[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

of course the Community tech team cant fix 900 existing issues, nor can it make a new team. The whole point about the wishlist is to focus on tools the community needs. The current reality is that instead of making new tools the Community really needs the tools made during previous wishlsts

[Wikimedia-l] Re: The Wikipedia Library: Accessing free reliable sources is now easier than ever

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 11:25 AM Samuel Klein wrote: > --> collab w/ a free-content annotation + summarization service Strong +1. Summarization of proprietary sources helps to further broaden access to the facts stated therein (summarization of free sources is, of course, useful as well!). I'm

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

> Perhaps we can also have community discussion and !voting on the larger suggestions, to help Wikimedia at large to prioritize (or reflect on why tackling a popular set of challenges is hard to focus on). This seems like a useful enough list to want to come out with a rough ordering of the

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

Perhaps we can also have community discussion and !voting on the larger suggestions, to help Wikimedia at large to prioritize (or reflect on why tackling a popular set of challenges is hard to focus on). This seems like a useful enough list to want to come out with a rough ordering of the

[Wikimedia-l] Re: The Wikipedia Library: Accessing free reliable sources is now easier than ever

Some practical things that could help expand access to referenced sources: --> collab w/ OA Works on an OAButton / equivalent integration (for works where the author can make it more open) --> collab w/ a free-content annotation + summarization service (like the

[Wikimedia-l] Re: The Wikipedia Library: Accessing free reliable sources is now easier than ever

I think it's something to bear in mind. Yay, more information on Wikipedia, and more information freely available to the world - but at the same time we tell our readers to use the references to verify the information, which they can't do if it's not openly available. I think the best thing

[Wikimedia-l] Re: The Wikipedia Library: Accessing free reliable sources is now easier than ever

I understand where you are coming from Mike, but I'm a bit stumped by it at the same time. Do you apply the same logic to editors using expensive print books they happen to have access through to some sort of connection or other privilege? I often think about this in the opposite way, wrestling

[Wikimedia-l] Re: The Wikipedia Library: Accessing free reliable sources is now easier than ever

Hi all, While the Wikipedia Library is definitely great at providing editors resources to find more information to Wikipedia articles - it does also have the drawback that it makes it much harder for readers to verify that information. It can even cause problems for other editors who haven't

[Wikimedia-l] How to innovate in free knowledge: Mapping the movement's innovation capacity

Dear Wikimedians, Today I am excited to share a document [1] with you that I hope will help initiate the conversation around how to ‘innovate in free knowledge’. This document directly refers to recommendation 9 “Innovate in Free Knowledge” [2] of the Movement Strategy that calls for the

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Updates on the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines Review

Xeno, Question 1 - ratification failure Could you explain more clearly what happens if the ratification process fails to get 50% support? "If the majority of voters oppose the adoption of the guidelines as written, they will be asked which elements need to be changed and why"[1] gives no clue