Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community survey to support the WMF ED search starts right now

[Brill Lyle]

I have over 15 years experience working in the private sector at an
investment bank, much of it working in Mergers & Acquisitions where
companies and their leadership were the focus of evaluating companies.

I would hope that whatever information is in the A.T. Kearney report, or
anything coming from PricewaterhouseCoopers, that the information is viewed
within the framework of the conservative private business sector within
which these companies operate. I started skimming these links and it's all
pretty typical information for that sector.

Also notable: A.T. Kearney is a consulting firm, and PwC is a financial
services company -- both deeply intertwined with the finance sector.

Long way of saying that I would hope that any approach towards innovating
the leadership of WMF would NOT come from the world of private
multi-national businesses who are often above governmental regulation, a
sector where there are few women and a place where profit is the primary
concern.

Ideally, the search for WMF leadership would be guided by ethics,
innovation, regard for fellow humans, etc. Versus the approaches most of
the businesses evaluated in the report, etc. are utilizing.

My unasked for 2 cents, but there you go.

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 5:47 PM, rupert THURNER 
wrote:

> hi,
>
> 2011 A T Kearney published a study saying that hiring a homegrown CEO let a
> company outperform other companies. also price waterhouse coopers Strategy&
> and RHR international come to similar conclusions:
> *
>
> https://www.atkearney.com/documents/10192/529727/Home-Grown_CEO.pdf/bbba713e-1a54-421f-81f9-4299faad42aa
> * http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news-archive/17975.html
> *
>
> http://www.rhrinternational.com/sites/default/files/V25N1-CEO-Succession-Makin_1.pdf
> * (de)
>
> http://www.finews.ch/themen/karriere/23186-korn-ferry-stefan-steger-ceo-nachfolge-wechsel-pwc-strategy?xing_share=news
> hiring an outsider CEO has the following effects:
> * higher compensation
> * greater risk profile
> * wrong expectations about business area and its specifics
>
> best
> rupert
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why are articles being deleted?

[Brill Lyle]

Saw this on the latest issue of Tech News (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tech/News/2016/26). Thought it might be
interest as it's directly related to this thread.

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Edit_Review_Improvements

see also: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/edit-review-improvements/

@Mitar -- you might want to volunteer to participate in this process, as
you have a lot of suggestions. I think the first way into the project is
via the Talk page, though :-)

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why are articles being deleted?

[Brill Lyle]

Thank you Carl. I will make sure to note re: real world identity going
forward. That was very helpful.

Agree Deletionists seem to be winning -- I've been told a contribution I
made was "too encyclopedic" for Wikipedia, among other nonsense. An entry
about a woman of course. Sometimes it's very absurd, and seems about
someone marking their territory than all of us working together to improve
the content.

It is a detriment to the community, as I know a lot of us adding content
are working really hard, are establishing notability, and using fully cited
information, etc. Really want to add content. But it's definitely not easy.
Blargh :-)

Mitar is not being specific about the entry and seems more into discussing
the process.

But for those newer editors needing help, please know that there is help
out there to get under-represented (but notable) entries and content onto
Wikipedia. There are a lot of initiatives and efforts to support that work.
A lot of us would like to make the encyclopedia representative of diverse
and culturally non-Western entities, to make it better, etc.

I also suspect people flock to editing Wikidata instead of Wikipedia
because maybe it's less contested?

Best,

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>*

On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 4:11 AM, carl hansen <carlhansen1...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> Brill Lyle, normally connecting real world identity with Wikipedia id
> within wikipedia
> is contrary to local ethos, but since Mitar links to his real page from
> User page, it's ok in this case.
>
> Mitar says.
> >
> > Why introducing artificial scarcity?
> >
>
> You have been hit by crossfire in the long running Inclusionist vs.
> Deletionist war.
> Your rant is an excellent exposition of the Inclusionist position. When I
> travel among
> Random Articles I often wonder why they deleted AAA but they leave this
> BBB. I guess
> the explanation of that is the sprawling size of English WP, there too much
> to curate
> satisfactorily. Currently I'd say the Deletionists are winning.
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why are articles being deleted?

[Brill Lyle]

Mitar

Gadzooks! The comments you made about friendly editors to a large community
of Wikipedia editors, maybe re-think saying that. I'm having a hard time
getting past these comments. *I* am a friendly editor, and am actually able
to help you. But you have basically said you have too much of a life to
engage, IRC is HARD, etc. Huh.

Quite frankly, without specifics about the entry -- and the citations used
-- there's nothing anyone can do to help you. It seems this is more about
discussing the process and your experience than finding a solution. Which
is fine, but I was trying to help solve the problem.

As others have said, this is not a new issue, or a newly discovered issue.
Saying the problem is systemic and not taking responsibility for yourself
as an editor by learning some of the requirements and rules of Wikipedia
seems to be a bit of an evasion of responsibility, perhaps?

Notability is definitely something that is highly debated within the
community, and I actually think there has been a lot of improvement in this
area. But if your citations -- or your entry -- isn't well done, I believe
that's when there are problems. Again, I would like to see these citations,
Slovenian or otherwise.

And I agree with John that there should be checks and balances. Many people
or subjects do not merit an article, but many others do.

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>*

On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Mitar <mmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> Thank you for your responses.
>
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Please include your user name and the name of the article you were
> working
> > on. Without any context it's impossible to help you. Thankfully I was
> able
> > to dig and find the page, etc. But include identifying info if you want
> > help / resolution.
>
> I didn't want to include this information because I didn't want to
> make it about my issue in particular. I wanted to give feedback and
> discuss principles behind my experience.
>
> I otherwise had good experience editing Wikipedia. Other editors were
> constructive and often with patience helped me learn how to improve
> the content and related rules of Wikipedia, which also seemed
> reasonable. But this rule I do not get and cannot relate to, thus I am
> bringing it here.
>
> I read that Wikipedia is trying hard to get new editors and this is
> why I am sharing this story here. Because from all my experience this
> one is the most problematic. It really pushes you off.
>
> And it is pretty reasonable that it is problematic. Now that most
> clearly "notable" articles have been already written the one which are
> left will be increasingly more and more in the "gray zone". And
> increasingly local, specialized, where such mistakes might be common.
>
> Maybe this policy for notability and significance had its historic
> place. It focused the community on the core set of articles, improving
> the quality of existing articles and created a name for Wikipedia. But
> I think maybe it is time that it is relaxed and a new level of
> articles is invited in. As I said, a warning could be used to tell
> readers that they are reading such a new article.
>
> (Oh, and please improve talk pages, that way of communicating is also
> a mess, but that one I can understand, it is a technical legacy. It is
> cumbersome, but I can understand it. But it does influence other
> issues then, like this one when you have to discuss something about
> Wikipedia. Why Wikipedia does not simply use some issue-management
> system where people could be opening issues for articles and other
> people and have conversation through that? It would also allow much
> better statistics of how many issues were satisfactory resolved, for
> example, for all sides.)
>
> > Discussion (with reason):
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG#Please_remove_the_tag_from_Poligon_page
>
> Yes, it is clear that the editor who deleted it does not understand
> local importance of the article. They could read the news articles I
> cited and might get a better picture.
>
> The issue is here that while new editors can edit pages, see tags to
> improve sources and so on, that is all helpful. But once a page is
> deleted, they are pushed off and cannot do anything anymore. I just
> started with the article. I could improve it through time, get more
> information in why it is important and so on. But once it is deleted
> nothing of this is not possible. I have to go around and find ways how
> to object to this, and I have no idea how to do that. (This is also
> why I am writing to such general list like this.)
>
> > I don't have 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why are articles being deleted?

[Brill Lyle]

Thanks for the responses. I think the overarching thought I have is that
Wikipedia needs to learn as much from editors as editors need to learn from
Wikipedia. I'm glad other editors are responding and focusing on this.

I'm doing remote support of an editathon today so I will work on assisting
on cleanup with this article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mitar/Poligon

Another hopefully helpful idea:

Use another makerspace/coworkspace entry / entries as examples of structure
and content:
- I know about this local one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyebeam_(organization)
- which led to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyebeam_(organization)#See_also

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>*

On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Mitar <mmi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> Thanks you for all the responses. It is really great to see this
> various explanations.
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Gadzooks! The comments you made about friendly editors to a large
> community
> > of Wikipedia editors, maybe re-think saying that. I'm having a hard time
> > getting past these comments. *I* am a friendly editor, and am actually
> able
> > to help you.
>
> Oh, sorry. I didn't mean it like that. I more than appreciate all the
> help and responses I am getting here. What I mean is that I would hope
> that it is possible to edit the Wikipedia without knowing editors and
> admins individually. But this would probably mean even more
> bureaucratic process, so maybe it is even better like this.
> Personally, I believe all editors are good people, with a common goal,
> it seems we just disagree sometimes, but this probably also comes from
> dissymmetry of information about particular things. Mine about
> Wikipedia rules, theirs about a particular topic. Addressing this
> dissymmetry is done through discussions.
>
> I see how that comment might offended. Sorry again.
>
> > But you have basically said you have too much of a life to
> > engage, IRC is HARD, etc. Huh.
>
> I am trying to present this as an occasional editor. Yes, one solution
> to issues I have is to get to know Wikipedia rules and community more,
> to get more engaged and integrated. This is a completely valid
> approach.
>
> But I wonder, is there an alternative path. What about occasional
> editor who might not have resources to embark on this path.
> Personally, it seems, I am already walking it. Yes, IRC is doable, of
> course. But this is because I get activated when I get frustrated and
> start thinking how to solve the problem. Instead of deactivated. My
> worry with that comment was that more obstacles are there, harder is
> to resolve such issues.
>
> > Quite frankly, without specifics about the entry -- and the citations
> used
> > -- there's nothing anyone can do to help you. ... Which is fine, but I
> was
> > trying to help solve the problem.
>
> Oh, sorry. I thought you already find the page? So it is this page:
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why are articles being deleted?

[Brill Lyle]

Okay, I did a pretty thorough scrub and reworking of the article. I added
the logo as well as moved it to the main space. As it stood the article
needed help but of course that's typical of new articles.

While the citations were okay I added more to them, and found a lot of
English articles as well as a few more Slovenian ones. There's probably a
lot more information out there but I need to stop and assist with the
ongoing editathon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poligon_Creative_Centre

Please feel free to edit, adjust, rework.

:-)

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>*

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the responses. I think the overarching thought I have is that
> Wikipedia needs to learn as much from editors as editors need to learn from
> Wikipedia. I'm glad other editors are responding and focusing on this.
>
> I'm doing remote support of an editathon today so I will work on assisting
> on cleanup with this article.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mitar/Poligon
>
> Another hopefully helpful idea:
>
> Use another makerspace/coworkspace entry / entries as examples of
> structure and content:
> - I know about this local one:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyebeam_(organization)
> - which led to
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyebeam_(organization)#See_also
>
> - Erika
>
> *Erika Herzog*
> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>*
>
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Mitar <mmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Thanks you for all the responses. It is really great to see this
>> various explanations.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Gadzooks! The comments you made about friendly editors to a large
>> community
>> > of Wikipedia editors, maybe re-think saying that. I'm having a hard time
>> > getting past these comments. *I* am a friendly editor, and am actually
>> able
>> > to help you.
>>
>> Oh, sorry. I didn't mean it like that. I more than appreciate all the
>> help and responses I am getting here. What I mean is that I would hope
>> that it is possible to edit the Wikipedia without knowing editors and
>> admins individually. But this would probably mean even more
>> bureaucratic process, so maybe it is even better like this.
>> Personally, I believe all editors are good people, with a common goal,
>> it seems we just disagree sometimes, but this probably also comes from
>> dissymmetry of information about particular things. Mine about
>> Wikipedia rules, theirs about a particular topic. Addressing this
>> dissymmetry is done through discussions.
>>
>> I see how that comment might offended. Sorry again.
>>
>> > But you have basically said you have too much of a life to
>> > engage, IRC is HARD, etc. Huh.
>>
>> I am trying to present this as an occasional editor. Yes, one solution
>> to issues I have is to get to know Wikipedia rules and community more,
>> to get more engaged and integrated. This is a completely valid
>> approach.
>>
>> But I wonder, is there an alternative path. What about occasional
>> editor who might not have resources to embark on this path.
>> Personally, it seems, I am already walking it. Yes, IRC is doable, of
>> course. But this is because I get activated when I get frustrated and
>> start thinking how to solve the problem. Instead of deactivated. My
>> worry with that comment was that more obstacles are there, harder is
>> to resolve such issues.
>>
>> > Quite frankly, without specifics about the entry -- and the citations
>> used
>> > -- there's nothing anyone can do to help you. ... Which is fine, but I
>> was
>> > trying to help solve the problem.
>>
>> Oh, sorry. I thought you already find the page? So it is this page:
>>
>>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why are articles being deleted?

[Brill Lyle]

Hi Mitar,

I haven't been on Wiki-l that long so not sure how (or if) people respond
to this issue, which is somewhat common. I will take a stab at responding
and will try to keep it short and sweet as you said you don't want a lot of
Wiki:Rulz

First off:
Please include your user name and the name of the article you were working
on. Without any context it's impossible to help you. Thankfully I was able
to dig and find the page, etc. But include identifying info if you want
help / resolution.

User name: Mitar

Name of page: Poligon

Deletion log:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete=Poligon

Discussion (with reason):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG#Please_remove_the_tag_from_Poligon_page

Second off:

This happens a lot. Here at Wikimedia NYC, where support a lot of
editathons with new users, who tend to want to create new pages, speedy
deletion of articles as well as edits is unfortunately common.

I don't have rights to view the deleted article, but if someone who does
moves it to your sandbox or a draft space you could work on it there, and I
would be happy to take a quick look at it / try to help.

Third off:

The structures you propose exist, but if you don't educate yourself on
procedures and policies and are a casual editor, you might not be aware of
them. Not trying to be mean or harsh here but I appreciate your passion and
thoughts and want you to know there are solutions in place

Potential solutions:

The best solution I've found if as a newish user you are wanting to create
new articles (as a short stub) is to do it in your Sandbox and make sure
you have at least 5 (or even 10) very solid citations. Have a friendly
editor take a look at the article before attempting to move it to the main
space.

It is critical you use the citations to establish notability. Not
everything is notable, and especially if the Wiki-en audience isn't
knowledgeable of the subject matter, it's even more important.

I know (and vouch for) DGG and he's queued a few articles I've worked on
for deletion. :-) He and many folks doing Articles for Deletion / Speedy
Deletion are well-intentioned, but sometimes it is a bit of an active
discussion. I suspect that folks who are evaluating deletions are doing it
quickly sometimes, and don't always have the context, but their goal is to
"protect" Wiki content, so

The IRC help channel (
http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=wikipedia-en-help) is also a great
resource -- especially if it's a time zone issue.

Glad you are enjoying the Visual Editor.

Best,

Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC

On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Mitar  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I am an occasional editor of Wikipedia, I read it a lot, I edit
> sometimes, and I am at all not familiar with bureaucracies and rules
> Wikipedia community has developed through years (call me lazy, but
> they simply always look too scary and too many for me to even start
> reading them, walls and walls of text). When I interact with Wikipedia
> I thus try to assume what reasonable rules for creating a
> collaborative source of all human knowledge would be.
>
> As such I would like to share one positive feedback and one negative
> feedback (frustration). The latter comes from my surprise between what
> I would assume rules would be and what I have experienced. I am
> sharing this to help prevent similar frustrations to other editors who
> maybe be less persistent than me and just give up.
>
> I am also guessing this has come up again and again in the past.
>
> Anyway. First the positive feedback. I love the visual editor! I
> finally switched to it and I am not going back! This is a life saver
> for somebody who just occasionally edits Wikipedia. No need to anymore
> guess if I should use single [ ] or double [[ ]]. No need to try to
> remember the syntax for references every time when I am editing
> Wikipedia after few months pause. Great job!
>
> But the negative feedback comes from me getting too enthusiastic about
> my new visual editor experience and I decided to create some my own
> new articles instead of just editing existing ones. The result was
> that one of such articles was speedily deleted without any due
> process, because it was deemed insignificant, no discussion, in a day.
>
> The whole notion of insignificant and not notable articles comes to me
> as a surprise. It seems to me as a legacy of printed encyclopedias
> which were limited in number of pages printed. But an online
> encyclopedia? How is this possible?
>
> Why I have problems with this:
>
> I created an English article which is significant at least for people
> in Slovenia, with references to local news articles. How can other
> editors who might not know the subject, and are not from Slovenia,
> decide that this is not significant and just delete a page, without
> even starting a discussion? I commented on 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why are articles being deleted?

[Brill Lyle]

I know David in real life so maybe I am not as objective as I could be but
I know how hard he works and how diligent he is about this admin work he
does. He is doing the devil's work in my opinion. I couldn't do what he
does so I'm thankful for his efforts. Thank you David.

When David has flagged things I've worked on -- or that I disagree on his
take on something others have worked on and he's flagged -- he's been very
willing to have a conversation about it -- and has changed his stance more
than once.

That said, it's down to the quality of the first draft. In this instance,
the draft, in my opinion, did a disservice to the subject. Although there
were good citations, the content of the page was not strong enough or well
developed enough to reflect what the entity actually does. And didn't
establish notability or have the basic details needed to be up on
Wikipedia. It was a draft and belonged in a Draft, Sandbox, or user space.

So this is another case of an enthusiastic editor putting something up on
the main space without doing the building blocks work that was needed. I
love the enthusiasm displayed here but helping new folks who want to create
entries for their friends and relatives or want to start right off with a
new entry -- vs. working on building skills by adding citations and
improving the gajillions of articles that need TLC -- well it begins to
wear even this inclusionist down. I don't think I had the guts or
confidence to start a new stub until I had been editing regularly for 6
months, but obviously other people have a different take on this.

Also:
Mitar, these long breathy quite frankly TL;DR posts don't really help your
cause. I think your concerns have been expressed and people have been great
about responding. But at a certain point no one has time to dig through all
your words and it becomes a bit presumptive that people have time to give
these legitimate concerns the attention they deserve. Just thought I'd
mention that. Totally ironic of me to say because I am a long-winded person
myself. So take that for what you will :-)

Again, only my opinion, all of the above. But wanted to give a shout out to
David and thank him publicly.

- Erika




*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 7:01 PM, David Goodman  wrote:

> I was the person who tagged the article we are discussing for deletion as
> no indication of importance. I am quite aware I have a certain frequency of
> error, probably about 2-5%, as does essentially everyone screening
> articles. Therefore there is an firmly established practice , that no
> administrator delete an article of such ground without a check from someone
> else, so it could not be deleted unless another administrator agreed. This
> reduces the error rate to about  0.05 to 0.25%,and I cannot imagine how and
> crowd-sourced process could do better.
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Massive Online Open Course about Wikipedia

[Brill Lyle]

Ah. Interesting. Apologies, I didn't know the two Education programs were
different. Thanks for explaining this.

It's all very interesting. Thank you so much for sharing!

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Shani <shani.e...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, Erika.
>
> I was referring to the Wikipedia Education Program (the global one), and
> specifically the Collab, a group of WikiEDU leaders from around the world,
> *not* the Wiki Education Foundation (which is basically the US education
> program). It's very confusing, I know! :)
>
> In any case, our efforts focus exactly on what you've described -- we've
> noticed that different parties seem to work on the same thing and are doing
> what we can to create global awareness and open up a dialogue about it, so
> we can learn from each other's efforts, as well as come up with a
>  successful "recipe" for those who want to start one.
>
> Best,
> Shani.
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I am curious about the overlap -- if any -- between the WikiMOOC
> > initiatives and WikiEdu. It seems like these are inter-related
> initiatives
> > that duplicate efforts to some degree? I understand WikiEdu is focused on
> > North America, so maybe that answers the question, but it sounds very
> > frustrating that these efforts are not more connected somehow. The
> WikiEdu
> > Dashboard is very cool!
> >
> > I am also wondering about user metrics, and how they were measured.
> > Apologies, I clicked through many of the original links but didn't see
> that
> > information quickly / easily.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Erika
> >
> > *Erika Herzog*
> > Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle
> >
> > Secretary, Wikimedia NYC
> > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC>
> >
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Massive Online Open Course about Wikipedia

[Brill Lyle]

I am curious about the overlap -- if any -- between the WikiMOOC
initiatives and WikiEdu. It seems like these are inter-related initiatives
that duplicate efforts to some degree? I understand WikiEdu is focused on
North America, so maybe that answers the question, but it sounds very
frustrating that these efforts are not more connected somehow. The WikiEdu
Dashboard is very cool!

I am also wondering about user metrics, and how they were measured.
Apologies, I clicked through many of the original links but didn't see that
information quickly / easily.

Best,

Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC


On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Shani  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> The Wikipedia Education Program
>  (more
> specifically, the Wiki Education Collaborative
> <
> https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/Wikipedia_Education_Collaborative
> >),
> has been following the development of WikiMOOCs across our movement. Our
> hope was to create dialogue and share experiences between various chapters
> / groups / individuals who are working on the same idea -- creating a wiki
> MOOC -- across the Wikiverse.
>
> So far, we've had an initial online meeting
> <
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKlLKz8Dm2k=PL3tYD7kLHbTEBYZd9_vFm0Y_WrUyC0ncc=3
> >
> (which was recorded) with reps from Argentina, Mexico, Sweden, Israel & the
> Education team at WMF. One of the outcomes of this meeting was the
> understanding that before we continue, we need to learn more about existing
> experiences and curate what is already happening. The result was an
> interview with Pete Forsyth
> <
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfXvzvZBWG0=PL3tYD7kLHbTEBYZd9_vFm0Y_WrUyC0ncc=2
> >,
> who's run a MOOC in the US, as well as an interview with reps from the
> French Chapter,
> <
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FclihxcIKU=PL3tYD7kLHbTEBYZd9_vFm0Y_WrUyC0ncc=1
> >
> Mathieu
> Denel & Jules Xénard, who have run the MOOC Emeric just reported on.
>
> I hope the above links might help those who interested in the idea.
> Also, we are planning a second WikiMOOCs meeting soon, so if any chapter /
> group / individuals are interested in joining us, please let me know. :)
>
> Cheers,
> Shani.
>
> -
>
> Shani Evenstein, WM-IL
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Anna Torres  wrote:
>
> > +1 Emeric!
> >
> > WMAR is almost ready to launch the 3rd online course with our own e
> > learning platform. We will let you know too.
> > Thanks for sharing your resources! This is super useful!
> >
> > Thanks a lot!!! Hugs and Congrats!
> > El abr 5, 2016 5:26 AM, "Àlex Hinojo"  escribió:
> >
> > > Thanks Emeric for sharing this impressive report. Good job!
> > >
> > > 2016-04-05 9:20 GMT+02:00 Sandra Rientjes - Wikimedia Nederland <
> > > rient...@wikimedia.nl>:
> > >
> > > > Hello Emeric,
> > > >
> > > > This is very impressive.  Many thanks to Wikimedia France for being a
> > > > pioneer.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sandra Rientjes
> > > > Directeur/Executive Director Wikimedia Nederland
> > > >
> > > > tel.(+31) (0)30 3200238
> > > > mob. (+31) (0)6 31786379
> > > >
> > > > www.wikimedia.nl
> > > >
> > > > *Postadres*: *
> > > > Bezoekadres:*
> > > > Postbus 167
> Mariaplaats
> > 3
> > > > 3500 AD  Utrecht Utrecht
> > > >
> > > > 2016-04-04 18:44 GMT+02:00 Emeric Vallespi <
> emeric.valle...@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello Wikimedians,
> > > > >
> > > > > The French WikiMOOC is now over. And we had more than 6,000
> > registered
> > > > > users!
> > > > > We are very happy and delighted with the results, not only by the
> > > number
> > > > > of registered users but also because 36% of participants are women,
> > and
> > > > 19%
> > > > > live in Africa. More than 1,000 accounts were created and around
> 300
> > > > > articles.
> > > > >
> > > > > The main goals of this MOOC was to have a scalable solution, to
> > > increase
> > > > > public awareness and improve the diversity of contributors. We
> > believe
> > > > that
> > > > > we've achieved these goals, and we believe it will be far easier
> with
> > > the
> > > > > next versions as the frame and the contents are already here and
> the
> > > team
> > > > > knows how to improve it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I can't write this email without sending huge thanks to the
> > > contributors
> > > > > and volunteers who had the inspiration with this great idea, then
> > > > designed
> > > > > and facilitated it, to the Wikimédia France's staff members who
> made
> > it
> > > > > happens and especially to Jules Xénard (User:Jules78120) who asked
> > the
> > > > help
> > > > > of our chapter, led and coordinated it from the early 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [recent changes]

[Brill Lyle]

I find this issue of Conflict of Interest exceedingly problematic.

Almost every person working and living today will have a conflict of
interest somehow, especially as one becomes a contributor to any of the
Wikimedia projects, gets to know people, tries to organize events or
promote the value of Wikipedia, Wikimedia, etc. Or if you work in any field
that specializes in anything online or technical. It is an impossible
situation.

I think that Wikimedia deals with this very badly -- and obviously at great
personal cost to talented, giving people. I am sorry.

And to the bigger problem: Wikimedia loses a smart person who has loads of
ideas and expertise -- and is a contributor to Wikidata (one of the best &
most exciting projects to be visited upon Wikimedia) because of this arcane
and quite frankly needing to be re-evaluated rule? I see this as one of the
many problems of Wikimedia.

EVERYONE has conflict of interest. We need the smartest and brightest minds
out there to contribute whatever they willingly can and will do on a
volunteer basis. How can they not have connections to the real world as
well as to online? Do we expect volunteers to be in their bunkers
somewhere, siloed from the world, that these clean folks are the ones to
move Wikimedia forward? It's laughable.

One thing Wikimedia seems to do quite well is torture people who want to
contribute by rules and policies that I think, quite frankly, are
unworkable.

Requiring some sort of absolute clean Conflict of Interest is an impossible
ideal. It is also obviously hurting the community.

There is much change happening. I think it's an opportunity for newbies
such as myself as well as folks with longer views to make things better. Or
these mistakes will continue to plague the Wikimedia community -- and we
will all lose out.

- Erika
*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 


On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 2:28 AM, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> Denny I am sorry to have lost a friend who is on the board but I am happy
> to welcome back a friend who can now express his ideas, his notions, his
> opposition, his point of view. Yes you work for Google. For me it means
> that you are again in an unique position to be an ambassador for both
> Google and WMF in either domain.
>
> You may have gained friends while on the board, the one sad thing is that
> it came at a huge cost to you personally. Nevermind what you do, I trust
> you to do well.
> Thanks,
> Gerard
>
> On 8 April 2016 at 20:17, Denny Vrandecic 
> wrote:
>
> > I exchanged a walk on part in the war for a lead role in the cage.
> >
> > I find myself tied and limited in my actions and projects. In order to
> > avoid the perception or potential for Conflict of Interests I have to act
> > extremely carefully in far too many parts of my life. Instead of being
> able
> > to pursue my projects or some projects at work - which I think would
> align
> > very well with our mission - I found myself trapped between too many
> > constraints. I feel like I cannot offer my thoughts and my considerations
> > openly, since they might easily be perceived as expressions of interests
> -
> > regarding my previous work, regarding my friends, regarding my current
> > employment.
> >
> > This hit home strongly during the FDC deliberations, where I had to deal
> > with the situation of people deliberating a proposal written by my Best
> > Man, around a project that has consumed the best part of the previous
> > decade of my life. Obviously, I explained the conflicts in this case, and
> > refrained from participating in the discussion, as agreed with the FDC.
> >
> > This hit home every time there was a topic that might be perceived as a
> > potential conflict of interest between Wikimedia and my employer, and
> even
> > though I might have been in a unique position to provide insight, I had
> to
> > refrain from doing so in order not to exert influence.
> >
> > There were constant and continuous attacks against me, as being merely
> > Google’s mole on the Board, even of the election being bought by Google.
> I
> > would not have minded these attacks so much - if I would have had the
> > feeling that my input to the Board, based on my skills and experiences,
> > would have been particularly valuable, or if I would have had the feeling
> > of getting anything done while being on the Board. As it is, neither was
> > the case.
> >
> > I discussed with Jan-Bart, then chair, what is and what is not
> appropriate
> > to pursue as a member of the Board. I understood and followed his advice,
> > but it was frustrating. It was infuriatingly limiting.
> >
> > As some of you might know, Wikidata was for me just one step towards my
> > actual goal, a fully multilingual Wikipedia. I hoped that as a Trustee I
> > could pursue that goal, but when even writing a comment on a bug in
> > Phabricator has to be considered under the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [recent changes]

[Brill Lyle]

Thanks for the response, Pine. I don't know if I agree with your assessment
re: resigning being the solution, but I am as not fully versed in many of
the details as you are obviously. I see this resignation as a real loss to
the community, and hope that possibly going forward there might be
alternatives to what seems to be a very torturous experience for
well-meaning, smart and talented folks who have only helped our community.

You bring up the business world, which is rife with conflicts of interests.
I have a background working in investment banking so I found that sort of
funny. They do a pretty terrible job of this -- see #PanamaPapers, people
sitting on boards, etc :-) So self-recusing seems sort of inadequate
and impractical...

I am obviously very new to all of this, but as I have come to learn more
about the Wikimedia family of projects, I have noticed that there is at
least one high profile public figure who "makes his living" off his
connection to Wikipedia -- Jimmy Wales -- which if that's not a conflict of
interest, well I don't know what is

And then there are various chapters that have paid staff, as well as
Wikimedia Foundation staff, who all what, stop editing once they become
paid?

Our local chapter here in New York City is starting to work with the WMF to
have annual grant-funded project positions, and as someone who is active in
the chapter's organization and event administration as well as a person who
is going to apply for one of the positions, this issue of conflict of
interest is a real stumbling block.

The issue is: Do I do a massive amount of free digital labor as a volunteer
(COI free) or do I get paid to do this work (COI rife)? Being paid seems
only fair, especially in contrast to country chapters who have as many
events as we do, and can rely upon paid staff to implement programming,
planning, and events. But being paid is a minefield of nightmarishness if
COI is applied harshly. It will completely affect the outcome of what can
be accomplished and done. Will pretty much completely handicap many of the
ideas I have to improve much of our work process.

But more on topic: I agree with Gnangarra here VERY well said.

This seems to be very true, which I have noticed on our chapter level as
well as on the larger WMF level. Denny realized he couldn't wait to start
and create Wikidata. If he didn't do it then it wouldn't have gotten done.
Without his expertise and skillsets -- which come from his professional
experience -- this would not have come to fruition. It is all inextricably
entwined. Quite frankly, to focus on bureaucracy over innovation is a sure
path towards death of all the great stuff that is possible around here. It
is riskier, because it relies upon people sticking their neck out and being
bold, but it's much better for our community than all of these flipping
rules and regulations weighing us down.

Fascinating discussion.

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC



On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 4:17 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:

> This is one inherrant problem with COI those who get stuff done are forced
> to sit out discussions in preference for those who spend all their time
> talking and producing nothing. What we end up with is not leadership, its
> not project experience, its bureaucracy with out any true direction  where
> every idea that sounds good, that is well presented gets the go ahead with
> no understanding of what it takes to make a project work. Because of that
> we have KPI or metrics that satisfy the bureaucracy, force the organisors
> to run by the numbers rather than focus on producing real impact results
> over the longer term.
>
> High impact long term projects take considerable investment of time over
> time the dont happen in 3, 6, 12 month cycles, look at WLE & WLM its be
> year in year out commitments by volunteers to build and expand but every
> year they waste time seeking funding for the year this is where the Grant
> process should take the lead and just assign a long term budget to be
> managed by WMF financial staff and let the volunteers concentrate on having
> impact. Wikidata is in the same boat, its the bureaucratic begging
> processes that cost most of our volunteers time and produce the least
> impact.
>
> Denny's loss should be awake up call otherwise it'll be repeated
> continously especially from community selected seats, some where along the
> way we have created a bureaucracy at the expense of trust and assuming
> people are acting in good faith for the betterment of the projects
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding Citation Hunt

[Brill Lyle]

I agree this is not a black and white issue.

To depend upon a volunteer workforce to chip away at big picture issues --
especially relating to citations (with the idea that they become systemized
and full on integrated with Wikidata in a super user friendly way) -- is
(a) impractical and (b) weakens the potential for innovation, information
gathering, and quality control.

But then again I think there should be rich and deep cultural partnerships
with GLAM and other institutions, even TV networks and other content
creators, that are funded by grants and outreach in an effort to make
Wikipedia less text heavy, less citation lite, and less curated by
hobbyists who drive out experts in their fields.

I am saying this lovingly, of course, as a hobbyist here

Agree also about how Wikimedia *does* pay many people -- and should
continue to do so in service to the projects. This is the first "dirty
secret" #NotReally I was truly shocked by once I started volunteering and
getting more involved here.

I don't get citation hunt, find it intimidating and is not why I edit
Wikipedia, but I support improving citations 100%.

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC


On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 10:02 AM, James Salsman  wrote:

> >
> > Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> >
> ...
>
>
> > I categorically oppose paying people for content. Enabling them to create
> > content is different. Citations is content and its quality is relevant
> but
> > only that.
>
>
> Why categorically? We already pay hundreds of people for work in support of
> the projects, including reader-facing administrative and content far more
> prominent than citations. We encourage Wikipedian in Residence programs
> where third parties pay for all kinds of content development. The PR
> editing guidelines explicitly recognize that paid content happens anyway,
> we can't control it, but we can offer best practices. We support editing
> assigned as part of academic class requirements.
>
> What reason is there to flatly rule out paying people to find citations
> before measuring the quality and cost/benefit ratio of doing so with a
> variety of both incentive payment models and managers?
>
>
> >  > How do people feel about a few of the larger the Chapters funding
> > pilots to
>
> > have professional researchers do
> https://tools.wmflabs.org/citationhunt/en
> > > and a few other main languages?
> > >
> > > It would be great to measure the quality of results of different
> payment
> > > incentive models and rates, but this is not something that the
> Foundation
> > > could do without some risk of breaching the DMCA safe harbor
> provisions,
> > as
> > > far as I can see. Even if I am technically wrong about that, the
> > > appearances would be that it's obvious exertion of what would be
> positive
> > > editorial control, which would still mean a greater likelihood of
> > lawsuits
> > > by disgruntled BLP and corporate subjects who can't win in court but
> can
> > > waste everyone's money.
> > >
> > > But I would rather have multiple measurements administered by different
> > > parties anyway, because there are likely to be large uncontrollable
> > sources
> > > of noise.
> >
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Calendars

[Brill Lyle]

Hi Quiddity,

This is great. I will go over the link you shared. I think I combed through
many if not all of these pages, but will double-check.

The Calendars I sent out previously now live on the WM NYC Event Archive
page here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Event_archive#Calendars

Best,

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC


On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) <
nwil...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

>
>
> Thanks, BrillLyle!
> I've been making a related linkdump page at
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Calendars,_events,_meetings,_and_conferences
> (feel free to add/edit/overhaul/etc) to try to collect and better
> understand the various problems, and this interim solution seems like a
> good one for the short-term. Extra thanks for clear linking to the .ics
> files. :-)
>
> Quiddity
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Calendars

[Brill Lyle]

Hello --

In an effort to de-clutter the Wikimedia NYC calendar -- and to support the
various initiatives and enhance event calendaring within Wikimedia -- after
some active discussion, Wikimedia NYC (well that would be me) has set up
the following calendars.

Many events were pulled from these source:
- https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Events
- https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Events

Ideally a calendar solution would be open source and Wiki-friendly (see
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T1035 Consolidate the many tech events
calendars in Phabricator's calendar), but Google calendars seem to provide
the most functionality right now so this is seen as an interim solution.
For reference: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/calendar/

Please feel free to add events and share widely.

*G L O B A L*


*Wikimedia Global Events*
Calendar ID: 7naa8gc5mjqhgjn1g2pbb48...@group.calendar.google.com
ics:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ical/7naa8gc5mjqhgjn1g2pbb4829s%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics


*Global Tech Events*
Calendar ID: 8bkj15efk0qgu4jut3oe5kd...@group.calendar.google.com
ics:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ical/8bkj15efk0qgu4jut3oe5kd5eg%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics

--

*I N I T I A T I V E S*

*AfroCROWD*
Calendar ID: djfkq9sql4h956b8vo6e35h...@group.calendar.google.com
ics:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ical/djfkq9sql4h956b8vo6e35h484%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics

*Art+Feminism* -- 3/4 complete, will go back and add missing & updated 2016
events
Calendar ID: vpjc23to157rgtvgnkces05...@group.calendar.google.com
ics:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ical/vpjc23to157rgtvgnkces05oq4%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics

*Black Lunch Table* -- will double-check complete
Calendar ID: speen8r33k1oh2e99u608g7...@group.calendar.google.com
ics:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ical/speen8r33k1oh2e99u608g7moc%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics

*Black WikiHistory Month*
Calendar ID: 40pgnrv1hbagcd40ukv6c15...@group.calendar.google.com
ics:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ical/40pgnrv1hbagcd40ukv6c15o0c%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics


*GLAM*
Calendar ID: ljmqctd112nju1fsngd1mvb...@group.calendar.google.com
ics:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ical/ljmqctd112nju1fsngd1mvbelc%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics

*Women in Red* -- just started, in progress
Calendar ID: qnadatlib4j65u1cn4ifo17...@group.calendar.google.com
ics:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ical/qnadatlib4j65u1cn4ifo17o4k%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics



*WikimediaNYC*
Calendar ID: nnvhsl9su019vngvb58qb68...@group.calendar.google.com
ics:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ical/nnvhsl9su019vngvb58qb68u6o%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics

*WM NYC Planning* -- Board and Event Planning so not public
Calendar ID: ed471n0r5vkgg99dn3tau1i...@group.calendar.google.com
ics:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ical/ed471n0r5vkgg99dn3tau1i9vg%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics


Please forgive typos, errors and works in progress. :-)

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] REMINDER: Invitation to upcoming office hours with WMF interim Executive Director

[Brill Lyle]

1. The sound quality was fine from what I saw and heard. I was on a desktop
computer using the Blue Jeans thing (which had the YouTube video playing)
and IRC chat -- and etherpad

2. Session notes were done live in Wiki Markup format on the etherpad which
resulted in a truly great cooperative effort to list detailed minutes. It
allowed a super quick publish to Wiki which was ideal. I was really happy
to see that and hope it can be a model going forward. I would suggest
having a "template" of information pre-filled out to facilitate the notes
going forward.

Having a timekeeper would probably necessitate having one person designated
to put time-stamps on main points. I think if there's consensus then
cooperatively this could be done? It seems like babysteps here -- having
transparent, detailed notes that are quickly turned around -- might be the
priority over the time-stamps but this is a logical and reasonable request,
I agree.

3. Agree on licensing default for published videos. Ideally the video
should be embedded on the Minutes page as a supporting resource.

An additional comment:

I'm new to both Wiki-l and learning more about the governance of WMF. I was
very happy with this meeting and the efforts made by Katherine to be
transparent and up front. However, I think this is a lot of pressure and
from my new perspective it is seeming to come down on one competent person.
I think this is a tough and somewhat problematic strategic position for any
one person to be in, and for any institution to rely upon. I hope that
there are more people who can take leadership roles at WMF who would share
this load. Assuming the consensus is for this approach to governance.

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC


On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> Thanks for the link. Handful of quick points:
>
> 1. The sound quality is poor, to a level where I find it quite hard to
> work out what is being said half the time especially as the speech is
> quite rapid. It would be worth investing in a bit of better audio kit
> for these videoed discussions. If the video is being captured
> remotely, better results might be possible by having a local capture,
> at least of the audio.
>
> 2. It would be great to have a tiny index as a text note on youtube at
> the time of publication so that, say, on an hour+ long meeting like
> this it would be possible to skip around the video to when new
> questions are addressed. Though the session notes are useful
> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Executive_Director/May_2016_office_hours/Video-based_session_notes
> >,
> there is no relationship to timing.
>
> 3. The video has been published on a standard youtube license. Can
> those that manage these videos apply a free license that would be
> allowed on Wikimedia Commons as a default please?
>
> As a side note, there was quite a few minutes of in-crowd banter at
> the start, an awkward drop-out mid-way for a couple of minutes and
> another award minute or two at the end where the meeting was being
> accidentally recorded to youtube after it ended. It might be good to
> edit these out of the published version considering it is a public
> record.
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Florida Librarians of Wikipedia

[Brill Lyle]

Congratulations to this new user group!

Hope it's okay -- I added a link to this meta page to the Wikipedia:Meetup
namespace:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup#Projects_.26_initiatives

Please reach out if any of us local Wikipedia chapters can be of
assistance. To the best of our resources, I think I can speak for Wikimedia
NYC and say we are happy to provide remote assistance and more importantly
guidance on helpful resources and event page content.

Also: There are a LOT of librarians in the Wikipedia:Meetup community who
are happy to assist. And hopefully reduce the need to re-invent the wheel
for much of the mechanical parts of editathons.

WM NYC and myself, inspired by the work of Dorothy Howard, have been having
an active discussion about Wikipedia editathons in a box, as well as
metrics in a box. To my mind it's basically event pages on the Wikipedia
meetup space (to onboard people to Wikipedia vs. Meta), with consistent
infoboxes, information, and resources. We also use a tabbed header for many
of the initiatives, as it seems to help a lot.

Congrats again! And Welcome!

Best,

- Erika



*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC


On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Carlos M. Colina 
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> It is my pleasure, on behalf of the Affiliations Committee, to announce
> the recognition of a new WIkimedia User Group: Florida Librarians of
> Wikipedia [1]
>
> As their name implies, they are librarians, and they want to focus on
> training other librarians on how to contribute to the different Wikimedia
> projects, especially Wikipedia. Apart from that, they have already
> organized some edit-a-thons and they're looking forward to organize more,
> as well as meetups of Wikimedians (librarians an non-librarians).
>
> Welcome to the family!
>
> 1: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Florida_Librarians_of_Wikipedia
> --
> "*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua
> junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain."
> Carlos M. Colina
> Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 | www.wikimedia.org.ve
> 
> Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee
> Phone: +972-52-4869915
> Twitter: @maor_x
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

[Brill Lyle]

I feel really bad for the person who started this thread. I hope and assume
that the WMF response means they have some sort of way to provide support
to someone suffering from ideations of suicide.

In addition to a policy on safe space -- which I know exists and our local
chapter as well as our regular venue have this posted on our namespaces --
I hope that there is documentation and support on this issue as well. If
there isn't one there needs to be. And it should be posted in a position
where it is visible, like the safe space policy.

I've been a member of various online communities, one music mailing list
for 10+ years where we had a person who had very bad PTSD (who eventually
got better) and others who died by suicide, etc. The acting out was a very
difficult situation and one that I have learned to not take lightly. It is
a lot like life, where you don't know what's going on for people, but it
definitely makes me pause a bit in interactions online.

This editor and their editing may be an extreme case, but they are not
alone. I hope they know that from the few responses here.

I have had bad interactions with obstructive, bullying, and Wikipedia rule
tossing folks. When I have started pages I hold my breath and hope that the
work doesn't get deleted -- or even scrutinized harshly. When I feel
passionate about a topic I will try to fight for notability but it's always
dicey. Then I see articles up on Wikipedia that have no business being up
there, have two citations and are paragraphs long, but are not challenged,
subject to the type of scrutiny the new stuff I contribute, etc.

Also, adding content. Good content with citations (I'm obsessed with
citations). Having it deleted. Being told it is too encyclopedic (yes!).
Editors deleting content is a real problem. It just takes one to be an
intransigent jerk and bully or rule throw their way into making the
experience uncooperative. Sigh.

So I tend to have a very long list of stuff I want to work on, much of it
in dustier corners of Wikipedia. Thankfully my attention wanders and if a
page heats up, I unfollow and try to walk away and refocus Sometimes I
can do that. I had to do that for Louis C.K.'s TV show Horace and Pete (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horace_and_Pete) because the editing became
super unpleasant.

Then as a counterbalance

There are times like the collective editing to improve the page on the
Reverend Clem Pinckney (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clementa_C._Pinckney),
who was killed in South Carolina during a prayer group by a white
supremacist, and the collective creation of a page on the setting of that
tragedy, a Wikipedia entry on the church, Mother Emanuel (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_African_Methodist_Episcopal_Church),
that was long overdue for an article due to its historical importance in
the African-American community. And a few other times when I've edited with
other editors, learned stuff, just enjoyed geeking out with another person
passionate about making Wikipedia better and more representative of the
world we live in.

I would love to do more cooperative editing. Most of the editathons we help
out with here in NYC focus on the new editor. I think we all have a lot to
offer each other, folks who have been adding content for a while and are
passionate about that. I wish we did a better job supporting each other.

Best,

- Erika




*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC


On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Michel Vuijlsteke 
wrote:

> Welcome to my exact experience on Dutch Wikipedia. Banned for life for
> 'outing' a power user.
>
> The 'outing' is in huge inverted commas -- (1) enter her on-wiki username
> in any search engine and you get oodles of vanity page(s) with her full
> name and (2) she'd done much worse than that to me.
>
> I've been called names, articles have been deleted, I've been told by many
> people that, sure, were it any other person they'd be banned, and sure,
> when she refers people to [Leck mich im Arsch] it *might* be construed as
> uncivil, but hey, she's doing good work on vandal patrol and deleting
> articles, so...
>
> Yup. It's very, very toxic at times. And nobody really cares.
>
> On 17 May 2016 at 14:47, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
>
> > Reaching out offlist. Anyone who knows Chris well and has helpful input,
> > feel free to contact me offlist.
> > -Pete
> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> >
> > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Chris Sherlock <
> > chris.sherloc...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I've just been blocked forever. I've been bullied, and I'm having
> > suicidal
> > > thoughts.
> > >
> > > I don't know what to do now.
> > >
> > > Right now I'm reaching out to anyone who might listen.  I've been
> called
> > > obsessive, someone who attacks people, I've not been listened to and
> I've
> > > been 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] REMINDER: Invitation to upcoming office hours with WMF interim Executive Director

[Brill Lyle]

Personally I'm not a huge fan of the visual editor -- but during the
presentation it was sort of awesome how quickly the notes shifted into Wiki
Markup

Anything that onboards folks into using more Wiki Markup, I'm a fan of that.

But good to know this for going forward.

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC>

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Kevin Smith <ksm...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > 2. Session notes were done live in Wiki Markup format on the etherpad
> which
> > resulted in a truly great cooperative effort to list detailed minutes. It
> > allowed a super quick publish to Wiki which was ideal.
> >
>
> For those who aren't aware, it's now possible to bring etherpad native
> formatting (e.g. bold, bullet lists) into a wiki page. You just have to use
> etherpad's "Export to HTML" feature, and then paste that result into Visual
> Editor.
>
> If the formatting is heavy on headings, wiki format is probably better.
> Otherwise, native formatting tends to be easier to deal with during the
> meeting itself (e.g. indenting nested bullet lists, WYSIWYG bold, etc.).
>
> It's great that we now have both options. Thanks VE team!
>
> Kevin
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
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>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] ArticlePlaceholder now live on first 4 Wikipedias

[Brill Lyle]

This is a tool that will be really useful to the AfroCROWD initiative that
Alice Backer leads (cc'd, as well as Pharos) -- especially for the Haitian
Creole community.

I'm hoping AfroCROWD and WM NYC can support an intensive translatathon
focusing on Wikidata, and really take advantage of this great resource.

Wonderful work!

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC


On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Lydia Pintscher <
lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de> wrote:

> Hi everyone :)
>
> Last year Lucie started working on the ArticlePlaceholder (
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ArticlePlaceholder) in order to
> fullfill Wikidata's promise of supporting especially the smaller
> Wikipedias. Today we have rolled it out on the first 4 Wikipedias:
> Esperanto, Haitian Creole, Neapolitan and Odia. When someone searches for a
> topic where no local article exists but Wikidata has data we will show an
> ArticlePlaceholder with this information and encourage the reader to create
> an article. I hope this will help these Wikipedias by offering their
> readers more content and by turning more of them into active editors.
>
> In order for the feature to work well we need labels for items and
> properties in these languages on Wikidata. A lot exist already but if you
> want to help out you can find items and properties that need labels in
> these languages at https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-terminator and
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:ListProperties.
>
> What we rolled out today as usual is a first version. Based on the feedback
> from those 4 Wikipedias we will expand and improve it. One of the next
> things we will do is add the option to translate an article from another
> language if it exists using the Content Translation tool and fix known
> bugs. Things we know are still broken or need work:
> * language fallbacks in the properties are not working so you will see a
> lot of P1234 and so on until a label is added on Wikidata in that language
> * long identifiers break out of the identifier box on the right side and
> don't look good
> * right now you only get an ArticlePlaceholder in the search results when
> Wikidata has at least 3 links to other Wikimedia projects and 3 statements.
> We might need to tweak this number still based on feedback from the first
> Wikipedias. We limit this in order to not encourage readers to create an
> article that will be deleted right after they created it because it isn't
> notable.
>
> Here are some example pages:
> * Odia:
>
> https://or.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%AC%AC%E0%AC%BF%E0%AC%B6%E0%AD%87%E0%AC%B7:AboutTopic?entityid=Q131074
> * Napolitan:
> https://nap.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speci%C3%A0le:AboutTopic?entityid=Q2613697
> * Esperanto:
> https://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciala%C4%B5o:AboutTopic?entityid=Q12345
> * Haitian Creole:
> https://ht.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espesyal:AboutTopic?entityid=Q12345
>
> I'm really excited about making true on one of Wikidata's biggest promises.
>
> Cheers
> Lydia
> --
> Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
> Product Manager for Wikidata
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
> Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24
> 10963 Berlin
> www.wikimedia.de
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
>
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
> der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board meeting minutes

[Brill Lyle]

Also, a request:

Please add:
- User names (i.e., {{User0|BrillLyle}}
- Links to relevant topics of conversation (i.e., Code of Conduct and
Confidentiality Agreement) and events (i.e., WikiCite 2016)

The March meeting minutes are making me itchy -- I want to add these
links

Here at WM NYC we list user names with talk pages and links to relevant
topics and events at WM NYC Board and chapter meetings. It seems to be more
convenient for folks and is aligned with the desire for good will
transparency. Plus the user names won't change significantly so I often
have them in hidden text, then adjust for actual attendees.

But then some might consider me an over wikilinker, probably. :-)

- Erika
Also enjoy alphabetical order


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC


On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 2:34 AM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> I note that the minutes I requested in my posting yesterday were published
> two hours later [1] althought not linked from
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Meetings as one would expect, not
> were
> they announced on the mailing list.  While I am glad that this has finally
> happened, it is deplorable that it should require persistent public
> complaints to make such a simple and easy thing happen when it should have
> been entirely routine -- the situation is still quite unsatisfactory and I
> look forward to receiving a clear explanation from the people responsible.
>
> I note that the issue of minutes will "be discussed as an item proposed as
> one of the governance improvements".  I hope that this discussion will lead
> to action, which is what has been conspicuously lacking.  Is the Community
> involved in these proposals for governance improvement?
>
> Rogol
>
> [1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2016-03
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

[Brill Lyle]

Thanks for doing this. It is much appreciated.

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC


On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Gregory Varnum 
wrote:

> Given the quickly approaching deadline, and the general support for
> affiliates voluntarily sharing if they voted (not who they voted for) - I
> went ahead (after chatting with folks that attended WikiCon) and setup a
> Meta-Wiki page to allow folks to voluntarily report back over the next
> couple of days:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2016/Voted
>  >
>
> -greg (User:Varnent)
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

[Brill Lyle]

Agree wholeheartedly. Don't need details but a summary list of chapters and
the record of who voted would be very welcome.

I was dismayed that this information was private. It seems like
transparency of basic information like this should be the goal here. I
don't think detailed information is necessary.

Like WM UK, WM NYC was transparent about the process and outcome of its
voting. It would be a real drag to have to look at each chapter's recent
events to see if this information is recorded locally.

Why not have it publicly viewable, collected in one place? I don't see a
downside here.

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC


On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Pharos 
wrote:

> In fact, for those who have access to it, there is a list of statements at
> the bottom of that page, listing statements from each chapthorg on their
> method and time of voting:
>
> https://chapters.wikimedia.ch/Appointment_process/2016/Voting#Statements
>
> For example, our entry says:
>
> "NYC: Decided by open public meeting on April 13, 2016."
>
> I think it might be best to make that whole section publicly viewable.
>
> Thanks,
> Pharos
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Andrew Gray 
> wrote:
>
> > Yes, for clarity, this is what I meant - a public list of who has
> > voted so far (or who hasn't - it's much the same thing, as the overall
> > electorate is known), but not a list of the votes.
> >
> > I'm quite happy with confidential voting - either fully secret or, as
> > Itzik says, just confidential until the end of the vote.
> >
> > But knowing *who* has voted would be quite useful. Ultimately, the
> > chapters represent large chunks of the community, and if the chapter
> > isn't doing its job then it's good their members know about it in
> > order to chase them. Discovering afterwards that your chapter hasn't
> > voted is interesting, but not very useful at making sure votes get
> > cast while there's still time - and ultimately, I think that last part
> > is what we all want to achieve :-)
> >
> > A.
> >
> > On 3 May 2016 at 16:21, Liam Wyatt  wrote:
> > > It seems like people are talking about two separate things at the same
> > time:
> > >
> > > - Some people are taking about publishing *the votes* (either before,
> or
> > > after the election has finished)
> > >
> > > - Some people are talking about publishing *the list of who has voted*
> > > right now.
> > >
> > > It is this second thing that I understood to be the request being made,
> > and
> > > it is also completely consistent with the way the community-election
> > works
> > > (where the voter, but not their vote, is published immediately). I also
> > > wouldn't think that publishing the names of the Chapters that have
> voted
> > > (and therefore identifying which ones have not yet) is still consistent
> > > with the preference that the *vote itself* remain private.
> > >
> > > So, in order for the community (and those of us who are members of
> > Chapters
> > > in particular) to encourage the chapters have not yet voted to do so,
> > would
> > > it be possible to please publish a table on Meta of the list of
> > > voting-eligible organisations, and a "tick" next to their name if they
> > have
> > > indeed already submitted their vote. [NOT who they voted for]
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -Liam
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > wittylama.com
> > > Peace, love & metadata
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > - Andrew Gray
> >   andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > 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
> 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Suggesting moderation

[Brill Lyle]

I was on a very active music mailing list for over 10 years and I was
grateful it was not moderated. Moderation can inhibit discussion, even when
there are disruptors, and it also requires moderators donate a lot of
volunteer hours. Which I think within the Wikimedia family community is
already being required of many of us. So I would vote against moderation.

If an argument / shift was towards moderation, maybe it could be based on
edit count and/or contributions? But that seems a bit extreme and awful.

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 4:26 AM, Asaf Bartov  wrote:

> A meta-question: I am wondering whether, if one thinks a user on this list
> should be moderated, it is better to discuss it privately with the list
> admins (who, if convinced, could announce the moderation publicly, or not),
> or publicly on this list (explicitly inviting more opinions, being
> transparent about my position regarding moderating the user, but also
> embarrassing the user whatever the outcome).
>
> Thoughts?
>
>A.
> --
> Asaf Bartov
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Wikimedians of Iowa User Group

[Brill Lyle]

This is great news. I've been trying to assist interested Nebraska Wikipedia 
editors and librarians with editathons and basic organization. The Midwest 
Silicon Prairie should include Wikipedia 100%!

Please reach out if Wikimedia NYC or other chapters can skill-share, etc. Our 
chapter has assisted remotely at events especially those related to AfroCROWD 
and the African diaspora and Art+Feminism.

Welcome!

- Erika
former Nebraskan
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC
User:BrillLyle

> On Aug 8, 2016, at 7:06 AM, Carlos M. Colina  wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> On behalf of the Affiliations Committee, I am pleased to announce the 
> recognition of the newest Wikimedia User Group: Wikimedians of Iowa User 
> Group [1]
> 
> The group is composed of  wikimedians from Iowa, who seek to organize 
> activities all over the state, like editathons and meetups, reaching out to 
> local educational institutions, libraries, and holding competitions. They can 
> trace the idea for the creation of the group during a Wikimedia DC editathon 
> this year ;-)
> 
> Welcome, Iowan colleagues!
> 
> 1: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Iowa_User_Group
> -- 
> "*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua 
> junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain."
> Carlos M. Colina
> Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 | www.wikimedia.org.ve 
> 
> Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee
> Phone: +972-52-4869915
> Twitter: @maor_x
> 
> El logotipo y el nombre de Wikimedia, Wikimedia Venezuela, Wikipedia, 
> Wikimedia Commons, Wikimedia Incubator, Wiktionary y otros proyectos 
> relacionados son marcas registradas usadas bajo permiso expreso de su 
> titular, la Fundación Wikimedia, Inc., una organización sin fines de lucro. 
> Otros nombres y marcas pertenecen a sus respectivos propietarios.
> 
> Asociación Civil Wikimedia Venezuela (Wikimedia Venezuela) | RIF.: 
> J-40129321-2 | Los Teques, Estado Miranda. Venezuela 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Changes to current chapter and thematic organisation criteria

[Brill Lyle]

I agree with Lane.

Setting higher criteria is all well and good -- as is expecting boards to
be cognizant of these expectations.

But we are dealing with volunteers doing a significant amount of free
digital labor and organizing. To set a bar super high in that structure is
a lot to expect of people contributing their T

Both Lane and I are part of Wikimedia NYC, a very active chapter that
somehow (I believe) manages to meet these criteria amidst almost
exponential growth of activities. The administrative burden on both our
leadership and membership is heavy, and I am grateful for everyone's pitch
in / can do approach and willingness to contribute.

And no, the answer is not to do less events and have less support to
institutional partners and various initiatives. That's not practical or
good for anyone.

But it brings to mind a recent trip I made where I visited the Wikimedia
Deutschland offices. Where there was a whole room (!) of 6 fully set up
computers with I am assuming the same number of staff for Event planning
alone -- all which I assume are paid positions. That really made me pause
in shock. And feel like a bit of an idiot that our chapter does so much
without that type of structural support.

So while I understand the idea of these criteria, to have the balance beam
heavily weighted on requirements without attendant support is not a
workable model.

- Erika
Secretary, Wikimedia NYC -- but not speaking on behalf of anyone but myself

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Romaine Wiki 
wrote:

> The criteria are for those groups who want to apply for an official status
> at WMF. In general I think all chapters should try to meet with these
> criteria. If a chapter is not able to structurally full-fill these
> criteria, a different board is the solution to revive the chapter.
>
> I personally think the criteria are a balanced set of guidelines to be
> followed.
>
> It is important for the movement to share the experiences and the results.
> Much more should be shared through best practices, how to's, reports and
> newsletters, like https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter for
> collaborations with various partner organisations.
>
> Romaine
>
> 2016-08-19 16:51 GMT+02:00 Lane Rasberry :
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Do these criteria apply to existing groups? Maybe I misunderstand, but
> > from this proposal it sounds like new groups will be held to
> significantly
> > higher standards than any currently recognized organizations. Is that the
> > case?
> >
> > yours,
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Carlos M. Colina <
> ma...@wikimedia.org.ve>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> On behalf of the Affiliations Committee, I would like to present some
> >> changes to the current chapter and thematic organisation criteria,
> which we
> >> will begin piloting as we officially reopen applications for chapter and
> >> thematic organization status. Until now, the criteria had not clearly
> >> defined what constitutes sufficient programmatic activity to justify
> >> chapter or thematic organisation status. To address this issue, we have
> set
> >> out three new criteria:
> >>
> >>1. Diversity of Activities: Chapters and thematic organisations are
> >>expected to plan and conduct a variety of different programs and
> events; to
> >>balance online and offline projects; to strive for continuous
> activity; and
> >>to conduct programs and events at least once every two months.
> >>2. Planning and Evaluation: Chapters and thematic organisations are
> >>expected to set specific goals and targets for programs, projects,
> and
> >>events before executing them; to measure the results of programs,
> projects,
> >>and events against those targets; and to report on those results to
> the
> >>Wikimedia Foundation and the wider Wikimedia movement.
> >>3. External Partnerships: Chapters and thematic organisations are
> >>expected to engage in programmatic partnerships with external groups
> and
> >>organizations (for example, cultural, academic, or government
> institutions,
> >>and so on) to promote the Wikimedia movement and to add and improve
> content
> >>on Wikimedia projects.
> >>
> >> In order to officially reopen the chapter and thematic organization
> >> recognition process, the Board of Trustees has instructed the
> Affiliations
> >> Committee to provisionally use these three new criteria for all new
> >> applicants. In addition, potential chapters and thematic organisations
> will
> >> continue to be assessed against the existing legal, governance, and
> >> viability criteria; more details, including the benefits and
> limitations of
> >> these affiliation models, are available on Meta.[1] [2]
> >>
> >> Please note that the use of these three new criteria is a pilot; there
> >> will be opportunities to share 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thoughts about upcoming Wikimedia strategy

[Brill Lyle]

Good points and thoughts here, Pine.

*3. Governance*


*Decentralization*I think is non-ideal. If WMF becomes incapacitated or
corrupted the whole ship goes down. I don't see how decentralizing the
structure would prevent this happenstance -- or more importantly provide a
solution or contingency plan. #4 Openness: Open culture and transparency
would provide a potential improvement and would support a centralized
structure


*Empower Wikimedia affiliates*I like this. A lot. The more affiliates can
work at a local, grass-roots level, with the support of various
WikiProjects and initiatives like WikiEdu, the better, in my opinion


*5. Finance*


*Acquire adequate financial resources...*Yes, but with a more effective,
focused, additional distribution. The free digital labor model is well and
good for casual contributors but I think for folks doing significant heavy
lifting it becomes a big problem. Focusing on paid positions -- really:
aligning paid positions globally -- is one potential method and solution.
For example, WMUK and WMDE have a full array of staff. Large chapters
elsewhere (either city or country) have no logistical and/or administrative
support.

I believe WMF needs to invest in its infrastructure (i.e., people) more.
And create a help desk type service that can address public relations
problems for BLP issues specifically.



:-)

- Erika



*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Pine W  wrote:

>
> 3. Governance
> Decentralize the functions currently managed by the Wikimedia Foundation to
> reduce dependencies and increase resilience of the Wikimedia projects,
> communities, and affiliates. Empower Wikimedia affiliates and the online
> communities to be capable of continuing operations, fundraising, and growth
> even if WMF becomes incapacitated or corrupted.
>
> 5. Finance
> Acquire adequate financial resources to achieve goals 1 through 4 within
> the lifespan of the strategic plan's time horizon.
>
> I look forward to hearing the thoughts of others in the months ahead, both
> on Wikimedia-l and on Meta.
>
> Regards,
>
> Pine
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Changes to current chapter and thematic organisation criteria

[Brill Lyle]

This is beautifully said. I just love it. 

Thank you!

> On Aug 22, 2016, at 8:13 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> 
> We need to focus on building communities
> 
> To me the first thing that should change is rather than focusing on how to
> bring down chapters we should be focusing on how to further improve and
> promote the affiliate network, its as simple as saying Affcom can provide
> x,y,z to help support the expansion of chapters, it also has a,b,c to
> assist user groups to expand...
> 
> I seam to remeber that the Affcom was originally created so Affiliates
> could help each other grow, not to give individuals a stick to whip others
> into submission.
> 
> I would rather a vague criteria, with groups being able to chose their own
> path and obtain what ever support they need and see growth in affiliates
> than see hundreds of pointless arguments about whether 5 with 100 attendees
> or 6 events with 10 attendees is enough when we know that one person or
> more precisely one volunteer contribute a to great deal of difference.
> Our people or the people are our greatest assets not numbers
> 
> On 23 August 2016 at 05:01, Chris Keating 
> wrote:
> 
>>> Does the Affiliations Committee have a list of existing chapters which do
>>> not meet the proposed criteria? I think we should at least get a sense
>> for
>>> that, and those chapters should be notified and be put on the path to
>>> meeting standards or losing their status.
>> 
>> Hi Ben,
>> 
>> The closest is this table for eligibility for the Wikimedia Conference:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_
>> 2016/Eligibility_Criteria
>> 
>> That did not apply the same criteria as AffCom are using, but you can see
>> that there were 2 chapters which appeared to be entirely inactive, and a
>> further 3 that had some kind of activity but were not reporting activity in
>> the terms required by their chapter agreements or grants.
>> 
>> In general, I think that it is sensible to have a method of inactive
>> chapters to be de-recognised - just as it is also useful for User Groups
>> working towards chapter status to know what they are meant to be working
>> towards.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Chris Keating
>> User:The Land
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> GN.
> President Wikimedia Australia
> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Changes to current chapter and thematic organisation criteria

[Brill Lyle]

I am fundamentally dismayed to read the response that this is not a discussion. 
I am baffled. Shutting down discussion is rule #1 in NOT fostering community. 

To create a one-way flow of communication with parties engaged enough to take 
the time to actively discuss concerns is a non-ideal approach to engagement on 
any level. 

I haven't heard anything untoward in this discussion. Except the dismissive 
responses by those who seem to be on the committee. 

If this was a for-profit organization this response might be more 
understandable but as Wikimedia is most definitely NOT this approach seems a 
real misstep. 

- Erika

> On Aug 23, 2016, at 3:44 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> 
> I dont see how a dissenting voice would be a surprise, I suppose you could be 
> surprised at my choice of language (blunter than I normally use) or at my 
> expectations from Affcom but being here in Australia we are isolated we dont 
> get the opportunities like people in Europe and America to be part of the 
> discussions behind those closed doors. When changes happen we dont normally 
> hear about them but are expected to follow them.
> 
> What I see is that Affcom has drifted from being a voice of the affiliates to 
> being just another bureaucracy which has resulted in exactly the same 
> response that caused affcom to be initially created back in 2012 with the 
> loose creation of a Latin America group, SE Asia group, Eastern Europe groups 
> being formed to give those chapters a voice they thought they had with 
> affcom.  
> 
> All we ever hear down here is the level of distrust and lack assumption of 
> good faith with more rules, more  bureaucracy more power cabals.  we make 
> rules to address things that might occur using language that shows a level of 
> distrust and badt faith .  As a group we need to get back to trust and 
> assuming good faith.
> 
> Choose language carefully, use wording to promote not put down, create 
> criteria thats boosts the affiliates we dont need to pull each other down to 
> make things better because we  just happen to find it easy to make that choice
> 
>> On 23 August 2016 at 14:46, Christophe Henner  wrote:
>> Hi Gnangarra,
>> 
>> This is not a discussion, and this is by design.
>> 
>> As Carlos said, those are provisional criterias so that our movement can
>> keep seeing new organizations blooming. But the discussion will not be only
>> about those criterias, but on a much larger, and I believe more interesting
>> and important, topic.
>> 
>> As we're moving forward regarding the movement strategy process (more to
>> come soon, it's only been 7 weeks since we announced that, and summer), it
>> is key to have discussions about the organizations in general. How do we
>> make them work as a whole? What values do we want Wikimedia organizations
>> to live by? etc. And out of those discussions, a criteria discussion will
>> come.
>> 
>> But it seemed quite a waste of time and energy to first have a consultation
>> about those provisional criterias and then another discussion about the
>> strategy.
>> 
>> That's for your point on the criterias. Now on the "Affcom whom I thought
>> was there to support the Affiliates not punish them". Yes, AffCom support
>> affiliates, but AffCom also has a duty to make sure that affiliates live by
>> their engagements.
>> 
>> One doesn't exclude the other, quite the opposite actually.
>> 
>> As a whole, I'm a bit surprized by your email. Things aren't black or
>> white.
>> 
>> Those criterias aren't up for discussion so that the discussion can happen
>> on a much larger topic that includes them.
>> AffCom role is to tend to our movement affiliates, this comes with many
>> duties and responsabilities amongst which helping organizations to get
>> recognized, supporting them, helping them, remind them of their duties and
>> sometime (rarely hopefully) challenge their statuts.
>> 
>> Happy to further that discussion,
>> 
>> Have a all great day
>> 
>> Christophe
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
>> 
>> > So to clarify, this isnt a discussion its been mandated to happen, just
>> > like Wikimania was mandated behind closed doors...
>> >
>> > sorry for it sounding like a dummy spit here but its nice to hear after all
>> > of the upraor and damage done over the last 18 months the community was
>> > heard and their requests were well and truly ignored by the BoT and now
>> > Affcom whom I thought was there to support the Affiliates not punish them
>> >
>> > On 23 August 2016 at 12:43, Salvador A  wrote:
>> >
>> > > I want to close the chapter of this discussion related to
>> > > quantitative-qualitative criteria in order to call your attention to some
>> > > consequences of this new criteria for existing affiliates. I want to be
>> > > clear on this in order to avoid future missunderstandings.
>> > >
>> > > Romaine said that it's desirable to have 

[Wikimedia-l] Project Grant: Twitterpedian-in-Residence -- Request for Review and Endorsement (10/11 -- today -- deadline)

[Brill Lyle]

*Apologies if you receive this as a cross-posting. I am re-sending this one
last time as there is an October 11 deadline for review, and the grant has
been updated a bit. **Thanks in advance.*

Hi Wikipedians,

I have written a *Wikimedia Grant Proposal: "Twitterpedian-in-Residence"* and
would be grateful for review, feedback, advice, and endorsement, if the
proposal seems positive.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/BrillLyle/
Twitterpedian-in-Residence

*Background*
In the last few months I have seen, been referred to, or tagged by friends
(who know about my Wikipedia obsession) on quite a few social media posts
written by people who are very unhappy with their Wikipedia entries. People
don't know how to fix their pages. And there doesn't appear to be an easy
answer or approach to talk with a human about the problem. Often, they try
to fix the problem themselves, which only exacerbates the problem. And they
hate their picture, etc. It goes on and on.

After the last few experiences where I have done significant amounts of
editing, it occurred to me that a more formalized answer might be a good
beta test solution to this problem.

I am a strong believer in the Wikipedian-in-Residence programs and GLAM
initiatives, so I envision this proposal within that type of framework.

Thanks so much in advance,

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,