Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

2017-10-13 Thread Caroline Becker
Hi Emeric,

I am very pleased that you take mental health seriously. I remember, not so
long ago, that your actions while you were in Wikimedia France had serious
impact on the mental health of at least two of your members.

In January, someone had a meltdown just in front of you. Could you remind
us what you did after that ?

In April, you learnt that your actions as a chair caused me a medical
leave. What can the Foundation and the movement as a whole learn about how
you dealt with the situation ?

Warmly,

Caroline

2017-10-12 12:39 GMT+02:00 Emeric Vallespi :

> Dear Maria,
> Dear all,
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees, the executive and the legal
> management of the Wikimedia Foundation have been informed of Nathalie
> Martin's complaint against her former employer now member of your board,
> and then of the criminal complaint against this same person (facts from his
> time in Wikimédia France and other from his time in your Board).
>
> It would have been logical for a board of trustees member to gather her
> testimony. No one has sought to make contact with her. Why?
> At the very least, the Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees could have
> requested a copy of the complaint, as well as the various testimonies, so
> that they could study them and make their opinion. We had no solicitation.
> Why?
> From what I see, the Wikimedia Foundation has done everything to stifle
> the problem. Here is the only initiative WMF has taken: paid "independent
> lawyers" (a concept unknown to me…) to "question Christophe". He responded,
> to the general surprise, that there was no problem.
> Do you really feel that this is a serious investigation? Honestly?
> Why did not these lawyers also hear Nathalie?
> Why did these lawyers not ask questions to the Wikimédia France Board of
> trustees members? Only with the testimony of the defendant himself, the
> Wikimedia Foundation today states that there is no problem. ...
> During the site visit, Nathalie proposed to the Wikimedia Foundation
> representatives to organize a confrontation. Not only did she have a flat
> denial, but, moreover, it was replied that it must not be addressed.
> Why did the Wikimedia Foundation not accede to this request for
> confrontation? Not to know the truth which can be too embarrassing to
> assume?
>
> We have a movement employee who brilliantly held management
> responsibilities for 4 years (great longevity for an Executive Director…)
> who asked for help. And what is the answer of the movement, of the
> Wikimedia Foundation? Nothing. Nothing was undertaken to give her any kind
> of listening or help.
>
> Marie-Alice Mathis, who courageously expressed disapproval of the sexist
> harassment of Nathalie, was also harassed by community members. Nathalie
> and Marie-Alice suffered health damages and had medical leaves issued by
> real general practitioners. The Wikimedia Foundation was informed and what
> did you do? Nothing, or worst: two messages from your staff legitimizing
> the harassment and one from a member of your board who publicly stated
> against Wikimédia France without any prior contact with us.
> What kind of help or support did you offer to Marie-Alice?
>
> The outcome of the complaints is not even the issue at this stage and this
> is not my point (I’m not a judge as you or other community member think
> they are).
> The real problem is that today a man in the movement, if he has power
> position, can do absolutely everything he wants without any control. The
> problem is, despite all the empty values you’re communicating on, you
> legitimize whatever the community does. Because the community is the
> measure of all things.
> No objective process is foreseen to protect women (and more generally,
> people) or at least to hear them.
> Do you find this normal for a movement that advocates inclusiveness and
> respect?
>
> I’ve read an ardent defender of epicene style of writing who is accusing
> of lying other women because of their private then public declarations.
> Having no clue of what is in the procedure. Thank you for enlightening me
> about true fight with feminism.
>
> I’m glad that « We take all allegations of harassment seriously », but I
> can not endorse this functioning which goes against legality and simply
> against human values.
>
> N.B: English is not my native language, may you be as tolerant of my
> selected words or sentences construction as with harassing behavior. Thanks
> for your understanding.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Emeric Vallespi
>
> > On 11 Oct 2017, at 19:54, María Sefidari  wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> >
> > We would like to specifically address the allegations related to
> harassment
> > in this thread’s original email. We take all allegations of harassment
> > seriously. Earlier this year, the Board of Trustees was informed that
> > allegations of harassment had been made against the Wikimedia Foundation
> > Board Chair dating back to 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Countries that publish in public domain

2018-05-15 Thread Caroline Becker
Hi,

You can have a kind of list with the PD-gov category in Commons :
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:PD-Gov_license_tags

Caroline Becker
Membre de Wikimédia France

2018-05-15 18:02 GMT+02:00 Jean-Philippe Béland <jpbel...@wikimedia.ca>:

> Good day,
>
> Is there a list somewhere of countries or sub-national governments that
> publish the works of their employees in the public domain?
>
> Jean-Philippe Béland
> Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Wikimedia Foundation's FY18-19 Annual Plan is on Meta-wiki

2018-03-31 Thread Caroline Becker
Hi and thank you for your input,

Please note that the WMF budget supports diversity in two ways :
_software and technical support, the most basic exemple being Mediawiki
which exists in a huge variety of languages
_grants to non-US projects, such a rapid grants and project grants.

Also, there is a lot of people left out of structures of power within the
US.


Le ven. 30 mars 2018 à 04:05, Michael Peel  a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> This seems to be an increase of $15 million USD in the WMF’s budget, with
> a $0.2 USD million increase in the international Wikimedia budget (through
> grants to chapters and other affiliates).
>
> That goes against the movement direction of "As a social movement, we will
> focus our efforts on the knowledge and communities that have been left out
> by structures of power and privilege”. Why aren’t we increasing our
> spending in the global south (through local affiliates) at the same rate
> that we are increasing it in the US?
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> > On 29 Mar 2018, at 17:42, Katherine Maher  wrote:
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I'm delighted to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation's Annual Plan for
> > FY18-19 is now on Meta[1].
> >
> > This year, we have organized our efforts around three goals that focus on
> > making critical improvements to our systems and structures to ensure that
> > we’re better positioned for our coming work against the strategic
> > direction[2]. The Foundation’s goals for this year should not only move
> us
> > closer to knowledge equity and service, but will prepare us to execute
> > against the 3- to 5-year strategic plan which we intend to develop this
> > year in order to guide the Foundation’s work into the future.
> >
> > As you’ll see, we’ve made some changes to the structure of this year’s
> > annual plan. This year’s plan is organized around three goals for the
> > Foundation’s work in the year to come. By restructuring the Annual Plan,
> we
> > have written a plan for the whole Foundation,  rather than an aggregation
> > of plans from all of our departments and teams. In this sense, we’re
> > seeking to become a better-integrated institution, rather than a
> collection
> > of teams and departments with disparate goals.
> >
> > We’ve also reduced the overall length of the published Annual Plan. We
> > wanted to make sure that the focus and goals of our work don’t get lost
> in
> > the details. Of course, we know that many community members enjoy reading
> > the particulars of our planned work, so you can still access the details
> of
> > departmental programs through links to their descriptions on Meta or
> > MediaWiki.org. These links will provide interested readers with detailed
> > departmental programs, which describe the specific and detailed program
> > goals, impact and outcomes. This change does not sacrifice the depth and
> > rigor of our planning process, but rather, it is meant to keep the Annual
> > Plan lean and focused while allowing interested readers to dive deep into
> > the details.
> >
> > Finally, we’ve expanded the planning framework we instituted last year
> for
> > cross-departmental programs to all of our programs across the Foundation.
> > This allows us to clearly link a program’s resources to outcomes and
> > measures. As such, we’ve presented the Annual Plan budget in terms of our
> > investments in the three defined goals rather than in terms of our
> internal
> > organizational structure.
> >
> > Thank you all for your support over the past year. I'm really looking
> > forward to your feedback on this year's proposed plan during the open
> > comment period -- a reminder it runs through May 15th.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Katherine
> >
> > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > Annual_Plan/2018-2019/Draft
> > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017
> >
> > --
> > Katherine Maher
> >
> > Executive Director
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> > 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
> > San Francisco, CA 94104
> >
> > +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635 <(415)%20839-6885>
> > +1 (415) 712 4873 <(415)%20712-4873>
> > kma...@wikimedia.org
> > https://annual.wikimedia.org
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikidata now officially has more total edits than English language Wikipedia

2019-03-20 Thread Caroline Becker
But... bots are operated, written, and reviewed by real humans ? Like if I
spend 2 hours adding "painting by Vincent van Gogh" manually on every
relevant item by hand, how is that more valuable than spending 20 minutes
to write a bot that does that for me (and can be used for similar tasks) ?

Caroline


Le mer. 20 mars 2019 à 10:45, Gabriel Thullen  a
écrit :

> Sorry about this mail, I hate to rain on somebody's parade but:
> Ever since Wikidata was set up, there have been more edit made by bots than
> by humans (registered contributor + anonymous contributor), except for a
> few periods in 2017 and 2018. On the other hand, the activity of the bots
> on the English Wikipedia has almost always been lower than the activity of
> anonymous contributors, and that activity has always been well below that
> of registered contributors. There was one exception, in 2013 where there
> was a spike of bot activity.
> We could also talk about the average number of edits per contributor which
> appears to be around 100 on the English Wikipedia and 1,200 on Wikidata
> (these numbers are after removing the estimated edits done by bots). Quite
> a difference.
> The different Wikimedia projects rely on the community to police and curate
> the content of these encyclopedias and data collections. I am therefore a
> bit wary of what is happening with Wikidata where more edits are still
> being done by bots than by real humans (by "real" I mean "real" not like
> "real" as in the TV series "real humans")
>
> Best regards
> Gabe
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 9:25 AM Olushola Olaniyan <
> olaniyanshol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This is a good news.
> >
> > Cheers!!!
> >
> > Olaniyan Olushola
> > CEO DataAccess Systems Ltd
> > President, Wikimedia Nigeria
> > Member, Affcom ( Wikimedia Foundation)
> > Co-director Wiki Women Radio
> > www.wikimedia.org.ng
> > sh...@wikimedia.org.ng
> > olaniyanshol...@gmail.com
> > +2348167352512
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 08:52 Ziko van Dijk  >
> > > Hello Ariel Glenn,
> > > Thanks for the notification, very interesting. Well, we all know that
> > > making a lot of edits on Wikidata is "easier" or happens quicker than
> on
> > > Wikipedia, for various reasons. But still it is a nice milestone to
> > > congratulate to Wikidata. Hereby. :-)
> > > Kind regards
> > > Ziko
> > >
> > >
> > > Am Mi., 20. März 2019 um 07:58 Uhr schrieb Gerard Meijssen <
> > > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > So in stead of calling us all Wikipedia, let us be known as
> Wikidata...
> > > > HU
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >   GerardM
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 at 07:48, Ariel Glenn WMF 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Wikidata surpassed the English language Wikipedia in the number of
> > > > > revisions in the database, about 45 minutes ago today.I was tipped
> > off
> > > > by a
> > > > > tweet [1] a few day ago and have been watching via a script that
> > > displays
> > > > > the largest revision id and its timestamp. Here's the point where
> > > > Wikidata
> > > > > overtakes English Wikipedia (times in UTC):
> > > > >
> > > > > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./get_revid_info.py -d
> > > > > www.wikidata.org -r 888603998,888603999,888604000
> > > > > revid 888603998 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > > revid 888603999 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > > revid 888604000 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./get_revid_info.py -d
> > > > > en.wikipedia.org -r 888603998,888603999,888604000
> > > > > revid 888603998 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > > revid 888603999 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > > revid 888604000 at 2019-03-20T06:01:00Z
> > > > >
> > > > > Only 45 minutes later, the gap is already over 2000 revsions:
> > > > >
> > > > > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./compare_sizes.py
> > > > > Last enwiki revid is 888606979 and last wikidata revid is 888629401
> > > > > 2019-03-20 06:46:03: diff is 22422
> > > > >
> > > > > Have a nice day!
> > > > >
> > > > > Ariel
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://twitter.com/MonsieurAZ/status/1106565116508729345
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > >  ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Caroline Becker
Hi all,

I have no opinion whatsoever about all the things going on in this mail,
except for this part :

Three additional anonymous complaints were:
* speaking to loud
* standing to close
* having touched someone's hand/arm

It must be noted that *none* of the people that complained to the Trust &
Safety team had indicated to WMBE's treasurer to experience anything as
problem.


You did not just "touched my hand/arm", you took MY stuff from my hands,
and for both medical and personnal reasons which I do not wish to share on
a public list, it was a bad experience for me, and maybe I didn't *say*
anything, but I was visibly distressed. I assumed good faith from you and
accepted your apologizes later in private, but I really do not appreciate
having this particular incident discussed here and being forced to step up
like that.

Caroline


Le lun. 17 juin 2019 à 11:00, Romaine Wiki  a
écrit :

> Hello all,
>
> On Saturday 15 June 2019 Wikimedia Belgium had its annual General Assembly
> in Brussels.
>
> *New board*
> Two board members have indicated to step down:
> * Afernand74
> * SPQRobin
>
> We thank them for their work and valuable input in the past years!
> They remain available for advice to the board.
>
> Two board members were up for re-election after their previous terms ended.
> Both board members have been re-elected without any votes against them, and
> they will keep serving Wikimedia Belgium in their roles.
> * Geertivp - president
> * Romaine - treasurer
>
> One new board member has been elected without any votes against.
> * Taketa - long term Wikipedia editor and organiser of various activities
>
> Welcome Taketa!
>
> The rest of the board remains the same and the board continues the work and
> development of our chapter.
>
>
> *Evaluation behaviour WMF*
> As board we have the obligation to inform the General Assembly and other
> stakeholders about the developments with our chapter, both the good
> developments as well as the bad developments.
>
> A year ago, with our previous General Assembly, we were hopeful to resolve
> the issues we then had with on other organisation in the movement, the
> Wikimedia Foundation. Sadly we had to inform the General Assembly that
> instead of improvements, the behaviour of multiple individuals from the
> Wikimedia Foundation is below any standard. This concerns one member of the
> grants team and multiple members of the Trust and Safety team, as well as
> their supervisors.
>
> On request of the Trust & Safety team no names are mentioned. Below is a
> summary of what happened.
>
>
> *Case 1*
> In April 2017 the treasurer of Wikimedia Belgium (Romaine) spoke with our
> new grants staff member from the Wikimedia Foundation as WMBE was scheduled
> to change from successful project grants in 2017 and earlier years to
> Simple Annual Plan grants. During this meeting the plan for WMBE in 2018
> was proposed and was fine for the grants staff member. In the Summer of
> 2017 this had been worked out, and with an online call our annual plan was
> considered fine. With the final submission in October 2017, our annual
> grants proposal was reviewed by the grants staff member from WMF, had some
> minor remarks we fixed, and was considered to be excellent.
>
> In December 2017 we were informed that our grant request (suddenly) was, to
> summarise, complete wrong. It contained factual errors (like facts do not
> matter), inconsistencies, the comment that Wikimedia France and Wikimedia
> Netherlands could take everything over in Belgium, suggesting that Belgium
> has no culture (this is a serious insult to us), and much more.
> (For your reference: Wikimedia Belgium had over 90 events and activities in
> 2017, including a photo contest, education program, GLAM program with
> content donations, workshops and edit-a-thons, and more.)
>
> It raised us a lot of questions, which we asked, but our grants member of
> WMF refused to seriously answer them.
>
> Even with our lack of information and received insults, we tried to be
> constructive and before Christmas we proposed to the grants staff member
> that we would re-write during the Christmas holidays our annual plan (as
> the staff member had said many times we could improve it). With the e-mail
> following from the grants member of WMF this proposal was not rejected. So
> during the two weeks of the Christmas holidays we spent many days, together
> with the help from another experienced chapter representative, re-writing
> our annual plan. After the Christmas holidays, we were ready, and the
> response from the grants member from WMF was then that the re-written
> version could not be taken into account...
>
> After some further e-mails with this staff member we concluded as WMBE mid
> January 2018 that a collaboration with this individual from WMF is
> impossible and we banned this individual from ever contacting us again and
> we never communicated ever with this person again.
>
> The supervisor of this staff member has 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Caroline Becker
I was forced to step up *today* on this mailing list because the
description of the WIkimania 2018 incident in the first mail was false: the
claim that "none of us expressed there was a problem" is simply not what
happened.

And by the way this is exactly why the details of stuff like that are NOT
shared publicly. For me the incident was closed and well handled by the T
team, I really didn't need a debate where people are expressing their
uninformed, bar room like opinions about the seriousness of the incident or
what should or should not have been done.

Caroline


Le lun. 17 juin 2019 à 17:14, Paulo Santos Perneta 
a écrit :

> Hi Dariusz,
>
> I understand Caroline wanted to add that she was finding difficult that
> Romain was not aware of her stress or unease on a specific situation
> vaguely described there (without any mention to her at all). And that later
> they have talked about it, and she accepted his apologies for that in
> private. I can't find the least evidence of her being forced to step up and
> expose herself just to clarify that there. As far as I know, it never was
> in question that some people felt uneasy with some behavior there. They
> talked about it, apologies were presented, end of story. Or would have been
> end of story, if not for the T interference.
>
> Paulo
>
>
>
> Dariusz Jemielniak  escreveu no dia segunda, 17/06/2019
> à(s) 16:04:
>
> > Hi Paulo,
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:54 PM Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> > " I'm referring to message from Caroline" - How have you jumped from
> > Caroline wanting to further clarify something, to the conclusion that the
> > OP was  "pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward"?
> >
> > I'm specifically referring to this sentence " I really do not appreciate
> > having this particular incident discussed here and being forced to step
> up
> > like that."
> >
> > Yes, she claims to have been "forced to step up", but were you able to
> > find any evidence for that in the OP? Any accusation is automatically
> true?
> >
> > I believe that the person who voluntarily identified herself as the one
> > requesting T support is not randomly lying about that. I don't think it
> > was an accusation, it was an expression of the personal urge to set the
> > record straight.
> >
> > Again, please note that I'm not referring to what did or did not happen a
> > year ago. I've been trying to express my frustration with discussing
> > personal details and stories on a public list. I've clearly failed.
> >
> > best,
> >
> > dj
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Some goodbye to all

2019-06-20 Thread Caroline Becker
This is such a lost. Not only did you waisted an opportunity to learn and
grow from your mistakes the first time, you reiterate here, showing no
willingness to grow and learn.

But why would you take the difficult path, when by just claiming your right
to "weirdness" (which I guess only apply to you and none to the people you
hurt), you're rewarding with public support ?

Caroline


Le jeu. 20 juin 2019 à 18:55, Dennis During  a écrit :

> I am ashamed that the movement has a climate that allows this unfortunate
> outcome
>
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 7:15 AM Romaine Wiki 
> wrote:
>
> >  Dear community,
> >
> >
> > About a month ago I have decided that I will indefinitely no longer
> attend
> > any WMF funded events as result of bullying, attempts to silence me,
> > intimidation and treats against me. This has resulted in that I feel
> > extremely unsafe as the result of the behaviour of only a few
> individuals.
> >
> >
> --
> Dennis C. During
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] "The Foundation does not care so much of the French-speaking contributors"

2019-09-15 Thread Caroline Becker
All of the people you wished were there
_Who was invited ?
_Was it before or after the days of the conference was choosen ?
_What accomodation was given with the invitation ?

Le dim. 15 sept. 2019 à 23:07, Joseph Seddon  a
écrit :

> Before we call out individuals for lack of attendance publicly, I think we
> should remember that both volunteers and staff have lives outside of
> Wikimedia that include children, families and other commitments in life.
> They all come with complications. Sometimes things don't work out. There
> are tens of conferences every year at various scales all over the world.
> Many staff and volunteer board members will have recently just travelled to
> Wikimania and a strategy summit in Tunis. Attendance at these events is
> often to the detriment to people's personal lives to some degree.
>
> So please lets just be careful about how we talk about this and keep the
> above in mind.
>
> Regards
> Seddon
>
> On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 7:02 PM Thierry Coudray 
> wrote:
>
> > "*The Foundation does not care so much of the French-speaking
> > contributors*".
> > This harsh sentence is the translation of a statement in French, I've
> just
> > said in a conversation a week ago at the Francophone Wikiconvention held
> > last weekend in Brussels. The statement may seem excessive, because the
> > Foundation does things for the Francophone community as well as for other
> > communities (and its website is fairly well translated into French). But
> it
> > reflected my feeling, shared by my three interlocutors, all non-French,
> > facing that no Foundation high-level members were present to this
> > Wikiconvention: no executive director, nor members of the Board, nor any
> > level-C staff. In an another conversation, where the subject came up over
> > again, someone said this absence was offensive. I do not know if it
> > reflects the majority of attendees feelings but with varying degrees, I
> > would said it was widely shared.
> >
> > In 2017, for the Francophone Wikiconvention in Strasbourg we had a very
> > quick visit of Katherine Maher, in 2018, a simple video message and in
> 2019
> > ... nothing. At the same time, the Francophone Wikiconvention has stepped
> > up with ever more participants, always more countries represented. This
> > year, it brought together more than 220 Francophones, Algerian, Belgian,
> > Beninese, Cameroonian, Canadian, French, Guinean, Ivorian, Swiss and
> > Tunisian contributors, and I may forget some, with varied and enriching
> > conferences and meetings. A huge success, very well organized by
> employees
> > but also by several volunteers, who dedicated time and energy. This
> > Wikiconvention and the projects and achievements submitted have shown the
> > French-speaking Wikimedia community vitality, which will continue to
> grow.
> > FYI, French is foreseen, thanks to Africa, to be the most rapidly growing
> > languages in the next twenty years and will be the mother tongue or the
> > language used for communication for more than 8% of the world's
> population
> > in thirty years' time. But my reaction would have been the same if I had
> > attended an Arabic, Chinese, Spanish, Swahili-speaking or any other
> > important languages Wikiconvention.
> >
> > So yes, this Wikiconvention is not in English. Fortunately, not all
> > Wikimedia meetings are in English. In a previous discussion on this
> mailing
> > list about the question of whether or not it is appropriate to continue
> > Wimania, one of the participants argued that unlike other Wikimedia
> > meetings, anyone could attend Wikmania. It may be obvious for those who
> > have English as a mother tongue or for Northern Europeans for whom
> English
> > is almost a second mother tongue but this is false: English is spoken
> only
> > by a small minority in the world, less than one human in six. So only one
> > human in six or seven could attend Wikimania or any other
> english-speaking
> > conferences or meetings (the case of the vast majority of global
> Wikimedia
> > conferences). I do not deny a common working language usefulness but a
> > Wikiconvention in French, as I hope other languages ones will be more to
> > come soon, allows all non-English speaking Francophones to participate in
> > the Wikimedia movement and above all, help them to meet our common goal
> of
> > spread freeknowledge.The movement talks a lot about its efforts to
> overcome
> > differents gaps (gender, LGBT,...) and it's rightly pointed, these topics
> > are important. But it simply forget the language gap and the almost
> > exclusive use of English excludes a very large majority.
> >
> > So why no high level Foundation members in Brussels ?
> > I was told that Valerie D'Costa, the new Chief of Community Engagement,
> > should initially be there but finally told she will not. But then, no
> other
> > member could then replace her and why only one Foundation representant
> > given the part of French language in the WM projects ? Perhaps