Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are we losing out against bad editing?

2018-05-31 Thread Pine W
Hi Micru,

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 7:36 AM, David Cuenca Tudela 
wrote:

> Pine,
> It is nice of you that you thought about including these topics in the WMF
> strategy process, which I assume it is an ongoing process and not a one-off
> event. However as the 2017 cycle ended, I am unable to find the way to
> incorporate new ideas into the process. I would have expected to find a
> discussion page where new input can be taken into consideration, but it
> might not be the case.
>
>
This sounds like another good question for Nicole.



> I consider that the importance of admin decline in Wikipedias is really
> high, and at the same time I understand why you or anybody else would not
> like to do some tasks as volunteer. For this reason, while I do not like
> the idea of employees doing project activities, I feel that by creating a
> scheme where volunteers become empowered/liberated from work through direct
> donations could be part of a practical way of addressing the issue. I'm
> very sensitive to potential pitfalls and for this reason I consider that
> the feedback given by Yaroslav is extremely important, and that any
> donation to volunteers should happen only if they are committed to a
> personal transformation, that involves developing the capacity for
> listening, humility, and other values important for the project. I think
> this is only part of the story so far, and at this point the only thing I
> can do in my capacity as volunteer is to steward the conversation, and
> bring it to an increasing number of people as the understanding on this
> topic increases.
>
>

Thank you for your interest in this issue. I'll make a few further points.

* There are a number of people who are working on facilitating and
improving the experience for new editors. There are existing projects like
the English Wikipedia Teahouse and various help channels. During the
2018-2019 fiscal year, my understanding is that WMF intends to reconstitute
the "Growth Team" to attempt to improve the experience of new editors. Mark
Miller is the project manager for this, and I am pinging him here in case
he would like to comment. Meanwhile, I am working on the project that I
previously called LearnWiki
,
which I plan to re-brand later this year for trademark reasons (eventually
I will publish a new name), and in my continuation of the project I am
making modifications to the project's original design. I hope that both
Mark and I will be able to demonstrate benefits from our work in 2018-2019.

* I am very interested in non-WMF funding for affiliate and community
projects. As you probably have noticed, I can be outspoken when I have
concerns about WMF, and I am worried that if I become financially dependent
on WMF then I would be much less willing to express my views out of fear
that WMF would eliminate my funding. So, while I want to work on my project
which I think would support the community's vision and goals, I would
prefer to obtain non-WMF funding. I hope that non-WMF funding could also be
available to other community members and affiliates to work on activities
which WMF has not funded, such as on-wiki administrative work for which
there is significant demand but too little volunteer capacity. I can't make
any promises regarding the availability of non-WMF funding for myself or
others, but I am having off-wiki conversations about these issues and I
hope to be able to report some success within a few years. In the meantime,
I think that we are stuck with the status quo, although I am hopeful that
in the context of the strategy process that WMF will be supportive of the
idea of diversifying funding sources for the community beyond WMF. I am
trying go avoid *competing* with WMF for funding, which I think would be
viewed negatively by WMF, and instead look for outside sources which WMF
has not tapped for funding. I would like to cooperate with WMF where
possible, and so I would prefer that my fundraising efforts be "parallel
with" rather than "in competition with" WMF efforts.

If you or others would be interested, perhaps we could have a
video-conference meeting at some point regarding ideas for non-WMF funding
sources.

Regards,

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )





> These are difficult topics indeed, but only by dealing with them we can
> grow as a movement.
>
> Regards,
> Micru
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Micru )
>
> On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 8:10 PM, Pine W  wrote:
>
> > Based on the limited information that I have, it seems to me that there
> > are already numerous contribtors who are paid to engage in promotional
> > activity on Wikipedia, whether declared or undeclared, and the community
> > does not have adequate human resources to patrol and investigate all of
> > these. I expect that the problem will continue to get worse unless WMF
> gets
> > more energetic about investigating TOS 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Form 990 for FY 2016-2017 now on-wiki

2018-05-31 Thread Pine W
Thank you for this report.

For the record, I note that I continue to object to what I consider to be
inadequate transparency regarding WMF's finances and my deep skepticism
that there are laws that prohibit a significantly greater degree of
transparency. There may be some quirks of California law with which I am
unfamiliar, but it's safe to say that based on my current knowledge of how
much data government agencies publish about their finances and personnel
practices, and the degree to which I feel that transparency is good for
deterring and detecting questionable uses of funds, that if I was on the
WMF Board then I would be pushing strongly for greater openness about WMF's
finances, and I question whether the Board is being given full and candid
advice by staff regarding this matter. Because of potential conflicts of
interest with current staff, this is a matter on which I would advise the
Board to consult outside counsel.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 5:03 PM, Tony Le  wrote:

> * Sending on behalf of Jaime Villagomez Hello Everyone, The
> Wikimedia Foundation has submitted our annual Form 990 to the US Internal
> Revenue Service 
> (IRS) and posted on-wiki[1]. The Form 990 is the annual financial
> reporting, known as an “information return,” which the federal government
>  requires nonprofit organizations in the United States to file. In addition
> to posting the Form 990 on-wiki, we have also posted an accompanying page
> with answers to frequently asked questions related to the form and
> information we reported[2]. Almost all financial reports by their very
> nature can be confusing, so to add clarity here is a simple breakdown of
> key disclosures this form covers. We have previously explained that the
> applicable dates for information disclosed on our financial reports can be
> confusing, given that our July 1 fiscal year is different from the January
> 1 calendar year. For example, this "2016 Form 990" covers the financial
> activities of the Wikimedia Foundation for our  2016-2017 fiscal year,
> which ran from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017. However, the calendar year
> applies to disclosure of compensation of our officers, key employees,
> highest paid staff and independent contractors.  Those disclosures are
> based on payments made during the 2016 calendar year -- in other words,
> compensation paid from January 1, 2016 - December 31, 2106. The
> compensation paid to individuals that is disclosed therefore spans part of
> Foundation’s 2015-2016 fiscal year and part of its 2016-2017 fiscal
> year. The Wikimedia Foundation's total revenue in our  fiscal year
> 2016-2017 was US $89,973,967. Our total expenses during  this period were
> US $69,076,192 and our total net assets at the end of the fiscal year were
> US $113,330,197.The Form 990 also includes information about compensation
> paid to the Wikimedia Foundation's five highest paid employees. The
> salaries for all paid positions are set according to salary bands which are
> determined bi-annually based on independent third party survey data[3].
> Executive salaries are subject to this same standard. All executive
> salaries, with the exception of the Executive Director's salary, are set by
> the Executive Director, using the survey data, and in discussion with the
> Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees also uses the independent third
> party survey data, as well as comparative data from other nonprofit
> organizations, to set the salary of the Executive Director, and to assess
> and advise on other executive salaries. This is not only a best practice,
> but is a process that is required under applicable law.In addition to
> salary information, the report includes other payments made to certain of
> the highest employees upon their departure from the organization -- even
> where those departures may have occurred in 2016, but prior to the
> Foundation’s fiscal year. Following our regular practice for staff
> departures, these severance amounts are set on a case-by-case based on a
> person's tenure with the organization. We recognize that people have an
> interest in this topic, and that there will be some questions. However, as
> an employer we are limited in what we can discuss publicly, both because of
> legal requirements, as well as respect for employees’ confidentiality. We
> are very transparent about executive payments, while ensuring that our
> transparency is consistent with a respectful work environment that does not
> violate the confidential personnel information of our staff.Through reports
> and discussions like these, the Wikimedia Foundation will continue to
> strive to provide a responsible level of transparency and accountability. I
> imagine there are other questions, and I invite you to review the on-wiki
> FAQ[2], or email me if your question is not answered there.Thank you to the
> Foundation's Talent & 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Category: French Jews on en.wp / GDPR

2018-05-31 Thread Samuel Klein
I agree with everything you say 100%.

On Fri 1 Jun, 2018, 2:50 AM sashi,  wrote:

> Another follow-up:
>
> ==
> Benjamin Lees wrote: "No, French Christians are just tagged with
> subcategories of Category:French Christians. The "requiring diffusion"
> category that you complain of is in fact a way to tell editors that
> pages in the category should really be in subcategories instead."
> ==
>
> Aha! You're right, I had not realized that "diffuse" (disseminate/spread
> widely) was being used as specialized en-wiki-jargon for
> "subcategorize". It might be wise to give that hidden category a more
> descriptive name.
>
> I looked into one of the many BLP entries with an unscourced
> Category:French Jews tag, and found a review of a book they wrote. In
> that book, the person stated that while they had a Jewish mother, they
> did not consider themselves Jewish.
>
> Given that the category French Jews contains more members than the
> category French Roman Catholics, and that there are living people
> included in both categories... I seriously wonder what it is that
> motivates folks to anonymously tag others in this way (i.e. whether they
> want to be tagged or not).
>
> The Library of Congress, the BNF,  Wikidata, etc. don't label people
> according to religion, unless their notability is due specifically to
> their religion (e.g. Alfred Dreyfus, Maimonides, etc.).  On en.wp people
> being labeled as Jewish/Catholic, etc. tend to be industrialists,
> politicians, journalists, bankers etc.  I don't think this is "best
> practice" and I'm afraid I do not agree that en.wp is mostly "getting it
> right" with regard to this specific question.  Fr.WP and Wikidata are
> doing much better.
>
> The relevant section on "data subject" privacy rights in the GDPR (in
> English) is based on the 1978 French law I cited earlier (though it has
> become more restrictive since -- see below).  As David Gerard noted, it
> is quite likely that this affects not only Wikipedians (who can petition
> to have libel/slander concerning their *online identity* (cf. definition
> of data subject) removed from (inter alia) block logs), but also the
> *content* of biographies of living people in the encyclopedia.
>
> == GDPR (Article 9)==
>
> *Processing* of personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin,
> political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or trade union
> membership, and the processing of genetic data, biometric data for the
> purpose of uniquely identifying a natural person, data concerning health
> or data concerning a natural person's sex life or sexual orientation
> shall be prohibited.
>
> ==
>
> As one who has contributed to the projects since 2006, I am posting this
> here not because I wish to sow dissent, but because I think some quick
> thinking and corrective action is needed.
>
>sashi
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] GDPR and Wikimedia content?

2018-05-31 Thread Märt Põder
28.05.2018 00:32 David Gerard kirjutas:

> But I'm wondering how we'll approach it for the Wikimedia sites. Not just
> the log data - but the content.
>
> We already have problems with Right To Be Forgotten, and well-cited content
> being removed from the search engines.
>
> What do we have in place to deal with this when - not if - we get GDPR
> requests to remove information about a person from the site?
>
> I don't mean just the letter of the law, in the EU or the US - I mean also,
> how we can handle this *right*.
>
> /---/
>
> Is anyone keeping track of what the communities are doing, as well as WMF
> itself?

Just a note based on the discussion we had in Wikimedia Estonia, lot of
smaller Wikipedia editions have quite low threshold for notability and
some of the articles end up almost doxing some hardly noteworthy person.
I am not sure how common this is, but already before GDPR I have
encouraged some people to write on discussion pages, that there is lot
of rather unimportant information in the article that should be edited
for encyclopedic clarity and unnecessary parts removed. However, as we
know, everything still remains in the article history and is technically
found, so from GDPR point of view this is not maybe enough to improve
data protection to the amount the new regulation expects to.

Also, in GDPR itself, there are exemptions for a) journalism and b)
historical research or "freedom of expression in every democratic
society" and "archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or
historical research purposes". These should generally apply to Wikipedia
and most Wikimedia projects, however it is not clear what is the right
policy for data in revision history and discussion pages, and what are
the notability criteria that should be applied. But this was so already
before GDPR and most complaints are from people who actually are
noteworthy and probably fit under either journalism or historical
research category or even both, so there is nothing more to do than
notice that notability criteria may need some more clarity and raising
of the threshold and start a discussion to improve the criteria.

Any more ideas?

Märt Põder // board member at ee.wikimedia.org | ee.okfn.org --
twitter.com/trtram | facebook.com/boamaod

___
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] Are we losing out against bad editing?

2018-05-31 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi,
Just a question. When you pay volunteers, where does it stop? Is it only
for admins and if so why and, is it only for English Wikipedia and if so
why?
Thanks,
  GerardM

On 28 May 2018 at 15:48, David Cuenca Tudela  wrote:

> Gnangarra, you have been showing a lot of generosity towards the community
> and that is laudable. As you, over the years I have also spent countless
> hours in this community, and I do not regret it either, I feel it has been
> and it still is a good investment of my time, and my dedication. You, as
> me, are able to do all that because we are not financially disadvantaged.
> You are not in need of any donation, you can do what you are doing without
> support and that is great. However that you do not need those resources
> does not mean that other people might not need them.
>
> Every volunteer can work in this community as long as their material needs
> are covered. If they cannot support themselves, we leave them to their own
> devices. That is totally opposite to cultivating a sense of community. In
> that regard I do not consider my comment disingenuous, but a reflection of
> what is common practice now.
> In my view if the community has resources, and a member of the community
> (more specifically, a dedicated member) needs them, then the community also
> should be generous with them, so that they don't have to leave.
>
> When I imagine what would be my ideal case scenario, I would also avoid
> giving disadvantaged volunteers money, I would give them food and a place
> to stay instead, but since that is even harder to materialize (at least at
> this point of time given the geographic dispersion and lack of real
> estate), I feel that donating resources to volunteers (that in turn have
> been donated, remember that) is a good idea to further the sense of
> community.
>
> I'm confused by your comment, can you please explain what makes you think
> that by donating to volunteers "they stop being volunteers in that aspect
> of what they do"?
>
> Regards,
> Micru
> ___
> 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] Category: French Jews on en.wp / GDPR

2018-05-31 Thread sashi

Another follow-up:

==
Benjamin Lees wrote: "No, French Christians are just tagged with 
subcategories of Category:French Christians. The "requiring diffusion" 
category that you complain of is in fact a way to tell editors that 
pages in the category should really be in subcategories instead."

==

Aha! You're right, I had not realized that "diffuse" (disseminate/spread 
widely) was being used as specialized en-wiki-jargon for 
"subcategorize". It might be wise to give that hidden category a more 
descriptive name.


I looked into one of the many BLP entries with an unscourced 
Category:French Jews tag, and found a review of a book they wrote. In 
that book, the person stated that while they had a Jewish mother, they 
did not consider themselves Jewish.


Given that the category French Jews contains more members than the 
category French Roman Catholics, and that there are living people 
included in both categories... I seriously wonder what it is that 
motivates folks to anonymously tag others in this way (i.e. whether they 
want to be tagged or not).


The Library of Congress, the BNF,  Wikidata, etc. don't label people 
according to religion, unless their notability is due specifically to 
their religion (e.g. Alfred Dreyfus, Maimonides, etc.).  On en.wp people 
being labeled as Jewish/Catholic, etc. tend to be industrialists, 
politicians, journalists, bankers etc.  I don't think this is "best 
practice" and I'm afraid I do not agree that en.wp is mostly "getting it 
right" with regard to this specific question.  Fr.WP and Wikidata are 
doing much better.


The relevant section on "data subject" privacy rights in the GDPR (in 
English) is based on the 1978 French law I cited earlier (though it has 
become more restrictive since -- see below).  As David Gerard noted, it 
is quite likely that this affects not only Wikipedians (who can petition 
to have libel/slander concerning their *online identity* (cf. definition 
of data subject) removed from (inter alia) block logs), but also the 
*content* of biographies of living people in the encyclopedia.


== GDPR (Article 9)==

*Processing* of personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, 
political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or trade union 
membership, and the processing of genetic data, biometric data for the 
purpose of uniquely identifying a natural person, data concerning health 
or data concerning a natural person's sex life or sexual orientation 
shall be prohibited.


==

As one who has contributed to the projects since 2006, I am posting this 
here not because I wish to sow dissent, but because I think some quick 
thinking and corrective action is needed.


  sashi




___
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] Does anyone know what wikimedia france are up to with the Request Network ?

2018-05-31 Thread Sylvain Boissel
Hi James,

Le lun. 28 mai 2018 à 17:24, James Salsman  a écrit :

> Hi Nadine, thank you for this update.
>
> Does the French Chapter have a position on replacing bitcoin mining
> with foldingcoin (http://foldingcoin.net)? I hope that all Wikimedians
> will oppose the wasteful consumption of electricity when useful
> alternatives exist.
>

The French Chapter does not use any crypto money at all right now.

Best,
Sylvain

>
> Best regards,
> Jim
>
> On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 7:50 AM, Nadine Le Lirzin
>  wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Update on the topic.
> >
> > Since Request Network were so slow and reluctant to change their delusive
> > communication into a fair and clean information, Wikimédia France broke
> the
> > agreement with them. Thus, this partnership is over.
> >
> > We deleted our blog post about it. And we keep on trying to obtain the
> same
> > from Request Network (who are turning a deaf ear until now).
> >
> > Once again, sorry for the noise and thanks for alerting us,
> >
> > Nadine Le Lirzin
> > *Secrétaire du conseil d'administration*
> > *Wikimédia France*
> >
> > *Post-scriptum:* no other cryptocurrency donations project is planned ^^'
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2018-04-28 17:12 GMT+02:00 Nadine Le Lirzin :
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> First of all, thanks for reporting the issue. Impressive reactivity :)
> >>
> >> Then, sorry for the intempestive and unwelcome communication about this
> >> local partnership. The agreement is quite clear, it has been
> established by
> >> Wikimédia France (of course *not* in name of Wikimedia Foundation) and
> >> our partners are obviously *not allowed* to use any of Wikimedia
> projects
> >> marks.
> >>
> >> Today, Request Network updated their posts to clarify things and
> >> suppressed Wikipedia logo from their communication messages :
> >> — https://www.reddit.com/r/RequestNetwork/comments/8firkq/up
> >> date_to_clarify_wikimedia_france_partnership/
> >> — https://blog.request.network/request-network-project-
> >> update-april-27th-2018-partnership-with-wikimedia-
> >> woocommerce-plugin-c598372e9b58
> >>
> >> We updated our blog post as well, with an introductive warning :
> >> — https://www.wikimedia.fr/2018/04/27/wikimedia-france-annon
> >> ce-partenariat-fondation-request-network-accepter-donations-
> >> crypto-monnaies/
> >>
> >> After the week-end and labor day (1 May), we are expecting that all
> >> occurrences of this misunderstanding have disappeared.
> >>
> >>
> >> Nadine Le Lirzin
> >>
> >> *Secretary of the Board*
> >> *Wikimédia France *
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2018-04-27 16:23 GMT+02:00 Devouard (gmail) :
> >>
> >>> Definitly confusing.
> >>>
> >>> See also this : https://blog.request.network/r
> >>> equest-network-project-update-april-27th-2018-partnership-wi
> >>> th-wikimedia-woocommerce-plugin-c598372e9b58
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Florence
> >>>
> >>> Le 27/04/2018 à 15:49, geni a écrit :
> >>>
>  According to their twitter feed they have announced a partnership with
>  something called the "Request Network‏" for cryptocurrency donations.
>  Also this article here
> 
>  https://www.wikimedia.fr/2018/04/27/wikimedia-france-annonce
>  -partenariat-fondation-request-network-accepter-donations-cr
>  ypto-monnaies/
> 
>  Ok. I don't approve but I'm not french so not its not an area where I
>  can reasonably expect anyone to pay any attention to my opinions.
> 
>  What concerns me is that they have retweeted something claiming the
>  partnership is with the wikimedia foundation rather than just
>  wikimedia france:
> 
>  https://twitter.com/wikimedia_fr?lang=en
> 
>  Is some form of clarification possible?
> 
> 
> >>>
> >>> ___
> >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >>> i/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] [Wikipedia Library] New Free Research Accounts via the Wikipedia Library Card

2018-05-31 Thread Raphael Berchie
Great news kudos to the team for the constant hard work.

*Raphael Berchie*
Co Founder Open Foundation, West Africa, MA Student Mass Communications.
Dan & Jonnie Winn Memorial Award Scholar.
Wikimedian , Open Advocate,
Climate Change Activist ,Blogger 

3401 Fair Park Blvd Apt H 304
Little Rock 72204
Arkansas
+15012515424
Twitter@berchie4gh 
Facebook 
Linkedin


On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Jake Orlowitz  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> The Wikipedia Library has new, free research donations available through
> the Library Card platform:
> 
>
> NEW
> * Rock's Backpages (Music articles and interviews from the 1950s onwards):<
> https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/partners/69/>
>
> * Invaluable (Database of more than 50 million auctions and over 500,000
> artists): 
>
> * Termsoup (Translation tool):
> 
>
> EXPANSIONS
> * Fold3 - Available content has more than doubled, now including new
> military collections from the UK, Australia, and New Zealand:
> 
>
> * Oxford University Press - The Scholarship collection now includes
> Electronic Enlightenment (http://www.e-enlightenment.com/):
> 
>
> * Alexander Street Press - Women and Social Movements Library (
> https://alexanderstreet.com/products/women-and-social-movements-library)
> now available:  
>
> * Cambridge University Press - Orlando Collection (
> http://orlando.cambridge.org/) now available:
> 
>
> Many other partnerships are available through the Wikipedia Library Card
> Platform: 
>
> Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references
> across Wikimedia projects: sign up today!
>
> --The Wikipedia Library Team
> wikipedialibr...@wikimedia.org
>  
>
> ___
> Wikipedia-Library mailing list
> wikipedia-libr...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-library
>
>
___
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] Does anyone know what wikimedia france are up to with the Request Network ?

2018-05-31 Thread Alphos OGame
Hello,

I'm but a simple member of Wikimedia France, but I trust the Post Scriptum
by Nadine was clear on the matter : "no other cryptocurrency donations
project is planned". And yes, I believe that includes Foldingcoin.
Personally, I'm fond of Folding@Home, I've even given more than my fair
share of processing time to the project some time ago ; but I don't need to
receive hard cash in return - especially when it's neither hard nor cash.
Whether you like it or not, it does waste electricity when an alternative
exists : the old way of having people pay dimes for a wee bit of
electricity to calculate protein folding instead of the new way of
performing copious calculations for the blockchain and a few cheap protein
foldings on the side.
It doesn't matter what the end goal is, even as laudable as F@H : a
blockchain is and always will be calculation-expensive, thus a waste of
electricity, by its very design. And Foldingcoin still relies on it.
Please don't be "that guy", and stick to F@H rather than push for FLDC.

Roger / Alphos



2018-05-28 17:23 GMT+02:00 James Salsman :

> Hi Nadine, thank you for this update.
>
> Does the French Chapter have a position on replacing bitcoin mining
> with foldingcoin (http://foldingcoin.net)? I hope that all Wikimedians
> will oppose the wasteful consumption of electricity when useful
> alternatives exist.
>
> Best regards,
> Jim
>
> On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 7:50 AM, Nadine Le Lirzin
>  wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Update on the topic.
> >
> > Since Request Network were so slow and reluctant to change their delusive
> > communication into a fair and clean information, Wikimédia France broke
> the
> > agreement with them. Thus, this partnership is over.
> >
> > We deleted our blog post about it. And we keep on trying to obtain the
> same
> > from Request Network (who are turning a deaf ear until now).
> >
> > Once again, sorry for the noise and thanks for alerting us,
> >
> > Nadine Le Lirzin
> > *Secrétaire du conseil d'administration*
> > *Wikimédia France*
> >
> > *Post-scriptum:* no other cryptocurrency donations project is planned ^^'
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2018-04-28 17:12 GMT+02:00 Nadine Le Lirzin :
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> First of all, thanks for reporting the issue. Impressive reactivity :)
> >>
> >> Then, sorry for the intempestive and unwelcome communication about this
> >> local partnership. The agreement is quite clear, it has been
> established by
> >> Wikimédia France (of course *not* in name of Wikimedia Foundation) and
> >> our partners are obviously *not allowed* to use any of Wikimedia
> projects
> >> marks.
> >>
> >> Today, Request Network updated their posts to clarify things and
> >> suppressed Wikipedia logo from their communication messages :
> >> — https://www.reddit.com/r/RequestNetwork/comments/8firkq/up
> >> date_to_clarify_wikimedia_france_partnership/
> >> — https://blog.request.network/request-network-project-
> >> update-april-27th-2018-partnership-with-wikimedia-
> >> woocommerce-plugin-c598372e9b58
> >>
> >> We updated our blog post as well, with an introductive warning :
> >> — https://www.wikimedia.fr/2018/04/27/wikimedia-france-annon
> >> ce-partenariat-fondation-request-network-accepter-donations-
> >> crypto-monnaies/
> >>
> >> After the week-end and labor day (1 May), we are expecting that all
> >> occurrences of this misunderstanding have disappeared.
> >>
> >>
> >> Nadine Le Lirzin
> >>
> >> *Secretary of the Board*
> >> *Wikimédia France *
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2018-04-27 16:23 GMT+02:00 Devouard (gmail) :
> >>
> >>> Definitly confusing.
> >>>
> >>> See also this : https://blog.request.network/r
> >>> equest-network-project-update-april-27th-2018-partnership-wi
> >>> th-wikimedia-woocommerce-plugin-c598372e9b58
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Florence
> >>>
> >>> Le 27/04/2018 à 15:49, geni a écrit :
> >>>
>  According to their twitter feed they have announced a partnership with
>  something called the "Request Network‏" for cryptocurrency donations.
>  Also this article here
> 
>  https://www.wikimedia.fr/2018/04/27/wikimedia-france-annonce
>  -partenariat-fondation-request-network-accepter-donations-cr
>  ypto-monnaies/
> 
>  Ok. I don't approve but I'm not french so not its not an area where I
>  can reasonably expect anyone to pay any attention to my opinions.
> 
>  What concerns me is that they have retweeted something claiming the
>  partnership is with the wikimedia foundation rather than just
>  wikimedia france:
> 
>  https://twitter.com/wikimedia_fr?lang=en
> 
>  Is some form of clarification possible?
> 
> 
> >>>
> >>> ___
> >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >>> i/Wikimedia-l
> >>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >>> Unsubscribe: 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Form 990 for FY 2016-2017 now on-wiki

2018-05-31 Thread Tony Le
* Sending on behalf of Jaime Villagomez Hello Everyone, The
Wikimedia Foundation has submitted our annual Form 990 to the US Internal
Revenue Service 
(IRS) and posted on-wiki[1]. The Form 990 is the annual financial
reporting, known as an “information return,” which the federal government
 requires nonprofit organizations in the United States to file. In addition
to posting the Form 990 on-wiki, we have also posted an accompanying page
with answers to frequently asked questions related to the form and
information we reported[2]. Almost all financial reports by their very
nature can be confusing, so to add clarity here is a simple breakdown of
key disclosures this form covers. We have previously explained that the
applicable dates for information disclosed on our financial reports can be
confusing, given that our July 1 fiscal year is different from the January
1 calendar year. For example, this "2016 Form 990" covers the financial
activities of the Wikimedia Foundation for our  2016-2017 fiscal year,
which ran from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017. However, the calendar year
applies to disclosure of compensation of our officers, key employees,
highest paid staff and independent contractors.  Those disclosures are
based on payments made during the 2016 calendar year -- in other words,
compensation paid from January 1, 2016 - December 31, 2106. The
compensation paid to individuals that is disclosed therefore spans part of
Foundation’s 2015-2016 fiscal year and part of its 2016-2017 fiscal
year. The Wikimedia Foundation's total revenue in our  fiscal year
2016-2017 was US $89,973,967. Our total expenses during  this period were
US $69,076,192 and our total net assets at the end of the fiscal year were
US $113,330,197.The Form 990 also includes information about compensation
paid to the Wikimedia Foundation's five highest paid employees. The
salaries for all paid positions are set according to salary bands which are
determined bi-annually based on independent third party survey data[3].
Executive salaries are subject to this same standard. All executive
salaries, with the exception of the Executive Director's salary, are set by
the Executive Director, using the survey data, and in discussion with the
Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees also uses the independent third
party survey data, as well as comparative data from other nonprofit
organizations, to set the salary of the Executive Director, and to assess
and advise on other executive salaries. This is not only a best practice,
but is a process that is required under applicable law.In addition to
salary information, the report includes other payments made to certain of
the highest employees upon their departure from the organization -- even
where those departures may have occurred in 2016, but prior to the
Foundation’s fiscal year. Following our regular practice for staff
departures, these severance amounts are set on a case-by-case based on a
person's tenure with the organization. We recognize that people have an
interest in this topic, and that there will be some questions. However, as
an employer we are limited in what we can discuss publicly, both because of
legal requirements, as well as respect for employees’ confidentiality. We
are very transparent about executive payments, while ensuring that our
transparency is consistent with a respectful work environment that does not
violate the confidential personnel information of our staff.Through reports
and discussions like these, the Wikimedia Foundation will continue to
strive to provide a responsible level of transparency and accountability. I
imagine there are other questions, and I invite you to review the on-wiki
FAQ[2], or email me if your question is not answered there.Thank you to the
Foundation's Talent & Culture, Legal, Advancement and Communications
departments for their assistance with developing this year's Form 990 and
related communications. A very big thank you to our Finance and
Administration department for their hard work preparing this important
public filing. Jaime VillagomezChief Financial Officer* *[1] Link to PDF
*
*[2] Link to FAQ
*

*[3] https://www.radford.com/home/surveys/gts/
*


-- 
Tony Le
Wikimedia Foundation
Ph: 415-839-6885 ext 6749
Fax:  415-882-0495
t...@wikimedia.org

*We've moved!  **Our new address:*

Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
San Francisco, CA 94104

This message is confidential and may be legally privileged or otherwise
protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please
telephone or email the sender and delete this message and any attachment
from your system; you must not copy or disclose the 

[Wikimedia-l] First designs for Special:Block with Granular blocks feature

2018-05-31 Thread Sydney Poore
Hello all,

The Wikimedia Foundation Anti-Harassment Tools team enlisted the assistance
of Alex Hollender, a User Experience designer at Wikimedia Foundation to
create wireframe designs of  Special:Block with the Granular block feature
included.1

Our first wireframes are based on the discussions on the Granular block
talk page, the Wishlist proposal, and in Phabricator to date.

Because the Special:Block page is already at its limits with its current
layout, we would like to propose a new organized layout for Special:Block.
This will make it easier to add the granular blocking (page, category,
namespace, etc) and whatever is to come in the future. All of the same
functionality is available on this new layout, but in a more organized,
step-by-step process.

Take a look at the wireframes and leave us your feedback on Meta.2

Please spread the word and forward this email to others (especially
administrators) who might be interested in helping re-design
Special:Block's layout.

1
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_health_initiative/Per_user_page,_namespace,_category,_and_upload_blocking
2
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_health_initiative/Per_user_page,_namespace,_category,_and_upload_blocking#First_designs

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team,
Sydney Poore
-- 
Sydney Poore
Trust and Safety Specialist
Wikimedia Foundation
Trust and Safety team;
Anti-harassment tools team
___
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] Most wanted articles across languages

2018-05-31 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
This is indeed comparable, though from a slightly different aspect, and we
are doing it completely ourselves.

Hopefully it will be directly useful to editors, and also for improving the
software. For example, we already used it to improve the functionality of
the search box itself, so that it would be able to find languages with
alternate names, such as "castellano" and "español" for Spanish, and a few
more.

בתאריך יום ה׳, 31 במאי 2018, 10:41, מאת James Heilman ‏:

> Excellent. Google also provided a list of some of the most missing items in
> 13 languages of India as part of Project Tiger.
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Supporting_Indian_Language_Wikipedias_Program/Contest/Topics
>
> James
>
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:58 AM, Amir E. Aharoni <
> amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > There's a little research project I've been working on in the last few
> > weeks: What are the articles that people are most often looking for in
> > their language, and *cannot* find?
> >
> > I was doing this by looking at the logs of searches in the language
> search
> > box in the interlanguage links panel and counting the articles on which
> > searching for a language didn't yield any result.
> >
> > This can be useful to the editors in different languages for
> understanding
> > which articles are in demand and should be created. This may also be
> useful
> > for considering how to reorganize existing articles. Of course, actually
> > doing this is up to the editing communities in each language; I'm just
> > trying to show where exactly does this happen.
> >
> > My first attempt at producing a report about it can be found here:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Most_wanted_articles_across_languages
> >
> > This is my first attempt to make a public version of this report, so you
> > may find some issues there, for example contradicting or missing data.
> > Also, the tables could probably be more nicely designed. Bug reports,
> > suggestions for improvement, and all other feedback is obviously welcome.
> > However, I believe this is good enough for taking a first look and
> reaching
> > some conclusions.
> >
> > The two immediate findings that I can see are that the most notable
> > articles that people cannot find fall into the following categories:
> > * Topics that are popular in the news: "Avengers: Infinity War", "General
> > Data Protection Regulation", "Avicii". In particular, I should note that
> > topics that are featured in Google Doodles [1] come up often: "Georges
> > Méliès", "Mahadevi Varma", etc.
> > * Topics that are covered in another language, but cannot be found
> because
> > of different organization of information. This often happens with
> articles
> > where there are cultural differences between languages, for example
> > "Football" in the English Wikipedia refers to several different games
> (I'd
> > guess that many people around the world are interested in "Association
> > Football"). This also often happens with articles about Biology and
> > species: "Homo Sapiens", "Blueberry", etc.; these are organized
> differently
> > in different Wikipedias.
> >
> > [1] https://www.google.com/doodles/
> >
> >
> > --
> > Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> > http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> > ‪“We're living in pieces,
> > I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> > ___
> > 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] Most wanted articles across languages

2018-05-31 Thread James Heilman
Excellent. Google also provided a list of some of the most missing items in
13 languages of India as part of Project Tiger.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Supporting_Indian_Language_Wikipedias_Program/Contest/Topics

James

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:58 AM, Amir E. Aharoni <
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> There's a little research project I've been working on in the last few
> weeks: What are the articles that people are most often looking for in
> their language, and *cannot* find?
>
> I was doing this by looking at the logs of searches in the language search
> box in the interlanguage links panel and counting the articles on which
> searching for a language didn't yield any result.
>
> This can be useful to the editors in different languages for understanding
> which articles are in demand and should be created. This may also be useful
> for considering how to reorganize existing articles. Of course, actually
> doing this is up to the editing communities in each language; I'm just
> trying to show where exactly does this happen.
>
> My first attempt at producing a report about it can be found here:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Most_wanted_articles_across_languages
>
> This is my first attempt to make a public version of this report, so you
> may find some issues there, for example contradicting or missing data.
> Also, the tables could probably be more nicely designed. Bug reports,
> suggestions for improvement, and all other feedback is obviously welcome.
> However, I believe this is good enough for taking a first look and reaching
> some conclusions.
>
> The two immediate findings that I can see are that the most notable
> articles that people cannot find fall into the following categories:
> * Topics that are popular in the news: "Avengers: Infinity War", "General
> Data Protection Regulation", "Avicii". In particular, I should note that
> topics that are featured in Google Doodles [1] come up often: "Georges
> Méliès", "Mahadevi Varma", etc.
> * Topics that are covered in another language, but cannot be found because
> of different organization of information. This often happens with articles
> where there are cultural differences between languages, for example
> "Football" in the English Wikipedia refers to several different games (I'd
> guess that many people around the world are interested in "Association
> Football"). This also often happens with articles about Biology and
> species: "Homo Sapiens", "Blueberry", etc.; these are organized differently
> in different Wikipedias.
>
> [1] https://www.google.com/doodles/
>
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> ‪“We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> ___
> 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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Invitation to the Wikimedia Foundation May 2018 Metrics & Activities Meeting: Thursday, May 31, 18:00 UTC

2018-05-31 Thread Lena Traer
REMINDER: This meeting starts in 30 minutes.


On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Lena Traer  wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> The next Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities meeting will take
> place on Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 6:00 PM UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC channel
> is #wikimedia-office on https://webchat.freenode.net, and the meeting
> will be broadcast as a live YouTube stream.[1] We’ll post the video
> recording publicly after the meeting.
>
> During the May 2018 meeting, we will hear about languages across the
> Wikimedia projects.
>
> Meeting agenda:
>
> * Welcome and introduction
> * Movement update
> * The Compact Language Links project
> * Executive update
> * Questions and discussion
> * Wikilove
>
> Please review the meeting's Meta-Wiki page for further information about
> the meeting and how to participate:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> metrics_and_activities_meetings
>
> You can also sign up to participate in future meetings on Meta-Wiki:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> metrics_and_activities_meetings/Future_meetings
>
> June 2018 Metrics & Activities meeting will take place on Thursday, 28
> June, starting at 6:00 PM UTC (11 AM Pacific Daylight Time).
>
> Thank you,
> Lena
>
> [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOaiU-v7PbE
>
> Lena Traer
> Project Coordinator // Communications // Advancement
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
___
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] Most wanted articles across languages

2018-05-31 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
Hi!

There's a little research project I've been working on in the last few
weeks: What are the articles that people are most often looking for in
their language, and *cannot* find?

I was doing this by looking at the logs of searches in the language search
box in the interlanguage links panel and counting the articles on which
searching for a language didn't yield any result.

This can be useful to the editors in different languages for understanding
which articles are in demand and should be created. This may also be useful
for considering how to reorganize existing articles. Of course, actually
doing this is up to the editing communities in each language; I'm just
trying to show where exactly does this happen.

My first attempt at producing a report about it can be found here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Most_wanted_articles_across_languages

This is my first attempt to make a public version of this report, so you
may find some issues there, for example contradicting or missing data.
Also, the tables could probably be more nicely designed. Bug reports,
suggestions for improvement, and all other feedback is obviously welcome.
However, I believe this is good enough for taking a first look and reaching
some conclusions.

The two immediate findings that I can see are that the most notable
articles that people cannot find fall into the following categories:
* Topics that are popular in the news: "Avengers: Infinity War", "General
Data Protection Regulation", "Avicii". In particular, I should note that
topics that are featured in Google Doodles [1] come up often: "Georges
Méliès", "Mahadevi Varma", etc.
* Topics that are covered in another language, but cannot be found because
of different organization of information. This often happens with articles
where there are cultural differences between languages, for example
"Football" in the English Wikipedia refers to several different games (I'd
guess that many people around the world are interested in "Association
Football"). This also often happens with articles about Biology and
species: "Homo Sapiens", "Blueberry", etc.; these are organized differently
in different Wikipedias.

[1] https://www.google.com/doodles/


--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
___
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] Are we losing out against bad editing?

2018-05-31 Thread David Cuenca Tudela
Pine,
It is nice of you that you thought about including these topics in the WMF
strategy process, which I assume it is an ongoing process and not a one-off
event. However as the 2017 cycle ended, I am unable to find the way to
incorporate new ideas into the process. I would have expected to find a
discussion page where new input can be taken into consideration, but it
might not be the case.

I consider that the importance of admin decline in Wikipedias is really
high, and at the same time I understand why you or anybody else would not
like to do some tasks as volunteer. For this reason, while I do not like
the idea of employees doing project activities, I feel that by creating a
scheme where volunteers become empowered/liberated from work through direct
donations could be part of a practical way of addressing the issue. I'm
very sensitive to potential pitfalls and for this reason I consider that
the feedback given by Yaroslav is extremely important, and that any
donation to volunteers should happen only if they are committed to a
personal transformation, that involves developing the capacity for
listening, humility, and other values important for the project. I think
this is only part of the story so far, and at this point the only thing I
can do in my capacity as volunteer is to steward the conversation, and
bring it to an increasing number of people as the understanding on this
topic increases.

These are difficult topics indeed, but only by dealing with them we can
grow as a movement.

Regards,
Micru
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Micru )

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 8:10 PM, Pine W  wrote:

> Based on the limited information that I have, it seems to me that there
> are already numerous contribtors who are paid to engage in promotional
> activity on Wikipedia, whether declared or undeclared, and the community
> does not have adequate human resources to patrol and investigate all of
> these. I expect that the problem will continue to get worse unless WMF gets
> more energetic about investigating TOS violations involving undeclared COI
> and WMF becomes predictable about extracting financial penalties that are
> severe enough to deter most of the undeclared COI contributors.
> Unfortunately, as far as I know, WMF has been largely passive about the
> problem of undeclared COI and has not announced any plans to become more
> aggressive.
> As nice as it would be if everyone could afford and was willing to work
> for free, this is not the case. If it was then we could safely eliminate
> the salaries of the entire WMF staff. However, I think that financial
> support makes sense for some paid staff to handle activities like network
> operations, interface design, legal defense, and responses to safety
> problems.
> Some types of Wikimedia activities are better suited to volunteer work
> than others. I encourage volunteers to avoid burning themselves out; there
> are some activities that I did in the past that I would not do again as a
> volunteer. Better to be an occasional and long-term contributor than to get
> burned out.
> I have some ideas about how to pay people to do certain types of work
> that, so far, WMF has not funded. Unfortunately these are merely ideas and
> not likely to become reality in the short term. Perhaps later this year or
> in the next few years I will have specific proposals with reasonable
> chances for sustainable success.
> I share the concern that paid participants in the Wikiverse, like staff of
> WMF and affiliates, WMF grantees, and potentially like the paid
> contributors that I have in mind, may become so numerous that they can
> drown out the consensus of the volunteers. Unfortunately I do not have easy
> solutions for this issue. We could prohibit all paid contributors from
> participating in  RFCs and related decision processes, but we would be
> largely relying on people to self-disclose their paid status, which seems
> unlikely to be adequate.
> Perhaps the issues that we are discussing in this conversation should be
> included in the Structures and Systems prong of the WMF strategy process. I
> am pinging Nicole to ask for her input about that idea. However, keep in
> mind that the strategy process is financially sponsored by WMF, and it is
> not free of potential conflicts with the interests of WMF.
> I wish that I could be more optimistic. These are difficult topics.
> Regards,
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> null
> ___
> 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,
> 
>



-- 
Etiamsi omnes, ego non
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: