[Wikimedia-l] WikiFundi (was Re: [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia Foundation and Kiwix partner to grow offline access to Wikipedia)

2018-07-25 Thread Devouard (gmail)

Hi Teemu

I would like to point out that the below statement is possibly slightly 
misleading. So please allow me to point out that in Anne sentence below:


"The WikiFundi team has been working on the product for a couple of 
years now, with support from WMF and the Orange Foundation."


the "WikiFundi team" is actually NOT Kiwix. The "editor" of WikiFundi is 
"Wiki in Africa" :)


And actually, the first version of WikiFundi was NOT based on Kiwix at 
all. Back then, I asked Emmanuel to actually work on WikiFundi V1, due 
to his experience, but the software was based on MediaWiki, not on Kiwix 
at all; also, at version 1 release, the Kiwix association did not exist 
yet... Emmanuel invoiced his time directly, as an individual.


However, for version 2, the Kiwix association was born, and we (Wiki in 
Africa) asked help from the Kiwix association to do the technical 
management. Aside from the tech management, the WikiFundi project 
directly benefit from various elements developped as part of the Kiwix 
project the past year.
In my perspective, we (Wiki in Africa) clearly benefit from a stronger 
and more reliable Kiwix association.



Teemu, you are right that we should never consider people from the 
offline world as merely readers, but should try as hard as we can to get 
them become writers.


This is why I conceived WikiFundi. When Isla and I were working with 
some new african wikipedians, or when working in schools and libraries 
over there, or when organizing edit-a-thons in cultural centers or 
museums, we run MANY times into the situation where the internet was 
down, or missing, or unstable. That was very frustrating. Hence the idea 
of having a plateform that could help bridge the gap between online and 
offline.


This is by no means a perfect solution, but a solution that help go into 
the right direction.


I invite you to read

* https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/03/10/digest-wiki-fundi/
Which was the blog published when we released WikiFundi V1

* https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/05/10/offline-access-wikipedia-wikifundi/
Which is an interview of myself by Anne a few months ago

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiFundi_Generic_Poster-A2.jpg
This is a brand new poster, released at Wikimania Cape Town, showcasing 
WikiFundi


* 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wiki_Africa_Schools_Subs_-_Final.webm
This is a video that outline some of the uses we have of WikiFundi 
(English, subtitled French)


* 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiChallenge_poster-High_Resolution.jpg
This is a brand new poster, released at Wikimania Cape Town, which 
showcase one educational project we made with WikiFundi (in French)



There are ongoing discussions to set up asynchronized systems that would 
automatically collect (when possible...) content written offline to 
transfer them on an intermediary server, from which we could populate 
the online wikis. It sound super complicated I fear. But at the moment, 
our best shot is to *train* the future users and make it possible for 
them to write content collaboratively on offline plateforms.



Flo


___
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] Would people be interested in a "Community Metrics and Activities Meeting"?

2018-07-25 Thread Pine W
Although there will not be a WMF Metrics and Activities Meeting this month,
I'm wondering, would people be interested in having a "Wikimedia Community
Metrics and Activities Meeting"? People could present lightning talks about
their subjects of interest (one to five minutes long), and we could have
round-table discussion about subjects of interest (like the strategy
process), and have Q with any presenters. Presentations from individual
Wikimedians and from affiliates would be welcome.

I think that tomorrow may be too soon because people might want to prepare
some lightning talks, so maybe we could do this next week.

I'm going to do a minimal setup for the meeting because I have discovered
through painful experience that "Pine does everything and isn't paid for
any of it" is emotionally exhausting and financially unsustainable, so this
will be less structured (and probably a bit more spontaneous and perhaps
chaotic) than a WMF metrics meeting, but I think that it could be fun. :)

I've set up a Doodle poll, and I'll use the number of votes there as an
indication of how many people are interested and available. If people want
to meet again in future months then I'll think some more about scheduling
for future months and also about how to include the possibility of
presentations in diverse languages.

The Doodle poll is here: https://doodle.com/poll/a84hz3k7rui8rg7b. I set up
the times in UTC, so you may need to convert them to your local timezone.

Especially if a lot of people show up, there may be some chaos and missed
opportunities the first time around, but if there's a high level of
interest and people want to do this again then we can make modifications
for future meetings.

We'll probably use Zoom as our online meeting tool, and at least for the
first meeting it won't be recorded but I (or maybe someone else) will take
notes and post the notes on Meta.

I realize that this is a risky experiment, but I think that overall it
could be something that people like and find to be beneficial for making
international connections.

Regards,

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia Foundation and Kiwix partner to grow offline access to Wikipedia

2018-07-25 Thread Anne Gomez
Teemu,

I agree with you completely. People who are reading Wikipedia should know
that Wikipedia is written by volunteers and that they can edit. Calling
someone a "reader" doesn't, to me, mean that editing is hidden from them..
it means that we're making sure we're meeting their needs as readers in
this moment. But they should still have the option and understanding of
editing!

Offline is harder because, for now, in most cases there isn't editing.
James mentioned what they have in offline medical. I'm not sure what the
treatments are in all the other contexts, but it's something I'll keep an
eye on for future projects.

Cheers,
Anne

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:03 AM, Leinonen Teemu 
wrote:

> Hi Anne,
>
> On 23 Jul 2018, at 19.24, Anne Gomez  go...@wikimedia.org>> wrote:
> Personally, I see the New Readers efforts as a step in that direction, and
> not the end goal. We're working on bringing more people to understanding
> Wikipedia/Wikimedia with the hope that they'll contribute down the line...
> but, in my opinion, we can't expect people to contribute if they don't
> visit our sites or understand the values and structures we have built to
> support building knowledge.
>
> Fair enough. I am just afraid that people who are from the beginning
> invited to be a “reader”, called “readers”, not having “edit” -button, not
> getting the full Wikipedia -experience, will not get the “values and
> structure”, either. For them Wikipedia will be a free encyclopedia, not the
> free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.
>
> I think the message for the people using the offline Wikipedia should be
> something like that we are really, really sorry that at this point of time
> we can only provide you access to read the content, but we are working hard
> to make it possible that your knowledge, in your own languages will be part
> of the "sum of all knowledge”. :-)
>
> Best regards,
>
> - Teemu
>
> ___
> 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,
> 
>



-- 
*Anne Gomez* // Senior Program Manager, New Readers

Pronouns: she/her
https://wikimediafoundation.org/


*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate
. *
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia Foundation and Kiwix partner to grow offline access to Wikipedia

2018-07-25 Thread Samuel Klein
It would be nice to have a little 6-pg workbook describing the idea of
wiki, and explaining how to create + edit your own wiki pages. Texting a
phone # (for tiny facts + images), offline/on a phone, on a local server,
or posting asynchronously to wikimedia; and details of what is expected of
edits + uploads directly to WP.

//S.



On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 9:35 AM James Heilman  wrote:

> The intro page of the offline medical wiki says that the content is written
> by volunteers and invites the reader to join us and make the next version
> better.
>
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 14:03 Leinonen Teemu 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Anne,
> >
> > On 23 Jul 2018, at 19.24, Anne Gomez  > ago...@wikimedia.org>> wrote:
> > Personally, I see the New Readers efforts as a step in that direction,
> and
> > not the end goal. We're working on bringing more people to understanding
> > Wikipedia/Wikimedia with the hope that they'll contribute down the
> line...
> > but, in my opinion, we can't expect people to contribute if they don't
> > visit our sites or understand the values and structures we have built to
> > support building knowledge.
> >
> > Fair enough. I am just afraid that people who are from the beginning
> > invited to be a “reader”, called “readers”, not having “edit” -button,
> not
> > getting the full Wikipedia -experience, will not get the “values and
> > structure”, either. For them Wikipedia will be a free encyclopedia, not
> the
> > free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.
> >
> > I think the message for the people using the offline Wikipedia should be
> > something like that we are really, really sorry that at this point of
> time
> > we can only provide you access to read the content, but we are working
> hard
> > to make it possible that your knowledge, in your own languages will be
> part
> > of the "sum of all knowledge”. :-)
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > - Teemu
> >
> > ___
> > 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia Foundation and Kiwix partner to grow offline access to Wikipedia

2018-07-25 Thread James Heilman
The intro page of the offline medical wiki says that the content is written
by volunteers and invites the reader to join us and make the next version
better.

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 14:03 Leinonen Teemu  wrote:

> Hi Anne,
>
> On 23 Jul 2018, at 19.24, Anne Gomez  ago...@wikimedia.org>> wrote:
> Personally, I see the New Readers efforts as a step in that direction, and
> not the end goal. We're working on bringing more people to understanding
> Wikipedia/Wikimedia with the hope that they'll contribute down the line...
> but, in my opinion, we can't expect people to contribute if they don't
> visit our sites or understand the values and structures we have built to
> support building knowledge.
>
> Fair enough. I am just afraid that people who are from the beginning
> invited to be a “reader”, called “readers”, not having “edit” -button, not
> getting the full Wikipedia -experience, will not get the “values and
> structure”, either. For them Wikipedia will be a free encyclopedia, not the
> free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.
>
> I think the message for the people using the offline Wikipedia should be
> something like that we are really, really sorry that at this point of time
> we can only provide you access to read the content, but we are working hard
> to make it possible that your knowledge, in your own languages will be part
> of the "sum of all knowledge”. :-)
>
> Best regards,
>
> - Teemu
>
> ___
> 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia Foundation and Kiwix partner to grow offline access to Wikipedia

2018-07-25 Thread Leinonen Teemu
Hi Anne,

On 23 Jul 2018, at 19.24, Anne Gomez 
mailto:ago...@wikimedia.org>> wrote:
Personally, I see the New Readers efforts as a step in that direction, and
not the end goal. We're working on bringing more people to understanding
Wikipedia/Wikimedia with the hope that they'll contribute down the line...
but, in my opinion, we can't expect people to contribute if they don't
visit our sites or understand the values and structures we have built to
support building knowledge.

Fair enough. I am just afraid that people who are from the beginning invited to 
be a “reader”, called “readers”, not having “edit” -button, not getting the 
full Wikipedia -experience, will not get the “values and structure”, either. 
For them Wikipedia will be a free encyclopedia, not the free encyclopedia that 
anyone can edit.

I think the message for the people using the offline Wikipedia should be 
something like that we are really, really sorry that at this point of time we 
can only provide you access to read the content, but we are working hard to 
make it possible that your knowledge, in your own languages will be part of the 
"sum of all knowledge”. :-)

Best regards,

- Teemu

___
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] Movement Strategy: First round of Working Group members

2018-07-25 Thread Frans Grijzenhout
Hi All, I cannot support the idea that the movement strategy is designed
for functionaries only. We encouraged editors and volunteers to meet and
discuss the strategy locally and also gave them (financial) support so that
they were able to attend the international conferences and take their part
in the discussions.
Frans (chair WMNL)



*Frans Grijzenhout*, voorzitter / chair
+31 6 5333 9499
-- 
*Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland*
Mariaplaats 3  -  3511 LH Utrecht
Kamer van Koophandel 17189036
http://www.wikimedia.nl/

2018-07-25 11:01 GMT+02:00 Yaroslav Blanter :

> Hi Jane,
>
> I think Andres is completely right of this description, that the whole
> exercise was designed by functionaries for functionaries, and nobody ever
> thought that volunteers working on the projects could be involved.
>
> It is indeed right that many of those do not care about the strategy
> discussions and just edit in their projects (though even say a Wikipedia
> editor from time to time confronts the situation that Commons and Wikidata
> exist but do not necessarily have the same policies as their project). But
> many do care. In the 2010 strategy discussions, we had the volunteer
> editors providing the input, and this is why this was a success.
> Apparently, this time there were a large number of applications from the
> volunteer editors who are not functionaries.
>
> Now, you can say that functionaries and staffers are sometimes editors as
> well. Indeed, some of them are and are well respected in the communities
> (Maggie Dennis is a great example). Some edited the projects before but
> since then have gone inactive and have no idea what is going on in the
> communities. Some are openly fighting with the communities and have no or
> very little respect there. Some never edited. Well, you can of course make
> a selection and hope that these selected people understand everything about
> the variety of our projects. May be. Or may be not. We had in the past very
> bad decisions which WMF, with varying degree of success, tried to impose on
> the projects. I often had an impression that people making these decisions
> had no understanding of what is actually going on the projects, and do not
> even know whom to ask.
>
> Now the whole process only convinces me that this would repeat more and
> more often. Especially since in the first round much of the project
> feedback was ignored.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>
> > Hmm. Yes and no. Yes the May 2017 conference suffered from some
> interesting
> > selection bias, but no the people there were not all brainwashed into
> > forgetting their "wildness". We are all still wild wild Wikipedians at
> > heart, speaking for the 2006 cohort in its entirety. I really doubt
> whether
> > the WMF is trying to shove us all in a direction of their choosing. I
> think
> > that we are in fact split down the middle into parties that believe "some
> > languages are better than others" and "let's save all existing languages
> on
> > the planet, including all of their fonts ever used on- and offline". Then
> > there is a huge discrepancy in workflow for these people and the folks
> who
> > work in just one language and never think of language as a movement topic
> > at all. Among this monolingual crowd (many of whom do not subscribe to
> any
> > mailing list or other communication outlets) are the overlapping groups
> > between the "field workers" and the "library workers". The field workers
> > tend to operate more by a "drive-by" methodology, and the "library
> workers"
> > tend to operate more by a "step-by-step" methodology. I respectfully
> submit
> > that we have all dabbled in all of these worlds and therefore we all have
> > enough common sense to shout "Whoa!" if something really really wrong
> gets
> > proposed. But in the past I have felt quite strongly that something was
> > really really wrong, but it turned out it was just a factor of me being
> > unaware of workflow difficulties experienced by others. So e.g.
> personally
> > I was against the idea of "protected pages" but have come around to
> seeing
> > they are useful - even on Wikidata.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 10:12 PM, Anders Wennersten <
> > m...@anderswennersten.se> wrote:
> >
> > > As I see it the strategy process is run for the functionaries in the
> > > movement and by them. People with focus on contributing to the projects
> > are
> > > not involved, when volunteers is mentioned it is mostly people running
> > > worskhops for beginners etc, a kind of semi functionaries, not the hard
> > > core contributes.
> > >
> > > This could be a good thing and foster a new set of moment leaders,
> fully
> > > in agreement with goals and strategy. It could also be seen as a
> > weakness,
> > > as we do not recognize the more "wild" (but creative)y culture in our
> > > communities and only have the "nice" and obedient culture being
> accepted.
> > >
> > > Facts
> > >
> > > The vision  

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: First round of Working Group members

2018-07-25 Thread Peter Southwood
That feels about right for most of the time.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Jane Darnell
Sent: 25 July 2018 09:29
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: First round of Working Group 
members

Hmm. Yes and no. Yes the May 2017 conference suffered from some interesting
selection bias, but no the people there were not all brainwashed into
forgetting their "wildness". We are all still wild wild Wikipedians at
heart, speaking for the 2006 cohort in its entirety. I really doubt whether
the WMF is trying to shove us all in a direction of their choosing. I think
that we are in fact split down the middle into parties that believe "some
languages are better than others" and "let's save all existing languages on
the planet, including all of their fonts ever used on- and offline". Then
there is a huge discrepancy in workflow for these people and the folks who
work in just one language and never think of language as a movement topic
at all. Among this monolingual crowd (many of whom do not subscribe to any
mailing list or other communication outlets) are the overlapping groups
between the "field workers" and the "library workers". The field workers
tend to operate more by a "drive-by" methodology, and the "library workers"
tend to operate more by a "step-by-step" methodology. I respectfully submit
that we have all dabbled in all of these worlds and therefore we all have
enough common sense to shout "Whoa!" if something really really wrong gets
proposed. But in the past I have felt quite strongly that something was
really really wrong, but it turned out it was just a factor of me being
unaware of workflow difficulties experienced by others. So e.g. personally
I was against the idea of "protected pages" but have come around to seeing
they are useful - even on Wikidata.

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 10:12 PM, Anders Wennersten <
m...@anderswennersten.se> wrote:

> As I see it the strategy process is run for the functionaries in the
> movement and by them. People with focus on contributing to the projects are
> not involved, when volunteers is mentioned it is mostly people running
> worskhops for beginners etc, a kind of semi functionaries, not the hard
> core contributes.
>
> This could be a good thing and foster a new set of moment leaders, fully
> in agreement with goals and strategy. It could also be seen as a weakness,
> as we do not recognize the more "wild" (but creative)y culture in our
> communities and only have the "nice" and obedient culture being accepted.
>
> Facts
>
> The vision  was really created in Wikiconf 2017 by functionaries
>
> The way forward was defined by Wikiconf 2017 by functionaries
>
> The set up of work groups was from the beginning set up  to include (only)
> functionaries (time requirement, and first it was also talked of candidates
> should be endorsed by local chapters). And the actual selection was not
> done transparent as is the culture of the communities but by "boss"
> selection (I only feel the movement is starting to resemble a big company,
> not the vibrant communities)
>
> Anders
>
>
>
> Den 2018-07-24 kl. 21:29, skrev Yaroslav Blanter:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 9:16 PM, David Cuenca Tudela 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I do not know what really happened but if I listen to what has been said
>> here and earlier on similar occasions, my conclusion is that for the
>> Strategy Team we - volunteers who are working on the projects but are not
>> associated with the chapters, do not show up at Wikimania, do not attend
>> real-life tutorials organized by WMF - just do not exist.
>>
>> If this is the case, this is a serious gap to be bridged. So far I have
>> net
>> see even an acknowledgement of its existence.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Yaroslav
>> ___
>> 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/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: First round of Working Group members

2018-07-25 Thread Yaroslav Blanter
Hi Jane,

I think Andres is completely right of this description, that the whole
exercise was designed by functionaries for functionaries, and nobody ever
thought that volunteers working on the projects could be involved.

It is indeed right that many of those do not care about the strategy
discussions and just edit in their projects (though even say a Wikipedia
editor from time to time confronts the situation that Commons and Wikidata
exist but do not necessarily have the same policies as their project). But
many do care. In the 2010 strategy discussions, we had the volunteer
editors providing the input, and this is why this was a success.
Apparently, this time there were a large number of applications from the
volunteer editors who are not functionaries.

Now, you can say that functionaries and staffers are sometimes editors as
well. Indeed, some of them are and are well respected in the communities
(Maggie Dennis is a great example). Some edited the projects before but
since then have gone inactive and have no idea what is going on in the
communities. Some are openly fighting with the communities and have no or
very little respect there. Some never edited. Well, you can of course make
a selection and hope that these selected people understand everything about
the variety of our projects. May be. Or may be not. We had in the past very
bad decisions which WMF, with varying degree of success, tried to impose on
the projects. I often had an impression that people making these decisions
had no understanding of what is actually going on the projects, and do not
even know whom to ask.

Now the whole process only convinces me that this would repeat more and
more often. Especially since in the first round much of the project
feedback was ignored.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> Hmm. Yes and no. Yes the May 2017 conference suffered from some interesting
> selection bias, but no the people there were not all brainwashed into
> forgetting their "wildness". We are all still wild wild Wikipedians at
> heart, speaking for the 2006 cohort in its entirety. I really doubt whether
> the WMF is trying to shove us all in a direction of their choosing. I think
> that we are in fact split down the middle into parties that believe "some
> languages are better than others" and "let's save all existing languages on
> the planet, including all of their fonts ever used on- and offline". Then
> there is a huge discrepancy in workflow for these people and the folks who
> work in just one language and never think of language as a movement topic
> at all. Among this monolingual crowd (many of whom do not subscribe to any
> mailing list or other communication outlets) are the overlapping groups
> between the "field workers" and the "library workers". The field workers
> tend to operate more by a "drive-by" methodology, and the "library workers"
> tend to operate more by a "step-by-step" methodology. I respectfully submit
> that we have all dabbled in all of these worlds and therefore we all have
> enough common sense to shout "Whoa!" if something really really wrong gets
> proposed. But in the past I have felt quite strongly that something was
> really really wrong, but it turned out it was just a factor of me being
> unaware of workflow difficulties experienced by others. So e.g. personally
> I was against the idea of "protected pages" but have come around to seeing
> they are useful - even on Wikidata.
>
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 10:12 PM, Anders Wennersten <
> m...@anderswennersten.se> wrote:
>
> > As I see it the strategy process is run for the functionaries in the
> > movement and by them. People with focus on contributing to the projects
> are
> > not involved, when volunteers is mentioned it is mostly people running
> > worskhops for beginners etc, a kind of semi functionaries, not the hard
> > core contributes.
> >
> > This could be a good thing and foster a new set of moment leaders, fully
> > in agreement with goals and strategy. It could also be seen as a
> weakness,
> > as we do not recognize the more "wild" (but creative)y culture in our
> > communities and only have the "nice" and obedient culture being accepted.
> >
> > Facts
> >
> > The vision  was really created in Wikiconf 2017 by functionaries
> >
> > The way forward was defined by Wikiconf 2017 by functionaries
> >
> > The set up of work groups was from the beginning set up  to include
> (only)
> > functionaries (time requirement, and first it was also talked of
> candidates
> > should be endorsed by local chapters). And the actual selection was not
> > done transparent as is the culture of the communities but by "boss"
> > selection (I only feel the movement is starting to resemble a big
> company,
> > not the vibrant communities)
> >
> > Anders
> >
> >
> >
> > Den 2018-07-24 kl. 21:29, skrev Yaroslav Blanter:
> >
> >> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 9:16 PM, David Cuenca Tudela  >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> I do not know what really 

[Wikimedia-l] No July Metrics and Activities meeting

2018-07-25 Thread Gregory Varnum
Greetings,

Due to the timing of Wikimania travel, upcoming remote work time in the office, 
and planned changes to the meeting - this month’s Metrics and Activities 
meeting will not be taking place.

We will return with some changes next month on 30 August 2018 starting at 18:00 
UTC (usual date and time).

If you have any questions - please let me know. Enjoy the rest of your July and 
we shall see you next month!

-greg

___
Gregory Varnum
Communications Strategist
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: First round of Working Group members

2018-07-25 Thread Jane Darnell
Hmm. Yes and no. Yes the May 2017 conference suffered from some interesting
selection bias, but no the people there were not all brainwashed into
forgetting their "wildness". We are all still wild wild Wikipedians at
heart, speaking for the 2006 cohort in its entirety. I really doubt whether
the WMF is trying to shove us all in a direction of their choosing. I think
that we are in fact split down the middle into parties that believe "some
languages are better than others" and "let's save all existing languages on
the planet, including all of their fonts ever used on- and offline". Then
there is a huge discrepancy in workflow for these people and the folks who
work in just one language and never think of language as a movement topic
at all. Among this monolingual crowd (many of whom do not subscribe to any
mailing list or other communication outlets) are the overlapping groups
between the "field workers" and the "library workers". The field workers
tend to operate more by a "drive-by" methodology, and the "library workers"
tend to operate more by a "step-by-step" methodology. I respectfully submit
that we have all dabbled in all of these worlds and therefore we all have
enough common sense to shout "Whoa!" if something really really wrong gets
proposed. But in the past I have felt quite strongly that something was
really really wrong, but it turned out it was just a factor of me being
unaware of workflow difficulties experienced by others. So e.g. personally
I was against the idea of "protected pages" but have come around to seeing
they are useful - even on Wikidata.

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 10:12 PM, Anders Wennersten <
m...@anderswennersten.se> wrote:

> As I see it the strategy process is run for the functionaries in the
> movement and by them. People with focus on contributing to the projects are
> not involved, when volunteers is mentioned it is mostly people running
> worskhops for beginners etc, a kind of semi functionaries, not the hard
> core contributes.
>
> This could be a good thing and foster a new set of moment leaders, fully
> in agreement with goals and strategy. It could also be seen as a weakness,
> as we do not recognize the more "wild" (but creative)y culture in our
> communities and only have the "nice" and obedient culture being accepted.
>
> Facts
>
> The vision  was really created in Wikiconf 2017 by functionaries
>
> The way forward was defined by Wikiconf 2017 by functionaries
>
> The set up of work groups was from the beginning set up  to include (only)
> functionaries (time requirement, and first it was also talked of candidates
> should be endorsed by local chapters). And the actual selection was not
> done transparent as is the culture of the communities but by "boss"
> selection (I only feel the movement is starting to resemble a big company,
> not the vibrant communities)
>
> Anders
>
>
>
> Den 2018-07-24 kl. 21:29, skrev Yaroslav Blanter:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 9:16 PM, David Cuenca Tudela 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I do not know what really happened but if I listen to what has been said
>> here and earlier on similar occasions, my conclusion is that for the
>> Strategy Team we - volunteers who are working on the projects but are not
>> associated with the chapters, do not show up at Wikimania, do not attend
>> real-life tutorials organized by WMF - just do not exist.
>>
>> If this is the case, this is a serious gap to be bridged. So far I have
>> net
>> see even an acknowledgement of its existence.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Yaroslav
>> ___
>> 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/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] [OT] Informative page about viruses on Linux

2018-07-25 Thread Shlomi Fish
Hi all,

this link is somewhat offtopic, but relevant to an earlier discussion:

http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/

it seems well-researched and informative.

Among other things, it tries to refute the common argument that Linux will have
a virus popular when and if it becomes more popular.

Regards,

Shlomi

-- 
-
Shlomi Fish   http://www.shlomifish.org/
http://is.gd/i5eMQd - Emma Watson’s Interview for a Software Dev Job

Java is a DSL (= Domain Specific Language) to transform big XML documents
into long exception stack traces. — Scott Bellware

Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .

___
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,