > --
> > > > >> > geni
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > ___
> > > > >> > 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>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> James Heilman
> > > > >> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> > > > >> ___
> > > > >> 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>
> > > > >>
> > > > > ___
> > > > > 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: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright enforcement?

[Samuel Klein]

Editors used to do plenty by hand, if you recall. The on-wiki list of
mirrors and forks had compliance info, and individuals would reach out and
ask for license changes or takedowns.

Since having a legal team I don't know how these have happened, or which
individuals have made such claims & requests.

On Jan 29, 2018 10:19 AM, "The Cunctator"  wrote:

> Related, has there ever been any copyright enforcement for Wikipedia, or is
> its copyleft a joke and it's functionally purely public domain?
>
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:42 AM, Renée Bagslint 
> wrote:
>
> > Does the Foundation have any standing to enforce the copyright, since
> that
> > belongs to the individual contributors?
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 12:12 AM, James Salsman 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Attribution is often considered impractical, but providing the source
> > > date along with e.g. the article name can be used to derive the
> > > attribution, so it should be required. It's not just a good idea to
> > > require this information from content re-users like Amazon, Apple, and
> > > Google, but doing so will help encourage those who find issues to
> > > edit.
> > >
> > > If the Foundation doesn't make attribution or at least article date a
> > > requirement, then they are actively opposing editor recruitment.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 7:34 PM, The Cunctator 
> > > wrote:
> > > > The copyright requirement isn't attribution; it's attribution and
> > > copyleft
> > > > retention for derived works.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:28 AM, James Heilman 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> It search result only contains a snippet (and thus is fair use).
> Plus
> > > >> Google provide attribution in a lot of their results.
> > > >>
> > > >> J
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:03 PM, geni  wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > On 5 June 2017 at 18:32, The Cunctator 
> wrote:
> > > >> > > Both Google and Graphiq are using pretty much the entire
> Wikipedia
> > > >> corpus
> > > >> > > for their results.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > However due to the way their output is structured it falls under
> > "you
> > > >> > can't copyright facts".
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > geni
> > > >> >
> > > >> > ___
> > > >> > 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>
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> James Heilman
> > > >> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > > >>
> > > >> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> > > >> ___
> > > >> 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>
> > > >>
> > > > ___
> > > > 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: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimedia vs. NSA

[Philippe Beaudette]

Great update, thank you.

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Katherine Maher 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I’d like to share an update and next steps in our lawsuit against the U.S.
> National Security Agency (NSA), Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA.[1] As you’ll
> recall, in March 2015, the Wikimedia Foundation joined eight other
> plaintiffs in filing a suit in United States Federal District Court against
> the NSA[2] and the Department of Justice,[3] among others. We have been
> represented pro bono[4] by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)[5] and
> the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.[6] The law
> firm Cooley LLP[7] has also been serving as pro bono co-counsel for the
> Foundation.
>
> Since we’re coming on the three-year anniversary, I wanted to offer a
> reminder of why we filed this suit. Our challenge supports the foundational
> values of our movement: the right to freedom of expression and access to
> information. Free knowledge requires freedom of inquiry, particularly in
> the case of challenging and unpopular truths. Each day people around the
> world engage with difficult and controversial subjects on Wikipedia and
> other Wikimedia projects. Pervasive mass surveillance brings the threat of
> reprisal, creates a chilling effect, and undermines the freedoms upon which
> our projects and communities are founded. In bringing this suit, we joined
> a tradition of knowledge stewards who have fought to preserve the integrity
> of intellectual inquiry.
>
> Our lawsuit challenges dragnet surveillance by the NSA, specifically the
> large-scale seizing and searching of Internet communications frequently
> referred to as “Upstream” surveillance.[8] The U.S. government is tapping
> directly into the internet’s “backbone”[9]—the network of high-capacity
> cables, switches, and routers that carry domestic and international
> communications—and seizing and searching virtually all text-based internet
> communications flowing into and out of the United States. It’s this
> backbone that connects the global Wikimedia community to our projects.
> These communications are being seized and searched without any requirement
> that there be suspicion, for example, that the communications have a
> connection to terrorism or national security threats.
>
> Last May, we reached an important milestone: a Federal Court of Appeals[10]
> in the United States ruled[11] that the Foundation alone had plausibly
> alleged “standing”[12] to proceed with our claims that Upstream mass
> surveillance seizes and searches of the online communications of Wikimedia
> users, contributors and Foundation staff in violation of the U.S.
> Constitution and other laws. The Court of Appeals’ ruling means that we are
> the sole remaining plaintiff among the nine original co-plaintiffs. There
> is still a long road ahead, but this intermediate victory makes this case
> one of the most important vehicles for challenging the legality of this
> particular NSA surveillance practice.
>
> As a result of our win in the appellate court, we are now proceeding to the
> next stage of the case: discovery.[13] In the U.S. court system, parties
> use the discovery stage to exchange evidence and ask each other questions
> about their claims. We have requested information and documents from the
> government, and they have made similar requests from us. The entire phase,
> which will also involve research and reports from experts, is expected to
> last the next few months.
>
> As part of our commitment to privacy, I want you to know about what this
> stage of the case means for our data retention practices. Our goal in
> bringing this lawsuit was to protect user information. In this case, like
> other litigation in which we engage, we may sometimes be legally required
> to preserve some information longer than the standard 90-day period in our
> data retention guidelines. These special cases are acknowledged and
> permitted by our privacy and data retention policies.[14]
>
> As always, however, we remain committed to keeping user data no longer than
> legally necessary. We never publish the exact details of litigation-related
> data retention, as part of our legal strategy to keep personal data safe.
> And we defend any personal data from disclosure to the maximum extent,
> taking both legal and technical measures to do so. We are keeping sensitive
> material encrypted and offline, and we have the support of the experienced
> legal teams at the ACLU and Cooley in ensuring its safety and integrity.
> Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA is currently one of the only freedom of
> expression and access to knowledge cases being prosecuted against
> government surveillance overreach. Unfortunately, the recent extension of
> these surveillance practices by the U.S. Congress[15] demonstrates that the
> courts may well be the only venue to stop or restrict these practices.
>
> The nature of litigation means that we will not always be able to 

[Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimedia vs. NSA

[Katherine Maher]

Hi all,

I’d like to share an update and next steps in our lawsuit against the U.S.
National Security Agency (NSA), Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA.[1] As you’ll
recall, in March 2015, the Wikimedia Foundation joined eight other
plaintiffs in filing a suit in United States Federal District Court against
the NSA[2] and the Department of Justice,[3] among others. We have been
represented pro bono[4] by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)[5] and
the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.[6] The law
firm Cooley LLP[7] has also been serving as pro bono co-counsel for the
Foundation.

Since we’re coming on the three-year anniversary, I wanted to offer a
reminder of why we filed this suit. Our challenge supports the foundational
values of our movement: the right to freedom of expression and access to
information. Free knowledge requires freedom of inquiry, particularly in
the case of challenging and unpopular truths. Each day people around the
world engage with difficult and controversial subjects on Wikipedia and
other Wikimedia projects. Pervasive mass surveillance brings the threat of
reprisal, creates a chilling effect, and undermines the freedoms upon which
our projects and communities are founded. In bringing this suit, we joined
a tradition of knowledge stewards who have fought to preserve the integrity
of intellectual inquiry.

Our lawsuit challenges dragnet surveillance by the NSA, specifically the
large-scale seizing and searching of Internet communications frequently
referred to as “Upstream” surveillance.[8] The U.S. government is tapping
directly into the internet’s “backbone”[9]—the network of high-capacity
cables, switches, and routers that carry domestic and international
communications—and seizing and searching virtually all text-based internet
communications flowing into and out of the United States. It’s this
backbone that connects the global Wikimedia community to our projects.
These communications are being seized and searched without any requirement
that there be suspicion, for example, that the communications have a
connection to terrorism or national security threats.

Last May, we reached an important milestone: a Federal Court of Appeals[10]
in the United States ruled[11] that the Foundation alone had plausibly
alleged “standing”[12] to proceed with our claims that Upstream mass
surveillance seizes and searches of the online communications of Wikimedia
users, contributors and Foundation staff in violation of the U.S.
Constitution and other laws. The Court of Appeals’ ruling means that we are
the sole remaining plaintiff among the nine original co-plaintiffs. There
is still a long road ahead, but this intermediate victory makes this case
one of the most important vehicles for challenging the legality of this
particular NSA surveillance practice.

As a result of our win in the appellate court, we are now proceeding to the
next stage of the case: discovery.[13] In the U.S. court system, parties
use the discovery stage to exchange evidence and ask each other questions
about their claims. We have requested information and documents from the
government, and they have made similar requests from us. The entire phase,
which will also involve research and reports from experts, is expected to
last the next few months.

As part of our commitment to privacy, I want you to know about what this
stage of the case means for our data retention practices. Our goal in
bringing this lawsuit was to protect user information. In this case, like
other litigation in which we engage, we may sometimes be legally required
to preserve some information longer than the standard 90-day period in our
data retention guidelines. These special cases are acknowledged and
permitted by our privacy and data retention policies.[14]

As always, however, we remain committed to keeping user data no longer than
legally necessary. We never publish the exact details of litigation-related
data retention, as part of our legal strategy to keep personal data safe.
And we defend any personal data from disclosure to the maximum extent,
taking both legal and technical measures to do so. We are keeping sensitive
material encrypted and offline, and we have the support of the experienced
legal teams at the ACLU and Cooley in ensuring its safety and integrity.
Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA is currently one of the only freedom of
expression and access to knowledge cases being prosecuted against
government surveillance overreach. Unfortunately, the recent extension of
these surveillance practices by the U.S. Congress[15] demonstrates that the
courts may well be the only venue to stop or restrict these practices.

The nature of litigation means that we will not always be able to discuss
certain details of any case in public. For example, deliberations about
tactical or strategic decisions will need to remain confidential in order
to preserve the attorney-client privilege.[16] In such situations,
particularly in a sensitive and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright enforcement?

[The Cunctator]

Related, has there ever been any copyright enforcement for Wikipedia, or is
its copyleft a joke and it's functionally purely public domain?

On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 7:42 AM, Renée Bagslint 
wrote:

> Does the Foundation have any standing to enforce the copyright, since that
> belongs to the individual contributors?
>
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 12:12 AM, James Salsman 
> wrote:
>
> > Attribution is often considered impractical, but providing the source
> > date along with e.g. the article name can be used to derive the
> > attribution, so it should be required. It's not just a good idea to
> > require this information from content re-users like Amazon, Apple, and
> > Google, but doing so will help encourage those who find issues to
> > edit.
> >
> > If the Foundation doesn't make attribution or at least article date a
> > requirement, then they are actively opposing editor recruitment.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 7:34 PM, The Cunctator 
> > wrote:
> > > The copyright requirement isn't attribution; it's attribution and
> > copyleft
> > > retention for derived works.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:28 AM, James Heilman 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> It search result only contains a snippet (and thus is fair use). Plus
> > >> Google provide attribution in a lot of their results.
> > >>
> > >> J
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:03 PM, geni  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On 5 June 2017 at 18:32, The Cunctator  wrote:
> > >> > > Both Google and Graphiq are using pretty much the entire Wikipedia
> > >> corpus
> > >> > > for their results.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > However due to the way their output is structured it falls under
> "you
> > >> > can't copyright facts".
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > geni
> > >> >
> > >> > ___
> > >> > 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>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> James Heilman
> > >> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > >>
> > >> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> > >> ___
> > >> 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,
> 
>
___
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] Copyright enforcement?

[Renée Bagslint]

Does the Foundation have any standing to enforce the copyright, since that
belongs to the individual contributors?

On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 12:12 AM, James Salsman  wrote:

> Attribution is often considered impractical, but providing the source
> date along with e.g. the article name can be used to derive the
> attribution, so it should be required. It's not just a good idea to
> require this information from content re-users like Amazon, Apple, and
> Google, but doing so will help encourage those who find issues to
> edit.
>
> If the Foundation doesn't make attribution or at least article date a
> requirement, then they are actively opposing editor recruitment.
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 7:34 PM, The Cunctator 
> wrote:
> > The copyright requirement isn't attribution; it's attribution and
> copyleft
> > retention for derived works.
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:28 AM, James Heilman  wrote:
> >
> >> It search result only contains a snippet (and thus is fair use). Plus
> >> Google provide attribution in a lot of their results.
> >>
> >> J
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:03 PM, geni  wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 5 June 2017 at 18:32, The Cunctator  wrote:
> >> > > Both Google and Graphiq are using pretty much the entire Wikipedia
> >> corpus
> >> > > for their results.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > However due to the way their output is structured it falls under "you
> >> > can't copyright facts".
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > geni
> >> >
> >> > ___
> >> > 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
> >>
> >> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> >> ___
> >> 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, 

[Wikimedia-l] Duty of care

[Renée Bagslint]

Looking at a couple of situations that have arisen recently on one of the
projects, where the health and well-being of volunteers might have been
affected by their participation, I wonder where we can find a clear
statement of the Foundation's Duty of Care towards the volunteers?  I
looked on Meta, but the search appeared to return only pages relevant to
the Trustees duty towards the Foundation.  I was looking for something
about the Foundation's duty towards the community?  Can anyone help?
___
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 Foundation Board statement endorsing future resourcing and direction of the movement

[Renée Bagslint]

The list can be summarised as

   - Spend more on staff
   - Spend more on chapters
   - Get more money
   - Get more money
   - Get more money
   - Spend more money

We notice that such minor matters as produce more content, produce better
content, support content contributors, disseminate knowledge more widely,
find new ways of curating and disseminating knowledge, ... are not on the
agenda.


On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 7:08 PM, Christophe Henner 
wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> As many of you know, in October we concluded phase 1 of the movement
> strategy process. The result was a final draft of the strategic
> direction,[1] summarizing the hundreds of conversations that took place all
> over the world, on wiki and off, about where we as a movement want
> Wikimedia to go next. Many communities and individuals have signed on to
> the direction, expressing their support for the guide we collectively
> created for our future.
>
> The Board recognizes the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead in
> making this direction a reality. In the next phase of the movement
> strategy, we will get into more of the specifics of how to make that
> happen. With that in mind, we would like to share a statement setting forth
> our commitment to the future of Wikimedia, and a clear mandate for the
> Wikimedia Foundation to invest the resources necessary to support the
> growth and evolution required for the next chapter of Wikimedia’s future.
>
> Our statement is included below, and on Meta-Wiki, where it has been set up
> for translation:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> Board_noticeboard/November_2017_-_Statement_endorsing_
> future_resourcing_and_direction_of_the_organization
>
> The Board greatly appreciates all of the time and energy that thousands of
> people have put into the movement strategy process. Special appreciation
> goes out to the members of the community who stepped up to help lead local,
> language, or global organizing efforts. We are not done yet, but what we
> have created is something that we should all be proud of -- for the process
> of how we got to this direction, as much as for the direction itself.
>
> On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees,
>
> Christophe Henner, Board Chair
>
> ***
>
> Statement
>
> At our most recent Board meeting on the 18th of November, the Wikimedia
> Foundation Board focused much of our discussion on the needs and goals of
> the Wikimedia 2030 movement strategy process.[1] We carefully considered
> the next steps we as a movement, and the Wikimedia Foundation in
> particular, need to take to build for our future.
>
> The Board is committed to ensuring the vision outlined in the Wikimedia
> 2030 process becomes a reality. To support this direction and the future of
> the Wikimedia movement, it is our belief that the Wikimedia Foundation must
> expand its resources through healthy, sustainable practices. To this end,
> we want to give a clear mandate for the Wikimedia Foundation to invest the
> resources necessary to support the growth and evolution required for the
> next chapter of Wikimedia’s future.
>
> We specifically recommend that the Foundation:
>
>-
>
>Increase investment in Foundation staffing and other means of support
>for the movement direction, sufficiently resourcing product, technology,
>and community health commitments in particular;
>-
>
>Support and engage with individuals, groups, and organizations,
>especially within the Wikimedia movement, to further develop their
>capacities, including the specific needs of emerging communities;
>-
>
>Support the fundraising team in raising additional funds beyond what is
>called for in the annual plan to prepare us for future growth;
>-
>
>Increase revenue as needed to support investment and growth;
>-
>
>Explore alternative revenue streams for the Foundation and movement; and
>-
>
>Undertake any capacity expansion in a healthy and sustainable way that
>anticipates current and future needs.
>
> Based on anticipated need and past performance, we envision an annual
> budgetary growth rate of 10–20% over the next several years.
>
> The Board takes seriously its responsibility to the Foundation and by
> extension, to the global Wikimedia movement. We believe this mandate will
> better ensure we can realize the future we all have outlined as part of
> Wikimedia 2030. We are committed to ensuring the sustainable growth and
> success of our movement, and the Wikimedia Foundation’s role in supporting
> its future.
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Direction
>
>
>
> Christophe HENNER
> Chair of the board of trustees
> chen...@wikimedia.org
> +33650664739
>
> twitter *@schiste*skype *christophe_henner*
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lower page views

[Frederick Noronha]

A lot of arbitrary deletions (and Western-centric approaches) seem to have
disincentives some volunteers. At least I can speak for myself.

My conjecture is that if even I feel the Wikipedia, thanks to its many
successes, is increasingly unable to reflect the diversity of our world,
why should readers not feel likewise. And these are your growth areas.

Frederick Noronha
Fredericknoronha
Goa, India
Volunteer since 2006


-- 

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/
_/  FN * फ्रेड्रिक नोरोन्या * فريدريك نورونيا‎ +91-9822122436
_/  RADIO GOANA: https://archive.org/details/@fredericknoronha
_/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/



On 24 Jan 2018 8:43 am, "Isaac Olatunde"  wrote:

> Perhaps our readers aren't getting their topics of interest on Wikipedia,
> partly because Wikipedia is becoming nothing more than a biographical
> encyclopedia.
>
> Regards,
>
> Isaac.
>
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 5:54 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
>
> > Our data is only comparable between May 2015 and Dec 2017 so:
> >
> > Nov/Dec/Jan 15/16 total 15.7, 14.6, 16.2
> >
> > Nov/Dec/Jan 16/17 total 16.4, 15.5, 17.0
> >
> > Nov/Dec/Jan 17/18 total 15.3, 14.3, 16.4 (last number an estimate)
> >
> > So went up from 15/16 to 16/17 and now come down in 17/18 to about were
> it
> > was in 15/16. We are definitely not seeing growth in pageviews though
> which
> > is concerning.
> >
> > James
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 5:10 AM, Wojciech Pędzich 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In order to have at least a partial answer we would need to know how
> the
> > > pageviews relate to actual database traffic I assume? That would
> explain
> > > Google and I do not know whether there are any other services worldwide
> > > that use the datastram without actually displaying pages.
> > >
> > > Wojciech
> > >
> > > 2018-01-23 11:55 GMT+01:00 Anders Wennersten  >:
> > >
> > > > We are seeing a steady decrease of page views to our projects
> > > (Wikipedia).
> > > > Nov-Dec-Jan it is decreasing in a rate of 5-10% (year-year), and for
> > big
> > > > languages like Japanese,  Spanish close to 10%, or some months even
> > more
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > > > Is there any insights of why this is so? Could it be that Google take
> > > over
> > > > accesses with their ever better way of showing results direct  (but
> > then
> > > > also with showing extracts of Wikipedia articles) . Or that our
> > interface
> > > > on mobiles is inferior so we miss accesses from mobiles (now being
> 54%
> > of
> > > > total). Or horror of horror that users look for facts on all new
> sites
> > > with
> > > > fake news instead of Wikipedia?
> > > >
> > > > Anders
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthlyCombined
> .htm
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > 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,
> > > 
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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,
> 
___
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] What's happening with #1Lib1Ref? (A lot...)

[Jake Orlowitz]

Each year the Wikipedia Library team, in collaboration with GLAM folks
(Galleries, Libraries, Archives & Museums) all around the world, asks a
simple favor: Give Wikipedia the gift of a citation for its birthday.

Website:
http://1lib1ref.org

This year Wikipedia turns 17 and it's our third annual #1Lib1Ref campaign.
The 20-day campaign is now in its second week... What's happened so far?

Across the languages we are tracking, editors have added 2097 citations in
21+ languages.

5 languages have made over 100 edits: English, French, Hebrew, Serbian and
Catalan.

View contributions by language:
https://twitter.com/WikiLibrary/status/955590632545726464

On social media #1Lib1Ref is a hype-machine. 37 countries have made 2260
Twitter posts reaching 4.4 million potential readers 8.1 million times.

We invited librarians (and library-lovers) around the world to participate. Our
Wikimedia Blog post, written by #1Lib1Ref originator and GLAM Strategist
Alex Stinson, set the tone and made the case:

Read blog:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/01/16/1lib1ref-2018/

The blog included a visual 'explainer' video created by Wikipedia Library
team member Felix Nartey, narrated by famous U.S. Librarian Jessamyn West.

Watch Video:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1Lib1Ref_MySimpleShow_Explainer_Video.webm

We promoted the Story of #1lib1ref on social media using an 8-part
TweetStorm:

Read Tweetstorm:
https://twitter.com/WikiLibrary/status/955507752410869760

Also we redesigned a simple new graphic and logo for the campaign:

View Graphic:
https://twitter.com/WikiLibrary/status/955507757880295424/photo/1

Each year #1Lib1Ref grows and brings in more people from libraries, and
more people who believe that Wikipedia and librarians share a mission which
benefits from collaboration. It's an exciting part of our work and we're
very thankful to everyone who adds to its impact and success!

Join in. Make an edit. Teach someone how to add a citation. Share something
nice about the campaign this week in your social media circles. Help share
free knowledge. #1Lib1Ref. Pass it on...

Best,
Jake Orlowitz
Head of The Wikipedia Library
jorlow...@wikimedia.org
@JakeOrlowitz
@WikiLibrary
wikipedialibrary.org
___
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] [Affiliates] New Affiliations Committee appointments

[Alangi Derick]

Hello everyone!

With due respect Katherine Maher, Narunnaby Hasive and everyone else, thank
you all very much for the warm welcome. I'm grateful to serve the Wikimedia
movement as a member of the Affiliations Committee and beyond. :)

*Kind regards,*
*Derick N. Alangi*

*V. Developer @ Wikimedia*
*Co-founder & Technical Lead, Africa Wikimedia Developers (AWMD)*

*More infos: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Alangi_Derick
*

*[image: https://twitter.com/AlangiDerick]

  *

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 3:33 PM, Nurunnaby Hasive 
wrote:

> Congratulations to all!
>
>
> Hasive
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 8:27 PM, Katherine Maher 
> wrote:
>
> > Congratulations to Sami, Derick, and Biplab on your new appointments,
> Emna
> > and Maor on your reappointments, and thank you Galileo for your many
> years
> > of service!
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 8:18 AM, Lucas Teles 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Congratulations to the approved ones and thanks Galio for so many years
> > of
> > > work!
> > >
> > > Teles
> > >
> > > Em qua, 24 de jan de 2018 às 13:04, Bijay chaurasia <
> > > bijaychaurasi...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> > >
> > > > Congratulations.
> > > > Regards
> > > > Bijay
> > > >
> > > > On 24 Jan 2018 8:59 a.m., "Rémy Gerbet" 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Congratulations to you all !!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > *Gerbet Rémy*
> > > > >
> > > > > *Chargé de Mission Politique Territoriale**07 84 37 91 04*
> > > > > *---**-*
> > > > >
> > > > > *WIKIMEDIA FRANCE*Association pour le libre partage de la
> > connaissance
> > > > > *www.wikimedia.fr  *
> > > > > *40 rue de clery, **75002 Paris*
> > > > >  86814/2.34683
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > * 
> > > > > *
> > > > >
> > > > > 2018-01-23 17:00 GMT+01:00 Galileo Vidoni :
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks to Kirill and to the rest of the committee for their kind
> > > words.
> > > > > > I'm very fond of having served AffCom and I'm always available if
> > you
> > > > > think
> > > > > > my past experience could be useful.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As to Stu's question —yes, there have been cases of outgoing
> > > committee
> > > > > > members not being re-appointed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Galileo
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > El 23 ene. 2018 4:37 p. m., "Stuart Prior" <
> > > > > stuart.pr...@wikimedia.org.uk>
> > > > > > escribió:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Congratulations to those re-selected and newly appointed, and
> > > > > > commiserations to those unsuccessful.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I do have one question spurred on by the consistent re-selection
> of
> > > > > > existing members for the past two rounds which will might
> require a
> > > > > little
> > > > > > collective institutional memory to answer.
> > > > > > Has anyone putting themselves forward for re-selection ever not
> > been
> > > > > > re-appointed by the committee?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Stuart
> > > > > > (User:Battleofalma)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 23 January 2018 at 13:52, Nabin K. Sapkota <
> > > > > nboycreationne...@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Congratulations to all newly appointed and reappointed members.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > Nabin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 23 January 2018 at 19:33, Kirill Lokshin <
> > > > kirill.loks...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm pleased to announce that Derick Ndimnain Alangi, Biplab
> > > Anand,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > Sami
> > > > > > > > Mlouhi have appointed to the Affiliations Committee as new
> > > members.
> > > > > In
> > > > > > > > addition, two incumbent members -- Maor Malul and Emna
> Mizouni
> > --
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > been
> > > > > > > > re-appointed for an additional term.  Please join me in
> > welcoming
> > > > our
> > > > > > new
> > > > > > > > and returning members.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The committee extends its profound gratitude to Galileo
> Vidoni,
> > > who
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > stepping down after having served six years on the committee,
> > and
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > everyone who participated in the recent selection process,
> > > whether
> > > > by
> > > > > > > > standing as a candidate or by providing feedback on the
> > > > applications.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > Kirill Lokshin
> > > > > > > > Chair, Affiliations Committee
> > > > > > > >