[Wikimedia-l] Requesting feedback about vandalism detection tools

2020-01-14 Thread Sydney Poore
Hello all,

The Wikimedia Foundation Anti-Harassment Tools team has put out some ideas
on a project page on Meta about tools we can build to help improve
vandalism detection and mitigation on Wikimedia projects. We want your help
with brainstorming on these ideas. What are some costs, benefits and risks
we might be overlooking? How can we improve upon these ideas? What sounds
exciting, what sounds sub-optimal? We want to hear all your thoughts.
Please leave comments on the talk page.

Or if you would like to give feedback privately by email, you can contact
me or Niharika (niharika[image: (_AT_)]wikimedia.org.)

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IP_Editing:_Privacy_Enhancement_and_Abuse_Mitigation/Improving_tools

Regards,
Sydney
-
Sydney Poore (she/her)
Strategist, socio-technical
Wikimedia Foundation
Trust and Safety team;
Anti-harassment tools team
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Recommendations and community conversations launching next week

2020-01-14 Thread Kaarel Vaidla
Hi everyone,

Thank you for your feedback regarding the community conversations process
and your care for doing it in the right way! It is truly appreciated.

I am happy to share a couple of points from the design perspective:

   - The movement strategy recommendations are, as some of you have noted,
   the product of lengthy consultation and consideration.
   - The goal of *this* round of conversations is to share the
   recommendations that came out of working group discussions and
   consultations with a wide range of communities. We ask for input on the
   recommendations to help the Board identify which may present challenges or
   create opportunities - in general, how people think they and their
   community would be affected by the prescribed changes. We hope that a
   transparent and honest conversation will happen so that this information is
   well understood.
   - The main discussions about the recommendations would need to happen in
   the first 4 weeks of conversations, which should be enough to convey
   essential viewpoints and provide context to create a good understanding
   around them.
   - We will start pulling together and structuring feedback as soon as the
   conversations start. This includes translations and summaries. This means
   that the 1 week break will be used for finalizing the community input
   report and not for creation of that report in its entirety.
   - The final week of conversations is planned for the review of that
   report so that we can make sure it accurately reflects the conversation.
   - The recommendations are meant to give an overall direction for moving
   forward. Implementation of these recommendations will need to happen in
   context, and so more specific discussions will be continued in the
   framework of implementation discussions.

I hope it makes sense, but am happy to hear any further thoughts and ideas
for improving the quality of the conversations ahead of us.

Best regards,
Kaarel


On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 9:47 PM Pine W  wrote:

> Hi Anders,
>
> I think that the original hope was that there would be community consensus
> around the recommendations from the strategy process. However, what I have
> heard so far leads me to think that the reception to the recommendations
> has been mixed.
>
> Neither the WMF Board nor the community are required to accept
> recommendations from the strategy organizers. I'm not trying to say this in
> a combative or demoralizing way. As much as anyone, I had hoped that there
> would be consensus around the recommendations, but so far I do not get the
> sense that there widespread optimism about this process or the
> recommendations from it.
>
> 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,
> 



-- 
*Kaarel Vaidla*
Process Architect for
Wikimedia Movement Strategy
2030.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


[Wikimedia-l] You're invited: Wikipedia & Education User Group Open Meeting, Jan 28 at 18:00 UTC

2020-01-14 Thread LiAnna Davis
Happy New Year! The Wikipedia & Education User Group invites you to attend
our next Open Meeting via Zoom on *Tuesday, January 28, from 18:00 UTC to
19:30 UTC*.

As usual for our Open Meetings, we will provide updates from the Wikipedia
& Education board, then leave most of the time for our guest speakers. This
month, we're thrilled to have featured speakers from Israel and Ghana join
us to speak about Wikidata in education and outside-the-classroom social
impact from Wikimedia projects.

*Shani Evenstein Sigalov* is one of the leading innovators in the Wikimedia
& Education movement globally. In addition to her work as a researcher and
free knowledge advocate, Shani has taught groundbreaking courses on
Wikipedia and Wikidata, and she'll be presenting in this meeting on her
Wikidata work. A founding board member of the Wikipedia & Education User
Group, Shani resigned to take on even greater responsibility as a Wikimedia
Foundation Trustee. We're particularly excited to welcome her back as a
guest speaker!

*Andrews Lartey*, Project Manager for Growing Open and Eco-friendly Skills
for the Youth (GOES), will speak about how Wikimedia Projects can be used
outside the classroom to create social impact (Industry 4.0 skills
acquisition, circular economy and zero hunger). Andrews Lartey will present
on how GOES, through community school farms is creating social impact in
Ghana, the global effect and how various institutions and individuals can
support the project.

The meeting will be hosted via this link on January 28:
https://zoom.us/j/580872511
___
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: Recommendations and community conversations launching next week

2020-01-14 Thread Pine W
Hi Anders,

I think that the original hope was that there would be community consensus
around the recommendations from the strategy process. However, what I have
heard so far leads me to think that the reception to the recommendations
has been mixed.

Neither the WMF Board nor the community are required to accept
recommendations from the strategy organizers. I'm not trying to say this in
a combative or demoralizing way. As much as anyone, I had hoped that there
would be consensus around the recommendations, but so far I do not get the
sense that there widespread optimism about this process or the
recommendations from it.

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] Movement Strategy: Recommendations and community conversations launching next week

2020-01-14 Thread effe iets anders
Hi Nicole,

Last round (or was it the round before that?) there were some disappointed
community members because their feedback did not really spark any
conversation/exchange in a timely manner. I don't want to go back to focus
on things that coulda woulda shoulda been better though.

However, I did want to ask whether this time, you (plural) could commit to
provide timely engagement with the feedback. As I understand it, there will
be a single round of feedback (even if it is a six week round), before the
board votes on it. It would be nice if we could make that truly interactive
and most likely to result in improvements and addressing concerns, rather
than registering them.

Would you, for example, be able to commit to a three day response time to
constructive questions? Maybe even to actively entertain constructive
improvement suggestions?

I realize that there has been a long process within the walls of many
committees so far - and that no change will be easy to make without risking
the fabric. Your initial announcement sounds a bit like you're only
collecting 'feedback' which you will 'summarize' and report back - which
suggests that not much will happen with it unless we collectively make a
lot of noise.

I would much prefer an active and constructive conversation with the
committee members, which is open for actual change over a set of
petitions/protests.

Best,
Lodewijk

On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 9:38 AM Nicole Ebber 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> We’ve got lots of news to share from movement strategy: The first version
> of the movement strategy document is almost ready, and we’ll be starting a
> new round of community conversations.
>
> == First version of the movement strategy document coming next week ==
> The writers have been hard at work developing the first version of the
> movement strategy document. A key part of this has been turning the 89
> recommendations produced by the nine working groups into one coherent set
> and consolidating the work into 13 recommendations. Alongside this, the
> document also features principles that guide the recommendations and a
> narrative of change that summarizes how the recommendations fit together
> and contribute to helping our Movement align with our strategic direction.
>
> There has been a high level of activity in the last few weeks, both by the
> writers and the community strategy liaisons, to create a set of
> recommendations that encompasses the work of the working groups and the
> broad community input received throughout the process. They’ve gone above
> and beyond what was asked of them, and I would like to thank them
> wholeheartedly for the huge effort they’ve invested into this work and for
> their inspiring dedication to making this happen.
>
> == Community conversations begin next week ==
> A new round of community conversations around this document will begin next
> week. We encourage people from across our Movement – members of online
> communities, affiliates, boards, WMF staff – to review the recommendations
> and share what these might mean for their community, organization, or
> context. With this round, we are looking to come to a common understanding
> that the recommendations enable us to move forward in our strategic
> direction.
>
> Conversations will be held on Meta [1], on various language wikis, on
> social media, and on your community’s other preferred channels. They will
> run until the first week of March. After that, the core team will take one
> week to summarize all community input and reflect it back in a short,
> public report. The community will then have one week to suggest changes to
> the posted summary so that it accurately reflects their viewpoints.
> Community Strategy Liaisons will help facilitate conversations in Arabic,
> French, German, Hindi, Portuguese, and Spanish. There will also be targeted
> support for English speaking communities. Finally, Strategy Liaisons from
> affiliates and online language communities will also receive support for
> facilitating conversations on their own channels.
>
> If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out. Looking forward
> to hearing from you soon.
>
> Best wishes,
> Nicole
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
>
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Leiterin Internationale Beziehungen
> 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.
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Recommendations and community conversations launching next week

2020-01-14 Thread Anders Wennersten
The people who has written the forthcoming recommendations, have been 
engaged for around two years, and they have spend manmonths of dedicated 
work.


It is not realistic to believe that an outsider (as we others now are) 
can substantially change any of the recommendations. We can though give 
comments based on our different backgrounds. And one or two aspect 
perhaps have such strong weight that it will be of interest for the 
Board to take in when deciding the strategy


Perhaps it is the word "conversation" that is confusing, it is more 
about "asking for comments" as I see it.


And one week to summarise the comment and one week to get feedback to 
this summary could be enough, as an actually discussion of the 
recommendation content as such is not a feasible considering the total 
process


Anders

Den 2020-01-14 kl. 11:03, skrev Paul J. Weiss:

I share the time concerns that Pine and Todd addressed. But my larger
concern is about the purpose of this next community conversation. You say
that the core team will summarize the community input, and then the
community will have a week to "suggest changes to the posted summary so
that it accurately reflects their viewpoints". So it seems that while
WMF wants to know how the community feels about the upcoming strategy
document, it is not giving the community any say, at this point in the
process, of the content of that document. So then why bother having another
community conversation at this juncture? Why take up so much community time
to develop responses to a document that will a priori not change based on
those responses? That seems to be a textbook case of how to get
dissatisfaction and disillusionment. Although I would prefer for the
community to still have a say in things, if the sense is that the document
really is done, maybe it should just be sent to the BOD now, saving 8 or
more weeks of time.  If the community conversation does go ahead, I think
it is very important to make it very clear what will be and won't be done
with the responses, allowing community members to make informed decisions
about how much time and effort to devote to the conversation. It took a
couple of read-throughs for me to realize that there will be a response
summary and suggestions to that document, but no further round of revision.

Thanks,
Paul


At 2020-01-13  11:46 p, you wrote:

I would tend to agree. This process has been ongoing for many months now,
and the community raised substantial concerns about the initial proposals.
Whether deliberate or not, allowing only a week for discussion of the final
product seems an attempt to ram it through. Surely longer than a week can
be allowed for discussion of such a critical item. Todd On Mon, Jan 13,
2020 at 11:25 PM Pine W  wrote: > Hi Nicole, > > After
reading this email, and taking into consideration a discussion that >
happened during the January online meeting of United States Wikimedians, I

feel that the timeline here is aggressive and likely to result in

problems. > In particular, giving the core team one week to review feedback
and giving > the community one week to review the core team's summary seem
risky at > best, even if everyone is communicating in English. When taking
into > account the need for translations,my guess is that one week is an >
impossibly short timeframe for quality work in these phases of the strategy

process. > > I suggesting adding at least one more week to the timeframe

for the core > team to review feedback including translations of comments,
and at least > three more weeks for conversations with the community
regarding the core > team's summary. > > I am concerned that this process
may be heading toward a rushed and chaotic > finish. > > 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, > <
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
>
___ Wikimedia-l mailing list,
guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to:
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Recommendations and community conversations launching next week

2020-01-14 Thread Paul J. Weiss
I share the time concerns that Pine and Todd addressed. But my larger
concern is about the purpose of this next community conversation. You say
that the core team will summarize the community input, and then the
community will have a week to "suggest changes to the posted summary so
that it accurately reflects their viewpoints". So it seems that while
WMF wants to know how the community feels about the upcoming strategy
document, it is not giving the community any say, at this point in the
process, of the content of that document. So then why bother having another
community conversation at this juncture? Why take up so much community time
to develop responses to a document that will a priori not change based on
those responses? That seems to be a textbook case of how to get
dissatisfaction and disillusionment. Although I would prefer for the
community to still have a say in things, if the sense is that the document
really is done, maybe it should just be sent to the BOD now, saving 8 or
more weeks of time.  If the community conversation does go ahead, I think
it is very important to make it very clear what will be and won't be done
with the responses, allowing community members to make informed decisions
about how much time and effort to devote to the conversation. It took a
couple of read-throughs for me to realize that there will be a response
summary and suggestions to that document, but no further round of revision.

Thanks,
Paul


At 2020-01-13  11:46 p, you wrote:

I would tend to agree. This process has been ongoing for many months now,
and the community raised substantial concerns about the initial proposals.
Whether deliberate or not, allowing only a week for discussion of the final
product seems an attempt to ram it through. Surely longer than a week can
be allowed for discussion of such a critical item. Todd On Mon, Jan 13,
2020 at 11:25 PM Pine W  wrote: > Hi Nicole, > > After
reading this email, and taking into consideration a discussion that >
happened during the January online meeting of United States Wikimedians, I
> feel that the timeline here is aggressive and likely to result in
problems. > In particular, giving the core team one week to review feedback
and giving > the community one week to review the core team's summary seem
risky at > best, even if everyone is communicating in English. When taking
into > account the need for translations,my guess is that one week is an >
impossibly short timeframe for quality work in these phases of the strategy
> process. > > I suggesting adding at least one more week to the timeframe
for the core > team to review feedback including translations of comments,
and at least > three more weeks for conversations with the community
regarding the core > team's summary. > > I am concerned that this process
may be heading toward a rushed and chaotic > finish. > > 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, > <
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
>
___ Wikimedia-l mailing list,
guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to:
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Recommendations and community conversations launching next week

2020-01-14 Thread Alice Wiegand
I understand that the community conversation is planned to be conducted for 
around the next 6 weeks, it’s the discussion of the summary of that, which is 
planned for one week.

Alice.

> Am 14.01.2020 um 08:47 schrieb Todd Allen :
> 
> Surely longer than a week can
> be allowed for discussion of such a critical item.

___
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,