Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the Wikimedia
community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the WGs 8and
their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around December.
Therefore, after 15 September or so, the Wikimedia community will only be
dealing with those recommendations again when they are already in the
process of implementation.

It's quite easy to predict that things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia
community does not approve some of the recommendations that pass all the
way till implementation phase.

Paulo

Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia quinta, 22/08/2019
à(s) 11:58:

> Dear all,
>
> Thank you for your engagement and input. It’s been great seeing so much
> attention on movement strategy and collaborative efforts for building our
> future. Here are a couple of follow up responses and clarifications.
>
> DRAFTS
> As pointed out in my previous email, the documents we recently shared are
> recommendation drafts. They are not final, and not complete, but working
> documents that are currently being refined by the working groups. Some
> answers still read like stubs that are longing for further development,
> others are very detailed and will become more focused over the next few
> weeks. We still decided to publish everything at once, to give everyone a
> full picture of the variety of topics and offer an insight into multiple
> progress levels.
>
> I would also like to reiterate that movement values, priorities and
> community conversation processes are high on our radar. A recommendation to
> change the existing license model, for example, will not just go through a
> quick approval process, but lead to a deeper exploration into the reasoning
> behind it: What problems are we trying to tackle, and what could be ways to
> mitigate them? Such recommendation would then rather suggest to look into
> different measures to ensure indigenous knowledge is included in the
> Wikimedia ecosystem, deploy research and further consultation, instead of
> rushing to a quick fix.
>
> INTEGRATION
> The working groups are taking input that they gathered at Wikimania and via
> different movement channels and incorporating it into the next iteration of
> their recommendations. These documents will then serve as a basis for
> harmonization across working groups.
>
> The input that we are gathering comes in on different levels. Some of it
> targets structural level changes or emphasizes specific principles or
> values, while other feedback is more on the programmatic side or already
> addressing implementation. Structural input will continue to be  considered
> in forthcoming iterations of the recommendations. Programmatic input will
> be documented and taken forward to inform the implementation.
>
> TIMELINE
> We wanted to get the English drafts out as soon as possible and the
> translations on a rolling basis, so that Wikimania participants could read
> and prepare to engage in person. Over the next few weeks, we will do
> targeted, public outreach to online project communities in multiple
> languages. We are soliciting feedback to shape the overall direction of the
> recommendations through mid-September. Working Groups are already working
> on identifying gaps and overlaps with other groups to prepare for
> harmonization.
>
> At the harmonization sprint in Tunis on 20-22 September, we will bring 3
> representatives from each Working Group together to work to develop a more
> coherent set of recommendations. The group will be supported by
> facilitators and external advice, as well as the core team. We have also
> invited María Sefidari, Katherine Maher, Ryan Merkley, Valerie D’Costa
> (Wikimedia Foundation) and Abraham Taherivand (Wikimedia Deutschland) to
> the sprint. They contribute expertise and experience from their work and
> leadership in the movement and beyond. They will be active listeners and
> can challenge recommendations by pointing out risks and consequences on the
> organizational and movement level. They also participate as the
> representatives of organizations that may be impacted by the
> recommendations. Involving them early is important so they can anticipate
> any possible changes for their staff and programs, and plan for
> implementation.
>
> Our aim is to release recommendations in November 2019, and present them to
> the Board of Trustees for approval in December. We will need the legal
> authority of the board for some of the recommendations, while others will
> then be further delegated to other community mechanisms and structures for
> approval or further consultation.[1] There will be additional public
> consultation activities around implementation that will be discussed and
> owned across the movement.
>
> WORKING GROUPS
> We have chosen the working group model to ensure that the process that
> embarks to make significant changes to our movement structures is owned by
> the community. Members of the nine working group were selected by 

[Wikimedia-l] Which script oral language will use anyway?

[Subhashish Panigrahi]

Dear Wikimedians,

Some of you might be recovering from the Wikimania fatigue. Those of you
who have already recovered, I wanted to pick your brain about something
that came up multiple times during discussions but none really seem to have
a clear answer.

Which script (writing system) an oral language speaker would use for
creating an entry on (gateway [1]) projects like Wiktionary or Wikibooks or
even uploading a list of words on Commons using a tool like Lingua Libre?
Will it be the script used for the official language of the region where
the former language is from?[2] This is a bit controversial as native
speakers of many indigenous languages would see this as a form of
colonization. Will it be the w:International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)? This
is probably the least controversial but a common and average user might not
be able to read IPA as the latter was created by linguists and was created
for linguistic and scholarly studies rather than for everyday use.

Wikimedians who are native speakers of languages with less written/recorded
documentation and individuals who work on such languages are more
encouraged to share their inputs based on past experience.

1. Gateway project: This is a made-up term to define the Wikimedia projects
that are more welcoming to newbies and do not require stringent citation as
almost all oral languages would lack that. It was fascinating to see Amir
challenging that it only takes about 30 seconds to add an entry to
Wiktionary (
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Amir_Aharoni_demonstrating_how_to_add_an_entry_to_Wiktionary_in_any_language_to_Ingrid_Cumming,_Wikimania_2019,_Stockholm,_Sweden.jpg
)

Subhashish
___
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: Draft recommendations are here!

[Andy Mabbett]

On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 at 19:48, Jeff Hawke  wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 7:41 PM Andy Mabbett 
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 at 09:55, Jeff Hawke  wrote:
> >
> > > the WG then collate them and decide the final form of the
> > > recommendations, to be implemented by the WMF
> >
> > This seems to be missing a rather crucial intermediate step; the one
> > where the recommendations are accepted, or not, by the wider Wikimedia
> > community.
> >
>
>  That step is not mentioned at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions#What_steps_will_take_place_in_the_next_few_months_to_put_a_decision-making_process_in_place?

But it is alluded to further down that page, albeit with an apparent
assumption that the recommendations will (all) be implemented:

   
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions#What_are_the_steps_that_will_take_place_between_recommendations_being_published_and_implementation?

In the light of Nicole's recent - and reassuring - email:

   https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2019-August/093303.html

perhaps that section could be updated to reflect that:

   "[recommendations not needing the legal authority of the board] will
then be further delegated to other community mechanisms and
structures for approval or further consultation."

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
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] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please reconsider!

[Nicole Ebber]

Hi Ziko and all,

Thanks for sharing your concerns and suggestions. I have posted a response
to the other thread and hope to have addressed your questions there as
well. Let me know if you need further clarification.

https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2019-August/093303.html

Best wishes,
Nicole

On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 at 10:50, Aron Manning  wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 22:07, Jeff Hawke  wrote:
>
> > "Open community input will be accepted until September 15, after which
> > working groups will refine and finalize their work using movement input
> as
> >
>
> I expect the drafts to be revised for new rounds of feedback within that
> timeframe. In one week the community gathered information fundamental to
> these drafts, but missing from the first iteration. In an agile environment
> this can be incorporated into the drafts in a few days, and even in
> wikipedian time 1-2 weeks could be enough to publish the next iteration,
> and keep the conversation alive.
> I hope after Wikimania the WG members will be able to dedicate time for
> this, otherwise the tight timeline is not possible. Ideally the most
> popular drafts would be updated weekly, or more often, answering some
> feedback in each iteration, not necessarily all of it.
>
> Aron
>
>
> ᐧ
> ___
> 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,
> 



-- 
Nicole Ebber
Adviser International Relations
Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
https://wikimedia.de

Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
https://spenden.wikimedia.de

Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
___
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: Draft recommendations are here!

[Nicole Ebber]

Dear all,

Thank you for your engagement and input. It’s been great seeing so much
attention on movement strategy and collaborative efforts for building our
future. Here are a couple of follow up responses and clarifications.

DRAFTS
As pointed out in my previous email, the documents we recently shared are
recommendation drafts. They are not final, and not complete, but working
documents that are currently being refined by the working groups. Some
answers still read like stubs that are longing for further development,
others are very detailed and will become more focused over the next few
weeks. We still decided to publish everything at once, to give everyone a
full picture of the variety of topics and offer an insight into multiple
progress levels.

I would also like to reiterate that movement values, priorities and
community conversation processes are high on our radar. A recommendation to
change the existing license model, for example, will not just go through a
quick approval process, but lead to a deeper exploration into the reasoning
behind it: What problems are we trying to tackle, and what could be ways to
mitigate them? Such recommendation would then rather suggest to look into
different measures to ensure indigenous knowledge is included in the
Wikimedia ecosystem, deploy research and further consultation, instead of
rushing to a quick fix.

INTEGRATION
The working groups are taking input that they gathered at Wikimania and via
different movement channels and incorporating it into the next iteration of
their recommendations. These documents will then serve as a basis for
harmonization across working groups.

The input that we are gathering comes in on different levels. Some of it
targets structural level changes or emphasizes specific principles or
values, while other feedback is more on the programmatic side or already
addressing implementation. Structural input will continue to be  considered
in forthcoming iterations of the recommendations. Programmatic input will
be documented and taken forward to inform the implementation.

TIMELINE
We wanted to get the English drafts out as soon as possible and the
translations on a rolling basis, so that Wikimania participants could read
and prepare to engage in person. Over the next few weeks, we will do
targeted, public outreach to online project communities in multiple
languages. We are soliciting feedback to shape the overall direction of the
recommendations through mid-September. Working Groups are already working
on identifying gaps and overlaps with other groups to prepare for
harmonization.

At the harmonization sprint in Tunis on 20-22 September, we will bring 3
representatives from each Working Group together to work to develop a more
coherent set of recommendations. The group will be supported by
facilitators and external advice, as well as the core team. We have also
invited María Sefidari, Katherine Maher, Ryan Merkley, Valerie D’Costa
(Wikimedia Foundation) and Abraham Taherivand (Wikimedia Deutschland) to
the sprint. They contribute expertise and experience from their work and
leadership in the movement and beyond. They will be active listeners and
can challenge recommendations by pointing out risks and consequences on the
organizational and movement level. They also participate as the
representatives of organizations that may be impacted by the
recommendations. Involving them early is important so they can anticipate
any possible changes for their staff and programs, and plan for
implementation.

Our aim is to release recommendations in November 2019, and present them to
the Board of Trustees for approval in December. We will need the legal
authority of the board for some of the recommendations, while others will
then be further delegated to other community mechanisms and structures for
approval or further consultation.[1] There will be additional public
consultation activities around implementation that will be discussed and
owned across the movement.

WORKING GROUPS
We have chosen the working group model to ensure that the process that
embarks to make significant changes to our movement structures is owned by
the community. Members of the nine working group were selected by a
steering committee and the groups were established in July 2019.[2] Group
members come from different parts of the movement, e.g. from different
regions and languages, from individual contributors and organized groups,
and with different volunteer and staff roles, incl. Wikimedia Foundation
staff and board.

The groups are doing an amazing job. With many of them being volunteers, or
doing this work on top of their regular jobs, creating the draft
recommendations is a huge achievement. They first needed to form, storm and
norm as a group and figure out how to best work together across time zones,
languages, and contexts. They then took a deep dive into the substance and
identified the scope of their work and the specific questions to tackle for
us as a movement to 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Apa yang membuatmu senang di minggu ini? / What's making you happy this week? (Week of 18 August 2019)

[Peter Southwood]

This!
This piece by Agnes Caillard should be required reading for Wikimedians 
debating policy.
Very well expressed
Thanks, Pine, It is also making me happy this week.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Pine W
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2019 3:11 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Apa yang membuatmu senang di minggu ini? / What's making 
you happy this week? (Week of 18 August 2019)



*Off wiki*

*The New York Times* published an opinion piece by Agnes Callard, who is an
associate professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago, titled "Why
Philosophers Shouldn't Sign Petitions
".
In the context of reflecting on how we make decisions in the Wikiverse, I
feel that the distinction between petitioning and arguing is a good topic
for reflection. Hopefully in the wikiverse we make collective decisions
that are largely based on rational consensus.



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, 



___
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,