Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gathering User Inputs for WikiCV Project

2017-12-17 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
I'd like to put a picture of me on such CV but even if this is voluntary that's 
usually the point when 4 or 5 users (mostly old-timers) write something like 
"we are not facebook" (or similar) and say they agree with themselves.
I wish I could do it myself, repeating standardized sentences as a social 
thing, stupid me that I try to do new things... :D But this time I also repeat 
myself, I'd like to put my picture on that. And the infobox of the languages I 
know. And make it available as a transcluded content from my meta user page and 
from there to all the wikipedia I don't have a user page, maybe with key title 
and description translated in their language. Because it would be nice that if 
I want to do something like that I could do it, especially if I am not the only 
one.
I am quite sure that the people who disagree will survive the cultural shock 
and write "we are not facebook"  in another discussion with no loss of their 
perceived social role. 
Alessandr
 

Il Domenica 17 Dicembre 2017 20:12, Megha Sharma 
 ha scritto:
 

 Hi all,

I'm an Outreachy  intern and as a part of
the internship, I'm working on a project - WikiCV
.

Through this project we (my mentors - Gergő Tisza and Stephen LaPorte and
I) want to create a contribution summarizing tool which (unlike the
existing ones that focus on statistics and are hard to interpret for
someone not familiar with Wikipedia editing) highlights contributions in an
easy-to-understand manner.

I'm writing this to gather inputs from prospective users of this tool, that
is all the Wikipedia editors!

Basically I want to understand what all things would you like to see in a
tool like this? Or what all would you write in your Wikipedia CV?

You can give in your inputs through mail (I'd be more than happy to get one
:)) or fill out this form . My work
is largely dependent on your inputs, so please pour in your comments/views.
Your help will be quite appreciated!

Eagerly waiting for your inputs :)
Thanks,
Megha Sharma
___
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] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-07 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
Hi,
I usually push diversity in any situation but only after I got a core quality 
group of volunteer. the first degree of diversity is the diversity based on 
wiki activity, IMHO.. I care about the rest and I try to be honest if I go in 
that direction and why I do that. If anyone is offended for something, that 
happens even if you do your best, in my experience being clear helps on the 
long term.
This a real documented example, if you want to read: 
http://www.wikisciencecompetition.org/people/ . For WSC2017 it was mostly my 
job to find these profiles, 90% of them. I did my best to find motivated jury 
members and, as a first step, I searched for expert wikimedians based on their 
CV on the profiles and their activities. My goal was to be balanced per topic, 
than per geographical area (language mostly, some description in English are 
poor), than maybe per gender, in that order. The evaluation of scientific 
images require expertise, that's the core business. I shared my experience 
here: 
http://www.wikisciencecompetition.org/2017/11/16/how-was-the-jury-for-wiki-science-competition-2017-formed/
In any case, I couldn't know who these people really were sometimes, I didn't 
care at the first step. You know where they work, but they could be foreigners. 
You know their enwikipedia activity (I need people with some decent English 
fluency, so I started there and in any case I found what I needed) but 
sometimes that does not reveal a lot, and English descriptions are 
gender-neutral. So even if it wasn't planned I got some unbalance, and I only 
discovered during the set up of the page that a certain nickname was a blond 
guy and not a Arab or Chinese girl. I did my best to "fix it" at that point but 
mostly because when you miss some positions and you look for additional 3-4 
names it's no big difference to look here or there. But still, the first search 
was based on their expertise. And they all kew that. 

I think it was quite balanced in the end, taking care of the issue but not 
ranking it more critical than the scientific quality of the profiles. Plus. I 
told some of the female jurors that they could be "promoted" to the main jury 
for next edition but that's because they deserve it.
So, in the end  I look also for "girls" and "exotic profiles", I admit that, 
but this was not my main goal, and it was never more important that the 
quality. So at least these people knew that they were part of a team, that they 
were there to share their expertise, not being displayed as a "token".
I think it's more easy and relaxed if you always stick to the content and the 
quality as a first step, IMHO. if you want the movement to grow roots you need 
real people, motivated people, and real sharing. I really hope they will set up 
real national challenges next time, thanks to the expertise we shared.
Alessandro







Il Lunedì 7 Maggio 2018 14:33, Andy Mabbett  ha 
scritto:
 

 On 7 May 2018 at 05:10, Romaine Wiki  wrote:

> I recently received an e-mail
> from a user in the Wikimedia movement who has (temporarily?) stopped
> contributing as she is not happy with a specific aspect of the atmosphere
> in Wikimedia.

> She was invited to participate in a Wikimedia activity, because:
> 1. she is a woman
> 2. she is from a minority
> 3. she is from an area in the world with much less editors (compared to
> Europe/US)
>
> and perhaps also because her colour of her skin is a bit different then
> mine (Caucasian).

I'm sorry to hear that a contributor feels unable to continue because of this.

In order to examine what improvements we can make, can you tell us -
without breeching confidentiality - how this approach was made, and
what exactly was said?

-- 
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, 


   
___
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] Welcome messages at arwiki

2017-12-30 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
What are the good reason to be poaranoid? The only reason I ever heard is "is 
making me waste time", usually expressed wasting more time.
BTW, after years of SUL most of the old time users have received a lot of 
welcome messages and they receive usually two new ones per year, no more in my 
experience. I made some test with newbies and it does not see more different, 
when they one open some wikis they might receive a message  (and if they are 
not used to other culture, that does not happen a lot of time, I suppose) . 
I can think of dozens of things in my life that spam me more, and make me more 
"paranoid". Yesterday I search a stupid thing and I found a related ad in my 
youtube after 5 minutes, I told on a chat app that I had the flue and I got a 
flu treatment opening a web page... spent more time being irritated by these 
facts, this might have a good impact on everybody's life. 
For wikimedia, just ask to add a link to a meta page where is written down 
which messages are received via bot simply after log in, so it is super 
transparent how it works and you learn how the build up of the SUL log in 
works. Put a link to CentralAuth too.
 

Il Sabato 30 Dicembre 2017 11:28, Peter Southwood 
 ha scritto:
 

 Hi Ting, You make a fair point about culture, but the impression I got is that 
the welcomes were being sent to people who were not intentionally editing the 
arwiki, or aware that they were doing so, which makes this a cultural thing 
imposed on people who were not aware of it or expecting it, and who did not 
have a way to avoid it even if they had known it might happen, which is a bit 
beyond local culture. For myself I am not bothered by messages from other 
Wikis, even if I can't read them. I am used to it, but some people are more 
paranoid than me, sometimes for good reasons. Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Ting Chen
Sent: 30 December 2017 11:38
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Welcome messages at arwiki

Hello Amir,


I think what you are questioning is right. And it is necessary to ask such 
questions. In my day job it is my duty to ask and discuss such questions with 
my customers.


But, with the time I sort of see that these pure utilitarian questions are not 
the only questions that we need to consider. I start to ask questions that are 
beyond or below (according to the perspective) these pure utilitarian 
questions. I find the answer Meno25 gave on Meta a very interesting one in this 
respect. In his answer he was not arguing about if the welcome-bot is useful or 
meaningful. He said it is their custom to do so. What he is pointing to is 
culture. See, why do we hug, shake hands, nod, or rub noses, or kiss? From a 
pure utilitarian point of view these behaviors are not only meaningless, they 
are even potentially dangerous for our health. If we just want to meet other 
people and talk to them why do we not just directly talk about what we want to 
talk about and make it behind us?


And this is why in my opinion it is good that every project has its own way to 
handle welcome message: Because the welcome message is not only a utilitarian 
thing, there is culture beyond or below it. There is culture encompassed from 
the societies where the project community is embedded in and there is culture 
that was created and developed by the project community.


This is why in my opinion as long as the message is not malicious how every 
community handles this is their own thing.


Greetings

Ting



Am 30.12.2017 um 09:29 schrieb Amir E. Aharoni:
> It's a good opportunity to step back and discuss a little something.
>
> The existence of pretty much every bot is a reason to think of a missing
> feature in the site's software. The same goes for templates and gadgets.
>
> Why do many wikis have custom welcome templates and bots that send them?
> The intuitive answer is "to send a personal message to a new user", but if
> it's done by a bot, it's already not personal. What does the bot actually
> automate? The placement of a template? But what is the actual purpose of
> the template?
>
> Is it to say "hello and welcome"? The notifications feature already does it
> nicely.
>
> To send people a list of useful links? I heard many times that new users
> actually do find them useful, and it's a good thing. But it's nevertheless
> an anecdotal claim, and smarter questions should be asked:
> * How many people actually read these messages?
> * Are all the links useful? Do people actually click them?
> * Could some be removed? Could some be added?
> * Why is it different in every project? Could at least some parts be reused
> across languages in a robust and properly localizable manner?
> * Is the talk page really a good place to do this?
> * How useful is it for people for people who come from another language and
> have an account auto-created?
>
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Welcome messages at arwiki

2018-01-25 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
you are not "exposing the user unknowingly visiting the site" with the bot 
itself...when you visit the site you are integrated in the SUL, it's public 
information since ages. The fact that a bot takes care of it or a human being 
leaves a message does not tell you a lot more. Sometimes on certain wiki 
welcome messages are delivered sometimes they are not. Sometimes immediately, 
sometimes later. It's a very fragmented situation so the bot tells you 
basically nothing per se, it simple makes some people aware that the 
information of visiting a site exists and it is public. 
So the question is not about the bot, the question is if when you do 
thishttps://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ACentralAuth=Alexmar983
and you can read that it's public that for example I was attached on fawiki on 
21:41, 11 April 2012, which is basically when I visited it the first time. 
Although not strictly, I could have visited it and the system having problem 
and log me out (that also happen) so technically this is not even true 
sometimes... But even if it was precise, is the public knowledge of this 
information really a threat to my privacy? or it is justing many of the things 
I implicitly agree when I make an account?
The "violation of privacy" of such information, it's not even comparable with 
dozen of other things in your life. But seriously if THIS is a problem and had 
to be "put secret" than I'd expect to be informed when a check user look at my 
data. You know a few group of people decide when it's right or wrong to 
look at my personal data and not informing me when they do it probably because 
they found nothing (but they have such information in their hand now, don't 
they? Shouldn't I generic user be informed about it?), that's not very nice for 
the privacy of anyone. So the core point is not that I receive a message once a 
year that makes me aware that the SUL information exist, but that I don't 
receive a lot of other messages that I should receiving about who's looking at 
many others of my personal data.
Privacy is a serious matter. I expect RfC for things that have impact. Now 
imagine that I go to people that are worried and tell them the nobody really 
cares that they are not informed when someone look inside their provider data 
(because put in the end of a small group of people is "enough") or that the 
disaggregated information of CU activity is not public for the majority of 
platforms... but someone cares so much if they receive a welcoming message by 
bot when they visit a platform for the first time. I am quite sure that the 
users I know will not be impressed. 

Il Venerdì 26 Gennaio 2018 0:27, John Erling Blad  ha 
scritto:
 

 I can't see that T42006 is relevant in this case. It is about abusive use
of a bot, not about creation of the central account in itself.

The existence of a central account leads to creation of the local account.
This is probably acceptable. Then this may lead to the abusiv behavior, ie
exposing the user unknowingly visiting the site. This is probably not
intended and not acceptable.

I wonder if the solution is to filter down the new users to real
contributors, that would be pretty simple

Den tor. 25. jan. 2018, 22.55 skrev Pine W :

> Joe,
>
> I believe that the issue of a potential privacy violation was first raised
> on this list on December 30th, and I first emailed WMF Legal about this
> issue on January 1st. Keeping in mind that the issue involves potential
> privacy violations, I think that it's reasonable to think that this issue
> should have been reviewed within days, not weeks. I disagree with the
> statement that "A subsequent review is clearly going to be a low priority
> task as I am sure you can understand Pine." If anything, I think that the
> situation is clear to the contrary and it should have been reviewed within
> days.
>
> For me, an RfC about this matter would be for the purposes of (1)
> encouraging WMF to give more attention to this matter, (2) attempting to
> establish community consensus about whether the matters being raised here
> involve privacy violations, and (3) what should be done, if anything.
> Personally, I think that the status quo does involve privacy violations and
> that there should be changes. Whether that view is shared by others is
> something that the RfC would attempt to measure.
>
> In this circumstance I consider RfC to be similar to a ballot measure, and
> I think that it's appropriate for me to say that if I think that there are
> problems then I may use tools that are available to me to attempt to
> address them, preferably with WMF's cooperation, but without WMF"s
> cooperation if necessary and if possible.
>
> John,
>
> A previous discussion about the privacy issues occurred in
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T42006. I received a new email from WMF
> Legal in which they affirmed their department's 2012 view on this matter.
> The most recent 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Welcome messages at arwiki

2018-01-25 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
i think many people might not understand what is the real problem here with 
this aspect in the general framework. I might make a brutal simplification, of 
course.
In any case, if you manage to make the moment when a logged-in user is 
connected to a platform for the first time a secret, that basically do not have 
a big impact on anything most of the people do, so I can probably tell you to 
go on. What would be the effect? The info will disappear from the SUL table or 
something like that. Whatever.
But I guess, cynically, that a "non-solution" of "don't use the bot" is much 
more fitting for the "social ecosystem" and the way it evolves on wiki 
platforms. This way you did not address a higher level aspect of the issue, you 
remove the global feeling of alert down a notch and you can act in any case as 
if you did something in that direction. Also, it makes no solid precedent when 
future real privacy problem are discussed. 
That's why asking to remove the info completely, from my point of view, it's 
even slightly better.  At least next time we discuss privacy in other matter I 
have a strong precedent case to cite. I mean... if people make a fuzz about 
this, I expect they really care about other things. I could ping all the 
favorable to such information removal one by one in a future RfC.
Alex 

Il Venerdì 26 Gennaio 2018 3:37, John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com> ha 
scritto:
 

 Fine! If people refuse the easy way out, then create an Rfc, and start the 
process to make creation of new user accounts non-public information.
Den fre. 26. jan. 2018, 03.04 skrev Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
<wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>:

you are not "exposing the user unknowingly visiting the site" with the bot 
itself...when you visit the site you are integrated in the SUL, it's public 
information since ages. The fact that a bot takes care of it or a human being 
leaves a message does not tell you a lot more. Sometimes on certain wiki 
welcome messages are delivered sometimes they are not. Sometimes immediately, 
sometimes later. It's a very fragmented situation so the bot tells you 
basically nothing per se, it simple makes some people aware that the 
information of visiting a site exists and it is public. 
So the question is not about the bot, the question is if when you do 
thishttps://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ACentralAuth=Alexmar983
and you can read that it's public that for example I was attached on fawiki on 
21:41, 11 April 2012, which is basically when I visited it the first time. 
Although not strictly, I could have visited it and the system having problem 
and log me out (that also happen) so technically this is not even true 
sometimes... But even if it was precise, is the public knowledge of this 
information really a threat to my privacy? or it is justing many of the things 
I implicitly agree when I make an account?
The "violation of privacy" of such information, it's not even comparable with 
dozen of other things in your life. But seriously if THIS is a problem and had 
to be "put secret" than I'd expect to be informed when a check user look at my 
data. You know a few group of people decide when it's right or wrong to 
look at my personal data and not informing me when they do it probably because 
they found nothing (but they have such information in their hand now, don't 
they? Shouldn't I generic user be informed about it?), that's not very nice for 
the privacy of anyone. So the core point is not that I receive a message once a 
year that makes me aware that the SUL information exist, but that I don't 
receive a lot of other messages that I should receiving about who's looking at 
many others of my personal data.
Privacy is a serious matter. I expect RfC for things that have impact. Now 
imagine that I go to people that are worried and tell them the nobody really 
cares that they are not informed when someone look inside their provider data 
(because put in the end of a small group of people is "enough") or that the 
disaggregated information of CU activity is not public for the majority of 
platforms... but someone cares so much if they receive a welcoming message by 
bot when they visit a platform for the first time. I am quite sure that the 
users I know will not be impressed.

    Il Venerdì 26 Gennaio 2018 0:27, John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com> ha 
scritto:


 I can't see that T42006 is relevant in this case. It is about abusive use
of a bot, not about creation of the central account in itself.

The existence of a central account leads to creation of the local account.
This is probably acceptable. Then this may lead to the abusiv behavior, ie
exposing the user unknowingly visiting the site. This is probably not
intended and not acceptable.

I wonder if the solution is to filter down the new users to real
contributors, that would be pretty simple

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Starting School Activity: Possible Support and Tips

2018-02-22 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
Do you need some contacts of local expert wikimedians too? It's a mail from 
Singapore, right?
I can show you how to contact them on their user talk pages if you are a total 
newbie. Some of them you can find listed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedians_in_Singapore
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Singapore

but they might not be updated.
Good luck,A.M. 

Il Giovedì 22 Febbraio 2018 11:08, Srishti Sethi  ha 
scritto:
 

 Hello Zubin,

Glad to hear your interest in starting an activity around Wikimedia
projects at your high school!

We recommend developers looking to contribute code to our projects to start
with following our New Developers guide [1]. This guide contains
information on how to choose a project, list of beginner-friendly projects
and bugs, additional resources, outreach programs, and how to contribute in
non-technical areas.

We also have documentation of a workshop [2] we ran for high school
students around Wikimedia and Google Code-in, that you might find useful.

If you have a specific request for support from us, feel free to reach out
to me personally or come and chat with our team members on IRC at
#wikimedia-devrel.

Cheers,
Srishti

[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/New_Developers
[2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Google_Code-in/Workshop_Materials


On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 5:35 AM, Zubin JAIN 
wrote:

> Hi,
> I'm trying to start a new school activity at my high school geared towards
> contributing to Wikimedia projects and was wondering what support is
> available?
> Sincerely,
> Zubin Jain
> ___
> 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,
> 




-- 
Srishti Sethi
Developer Advocate
Technical Collaboration team
Wikimedia Foundation

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:SSethi_(WMF)
___
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] Welcome messages at arwiki

2017-12-29 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
Some reactions to welcome bot or welcomes are a little bit "exaggerated" 
sometimes. it's just a small red color spot in a corner. Two seconds to process 
it, more time to complain about it.
I study user activities and sometimes I leave welcome messages here and there. 
99.5% of the time is because they have some sort of activities on the platform. 
it happened to me one or two times per year that some users deleted a welcome 
message I have left here or there. A scenario that occurred more than once is 
wikidata and old-term users that have some issues with the fact that even if 
they don't want to be part to it, they do have edits indirectly on such 
platform. Sometimes they spent more time writing in the object why they are 
deleting it that simply ignoring it. 
I stick to the fact that with "side" platforms 95% of the users don't care, 4% 
reply interested or thank for the welcome or similar, and 1% (or less) have 
issues. Such 1% are mostly long term or established users. In the general 
framework, I think that leaving such templates from real users to people with 
some activities is potentially useful, at least to establish a connection.
I also have no direct experience of anyone complaining about bot messages on 
other "side" platforms, I know about users discovering less "common" wiki such 
as some of the "Asian" ones, but they are kinda amused. Such bot welcome 
message arrives when you do something to log in, such as opening one of their 
articles for example. Or maybe you use a computer when someone else have opened 
them recently.
We can write a meta policy to leave welcome message only with people with 
edits, but in the end someone could point out that informing people before they 
do anything if they actually entered the platform is a good strategy (why wait 
they have to do something? maybe they need help). On some wiki you get the 
message as soon as you log in, for example frwiki if I remember with a test 
from a friend. Why is that different?
The core issue is to be sure that the welcome message has a part in one or two 
main world languages, and a link to the embassy page. That's the occasion to 
make it smarter not to remove it totally, we have the expertise to do that. For 
example you leave the en-N welcome message to people who have edits on 
enwikipedia and so on. 

Alessandro


 

Il Venerdì 29 Dicembre 2017 10:27, K. Peachey  ha 
scritto:
 

 Have you asked the user how the finding the users?
Have you considered other steps than just jumping to mailing list?
Where are the complaints from the other users to show this is a long
running issue?

On 29 December 2017 at 19:20, John Erling Blad  wrote:
> Users on other projects are complaining about the welcome messages at
> arwiki. A bot at that project are welcoming people that has no activity at
> that project at all. The bot operator claims the activity is valid, but I
> can't see that this is a well-behaving bot at all.[1]
>
> I suspect the bot is welcoming every user it can find, but using user
> accounts from central login and not users that has local contributions at
> arwiki.
>
> Can someone shut down the bot until the user fix the spam problem.
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Meno25#Welcome_messages
> ___
> 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] Curating YOUR Wikipedia

2018-07-15 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
yes, it is an old issue, what you say it's right but I would be more optimistic.
To summarize my view (I couls send you more information privately)

1. Wikidata largely reflected what Wikipedia indicated, and that was not the 
right way to make it grow, but that was also the past. At the moment, the 
reference of the content is increasing, the clean-up too. In some areas, 
wikidata items are also created before the wikipedia articles nowadays. 

2. new tools are great and will do a lot, but it's users who do the real 
tricks. You have to start to bring local users to wikidata, show them how it 
can be used (automatic infoboxes, fast creation of stubs, automatic lists, 
detecing missing images). They will start to fix the issues, curating their 
wikipedia, wikidata and also indirectly influence the other ones. 

3. IMHO, the wikidata ecosystem is not so bad, it could have more expert users 
with real knowledge of topics, but  commons with millions of automatically 
imported files, and tons of poorly described and uncategorized images faces a 
much worse perspective. You need more tools there than on wikidata, at the 
moment, if you want to keep some balanced workflow. What is really missing on 
wikidata are mostly active projects to coordinate and catalyze the ongoing 
efforts. This one 
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Ancient_Greece made 
miracles, for example. But I couldn't find one about peer-reviewed researchers 
or photographers to name a few, at least in the past months. Investing on this 
aspect would not change the final situation on wikidata (that will be positive 
for me), but it would speed up the process. it will also influence much more 
the content on local wikis because it will bring content-related users closer 
together and increase their wikidata literacy with lower effort.
4. In the end, even with a good high quality wikidata platform, there will 
always be communities that will not integrated in wikidata massively... but 
that's also a good thing for pluralism. You can't assume that a discrepancy is 
always a clue for a mistake (I am sure the examples of your experience are, of 
course), on the long term some of them are simply effects of gray areas that 
need to wait to be resolved even at the level of the sources. Insome fields, 
such as taxonomy, there is some confusion and asymmetric organization of the 
content and will never be solved easily. But in the other areas they probably 
will. 
Alex






Il Domenica 15 Luglio 2018 22:37, Gerard Meijssen 
 ha scritto:
 

 Hoi,
Wikidata is a reflection of all the Wikimedia projects, particularly the
Wikipedias. Both Wikidata and Wikipedia are secondary sources and when two
Wikipedias have opposing information on singular information, it is a cop
out to state both "opinions" on Wikidata and leave it at that.

Given that Wikidata largely reflects what a Wikipedia indicates, it is
important to curate such differences. The first thing to consider is are we
interested at all in knowing about "false facts" and then how we can
indicate differences to our editing and reading community.

I have been editing about Africa for a long time now and I find that the
content about Africa is woefully underdeveloped. Best Wikipedia practice
has it that cities and villages are linked to "administrative territorial
entities" like provinces and districts and I have added such relations from
primary to secondary entities. Adding such information to villages and
cities as well is too much for me. The basic principle is that I am being
bold in doing so. I do relate to existing items and I have curated a lot of
crap data so far. The result is that Wikidata in places differs
considerably from Wikipedias, particularly the English Wikipedia.

As topics like the ones about Africa are severely underdeveloped, just
adding new data is a 100% improvement even when arguably adding sources is
a good thing. By being bold, by starting from a Wikipedia as a base line,
it is important to note that not adding sources is established practice in
Wikidata.

The issue I raise is that when "another" Wikipedia considers its
information superior, it is all too easy to make accusations of adding
"fake facts" particularly when it is not obvious that the "other" Wikipedia
provides better information. To counter such insular behaviour, it becomes
relevant to consider how we can indicate discrepancies between stated facts
in any Wikimedia project vis a vis Wikidata. Obviously it would be
wonderful when the total of all our projects are considered in a
visualisation.

Particularly when a subject is of little interest to our current editor
community, the data in the Wikipedias and by inference in Wikidata is weak.
Many of the subjects, Africa just as one example, are relevant to a public,
both a reading and editing public, that we want to develop. Without tools
that help us curate our differences we will rely on insular opinions and
every project is only a part of what 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Curating YOUR Wikipedia

2018-07-16 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
uffers. When for a subject the error rate is 
more than 6%, the error rate is more than can be expected of human adding good 
faith information to a project. The data I am adding at this time supports 
Wikipedia best practices. It is particularly intended for the "minority 
languages" [2] but the quality of all our data will be improved when we are 
aware of the differences and curate them everywhere.
This is distinctly different from the issue with Commons; its data is good 
enough for its current use case but is what holds it back from becoming the 
resource you goto because you can "find" what you are seeking. 
In a nutshell our problem is that we work in an insular fashion. We do not have 
ways to find the differences, the errors, the bias between our projects. We 
could do, suggestions for a basic mechanism have been made. Our quality suffers 
and it does not need to [3].Thanks,       GerardM
[1] https://ultimategerardm. blogspot.com/2018/07/ africagap-where-wikipedias- 
collide.html[2] https://ultimategerardm. blogspot.com/2018/07/ 
africagap-support-for- minority-languages.html[3] https://ultimategerardm. 
blogspot.com/2016/01/ wikipedia-lowest-hanging- fruit-from.html
On 16 July 2018 at 05:41, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
 wrote:

yes, it is an old issue, what you say it's right but I would be more optimistic.
To summarize my view (I couls send you more information privately)

1. Wikidata largely reflected what Wikipedia indicated, and that was not the 
right way to make it grow, but that was also the past. At the moment, the 
reference of the content is increasing, the clean-up too. In some areas, 
wikidata items are also created before the wikipedia articles nowadays. 

2. new tools are great and will do a lot, but it's users who do the real 
tricks. You have to start to bring local users to wikidata, show them how it 
can be used (automatic infoboxes, fast creation of stubs, automatic lists, 
detecing missing images). They will start to fix the issues, curating their 
wikipedia, wikidata and also indirectly influence the other ones. 

3. IMHO, the wikidata ecosystem is not so bad, it could have more expert users 
with real knowledge of topics, but  commons with millions of automatically 
imported files, and tons of poorly described and uncategorized images faces a 
much worse perspective. You need more tools there than on wikidata, at the 
moment, if you want to keep some balanced workflow. What is really missing on 
wikidata are mostly active projects to coordinate and catalyze the ongoing 
efforts. This one https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/ Wikidata:WikiProject_Ancient_ 
Greece made miracles, for example. But I couldn't find one about peer-reviewed 
researchers or photographers to name a few, at least in the past months. 
Investing on this aspect would not change the final situation on wikidata (that 
will be positive for me), but it would speed up the process. it will also 
influence much more the content on local wikis because it will bring 
content-related users closer together and increase their wikidata literacy with 
lower effort.
4. In the end, even with a good high quality wikidata platform, there will 
always be communities that will not integrated in wikidata massively... but 
that's also a good thing for pluralism. You can't assume that a discrepancy is 
always a clue for a mistake (I am sure the examples of your experience are, of 
course), on the long term some of them are simply effects of gray areas that 
need to wait to be resolved even at the level of the sources. Insome fields, 
such as taxonomy, there is some confusion and asymmetric organization of the 
content and will never be solved easily. But in the other areas they probably 
will. 
Alex






    Il Domenica 15 Luglio 2018 22:37, Gerard Meijssen 
 ha scritto:


 Hoi,
Wikidata is a reflection of all the Wikimedia projects, particularly the
Wikipedias. Both Wikidata and Wikipedia are secondary sources and when two
Wikipedias have opposing information on singular information, it is a cop
out to state both "opinions" on Wikidata and leave it at that.

Given that Wikidata largely reflects what a Wikipedia indicates, it is
important to curate such differences. The first thing to consider is are we
interested at all in knowing about "false facts" and then how we can
indicate differences to our editing and reading community.

I have been editing about Africa for a long time now and I find that the
content about Africa is woefully underdeveloped. Best Wikipedia practice
has it that cities and villages are linked to "administrative territorial
entities" like provinces and districts and I have added such relations from
primary to secondary entities. Adding such information to villages and
cities as well is too much for me. The basic principle is that I am being
bold in doing so. I do relate to existing items and I have curated a lot of
crap data so far. The result is that Wik

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Welcome messages at arwiki

2018-01-23 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
There are a lot of SUL issues that are waiting to be addressed. One for example 
is the definition of what is not "appropriate" as a name. Another one is a 
centralized interface for preferences, a third one is a centralized management 
of key user information, a forth one is the possibility to disactivate 
crosswiki ping services so you can manage them only when you want to... and so 
on... one reasonable thing you can ask is that the message is not inserted in 
the talk of people with no edits, for example. Or that the welcome messages are 
progressively standardized, with a clear layout for the message that can be 
declined with the users' language preferences when they are declared. Sure, 
there is no point in linking me again to the five pillar, but a link to some 
key pages might still be useful.
In any case I cannot think of it as really important, and it is to me less 
important than other issues related to the SUL interface.
Right in these days one of my friends that I registered years ago or that was 
already registered (in any case a very minor contributor, with only a 
superficial involvement on wiki platforms) received one of this welcome message 
in one "non-western language". He/She found it funny.
I probably have very tolerant friends... good for me! But so far I still feel 
that this is a problem only for a small fraction on  mid-term and long-term 
users than for the rest of the world. I believe that if you make an extensive 
research these messages might have no effect (especially if left by bot), they 
probably have some effect if they are part of a human interaction, and there is 
a minority who will disagree with them strongly. Based on the human 
interactions and experiences in my life at the workplace, I kinda suspect that 
for many of these people this could be also their general attitude in other 
fields.
Don't get me wrong, I am concerned by the abuse of psychometric and personal 
data on modern internet platform, I'll do whatever I could to prevent it that's 
why I really don't understand why these messages given by an open and linear 
process are such a big deal per se. To me it's like overthinking something 
quite superficial and that's unfortunately rarely in the interest of taking 
care of the real big deal, such as e.g. your personal metadata being sold to 
big conglomerates without your "active permission". So are my friends, and, 
surprise surpirse, they don't care about these welcome messages too. 

Il Mercoledì 24 Gennaio 2018 4:41, Pine W  ha scritto:
 

 FYI for those on WIkimedia-l who may be interested, conversation about this
matter is ongoing. I am waiting a response from WMF Legal, and there may be
others who have opened their own lines of inquiry.

If I don't receive a reply from WMF Legal that I feel is satisfactory, or
if I don't receive one at all, then I plan to set up an RfC about this
matter.

Pine 


On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Vi to  wrote:

> I'm scared of the solutions that will "fix" this.
> I expect something as dramatically useful as the removal of "unblock this
> IP" button for IPs caught by autoblocks of registered users.
>
> Vito
>
> 2018-01-01 22:46 GMT+01:00 Pine W :
>
> > I have created https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T183876 and am pinging
> > Legal to request a review of this matter.
> >
> > Happy new year,
> >
> > 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,
> 
>
___
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: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New Stewards elected

2018-02-28 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
Compared to the low point of 2016, it is glad that for another year we had 
enough elected candidates. 
Five is a good number. 

Il Giovedì 1 Marzo 2018 1:36, Md. Ibrahim Husain  ha 
scritto:
 

 Congrats to the new stewards.

On Thursday, March 1, 2018, Mardetanha  wrote:

> Hey Wikimedia community
> after a long election we finally have couple new stewards elected
>
>
>    1. علاء 
> (
>    talk  D8%A7%D8%A1>
>    · contribs
>     D8%B9%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%A1>
>    )
>    2. Green Giant  (talk
>     · contribs
>    )
>    3. Rxy  (talk
>     · contribs
>    )
>    4. -revi  (talk
>     · contribs
>    )
>    5. There'sNoTime 
> (
>    talk  ·
>    contribs
>     >)
>
>
> please join me in welcoming them for the new position and congratulating
> them for gaining communities trust.
>
>
>
> Mardetanha
> On behalf of election committee
> ___
> 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,
> 



-- 
Mohammad Ibrahim Husain
Mobile: 01921 584733
___
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] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-05 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria ... agree, but the risk 
assesement we are discussing here is not about safety, but security. I am sure 
we might not use them all properly, I am also not a native English speaker, but 
they are not the same concept, right?

Now, there were examples where looking at a dossier where the information was 
about only the first one... that's the point here. I am talking about events, 
the first email was about the place of the office... but the motivation of a 
criminal act in both case can be overlapping, so they are an unicum in a proper 
evaluation, IMHO. I am not expert in the field, but if you start to assess the 
risk of someone harming you in SFO, that could happen also in another place 
where many of the same people gather annually, and that you also inform 
millions of people with sitenotices about it.

Now, I don't say that you must inform a lot. But if you are not the police you 
are also not the fire brigade, but you wouldn't write in a candidature nothing 
or simply "if there is a fire someone is paid to extinguish it"... you would 
make more effort, and we do. If you don't want to add another paragraph in the 
final document, rename it "safety and security" but start to think organically 
about it. 

Alex

 

Il Venerdì 6 Aprile 2018 1:59, Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
 

 Safety of attendees has for a long time been a criteria that needs to be 
addressed when bidding for any WMF event, the people bidding are the better 
placed to assess the reality of the local situation.  Open bidding processes 
enable others to also critically look at the options,  ultimately we are more 
at risk at home where feel comfortable then when travelling.   Every location 
has its risks, its undesirables, and crime, just getting a taxi to and from the 
airport is a risk reality is its also more likely than a terrorist event
On 6 April 2018 at 03:24, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
<wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

That's why people offwiki say they don't discuss this thing on meta or here, 
because you always have an "answer" like this... this sarcasm. in it's way, an 
example of an unhealthy community.
 
 Look at what I wrote:

"Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it 
mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain point 
that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so on. it 
should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it should be 
done."
that's it. it's not complicated... I know because of partially direct 
experience... it's part of the world, when you are professional. You can't 
prepare an event of certain scale and in a certain areas and ignore it in the 
final dossier. There will be someone who take a look at that. So, who talked 
about "solving terrorism"? just the one who wanted to make a joke.

Maybe people are not big babies and even without constant reminder they don't 
exaggerate. You have no idea with whom I discuss this aspect so far, what such 
wikimedians do in their real life.  They are able to focus on the point... the 
point is security and if you replied this way to this question in many 
situations, you will be considered unprepared.

Alex


    Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 20:29, Alphos OGame <alphos.og...@gmail.com> ha 
scritto:


 I heartily agree : build that firewall, and let Cisco pay for it !
Wait, what were you suggesting in your incipit ? Oh, right, "a way that's 
rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic of course".
I'd rather not ask of people organizing conventions (which is already 
time-consuming by itself) that they solve terrorism in their town, which is 
what the police are probably more suited for, if you don't mind ; as a matter 
of fact, it is not one of their duties as convention holders, plain and simple, 
and neither are they doctors, police officers, judges, jesters, masseuses, 
nannies, yoga instructors, cooks, indentured servants, etc (except of course if 
they are, which may happen).

So let's please not overreact, and stick to the current discussion instead of 
having the next WikiConvention in a flying fortress with armed guards, sniffing 
dogs, and metal detectors at every door…

Roger / Alphos



2018-04-05 18:40 GMT+02:00 Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
<wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia. org>:

I remember we discussed 2 or 3 years about this scenario with some wikimedians 
off wiki. I strongly support to discuss at least once openly about that. In a 
way that it's rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic... of course.


Despite the claimed neutrality of the communities, reality always bites. Now, a 
terrorist can imagine that we will not put a black banner if someone kill a lot 
of people somewhere... but if same amount of wikimedians are killed at a 
international rally the probability 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-05 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
I remember we discussed 2 or 3 years about this scenario with some wikimedians 
off wiki. I strongly support to discuss at least once openly about that. In a 
way that it's rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic... of course. 


Despite the claimed neutrality of the communities, reality always bites. Now, a 
terrorist can imagine that we will not put a black banner if someone kill a lot 
of people somewhere... but if same amount of wikimedians are killed at a 
international rally the probability that a block ribbon, an editnotice with a 
statement appear on many language edition is higher. it's an attack at the 
community like it is a proposal of a law somewhere, and we naturally react 
stronger.


It would be a bigger impact, if you think about it. You can get the attention 
of billions of people every time they connect to the 5th or 6th largest website 
in the world. Cynically speaking, if you also consider the facts that it's 
about free knowledge and volunteers, than a mass murder at at a wikimedian 
event might be more "effective" than at a discotheque or the seat of a 
multinational conglomerate.


If i remember correctly. in the months before a certain wiki-event, many people 
linked to radical activities were arrested in the area, in the same country. 
So, when you organize an event, it's not just about safety but also security. 
Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it mostly 
in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain point that you 
are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so on. it should be a 
paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it should be done.

A.M. 

Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 18:09, Vi to  ha scritto:
 

 I read/receive related craps

on
a daily basis but it's hard to tell an idiot from a psychopath, so it may
become a risk for WMF offices.

Vito

2018-04-05 17:33 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :

> I'm sure most of you will be aware of the unfortunate events at
> YouTube's HQ a couple fo days ago:
>
>    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube_headquarters_shooting
>
> Without giving away anything that might reveal vulnerabilities, does
> the WMF have contingency plans for such an incident? What about at
> community events in the US, and elsewhere?
>
> --
> 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,
> 
___
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] YouTube shooting and risk assessment

2018-04-05 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
That's why people offwiki say they don't discuss this thing on meta or here, 
because you always have an "answer" like this... this sarcasm. in it's way, an 
example of an unhealthy community.
 
 Look at what I wrote:

"Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it 
mostly in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain point 
that you are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so on. it 
should be a paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it should be 
done."
that's it. it's not complicated... I know because of partially direct 
experience... it's part of the world, when you are professional. You can't 
prepare an event of certain scale and in a certain areas and ignore it in the 
final dossier. There will be someone who take a look at that. So, who talked 
about "solving terrorism"? just the one who wanted to make a joke. 

Maybe people are not big babies and even without constant reminder they don't 
exaggerate. You have no idea with whom I discuss this aspect so far, what such 
wikimedians do in their real life.  They are able to focus on the point... the 
point is security and if you replied this way to this question in many 
situations, you will be considered unprepared.

Alex


Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 20:29, Alphos OGame <alphos.og...@gmail.com> ha 
scritto:
 

 I heartily agree : build that firewall, and let Cisco pay for it !
Wait, what were you suggesting in your incipit ? Oh, right, "a way that's 
rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic of course".
I'd rather not ask of people organizing conventions (which is already 
time-consuming by itself) that they solve terrorism in their town, which is 
what the police are probably more suited for, if you don't mind ; as a matter 
of fact, it is not one of their duties as convention holders, plain and simple, 
and neither are they doctors, police officers, judges, jesters, masseuses, 
nannies, yoga instructors, cooks, indentured servants, etc (except of course if 
they are, which may happen).

So let's please not overreact, and stick to the current discussion instead of 
having the next WikiConvention in a flying fortress with armed guards, sniffing 
dogs, and metal detectors at every door…

Roger / Alphos



2018-04-05 18:40 GMT+02:00 Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
<wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>:

I remember we discussed 2 or 3 years about this scenario with some wikimedians 
off wiki. I strongly support to discuss at least once openly about that. In a 
way that it's rational, avoiding to create unnecessary panic... of course.


Despite the claimed neutrality of the communities, reality always bites. Now, a 
terrorist can imagine that we will not put a black banner if someone kill a lot 
of people somewhere... but if same amount of wikimedians are killed at a 
international rally the probability that a block ribbon, an editnotice with a 
statement appear on many language edition is higher. it's an attack at the 
community like it is a proposal of a law somewhere, and we naturally react 
stronger.


It would be a bigger impact, if you think about it. You can get the attention 
of billions of people every time they connect to the 5th or 6th largest website 
in the world. Cynically speaking, if you also consider the facts that it's 
about free knowledge and volunteers, than a mass murder at at a wikimedian 
event might be more "effective" than at a discotheque or the seat of a 
multinational conglomerate.


If i remember correctly. in the months before a certain wiki-event, many people 
linked to radical activities were arrested in the area, in the same country. 
So, when you organize an event, it's not just about safety but also security. 
Even if it is not nice to think about it, and of course you try to do it mostly 
in private, you should clearly write down at least at a certain point that you 
are preparing to all scenario, contacting the police and so on. it should be a 
paragraph in a candidature for an event, IMHO. but it should be done.

A.M.

    Il Giovedì 5 Aprile 2018 18:09, Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com> ha scritto:


 I read/receive related craps
<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/ index.php?title=User_talk: 
Vituzzu=prev= 831949995>
on
a daily basis but it's hard to tell an idiot from a psychopath, so it may
become a risk for WMF offices.

Vito

2018-04-05 17:33 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>:

> I'm sure most of you will be aware of the unfortunate events at
> YouTube's HQ a couple fo days ago:
>
>    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ YouTube_headquarters_shooting
>
> Without giving away anything that might reveal vulnerabilities, does
> the WMF have contingency plans for such an incident? What about at
> community events in the US, and elsewhere?
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

2018-10-10 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 When I read such mails, I think there is something that it's not 100% working 
in the workflow of AffCom. If i might say how i feel it, I would say that it is 
not perceived like a "catalyst" of good practices, but more like a bottleneck 
of processes.

Maybe more transparency could help. UG and chapters are an important part of 
our ecosystem and the interaction with communities should be put at the core of 
the process. Maybe there is some overflow, and they need more support and 
resources. Or we need a better system to minimize problems before they become 
so large.
In any case, I feel the current situation is not optimal. Many things aren't of 
course, so it's probably not critical. It's a delicate topic of course but 
that's also why it should need more long-term discussion. Soon or later, 
someone should gather the feedback produced by these occurrences and start a 
discussion about possible improvement. 




Il mercoledì 10 ottobre 2018, 22:54:30 CEST, Pine W  
ha scritto:  
 
 SJ, maybe I should explain my comments about involvement of legal counsel
in more detail. My understanding of the situation, which is far from
complete and may be wrong, is that AffCom decided to intervene in this
situation (1) before they had undertaken an effort to gather facts "on the
ground", and (2) with disregard for local laws that could apply to the
situation. (I wouldn't accept an excuse that AffCom lacked the time to do
legal research. It is my opinion that AffCom and WMF both should know
better, and that WMF should ensure that AffCom has access to knowledgeable
legal counsel when needed). If AffCom had taken the time to first gather
the facts of the situation from someone who could investigate it "on the
ground", and had taken the time to obtain knowledgeable legal counsel about
local laws, I wonder whether a significant amount of volunteer time and
stress could have been saved both for AffCom members and for WMPT members.

I don't mean to suggest that nothing is wrong at WMPT or that AffCom should
have remained uninvolved, but my impression is that there are changes that
should be made in AffCom regardless of whether there are problems with
WMPT, starting with AffCom's lack of transparency in general.

It's possible that what we're hearing from WMPT is entirely wrong and that
AffCom did everything well, but even if that is true, I think that AffCom
should be much more transparent.

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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

2018-10-11 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 The pro forma statement bout what a chapter is is valuable, but I think many 
of us kinda got the idea that the problem was not the starting point (otherwise 
why electing him?) but came later. It's possible that someone else with more 
community experience would have never behaved such way, but that's speculation. 

Statistically, in this scenario this lack of community view probably did not 
help. Whatever his skills in "management and conflict resolution" were, even 
assuming they were correctly stated based on previous expertise in other 
fields, they were not the best ones to handle the conflicts that later emerged. 
Also, considering the resolution we see now, which is not a great resolution.
The point is that in all these disputes (I think about Brazil few months ago) 
it looks like the AffCom position sounds like "you are both wrong". Now, this 
is never a healthy long-term strategy. If it occurs again, it gives more and 
more the idea that whoever is in the less correct position can hold still 
because if the matter arrives to the AffCom everybody pays equally. I am sure 
the situation is more multifaceted, but let's try to grasp the general vibe 
here.

 This is not wise. King Solomon solved the issue bluffing and spotting the real 
mother, he never actually cut the baby in two halves ... But wisdom comes also 
with experience.
   Il giovedì 11 ottobre 2018, 15:43:01 CEST, GoEthe.wiki 
 ha scritto:  
 
 Hi Illario,

Apologies, I probably explained myself poorly. I never said that a chapter
is a representative of the Wikimedia community, rather I was trying to
explain that João’s claimed experience (emphasis on claimed) in management
and conflict resolution was a major factor in him being elected to the
Board. At the time, WMPT thought that that could be very valuable to the
chapter. So, we agree, a heterogeneous board is absolutely an advantage,
but in this case the issue was not one of diversity, but rather of
competence and alignment to the movement goals and principles.

In practice, he did not contribute to the management of the chapter, and he
was not prepared to an increase of the chapter activities. He very quickly
started demonstrating uneasiness with any procedural decision he did not
personally vet (which are imperative in volunteer-based, collaborative
projects), and soon after, without any previous warning, started sending
legal threats going as far as using a lawyer to intimidate one of our most
active members on behalf of WMPT (without discussing it with anyone
beforehand), and resigned.

We have no intention to expose João even more in this public mailing list,
so we will not provide a comprehensive list of the problems we found with
his term on the board. But to make it clear, when this whole issue began to
be addressed, even though we did not ask him to stay on the Board, we did
invite him to continue on the chapter, working with us, as AffCom can
confirm. Just not in any role with legal responsibilities.


Cheers,
Gonçalo Themudo

*Presidente*
*Wikimedia Portugal*
*Email: *goethe.w...@gmail.com
*Website: *http://pt.wikimedia.org 
*Imagine um mundo onde cada ser humano pode partilhar livremente a soma de
todo o conhecimento, na sua própria língua.*
___
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] Hiding versions because of copyright violation

2019-01-14 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 privacy violations is not standard at all. For example some wikis hide 
personal details that people put on purpose, while other ones see no point 
since it's their will to show them. 

Also, even if it is not strictly related to private information, blocking 
deceased users is not standardized among platforms.

Il lunedì 14 gennaio 2019, 18:29:36 CET, effe iets anders 
 ha scritto:  
 
 Hi all,

This is one of these things that seems particularly hard to find, so I'd
like to pick your collective brains on this:

What are the various policies across our little universe on using the 'hide
version' functionality to hide historical versions of articles? I would
especially appreciate it if you could elaborate a bit on how it's used in
practice with regards to privacy violations (what is the threshold of
private information that would justify hiding versions) and copyright
violations (when do you actually hide the versions, rather than just remove
it from the current version and leave it in the history).

Are there any global policies on this? I think not, but always better to
double check :).

Best,
Lodewijk
___
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] Picture of the Year 2018: The results are in!

2019-03-25 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 I am happy to notice that, if I recall correctly, two of these finalists were 
runner-ups of Wiki Science Competition 2017 (the tornado, Commons:Wiki Science 
Competition 2017/Winners - Wikimedia Commons "image sets" category) and of 
European Science Photo Competition 2015 (the frozen bubble, Commons:European 
Science Photo Competition 2015/Winners - Wikimedia Commons "general" category). 


| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Commons:Wiki Science Competition 2017/Winners - Wikimedia Commons


 |

 |

 |





| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Commons:European Science Photo Competition 2015/Winners - Wikimedia Commons


 |

 |

 |


This IMHO proves how important is to focus also on technical and scientific 
fields in order to get multimedia of high quality. Specifically, these images 
were not considered of similar scientific relevance compared to the final 
winners, but they are wonderful pictures and they are valuable to illustrate 
scientific articles.

Alessandro

Il lunedì 25 marzo 2019, 19:08:19 CET, Steinsplitter Wiki 
 ha scritto:  
 
 Dear Wikimedians,


The 2018 Picture of the Year competition has ended and we are pleased to 
announce the results:

In both rounds, people voted for their favorite media files.

  *  In the first round, there were 963 candidate images.
  *  In the second round, people voted for the 57 finalists (the R1 top 30 
overall and top 2 in each category).

In the second round – the “three votes” was used – eligible users could vote 
for up to 3 finalists – each of these 3 votes counted equal. There were 2983 
people who voted in R1 and 3496 who voted in round R2.

We congratulate the winners of the contest and thank them for creating these 
beautiful media files and sharing them as freely licensed content:

  1.  439 people voted for the winner, File:Evolution of a 
Tornado.jpg.
  2.  In second place, 361 people voted for File:FCAB EMD GT22CU-3 San Pedro - 
Ascotan.jpg.
  3.  In third place, 356 people voted for 
File:Frostedbubble2.jpg.

Click here to view the top images 
»


We also sincerely thank to all voters for participating. We invite you to 
continue to participate in the Wikimedia Commons community by sharing your 
work.

Thanks,
the Picture of the Year 
committee


-
Read E-Mail as HTML: 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2018/Results/R2/msg

___
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] How diverse are your readers?

2019-03-11 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
Reminding is easy, it's analyzing that it's complex. 

I suspect that editors and readers are probably a little bit smarter than 
generally assumed. It's quite "obvious" that editors understand what is an 
encyclopedia, after years. When I make an informal survey, statistically the 
"smarter" students in the class or in the group of people in front of me at an 
event are those who already edited something or who want to know more or are 
willing to compile a form to state their opinion or similar. 

Plus, every topic is multifaceted somehow, it's the same for the most popular 
ones. It's strange when long-time editors seem to miss this aspect. There is 
always a specific disease, an historical event, a place or a person in a family 
history linked to a most searched topic. You can detect many missing specific 
things just focusing on a core topic and starting from there. Again, maybe it's 
worth reminding also how our editors are quite good at doing this, and this 
type of information is therefore a starting point. In some of this comments, it 
always look like an end per se. 

Seriously, if someone is so superficial to just edit something with no depth 
because it's on a list, (s)he will just do something equally superficial 
somewhere else. Clinically, I might state that it's probably a good thing if 
this occur in an area with huge focus, it actually lowers the possible 
long-term disfunctionalities induced by a rigid approach, something that it's 
more subtle to detect in less supervised areas.

in any case, these lists can change a lot from area to area so it is not even 
driven by the "mass", if you give a country in South America or Asia the same 
focus on a western country you end up with very unusual guideline. it's nice to 
know that you expertise in an area even if less taken into account in the 
average community around you, it's useful in a different part of the word. 



Il lunedì 11 marzo 2019, 13:32:12 CET, Amir E. Aharoni 
 ha scritto:  
 
 ‬

> The idea of a popularity-driven encyclopaedia scares 
>
>
I agree, although I'd make it a bit more focused: an encyclopedia that is
*only* popularity-driven is indeed scary. It's good to mention this, and
not once, but repeatedly.

However, providing Wikipedia editors with information about what *is* in
demand is useful, as long as the editors clearly know that they have the
choice to write what is *important* and that "important" is not equal to
"popular".

While I haven't ran a proper survey about this, conversations that with
Wikipedia editors from various "big" and "small" languages tell me that
most of them already understand it, and this is good. Nevertheless,
reminding people that Wikipedia is not supposed to be just about covering
popular topics won't hurt.

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
___
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] How diverse are your readers?

2019-03-11 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 I know people in many fields with great technical expertise. people who 
published articles on Science and Nature basically, and in the end I think they 
are probably qualified to have an idea of what a good encyclopedia should be. 
The point is that these people open wiki for topics far away from their area, 
most of the time they look also for "pop" topics. Finding pop culture is what 
makes them stay and grow interest as much as everything else. It's when they 
find a deleted ye useful page of something of interest for some internal reason 
they think wikipedia it's not worth spending time on. 

Based on that experience, in all the discussions when people who claim that 
this focus on such pop information lower our image or damage our workflow, I 
always question where these opinions come from and if they are peer-reviewed. I 
am a scientist, I look at data. it has been years people are claiming the 
"popmaggedon" of wikipedia is soon, and in the meantime its overall quality on 
very specific topic is still increasing.

A balanced encyclopedia comes from trying to fill the gaps, all information are 
useful in that direction. As long as someone else is studying missing links, 
pages existing in other languages, encouraging what editors want and so on, 
your idea is just part of patchwork. I cannot peer-review such statement, but 
at least i can tell you it is said by someone who never edited a "pop" article 
in all his wikipedia life and manage projects of outreach in organic chemistry 
or biophysics, to name the last ones. So I hope that it gives a hint that is 
probably fine.
Go on and explore.



Il lunedì 11 marzo 2019, 10:08:23 CET, Vi to  ha 
scritto:  
 
 That's an unstable process on a long-term, with popular topics
cannibalizing resources. Top read articles are already about two or three
sports, some TV series and three or four music topics.
These are also the most popular topics among editors but if you'll start
focusing energies on these already popular topics you'll end up having no
resources to be spent on "female combatants during Russian civil war",
"near to extinction languages in Brazil", "computational chemestry in late
XX century".

The way we self-identify as a project  deeply affects our results:
promoting the idea of Wikipedia as "the pop encyclopedia" (instead of "the
free encyclopedia embedding pop topics") will weaken our commitment to
diversity and quality.

Also, topic popularity is mutable on a daily basis and it's driven by a
very narrow number of media (basically Google/YouTube and Facebook) which
will gain a complete influence over us.

To me the mission of an encyclopedia is providing the *knowledge* (not
*information*) which is worth collecting and preserving. The information
people need/want is likely to be a subset of this.

If Wikipedia is also an educational medium we should find a way to ask the
ordes of people looking for new mr. Trump's bizarreness "hey, do you know
the background of India-Pakistan conflicts?"

Vito

Il giorno lun 11 mar 2019 alle ore 06:19 David Goodman 
ha scritto:

> The idea of an encyclopedia is to provide the information people need or
> want  that's appropriate to the format. It would be useful to see what they
> want that is appropriate but we do not have -- and also useful to see what
> they look for that isn't appropriate for us. Within what's appropriate, I
> see no reason why selection of topics should not be driven by reader
> interests as much as by editor interests. Our purpose is not to practice
> our writing skills for our own benefit.
>
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2019 at 6:58 PM Vi to  wrote:
>
> > The idea of a popularity-driven encyclopaedia scares 
> >
> > Vito
> >
> > Il giorno dom 10 mar 2019 alle ore 22:26 Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > I have been thinking about it.. There is a place for research but
> really
> > > why can we not have the data that allows us to seek out what people are
> > > actually looking for and do not find.. Why can we not promote what
> proves
> > > to be of interest [1] ?
> > > Thanks,
> > >      GerardM
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2019/03/a-marketing-approach-to-what-it-is-that.html
> > >
> > > On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 22:13, Leila Zia  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > As I mentioned in an earlier thread [1], we will be running reader
> > > > surveys across a number of Wikipedia languages to learn about the
> > > > reader needs and motivations in these languages as well as some of
> > > > their demographic information (and perhaps the correlations between
> > > > demographics and user motivations and characteristics).
> > > >
> > > > If your language community is interested to have statistics on the
> > > > distribution of reader gender, age, education, native language, and
> > > > geographic region (rural/urban) in your language (and depending on
> how
> > > > much data we collect in your language, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of Wikimedia Community User Group Albania

2019-02-06 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 I guess... probably one include also the majority of Kosovo, Albanian-speaking 
regions of Greece, P.Y.R.O.M./North Macedonia and maybe even Southern Italy and 
the other one is just centered on Albania as a state. This is not the same 
scenario as Brazil (not sure if, partially, also Greece) since in that case we 
had two group precisely centered on one country. 

It's not totally practical but the geopolitical situation is not practical in 
the end by itself...  You cannot force people to get rid of a group that might 
become a future national chapter because their language is spoken by many other 
people in neighboring countries who already clustered in a  previous UG. So it 
should not be considered a critical situation per se, although the interaction 
of the two UGs should be closely monitored and addressed since the beginning. 

What is missing is a precise guideline or attention to UG related to languages 
(of minorities or globally spoken). You could have the same problem with a 
future Italian minor languages UG active in Corsica or Croatia, with a 
Retho-romance Alpine language user group, with a gender gap UG active in a 
language distributed along various borders... and so on. They don't seem to 
show huge problems when similar situation exist in reality but they could 
degenerate, stop cooperation, or never start it with other UGs or national 
chapters.
I value plurality, I want UG to be created and catalyze activities, and I think 
that the problem is mostly the character of people. However, I strongly 
advocate a more structured architecture of language-based UG to be implemented. 
Basically what I suppose was done with Catalan Wikimedia Thematic Organization, 
although in that case there is no main entity competing on the area of a 
sovereign country where Catalan is spoken (which is not necessarily a better 
scenario, just complex in a different way). We call them almost all "User 
groups" but they are sometimes local geographical unions of users and 
volunteers (embryonic future national chapters or just regional associations), 
language-oriented associations created to involve minorities or cross-projects 
of interested users unified by a topic. They all have different purpose and 
should be rationalized somehow. I think I pushed a little bit in that direction 
on the application to WikiSummit, stressing the importance to make order in the 
field.
IMHO, we should have single-language thematic organizations (specifically for a 
language), cross-language thematic organization or local UG centered on a vague 
historic geographical area or a very precise administrative one. And think 
carefully about their status. This is however just a vague idea.

Alessandro
   Il mercoledì 6 febbraio 2019, 18:11:57 CET, Philip Kopetzky 
 ha scritto:  
 
 Just to close off this thread, there seemingly is no plan and others are
left to deal with the fallout of this decision.

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 at 08:23, Paulo Santos Perneta 
wrote:

> Hi Kirill,
>
> I join Philip and Mardetanha on their concerns and questions. Having
> followed closely the Brazil situation - which ended up in the worst
> possible way, IMO - I'm very interested in your answer.
>
> Best,
>
> Paulo
>
> 2018-06-11 13:07 GMT+01:00 Mardetanha :
>
>> ​ Hi Kirill
>>
>>  Philip's concerns were not answered, would you please respond, I had the
>> very same question.
>>
>>
>>
>> Mardetanha
>>
>> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Philip Kopetzky <
>> philip.kopet...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Kirill,
>> >
>> > what's the difference/relationship between this group and the
>> Wikimedians
>> > of Albanian Language User Group, which is currently applying for a
>> > simpleAPG grant? How do we avoid creating more Brazilian scenarios by
>> > reconising even more user groups from the same area?
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Philip
>> >
>> > On 22 May 2018 at 22:07, Kirill Lokshin 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi everyone!
>> > >
>> > > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
>> recognized
>> > > [1] Wikimedia Community User Group Albania [2] as a Wikimedia User
>> Group.
>> > > The group aims to improve content about Albania across the Wikimedia
>> > > projects, including Commons and Wikidata, and to collaborate with
>> other
>> > > Wikimedia user groups, chapters, and other free culture groups in
>> Albania
>> > > and across the region.
>> > >
>> > > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Kirill Lokshin
>> > > Chair, Affiliations Committee
>> > >
>> > > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/
>> > > Resolutions/Recognition_Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Albania
>> > > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_
>> > Group_Albania
>> > >
>> > > ___
>> > > Affiliates mailing list
>> > > affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>> > >
>> > >
>> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ASBS2019 voter selection from UG-GE

2019-04-15 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 Hi all. Thanks to UG Georgia for their effort.
if any UGs or chapter would like to publish a meta page about the choice of the 
voter, in order to maximize transparency, that's a good idea. My only request 
is to try to follow a similar naming scheme "Name of the affiliate/ASBS2019 
Voter" (also take a look at the categorization)

With so many affiliates, we need to minimize the propagation of differences or 
keeping order is much more difficult. Thank you for your effort.
Alessandro






Il lunedì 15 aprile 2019, 22:09:55 CEST, Mehman Ibragimov 
 ha scritto:  
 
 Hi to all!

These days we (Wikimedia UG 
Georgia) have increased 
internal consultations on ASBS and agreed our positions on key issues.

After consultation and discussion, we selected a representative from Wikimedia 
UG Georgia, who will vote in the election Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia 
Foundation.

You can see selection process on this 
page.


Best,
__
Mehman Ibragimov
UG-GE Board 
Member
User:Mehman97

+995 598 42 86 03

mehman.ibragi...@outlook.com


Meta-Wiki | 
Twitter | 
Facebook

___
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] How diverse are your readers?

2019-03-13 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 I think, Benjamin, that sometimes some users don't get the experience of other 
people. I met so many smart men and women with very trivial hobbies that the 
idea of such separation sounds simply wrong or odd.  I have never edited on 
"pop" topic on purpose, I have no interest for cartoons or TV series, mostly 
"serious" stuff, still I don't see the issue here.

Maybe on some local communities this will remain accepted as general truth, 
that "opposing" focus or research on "pop" topics is good for the image or the 
balance of energies of the Wikimedia projects but when you move on the global 
scale I don't think it holds very well. 

It sounds simple to say so, but based on my experience I don't think it's 
actually correct. Again, I am willing to read any peer-reviewed publication 
where something related to the opposite is stated, but so far if these are just 
opinions, than I stick to my perception, and I remain generally favorable 
toward this sort of interest.
   Il giovedì 14 marzo 2019, 01:08:57 CET, Benjamin Ikuta 
 ha scritto:  
 
 



I also don't see why it would be such a problem to have more articles about 
Pokemon. 

Volunteer effort is certainly not zero sum. 

Contributing to one area doesn't necessarily mean contributing less to another. 

Speaking from personal experience now, one of my earliest Wikipedia edits was 
about Pokemon. 

It was reverted. 

Luckily, I was not discouraged, but I know that many people would be, and that 
is a real problem. 

I think there's a bias on Wikipedia when weighing the pros and cons of policy, 
because it's easy to overlook the absence of something that never was there to 
begin with. 




On Mar 13, 2019, at 5:01 PM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
 wrote:

> We certainly could do editatons about Naruto and Pokemon and it would 
> actually be quite useful. As Paulo said, a well written "pop" page has a good 
> influence. People can understand easily how a complex and multifaceted 
> article with appropriate navboxes, infoboxed, is structured for a trivial 
> topic, and think how they can help for other topics.
> I repeat the concept: I have friends who work at the top of their fields, 
> some of them have also their own wikipedia article (I am not telling which 
> one because of respect of their privacy) and they leave edits on complex 
> topic sometimes but it's their everyday job so they are bored to do even on 
> wiki in their free time. Still, they do a little bit and they learned how to 
> do it visiting other pages about the most trivial topics you can imagine. 
> They showed me their first edits as IPs sometimes and they are as diverse as 
> you can imagine. Obscure dialects, silly TV series, things like that.
> 
> Also, since we are talking about PokemonI can show something directly 
> like Paulo did.This is the history of the article Cronologia delle modifiche 
> di "Ulva lactuca" - Wikipedia Ulva Lactuca. HisuiSama and Adriana Hariuc who 
> added more text on January the 20th are the same students who are comparing 
> the very same morning a plant at the botanical garden to a Pokemon in this 
> gallery: https://twitter.com/Alexmar983/status/1087119134058516480
> So, Go Pokemon... I know about the "pokemon test" but in the end I actually 
> wish we had more Pokemon pages, it would probably be fine.
> Alex
> 
> 
> | 
> | 
> | 
> |  |  |
> 
> |
> 
> |
> | 
> |  | 
> Cronologia delle modifiche di "Ulva lactuca" - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> |
> 
> |
> 
> |
> 
> 
> 
> 
>    Il giovedì 14 marzo 2019, 00:14:57 CET, Benjamin Ikuta 
> ha scritto:  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I, for one, would indeed go so far as to say we should be doing editatons 
> about Naruto and Pokemon. 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 12, 2019, at 10:10 AM, Paulo Santos Perneta  
> wrote:
> 
>> I would not go as far as saying we should be doing edithatons about Naruto
>> and Pokemons,
> 
> ___
> 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=

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

2019-05-13 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
m more neutral (what to focus 
on), and how to find material that could be reused.
Fourth, I went again with them to a four hour class where we revised all the 
materials, we certified that all the music was free, we checked all the 
illustrations and we asked not to upload those that were of poor value or had 
any doubt about their copyright status.
Fifth, we helped students to find suitable songs for their videos, how to tag 
that the files were derivative works if applicable using Commons uploading 
system, how to fill everything if they were using video2commons and how to use 
the materials on wikipedia. It was my fourth morning with the students, and the 
third one dedicated to Commons. We also explained again what was the difference 
between free access and free license, because some of the students didn't get 
why we were not allowing them to upload some content.
Sixth, yes, there is a sixth, I spent another morning with the professors 
evaluating all the materials from a wikimedian point of view, talking about 
their quality and designing improvements for next year. Students then presented 
their works to a broader audience at the University.
Seventh, students went on vacations. At this moment an admin decided that all 
the previous work was not valid and claimed that it should be DW. Period. And 
then I noticed that some stuff was missing when I started to write a report 
about the experience for the Outreach Newsletter. And as I have followed all 
the steps, I have a dedicated place at the Outreach Dashboard where I can track 
everything this students created, uploaded or 
edited:https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/HUHEZI/Ikus-entzunezko_komunikazioa_(2019)/home
 . This content is public and can be easily reached in our dedicated education 
programme portal:https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari:Hezkuntza

It should be maybe few days spent with them explaining how Commons work, what 
licenses are suitable and why free content matters. If you feel so, then I 
should explain that we have created two videotutorials, a leaflet and a small 
book explaining everything we were explaining direcdtly to them, so if they had 
any doubt they could read them. And we gave a copy to each student, so they 
could have a guidance. And we also gave them a direct e-mail so they could ask 
for copyrights issues: two of them did it and we gave them some answers.
Cheers
Galder
From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf of 
Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 5:30 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach We have dozens 
of cross project brainstorming off-wiki. But the general feeling is often that 
if you encourage the social dynamics of a platform in a way that people who 
like to "play cops" are a key actor... when this is established there is no 
point in creating sophisticated or efficient tools, because as long as they 
force such people to work in a different way they will kinda oppose them.
For example, many time I find a deleted file  I could spot dozens of similar in 
the very same category and the few times I have asked the user who deleted it 
or ask the deletion, I could feel he had no real interested in completing the 
job. The fight for copyright is not a goal, it's a just a mean for him. He 
probably has fun cherry-picking one random file, with no consistent approach. 
So how many times for example I found files from the USA where there is no FOP 
for statues deleted maybe if uploaded by the European users but not by the 
American ones. Because of course if you did delete them all (as you should),  
enwikipedia community will notice and it will be a bigger deal.. it's a problem 
when all images of a monument disappear, right? So let's delete some random 
files, and vanish when somebody point out the other ones, just to repeat the 
same pattern somewhere else after a while. That's why it's so easy to find en-N 
users from the USA who have limited clue with rule of FOP. Now, the users who 
perform this type of deletion pattern will dislike any tools or preference who 
simply encourage to do it in a consistent way... they are expert and they know 
how categories work, if they don't complete the job is probably because they 
don't want to. If we get close to the issue, we manage to get around some "the 
newbes will misuse it" or "its a delicate matter", I guess the "good faith " 
clause will appear.

So, we keep a random patrolling and retropatrolling on this issue, which means 
poor overall copyright literacy, angry users because of the procedural 
incoherence and in the end a huge backlog (since the bulk of the files remain 
there). Take this dynamics, in other fields, with different nuances, multiplied 
by a dozens of different legal and workload scenarios and voilà. You have one 
of the reason of our current situation.

I guess there is no tool which can fix that, it's just the way a commu

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

2019-05-13 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 If I could share my vision, I am not part of the group of "expert flagged 
users"(I have some flags here and there, I was asked to get more but I have no 
rush) and I am not part of the group of "expert outreach users" (I make events 
but change them so often I do not play any specific role). Surprisingly, I 
never had any problem so far with Commons. Some unnecessary excess, but limited 
and mostly immediately showed to newbies as an example. Obviously, there is no 
way I sugar coat them, it's part of being a honest teacher to show these 
aspects and they are not cow to milk. I guess it works probably because my 
approach is far from those that I see here on both side.

The people who patrol (or have similar functions) show often limited interested 
in a functional working environment. Their approach is in my opinion one of the 
cause of the backlog, not a consequence. I could make you a long detailed list 
right now about that. 

On the other side, people who do outreach push too much for results with lmited 
understanding of the ecosystem they ask students to interact. I have met people 
who ask for "button men" at their initiatives with poor regard for the real 
expertise, often overselling what they do. it's not nice to be treated 
superficially when you try to explain why a certain topic is not relevant or 
why sending a ticket is appropriate for a certain image. If you are too focused 
on "your stuff", I wouldn't be surprised if you don't care for a functional 
working environment as well. You just expect someone else to build it for you.

That being said, that there are many small ways to improve the situation, not 
even complicated ones, and they can act as a catalysts on the long term but 
they don't come for free or because "WMF does stuff" or because there are 
patient users who build them step by step in the dark. They could, if you are 
lucky, but probably in this scenario they will also start from from your 
self-criticism. 

if you can spot such attitude in these mails, there's hope. Otherwise, it's 
probably going to be the same for some time.
BTW, glad to be proven wrong.
have a nice wiki
A.M.



Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 14:27:01 CEST, John Erling Blad 
 ha scritto:  
 
 Some years ago I did a quite simplified analysis of the number of
active contributors, and normalized the number against the number of
people wit internet connections for the respective language groups.
The relative number was pretty similar for all languages from similar
cultural groups. I suspect that for a given group, or project, there
is a limit on the relative number of contributors and we can't get
above it without changing the project somehow. Another indication that
there is a "crowdsource constant" is the trend themselves on
contributors at the individual projects, they have been stable (or
near stable) for a very long time. (Yes they drop somewhat, I know
that!)

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 8:09 AM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
 wrote:
>
> A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And maybe 
> (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed here.
> ___
> 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] Dispute between Common and Outreach

2019-05-13 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 We have dozens of cross project brainstorming off-wiki. But the general 
feeling is often that if you encourage the social dynamics of a platform in a 
way that people who like to "play cops" are a key actor... when this is 
established there is no point in creating sophisticated or efficient tools, 
because as long as they force such people to work in a different way they will 
kinda oppose them.
For example, many time I find a deleted file  I could spot dozens of similar in 
the very same category and the few times I have asked the user who deleted it 
or ask the deletion, I could feel he had no real interested in completing the 
job. The fight for copyright is not a goal, it's a just a mean for him. He 
probably has fun cherry-picking one random file, with no consistent approach. 
So how many times for example I found files from the USA where there is no FOP 
for statues deleted maybe if uploaded by the European users but not by the 
American ones. Because of course if you did delete them all (as you should),  
enwikipedia community will notice and it will be a bigger deal.. it's a problem 
when all images of a monument disappear, right? So let's delete some random 
files, and vanish when somebody point out the other ones, just to repeat the 
same pattern somewhere else after a while. That's why it's so easy to find en-N 
users from the USA who have limited clue with rule of FOP. Now, the users who 
perform this type of deletion pattern will dislike any tools or preference who 
simply encourage to do it in a consistent way... they are expert and they know 
how categories work, if they don't complete the job is probably because they 
don't want to. If we get close to the issue, we manage to get around some "the 
newbes will misuse it" or "its a delicate matter", I guess the "good faith " 
clause will appear. 

So, we keep a random patrolling and retropatrolling on this issue, which means 
poor overall copyright literacy, angry users because of the procedural 
incoherence and in the end a huge backlog (since the bulk of the files remain 
there). Take this dynamics, in other fields, with different nuances, multiplied 
by a dozens of different legal and workload scenarios and voilà. You have one 
of the reason of our current situation.

I guess there is no tool which can fix that, it's just the way a community 
really wants to be. Tools can help to encourage people to think differently of 
course, but I fear that would be a strong resistance.

A. M:


Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 16:56:49 CEST, Samuel Klein  
ha scritto:  
 
 Ditto.  But did not have the impression that this was {a, the} pressing
need.
Perhaps we also need better ways to highlight workload overloads (and
continue conversations about them through time, rather than sporadic
proposals of specific implementations that can easily fail) to stimulate
cross-project brainstorming to solve the most pressing problems of scale

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:02 AM James Heilman  wrote:

> I have a fairly good understanding of copyright. Deal with a fair bit of
> copyright issues occurring via paid editing and flicker washing of images
> and would be happy to do admin work around that if the Commons community
> was interested.
>
> James
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:00 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Wikimedia project communities in general seem to be quite stagnant, if
> not
> > declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole
> > different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it is
> > now when I joined in 2009. I always found it a very pleasant place, but
> > overtime I understood I was the exception there, and most people had bad
> > experiences. And it is as Yann has shown there, it's a few sysops running
> > the entire show almost alone, not because they want that, but because
> > nobody else helps with that.
> >
> > IMO the problem is not with the existing sysops, but because people in
> > general do not feel attracted to copyright and other similar minucious
> > stuff which marks everyday life in Commons. And, without that knowledge
> it
> > is pointless, if not counterproductive, to place a candidacy to sysop. No
> > idea what the solution could be, but it certainly is not blaming Commons
> > and the existing sysops. If more people was interested in copyright, less
> > mistakes would be happening in Commons as well. Whatever the solution is,
> > it probably passes by that.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga  escreveu no dia
> segunda,
> > 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
> >
> > > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And
> > > maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed
> here.
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of the WikiClassics User Group

2019-05-15 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 Thank you all for your replies. Congratulation also to Wikimédiens du Bénin 
User Group, for being recognized with us.

FYI, it seems that WikiClassics abbreviation will be WCS 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Reports=revision=19091680=19086803
Alessandro


Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 21:42:33 CEST, Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής 
 ha scritto:  
 
 Congratulations!

Στις Κυρ, 12 Μαΐ 2019 - 8:11 μ.μ. ο χρήστης Shlomi Fish <
shlo...@shlomifish.org> έγραψε:

> On Sun, 12 May 2019 11:43:22 -0400
> Kirill Lokshin  wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone!
> >
> > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> > [1] the WikiClassics User Group [2] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group
> > aims to improve the quantity and quality of information about classical
> > antiquity on the Wikimedia projects.
> >
> > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
> >
>
> Congratulations!
>
> > Regards,
> > Kirill Lokshin
> > Chair, Affiliations Committee
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_WikiClassics_User_Group
> > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiClassics_User_Group
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
> --
> -
> Shlomi Fish      http://www.shlomifish.org/
> List of Portability Libraries - http://shlom.in/port-libs
>
> Shlomi: if you read my stories, I’ll give you 1,000,000 virtual dollars.
> Sjors: causing me to have a lot of extra virtual time!
>
> 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,
> 
___
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] Introducing our newest chapter, Wikimedia Colombia

2019-07-31 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 Good luck!

Il mercoledì 31 luglio 2019, 20:11:39 CEST, Asaf Bartov 
 ha scritto:  
 
 Congratulations!

  A.

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 7:02 PM Kirill Lokshin 
wrote:

> Hi everyone!
>
> I'm very happy to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> has approved the recognition of Wikimedia Colombia [1] as a Wikimedia
> chapter.
>
> Over the past five years, Wikimedia Colombia has successfully planned and
> executed a significant portfolio of innovative and effective programs,
> attracting new contributors, forming partnerships with local institutions,
> promoting the Wikimedia movement throughout the Republic of Colombia, and
> demonstrating a substantial record of programmatic impact.
>
> It is our hope that recognition as a Wikimedia chapter will empower the
> Wikimedia Colombia community to continue fostering the Wikimedia movement
> in Colombia and enable them to more effectively engage with government
> entities and other partners.  We additionally hope that Wikimedia Colombia
> will prove to be a source of inspiration and support for emerging Wikimedia
> communities in the surrounding geographic areas, furthering affiliate
> development across northern South America and Central America.
>
> I want to thank everyone who has been involved with setting up the new
> chapter, and recognize their commitment and patience over the past two
> years as we've worked through the chapter recognition process.  Please join
> me in congratulating the entire Wikimedia Colombia team for their
> accomplishment!
>
> Regards,
> Kirill Lokshin
> Chair, Affiliations Committee
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Colombia
> ___
> 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,
> 



-- 
    Asaf Bartov
    Wikimedia Foundation 

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.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 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] Recognition of the Wikipedians of Goa User Group

2019-07-31 Thread Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
 congratulations!

Il mercoledì 31 luglio 2019, 20:08:32 CEST, camelia boban 
 ha scritto:  
 
 Wonderful news, congrats to the new UG .

Camelia, WikiDonne UG


--
*Camelia Boban*

*| Java EE Developer |*

*Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*

*Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member

M. +39 3383385545
camelia.bo...@gmail.com
*Aissa Technologies* * | *Twitter
 *|* *LinkedIn
*
*Wikipedia  **| **WikiDonne
UG * | *WikiDonne Project
 *











Il giorno mer 31 lug 2019 alle ore 17:55 Rajeeb Dutta 
ha scritto:

> Great news and many many congratulations to all the members involved in
> making this happen.
> Thanks Kirill for the update.
>
> Best Regards,
> Rajeeb Dutta.
> (U: Marajozkee)
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On 31-Jul-2019, at 9:11 PM, Kirill Lokshin 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi everyone!
> >
> > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> > [1] the Wikipedians of Goa User Group [2] as a Wikimedia User Group. The
> > group aims to build content related to Goa in all possible languages, to
> > conduct Wikipedia-related training in Goa, and to help build and sustain
> > the Konkani Wikipedia.
> >
> > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kirill Lokshin
> > Chair, Affiliations Committee
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Wikipedians_of_Goa_User_Group
> >
> > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedians_of_Goa_User_Group
> > ___
> > 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, 
  
___
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,