Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research about the effects of its demise?

[James Heilman]

The offline apps have also been downloaded 100 of thousands of times
mostly from people in LMIC.

Wikipedia Zero faced the controversial about net neutrality. And thus
we were legally banned from continuing in India.

Douglas Scott and I discussed the effects of the program in South
Africa. Have cc'ed him to comment further but basically it sounded not
all that great due to all the further limitations that were added by
the telecoms.

James

On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 4:25 PM James Salsman  wrote:
>
> Kul,
>
> Would you please send a few or more paragraph description of the
> accomplishments and costs of the Wikipedia Zero program to the
> wikimedia-l list?
>
> I also would love to see it back. The concerns about zero rating
> service abuse are real, but they did not apply to WZ no matter how
> many people implied they did at the time.
>
> Best regards,
> Jim
>
> On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 4:13 AM Peter Southwood
>  wrote:
> >
> > Gerhard,
> > I am also interested in what the impact of Wikipedia Zero was, but it is 
> > not obvious to me how it would be measured.
> > The board members are unlikely to have personally researched this, but 
> > might know if there is or was a project and if so what they are or were 
> > trying to measure. Equally, someone from WMF might be able to report on 
> > what has been or is being done in this regard. It is also possible that 
> > nothing has been done, or someone who does not read this list is working on 
> > it.
> > If anyone reads this and can enlighten us, either to whether it is an 
> > ongoing project, has been done and the information is available somewhere, 
> > or nobody is known to be working on it, please let us know.
> > Anyone who has ideas on how it could be measured or why it can't is also 
> > welcome to comment.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On 
> > Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> > Sent: 01 December 2019 08:19
> > To: Lodewijk Gelauf; Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research 
> > about the effects of its demise?
> >
> > Lodewijk,
> > What I asked for is: do we understand what the impact was of the Wikipedia
> > Zero project. In the answer of James, a board member of the WMF someone who
> > could know, there is nothing that answers that question. All the answer
> > does is deflect the question to something else. A notion that it is "not
> > that bad because we have these other things". These things we had before
> > Wikipedia Zero, they are not Wikipedia and they do not scale.
> >
> > What I have noticed is that once consensus has been reached, we do not want
> > to be confronted with the consequences of our actions. Wikipedia Zero has
> > damaged our outreach and what the BBC info reminds us of is that Internet,
> > the cost of Internet, is not comparable in Africa with what we are used to.
> > It means that we no longer reach the girls and boys in Soweto as we showed
> > in our film clip at the Erasmus award.
> >
> > We do not cover Africa properly, we do not need to seek consensus about
> > this, that is easily to be shown. Our focus on outreach is in America, then
> > Europe, then the rest of the world and there is Africa. From the moment we
> > stopped Wikipedia Zero, we have invested heavily in infrastructure in
> > Africa, the organisational presence in the USA is now such that it rivals
> > Wikimania and is used as an excuse by some to even dismantle Wikimania. As
> > an organisation, a movement the "centre periphery" model is alive and well.
> > We happily embrace Burke's peerage in Wikidata and we balk at the fact that
> > covering science takes resources away from pet projects.
> >
> > You tell me to be constructive and here I lay out what the situation is.
> > How can you be constructive as our movement does not support science, the
> > people who need our information most are disenfranchised because we do not
> > cover them, support them in an equal manner.
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 04:31, effe iets anders 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Gerard,
> > >
> > > It would be great if you could keep a slightly more constructive tone in
> > > your messages. On one hand, you seem genuinely interested to help access 
> > > to
> > > free knowledge in Africa, but in your second email, you seem to jump 
> > > (after
> > > one response) to conclusions already. If you like to get real responses to
> > > your emails, you may want to try a more constructive attitude. For me, it
> > > is at least sufficiently offputting to disengage (I removed the rest of my
> > > response/suggestions).
> > >
> > > -- Lodewijk
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 9:34 PM Gerard Meijssen  > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > Kiwix and off line Wikipedia did exist at the start of Wikipedia Zero.
> > > It
> > > > is great that you brought some to Africa but you do not scale and it is
> > > not
> > > > a 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research about the effects of its demise?

[James Salsman]

Kul,

Would you please send a few or more paragraph description of the
accomplishments and costs of the Wikipedia Zero program to the
wikimedia-l list?

I also would love to see it back. The concerns about zero rating
service abuse are real, but they did not apply to WZ no matter how
many people implied they did at the time.

Best regards,
Jim

On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 4:13 AM Peter Southwood
 wrote:
>
> Gerhard,
> I am also interested in what the impact of Wikipedia Zero was, but it is not 
> obvious to me how it would be measured.
> The board members are unlikely to have personally researched this, but might 
> know if there is or was a project and if so what they are or were trying to 
> measure. Equally, someone from WMF might be able to report on what has been 
> or is being done in this regard. It is also possible that nothing has been 
> done, or someone who does not read this list is working on it.
> If anyone reads this and can enlighten us, either to whether it is an ongoing 
> project, has been done and the information is available somewhere, or nobody 
> is known to be working on it, please let us know.
> Anyone who has ideas on how it could be measured or why it can't is also 
> welcome to comment.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf 
> Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: 01 December 2019 08:19
> To: Lodewijk Gelauf; Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research 
> about the effects of its demise?
>
> Lodewijk,
> What I asked for is: do we understand what the impact was of the Wikipedia
> Zero project. In the answer of James, a board member of the WMF someone who
> could know, there is nothing that answers that question. All the answer
> does is deflect the question to something else. A notion that it is "not
> that bad because we have these other things". These things we had before
> Wikipedia Zero, they are not Wikipedia and they do not scale.
>
> What I have noticed is that once consensus has been reached, we do not want
> to be confronted with the consequences of our actions. Wikipedia Zero has
> damaged our outreach and what the BBC info reminds us of is that Internet,
> the cost of Internet, is not comparable in Africa with what we are used to.
> It means that we no longer reach the girls and boys in Soweto as we showed
> in our film clip at the Erasmus award.
>
> We do not cover Africa properly, we do not need to seek consensus about
> this, that is easily to be shown. Our focus on outreach is in America, then
> Europe, then the rest of the world and there is Africa. From the moment we
> stopped Wikipedia Zero, we have invested heavily in infrastructure in
> Africa, the organisational presence in the USA is now such that it rivals
> Wikimania and is used as an excuse by some to even dismantle Wikimania. As
> an organisation, a movement the "centre periphery" model is alive and well.
> We happily embrace Burke's peerage in Wikidata and we balk at the fact that
> covering science takes resources away from pet projects.
>
> You tell me to be constructive and here I lay out what the situation is.
> How can you be constructive as our movement does not support science, the
> people who need our information most are disenfranchised because we do not
> cover them, support them in an equal manner.
> Thanks,
>
>
> On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 04:31, effe iets anders 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Gerard,
> >
> > It would be great if you could keep a slightly more constructive tone in
> > your messages. On one hand, you seem genuinely interested to help access to
> > free knowledge in Africa, but in your second email, you seem to jump (after
> > one response) to conclusions already. If you like to get real responses to
> > your emails, you may want to try a more constructive attitude. For me, it
> > is at least sufficiently offputting to disengage (I removed the rest of my
> > response/suggestions).
> >
> > -- Lodewijk
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 9:34 PM Gerard Meijssen  > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > Kiwix and off line Wikipedia did exist at the start of Wikipedia Zero.
> > It
> > > is great that you brought some to Africa but you do not scale and it is
> > not
> > > a study into the effects of what the effects are of terminating Wikipedia
> > > Zero.
> >
> >
> > > No idea what "Starlink"  is
> >
> >
> > https://lmgtfy.com/?q=starlink=l
> >
> >
> > > but it is not a reality for a few more years..
> > > It sounds like we have thrown all these kids under the bus but hey, we
> > have
> > > plan. A plan/action is having our own caches in Africa and providing edit
> > > and read capabilities for all who care to use it... and then measure the
> > > extend it helps us recover from our Wikipedia Zero public.
> > > Thanks,
> > >GerardM
> > >
> > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 at 02:48, James Heilman  wrote:
> > >
> > > > We have offline Wikipedia. I have shipped devices to 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Coming up: A Knowlege Equity Calendar

[Cornelius Kibelka]

And for those who didn't see it on Social Media:

The first story is about Bojan, who uses Wikimedia as a tool to promote
LGBT rights in the homophobic, conservative context of Serbia.

On Meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Equity_Calendar/1

On Wikimedia Space:
https://space.wmflabs.org/2019/12/01/knowledge-equity-calendar-bojan-from-serbia/

Cheers
Cornelius



On Fri, 29 Nov 2019 at 18:25, Cornelius Kibelka <
cornelius.kibe...@wikimedia.de> wrote:

> (I take a 'd' as a present for my subject line, thank you)
>
> On Fri, 29 Nov 2019 at 18:10, Cornelius Kibelka <
> cornelius.kibe...@wikimedia.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I’m delighted to pre-announce a small communication initiative called
>> “Knowledge Equity Calendar” for the upcoming weeks:
>>
>> Back in 2017, the Wikimedia Movement agreed on its Strategic Direction
>> with its core goal to be the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem of
>> free knowledge until 2030.[1] One priority to achieve this goal is called
>> "Knowledge Equity" (As a social movement, we will focus our efforts on
>> the knowledge and communities that have been left out by structures of
>> power and privilege. We will welcome people from every background to build
>> strong and diverse communities. We will break down the social, political,
>> and technical barriers preventing people from accessing and contributing to
>> free knowledge.). But what does that mean in your context? What are
>> others already doing to translate “Knowledge Equity” from the strategic to
>> the programmatic level?
>>
>> In the light of the last days and weeks of the year, we'd like to adapt
>> the German tradition of the “Advent calendar
>> ” counting the days
>> towards Christmas (December 1 to 24), and share one story per day via
>> Meta[2] and Wikimedia Space blog[3] on how Wikimedians are working towards
>> achieving Knowledge Equity in their respective context. The idea is mainly
>> to inspire Wikimedians what other Wikimedians are already doing. We’ll use
>> Wikimedia Deutschland's Twitter and Facebook accounts to accompany that.
>>
>> On Meta, the translation extension is activated – so if you like, chip in
>> and translate the stories to your language. Or just share the stories with
>> other Wikimedians to show what kind of cool and inspiring initiatives and
>> projects working towards Knowledge Equity we already have in the Wikimedia
>> movement.
>>
>> If you have any questions about the initiative, the stories, or what an
>> Advent calendar is, feel free to send me a message.
>>
>> Happy reading and sharing,
>>
>> Cornelius
>>
>> [1]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Direction
>>
>>
>> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Equity_Calendar
>>
>> [3] https://space.wmflabs.org/blog/
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cornelius Kibelka
>> Internationale Beziehungen | International Relations
>> Vorstandsteam | Office of the ED
>>
>> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
>> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
>> http://wikimedia.de
>>
>> Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
>> Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
>> http://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
>>
>
>
> --
> Cornelius Kibelka
> Internationale Beziehungen | International Relations
> Vorstandsteam | Office of the ED
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> http://wikimedia.de
>
> Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
> Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> http://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
>


-- 
Cornelius Kibelka
Internationale Beziehungen | International Relations
Vorstandsteam | Office of the ED

Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
http://wikimedia.de

Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
http://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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising needs your help

[James Salsman]

As is my custom, I have answered the call for fundraising message; this
time with 14 alternatives to the $3 cup of coffee:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising%2F2019-20_Fundraising_ideas#Story_suggestion_3

I am confident this approach will leave all future fundraisers in the dust.
I hope there is time to try my other suggestions too.

Best regards,
Jim

On Wednesday, November 27, 2019, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> (reposting due to filter rejection)
>
>
> Fundraising are looking for ideas and suggestions for our writing team to
> explore for our messaging in this years fundraiser. I only need a minute of
> your time to answer the following question:
>
>
> --- What’s your favorite thing about Wikipedia that you wish our readers
> and donors knew? ---
>
>
> We'll use the responses to generate new test ideas
>
> Post your answers on list or directly to me :) Thanks in advance
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> *Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
> *Advancement (Fundraising), 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 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] Wikimédia France new Board members

[Nadine Le Lirzin via Wikimedia-l]

Hi all, 

On November 16th, Wikimédia France held its annual General
Assembly and partialy renewed its Board. We are particularly glad and
proud of announcing that for the first time our chapter has reserved a
seat for a candidate appointed by the community.  

Here is a brief
presentation of the newly elected Board members, including the
community-appointed seat ratified by the Assembly:  

* Pascale
Camus-Walter, elected for 2 years: On Wikipedia since 2011, Pascale is a
Wikimédia France member since 2015. 

* Jonathan Mouton, elected for 3
years: Registered on Wikipedia in 2007, Jonathan is the one elected as a
Board member by the community.

* Diane Ranville, elected for 3 years:
Wikimedian from Grenoble, Diane is committed in Wikimédia France since
2017.

* Carole Renard, elected for 3 years: Feminist, Wikimedian
since 2017, Carole is contributing on Wikipedia, Commons, Wikidata and
Wikisource.

* Benoit Soubeyran, elected for 2 years: Wikimedian since
2012, Benoit has been a librarian and a blogger for several years.

This
brings the number of women on our Board to 4 on a total of 12 members
(Improvement in progress). 

The other Board members remain unchanged,
as well as the executive bureau: 

* Pierre-Yves Beaudouin: President,
whose turn will end in 1 year.

* Benoît Deshayes: whose turn will end
in 1 year.

* Julien Gardet: reelected for 3 years.

* Roger Gotlib:
whose turn will end in 1 year.

* Nadine Le Lirzin: Secretary, whose
turn will end in 1 year.

* Pascal Radigue: Treasurer, whose turn will
end in 1 year.

* Willie Robert: Vice-President, whose turn will end
in 1 year. 

We would like to thank Marin Dubroca-Voisin, Pierre-Selim
Huard, Pierre-Antoine Le Page, Lucas Lévêque and Hélène Masson, whose
turns just came to an end, for having worked with us at restoring the
good health of the Association. We know you're still around :) 

For the
Board of Wikimédia France,  
Nadine Le Lirzin, Secretary  
___
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] World AIDS Day current events page

[Pharos]

I'd like to share our current events page collaboration, covering Word AIDS
Day, which is today, December 1,with a compendium of events worldwide :

https://wikispore.wmflabs.org/wiki/Event:World_AIDS_Day_2019

I encourage anyone interested to edit and expand and update this page, and
to make it more complete in medicine and public policy areas, and
particularly to have better global coverage outside of the USA.

This effort is part of the current events project on Wikispore:

https://wikispore.wmflabs.org/wiki/Event_Spore

(You have to register a new account on Wikispore, you can just use you
Wikimedia username, but for security reasons use a different password. We
will merge the accounts later.)

For the Meta proposal for Wikispore of which the current events project is
a part, see and participate at:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikispore

Thanks,
Richard
(User:Pharos)
___
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] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research about the effects of its demise?

[Gabriel Thullen]

Top-down and Bottom-up:
Wikipedia relies on volunteers and can really be considered to be a
"bottom-up" encyclopedia project, where the readers can also add content
and become part of the project. I consider that the Kiwix offline Wikipedia
is also very democratic in that anyone can copy and share the files,
install them on their own devices and really feel like they own the
knowledge.

Wikipedia Zero is a top-down way of distributing the encyclopedia and users
of Wikipedia zero are just that: users. They will consume the knowledge and
will have no role in distributing it further except maybe by promoting one
particular cell phone operator instead of another.

I have been a few times to Senegal, visiting schools and sharing Kiwix and
off-line Wikipedia with the teachers and the educational community.  The
files that I brought on USB thumb drives have been copied and shared
hundreds and hundreds of times. But I am just one guy and that is really
not enough to reach the whole continent. But we can scale up...

Wikimedia Zero was never even present in Senegal, at least not when I was
there: in 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2019. I think that it never took off before
the whole project was abandoned.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_Reach/MEA#Wikipedia Zero in Senegal
with Tigo [Affordability] [Private Sector]

That been said, it would be interesting to measure the effectiveness of the
"Wikipedia Zero" project...

On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 1:13 PM Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Gerhard,
> I am also interested in what the impact of Wikipedia Zero was, but it is
> not obvious to me how it would be measured.
> The board members are unlikely to have personally researched this, but
> might know if there is or was a project and if so what they are or were
> trying to measure. Equally, someone from WMF might be able to report on
> what has been or is being done in this regard. It is also possible that
> nothing has been done, or someone who does not read this list is working on
> it.
> If anyone reads this and can enlighten us, either to whether it is an
> ongoing project, has been done and the information is available somewhere,
> or nobody is known to be working on it, please let us know.
> Anyone who has ideas on how it could be measured or why it can't is also
> welcome to comment.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: 01 December 2019 08:19
> To: Lodewijk Gelauf; Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research
> about the effects of its demise?
>
> Lodewijk,
> What I asked for is: do we understand what the impact was of the Wikipedia
> Zero project. In the answer of James, a board member of the WMF someone who
> could know, there is nothing that answers that question. All the answer
> does is deflect the question to something else. A notion that it is "not
> that bad because we have these other things". These things we had before
> Wikipedia Zero, they are not Wikipedia and they do not scale.
>
> What I have noticed is that once consensus has been reached, we do not want
> to be confronted with the consequences of our actions. Wikipedia Zero has
> damaged our outreach and what the BBC info reminds us of is that Internet,
> the cost of Internet, is not comparable in Africa with what we are used to.
> It means that we no longer reach the girls and boys in Soweto as we showed
> in our film clip at the Erasmus award.
>
> We do not cover Africa properly, we do not need to seek consensus about
> this, that is easily to be shown. Our focus on outreach is in America, then
> Europe, then the rest of the world and there is Africa. From the moment we
> stopped Wikipedia Zero, we have invested heavily in infrastructure in
> Africa, the organisational presence in the USA is now such that it rivals
> Wikimania and is used as an excuse by some to even dismantle Wikimania. As
> an organisation, a movement the "centre periphery" model is alive and well.
> We happily embrace Burke's peerage in Wikidata and we balk at the fact that
> covering science takes resources away from pet projects.
>
> You tell me to be constructive and here I lay out what the situation is.
> How can you be constructive as our movement does not support science, the
> people who need our information most are disenfranchised because we do not
> cover them, support them in an equal manner.
> Thanks,
>
>
> On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 04:31, effe iets anders 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Gerard,
> >
> > It would be great if you could keep a slightly more constructive tone in
> > your messages. On one hand, you seem genuinely interested to help access
> to
> > free knowledge in Africa, but in your second email, you seem to jump
> (after
> > one response) to conclusions already. If you like to get real responses
> to
> > your emails, you may want to try a more constructive attitude. For me, it
> > is at least 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research about the effects of its demise?

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Peter we were celebrated when we received the Erasmus prize. It was a
joyous occasion and a clip was shown with children from Soweto explaining
what Wikipedia Zero meant for them. At the time we DID have statistics on
growth from Africa. We did know what growth was attributable to Wikipedia
Zero. We have continued to measure our performance so the answer is one
where someone with appropriate knowledgeable or skills looks at the
numbers, extrapolate a growth path and compare. Not really problematic.
What is problematic is for us to accept that our choices have
consequences. *Our
*maturity can be measured by our ability to know and accept the
consequences of our actions.

Contrary to some, I do think as an organisation we are doing quite well.
What we do is still biased and if we are to be less biased we have to both
ask for money and spend more money in Africa, South America and Asia. As it
is, European and North Americans have the expectation that they are
entitled because they pay for things. Fundraising in Africa, South American
and Asia may not be as "profitable" but the value we gain by asking people
to support *themselves *is of value in itself.

We could and should spend more where our potential impact is biggest. As it
is we do not even know the science that establishes or refutes what we have
in our Wikipedias. As it is we only know somewhat what we used as a
reference, hardly representative particularly when you broaden your
horizon. Oh and when will we have a formal register of organisations we
partner with like the Internet Archive?
Thanks,
GerardM

On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 13:13, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Gerhard,
> I am also interested in what the impact of Wikipedia Zero was, but it is
> not obvious to me how it would be measured.
> The board members are unlikely to have personally researched this, but
> might know if there is or was a project and if so what they are or were
> trying to measure. Equally, someone from WMF might be able to report on
> what has been or is being done in this regard. It is also possible that
> nothing has been done, or someone who does not read this list is working on
> it.
> If anyone reads this and can enlighten us, either to whether it is an
> ongoing project, has been done and the information is available somewhere,
> or nobody is known to be working on it, please let us know.
> Anyone who has ideas on how it could be measured or why it can't is also
> welcome to comment.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: 01 December 2019 08:19
> To: Lodewijk Gelauf; Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research
> about the effects of its demise?
>
> Lodewijk,
> What I asked for is: do we understand what the impact was of the Wikipedia
> Zero project. In the answer of James, a board member of the WMF someone who
> could know, there is nothing that answers that question. All the answer
> does is deflect the question to something else. A notion that it is "not
> that bad because we have these other things". These things we had before
> Wikipedia Zero, they are not Wikipedia and they do not scale.
>
> What I have noticed is that once consensus has been reached, we do not want
> to be confronted with the consequences of our actions. Wikipedia Zero has
> damaged our outreach and what the BBC info reminds us of is that Internet,
> the cost of Internet, is not comparable in Africa with what we are used to.
> It means that we no longer reach the girls and boys in Soweto as we showed
> in our film clip at the Erasmus award.
>
> We do not cover Africa properly, we do not need to seek consensus about
> this, that is easily to be shown. Our focus on outreach is in America, then
> Europe, then the rest of the world and there is Africa. From the moment we
> stopped Wikipedia Zero, we have invested heavily in infrastructure in
> Africa, the organisational presence in the USA is now such that it rivals
> Wikimania and is used as an excuse by some to even dismantle Wikimania. As
> an organisation, a movement the "centre periphery" model is alive and well.
> We happily embrace Burke's peerage in Wikidata and we balk at the fact that
> covering science takes resources away from pet projects.
>
> You tell me to be constructive and here I lay out what the situation is.
> How can you be constructive as our movement does not support science, the
> people who need our information most are disenfranchised because we do not
> cover them, support them in an equal manner.
> Thanks,
>
>
> On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 04:31, effe iets anders 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Gerard,
> >
> > It would be great if you could keep a slightly more constructive tone in
> > your messages. On one hand, you seem genuinely interested to help access
> to
> > free knowledge in Africa, but in your second email, you seem to jump
> (after
> > one response) 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research about the effects of its demise?

[Peter Southwood]

Gerhard,
I am also interested in what the impact of Wikipedia Zero was, but it is not 
obvious to me how it would be measured. 
The board members are unlikely to have personally researched this, but might 
know if there is or was a project and if so what they are or were trying to 
measure. Equally, someone from WMF might be able to report on what has been or 
is being done in this regard. It is also possible that nothing has been done, 
or someone who does not read this list is working on it.
If anyone reads this and can enlighten us, either to whether it is an ongoing 
project, has been done and the information is available somewhere, or nobody is 
known to be working on it, please let us know.
Anyone who has ideas on how it could be measured or why it can't is also 
welcome to comment.
Cheers,
Peter


-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: 01 December 2019 08:19
To: Lodewijk Gelauf; Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research 
about the effects of its demise?

Lodewijk,
What I asked for is: do we understand what the impact was of the Wikipedia
Zero project. In the answer of James, a board member of the WMF someone who
could know, there is nothing that answers that question. All the answer
does is deflect the question to something else. A notion that it is "not
that bad because we have these other things". These things we had before
Wikipedia Zero, they are not Wikipedia and they do not scale.

What I have noticed is that once consensus has been reached, we do not want
to be confronted with the consequences of our actions. Wikipedia Zero has
damaged our outreach and what the BBC info reminds us of is that Internet,
the cost of Internet, is not comparable in Africa with what we are used to.
It means that we no longer reach the girls and boys in Soweto as we showed
in our film clip at the Erasmus award.

We do not cover Africa properly, we do not need to seek consensus about
this, that is easily to be shown. Our focus on outreach is in America, then
Europe, then the rest of the world and there is Africa. From the moment we
stopped Wikipedia Zero, we have invested heavily in infrastructure in
Africa, the organisational presence in the USA is now such that it rivals
Wikimania and is used as an excuse by some to even dismantle Wikimania. As
an organisation, a movement the "centre periphery" model is alive and well.
We happily embrace Burke's peerage in Wikidata and we balk at the fact that
covering science takes resources away from pet projects.

You tell me to be constructive and here I lay out what the situation is.
How can you be constructive as our movement does not support science, the
people who need our information most are disenfranchised because we do not
cover them, support them in an equal manner.
Thanks,


On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 04:31, effe iets anders 
wrote:

> Hi Gerard,
>
> It would be great if you could keep a slightly more constructive tone in
> your messages. On one hand, you seem genuinely interested to help access to
> free knowledge in Africa, but in your second email, you seem to jump (after
> one response) to conclusions already. If you like to get real responses to
> your emails, you may want to try a more constructive attitude. For me, it
> is at least sufficiently offputting to disengage (I removed the rest of my
> response/suggestions).
>
> -- Lodewijk
>
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 9:34 PM Gerard Meijssen  >
> wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > Kiwix and off line Wikipedia did exist at the start of Wikipedia Zero.
> It
> > is great that you brought some to Africa but you do not scale and it is
> not
> > a study into the effects of what the effects are of terminating Wikipedia
> > Zero.
>
>
> > No idea what "Starlink"  is
>
>
> https://lmgtfy.com/?q=starlink=l
>
>
> > but it is not a reality for a few more years..
> > It sounds like we have thrown all these kids under the bus but hey, we
> have
> > plan. A plan/action is having our own caches in Africa and providing edit
> > and read capabilities for all who care to use it... and then measure the
> > extend it helps us recover from our Wikipedia Zero public.
> > Thanks,
> >GerardM
> >
> > On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 at 02:48, James Heilman  wrote:
> >
> > > We have offline Wikipedia. I have shipped devices to Kinshasa, and
> > > they arrived :-)
> > >
> > > Of course they do not at all address the need for two way
> communication.
> > >
> > > I am hoping Starlink will help when it comes online in a few years.
> > >
> > > James
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 12:19 AM Gerard Meijssen
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > The BBC shows how dramatically expensive internet is in Africa.. For
> in
> > > my
> > > > opinion local political reasons Wikipedia Zero has terminated. That
> is
> > ok
> > > > up to a point; the point being that we understand the consequences
> from
> > > > this action.
> > > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research about the effects of its demise?

[Fæ]

On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 11:09, Gerard Meijssen  wrote:
...
> What I have noticed is that once consensus has been reached, we do not want
> to be confronted with the consequences of our actions. Wikipedia Zero has
> damaged our outreach and what the BBC info reminds us of is that Internet,
> the cost of Internet, is not comparable in Africa with what we are used to.
> It means that we no longer reach the girls and boys in Soweto as we showed
> in our film clip at the Erasmus award.
...

The disconnect between what matters and the different realities we
live in is easy to see when a fundraising appeal for the WMF was based
on virtual charity tin rattling to raise $3 being the "price of a
coffee".[1] For some, $3 pays for our Sunday lunch.

We should accept that it is impossibly hard for Wikimedia Foundation
employees to take to heart that San Francisco or the Trump dominated
America is not the "real world", and the ever thin rationales to keep
on funding the WMF head office there, rather than relocating to
anywhere else in the world that would in every practical way be run at
half the cost has been a jarring reminder. The "Wikimedia Community"
has never been the Wikimedia Foundation, and yet the Wikimedia
Community is failing when it leaves decisions like Wikipedia Zero to
be created and cancelled entirely under the authority of the Wikimedia
Foundation.

In the long term, the Foundation does not bear the responsibility for
these actions, it is us. It is up to us to find better and more
transparent ways to govern the operational business that acts in our
name and which left to its own devices will become less transparent
every year, and less accountable for why high budget and
staff/contractor growth is a "good" thing when money for volunteer
activities flatlines.

Link
1. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oversized_donation_notice.png

Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
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,