[Wikimedia-l] Re: Mopping with the tap open

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

For 10 years or more, already, reliable sources have been mandatory in
the Wikipedia in Portuguese, and any unsourced edit can and should be
reverted and the user warned.
Adding to that, since at least 2016, we use the abuse filters to block any
edition lacking sources. Newbies like the one described by Romaine would
receive a daunting red warning from the abuse filter system about the
necessity of adding reliable sources in order for their edit to be saved -
and the opportunity to go back and fix the problem. This has greatly
improved things there, in that subject.

Back in 2009, about 1 month after joining Wikipedia I found myself in a
serious conflict with other, well established users, about a well sourced
edit I wanted to add, which was being reverted by the veteran users in
favour of unsourced (and false) information. At the time, I had to comply
and swallow it, as the newbie I was. One year later, now with a reputation,
I returned to the theme, reverted the whole thing and opened a public case
there about falsification of information by said veteran user(s) - and that
time it stood. This whole episode deeply marked me, and made absolutely
clear that in Wikipedia there can be no tolerance for whatever lacks proper
sources - something we actually often indulge in in paper encyclopedias, in
my own experience. I'm very glad that the era of rampant tolerance with
people adding unsourced content - something that was already against all
good practices back in 2001 - is now a distant, sad memory. The quality of
our Wikipedia skyrocketed since then, changing the paradigm from "Wikipedia
is not reliable" to "Wikipedia is actually quite reliable, so much that I
actually want to be there" all over the Lusophone world - and bringing new
problems of its own. But that's undoubtedly the way to go, and it's sad it
took so much time to actually implement what should have been there already
from day 1.

Best,
Paulo




Romaine Wiki  escreveu (quarta, 6/03/2024 à(s)
13:59):

> In the past days, a new Wikipedia contributor edited Wikipedia and made a
> great contribution, except... This user added zero sources, and the article
> in what the edit was made was about a living person. So the verifiability
> is a problem and in conflict with the policy Biographies of living persons.
> This was just one example of thousands that have to be dealt with every day
> in Wikimedia. And every day the community tries to maintain the quality of
> Wikipedia and has to deal with this kind of edits.
>
> I asked myself the question: why did this new contributor not add any
> sources?
>
> I logged out, went to an article and clicked edit. Made some modifications
> (in the Visual Editor), and then clicked Publish changes. In the steps I
> took to edit the article, I got nowhere a message that Wikipedia wants to
> have sources for the information I added. Nowhere!
>
> I hope that every experienced user by now understands the importance of
> adding sources. But we cannot expect from new contributors to already know
> this. They need to be informed that adding sources is needed. They do not
> go first read the manual of Wikipedia with all the help and project pages,
> they just start editing right away. They think, link in many other
> platforms, that if they do something wrong, they get a message while
> editing/uploading/etc.
>
> For some strange reason, if you edit Wikipedia, you get no notification at
> all that you need to add sources, even while this is one of the most
> important pillars of Wikipedia. The result is that a lot of work of these
> new contributors gets lost, because the information is removed from the
> articles because of a lack of sources. If those new users would have got a
> message in the Visual Editor during the editing, a lot more contributions
> would be able to stay in Wikipedia, less new contributors would get
> demotivated, and it would reduce the workload of existing users who do the
> maintenance every day.
>
> As with the influx of edits without sources nothing is done, the Dutch
> expression "mopping with the tap open" (Dutch: dweilen met de kraan open)
> applies here.
>
> Romaine
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/2J32V233R72OWB5W2DKGXIGBPVC6Y75B/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/45F47VN2KGKYF4Q42D7ZPZUKNUZHCNAU/
To 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

WMF is doing it wrong, not we.
Many people in the movement have been alerting to this situation over the
years, apparently to deaf ears.

Paulo

Felipe Schenone  escreveu (quinta, 1/02/2024 à(s)
07:09):

> Well, perhaps you'll be elated to know then that the grants for tech seem
> to have been removed
> 
>  after
> many months of waiting for them
> 
> .
> We're doing it wrong, indeed.
>
> El mié., 31 de ene. de 2024 11:02 p. m., Gnangarra 
> escribió:
>
>> Before the WMF starts hiring, we need to be very clear exactly what
>> pathways and objectives we want to pursue, along with what functions should
>> be internally maintained. With that what happens with community built tools
>> that cross over from great tools to essential community infrastructure that
>> needs continued updates.  Perhaps part of the "hiring" option is rewarding
>> volunteers who create them to help transition the tool to the internal
>> system.
>>
>> On Thu, 1 Feb 2024 at 01:35, Felipe Schenone  wrote:
>>
>>> I also think the WMF should prioritize hiring more developers over other
>>> roles and expenditures. The WMF has only a few hundred developers while
>>> other top sites have many thousands. While this efficiency is something to
>>> be proud of, it evidently comes at a cost.
>>>
>>> El mié., 31 de ene. de 2024 4:08 a. m., rupert THURNER <
>>> rupert.thur...@gmail.com> escribió:
>>>
 On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 1:27 AM Gergő Tisza  wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 1:57 PM Ori Livneh 
> wrote:
>
>> If we're collecting exemplars, I'd like to add Bartosz
>> Ciechanowski's superlative articles ,
>> like the ones on bicycles  and sound
>> . His articles are the best examples I
>> know of interactive content that complements long-form text content.
>>
>
> This concept was popularized by Bret Victor under the name "explorable
> explanations ". There
> is a whole Wikipedia article
>  on it. There
> are some great examples on his website, and there are some websites for
> collecting similar content, such as explorabl.es and an awesome list
> . I agree they are
> really cool but...
>
>
>> The critical issue is *security*. Security is the reason the graph
>> extension is not enabled. Security is the reason why interactive SVGs are
>> not enabled. Interactive visualizations have a programmatic element that
>> consists of code that executes in the user's browser. Such code needs to 
>> be
>> carefully sandboxed to ensure it cannot be used to exfiltrate user data 
>> or
>> surreptitiously perform actions on wiki.
>>
>
> I think it's fundamentally a human scaling problem. Being able to
> create good interactive content is just a much more niche skill than being
> able to create good text content. Interactive animations were very much
> part of Yuri's vision
>  for
> the Graph extension, but during the decade Graph was deployed in 
> production
> the number of such animations made was approximately zero. Granted Vega is
> probably not the easiest framework for creating animations, but I don't
> think there are other tools which would make it much easier. You could 
> just
> write arbitrary Javascript and package it as a gadget; but no one did that
> either. Instead, both gadgets and Graph usage are mostly focused on very
> basic things like showing a chess board or showing bar charts, because
> those are the things that can be reused across a large number of articles
> without manually tailoring the code to each, so the economics of creating
> them work out.
>

> Security is a challenge but could be worked around via iframes. But
> it's hard to justify the effort required for doing that when there is no
> community of animation makers interested in it - there are plenty of
> volunteers who want to *have* animations, but it's not very clear
> that there are any who want to *make* animations. This is the same
> problem geni mentioned for videos - a lot of people say "we should have
> more videos", but it's not very clear who would make them. If platform
> support were the bottleneck here, I think the platform support would
> happen. But as things look now, it would just be a poor investment of
> resources IMO (compared to e.g. the Gadgets extension or Toolforge or
> Scribunto which do sustain vibrant volunteer ecosystems which are
> 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Should read 2030 Strategy, not 2023 strategy, sorry.

Paulo Santos Perneta  escreveu (terça, 23/01/2024
à(s) 19:41):

> I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment. We are currently grappling
> with rather rudimentary approaches when it comes to uploading and reusing
> video and music files...
> The incredibly useful Graph has been down for quite some time. The
> extensive capabilities of Wikidata query representations, particularly with
> geolocated data on maps, appear to have barely scratched the surface.
> Listeria frequently experiences issues and underwent a major update that
> disrupted previous queries.
>
> On a personal note, I attempted to create a dynamic digital library of
> works under a free license using Wikidata for our Digital Humanistics
> centre. However, I discovered that with the available tools, I would need
> to code the presentation myself, as the options for reuse outside of
> Wikidata were very basic.
>
> On the whole, the Wikipedia experience remains challenging, especially for
> newcomers. The much wanted Visual Editor developments and improvements seem
> to have stopped years ago. The recent changes made by the 'Desktop
> Improvement' team to the default Wikipedia skin seem to be more geared
> towards readers than editors and have apparently worsened the overall
> experience, according to feedback I've received from newcomers.
>
> These are just a few instances that have underscored, and continue to
> underscore, my belief that we are likely not on the path towards achieving
> the objectives outlined in the 2023 Strategy.
>
> My personal impression is that the issue doesn't necessarily stem from a
> lack of funding to pursue these objectives but rather from the ineffective
> expenditure and allocation of those funds. I wish I knew how to contribute
> to changing or improving this situation.
> It would also be great to see a comment/opinion from current CEO Maryana
> Iskander on this state of affairs, and if there is some roadmap for
> improving it.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
>
> Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga  escreveu (terça,
> 23/01/2024 à(s) 11:03):
>
>> Dear wikimedians,
>> Nearly one year ago, the Graphs extension was disabled from all wikis,
>> because there was a security issue that should be solved (
>> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T334940). A wide team from the WMF
>> worked on a solution for some weeks, but after Northern Hemisphere spring
>> ended, summer came, then the monsoon season, and now it is again summer in
>> the Southern Hemisphere... and Graphs are still disabled. All the solutions
>> proposed have been dismissed, but every two months there's a proposal to
>> make a new roadmap to solve the issue. We have plenty of roadmaps, but no
>> vehicle to reach our destination.
>>
>> Seven years ago, we were discussing our Strategy for 2030. We used
>> thousands of volunteer hours, thousands of staff hours and millions of
>> dollars to build a really well-balanced strategy. There we concluded that 
>> "*By
>> 2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem
>> of free knowledge*". We also made some recommendations to improve the
>> User Experience (
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Recommendations/Improve_User_Experience)
>> and claimed that we wanted to Innovate in Free Knowledge (
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Recommendations/Innovate_in_Free_Knowledge).
>> Well, the situation is now worse than it was seven years ago, let me give
>> some examples:
>>
>>
>>- Graph extension is used in thousands of pages, some of them highly
>>relevant, as COVID or Climate Change information. There are thousands of
>>graphs broken now, and the only partial solution give is loading these
>>graphs as images, instead of promoting an interactive solution.
>>- Meanwhile, a place like Our World in Data has been publishing data
>>and interactive content with a compatible license for years. (Remember, 
>> "*By
>>2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem
>>of free knowledge*"). Trying to add this data and graphs to Wikimedia
>>projects has been done by WikiMed, and it is technically possible, but
>>still blocked to deploy (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T303853).
>>- Wolfram Alpha is like a light year ahead us on giving interactive
>>solutions to knowledge questions, even the silliest ones (
>>
>> https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=how+many+oranges+fit+in+the+Earth%3F).
>>We have good technical articles about a lot of things, but sometimes 
>> "

[Wikimedia-l] Re: We need more interactive content: we are doing it wrong

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment. We are currently grappling with
rather rudimentary approaches when it comes to uploading and reusing video
and music files...
The incredibly useful Graph has been down for quite some time. The
extensive capabilities of Wikidata query representations, particularly with
geolocated data on maps, appear to have barely scratched the surface.
Listeria frequently experiences issues and underwent a major update that
disrupted previous queries.

On a personal note, I attempted to create a dynamic digital library of
works under a free license using Wikidata for our Digital Humanistics
centre. However, I discovered that with the available tools, I would need
to code the presentation myself, as the options for reuse outside of
Wikidata were very basic.

On the whole, the Wikipedia experience remains challenging, especially for
newcomers. The much wanted Visual Editor developments and improvements seem
to have stopped years ago. The recent changes made by the 'Desktop
Improvement' team to the default Wikipedia skin seem to be more geared
towards readers than editors and have apparently worsened the overall
experience, according to feedback I've received from newcomers.

These are just a few instances that have underscored, and continue to
underscore, my belief that we are likely not on the path towards achieving
the objectives outlined in the 2023 Strategy.

My personal impression is that the issue doesn't necessarily stem from a
lack of funding to pursue these objectives but rather from the ineffective
expenditure and allocation of those funds. I wish I knew how to contribute
to changing or improving this situation.
It would also be great to see a comment/opinion from current CEO Maryana
Iskander on this state of affairs, and if there is some roadmap for
improving it.

Best,
Paulo


Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga  escreveu (terça,
23/01/2024 à(s) 11:03):

> Dear wikimedians,
> Nearly one year ago, the Graphs extension was disabled from all wikis,
> because there was a security issue that should be solved (
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T334940). A wide team from the WMF
> worked on a solution for some weeks, but after Northern Hemisphere spring
> ended, summer came, then the monsoon season, and now it is again summer in
> the Southern Hemisphere... and Graphs are still disabled. All the solutions
> proposed have been dismissed, but every two months there's a proposal to
> make a new roadmap to solve the issue. We have plenty of roadmaps, but no
> vehicle to reach our destination.
>
> Seven years ago, we were discussing our Strategy for 2030. We used
> thousands of volunteer hours, thousands of staff hours and millions of
> dollars to build a really well-balanced strategy. There we concluded that "*By
> 2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem
> of free knowledge*". We also made some recommendations to improve the
> User Experience (
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Recommendations/Improve_User_Experience)
> and claimed that we wanted to Innovate in Free Knowledge (
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Recommendations/Innovate_in_Free_Knowledge).
> Well, the situation is now worse than it was seven years ago, let me give
> some examples:
>
>
>- Graph extension is used in thousands of pages, some of them highly
>relevant, as COVID or Climate Change information. There are thousands of
>graphs broken now, and the only partial solution give is loading these
>graphs as images, instead of promoting an interactive solution.
>- Meanwhile, a place like Our World in Data has been publishing data
>and interactive content with a compatible license for years. (Remember, 
> "*By
>2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem
>of free knowledge*"). Trying to add this data and graphs to Wikimedia
>projects has been done by WikiMed, and it is technically possible, but
>still blocked to deploy (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T303853).
>- Wolfram Alpha is like a light year ahead us on giving interactive
>solutions to knowledge questions, even the silliest ones (
>https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=how+many+oranges+fit+in+the+Earth%3F).
>We have good technical articles about a lot of things, but sometimes 
> "*becoming
>the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem of free knowledge*"
>needs to provide solutions to exact problems, like the answer to an
>equation, and how to solve it. That's also "free knowledge".
>- Brilliant (https://brilliant.org/) is brilliant if you want to learn
>lots of things, like geometry or programming. Way better than Wikipedia.
>But... you need to pay for it. How could we even try if we can't add
>anything interactive to our platforms?
>- We can build interactive timelines using Wikidata, but we can't
>embed them at Wikipedia. Weird, because I can do it in any external page.
> 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Celebrating Alberto Leoncio!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I wholeheartedly join this well-deserved tribute to one of the most
passionate, affable, active, and competent Wikipedians in the pursuit of
free and universal knowledge I know, whom I had the great pleasure of
meeting in person a few weeks ago.
A big hug to Alberto, and thank you very much!

Paulo

Giselle Bordoy  escreveu no dia segunda,
4/12/2023 à(s) 16:36:

> Dear all,
>
> Wikimedia projects would not be possible without the work of the countless
> volunteers, passionately working on bringing free knowledge to the world.
> Through the year we WikiCelebrate
>  different
> volunteers and their amazing work. [1]
>
> This time we celebrate Alberto Leoncio, a Wikimedian who likes to work on
> the backstage of the Portuguese Wikimedia projects. There are many reasons
> to celebrate Alberto, nowadays  he manages bots, scripts, filters,
> templates and modules. He helps beginners to understand Wikipedia rules and
> policies, and engages in administrative work: protecting pages, and
> blocking vandals. “I wish whoever reads Wikipedia understands that it is
> not just a website to look for information, that Wikipedia is just one
> aspect of something much bigger, that there are several editors behind a
> single article, that there is a community behind each Wikipedia and that it
> goes much beyond that, with many projects in the wiki movement created by
> volunteers for free knowledge.” - he says.  Visit WikiCelebrate
> 
> [2] page to learn more about Alberto and congratulate him. You can also
> read about him on Diff
>  [3]
> (the post is available in English, Portuguese, Spanish, French, Arabic).
>
> Each month we will celebrate a different Wikimedian, acknowledging the
> great people that have contributed so much to bringing us to where we are
> today, and continue to do so. We warmly invite you to write about the
> people celebrated each month. If you know them, share some wiki love. If
> there’s an outstanding Wikimedian that you think should be celebrated, 
> recommend
> them .[4]
>
>
> Happy celebrating
>
> Giyu, Natalia and Mehrdad
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/WikiCelebrate
>
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/WikiCelebrate/Alberto_Leoncio
>
> [3] https://diff.wikimedia.org/2023/12/04/celebrating-alberto-leoncio/
> [4] https://wikimediafoundation.limesurvey.net/WikiCelebrate
>
> --
>
> Giselle Bordoy (ella/she/her)
>
> Senior Global Movement Communications Specialist (Latin America)
>
> Wikimedia Foundation 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/JWAW4J6DTKQLWPQUXKMJWWIZREV4UKUE/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/JB6IQHX6MNTRIDLO5RVZ6ZKLHXRBISJX/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Google not indexing Wikisource for last few years now.

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

For many months I have been extremely frustrated with Wikisource due to
Google not indexing what is being added to it. I also suspect the problem
may have to do with Ilario Valderi and Galder described, the gadget
parafernalia under it, which seems to have got more complex by 2019 (I seem
to recall this coincides with new developments by WMF devs dedicated team,
namely concerning page organization, which may have been the culprit of
this?)
I'll experiment removing these complex gadgets and page framework from some
pages at the Portuguese Wikisource to see if the situation improves.

Best,
Paulo

Nanour Garabedian  escreveu no dia
quarta, 23/08/2023 à(s) 08:02:

> +1 to this. I suggest adding what you indicated to the agenda of the next
> Wikisource Community meeting to request it formally from WMF on behalf of
> the user group.
>
> Best,
> NANöR
>
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 3:08 AM Bodhisattwa 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The sessions at Google headquarters in Singapore were designed in a way
>> that there was no option to sit together and discuss this grave issue with
>> Google's Search team. I guess, the slim opportunity for the Wikisource
>> volunteers to discuss the issue directly with Google was unfortunately
>> lost. Now it is totally up to WMF and sysadmins to take it up and figure it
>> out themselves with Google.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bodhisattwa
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 1, 2023, 14:48 Butch Bustria  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>
>>> I think this is a good opportunity to discuss with Google's Search Team
>>> here in Singapore in 2 weeks time.
>>>
>>> You can register at Wikimania pre-Conference at this link:
>>>
>>> https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2023:Related_events/Mind_The_Gap
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Butch
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 1, 2023, 5:13 PM James Heilman  wrote:
>>>
 Am having the same issue with Google poorly indexing MDWiki.org. I
 have personally switched my default browser to duckduckgo as they index
 much better. The two folks at Google who used to support their
 collaborations with Wikipedia are no longer with the company. Not sure if
 they have been replaced by anyone.

 James


 On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 12:51 AM Bodhisattwa <
 bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> Apologies for cross-posting.
>
> For those who have not noticed till now, Google is not indexing any
> Wikisource language editions for the last couple of years which 
> practically
> means that any Wikisource contents in any languages, which are being
> created in these years, are not searchable on Google and hence largely
> remain invisible on the web.
>
> This is an extremely demotivating and frustrating situation for the
> existing Wikisource volunteers to witness, draining away all of our past
> and current efforts to bring and retain viewers, readers, GLAM partners 
> and
> any potential new editors. We already have a very low awareness and
> visibility about Wikisource among general internet users due to lack of
> organized support in these years but the invisibility on Google search
> engine could become the last nail in our coffin, unless it is fixed soon.
>
> There is a phabricator ticket raised by Darwinius back in December
> 2022 - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T325607.
>
> Can't this issue be put into priority by sys admins and WMF to work
> upon? Wikisource is still a sister project of Wikimedia and it needs some
> very basic care, after all.
>
> Regards,
> Bodhisattwa
> (Bengali Wikisource volunteer)
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org,
> guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ECNVHN45JW67B6RADFYSQ3V43FJOB6KD/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org



 --
 James Heilman
 MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org,
 guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
 Public archives at
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/RPHXHH7JTKELZQTO3PACVNNZL75IDPNJ/
 To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> Public archives at
>>> 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Query about membership to Wikimedia Chapters

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello,

Have you considered asking the Affiliation Committee about what you have
been reporting?

Paulo

On Tue, May 30, 2023, 09:03 Andrew Owens  wrote:

> Indeed. This too considering that Wikimedia Foundation have identified
> transparency as one of their core values. While the document containing
> this is quite clear that this is for the Foundation itself and not for the
> movement as a whole, one would expect chapter organisations to operate in
> the same vein - and certainly not to act contrary to it as WMAU appears to
> be doing.
>
> As an earlier contributor to this thread noted, I have no idea why my
> membership application has been declined - I have been very reasonable in
> my requests to find out why, but have been met with a wall of silence. It's
> unfortunate that I should have to resort to compliance measures with an
> organisation I once ably served as both a secretary and an international
> delegate over several years, and with which, despite being uninvolved for
> some time, I have never had any dispute or falling-out.
>
> Kindest regards
> Andrew
>
> On Tue, 30 May 2023, 01:07 ,  wrote:
>
>> One thing further I would like to point out. Increasingly I have been
>> getting private emails advising me that those who wish to understand who or
>> why a decision has been made by the Committee is a form of stalking, and
>> against the UCoC.
>>
>> I think it is very concerning that an excellent initiative such as this
>> is being weaponised to prevent reasonable requests about decisions made by
>> the WMAU Committee. It would mean, for instance, that asking for your
>> private information and any correspondence about decision made about
>> yourself might be seen as a form of harassment. The irony is that decisions
>> made about existing members or people attempting to gain membership of the
>> WMAU is being kept complete opaque and preventing any right of reply
>> against adverse commentary against those people. It means that the
>> Committee who directly reviews these things have no accountability.
>>
>> I am increasingly concerned there is a culture of exclusivity and
>> discrimination within the WMAU committee. In fact, it might be interesting
>> if a privacy request was indeed sent to find out about what is being said,
>> per the Australian citizens legal right.
>>
>> I also raise as a concern that the committee is unwilling to respond in
>> writing in a timely manner to these requests. What does seem to be
>> happening is they want private phone calls to provide responses, thus
>> leaving no record of decision making.
>>
>> Chris
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/RUKW635V7XNT4UCQE62ESEFHSX47VJFU/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ICQN2DCXKCQ2NK5CGJWHNRN3BQWJ6ZJT/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/B26NEEMZ6HC5T63NDPPGLMYCV7JZAPQG/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: ChatGPT as a reliable source

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

It's quite interesting how these models ended up being so illiterate and
dumb on source reading and interpretation, while so creative and plausible
at the same time.
I'm sure there's a reason for this, can somebody please point to a link to
a place where this is discussed, if you know it?

Thanks,
Paulo

David Gerard  escreveu no dia quarta, 17/05/2023 à(s)
13:12:

> Note that quite often it just *makes up* a plausible-looking source.
> Because AI text generators just make up plausible text, not accurate
> text.
>
> On Wed, 17 May 2023 at 09:40, Lane Chance  wrote:
> >
> > Keep in mind how fast these tools change. ChatGPT, Bard and
> > competitors understand well the issues with lack of sources, and Bard
> > does sometimes put a suitable source in a footnote, even if it
> > (somewhat disappointingly) just links to wikipedia. There's likely to
> > be a variation soon that does a decent job of providing references,
> > and at that point the role of these tools moves beyond being an
> > amusement to a far more credible research tool.
> >
> > So, these long discussions about impact on open knowledge are quite
> > likely to have to run again in 2024...
> >
> > On Wed, 17 May 2023 at 09:24, Kiril Simeonovski
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Thank you everyone for your input.
> > >
> > > Your considerations are very similar to mine, and they give a clear
> direction towards what the guidelines regarding the use of ChatGPT should
> point to.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Kiril
> > >
> > > On Wed, 17 May 2023 at 10:11, Ilario valdelli 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Define "reliable source".
> > >>
> > >> A source is reliable if can be consulted by other people than the
> editor
> > >> to check the content.
> > >>
> > >> Is this possible with ChatGPT? No, becaue if you address the same
> > >> question to CHatGPT, you will have a different answer.
> > >>
> > >> In this case how the people verificaying the information can check
> that
> > >> the editor did not invent the result?
> > >>
> > >> Kind regards
> > >>
> > >> On 17/05/2023 09:08, Kiril Simeonovski wrote:
> > >> > Dear Wikimedians,
> > >> >
> > >> > Two days ago, a participant in one of our edit-a-thons consulted
> > >> > ChatGPT when writing an article on the Macedonian Wikipedia that did
> > >> > not exist on any other language edition. ChatGPT provided some
> output,
> > >> > but the problem was how to cite it.
> > >> >
> > >> > The community on the Macedonian Wikipedia has not yet had a
> discussion
> > >> > on this matter and we do not have any guidelines. So, my main
> > >> > questions are the following:
> > >> >
> > >> > * Can ChatGPT be used as a reliable source and, if yes, how would
> the
> > >> > citation look like?
> > >> >
> > >> > * Are there any ongoing community discussions on introducing
> guidelines?
> > >> >
> > >> > My personal opinion is that ChatGPT should be avoided as a reliable
> > >> > source, and only the original source where the algorithm gets the
> > >> > information from should be used.
> > >> >
> > >> > Best regards,
> > >> > Kiril
> > >> >
> > >> > ___
> > >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org,
> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > >> > Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WMGIBNPN5JNJGUOCLWFCCPD7EL5YN6KU/
> > >> > To unsubscribe send an email to
> wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Ilario Valdelli
> > >> Wikimedia CH
> > >> Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
> > >> Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
> > >> Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
> > >> Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
> > >> Wikipedia: Ilario
> > >> Skype: valdelli
> > >> Tel: +41764821371
> > >> http://www.wikimedia.ch
> > >>
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org,
> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/4L4K2BUD3YYTAKN6JPHVSSVGOFHW5AKG/
> > > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/DNOFFTF2DECPFETILCWBOVT5AD63R3UH/
> > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Deror Lin passed away

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

This is so sad to know... I fondly remember Deror, when we first met in
GLAM Wiki 2018 in Tel Aviv, the way he very warmly welcomed me to the
place, and all the interaction we had afterwards...
Thank you very much Itzik, for telling us about this great loss to our
movement and everyone who had the great privilege of meeting him.
Sending my deep condolences to his family and friends.

Kind regards,
Paulo

Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia quarta, 10/05/2023
à(s) 12:19:

> Thank you, Itzik.
>
> This is devastating. I am very sorry to hear that, and would like to
> extend my condolences to Deror's family, friends and Wikimedia Israel.
>
> For me, Deror has kind of always been around, and the (too few) moments we
> shared were delightful and insightful at once. Such a loss for our
> movement.
>
> Kind regards,
> Nicole
>
>
>
> On Sat, 6 May 2023 at 13:00, itzik Edri  wrote:
>
>> Dear friends,
>>
>> I'm sorry to update that our friend and colleague Deror Lin
>> (user:Deror_Avi) passed away this morning.
>>
>> Deror was a truly Wikimedian in blood who poured his heart and soul into
>> the movement in many ways, even in his final days. He joined Wikipedia in
>> 2004 and was one of the founders of Wikimedia Israel. For over 16 years, he
>> served as an active board member.
>>
>> He was the driving force behind Wikimania 2011 in Haifa and a key member
>> of the Wikimania committee ever since. He led countless programs and
>> projects, both locally and internationally, including conferences, WLM
>> competitions, educational programs, photo and editing contests, and many
>> others.
>>
>> More than that, he wrote over 8,600 articles on HEWP (comprising more
>> than 2% of it!), making him the number one article writer in HEWP,
>> alongside more than 37,000 contributions to Commons.
>>
>> For his huge contribution and love for the movement, he was honored last
>> year as the Wikipedia Laureate of 2022.
>>
>> Deror, you were not just a colleague but a true friend. We worked
>> together on many projects, events, and initiatives over the years. No
>> matter the situation, you always had a smile and shining eyes with your
>> love for Wikipedia.
>>
>> *On behalf of Wikimedia Israel, I extend our deepest condolences to
>> Deror's family and friends. You will always be remembered, Deror.*
>> *ברוך דיין האמת. Baruch dayan ha-emet*
>>
>>
>> Itzik.
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WUMCWUVMGMHWYPA7KZQEG6F7QBBWIMNH/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Director Movement Strategy and Global Relations
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Phone: +49 30 577 11 62-0
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Keep up to date! Current news and exciting stories about Wikimedia,
> Wikipedia and Free Knowledge in our newsletter (in German):
> https://www.wikimedia.de/newsletter/
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland – Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/J2WTBVOP2QAQ2XJHNQRKAEEESWQJU5YO/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/CS27F57NPB62FH4YTYU26KG5RJGFYEKM/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Foundation Form 990 for FY 2021-2022 now on-wiki

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello,

I'm a bit lost on this, probably because I'm not familiar with US Work
laws. Why did Katherine Maher received $623,286 on severance pay? Was she
fired?

Best,
Paulo

Andreas Kolbe  escreveu no dia terça, 9/05/2023 à(s)
22:17:

> The information is right there, Lodewijk, all you need to do is click the
> link. The Form 990 discloses
> 
>  that
> the WMF paid five executives a combined total of over $1.2 million in
> severance pay. About half of this went to Katherine Maher. Individual
> severance figures are given on page 50
> 
> :
>
>- Katherine Maher $623,286 (over 150% of her base compensation in her
>last full year)
>- Janeen Uzzell $324,748 (over 100% of her base compensation in her
>last full year)
>- Heather Walls $153,612
>- Lynette Logan $74,645
>- Anthony Negrin $70,920
>
> For historical comparison, the severance payment Lila Tretikov got in 2016
> was $262.5K, approx. 77% of her $342K base compensation in 2015, her last
> full year.
>
> So severance payments for top executives seem to be trending up.
>
> Andreas
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 8:56 PM effe iets anders 
> wrote:
>
>> I'm sure someone at the Foundation will have a better response, and you
>> may have puzzled this together yourself already, but we've seen in previous
>> years that the reported salary went up in the last year of someone's
>> service, possibly due to consulting fees and severance packages. Both Maher
>> and Uzzell left the Foundation in 2021. Typically the WMF has been cautious
>> to give much detail on this though (understandably).
>>
>> Lodewijk
>>
>> On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 10:03 AM Andreas Kolbe  wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> Page 49 of the new Form 990 (2021) shows the following total
>>> compensation figures for former CEO Katherine Maher and Janeen Uzzell in
>>> that year:
>>>
>>> *$798,632 and $515,553 *respectively. Both figures far exceed all prior
>>> records.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/1/14/Wikimedia_Foundation_2021_Form_990.pdf#page=49
>>>
>>> The Form 990 now shows a total of *six* executives whose total
>>> compensation exceeded *$400,000*.
>>>
>>> For comparison, the Form 990 for the year before (2020) showed a total
>>> of *eight* executives whose total compensation exceeded *$300,000*:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/e/e4/Wikimedia_Foundation_2020_Form_990.pdf#page=48
>>>
>>> These are interesting developments.
>>>
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 4:25 PM Nataliia Tymkiv 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Dear all,

 Today, the Wikimedia Foundation published the Form 990 [1], an
 informational tax form required annually of all nonprofit organisations
 based in the US. The Form 990 provides a financial overview of the
 Foundation, including the balance sheet, revenue and expenses, as well as
 grantmaking, governance, and other financial policies. It also includes
 compensation information required for senior executives. This document is
 reviewed by the Board each year before it is published on the Foundation
 website.

 Because of reporting periods, the Form 990 provides a look back at the
 activities and budget for the Foundation in prior years. This year’s Form
 990 covers last fiscal year (July 2021-June 2022), and for compensation
 related reporting, it covers the 2021 calendar year. Because the Form 990
 is a tax document with a complicated format, this year the Foundation
 has also published a Diff post [2] that provides an overview of the
 different sections of the form; an executive summary [3] of the Form, and
 an FAQ on Meta [4].

 This year’s Form 990 contains several key takeaways:


-

Growth in support of Wikimedia projects: In the 2021-2022 fiscal
year, the Foundation invested 77% in Program Services, an increase of 4
percentage points as compared to fiscal year 2020–2021 of 73%. This 
 measure
reflects how much of the organisation’s expenses are allocated towards 
 the
programs and services that it exists to deliver. This surpasses 
 third-party
standards for how much nonprofit organisations should spend on programs,
which should be the majority of their budget (more than 65% according to
the Better Business Bureau).
-

Increase in community grants: During fiscal year 2021-2022, the
Foundation’s revenue received through donations and grants, totaled 
 $164.2
million, a roughly $9 million increase from the prior fiscal year. The
Foundation increased its grants programme by 50%, from $10.1M in the 
 prior
fiscal year to $15.2M in fiscal year 2021-2022.

[Wikimedia-l] Re: 23 March: Invitation to Open Community Call on ChatGPT, generative AI, and Wikimedia

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Yes, please, make this a regular event, at least for the time being.
These discussions are incredibly useful, given the speed the developments
are happening in this area, and the complexity of the challenges we are
facing due to them.
And thank's a lot for organizing the meeting yesterday!

Paulo

Samuel Klein  escreveu no dia quinta, 23/03/2023 à(s)
21:11:

> The Bau lab (that produced ROME) is great; see their update MEMIT
> https://memit.baulab.info scaling that approach.
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 3:43 PM Lauren Worden 
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 12:20 PM Samuel Klein  wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Yael and all for hosting this!  A great conversation which we
>>> should revisit regularly.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I hope that this can be a (monthly?) regularly occurring event given
>> the current state of very substantial advancements and improvements in the
>> field.
>>
>> I want to reiterate some links which I feel may be of considerable help
>> to those trying to understand our situation:
>>
>> RARR: https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.08726
>>
>> ROME: https://rome.baulab.info/
>>
>> ROME:
>>
>> -LW
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ROUPXZQXNZSGXX5HKPLSUKIKZSR7LJT7/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>
>
> --
> Samuel Klein  @metasj   w:user:sj  +1 617 529 4266
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/IRPDSTNKLEWXE5RRVJHDKHL2OXZZXXN6/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/LNKUGJT3XQEAJCDWNJU5QA6EIZHTHJGZ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Results of the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines Vote

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

 From the empirical, anecdotal evidence I have, low turnout (could be
worst, but still not great) at my homewiki, the Wikipedia in
Portuguese, was mostly due to lack of interest, part of it eventually
caused by the belief that the way it was designed, the impact on the UCOC
on the wiki would be negligible. This time thankfully we had someone hired
by WMF to communicate in Portuguese about it, so lack of knowledge of what
was going on was probably not a factor.
 I left the voting for the last day, and voted for it hoping that at worst
it would be harmless, and at best it would reinforce the positive parts of
the system we already have in place to deal with abuse... Though I'm still
unsure about it, and maybe should not have voted at all. One thing that
kind of surprised me was the approval not being the landslide I was
expecting, since in most meetings and communications I've been or seen it
was presented as something so obviously very good and positive that had to
be approved for the common good of everyone... Anyway, waiting to see how
it fares.

Best,
Paulo

Joe Sutherland  escreveu no dia sexta,
17/02/2023 à(s) 07:57:

> Just to follow up on this from Risker, I filed a task on the home wiki
> issue: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T329922
>
> best,
> Joe
>
> --
> *Joe Sutherland* (he/him)
> Lead Trust and Safety Specialist
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 13:27, Risker  wrote:
>
>> Just noting in passing that the SecurePoll default for "home wiki" is the
>> project on which an account made its first edit.  A large number of editors
>> who would consider their "home wiki" a different project (or even a
>> different language entirely) made their first edit on English Wikipedia;
>> the same is true of several of the other "large" Wikipedias.  The extended
>> statistical information tells us that more than half of all voters met
>> voting requirements on two or more projects.
>>
>> It's also noteworthy that the majority of Wikimedia projects have a very
>> small group of contributors who would meet the voting requirements.Most
>> editors who work on our smaller projects made their earliest contributions
>> on a larger project, and that larger project is going to be considered
>> their "home" wiki.  SecurePoll treats an account's edits wholistically,
>> rather than project-by-project, and it does not record the location
>> (wiki/project) from which an account has voted.  It should be noted that
>> there isn't a lot of data provided with relation to our smaller projects in
>> the statistical analysis.  This is appropriate as it could impact user
>> privacy.
>>
>> As an aside, I am part of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee team
>> looking at using SecurePoll for some aspects of ratification of the
>> Charter.  We are already discussing with the team that is responsible for
>> SecurePoll about some of these issues, such as users being able to select
>> their "home wiki", results per project, expanding the available
>> translations, and ways to maintain privacy for contributors to smaller
>> projects.  We're also watching closely for relevant comments specific to
>> the use of SecurePoll in this and other elections, and what improvements
>> Wikimedians (especially those from smaller projects) suggest for
>> SecurePoll.  Thanks, Xavier, for raising the issue.
>>
>> Risker/Anne
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 15:49, Stella Ng  wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Xavier,
>>>
>>> Thank you for your email, and sharing your observations and concerns.
>>> Many other movement initiatives face similar challenges. Equitable
>>> participation and engagement are something we are working to improve with
>>> each and every interaction. The UCoC project team has poured a sizable
>>> amount of discussion, planning and energy into outreach to the movement
>>> throughout the process. The goal was to encourage participation from as
>>> many communities as possible.
>>>
>>>
>>> The ways the UCoC team encouraged participation can be seen through the
>>> results of this work. The Revised Enforcement Guidelines are currently
>>> translated into over 40 languages; voter information, banners, and emails
>>> were also heavily translated. The project team hosted outreach and
>>> conversation hours throughout the drafting process. We have made it a point
>>> to invite and engage with many communities, particularly small and
>>> medium-sized, and it is our goal to continue to ensure that the growing
>>> communities and small language wikis are invited to engage with us. It is
>>> our hope that as we progress, the UCoC and the Enforcement Guidelines will
>>> create a better environment that will see more interaction from all
>>> communities.
>>>
>>> As we embark on the next steps and stages of this ongoing project, we
>>> will increase engagement, conversations, and interaction with the growing
>>> communities and small language wikis in as many languages, places, and
>>> contexts as possible. The UCoC is an iterative process, 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: ChatGPT and Wikipedia

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I've been playing with it on over the last week, and my experience is that
that AI is incredibly prone to invent informations that look credible,
while being entirely made up by it. It would generate inexistent persons,
dates, events and places, and build an entire story out of them that,
nevertheless, looks credible. I would advise anyone against using it for
anything more than helping with paraphrasing already existing texts, when
using it.

Just now. when asked about bishop Pedro Sardinha (first bishop of Brazil)
he told me:
It's possible that you are referring to Pedro da Silva Sardinha, also known
as Father Francisco, who was a Portuguese Jesuit missionary who served as
the bishop of Timbuktu in the early 18th century. Father Francisco was born
in Lisbon, Portugal, and entered the Jesuit order as a young man. He was
sent to West Africa as a missionary and served as the bishop of Timbuktu
from 1705 to 1706. Father Francisco is known for his efforts to convert the
local population to Christianity and for his work to improve the education
and literacy of the people in Timbuktu. However, he died in 1706,
apparently while being held captive by local authorities.

This person never existed, nor those events, it was entirely made up by
the AI, but looks credible. Often it says the information is based on its
research on reliable sources, even presenting some of them (but also fake).

Yesterday, when asked about the Quintinense Scheme, a well known sockpuppet
affair of the Portuguese Wikipedia, it said it was an arrangement by King
Manuel I of Portugal in the early 16th century, concerning the way the
lands should be cultivated in the colonies, named after Quinta do Lorde,
which it said was the first settlement in Madeira (it's actually a tourist
resort built in the late 1990s). I'm constantly surprised by the AI
capacity of inventing such elaborate fakes.

In the case of Pharos experiment, this AI generated information, which
still persists (unsourced) in the article, is probably fake as well: The
practice of titling artworks dates back to ancient civilizations, where
works of art were often inscribed with the name of the artist and the
subject of the piece.

Best,

Paulo

Ziko van Dijk  escreveu no dia quinta, 22/12/2022 à(s)
18:01:

> Hello,
> About my experiences with Chat CPT - is it good enough to write our
> articles? - I made this video:
> https://youtu.be/zKPEyxYt5kg
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
> Am Di., 20. Dez. 2022 um 20:25 Uhr schrieb Pharos
> :
> >
> > I'd like to share my experiment with using ChapGPT to help write an
> article on English Wikipedia:
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artwork_title
> >
> > You can see an explanation of the process here, your comments are
> welcome:
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Artwork_title#Use_of_ChatGPT
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Richard
> > (User:Pharos)
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 1:45 PM ZhaoFJx  wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd be curious about copyright issues though, as it's licensed on
> Github. It may indeed be infringing copyright, since he may require
> attribution. However, I agree with The Cunctator that the community won't
> do anything about it.
> >>
> >> Incidentally, I'm a little worried that he might grab broken content
> that wasn't rolled back. After all - the current artificial intelligence
> can not reach the level of human thinking
> >>
> >> Sincerely,
> >> ZhaoFJx
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org,
> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >>
> >> Anders Wennersten  于2022年12月19日周一 08:52写道：
> >>>
> >>> I think we should not underestimate what this could evolve into. We
> thrived because our readers find us "good enough" when it comes to finding
> facts, not the ultimate source.
> >>>
> >>> And the software learns by reading, and can (and have done so)
> Wikipedia, Wikidata etc and represent our data in its own syntax och
> present it in a way so it is not a direct copy. Perhaps data will be a bit
> delayed to the actual content in Wikipedia, but so what - good enough?
> >>>
> >>> Anders
> >>>
> >>> Den 2022-12-19 kl. 14:26, skrev Gnangarra:
> >>>
> >>> AI simply cant descriminate between good research and faked research,
> for any outcome it must provide all of its sources whether they are from
> Wikipedia, Wikidata, WikiCommons, WikiSource or some other place.
> Otherwise it will answer yes to some asking if the world is flat because
> it'll seek out that answer and find all the nonsense that has been produced.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, 19 Dec 2022 at 06:02, Erik Moeller 
> wrote:
> 
>  On Sun, Dec 11, 2022 at 5:55 AM Anders Wennersten
>   wrote:
>  > ChatGPT is now making headlines more or less every day  and I
> perceive
>  > them to try to position themself  av the "next" google.
> 
>  I suspect OpenAI will continue to focus on generative 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Obnoxious fundraisers again: Undismissable notice

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I thought it was decided by the community[1] they wouldn't be allowed in
that kind of format anymore 樂 at least on wiki.en.

[1] -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#RfC_on_the_banners_for_the_December_2022_fundraising_campaign

Benjamin Ikuta  escreveu no dia sábado, 17/12/2022
à(s) 14:32:

>
>
> We ought to have an RfC proposing to limit the size of such disruptive
> banners.
>
>
>
> > On Dec 17, 2022, at 6:16 AM, David Gerard  wrote:
> >
> > If you aren't logged in and you're on mobile, the fundraising notice
> > now takes up 1.5 screens, and can't be dismissed - there's only "Maybe
> > later", and that demands an email address and can't be dismissed.
> >
> > The fundraising department are making the site actually unusable again.
> >
> >
> > - d.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/U4RSQRZLWQWJXLRVA4TN5PMB5LYCJJZV/
> > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/OVOB6TBOFLYRBPBDAOGIAI723WEEOFRH/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/J3FWDNYLB6UWR2QVYQDVM645JOMC2OQ3/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Long Reddit post laying out inner workings of English Wikipedia

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I very much agree that it does not wholly replace Wikipedia, for indeep
research it's the best. However, for quick searches I need an immediate
answer - such as quickly understanding what the boss means when he's
talking about the "debit leg" or some technical term I never heard, it
already replaced Wikipedia. And indeed, for my work mate it already
replaced Stackoverflow as the first place to look when he has doubts on
coding.

I'm pretty sure we're already being hurt by this, being myself one of the
"hurters".

Paulo



Shabab Mustafa  escreveu no dia quinta,
15/12/2022 à(s) 17:58:

> OT continued -
>
> ChatGPT poses bigger threat to search engines, like Google or Human
> generated knowledge platform like Stackoverflow, Quora than Wikipedia at
> this moment of time. According to CNBC news article, Google already taking
> a conservative stance towards this. [1]
>
> I my personal opinion, ChatGPT might not be replacing WP very newer
> future. There is a chance that the startup behind ChatGPT will get burried
> under lawsuits from big fishes in the pond if they feel any existential
> threat. For example, Stackoverflow already banned (temporarily) ChatGPT. [2]
>
> Ref:
> ---
> [1]
> https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/13/google-execs-warn-of-reputational-risk-with-chatgbt-like-tool.html
>
> [2]
> https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/421831/temporary-policy-chatgpt-is-banned
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022, 7:18 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> OT for the thread, but on the topic "Competition to Wikipedia" -
>>
>> This is very new for me (found about it yesterday, through a work mate),
>> probably already well known for others - but a lot of people (including me)
>> iw now using it extensively as an alternative to Wikipedia:
>> https://chat.openai.com .
>>
>> Spare your time lecturing me about it not having reliable sources, or
>> whatever argument you may find - I write Wikipedia and know all that pretty
>> well. I'm just saying that people here that used to go to Wikipedia for
>> quick results are now using that thing, and it's spreading like fire.
>> Doesn't work for everything (like bios and current events), but for many
>> stuff seems to be an advantageous replacement of wp, when what we want is
>> quick & fairly reliable (even if not bulletproof) results.
>>
>> Best,
>> Paulo
>>
>> Peter Southwood  escreveu no dia quinta,
>> 15/12/2022 à(s) 04:34:
>>
>>> Last I heard, Wikipedia is not for sale, so not much point in persuading
>>> someone to try to buy it. Also some real competition could be good for
>>> Wikipedia, and for that matter, good for the Wikimedia Foundation. It
>>> would
>>> also be very interesting to see how a real challenge to English Wikipedia
>>> would be organized. All the previous attempts have failed, often quite
>>> dismally. If it were to work better, many of us would probably join it,
>>> if
>>> it turns out to be a thing one could join.
>>> Many of us are loyal to the concept of free knowledge, not so much to the
>>> platform it is presented on.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Rey Bueno via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org]
>>>
>>> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2022 19:01
>>> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Cc: reybue...@proton.me
>>> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Long Reddit post laying out inner workings of
>>> English Wikipedia
>>>
>>> The last part of the great wall of text appears to persuade him to
>>> invest in
>>> alternatives instead of buying Wikipedia. For him Wiki is like a sole
>>> McDonald's in a food dessert, and that the solution is to open new
>>> "restaurants".
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>>> at:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> Public archives at
>>>
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
>>> message/6LNO3HAMIVCEXO7PBMZGRAOG2JGGI4IW/
>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/6LNO3HAMIVCEXO7PBMZGRAOG2JGGI4IW/>
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, gu

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Long Reddit post laying out inner workings of English Wikipedia

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

OT for the thread, but on the topic "Competition to Wikipedia" -

This is very new for me (found about it yesterday, through a work mate),
probably already well known for others - but a lot of people (including me)
iw now using it extensively as an alternative to Wikipedia:
https://chat.openai.com .

Spare your time lecturing me about it not having reliable sources, or
whatever argument you may find - I write Wikipedia and know all that pretty
well. I'm just saying that people here that used to go to Wikipedia for
quick results are now using that thing, and it's spreading like fire.
Doesn't work for everything (like bios and current events), but for many
stuff seems to be an advantageous replacement of wp, when what we want is
quick & fairly reliable (even if not bulletproof) results.

Best,
Paulo

Peter Southwood  escreveu no dia quinta,
15/12/2022 à(s) 04:34:

> Last I heard, Wikipedia is not for sale, so not much point in persuading
> someone to try to buy it. Also some real competition could be good for
> Wikipedia, and for that matter, good for the Wikimedia Foundation. It would
> also be very interesting to see how a real challenge to English Wikipedia
> would be organized. All the previous attempts have failed, often quite
> dismally. If it were to work better, many of us would probably join it, if
> it turns out to be a thing one could join.
> Many of us are loyal to the concept of free knowledge, not so much to the
> platform it is presented on.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rey Bueno via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org]
> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2022 19:01
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Cc: reybue...@proton.me
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Long Reddit post laying out inner workings of
> English Wikipedia
>
> The last part of the great wall of text appears to persuade him to invest
> in
> alternatives instead of buying Wikipedia. For him Wiki is like a sole
> McDonald's in a food dessert, and that the solution is to open new
> "restaurants".
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
> message/6LNO3HAMIVCEXO7PBMZGRAOG2JGGI4IW/
> 
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/VL2H4QTOIIEPIARBE34Q7Y7CLAMMTIG7/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/B7Z7MCRF4AEBYWPBGXQJTUK44OJYAZAV/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Vote for your favourite sound logo

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Look, I'm sorry, but I have to say this.
I have not the least idea why WMF is using the resources on this. Was this
a priority, or even needed? What does it serve for?
And, as someone with hypersensitivity to part of the sound spectrum, I
sincerely hope you don't use any of those cacophonic screams or whatever
they are in any noticeable place.

 I'm really puzzled why this has been done at all.

Paulo

Mehrdad Pourzaki  escreveu no dia terça, 6/12/2022
à(s) 15:23:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Voting  in
> the Wikimedia sound logo contest has started [1]. Crowds, pages turning,
> drums, chimes, vocals, and the sound of keyboards typing. Wikimedia is
> alive with sound, music, and everything in between. From December 6 to 19,
> 2022, please play a part
>  and help
> identify the Sound of All Human Knowledge. Voting is open until 19
> December, 23:59 UTC. Learn more on Diff
> 
> [2].
>
> The sound logo team is grateful to everyone who participated in this
> global contest. We received 3,235 submissions from 2,094 participants in
> 135 countries. We are incredibly grateful to the team of volunteer
> screeners
> 
> and the selection committee
> 
> who, among others, helped to bring us to where we are today. It is now up
> to Wikimedia to choose its sound logo.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> The sound logo team
>
>
>
> [1] Vote for the Sound of All Human Knowledge:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Sound_Logo_Vote
> [2] Learn more on Diff:
> https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/12/06/vote-for-the-sound-of-all-human-knowledge/
> [3] Screening 3235 submissions:
> https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/10/31/screening-3235-sound-submissions/
> [4] The Selection Committee:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Sound_Logo/Contest_proposal#How_will_the_final_selection_happen
> ?
>
>
>
> *Mehrdad Pourzaki*
> Lead Movement Communications Specialist
> wikimediafoundation.org
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/LWW77MLYX22O3Q5MJSA5L43YZGYGBQPO/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/7GNG44623VFG2SLKKYKYM7ANJVZGIKUG/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

"*if a wiki chooses to block all unregistered edits (...) w**ould we still
need to auto-block open proxies, if there was no more anonymous editing at
all?*"

Please don't use the term "anonymous" to refer to IP edits, which are
anything but anonymous.
The only edits with a minimum level of anonymity are precisely those made
by registered users.
One of the reasons we blocked IP editing on pt.wiki was exactly because
editors using IP addresses were being traced, identified, and harassed.

Best,
Paulo


 escreveu no dia terça, 3/05/2022 à(s) 02:31:

> I've been getting really helpful replies both here and in the Meta
> discussion, thank you very much. I'm going to summarize what I'm seeing so
> far, and ask some new questions.
>
> One thing that's come up is that there are many kinds of good-faith people
> who experience collateral damage from the current practice — people in
> Africa and South/Southeast Asia who are automatically in proxies thanks to
> their ISP (the folks who started the conversation), and also people who
> live in countries where contributors risk harassment or legal action,
> including queer editors who live in countries where queer sexualities are
> criminalized.
>
> Right now, I'm thinking about the different kinds of "pain" involved on
> all sides. Just for the sake of this conversation, I'm using the word
> "pain" to mean something that's frustrating, time-consuming, dangerous,
> obstructive, or otherwise negative. Admins & stewards who spend all of
> their free time trying to block IP-hopping abusers experience "pain", users
> who get doxxed or harassed by IP-hopping abusers experience "pain",
> organizers with editathon participants getting blocked experience "pain",
> editors who are blocked from contributing experience "pain".
>
> So: is this a zero-sum game, where one group's pain relief = another
> group's pain point? Right now, I think the expansion of proxy blocks since
> last year has been reducing the pain for vandal/abuse fighters, which has
> increased the pain for good-faith users (especially in Africa/South Asia).
> For stewards, it may have just shifted the work: less work blocking the
> vandals, but more work granting block exemptions.
>
> If it's a zero-sum game, then we're trying to find an acceptable balance
> among these groups, which is difficult and makes everyone unhappy. I'm
> hoping there are things that we can change in the software that make this
> more of a non-zero-sum game, so that relieving pain for one group doesn't
> increase it for someone else.
>
> The ideas so far break down into two categories: #1) making proxy blocks
> less frequent or more nuanced so that we don't need an unblocking request
> process, and #2) making the unblocking request process easier or more
> efficient. The IPBE process is kind of the pivot point in the problem. From
> a software design perspective, the fact that IPBE even exists is a failure
> state — we're not doing our job properly making a website that anyone can
> edit, if good-faith people are blocked and other good-faith people are
> spending time unblocking them. So the ideal solutions would be focused on
> #1, because if we solve those, #2 doesn't exist anymore.
>
> Here are some of the ideas suggested so far:
>
> Category #1: Making proxy blocks less frequent, or more nuanced
> * Instead of auto-blocking, wait for someone to vandalize before blocking
> that open proxy
> * Tag edits made through open proxies, so that admins can give them more
> scrutiny
> * Throttle edits made through open proxies, to discourage vandals (and
> good-faith people)
> * For Apple's Private Relay, rangeblock the regions where vandalism is
> coming from rather than blocking the whole service
> * Treat ISPs in Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia that use
> carrier-grade NAT differently, instead of making them auto-blocked open
> proxies
>
> Category #2: Making the IPBE process easier, or more efficient
> * Make the local/global distinction easier to understand and navigate by
> signaling to users that they've got a local or global block, and guiding
> them in the right direction
> * Let trusted users like campaign organizers submit lists of accounts to
> be automatically exempt (but obviously blockable if those accounts are used
> badly)
>
> Are there other suggestions for either category? What have I missed?
>
> One thing I'm curious about: for the "treat ISPs in Africa/South Asia
> differently" idea — would people in other regions be able to abuse those
> services? Would a bad actor in Europe be able to make edits through an
> unblocked ISP in Ghana?
>
> Also: What happens if the open-proxy block only applies to anon edits, and
> allows edits from people with accounts? I know that the basic answer is
> "then the bad-faith people create accounts, so there's no point" — but does
> that at least reduce the amount of "pain"/damage to a more acceptable
> level?
>
> I'd also like to know what happens if a wiki chooses to block all
> 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

With Wikipedia Zero we were able to filter the users using that program
with a flag similar to the one you propose, and then monitor them and make
informed decisions based on the quality of the editions. I suppose
something similar could be done with OPs too. That would really be a
relief. It would make it much easier for those who have access to the
filters to identify sockpuppets and LTAs, possibiliting a much more
intelligent and informed blocking of those accounts, instead of the
randomic mess that happens now. There are some privacy concerns with the
use of that flag, but all of them way more bearable than using bare IP
addresses, or having to expose oneself on the steward mailing list when
trying to request a IPBE for legitimate use.

And legitimate uses for OPs are getting more and more common by the day,
and not only for those living in China, Russia or Venezuela. At this point
most of us who edit from Portugal and Brasil know very well the dire risks
we incur everyday when editing Wikipedia with a known identity, which go
from physical threats and harassment of us and our direct family, to having
to defend ourselves in court on all kind of frivolous causes - which is
just another form of harassment - generally without help from the WMF.

Best,
Paulo

effe iets anders  escreveu no dia sábado,
30/04/2022 à(s) 08:37:

> Hi Danny,
>
> this is great thinking. There's one more angle that I'd like to offer, but
> it would come with plenty of risks and downsides, so I'm not sure if it is
> actually viable (I guess it falls in the 'mitigate harm' category). But
> just to put it out there:
>
> One of the main reasons that we block open proxies, is because of
> sockpuppets and block evaders. What if we would somehow expose to admins
> which edits are made by open proxy? That way they can consider the entire
> picture (including a history of good faith edits) before blocking their
> edits. Down the road, that flag could become more nuanced (open proxy vs
> shared connection) but obviously it would have to remain pretty broad
> categories. There are plenty of downsides (WMF would need to keep a
> database of open proxies for one, but it would also share a small piece of
> private information about the user - we could warn them about that as they
> are saving their edit).
>
> If we are afraid primarily for rapid open proxy edits, we could use a
> tactic that is used by some social media tech companies in other settings:
> slow them down when using an identified open proxy. If we build in a 30s
> throttle or even wait time before the edit can be saved, or a 5 minute
> delay before the edit can become visible, that would take the fun out of it
> possibly. Obvious downside is that this is still annoying as hell for good
> faith users, but at least they can now request exceptions on-wiki.
>
> This family of methods risks a two class community, but I'm not sure if
> that is worse than the current situation. I'm not sure what would be the
> 'right' path either.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 5:03 PM  wrote:
>
>> (cross-posted from
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking#Help_from_WMF
>> )
>>
>> Hi folks, I'm DannyH from the Wikimedia Foundation. I manage the product
>> teams that build Contributor Tools -- Community Tech, Campaigns, CheckUser
>> improvements and sockpuppet detection, moderator tools on mobile web, and
>> the new incident reporting system.
>>
>> I've been reading all of these conversations, and I'm concerned about the
>> people on both sides of the issue -- the admins working to keep the
>> projects safe from bad-faith people, and the good-faith people who are
>> being blocked because of someone else's rangeblock, or because they're
>> using default network proxy features that they're not aware of.
>>
>> This problem is getting attention within the WMF. Foundation folks are
>> really concerned about what we're hearing on Wikimedia-L and in this
>> discussion, especially because there seem to be systemic issues that are
>> specifically making things harder for new users in Africa. I've got the
>> opportunity right now to assign people to make software changes to help
>> solve this problem, which is great. But now I'm trying to figure out what
>> those software changes could be, and I don't have a clear answer yet for
>> what that should be.
>>
>> So if you don't mind, I'd like to run through what I think the main
>> points are, and a list of possible directions that a solution could take,
>> and then I would love it if you could help me figure this out.
>>
>> Here's what I understand about the problem:
>>
>> * Open proxies are a vector for harassment and vandalism. Bad-faith long
>> term abusers use them to disguise their IP and evade detection. The
>> projects automatically block open proxies that they know about, to
>> discourage the bad-faith vandals.
>>
>> * There's been a big increase in proxy blocks since July 2021 on English
>> Wikipedia (and Oct 2021 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Please, replace "block anonymous access" with "block unregistered access".
That extremely wrong, nocive, but generalized Wikimedia habit of calling IP
access "anonymous", when they are anything but anonymous, is so pervasive
in the wikiverse that I still fall for it sometimes. 

Paulo Santos Perneta  escreveu no dia sexta,
22/04/2022 à(s) 18:50:

>
> "*Firstly, unblock IPs that geolocate to countries where we lack
> contributors.Yes we will get more vandalism in those countries, but far far
> less than if we also unblocked all IPs in countries where we have lots of
> editors.*" -> That's not as simple as that, as the whole Wikipedia Zero
> Angola debacle has shown perfectly well - > at some point, the situation
> with piracy and vandalism coming from Angola W0 IPs was so bad that pretty
> much the whole country was hard blocked. I put a number of filters on place
> in order to monitor those editions on wiki.pt, and the result was that
> basically 100% of the editions coming through those IPs - and even accounts
> using them - were either vandalism, piracy or absolutely hopeless newbies
> who had not the least idea how to edit, without any means available to
> teach them - and without the least shred of interest from who was
> coordinating that W0 project in teaching the few goodwilling newbies the
> very basics of edition. This was clearly stated at the time by the WMF
> representative, it would have to be us, volunteers, who had somehow to find
> some way to teach users in Angola entering the projects from their
> cellphones (which is basically hell on earth even to old, seazoned,
> wikiwise rats like me and many others I know) without even access to talk
> pages or alerts or whatever how to edit Wikipedia. The obvious result was
> that shortly after that problem began, pretty much the whole country was
> blocked in a number of projects, including wiki.pt (not covering
> registered users) and Commons, and then, at some point, globally blocked on
> Meta. That was basically the end of the Angola community that had
> been forming before the W0 program started, since, if I recall correctly,
> the few users that existed were generally blocked at the time the global
> block was implemented, and asking for an IP block exception is very far
> from being an easy process, especially if you are using a cell phone, which
> was generally the case over there.
>
> Anyway, IP blocks* per se *are not the problem here. It is perfectly
> possible to block anonymous access, as we do at wiki.pt, and allow (and
> encourage!) registration of new users, allowing for a much productive and
> much less frustrating Wikipedia experience - where newbies can find help in
> many ways, including at the new mentorship program, which works fairly
> well, and actually engage with the community in a productive manner from
> day 1. The problem are those global blocks that do not allow new users to
> register, and often not even registered users if they have not sysop access
> or are not otherwise IP block exempt.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/SSNHFYW2WLR46NNFFDZ4Q7EX3JAN5TLS/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

"*Firstly, unblock IPs that geolocate to countries where we lack
contributors.Yes we will get more vandalism in those countries, but far far
less than if we also unblocked all IPs in countries where we have lots of
editors.*" -> That's not as simple as that, as the whole Wikipedia Zero
Angola debacle has shown perfectly well - > at some point, the situation
with piracy and vandalism coming from Angola W0 IPs was so bad that pretty
much the whole country was hard blocked. I put a number of filters on place
in order to monitor those editions on wiki.pt, and the result was that
basically 100% of the editions coming through those IPs - and even accounts
using them - were either vandalism, piracy or absolutely hopeless newbies
who had not the least idea how to edit, without any means available to
teach them - and without the least shred of interest from who was
coordinating that W0 project in teaching the few goodwilling newbies the
very basics of edition. This was clearly stated at the time by the WMF
representative, it would have to be us, volunteers, who had somehow to find
some way to teach users in Angola entering the projects from their
cellphones (which is basically hell on earth even to old, seazoned,
wikiwise rats like me and many others I know) without even access to talk
pages or alerts or whatever how to edit Wikipedia. The obvious result was
that shortly after that problem began, pretty much the whole country was
blocked in a number of projects, including wiki.pt (not covering registered
users) and Commons, and then, at some point, globally blocked on Meta. That
was basically the end of the Angola community that had been forming before
the W0 program started, since, if I recall correctly, the few users that
existed were generally blocked at the time the global block was
implemented, and asking for an IP block exception is very far from being an
easy process, especially if you are using a cell phone, which was generally
the case over there.

Anyway, IP blocks* per se *are not the problem here. It is perfectly
possible to block anonymous access, as we do at wiki.pt, and allow (and
encourage!) registration of new users, allowing for a much productive and
much less frustrating Wikipedia experience - where newbies can find help in
many ways, including at the new mentorship program, which works fairly
well, and actually engage with the community in a productive manner from
day 1. The problem are those global blocks that do not allow new users to
register, and often not even registered users if they have not sysop access
or are not otherwise IP block exempt.

Best,
Paulo
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/NSKTDJOOC4RQVHYDDOIUBOGMIJJ5HXL4/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I absolutely concur with Flo.
Though I've not followed the recent developments Flo tells about, in the
last years this problem has been getting increasingly worse. And despite
dozens of alerts in many public channels, including personally to stewards,
nothing seems to have been done to fix this. If at all, the proxy blocking
policy (at least empirically) seems to have become even more aggressive
than it used to be.

What are we gaining with all the harassment this policy is causing in many
communities, most of them allegedly a priority for the Wikimedia projects?
Clearly something is broken with that policy, and clearly needs to be
fixed. I've no idea how, as Meta is the most opaque project I know in the
Wikiverse, and by far the most difficult to understand. But this situation
has passed all limits, and needs to be dealt with. With an RFC to put an
end or to fix that policy or whatever other means are available.

Best,
Paulo



Florence Devouard  escreveu no dia quarta, 20/04/2022
à(s) 19:21:

> Hello friends
>
> Short version : We need to find solutions to avoid so many africans being
> globally IP blocked due to our No Open Proxies policy.
> *https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking
> *
>
>
> Long version :
>
> I'd like to raise attention on an issue, which has been getting worse in
> the past couple of weeks/months.
>
> Increasing number of editors getting blocked due to the No Open Proxies
> policy [1]
> In particular africans.
>
> In February 2004, the decision was made to block open proxies on Meta and
> all other Wikimedia projects.
>
> According to the no open proxies policy : Publicly available proxies
> (including paid proxies) may be blocked for any period at any time. While
> this may affect legitimate users, they are not the intended targets and may
> freely use proxies until those are blocked [...]
>
> Non-static IP addresses or hosts that are otherwise not permanent proxies
> should typically be blocked for a shorter period of time, as it is likely
> the IP address will eventually be transferred or dynamically reassigned, or
> the open proxy closed. Once closed, the IP address should be unblocked.
>
> According to the policy page, « the Editors can be permitted to edit by
> way of an open proxy with the IP block exempt flag. This is granted on
> local projects by administrators and globally by stewards. »
>
>
> I repeat -> ... legitimate users... may freely use proxies until those
> are blocked. the Editors can be permitted to edit by way of an open proxy
> with the IP block exempt flag <-- it is not illegal to edit using an
> open proxy
>
>
> Most editors though... have no idea whatsoever what an open proxy is. They
> do not understand well what to do when they are blocked.
>
> In the past few weeks, the number of African editors reporting being
> blocked due to open proxy has been VERY significantly increasing.
> New editors just as old timers.
> Unexperienced editors but also staff members, president of usergroups,
> organizers of edit-a-thons and various wikimedia initiatives.
> At home, but also during events organized with usergroup members or
> trainees, during edit-a-thons, photo uploads sessions etc.
>
> It is NOT the occasional highly unlikely situation. This has become a
> regular occurence.
> There are cases and complains every week. Not one complaint per week.
> Several complaints per week.
> *This is irritating. This is offending. This is stressful. This is
> disrupting activities organized in good faith by good people, activities
> set-up with our donors funds. **And the disruption** is primarlly taking
> place in a geographical region supposingly to be nurtured (per our strategy
> for diversity, equity, inclusion blahblahblah). *
>
>
> The open proxy policy page suggests that, should a person be unfairly
> blocked, it is recommended
>
>- * to privately email stewards[image: (_AT_)]wikimedia.org.
>- * or alternatively, to post a request (if able to edit, if the
>editor doesn't mind sharing their IP for global blocks or their reasons to
>desire privacy (for Tor usage)).
>- * the current message displayed to the blocked editor also suggest
>contacting User:Tks4Fish. This editor is involved in vandalism fighting and
>is probably the user blocking open proxies IPs the most. See log
>
>
> So...
> Option 1: contacting stewards : it seems that they are not answering. Or
> not quickly. Or requesting lengthy justifications before adding people to
> IP block exemption list.
> Option 2: posting a request for unblock on meta. For those who want to
> look at the process, I suggest looking at it [3] and think hard about how a
> new editor would feel. This is simply incredibly complicated
> Option 3 : user:TksFish answers... sometimes...
>
> As a consequence, most editors concerned with those global blocks... stay
> blocked several days.
>
> We do not know know why 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Creating new Wikidata items for all Commons categories

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I hope we are not forced to connect Commons categories to Wikipedia
categories because of that, which has been a nasty side effect of
connecting things through Wikidata, due to  misunderstanding the Gallery
space in Commons and taking it for some kind of equivalent to articles,
which it is not in the least.
But a huge lot of Commons categories probably should never have any
Wikidata item (ex: "Eiffel Tower taken from the west corner of the
Trocadero terrace" (don't know if this one exists, but that's the kind of
stuff we usually create there to classify views), so I'm not especially
confident that should be done.

Best,
Paulo

Mike Peel  escreveu no dia sábado, 18/12/2021 à(s)
23:10:

> Hi all,
>
> Over the last few years, over 3.6 million Wikimedia Commons categories
> have gained an infobox that displays information from Wikidata in the
> reader's language. I would like to see this expanded so that all Commons
> categories have a multilingual infobox.
>
> I've started an RfC about this at:
>
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/Creating_new_Wikidata_items_for_all_Commons_categories
>
> If you're interested in this topic, please comment there.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/VRHAASU2EFZAZARC3VAOLPVGOJS6MOJ2/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/H4SG3VKSFEISQFUV23CFI5J4F46PNOXM/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Investigation of possible AffCom's violations - your input welcomed!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

(Clarification: They are chosen by AffCom from a pool of self nominated
candidates usually from the communities that make the Wikimedia Movement -
but community involvement stops there, AFAIK)

P.

Paulo Santos Perneta  escreveu no dia terça,
26/10/2021 à(s) 12:16:

> That (AffCom history) I don't know, apart that once they were known as
> ChapCom. At least since 2017 (and probably well before?) AffCom members are
> chosen by AffCom itself, and the only entity they answer to is the WMF BoT.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
>
> Gnangarra  escreveu no dia terça, 26/10/2021 à(s)
> 12:01:
>
>> During my time on Wikimedia Australia Committee/board the Affcom members
>> were elected by the Affiliates, though like all committees individuals can
>> be cooped to fill specific needs
>>
>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 18:53, Paulo Santos Perneta <
>> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Affcom cant be violating this as they are a volunteer community
>>> elected committee." - No, despite the dubious information that AffCom
>>> keeps about themselves on their meta page, they are not "elected", and they
>>> do not answer to the community 8Wikimedia Movement), as you seem to
>>> believe.
>>> They are nominated (by themselves, none the less), and they work for WMF
>>> BoT (they are a committee of the BoT), and answer to none other than WMF
>>> BoT. So yes, I'm pretty sure these principles do fully apply to them.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Paulo
>>>
>>> Gnangarra  escreveu no dia terça, 26/10/2021 à(s)
>>> 00:45:
>>>
>>>> Michal
>>>>
>>>> The guiding principles you refer to state "*These are not principles
>>>> intended to cover the entire Wikimedia movement, just the Wikimedia
>>>> Foundation*"
>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles.
>>>> Affcom cant be violating this as they are a volunteer community elected
>>>> committee. As a liaison for the WMF to AFFCOM the person you refer to must
>>>> follow the decisions of the committee and is limited to how much they can
>>>> respond.   This is the third forum you have shopped in attacking someone
>>>> who is unable to respond, your complaint is that you dont like a decision
>>>> made by Affcom.
>>>>
>>>> Your action do clearly read as a personal public attack intended to
>>>> negatively affect her reputation, you state that it is by saying " *I
>>>> would much rather to communicate about these affairs privately. 
>>>> **Unfortunately,
>>>> I have recognized her in the MCDC too lately for private communication*"
>>>>  It is never too late for private discussion and in every event it is
>>>> always best to work directly with people to resolve an issue rather than
>>>> post long rambling emails to lists like this and other pub;ic communication
>>>> channels as the person cannot respond in every forum and will never have
>>>> the ability for everyone who has read your rant to get a clear outcome.  As
>>>> an employee future employers will also see these threads, again they wont
>>>> find resolutions or any apology.
>>>>
>>>> Act respectfully and take your issues to AFFCOM or to the WMF employees
>>>> line manager privately.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Gnangarra
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 02:45, Michal Matúšov 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Risker,
>>>>>
>>>>> first of all I would like to emphasize that I am not sure whether
>>>>> AffCom is violating WMF Guiding principles or not. I have my strong 
>>>>> opinion
>>>>> based on months of interactions, but I consider that investigation is
>>>>> needed to be sure. And in order to receive diverse data for a meaningful
>>>>> investigation I have launched this thread and some data have started to
>>>>> come (thanks Lane!).
>>>>>
>>>>> Now to the point, what are the possible AffCom's violations of WMF
>>>>> Guiding principles? Here are some examples (sorry in advance that they are
>>>>> going to be bit longer that I would like..):
>>>>>
>>>>> Over the last months I have been in intense communication with AffCom
>>>>> over several things. While I have expected (and accepted) that some
>>>>> communication can b

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Investigation of possible AffCom's violations - your input welcomed!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

That (AffCom history) I don't know, apart that once they were known as
ChapCom. At least since 2017 (and probably well before?) AffCom members are
chosen by AffCom itself, and the only entity they answer to is the WMF BoT.

Best,
Paulo


Gnangarra  escreveu no dia terça, 26/10/2021 à(s)
12:01:

> During my time on Wikimedia Australia Committee/board the Affcom members
> were elected by the Affiliates, though like all committees individuals can
> be cooped to fill specific needs
>
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 18:53, Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Affcom cant be violating this as they are a volunteer community elected
>> committee." - No, despite the dubious information that AffCom keeps
>> about themselves on their meta page, they are not "elected", and they do
>> not answer to the community 8Wikimedia Movement), as you seem to believe.
>> They are nominated (by themselves, none the less), and they work for WMF
>> BoT (they are a committee of the BoT), and answer to none other than WMF
>> BoT. So yes, I'm pretty sure these principles do fully apply to them.
>>
>> Best,
>> Paulo
>>
>> Gnangarra  escreveu no dia terça, 26/10/2021 à(s)
>> 00:45:
>>
>>> Michal
>>>
>>> The guiding principles you refer to state "*These are not principles
>>> intended to cover the entire Wikimedia movement, just the Wikimedia
>>> Foundation*"
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles.
>>> Affcom cant be violating this as they are a volunteer community elected
>>> committee. As a liaison for the WMF to AFFCOM the person you refer to must
>>> follow the decisions of the committee and is limited to how much they can
>>> respond.   This is the third forum you have shopped in attacking someone
>>> who is unable to respond, your complaint is that you dont like a decision
>>> made by Affcom.
>>>
>>> Your action do clearly read as a personal public attack intended to
>>> negatively affect her reputation, you state that it is by saying " *I
>>> would much rather to communicate about these affairs privately. 
>>> **Unfortunately,
>>> I have recognized her in the MCDC too lately for private communication*"
>>>  It is never too late for private discussion and in every event it is
>>> always best to work directly with people to resolve an issue rather than
>>> post long rambling emails to lists like this and other pub;ic communication
>>> channels as the person cannot respond in every forum and will never have
>>> the ability for everyone who has read your rant to get a clear outcome.  As
>>> an employee future employers will also see these threads, again they wont
>>> find resolutions or any apology.
>>>
>>> Act respectfully and take your issues to AFFCOM or to the WMF employees
>>> line manager privately.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Gnangarra
>>>
>>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 02:45, Michal Matúšov 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Risker,
>>>>
>>>> first of all I would like to emphasize that I am not sure whether
>>>> AffCom is violating WMF Guiding principles or not. I have my strong opinion
>>>> based on months of interactions, but I consider that investigation is
>>>> needed to be sure. And in order to receive diverse data for a meaningful
>>>> investigation I have launched this thread and some data have started to
>>>> come (thanks Lane!).
>>>>
>>>> Now to the point, what are the possible AffCom's violations of WMF
>>>> Guiding principles? Here are some examples (sorry in advance that they are
>>>> going to be bit longer that I would like..):
>>>>
>>>> Over the last months I have been in intense communication with AffCom
>>>> over several things. While I have expected (and accepted) that some
>>>> communication can be rather slow (because of the structure of AffCom), it
>>>> showed up that some communication from AffCom is at best very misleading.
>>>> E.g. AffCom reactively (on my question) informed WUG Esperanto and Free
>>>> Knowledge (EliSo) that AffCom put on hold EliSo's recognition as a hematic
>>>> Organisation. As a reason AffCom mentioned "several issues" and that AffCom
>>>> is already dealing about them "with the group". It showed up that nor
>>>> issues, nor dealing up with the group [EliSo] was true... I have asked
>>>> AffCom seve

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Investigation of possible AffCom's violations - your input welcomed!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

"Affcom cant be violating this as they are a volunteer community elected
committee." - No, despite the dubious information that AffCom keeps about
themselves on their meta page, they are not "elected", and they do not
answer to the community 8Wikimedia Movement), as you seem to believe.
They are nominated (by themselves, none the less), and they work for WMF
BoT (they are a committee of the BoT), and answer to none other than WMF
BoT. So yes, I'm pretty sure these principles do fully apply to them.

Best,
Paulo

Gnangarra  escreveu no dia terça, 26/10/2021 à(s)
00:45:

> Michal
>
> The guiding principles you refer to state "*These are not principles
> intended to cover the entire Wikimedia movement, just the Wikimedia
> Foundation*"
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles.
> Affcom cant be violating this as they are a volunteer community elected
> committee. As a liaison for the WMF to AFFCOM the person you refer to must
> follow the decisions of the committee and is limited to how much they can
> respond.   This is the third forum you have shopped in attacking someone
> who is unable to respond, your complaint is that you dont like a decision
> made by Affcom.
>
> Your action do clearly read as a personal public attack intended to
> negatively affect her reputation, you state that it is by saying " *I
> would much rather to communicate about these affairs privately. 
> **Unfortunately,
> I have recognized her in the MCDC too lately for private communication*"
>  It is never too late for private discussion and in every event it is
> always best to work directly with people to resolve an issue rather than
> post long rambling emails to lists like this and other pub;ic communication
> channels as the person cannot respond in every forum and will never have
> the ability for everyone who has read your rant to get a clear outcome.  As
> an employee future employers will also see these threads, again they wont
> find resolutions or any apology.
>
> Act respectfully and take your issues to AFFCOM or to the WMF employees
> line manager privately.
>
> Regards
> Gnangarra
>
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 at 02:45, Michal Matúšov 
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Risker,
>>
>> first of all I would like to emphasize that I am not sure whether AffCom
>> is violating WMF Guiding principles or not. I have my strong opinion based
>> on months of interactions, but I consider that investigation is needed
>> to be sure. And in order to receive diverse data for a meaningful
>> investigation I have launched this thread and some data have started to
>> come (thanks Lane!).
>>
>> Now to the point, what are the possible AffCom's violations of WMF
>> Guiding principles? Here are some examples (sorry in advance that they are
>> going to be bit longer that I would like..):
>>
>> Over the last months I have been in intense communication with AffCom
>> over several things. While I have expected (and accepted) that some
>> communication can be rather slow (because of the structure of AffCom), it
>> showed up that some communication from AffCom is at best very misleading.
>> E.g. AffCom reactively (on my question) informed WUG Esperanto and Free
>> Knowledge (EliSo) that AffCom put on hold EliSo's recognition as a hematic
>> Organisation. As a reason AffCom mentioned "several issues" and that AffCom
>> is already dealing about them "with the group". It showed up that nor
>> issues, nor dealing up with the group [EliSo] was true... I have asked
>> AffCom several times when it put EliSo's recognition on hold but AffCom
>> never clearly answered that. *That is taking 3 months now!* AffCom
>> despite my clear question to inform ELiSo about when AffCom put ELiSo's
>> recognition on hold never answered this question. That would be rather
>> annoying, but the additional fact is that EliSo asked for ThemOrg
>> recognition on late november 2020. So according to ThemOrg requirements
>> page [1] , the projected time for approval is 4–6 months, meaning that
>> ELiSo would be projected to be recognized in late March - May 2021. So
>> AffCom reactively (!) informed ELiSo about putting on hold its ThemOrg
>> application after 2 months of the longest projected time for approval... *In
>> summary*: AffCom have communicated false information, non-proactively
>> and in a secretive manner. In my personal opinion it is in conflict with
>> the principle of transparency and accountability.
>>
>> I am during last 4,5 years involved in helping WUG WMSVK to stop
>> violating its bylaws and correct its past and current intentional {and
>> possibly non-intentional) violations of Bylaws, Board agreements and
>> possibly national laws. AffCom is formally involved since early 2020 and in
>> December 2021 AffCom took full responsibility for WUG WMSVK. During the
>> time of most engagement, AffCom was (and still is) very secretive and
>> hardly ever and only after several attempts to communication does provide a
>> clear answer of meaningful clarification. 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming the new Wikimedia Foundation CEO

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Welcome Maryana!

The first thing I've done after knowing the name of the new CEO was
stalking the history of your Wikipedia entry, to see when it was created.
And now I've red how it happened first hand  About your other Wiki
experience - I also had the privilege of participating in an AfroCuration
event in Mozambique the weekend before the last with the Macua students and
teachers of Rovuma University, promoted by the Moleskine Foundation, and it
was beyond fantastic.

I strongly concur that if you are about to begin your own editing and
volunteer journey, do it under a non identifiable name, and see for
yourself what newbies have to endure to be part of our movement. It will
certainly be a very valuable experience.

Wishing all the best in this new journey of your professional life,
Paulo

Maryana Iskander  escreveu no dia terça,
14/09/2021 à(s) 16:37:

> Dear All,
>
> Thank you for this opportunity to introduce myself to you.
>
> When I read the job position [1] for the next leader of Wikimedia
> Foundation, I noticed that it opened with a seemingly simple statement:
> “Knowledge belongs to all of us.” Does it, really? It’s a striking
> statement. In an increasingly unequal and polarizing world, one in which
> almost nothing belongs to all of us, the idea that knowledge *must *belong
> to all is enough to capture anyone’s attention and imagination – certainly
> mine.
>
> My story is shaped by a twin belief that knowledge can also set us free.
> Shortly after I was born in Cairo, Egypt, my parents left for the United
> States. During my time at university, graduate school, and law school, I
> was consistently pulled towards some of society’s toughest issues – women’s
> rights, civil rights, and the rights of prisoners. I was equally pulled by
> the need to be effective in making change – seeking out leadership
> positions and raising my hand and voice to change the institutions of
> power, not just protest against them. I learned that the opportunity to
> make meaningful impact often sits ‘in-between’ traditional spheres:
> in-between research and teaching at Rice University, in-between healthcare
> delivery and advocacy at Planned Parenthood, and in-between government and
> the private sector at Harambee Youth Employment Accelerator. My time at all
> of these organisations required listening to and learning from many diverse
> stakeholders – including volunteers – and using my position of leadership
> to champion often unheard voices.
>
>
>
> In 2012, I followed my heart to South Africa and its very complicated
> society – a legacy of apartheid perpetuating deep inequality despite the
> resilience of communities full of potential and hope, and a country with
> one of the highest youth unemployment rates in the world. A new
> organisation had just been formed with a big vision to close this
> opportunity gap. I signed up, first as an unpaid volunteer, and then for
> many years as the CEO. My job has been to cultivate a common space of trust
> for the collective assets of the society – from government, the private
> sector, civil society, and millions of young people – to work in a
> coalition to tackle one of the most daunting challenges of our time. To do
> this, we relied on an inclusive, multi-channel platform that leverages all
> forms of technology as a way to serve communities still riddled by a basic
> lack of access. Our successes came from the power of connection,
> partnership, and a collective belief that young people are the solution,
> not the problem. As I began my tenth year, I felt it was time to make space
> for new leaders.
>
>
>
> Why am I joining the Wikimedia Foundation at this moment? There are many
> reasons: (1) this collective of projects is growing what is perhaps the
> most important commons infrastructure of our modern world. I am excited to
> add my time and talents to this vision. What will it take to create – not
> just imagine – a world in which every single human being can freely share
> in the sum of all knowledge? (2) I have experienced first-hand that
> distributed leadership models can usually achieve more than any group of
> people can do on their own. I am eager to support processes that will make
> this even more true for our movement; and (3) I am drawn to working with
> people of integrity and commitment, who also appreciate humor and joy. I
> can already see that I will meet new colleagues like this from all over the
> world.
>
>
>
> My former colleagues will say that I believe progress is enabled by
> culture: one that is founded on accountability, diversity and inclusion in
> all its forms, and a way of working led by values. It has informed an
> organisational humility in working with others and a relentless focus on
> getting things done the right way – while doing the right thing.
>
>
>
> During the recruitment process, I met with a leading academic in the
> United States named Rebecca. She told me a story of her primary school
> teacher asking the 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

"founding a user group or chapter (the latter is pretty unlikely
nowadays), applying
for a grant proposal and being hired by your colleagues as the first staff
member of the user group you founded would be something totally legal, just
lacking any ethical or moral compass."  - I believe you are forgetting here
that both affiliate Board and affiliate staff often draw from exactly the
same pool (expert wikimedians), which is often a very limited pool. I
believe that as long as the hiring process is transparent, there's nothing
there "lacking any ethical or moral compass". Skilled human resources are
very limited, and very few people do not have to work, are retired or
otherwise can entirely dedicate themselves both to the Wikimedia projects
where they get the expertise, and to unpaid affiliate management.

Either those ppl can serve both as affiliate board and then staff (or vice
versa), or you'll hardly find anyone with the proper skills to be in any
board. This is especially true when being in an affiliate board exposes one
to all sorts of harassment, including in their private lives, due to the
affiliate association to WMF and Wikipédia. Harassment + having to work for
free (including in training and monitoring paid staff) -> Nobody wants this.

To be clear, I don't think this is the case with WMF Board, at all, where a
much larger pool is always available.

Best,
Paulo

Philip Kopetzky  escreveu no dia domingo,
27/06/2021 à(s) 13:58:

> Adding to Chris' points, I would also like to illustrate the point where
> in the future, founding a user group or chapter (the latter is pretty
> unlikely nowadays), applying for a grant proposal and being hired by your
> colleagues as the first staff member of the user group you founded would be
> something totally legal, just lacking any ethical or moral compass.
>
> Now of course whatever volunteer committee at the WMF rejects this
> proposal would be confronted with the fact that the WMF saw no problem
> where this affected the WMF. Good luck explaining that and keeping any
> sense of ethical coherence.
> I really hope the Movement Charter can provide some guidance on this
> issue, which the WMF would have to adhere to as well.
>
> Cheers,
> Philip
>
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 at 13:03, Chris Keating 
> wrote:
>
>> I will note that, as Chris pointed out, even WMUK's current policies
>>> would permit a transaction like the one we're discussing if approved
>>> by the Board ("no trustee may _without the consent of the board_"
>>> [8]), and Wikimedia Austria's Good Governance Kodex would permit it if
>>> approved by the Gremium ("bedarf diese Anstellung der ausdrücklichen
>>> Genehmigung durch das Good-Governance-Gremium" [9]).
>>>
>>> If such transactions are sometimes viewed as permissible, as part of
>>> harmonizing governance standards, it would be good to enumerate
>>> examples: would this transaction qualify? If the emerging consensus is
>>> to enforce waiting periods at all times, clauses which permit Boards
>>> to overrule them should perhaps be revised as part of harmonization
>>> efforts.
>>>
>>
>> Hi Erik,
>>
>> Indeed, most of these policies are written with a certain level of
>> flexibility. And I do know of cases where board members of affiliates have
>> gone on to have staff roles within the movement, and asked for and received
>> permission to do so. So why might this be a problem and other instances not
>> a problem?
>>
>> It's probably worth setting out the objective of this kind of policy,
>> which is to give confidence that organisations are making decisions based
>> on what will best fulfill their mission, and to avoid the perception that
>> decisions are made for the personal gain of trustees.
>>
>> Whatever a conflict of interest policy says, if it doesn't end up
>> achieving that goal, then either the policy or the associated
>> decision-making is at fault.
>>
>> My concern over this specific instance is prompted by several things:
>> - A paid role has been created for a specific person, based on their
>> contributions as a trustee
>> - the trustee concerned was involved in shaping the role: certainly at a
>> 'meta' level in terms of championing the work area the role is about, and
>> evidently also in conversations about how the role would work out while
>> still being Chair of the organisation
>> - there was no open recruitment process, so it's unclear if there really
>> was no other conceivable candidate. I understand this is not unheard of for
>> the WMF, but it's poor practice, particularly when there are
>> other warning flags. (I am told that when jobs are openly advertised, the
>> recruitment process can be long and arduous.)
>> - there was no gap at all between the trustee departing as Chair, and
>> starting the role. Indeed the role was evidently offered, in some form,
>> while the Trustee in question was still Chair of the Board.
>> - it's unclear in what manner or at what level of detail the Board's
>> approval of this was given
>> - all 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I'm not sure reversing such a decision, with the consequent indemnisation
that most probably WMF will have to pay to Maria Sefidari, is the best
solution out of this conundrum.
If the evil is already done, it should be solved in a way that best serves
the Movement, and throwing such indemnization costs out of the window
probably is not the best.

Thanks,
Paulo

Chris Keating  escreveu no dia sábado,
26/06/2021 à(s) 10:37:

> Hi Amanda and Maggie,
>
> On the whole I am a great fan of this kind of office hour and believe it
> does a lot to improve communication between the WMF and community members.
>
> However this is not a problem of communication. The people speaking up
> in this thread are largely not the people who are inherently sceptical of
> the WMF (indeed, two of them are former chairs of the WMF Board of
> Trustees!). Nor are they people who don't understand the situation or the
> context. They are mainly people who are quite aware of the context, often
> know some of the people involved personally, and are already placing a
> charitable interpretation on the statements that have already been made.
> And *still* reach the conclusion that the situation is unsustainable and
> the only way out of it is to reverse the decision that's been made.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>
> On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 12:33 AM Maggie Dennis 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello, all.
>>
>> Following up on Amanda because she mentioned that we were going to hold
>> an open meeting to discuss this. I just announced the details in a separate
>> email thread titled "Tuesday Foundation office hour." They are also
>> available on Meta, here
>> 
>> .
>>
>> This office hour will be on *June 29 at 15:00 UTC* — see
>> https://zonestamp.toolforge.org/1624978855 for your local time. If you
>> can't come, there are ways to submit questions in advance (or
>> simultaneously, if you don't want to join Zoom).
>>
>> It's taken quite a bit of time to pull together the technical details
>> today, and the team will be sharing information in other fora over the next
>> few days, but we wanted to follow up on this thread ASAP.
>>
>> I hope to see you there.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Maggie
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 12:51 AM  wrote:
>>
>>> Hello, All,
>>> I’m Amanda Keton, the General Counsel of the Foundation, and I’d like to
>>> clarify some of the questions and comments that have been raised over the
>>> engagement of María as a Foundation consultant. I want to assure you that
>>> we carefully followed our policies, compensated this in line with similar
>>> consultants, and legitimately assessed her as the best person for the role.
>>> The need. Maria’s engagement comes at a time of transition for both the
>>> Board and the Foundation executive staff. This is also a time where the
>>> Community Resilience & Sustainability (CR) unit is setting up mechanisms
>>> to ensure that the Foundation provides seamless service to our growing
>>> community in its areas of responsibility. As many of you know, that team
>>> has taken on Movement Strategy due to the transition along with maintaining
>>> their support of Board elections, the Universal Code of Conduct, and
>>> leading our cross-departmental approach to supporting a Thriving Movement.
>>> As a unit, CR undertook a needs assessment of the workload ahead. This
>>> needs assessment revealed gaps in implementation of the Foundation’s
>>> Movement Strategy and in supporting staff with the ongoing Board selection
>>> process, upcoming onboarding, and supporting a smooth transition. The team
>>> currently supporting the Board expansion is quite stretched, monitoring
>>> multiple channels in many languages. Having another person who can step in
>>> immediately is tremendously helpful to these efforts. Based on this, CR
>>> considered the necessary skills and expertise for assistance in executing
>>> this work. While seeking this expertise, numerous factors were considered.
>>> Some of these factors included experience with the Board, volunteers and
>>> management. We also considered the qualifications with respect to the
>>> criteria and role at hand. The unique blend of circumstances at play and
>>> the importance of moving forward strongly at this time led us to carefully
>>> assess our needs and explore creative solutions.
>>> The role. In developing the scope of work for this role, we determined
>>> that María was a very strong candidate to support this critical work. With
>>> the transition at the executive level, and at the Board level, Maria brings
>>> long-term familiarity with the strategy process and strategy conversations
>>> that is crucial for the Foundation and the movement. Furthermore, she has
>>> been a big believer and a promoter of the Movement Strategy. We believe she
>>> can help ensure continuity in that work and can also support Maggie and
>>> others in the Foundation working to help expand the Board in service of

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

"It also concerns me that the WMF were *not* aware of Community & affiliate
norms in this field - what level of oversight of affiliate governance is
occurring that there being significant affiliates with provisions like this
not be known?"

This is a question I would really like to be answered. For way more than a
decade, the WMF Board maintains a committee precisely to deal with those
issues - first ChapCom, now AffCom. How come this disconnection is
happening between the Board, and their own committee?

P.


 escreveu no dia sexta, 25/06/2021 à(s) 18:19:

> Hi Amanda, [Apologies if accidental double-post]
>
> "Moving forward, we will
> articulate and follow the best practices that emerge from these important
> discussions and
> our corresponding review of the attendant policies, procedures, and
> practices."
>
> That would be a reasonable statement if this were a more marginally
> concerning action - something that promoted some concerns, and pointed to
> potential greater future issues if not resolved.
>
> However this indicates the WMF is willing to accept that an error was
> made, but not actually vitiate that error. It also concerns me that the WMF
> were *not* aware of Community & affiliate norms in this field - what level
> of oversight of affiliate governance is occurring that there being
> significant affiliates with provisions like this not be known?
>
> Like functionally the entire participant list of the email thread to date,
> I don't think there was any absence of good faith from key actors. But nor
> do I think it's "merely" (and it's a very big "merely" indeed) an optics
> complaint. There are genuine accidental COI issues that arise, as well as
> the instance raising genuine concerns at the decision-making and awareness
> of community values that anyone operating in such a significant consulting
> role in the most critical field of discussions the movement has had in a
> decade.
>
> Yours,
>
> Nosebagbear
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/YZ6SE42G5U7CTBJQY3CQWNTATCU47G3F/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/3NB5VVN3POFHVKBJ5WADQUERG6UPSS6S/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Paid "independent consultant"?

P.

Maggie Dennis  escreveu no dia quarta, 23/06/2021
à(s) 23:01:

> Hello, all.
>
> I’m sorry for my lack of clarity! María is *not* Foundation staff. She is
> an independent consultant. She did not discuss this role with me while she
> was on the Board. She quite rightly would not. We talked about it after her
> departure.
>
> Best regards,
> Maggie
>
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 5:53 PM টিটো দত্ত Tito Dutta 
> wrote:
>
>> Greetings,
>> This is an unfortunate situation. In general circumstances I would have
>> been happy to see the addition.
>> "to draw clear lines between staff and board members " — I think this has
>> been a practice in different organisation. In a different organisation I
>> have seen a director was disallowed to join as a consultant immediately
>> after his disassociation.
>> But do we have any documented Wikimedia policy that allows or prohibits
>> such an appointment? It would be good to know about such guidelines.
>>
>> ইতি,
>> টিটো দত্ত/User:Titodutta
>>
>>
>> বৃহস্পতি, ২৪ জুন, ২০২১ তারিখে ৩:০৩ AM টায় এ Philip Kopetzky <
>> philip.kopet...@gmail.com> লিখেছেন:
>>
>>> Hi Maggie,
>>>
>>> to be honest this is really difficult to understand. While the WMF,
>>> through it's various committees, pushed affiliates to clearly draw the
>>> lines between board and staff by introducing stringent governance measures
>>> (and rightly so), which also include paragraphs about introducing a
>>> cooldown period before switching between board and being employed by the
>>> same organisation, the WMF is ignoring all of that governance advice it has
>>> given over the last few years.
>>>
>>> I feel quite silly now having been on the simpleAPG committee for three
>>> years and having advised affiliates who wanted to hire staff for the first
>>> time to draw clear lines between staff and board members, to now have to
>>> see this exact scenario I warned against play out at the WMF. Maria's
>>> departure from the BoT, even before her tenure was over and subsequent
>>> hiring really calls into question what the WMF thinks good governance
>>> should look like, notwithstanding the fact that the BoT now has one
>>> community elected seat less at a critical time in the strategy
>>> implementation process.
>>>
>>> All in all I can only call for a governance overhaul at the WMF so that
>>> murky situations like this don't happen again.
>>>
>>> Quite frustrated regards,
>>> Philip
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 at 21:46, Maggie Dennis 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hello, all. :)

 I hope and trust that everyone is keeping well during these times!

 I’m Maggie Dennis, Vice President of the Community Resilience &
 Sustainability group of Wikimedia Foundation, within the Legal department.
 I wanted to announce with pleasure that Maria Sefidari has agreed to
 consult with the Foundation on Movement Strategy and the ongoing Board
 evolution for the upcoming year. Many of us know María from her role as the
 chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, from which she
 provided invaluable leadership in governance, oversight, and fundraising.
 Others may know her from her volunteer work as User:Raystorm
 , in which she has a
 broad range of experience.

 María, based in Spain, commenced her assignment with the Foundation
 this week. We intend to tap into her expertise and knowledge of the
 Foundation to support a successful implementation of the Movement’s
 Strategy and to tap into new opportunities. (With her Board work, she will
 be supporting Quim Gil’s team with the Board election and helping Margo Lee
 in improving onboarding, documentation practices, and training.) María will
 report to me as part of our Community Resilience & Sustainability group.
 I’m excited that she accepted our offer for a more hands-on assignment,
 particularly given how important all of the work she’ll be supporting is.
 :) With more than 15 years of Wikimedia experience, her contributions in
 the next phase will be a tremendous benefit to me and my team as we
 continue settling into our own work on Movement Strategy.

 Those of you who are involved with Movement Strategy are used to seeing
 her at related meetings and still will. :) I anticipate María will be
 joining one or more of the Movement Strategy global conversations
 
 this weekend. Advertisement alert: maybe you can, too? Here’s more
 detail
 !
 I myself will be attending at least one of those sessions and look forward
 to seeing some of you there.

 Warm regards,

 Maggie


 --
 Maggie Dennis
 She/her/hers
 Vice President, Community Resilience & Sustainability
 Wikimedia 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy Global Conversations: Lessons Learned published!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Quite thoughtful and very helpful report, thank you very much for doing
that analysis and providing those additional results.

Thanks,
Paulo

Cornelius Kibelka  escreveu no dia sexta,
12/03/2021 à(s) 14:12:

> Hi friends,
>
> Over November, December and January, the Movement Strategy team at the
> Wikimedia Foundation organized -- for the first time ever --  an virtual
> events series in which the Wikimedia communities on a global level were
> invited to prioritize initiatives from the Movement Strategy
> recommendations for the upcoming 18 month. More than 600 people in total
> participated in these events.
>
> Kaarel already shared the content-related reports on what has happened at
> these events. Today, I wanted to share some additional material: A report
> that covers extensively on how we organized this event series, mostly from
> a logistical, technical, and operational perspective:
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Transition/Global_Conversations/Lessons_Learned
>
> From what we know, these were the largest online events the Wikimedia
> Foundation has organized so far, and we wanted to share as many lessons
> learned as possible on how to organize virtual events, so that others can
> pick up from what we did. Also, the pandemic is far from over and we all
> will have to learn better on how to organize virtual and, especially,
> hybrid events in the upcoming future.
>
> Happy reading & sharing,
> Cornelius
>
> --
>
> Cornelius Kibelka (he/him)
>
> Event Coordinator
>
> Movement Strategy
>
> 2030.wikimedia.org
>
> 
>
> *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate.
> *
> 
> ___
> 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] Wikimedia España has been recognized as a charity in Spain

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Congratulations Santi and Wikimedia Spain!!

That's so great, and so well deserved. It truly is a great milestone in the
history of Free Knowledge in Spain!

Best,
Paulo

Santiago Navarro  escreveu no dia quarta,
24/02/2021 à(s) 11:14:

> Hello. I have the pleasure to inform that last Friday, 19th February
> 2021, Wikimedia España was recognized as a charity (entidad de utilidad
> pública) in Spain by the Ministry of the Interior and it was published
> at the Boletín Oficial del Estado (Official State Gazette). This is a
> recognition of the hard work the association has been doing last 10
> years in Spain. To be recognized, it has been a long process, and we
> were waiting for an answer for this application since the end of 2019. I
> want to say thanks to all people who worked to achieve that.
>
> Here you have a short entry in our website about that:
>
> https://www.wikimedia.es/2021/02/19/wikimedia-espana-declarada-entidad-de-utilidad-publica/
> Here the text of the Boletín Oficial del Estado:
> https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2021-2626
>
> --
> Santiago Navarro Sanz
> Presidente
> Wikimedia España
> www.wikimedia.es
>
> ___
> 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] Board of Trustees elections, membership, quorum, and

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello Brad,

Asking what the legitimacy of such a thing is for the broad Movement seems
to me a very reasonable question, especially when I'm not from the US, I'm
not a native English speaker and I'm not US-stuff wise.
You, however, have answered in a defensive and aggressive way, as if
everybody in the globe had to born knowing US laws and bureaucracy, which
seems quite unreasonable.
Stay with your truths and your "Former WMF General Counsel" title, my
argument here is finished.

Best,
Paulo


Brad Patrick  escreveu no dia quarta, 7/10/2020 à(s)
19:45:

> This is a very, very old and tired argument. If you do not understand
> United States non-profit corporations, go educate yourself about those
> first. If your perspective is non-US based, you may have a different frame
> of mind which is irreconcilable with the way WMF is. Take all the time you
> need to see the differences before attacking WMF for (a) what it is and (b)
> why it isn't what you want it to be.
>
> WMF exists legally, and has as its foundation organizational principle,
> authority vested in a Board. WMF is not a membership organization. You
> would not want it to be a membership organization (as a matter of law).
>
> Please temper your criticism accordingly.
>
> Brad Patrick
> Former WMF General Counsel
>
> On 10/7/20, 12:47 PM, "Wikimedia-l on behalf of Paulo Santos Perneta" <
> wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org on behalf of
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I knew they are theoretically self-appointed, but was under the
> impression
> that at least until now an appearance of democracy and legitimacy
> towards
> the community has been respected, which no longer seems to be the case.
> I wonder what would be the legitimacy of a self-appointing body in the
> eyes
> of the Wikimedia Movement, and all the communities which are part of
> it?
>
> Regards,
> Paulo
>
> Adam Wight  escreveu no dia quarta,
> 7/10/2020 à(s)
> 17:20:
>
> > Greetings, this is a semiautomated response pointing out that the
> > Wikimedia Foundation Board is not elected, it's self-appointing. The
> > so-called "elections" are in fact nominations to be considered by the
> > Board.  Therefore, the Bylaws have not been broken.
> >
> > This is an unfortunate arrangement, please see [1] for some
> background
> > about the conversion from a membership organization to a
> non-membership
> > organization which is no longer legally required to hold elections.
> >
>     > Regards,
> >
> > Adam W.
> > [[mw:User:Adamw]]
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_membership_controversy
> >
> > On 10/7/20 5:55 PM, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> > > The terms of 3 BoT members expired last month, and the BoT itself
> decided
> > > to extend them? What is the legitimacy of that? And why is a BoT
> which is
> > > expected to be in a mere interim management waiting for elections,
> > > presenting profound changes to its Bylaws [1]?
> > >
> > > [1] -
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Proposed_Bylaws_changes
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > Nataliia Tymkiv  escreveu no dia quarta,
> > 7/10/2020
> > > à(s) 16:49:
> > >
> > >> Hello,
> > >>
> > >> I can answer a few of the questions raised in this thread.
> > >>
> > >> When the Board postponed the community selection of trustees, we
> also
> > >> extended the terms of the trustees in the affected seats (María
> > Sefidari,
> > >> Dariusz Jemielniak, and James Heilman)[1]. Their terms were
> originally
> > set
> > >> to expire last month, but because of that term extension they are
> still
> > >> serving as trustees, and as such María remains the Board Chair and
> > Dariusz
> > >> and James continue on as Committee Chairs[2].
> > >>
> > >> Raju Narisetti and Esra'a Al Shafei have been reappointed to the
> Board
> > for
> > >> an additional three-year term[3][4].
> > >>
> > >> The current members of the Board of Trustees are listed on the
> Wikimedia
> > >> Foundation website[5].
> > >>
> > >> We do not curren

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustees elections, membership, quorum, and

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I knew they are theoretically self-appointed, but was under the impression
that at least until now an appearance of democracy and legitimacy towards
the community has been respected, which no longer seems to be the case.
I wonder what would be the legitimacy of a self-appointing body in the eyes
of the Wikimedia Movement, and all the communities which are part of it?

Regards,
Paulo

Adam Wight  escreveu no dia quarta, 7/10/2020 à(s)
17:20:

> Greetings, this is a semiautomated response pointing out that the
> Wikimedia Foundation Board is not elected, it's self-appointing. The
> so-called "elections" are in fact nominations to be considered by the
> Board.  Therefore, the Bylaws have not been broken.
>
> This is an unfortunate arrangement, please see [1] for some background
> about the conversion from a membership organization to a non-membership
> organization which is no longer legally required to hold elections.
>
> Regards,
>
> Adam W.
> [[mw:User:Adamw]]
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_membership_controversy
>
> On 10/7/20 5:55 PM, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> > The terms of 3 BoT members expired last month, and the BoT itself decided
> > to extend them? What is the legitimacy of that? And why is a BoT which is
> > expected to be in a mere interim management waiting for elections,
> > presenting profound changes to its Bylaws [1]?
> >
> > [1] -
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Proposed_Bylaws_changes
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Nataliia Tymkiv  escreveu no dia quarta,
> 7/10/2020
> > à(s) 16:49:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I can answer a few of the questions raised in this thread.
> >>
> >> When the Board postponed the community selection of trustees, we also
> >> extended the terms of the trustees in the affected seats (María
> Sefidari,
> >> Dariusz Jemielniak, and James Heilman)[1]. Their terms were originally
> set
> >> to expire last month, but because of that term extension they are still
> >> serving as trustees, and as such María remains the Board Chair and
> Dariusz
> >> and James continue on as Committee Chairs[2].
> >>
> >> Raju Narisetti and Esra'a Al Shafei have been reappointed to the Board
> for
> >> an additional three-year term[3][4].
> >>
> >> The current members of the Board of Trustees are listed on the Wikimedia
> >> Foundation website[5].
> >>
> >> We do not currently have a shortage of trustees on the Board, and we
> have
> >> had a quorum for every decision we have made this year. We have
> published
> >> some outstanding Board records, many of which were just approved at our
> >> recent meeting in September[6][7].
> >>
> >> I have just sent an email to this list, as well as posted an update to
> >> Meta-Wiki, with a request for feedback on matters related to the
> >> Foundation’s Bylaws and trustee selection[8]. That announcement contains
> >> more information about the postponed community selection of trustees.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >> antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv
> >>
> >> Vice Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> >>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Postponement_of_Community_Selection_of_Trustees_and_Extension_of_Community_Selected_Trustee_Terms_until_next_selection_process
> >>
> >>
> >> [2]
> >>
> >>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Board_Officers_and_Committee_Membership,_2019
> >>
> >>
> >> [3]
> >>
> >>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Renewing_Raju_Narisetti%27s_Appointment_to_the_Board_of_Trustees,_2020
> >>
> >>
> >> [4]
> >>
> >>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Renewing_Esra%27a_Al_Shafei%27s_Appointment_to_the_Board_of_Trustees,_2020
> >>
> >>
> >> [5] https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/board/
> >>
> >>
> >> [6] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meetings
> >>
> >>
> >> [7] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolutions
> >>
> >> [8]
> >>
> >>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Call_for_feedback_about_Bylaws_changes_and_Board_candidate_rubric
> >> <
> >>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/July_2

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustees elections, membership, quorum, and

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

The terms of 3 BoT members expired last month, and the BoT itself decided
to extend them? What is the legitimacy of that? And why is a BoT which is
expected to be in a mere interim management waiting for elections,
presenting profound changes to its Bylaws [1]?

[1] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Proposed_Bylaws_changes

Best,
Paulo

Nataliia Tymkiv  escreveu no dia quarta, 7/10/2020
à(s) 16:49:

> Hello,
>
> I can answer a few of the questions raised in this thread.
>
> When the Board postponed the community selection of trustees, we also
> extended the terms of the trustees in the affected seats (María Sefidari,
> Dariusz Jemielniak, and James Heilman)[1]. Their terms were originally set
> to expire last month, but because of that term extension they are still
> serving as trustees, and as such María remains the Board Chair and Dariusz
> and James continue on as Committee Chairs[2].
>
> Raju Narisetti and Esra'a Al Shafei have been reappointed to the Board for
> an additional three-year term[3][4].
>
> The current members of the Board of Trustees are listed on the Wikimedia
> Foundation website[5].
>
> We do not currently have a shortage of trustees on the Board, and we have
> had a quorum for every decision we have made this year. We have published
> some outstanding Board records, many of which were just approved at our
> recent meeting in September[6][7].
>
> I have just sent an email to this list, as well as posted an update to
> Meta-Wiki, with a request for feedback on matters related to the
> Foundation’s Bylaws and trustee selection[8]. That announcement contains
> more information about the postponed community selection of trustees.
>
> Best regards,
>
> antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv
>
> Vice Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
>
> [1]
>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Postponement_of_Community_Selection_of_Trustees_and_Extension_of_Community_Selected_Trustee_Terms_until_next_selection_process
>
>
> [2]
>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Board_Officers_and_Committee_Membership,_2019
>
>
> [3]
>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Renewing_Raju_Narisetti%27s_Appointment_to_the_Board_of_Trustees,_2020
>
>
> [4]
>
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Renewing_Esra%27a_Al_Shafei%27s_Appointment_to_the_Board_of_Trustees,_2020
>
>
> [5] https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/board/
>
>
> [6] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meetings
>
>
> [7] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolutions
>
> [8]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Call_for_feedback_about_Bylaws_changes_and_Board_candidate_rubric
> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/July_2020_-_Call_for_feedback_about_Bylaws_changes_and_Board_candidate_rubric
> >
>
>
> *NOTICE: You may have received this message outside of your normal working
> hours/days, as I usually can work more as a volunteer during weekend. You
> should not feel obligated to answer it during your days off. Thank you in
> advance!*
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 9:52 PM Bill Takatoshi 
> wrote:
>
> > After I asked my questions on September 4, I was sent the message
> > below by some role account I've never heard of, asking about claims
> > that have used the names of five other people. I don't edit under my
> > real name, but I have never used the names in the linked forum
> > postings.
> >
> > The linked posts also claim that the Foundation's nonprofit status is
> > at risk. I am not a lawyer, but I am skeptical of that claim even
> > though five Trustees whose three-year terms expired in August
> > apparently voted on a Resolution in a Board meeting on September 24.
> > According to Section 4 of the Bylaws, "A quorum shall consist of a
> > majority of Trustees then in office." Section 6 says, "the Board may
> > continue doing business as a Board during the vacancy of any Trustee
> > position." Therefore, since four of the five remaining Trustees all
> > voted in favor, the Resolution was properly carried, in my layperson's
> > view. I am less certain about the propriety of allowing a Trustee
> > whose three year term expired to continue to serve as Chair.
> >
> > The lack of any update or even ETA for an update on
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2020#Postpone%3F
> > is baffling. Elections have never been held in person, only online,
> > and so the excuse that they were postponed because of the pandemic
> > crisis seems extremely suspicious. Indefinitely delaying elections for
> > such a vacuous reason makes the Foundation look like the worst of the
> > bad actors in today's international political climate. Doesn't the
> > cancelled travel of the pandemic crisis give the Foundation more time
> > to hold elections, not less? Whether non-profit status is at risk or
> > not, I would hope that the Foundation, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution to pause Movement Brand Project through March 2021

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello,

I've read it, and the recommendations sounded all with good sense, and on
point.
I believe there is an excellent base there for future work on the subject.
You've done a good job, despite the difficult conditions.

Just a minor curiosity: The percentages of Africa and Asia participations
on the survey are absent from there, can they be seen somewhere, or shared?

Thanks,
Paulo



Samir Elsharbaty  escreveu no dia terça,
6/10/2020 à(s) 17:25:

> Hi everyone
>
> I wanted to follow up on Zack’s email with an update and links to the
> naming survey resources published today:
>
> The naming survey report is now available.[1] Thank you to everyone who
> provided feedback. To learn more about what naming elements should be
> removed, refined and recombined please view the full report.[2]
>
> We are looking forward to collaborating with you again next year.
>
> Samir and the Brand Project Team
>
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Naming_survey_feedback_report
>
> [2]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Brand_Project_Naming_Survey_Feedback_Report.pdf
>
> Samir Elsharbaty (he/him)
>
> Brand Associate
>
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 11:43 PM Olga Lidia Paredes Alcoreza <
> olga.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thank U!
> >
> > El mié., 30 de septiembre de 2020 15:55, Zack McCune <
> > zmcc...@wikimedia.org>
> > escribió:
> >
> > > Thank you María!
> > >
> > > Following this Board resolution, the Brand Project team will be
> updating
> > > the project hub. [1]  We will also release the Naming Survey results as
> > > both a report and as the anonymized data by October 6. The publication
> of
> > > those materials will be shared on the project hub and announced here.
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > - Zack, Essie, and Samir (the Brand Project team)
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:51 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
> > > galder...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for hearing the voices, María and members of the board.
> > > >
> > > > Defining common goals is the best practice for reaching to the best
> > > > solution.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > >
> > > > Galder
> > > > 
> > > > From: Wikimedia-l  on
> behalf
> > of
> > > > María Sefidari 
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 9:47 PM
> > > > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org  >
> > > > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Resolution to pause Movement Brand Project
> > through
> > > > March 2021
> > > >
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > >
> > > > The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, following the
> > recommendation
> > > of
> > > > staff, has resolved to pause the Movement Brand Project until the
> next
> > > > calendar year.[1] We recognize that much of the Wikimedia movement’s
> > > > activities, events, and key collaborations have been put on hold or
> > > > restructured due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and we have received
> formal
> > > > requests to pause Movement Brand Project activities to reflect this
> > > > need.[2]
> > > >
> > > > The Board remains persuaded that there is potential value in making
> > > change
> > > > to our branding system in service of our goals of engaging more
> people
> > in
> > > > our mission. However, we also know that change moves at the speed of
> > > trust.
> > > > We have asked staff to meaningfully engage with community concerns
> and
> > > > address the request for equitable decision-making within the process.
> > We
> > > > also ask members of the community to use this pause to consider how
> > > equity
> > > > may ask us to let go of some aspects of our past, in order to create
> > > space
> > > > for what could be. Making these decisions together, with so many
> > > passionate
> > > > perspectives, will be challenging, but building this capacity is
> > > essential
> > > > for how we grow together as a thriving global movement.
> > > >
> > > > In the meantime, we will establish a small ad-hoc Board committee to
> > > liaise
> > > > with staff, and develop a process of collaboration and
> decision-making
> > > > appropriate for the Movement’s brand. This committee will constitute
> > > > Trustees James Heilman, Raju Narisetti, and Shani Evenstein Sigalov.
> We
> > > > hope and intend for this committee to include a small number of
> > community
> > > > representatives from affiliates, open letter signatories, and
> emerging
> > > > communities, and Foundation staff to be designated by the Executive
> > > > Director. We’ll update you with more details on the committee soon.
> > > >
> > > > In 2021, using insights and recommendations gleaned through the
> ad-hoc
> > > > committee, the Brand Project team will restart collaboration and
> > > > communicate next steps accordingly. This resolution was ratified on
> > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Institutional memory @ WMF

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

No, not related in the least.
He's probably talking about a recent situation discussed at this ML where a
WMF employee at T emergency role directed someone complaining of
harassment to the AN/I because they thought it was the appropriate venue.

Amir Sarabadani  escreveu no dia terça, 25/08/2020
à(s) 22:03:

> Hey,
> Can you elaborate what happened? if It's public of course. It's hard to
> understand the problem without proper context.
>
> Is it https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T261133 ?
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 10:52 PM Strainu  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > It seems the WMF is going through another crisis of institutional
> > memory, with the T team taking center stage. It's not really
> > important what they did wrong, it's minor compared with other faux-pas
> > they did in the past.
> >
> > I was wondering though if the organization as a whole has learned
> > anything from major crisis in the past and if there is a formal way of
> > passing to newcomers information such as when and how to contact
> > communities, what's the difference between a wiki, a community and an
> > affiliate etc.?
> >
> > Strainu
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> >
>
>
> --
> Amir (he/him)
> ___
> 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] Board Update on Branding

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

And there never was any insult or anything close to that, just a
misunderstanding, which I believe was clarified.

A terça, 23 de jun de 2020, 08:56, revi  escreveu:

> Hi,
>
> > 2020. 6. 23. 14:13, Gnangarra  작성:
> >
> > Nat insulted an ESEAP
> > affiliate because she wanted a European affiliate to endorse her
> > nomination.
>
> Fact check: that was Shani Evanstein.
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Affiliate-selected_Board_seats/2019/Nominations/Shani_Evenstein
> ___
> 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] Board Update on Branding

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

(Just reminding that Nat was not elected by the community, as Gnangarra
seems to think, but by the affiliates.)

Jan-Bart de Vreede  escreveu no dia segunda,
22/06/2020 à(s) 17:26:

>  Hi Gnangarra
>
> I find your request for Nat to resign uncalled for…. and not in the least
> because of the common misconception you have with regards to the role of
> Board members of the Wikimedia Foundation.
>
> Quoting from the excellent Wikimedia Board Handbook(1)
>
> "WMF is an entrusted steward within the Wikimedia movement. The Board's
> role (and legal obligation) is to oversee the management of the
> organization and ensure that it fulfills its mission and responsibilities
> as a steward. To help accomplish this, the Board maintains a strong
> connection to the Wikimedia communities. For example, WMF's bylaws require
> that a majority of Board seats (not including the Founder's seat and
> non-member officer positions) be filled by candidates selected by the
> communities and chapters, and appointed by the incumbent Board members - an
> unusual requirement for a nonprofit board. Board members are often active
> community members as well. That said, Board members have a fiduciary duty
> to represent the overall WMF interests during their service on the Board –
> not just the interests of chapters or certain parts of the communities. “
>
> So while the community certainly gets to elect board members, these board
> members have obligations once they are appointed to the board. And yes:
> that also means getting community input, but all board members should be
> concerned with that, not just those elected by the community.
>
> Jan-Bart
>
> > On 22 Jun 2020, at 08:52, Gnangarra  wrote:
> >
> > The choice is yours to resign because the The Board isnt considering the
> > community as a key part of what we have created, or because you
> > arent representing the community's voice on the Board.
>
>
> 1)
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Handbook#Fiduciary_duties
> ___
> 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] Board Update on Branding

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hi Nat,

Thank you very much for managing to put out a statement in a reasonable
timeframe, despite the harsh conditions most of all endure now. I can only
imagine how hard it has been to get to that.
Above all, thank you a lot for the sincerity and for the courage on taking
a blame that I'm certain is not (at least entirely) yours

As a very first reaction,

"*it is important to be clear: the Board absolutely can change the  name of
the Wikimedia Foundation, even to the “Wikipedia Foundation,” if it
decides.*" - Of course you (Board) can, and it will have obvious
consequences. Stating that you can do whatever you please because you can,
looks unnecessary and aggressive. I wished you've not written that there

"*the exploratory project was and still is ongoing*" - The use of the word
"exploratory" here seems to directly contradict the established timeline
[1], which is about defining a concrete proposal and approving it or not,
not about exploring options. At least, not with the involvement of the
community. Can you please clarify?

"*The Board conversation about this is planned to happen during the August
meeting.*" - I hope you recall during that conversation that part of the
current Board terminated (or should have terminated) the mandate they were
elected to.

"*What are the possible outcomes for the August Board meeting on branding?
The Board can 1) stop the project, 2) pause the work being done or 3)
continue with it.*" - It is truly a relief that you are at least
considering as an option to stop or pause the branding project. However,
from the available timeline [1], what follows in August is the final
refinement, which seems to imply that whatever comes from the much
controversial survey going on - with all certainty, one of the 3
"Wikipedia" options - will be all that will be there to be continued. There
is no space nor time for any other version that does not include
"Wikipédia". Is this correct?

"*The currently open survey [6] is intended to find the best possible
outcome if the Foundation's (!) branding*" - This seems to imply the survey
is only about the Foundation "(!)" branding, but that's not what is written
there. This is how the survey starts: " With this survey, the 2030 Movement
Brand Project team invites your feedback on proposals for *movement* names
based on our best-known brand, Wikipedia. The proposed names apply to the
*movement*, the *affiliates* and the Foundation." You say the branding only
applies to the Foundation, the survey says it's also about affiliates, and
- and this is really surprising - to the whole movement, something it's not
really in the hands of the Board to decide, as the movement, as an organic
group of many different people with different opinions, voices, cultures,
is not controlled nor defined in the least by the Board. Could you please
clarify why you say the survey only applies to the Foundation, despite what
the survey itself states?

(when I write "you" here it is the Board, obviously, not you, Nat)

Thanks again for all your dedication, courage and sincerity,
Paulo

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Timeline


Nataliia Tymkiv  escreveu no dia segunda, 22/06/2020
à(s) 01:44:

> Dear all,
>
> As Acting Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees since March
> [1] I take full responsibility for this situation. I am truly sorry for all
> the frustration this whole situation has caused to volunteers, who have
> engaged in discussions expressing their concerns, and to the staff, who
> have been working and not really sure if that is really the direction the
> Board is prepared to seriously consider, or if it is just an exercise on
> our part. As Chair of the Board, I recognize the Board owes clear
> information to the communities and guidance to the staff.
>
> In 2017, the Board approved the 2030 Movement Strategic Direction,
> recognizing the strategic importance of growing the reach of the Wikimedia
> projects to new languages, communities, and geographies, as part of our
> global mission. In June 2018, the Board approved a Foundation Annual Plan
> that included research into the Wikimedia and Wikipedia brands to
> understand how they could be tools in helping us reach these goals.
>
> In November 2018 [2], the staff presented research to the Board about the
> Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. I personally, even though a relatively long
> term Wikipedian (and a bit less long term Wikimedian), was basically
> convinced by the findings that a rebranding is needed and beneficial for
> our mission and global vision, and furthermore that it should be based on
> the Wikipedia brand. The information presented there also convinced the
> Board that the team should continue their work, but as you can see from the
> minutes the Board believed that communication is crucial, but already a
> possibility for a new name for the Wikimedia Foundation was seriously
> considered [3].
>
> And I am going to 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Affiliations Committee/Candidates/June 2020

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello Rosie,

Why after all this time, and after all the convulsions that have happened,
AffCom candidates are still being selected by AffCom itself, instead of by
the community, or other more legitimate process?

You wrote: " As a reflection of our commitment to openness, transparency,
and bilateral engagement with the Wikimedia community, the 2020 member
selection process
will include a public review and comment period." -> how is this different
from what has been happening in the other selections? There is a public
review, and then AffCom recklessly ignores it and does whatever it pleases.

The way it is, it's a game of marked cards, and extremely demotivating for
candidates.
It is also a continuous source of lack of legitimacy and low reputation to
AffCom itself, as a body.
Why don't you change the process? The way it is, it clearly serves no one.

Best,
Paulo


Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight  escreveu no dia
sexta, 22/05/2020 à(s) 20:54:

> Hi everyone,
>
> The Affiliations Committee (AffCom) – the committee responsible for guiding
> volunteers in establishing and sustaining Wikimedia chapters, thematic
> organizations, and user groups – is seeking new members!
>
> The main role of the AffCom is to guide groups of volunteers that are
> interested in forming Wikimedia affiliates. We review applications from new
> groups, answer questions and provide advice about the different Wikimedia
> affiliation models and processes, review affiliate bylaws for compliance
> with requirements and best practices, and update the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board of Trustees as well as advise them on issues connected to chapters,
> thematic organizations and Wikimedia user groups.
>
> The committee consists of five to fifteen members, selected at least once
> every year, to serve two-year terms. As the committee must hold mid-year
> elections to replenish its members at this time, those joining the
> committee during the current process will serve a slightly extended term
> from July 2020 through December 2022.
>
> AffCom continues to closely monitor the Wikimedia 2030 Strategy process
> initiated in 2016. While the affiliation models continue to be discussed as
> part of the broader strategy discussion, as no decisions have been made to
> change the current affiliation models yet, AffCom continues to work in the
> same manner with regard to affiliate recognitions and intervention support
> for affiliates with issues of non-compliance in 2020. AffCom continues to
> process applications for user group and chapter/thematic organization
> creation, while we await the strategy next steps and begin to prepare for a
> smooth transition of the committee and affiliates ecosystem to any changing
> movement structures and systems in 2021.
>
>
>
> Being a part of the AffCom requires communication with volunteers all over
> the world, negotiating skills, cultural sensitivity, and the ability to
> understand legal texts. We look for a mix of different skill sets in our
> members.
>
>
>
> ==Responsibilities==
>
>
>
>1.
>
>   Availability of up to 5-8 hours per month
>   2.
>
>   Participate in monthly one and two-hour voice/video meetings
>   3.
>
>   Commitment to carry out assigned tasks in a given time.
>   4.
>
>   Facilitate and support communications
>   5.
>
>   Affiliate Support and growth
>
>
>
> == Required and Recommended Abilities, Skills, Knowledge for Affiliations
> Committee Members ==
>
> Strong interpersonal relationship among members of the committee and also
> with the Wikimedia community members. Across all committee members, there
> are additional relevant skills as well as requirements which help to
> support the committee and its sustainability which include both required
> and relevant general skills
>
>
>
> ===Required===
>
> * Fluency in English
>
> * Availability of up to 5 hours per week, and the time to participate in a
> monthly one and two-hour voice/video meetings.
>
> * Willingness to use one's real name in committee activities (including
> contacts with current and potential affiliates) when appropriate.
>
> * Strong track record of effective collaboration
>
> *  International orientation
>
>
>
> ===Relevant for all members===
>
> * Public Communications (English writing and speaking skills)
>
> * Skills in other languages are a major plus.
>
> * Understanding of the structure and work of affiliates and the Wikimedia
> Foundation.
>
> * Documentation practices
>
> * Interviewing experience
>
> * Experience with, or in, an active affiliate is a major plus.
>
> * Teamwork: Project and people management skills to coordinate and
> collaborate with different parties on a shared plan and see it through to
> completion.
>
> * Problem-Solving: Ability to evaluate various solutions, consider multiple
> interests and points of view,  revisit unresolved issues, seek compromise
> and work and communicate across languages and cultures.
>
>
>
> Given the expectations for 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Annoying ads

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Why do you ask? Unregistered readers are some kind of inferior creatures
not worth of any attention?
Registering an account and logging in is optional in Wikimedia.

Paulo

Robert Fernandez  escreveu no dia segunda,
4/05/2020 à(s) 16:27:

> I know this might sound crazy, but have you considered logging in?
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:56 AM John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> > Often I surf Wikipedia without being logged in, and so I did right now. I
> > got the usual banners, but this time they popped up repeatedly in several
> > locations. This quickly gets extremely annoying, and I find it unwise.
> > Create one banner, and stick with that. Several banners are simply way
> over
> > the top.
> >
> > /jeblad
> > ___
> > 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] Annoying ads

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

In the first days of the pandemic, while trying to read info on my
cellphone, where I'm usually logged out, I was bombed first with that ugly
black thing signed by Katherine Maher, then in the next page I navigated
to, with a red message directed at "my friend from Portugal", both of them
asking money using the context of the pandemic. Which I found not only
annoying but on a bad taste.

It seems to only affect wiki.en, but it is still quite annoying, as I read
it often using the cellphone.

On the other hand, if WMF insists in that strategy, maybe it means it's
working somehow? But there must be less aggressive ways of reaching to the
people...

Best,
Paulo

John Erling Blad  escreveu no dia segunda, 4/05/2020 à(s)
15:56:

> Often I surf Wikipedia without being logged in, and so I did right now. I
> got the usual banners, but this time they popped up repeatedly in several
> locations. This quickly gets extremely annoying, and I find it unwise.
> Create one banner, and stick with that. Several banners are simply way over
> the top.
>
> /jeblad
> ___
> 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] Message to readers from the Wikimedia Foundation regarding COVID-19

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Please don't use the "coronavirus pandemic" misnomer, at least in the
version in Portuguese.
"Coronavirus" is a group of virus, not the disease. It's proper name is
COVID-19. Using that misnomer is akin as calling "retrovirus epidemic" to
AIDS, and fertile ground for all kinds of fake news, such as the
"coronavirus" interferons from Cuba and ppl caughting unrelated
"coronavirus" (such as MERS-CoV) and using that to spread panic.
We've already enough "coronavirus" disinformation around without that
banner.

Thanks,
Paulo

Joseph Seddon  escreveu no dia quinta, 19/03/2020
à(s) 20:27:

> Dear list,
>
> Given the unfolding global events, the Wikimedia Foundations feels it is
> important to reassure readers across the globe.
>
> We'll be displaying a short message at the top of the projects reaffirming
> our commitment to keep Wikipedia and the Wikimedia projects online, open
> and free for all. Readers often turn to Wikipedia for neutral information
> in times of stress. This is a critical moment for students who can't go to
> school, people who have to stay home with their families, and anyone who
> needs a trusted source of unbiased information.
>
> We also want to take a moment to acknowledge the invaluable work of all the
> medical contributors on Wikipedia. Thank you for keeping a close watch and
> keeping misinformation at bay. Coronavirus topics have received tens of
> thousands of edits by thousands of editors since the start of the pandemic.
> The article has been read more than 30 million times, in English alone.
>
> The message will be displayed just once to readers, and you can preview the
> banner [1]. The draft is in English but we want this message to be
> multilingual. If you have a moment, please help translate this banner into
> your language [2]. Thank you all, for your work and efforts.
>
> Stay safe, and wash your hands!
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> [1] - Banner Preview:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA?banner=programmatic_mlWW_rsp_covid19=1=US
>
>
> [2] - Translate link:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Translate=Centralnotice-tgroup-Programmatic_translations_2020=view=%21translated=translate
> ___
> 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] WikiProject COVID-19 (English Wikipedia) is started

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

The thread was about COVID-19, not about "COVID", so no idea really why Doc
James replied talking about something else. But I don't want to go on with
that subject, at Pine's request. What I wanted to say about it, I've
already said.

Thanks,
Paulo

Andy Mabbett  escreveu no dia domingo,
15/03/2020 à(s) 22:01:

> On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 at 21:07, Paulo Santos Perneta
>  wrote:
>
> >> Covid is an abreviaton for coronavirus disease.
>
> > No, it's an abbreviation for *Coronavirus Disease 2019* [1]
>
> That would make "COVID-19" mean "Coronavirus Disease 2019-19".
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <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] WikiProject COVID-19 (English Wikipedia) is started

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I photographed the COVID-19 isolation room at our local university (it's
precisely in front of the cabinet I usually work in), and created the
category for COVID-19 isolations:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:COVID-19_isolations

Best,
Paulo

Yaroslav Blanter  escreveu no dia domingo, 15/03/2020
à(s) 21:46:

> Just to remark that I went today to a supermarket to take a picture of
> empty shelves and eventually to upload it to Commons. Which I did (and
> eventually I added one of the photographs to an English Wikipedia article),
> just to discover that several people had the same idea before me, including
> one in my city. Still, the number of relevant pictures is laughably small,
> and now it is good time to take pictures for example of places which are
> normally overcrowded by tourists and now are empty. Or queues at the
> airports due to cancellations, We need to document the event (obviously not
> compromising on the safety), and anybody with a cell phone can easily
> contribute.
>
> Best
> Yaroslav
>
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Empty_chips_shelves_in_AH_Delft_02.jpg
>
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Empty_butter_shelves_in_AH_Delft_01.jpg
>
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 10:12 PM Pine W  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > May I suggest that the discussion regarding the name take place
> > somewhere other than Wikimedia-l? I think that a talk page of one of
> > the relevant articles on English Wikipedia, a WikiProject Medicine
> > talk page, or the WikiProject Medicine Mailing List, would all be
> > reasonable venues.
> >
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
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] WikiProject COVID-19 (English Wikipedia) is started

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

No, it's an abbreviation for *Coronavirus Disease 2019* [1]. There are many
other "coronavirus diseases".

[1] - https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/about/index.html

Best,
Paulo

James Heilman  escreveu no dia domingo, 15/03/2020 à(s)
21:02:

> Covid is an abreviaton for coronavirus disease.
>
> J
>
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020, 14:56 Paulo Santos Perneta 
> wrote:
>
> > Congratulations for the new project.
> >
> > Possibly you could start by moving the "coronavirus" pandemic articles at
> > wiki.en to the proper name of the disease, COVID-19.
> > No idea why the English Wikipedia insists naming this disease with the
> name
> > of a group of virus that causes a number of other different diseases,
> > instead of the WHO recognized name, providing misleading information and
> > opening fertile ground to all kind of fake news and disinformation
> selling
> > stuff for other coronavirus diseases as if it was COVID-19.
> > Even worst, it's contaminating other projects, like Wikidata and
> Wikimedia
> > Commons, with teams of wiki.en editors going there to revert anyone that
> > dares to move the disease to its proper name.
> >
> > Please help fix this, providing accurate information, specially at a
> > situation like this, is at the core of Wikipedia mission.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Tito Dutta  escreveu no dia domingo, 15/03/2020
> à(s)
> > 19:47:
> >
> > > Please read the noticeboard/talk page link as:
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_COVID-19. It
> > > looks
> > > like I had another noticeboard open at that time. Apologies for the
> wrong
> > > link in the last post.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Tito Dutta
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 at 01:15, Tito Dutta  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > > A few Wikipedians on English Wikipedia have decided to start a
> > > WikiProject
> > > > on COVID-19 on English Wikipedia to work more systematically and
> > > > collaboratively on the subject. The WikiProject is started by
> > > > [[User:Another Believer]] on 15 March, and very quickly got ~20
> > > > participants and several discussions started on the talk page.
> > > > Please have a look at WikiProject:
> > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_COVID-19
> > > > Questions or comments or suggestions at:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Tito Dutta
> > > > [[User:Titodutta]]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <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] WikiProject COVID-19 (English Wikipedia) is started

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Congratulations for the new project.

Possibly you could start by moving the "coronavirus" pandemic articles at
wiki.en to the proper name of the disease, COVID-19.
No idea why the English Wikipedia insists naming this disease with the name
of a group of virus that causes a number of other different diseases,
instead of the WHO recognized name, providing misleading information and
opening fertile ground to all kind of fake news and disinformation selling
stuff for other coronavirus diseases as if it was COVID-19.
Even worst, it's contaminating other projects, like Wikidata and Wikimedia
Commons, with teams of wiki.en editors going there to revert anyone that
dares to move the disease to its proper name.

Please help fix this, providing accurate information, specially at a
situation like this, is at the core of Wikipedia mission.

Best,
Paulo

Tito Dutta  escreveu no dia domingo, 15/03/2020 à(s)
19:47:

> Please read the noticeboard/talk page link as:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_COVID-19. It
> looks
> like I had another noticeboard open at that time. Apologies for the wrong
> link in the last post.
>
> Thanks
> Tito Dutta
>
>
> On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 at 01:15, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> > A few Wikipedians on English Wikipedia have decided to start a
> WikiProject
> > on COVID-19 on English Wikipedia to work more systematically and
> > collaboratively on the subject. The WikiProject is started by
> > [[User:Another Believer]] on 15 March, and very quickly got ~20
> > participants and several discussions started on the talk page.
> > Please have a look at WikiProject:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_COVID-19
> > Questions or comments or suggestions at:
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics
> >
> > Thanks
> > Tito Dutta
> > [[User:Titodutta]]
> >
> >
> ___
> 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] Treatment of newbies with mild CoI

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Some established users have the habit of reverting every edit by IPs and
newbies in the articles they watch - often with the special reversion tool
-  no mater the content and value of the edition. That is a very consistent
behavior I've been observing over more than one decade at the Wikipedia in
Portuguese, and the newbie edit only stays if another established user
notices the reversion, and reverts it back. Meaning: One established user
has to risk potential conflict with those other established users to
reinstate the newbie edition - with the result that many simply staying
away from that and leaving the IP/Newbie to its fate.

It's against the community rules, but pretty much nobody seems to care -
meaning: it's not really against the will of the community.

The general result is a very poor experience for everyone using IPs; and
slightly better (or less bad) for registered newbies, but still quite
hostile.

Best,
Paulo



Martijn Hoekstra  escreveu no dia quinta,
27/02/2020 à(s) 16:41:

> As a quick/rough data point  I don't frequently edit wikipedia anymore, and
> when I do I never log in.
>
> About 2/3 edits no further interactions happen. About 10% gets reverted,
> about 10% of the time I get a warning and the last 10% I get a welcome
> template.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020, 15:52 Marshall Miller 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for mentioning the WMF Growth team [1], Pine.  This is a really
> > interesting thread that has touched on much of what the team has been
> > working on alongside the Czech, Korean, Arabic, and Vietnamese Wikipedia
> > communities (and with the advice of people from many different
> communities
> > along the way).
> >
> > We've tried to base our approach in research on newcomers, which taught
> us
> > that newcomers face three main types of challenges: technical,
> conceptual,
> > and cultural [2].  For instance, the research tells us that the rules of
> > the wiki are hard to learn, and that a negative first interaction can
> cause
> > a newcomer to leave the wiki and not return -- but that a positive
> > interaction, such as getting advice from a friendly editor, can cause
> them
> > to stay.
> >
> > Over the last year and a half, we have experimented on mid-size
> Wikipedias
> > with features that promote good communication between new and experienced
> > users [3], that help newcomers teach themselves [4], and that give
> > newcomers easy tasks to do [5].  The goal is to build an experience for
> > newcomers that helps them get on a positive track in their first days on
> > the wiki, and want to stick around to join their communities.  It's
> > possible that what we've learned and built so far will apply differently
> to
> > the largest Wikipedias.
> >
> > I hope that anyone who is interested in newcomers can tell us about their
> > own experiences and ideas on our team's discussion page [6], or on the
> > discussion pages of any of our projects.  It's very important to us that
> > the things we build fit in with how communities work today.  Over the
> next
> > year, we're planning to expand the Growth features to more wikis, so we
> > definitely want to talk to people who think the features might be a good
> > fit for their wikis.
> >
> > To keep informed about the Growth team, please subscribe to our
> newsletter
> > [7].
> >
> > [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth
> > [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/New_Editor_Experiences
> > [3]
> >
> >
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Personalized_first_day/Newcomer_homepage#Mentorship_module
> > [4] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Focus_on_help_desk
> > [5]
> >
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Personalized_first_day/Newcomer_tasks
> > [6] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Growth
> > [7] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Newsletters
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:07 AM Vi to  wrote:
> >
> > > Not really, drawing practical advices/lessons (e.g. "differentiate
> among
> > > kinds of COIs") is the only sensible path towards solving issues.
> > > "Let's be kind" is close to a tautology.
> > >
> > > Vito
> > >
> > > Il giorno mer 26 feb 2020 alle ore 09:59 Andy Mabbett <
> > > a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> ha scritto:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 20:36, Vi to  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hard to tell anything without the relevant link(s).
> > > >
> > > > For you, maybe. Others have already given helpful replies.
> > > >
> > > > My question was generic, and not about the specific case I gave as an
> > > > example.
> > > >
> > > > I chose not to post links to to the example, both in order to avoid a
> > > > pile-on, and to avoid us being distracted by the minutiae of the
> > > > incident concerned.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andy Mabbett
> > > > @pigsonthewing
> > > > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why renaming to Wikipedia will wreak havoc on other projects

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

The OP is misleading. The issue is not with Commons at all, but with OTRS.
As far as I know, Commons never, ever, deleted a file which was in use in
any Wikimedia project, with the notable expectation of copyvios. Otherwise,
use in *any* wikimedia project = on scope for Commons.

Apparently some OTRS volunteers follow some outdated procedures - including
that one related to selfies, which was mentioned - but that is a problem
exclusively with OTRS. I'm part of that team, and I always had the freedom
to decide which looked like a genuine selfie, and which was problematic at
that (e.g., with a copyright notice at the metadata). And, as far as I
know, anyone willing to help fixing those problems at OTRS is very much
welcome there. When the volunteers are very few, and the ones complaining
do not volunteer themselves, it only adds up to the pressure on the few
existing volunteers, making everything worse.

Best,
Paulo

Peter Southwood  escreveu no dia quarta,
26/02/2020 à(s) 06:04:

> This does seem unreasonable. Do they have an explanation at Commons?
> This is happening without standardising in one label Wikipedia, so it is
> jumping to quite a conclusion to assume that the issue is related.
> For the record, I am also opposed to rebranding to Wikipedia, but I do not
> think this issue is necessarily related.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2020 6:10 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Why renaming to Wikipedia will wreak havoc on other
> projects
>
> Hoi,
> Apparantly at Commons they have standardised themselves to only support
> Wikipedia.
>
> At Wikidata we have people who are notable according to our standards. We
> are actively asking them for images to illustrate our information. The best
> suggestion we get is: do not ask for images because they are deleted at
> Commons.
>
> When this is what awaits us when we standardise on one label Wikipedia, it
> is obvious that this is the worst scenario for the "other" projects. The
> projects who operate to different standards who have notability criteria
> different from English Wikipedia.
> Thanks,
>   GerardM
> ___
> 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] Treatment of newbies with mild CoI

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello Peaceray,

There are many Wikipedians like you who continuously dedicate themselves to
well receive and help newbies, being absolutely decisive in keeping and
improving the projects health. But I was referring specifically to the core
community, the one which regularly frequent village pumps and generally has
a say in the project politics and community issues - no idea if you
consider yourself to be or not be part of that. My perception is that such
core community is generally hostile to newbies. I have been myself an
active part of that core community in my home wiki pretty much since I
joined 11 years ago, but I remember quite vividly how difficult it was to
become part of that club, facing constant accusations of being a
sockpuppet, accused of knowing too much for a newbie while getting my talk
page carpet-bombed with warnings, accused of lying about my nationality,
enduring childish jokes about my family name, accused of coming there to
disturb what was in peace for years, and whatever. And those were the
golden years, now it's way worst than that.

The basic premise for any activity related to Wikipedia, is that Wikipedia
generally is an hostile environment. Whoever joins the project must be
prepared to face the worst, and then anything good that happens gets to be
a wonderful gain. But the stuff about how fun is to edit Wikipedia is not
true a very significant part of the time. Old rats like me got to know very
well over the years how to avoid trouble and get the thing to be as
pleasant as possible, but the poor rookies, they are generally up to some
troubled times if they really want to stay. Social media such as Telegram,
where newbies can socialize with experts and get help in an easy, friendly
and quick way, are playing a very positive role on that. But the onwiki
situation is pretty much awful.

Best,
Paulo



Raymond Leonard  escreveu no dia terça,
25/02/2020 à(s) 19:40:

> I hope I am one of those "rare exceptions" that Paulo Santos Perneta writes
> about. I also wish that welcoming would be neither rare or exceptional.
>
> My habit:
>
>- For newly registered users, which I define as someone with a redlinked
>talk page, I welcome them.
>- If I am going to revert that user's edit then warn them (via Twinkle
>   almost always), I want to ensure that they are welcomed first.
>- For IP editors:
>   -  If I am reverting an obviously inappropriate edit by an
>   un-welcomed IP editor, I typically use one of the Twinkle
> welcome/warning
>   combos, such as Template:Welcome-anon-test,
>   Template:Welcome-anon-unconstructive, or
> Template:Welcome-anon-delete.
>   - If an  un-welcomed IP editor, makes a revertible edit that is
>   non-malicious, I usually do a Template:Welcome-anon without the
> article
>   parameter, then add a warning
>   - If an  un-welcomed IP editor, editor is doing good, I use a
>   Template:Welcome-anon-constructive
>
> Peaceray
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:58 AM Pine W  wrote:
>
> > I have a more nuanced view.
> >
> > The community benefits from new editors who are acting in good faith
> > and willing to learn.
> >
> > I agree that treatment of new editors can be problematic.
> >
> > On the other hand, having become one of the "insiders", I now
> > understand how English Wikipedia has a limited supply of skilled labor
> > from volunteers who are trying to defend Wikipedia against vandals,
> > conflict of interest editors, copyright violations, and other
> > problems.
> >
> > There is a WMF team working to improve the onboarding experience. I'm
> > cc'ing Marshal Miller (WMF) here in case he would like to comment.
> >
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Treatment of newbies with mild CoI

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

As a rule, (at least) in Wikipedia, with very rare exceptions,  established
communities of editors treat newbies as unwelcome invaders.
No idea how to solve that, since it's a problem related to the nature of
humane beings, not something technical.
But the result is a very low rate of retention, indeed - and increasingly
reduced diversity and cultural richness, which eventually ends up reflected
on content. At some point those established editors also start preying at
other established editors, specially when newbies are not available. The
environment is awful and toxic in general.

For outreach activities to have at least a minimal rate of success, the
participants need to have some kind of protection shield, such as some
privileged contact with established editors willing to help them.
Otherwise, edithatons and other outreach activities are basically sending
lambs to the slaughterhouse. As for newbies that come to Wikipedia by
themselves, they are generally on their own.

Best,
Paulo

Aron Demian  escreveu no dia domingo, 23/02/2020
à(s) 23:30:

> On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 22:35, Andy Mabbett 
> wrote:
>
> > I have just come across a case on en.Wikipedia where the daughter of
> > an article subject added details of his funeral (his death in 1984,w
> > as already recorded) and his view about an indent in his life.
>
> [...]
> >
> As well as being reverted, she now has three templates on her talk
> > page; two warning her of a CoI, and sandwiching one notifying her of a
> > discussion about her on the COI noticeboard. These total 4094
> > characters or 665 words.
> >
>
> This is a topic that's seldom discussed and somewhat taboo in certain
> areas, therefore not many people are aware of what experiences many
> newcomers have. These events go generally unnoticed, but if you were
> wondering why editor retention is a constant issue, the pattern that lies
> behind this single case you brought to our attention is a top reason.
>
> I've tried to help in a similar case of a footballer unknown in
> English-speaking countries. She was repeatedly reverted without the edits
> being evaluated or the rules being explained. She never returned and I was
> frowned upon by the admin, who was involved, for trying to help.
>
> I've noticed this "shoot first, ask later" pattern in many cases, not just
> with newcomers. Unfortunately, this is all too common and a contributing
> factor to the toxicity.
>
> I've noticed the following issues:
> 1) The general unwelcoming treatment of newcomers: "noobs" are considered
> lacking the proper understanding and necessary knowledge, unless they jump
> right into RC patrolling, which is not the sign of a new editor.
> 2) The lack of protection given to newcomers:  "You have no rights" being
> explicitly said to one newcomer, that I recall.
> 3) Preferential treatment and authority bias: the experienced/established
> user is "trusted", thus must be right, therefore unwelcoming - and often
> hostile - conduct is not considered uncivil or it's "not actionable".
> 4) The excessively vilifying application of the most frowned-upon rules
> such as COI, socking. Editors tagged as such are treated the same
> regardless of the effect of their actions and whether that has caused any
> damage, which can scale from none to introducing bias to many articles for
> years.
>
> Currently, there is no effort to mitigate these issues, to improve the
> policies and community practices. It's also a problem that while the
> "biting newbies" and "civility" policies are very well written, these are
> almost never applied and definitely not in the protection of newcomers. By
> that I don't mean these should always result in sanctions, but that the
> community - and primarily who get involved with handling disputes - should
> take these seriously, approach with a neutral mindset and remind the
> editors about our policies, but that almost never happens and such
> complaints are either ignored or blindly decided in favor of the editor
> with more supporters, enabling the abuse of newcomers.
>
> Tl;dr:  newcomers don't enjoy the safety net created by editors who know
> and care for each other and the community processes are not set up to
> create a welcoming and/or safe environment, this purpose is not manifested
> in any kind of endeavors or practices. If the WMF and the movement take the
> Mid-Term target of a welcoming environment seriously, that's a difficult,
> long-term target that will take a lot of effort.
>
> Aron (Demian)
> ___
> 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: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why renaming to Wikipedia will wreak havoc on other projects

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I'm not that familiar with the photosubmissions OTRS queue, and I've no
idea if we have that rule internally on OTRS.
But it surely seems a weird rule. Anything that is on scope to Commons -
which is the case for anything used in Wikdiata too - should be accepted in
photosubmission, period.
That claimed attachment to Wikipedia, a project very well known for often
having a communities with draconian and unhelpful rules of notability,
doesn't seem productive in the least. If that rule exists at all, it should
be dropped and the images accepted.

"some people have turned Wikidata into a dumping ground for scientific
papers and a phone book for scientists" - O RLY?

Best,
Paulo


Gerard Meijssen  escreveu no dia terça,
25/02/2020 à(s) 17:21:

> Hoi,
> This is the chat (too long) at Wikidata
>
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat#Images_for_Wikidata_-_%22Global_Young_Academy%22
> This is the chat at Commons
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#OTRS_&_Wikidata
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 17:45, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> >  Can you provide some links?
> > I keep asking images for Wikidata items since years and I do not recall
> > any issue at all. I have the feeling that as long everything is formally
> > correct (all categories prepared and linked via wikidata infobox) nobody
> > digs into that very much.
> > It's true however that I have a cynical approach. In general, I think
> that
> > whoever spends his/her time on this and not on deleting unused low
> > resolution old images or cropping files or improving categorization is
> > probably more focused on chasing users than actually cleaning up. As soon
> > as you assume that this is the core source of the behavior, you can teach
> > newbies quite well how to avoid it. It's not "good faith" but... it kinda
> > works.
> > Alessandro
> >
> > Il martedì 25 febbraio 2020, 17:11:44 CET, Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> >
> >  Hoi,
> > Apparantly at Commons they have standardised themselves to only support
> > Wikipedia.
> >
> > At Wikidata we have people who are notable according to our standards. We
> > are actively asking them for images to illustrate our information. The
> best
> > suggestion we get is: do not ask for images because they are deleted at
> > Commons.
> >
> > When this is what awaits us when we standardise on one label Wikipedia,
> it
> > is obvious that this is the worst scenario for the "other" projects. The
> > projects who operate to different standards who have notability criteria
> > different from English Wikipedia.
> > Thanks,
> >   GerardM
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps on Wikimedia Space

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello Quim,

I knew this was a possibility, but it still is a big surprise for me that
the WMF has not recognized the enormous value and potential of Wikimedia
Space, which was a space incredibly more friendlier and easier to use than
anything I've ever seen onwiki. As we discussed last November in
WikiIndaba, it only needed to be somehow connected to the Wikimedia
Projects, so that we could get the notifications there - as a standalone
project it's very difficult to follow, since apart from real life we have
mail, social networks, chats - and the wikimedia projects constantly
draining attention and competing for time.

But... All the investment, all the information shared there, will be lost?

I suspect that after this last debacle of Wikimedia Space, it will be
considerably more difficult for people to embark in more new WMF
adventures. It was already difficult with this one.

Bad decisions at top level -> lots of money wasted, valuable WMF staff time
and expertise wasted... and a lot of volunteer time and expertise, and
community goodwill burned for nothing, like if we have plenty of that.

Best,
Paulo

Quim Gil  escreveu no dia terça, 18/02/2020 à(s) 10:31:

> Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to experiment
> with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and
> showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important
> goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the Foundation
> has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to fill
> a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a
> new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so that
> we may share them with the movement.
>
> To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at
> https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
>
> We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space
> users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone
> interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to join
> us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia Space
> category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_get_started
> [2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all
> [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2
> [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
>
> --
> Quim Gil (he/him)
> Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AffCom - Candidates for new mandate

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

And the next big surprise, to me, is that so many of their members are
genuinely good people, strongly engaged with the movement. Still, that
committee is something close to a complete failure (if not a complete
failure).
It seems clear to me that the failure of AffCom most probably is not the
fault of its members. But if they do not come in the open to the community
talking about the problems they face there, I don't see much that people
out of WMF can do about it, besides barking at AffCom when it misbehaves.

It seems an useful body, it seems to have been an useful body when it was
still ChapCom - I wonder what have happened after that that led to this sad
situation - and I hope it can be fixed somehow in the near future, as we,
the affiliates, desperately need that body in a functional state - at least
while something else is not devised to coordinate affiliations in the
Wikimedia Movement.

Best,
Paulo - Darwin



Chris Keating  escreveu no dia quinta,
23/01/2020 à(s) 09:57:

> To me the main surprise is that AffCom continues to exist despite being
> obviously broken.
>
> It does not fulfill its mandate, it never has done, everyone knows this,
> yet still the WMF is happy to have a non-functional committee.
>
> Chris
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 12:23 AM Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> >  On January the 10th I put it in the home page of meta
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Main_Page/WM_News=prev=19695407
> > , I think I did the same last year but I was considering obvious we had
> > received some mails and I did not pay attention.
> > I am surprised there are so many candidates considering the limited
> > publicity the page gets in the month of December.
> >
> > Next year I will try to put it on the news section of the meta home page
> > sooner.
> > Alessandro
> >
> >
> >
> > Il giovedì 23 gennaio 2020, 01:14:00 CET, Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > paulospern...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> >
> >  Not sure this made it to the Wikimedia-L - I couldn't find it easily, at
> > least. But the candidates for the new mandate in AffCom are under
> > discussion now (and have been for some time already.
> >
> > Interested ppl, please follow the link and comment/endorse/ask questions
> to
> > them there:
> >
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Candidates/December_2019
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo - DarwIn
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <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] AffCom - Candidates for new mandate

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

It should also be here in the "News" section:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee
And visible elsewhere in that page, probably close to where the "voting
members" list is. But it's nowhere to seen in that page, as far as I know.
I already knew that selection process should be going on since December, or
else I would have missed it entirely.

There's a lot to improve in AffCom concerning communication with the
communities, for sure... :P

Best,
Paulo


Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
escreveu no dia quinta, 23/01/2020 à(s) 00:23:

>  On January the 10th I put it in the home page of meta
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Main_Page/WM_News=prev=19695407
> , I think I did the same last year but I was considering obvious we had
> received some mails and I did not pay attention.
> I am surprised there are so many candidates considering the limited
> publicity the page gets in the month of December.
>
> Next year I will try to put it on the news section of the meta home page
> sooner.
> Alessandro
>
>
>
> Il giovedì 23 gennaio 2020, 01:14:00 CET, Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
>  Not sure this made it to the Wikimedia-L - I couldn't find it easily, at
> least. But the candidates for the new mandate in AffCom are under
> discussion now (and have been for some time already.
>
> Interested ppl, please follow the link and comment/endorse/ask questions to
> them there:
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Candidates/December_2019
>
> Best,
> Paulo - DarwIn
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

[Wikimedia-l] AffCom - Candidates for new mandate

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Not sure this made it to the Wikimedia-L - I couldn't find it easily, at
least. But the candidates for the new mandate in AffCom are under
discussion now (and have been for some time already.

Interested ppl, please follow the link and comment/endorse/ask questions to
them there:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Candidates/December_2019

Best,
Paulo - DarwIn
___
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] Wikimedia Foundation Chief of Community Engagement to leave the Foundation

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

 What websites are you talking about, Gerard? I couldn't get that part.

Africa is way more engaged and active that the impression that often passes
to the rest of the movement, and I believe that the WMF staff that went to
Wiki Indaba has noticed that (it was impossible not to notice it, IMO). I
was at Wiki Indaba, and my impression is that the WMF was well and properly
represented at the conference, that the money was well spent and that there
will be/ already are practical and noticeable improvements in the
engagement with the wiki communities in Africa on the part of the WMF after
that.

Best,
Paulo

Gerard Meijssen  escreveu no dia sábado,
16/11/2019 à(s) 16:12:

> Hoi,
> What language does the staff, the departments speak.
>
> What chance for the current bias to be sustained and for no real progress
> where we do a mediocre job at best.. Did we EVER research what the effect
> was of ending the free access to our articles when we ended our program. Do
> we know how to make a difference and are we willing to let go of what holds
> us back?
>
> Just compare the recent conventions and the money spend. Africa could be so
> much more active when our websites are as good there as what we are
> accustomed to. Yes, staff went to Africa and then what?
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On Sat, 16 Nov 2019 at 16:04, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> wrote:
>
> > If the changes get staff more directly and personally involved in
> > communicating with the rest of the community it could be helpful to both
> > groups,
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Dariusz Jemielniak
> > Sent: 16 November 2019 12:39
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Chief of Community
> > Engagement to leave the Foundation
> >
> > hi,
> >
> > speaking just in my personal opinion and capacity, without discussing it
> > with anyone else: only time will tell whether this structural change
> works,
> > and jumping to conclusions is definitely premature.
> >
> > In principle, as a person specializing in management and organizational
> > change, I can tell that there is no one-size-fits-all solution. I can
> > definitely see a lot of possible benefits to the restructuring though,
> and
> > we definitely DO want all WMF departments to be in touch with the
> > communities. The proposed approach tries to address the siloses. Every
> > department will have good interface with the CE issues, and this is a
> good
> > thing. Whether it leads to better CE prioritization is unknown yet, but
> > structurally it can definitely help.
> >
> > On a practical level, given the fact that our previous search for the
> > C-level position for CE took more than half a year, AFAIR, in the short
> > term the assumed approach allows us to leapfrog a lot of turmoil, which
> > could be damaging to community engagement in this crucial moment (last
> > stretch of our strategic exercise effort). In the long run - I am certain
> > that the WMF leadership does not believe in things written in stone.
> >
> > I'd be really reluctant to assume the restructuring is good or bad for
> the
> > community as it is, everything depends on how the new structure is used
> in
> > practice.
> >
> > best,
> >
> > dj "pundit"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 1:29 AM Paul J. Weiss  > pjwe...@uw.edu>> wrote:
> > I find the disbanding of the Community Engagement department at WMF to be
> > quite concerning. I will go so far as to say that I view it as a mistake
> > that will have negative impacts well into the future.
> >
> > For one thing, the structure of an organization is in some sense a
> > statement of priorities. I believe this move does indeed say to
> employees,
> > the community, allied organization, and the rest of the world that the
> WMF
> > is now placing less value on engaging the community. Given that many in
> the
> > community have been feeling this already, this is not an opportune time
> to
> > make this transition, even if it were a good idea for other reasons.
> >
> > Another issue is the specific placement of individual teams. For example,
> > you say that returning the Trust & Safety team to the Legal department is
> > intuitive. It certainly is not to me, and that move in particular is
> > concerning. The team's homepage on Meta states that it "identifies,
> builds
> > and – as appropriate – staffs processes which keep our users safe;
> design,
> > develop, and execute on a strategy that integrates legal, product,
> > research, and learning & evaluation to proactively mitigate risk as well
> as
> > manage the overall safety of our online and offline communities when
> > incidents happen." The legal aspect is only one of many in the team's
> > purview, and hopefully not a large one.
> >
> > In my experience, units within legal departments take a very legalistic
> > view of their work. As one 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Mali User Group

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Congratulations to all Malian Wikimedians, it's really great to have one
more affiliate from Africa! :D

Paulo

Isaac Olatunde  escreveu no dia sexta, 8/11/2019
à(s) 18:22:

> Congratulations to Wikimedians of Mali. We look toward to collaborating
> with you.
>
> Regards
>
> Isaac
>
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2019, 6:13 PM Kirill Lokshin  wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone!
>>
>> I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
>> [1] the Wikimedians of Mali User Group [2] as a Wikimedia User Group. The
>> group aims to promote the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects in Mali,
>> and to support and encourage people to collect, develop and disseminate
>> knowledge and other educational, cultural and historic content under free
>> licenses or in the public domain.
>>
>> Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Kirill Lokshin
>> Chair, Affiliations Committee
>>
>> [1]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Wikimedians_of_Mali_User_Group
>> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Mali_User_Group
>> ___
>> Affiliates mailing list
>> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>>
> ___
> Affiliates mailing list
> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>
___
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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hi Ziko,

When WMPT was forced by AffCom early this year to change the old chapter
agreement we had signed in 2009 for a new one, which we were told was the
current model for everyone, the main difference between the two was
precisely the end of the chapter hegemony over the national territory. We
were told, back then, that those were the new rules. You can read it here:
https://pt.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chapter_agreement

Personally, I don't mind that in the least. If some caution is taken by
AffCom, e.g., to not approve rogue affiliates which at it's very inception
are already at war with the national chapter (or "post/pre"-chapter
affiliate, as AffCom has done in Brazil back in 2015, causing all the mess
everybody knows), all is cool. Spain has already something like 5 or 6
affiliates, and they seem to live happily in peace. If it works, let it go.

Best,
Paulo

Ziko van Dijk  escreveu no dia segunda, 7/10/2019 à(s)
12:50:

> Sorry, people, but I would like to read an official statement of the WMF
> (committee) what is the reason or rationale behind this policy to accept WM
> user groups in countries where you already have a chapter. Does anybody
> have a link?
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
> Am Sa., 5. Okt. 2019 um 19:16 Uhr schrieb Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi Farhad,
> >
> > Very interesting, thank you very much for sharing your insight.
> > The advantages at an organizational level are quite obvious, indeed, and
> > it's a smart way to deal with those membership limitations.
> > I'm glad that the WMF & Wikimedia is abandoning the very rigid chapter
> > model as the preferred one, and is evolving into more flexible and
> nuanced
> > options and varieties, such as those confederations.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> >
> > Фархад Фаткуллин / Farhad Fatkullin  escreveu no dia
> > sábado, 5/10/2019 à(s) 15:38:
> >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > I can probably comment this, as a member of both Wikimedia Russia and a
> > > Tatar language-specific UG.
> > > On top of participation in Wikimedia Language Diversity initiative on
> > > meta, I am also contemplating and working towards starting a
> > > territory-specific UG for my region + an incubator UG for more
> > > language-specific UG in the languages of Russia.
> > >
> > >
> > > Wikimedians of Russia seem to see the matreshkas of (1) "global
> > conference
> > > - regional conference - topic-specific conferences"  & (2) WMF &
> > affiliates
> > > general meeting - national chapters - UGs" as natural structures, each
> > > addressing different tasks, having different priorities, whilst
> > cooperating
> > > in various projects.
> > >
> > > * Wikimedia Russia legal requirements (in-person quorum for
> > > decision-making, etc.) doesn't allow us to accept into membership all
> > > members of all our regional, language or topic specific UGs. So our
> > chapter
> > > is evolving towards a mixed confederation status, selectively welcoming
> > > some members from various groupings around Russia (which themselves
> can't
> > > be neither cells nor branches of WMRU).
> > >
> > > * SPB is not purely a city, but a one of 85 provinces (read states) of
> > the
> > > Russian Federation (like my home Republic of Tatarstan, neighbouring
> > > Republic of Bashkortostan with its Bashkir Wiki-grandmas, or a city of
> > > Moscow).
> > >
> > > * Once we will spin out UG MSK, we will complete transforming Wikimedia
> > > Russia into a collective entity for join tasks, working on
> national-level
> > > advocacy & other projects.
> > >
> > > * We currently have 5 existing UGs, have two more filed & at least one
> > > more at the preparation stage - as this is a good way to engage locally
> > or
> > > topically interested public into Wikimedia universe.
> > >
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > farhad
> > >
> > > --
> > > Farhad Fatkullin - Фархад Фаткуллин Тел.+79274158066 / skype:frhdkazan
> /
> > > Wikipedia:frhdkazan / Wikidata:Q34036417
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hi Farhad,

Very interesting, thank you very much for sharing your insight.
The advantages at an organizational level are quite obvious, indeed, and
it's a smart way to deal with those membership limitations.
I'm glad that the WMF & Wikimedia is abandoning the very rigid chapter
model as the preferred one, and is evolving into more flexible and nuanced
options and varieties, such as those confederations.

Best,
Paulo


Фархад Фаткуллин / Farhad Fatkullin  escreveu no dia
sábado, 5/10/2019 à(s) 15:38:

> Hi folks,
>
> I can probably comment this, as a member of both Wikimedia Russia and a
> Tatar language-specific UG.
> On top of participation in Wikimedia Language Diversity initiative on
> meta, I am also contemplating and working towards starting a
> territory-specific UG for my region + an incubator UG for more
> language-specific UG in the languages of Russia.
>
>
> Wikimedians of Russia seem to see the matreshkas of (1) "global conference
> - regional conference - topic-specific conferences"  & (2) WMF & affiliates
> general meeting - national chapters - UGs" as natural structures, each
> addressing different tasks, having different priorities, whilst cooperating
> in various projects.
>
> * Wikimedia Russia legal requirements (in-person quorum for
> decision-making, etc.) doesn't allow us to accept into membership all
> members of all our regional, language or topic specific UGs. So our chapter
> is evolving towards a mixed confederation status, selectively welcoming
> some members from various groupings around Russia (which themselves can't
> be neither cells nor branches of WMRU).
>
> * SPB is not purely a city, but a one of 85 provinces (read states) of the
> Russian Federation (like my home Republic of Tatarstan, neighbouring
> Republic of Bashkortostan with its Bashkir Wiki-grandmas, or a city of
> Moscow).
>
> * Once we will spin out UG MSK, we will complete transforming Wikimedia
> Russia into a collective entity for join tasks, working on national-level
> advocacy & other projects.
>
> * We currently have 5 existing UGs, have two more filed & at least one
> more at the preparation stage - as this is a good way to engage locally or
> topically interested public into Wikimedia universe.
>
>
> regards,
> farhad
>
> --
> Farhad Fatkullin - Фархад Фаткуллин Тел.+79274158066 / skype:frhdkazan /
> Wikipedia:frhdkazan / Wikidata:Q34036417
>
> ___
> 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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

BTW, I seem to recall that in last ASBS election, affiliates which
presented something like 70% member overlap with another affiliate would
not be allowed to participate in the process.
If this practice is kept, it avoids gaming the system (intentionally or
unintentionally) through a multiplication of affiliates which are basically
cells or clones of one of them.

If this is safeguarded, cell-style affiliates probably can become a nice
feature.

Paulo

Paulo Santos Perneta  escreveu no dia sábado,
5/10/2019 à(s) 00:45:

> Hey,
>
> "*1) if a group has more active cores, maybe they should be more broadly
> represented in Berlin. Maybe these constructs shouldn't be necessary.*"
> -> I can agree with that point, yes;
> "*2) No matter how much some care about the ASBS, I doubt that this will
> be a driving force to get more bureaucracy (because that is the cost of
> setting up a UG).*" - I respect your opinion, but IMO getting to have
> increased, or even decisive power on the election of 2 of the 5 members
> (which in turn appoint and confirm the other 5) of the board of one of the
> biggest players and stakeholders of modern days, as the Wikimedia
> Foundation has been growing into progressively, is indeed a powerful driven
> force. Furthermore, as far as I know, bureaucratic requirements for UGs are
> really low, and in line with a department or cell would have to report to
> the mother organization. I'm not saying or even suggesting this was the
> driven force behind the formation of the SPUG, I certainly assume good
> faith. I'm saying that it may be a driven force for similar cases presented
> as local affiliates more or less explicitly under the umbrella of a
> national chapter to pop up. And this aspect can be potentially unfair, and
> even amount to abuse of the system, as a trick to gather more votes;
> *"3) funding for local activities is probably not really a consideration
> in the case of Russia, where foreign funding is (to put it mildly)
> 'complicated'.* I mentioned funding, not WMF funding necessarily. It's
> perfectly understandable that a locally registered association may have, in
> some contexts, more easy access to funds than a national one. I live in an
> autonomous region where it is very common, so I understand it may be indeed
> a legitimate reason to create and register a local affiliate. No idea if
> that is the case of Saint Petersburg, but if it is, it's a smart move.
>
> Basically, I'm not criticizing this approval - I've no idea what is behind
> the group formation, though I assume the members have the best intentions,
> and it actually looks like a smart move. I'm just curious if this will
> become a trend, and how will it develop.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
> effe iets anders  escreveu no dia sexta,
> 4/10/2019 à(s) 21:39:
>
>> Sure, if you want to see it through that lens I guess you could argue
>> such.
>> However, just to put things in perspective: 1) if a group has more active
>> cores, maybe they should be more broadly represented in Berlin. Maybe
>> these
>> constructs shouldn't be necessary. 2) No matter how much some care about
>> the ASBS, I doubt that this will be a driving force to get more
>> bureaucracy
>> (because that is the cost of setting up a UG). 3) funding for local
>> activities is probably not really a consideration in the case of Russia,
>> where foreign funding is (to put it mildly) 'complicated'.
>>
>> Lets assume for the sake of the discussion that the group has legitimate
>> reasons to request affiliate status (although I have my assumptions, I'm
>> curious what tipped the scale).
>>
>> Lodewijk
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:01 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
>> paulospern...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > This is a very interesting strategy for any well developed affiliate. It
>> > allows :
>> >
>> > * decentralization, and stronger local groups, now as full fledged
>> > affiliates
>> > * more seats in Berlin and other conferences
>> > * more votes in the ASBS election
>> > * less financial burden over the national chapter, and additional
>> funding
>> > for local activities.
>> >
>> > Huge and well established chapters like WMDE could easily set up dozens
>> of
>> > local affiliates, with great advantage.
>> >
>> > Paulo
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > A sexta, 4 de out de 2019, 08:04, Philip Kopetzky <
>> > philip.kopet...@gmail.com>
>> > escreveu:
>> >
>> > > I can only reiterate what Lodewijk said - I'm trying to find the
>> approach
>> > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hey,

"*1) if a group has more active cores, maybe they should be more broadly
represented in Berlin. Maybe these constructs shouldn't be necessary.*" ->
I can agree with that point, yes;
"*2) No matter how much some care about the ASBS, I doubt that this will be
a driving force to get more bureaucracy (because that is the cost of
setting up a UG).*" - I respect your opinion, but IMO getting to have
increased, or even decisive power on the election of 2 of the 5 members
(which in turn appoint and confirm the other 5) of the board of one of the
biggest players and stakeholders of modern days, as the Wikimedia
Foundation has been growing into progressively, is indeed a powerful driven
force. Furthermore, as far as I know, bureaucratic requirements for UGs are
really low, and in line with a department or cell would have to report to
the mother organization. I'm not saying or even suggesting this was the
driven force behind the formation of the SPUG, I certainly assume good
faith. I'm saying that it may be a driven force for similar cases presented
as local affiliates more or less explicitly under the umbrella of a
national chapter to pop up. And this aspect can be potentially unfair, and
even amount to abuse of the system, as a trick to gather more votes;
*"3) funding for local activities is probably not really a consideration in
the case of Russia, where foreign funding is (to put it mildly)
'complicated'.* I mentioned funding, not WMF funding necessarily. It's
perfectly understandable that a locally registered association may have, in
some contexts, more easy access to funds than a national one. I live in an
autonomous region where it is very common, so I understand it may be indeed
a legitimate reason to create and register a local affiliate. No idea if
that is the case of Saint Petersburg, but if it is, it's a smart move.

Basically, I'm not criticizing this approval - I've no idea what is behind
the group formation, though I assume the members have the best intentions,
and it actually looks like a smart move. I'm just curious if this will
become a trend, and how will it develop.

Best,
Paulo

effe iets anders  escreveu no dia sexta,
4/10/2019 à(s) 21:39:

> Sure, if you want to see it through that lens I guess you could argue such.
> However, just to put things in perspective: 1) if a group has more active
> cores, maybe they should be more broadly represented in Berlin. Maybe these
> constructs shouldn't be necessary. 2) No matter how much some care about
> the ASBS, I doubt that this will be a driving force to get more bureaucracy
> (because that is the cost of setting up a UG). 3) funding for local
> activities is probably not really a consideration in the case of Russia,
> where foreign funding is (to put it mildly) 'complicated'.
>
> Lets assume for the sake of the discussion that the group has legitimate
> reasons to request affiliate status (although I have my assumptions, I'm
> curious what tipped the scale).
>
> Lodewijk
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:01 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This is a very interesting strategy for any well developed affiliate. It
> > allows :
> >
> > * decentralization, and stronger local groups, now as full fledged
> > affiliates
> > * more seats in Berlin and other conferences
> > * more votes in the ASBS election
> > * less financial burden over the national chapter, and additional funding
> > for local activities.
> >
> > Huge and well established chapters like WMDE could easily set up dozens
> of
> > local affiliates, with great advantage.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> >
> >
> > A sexta, 4 de out de 2019, 08:04, Philip Kopetzky <
> > philip.kopet...@gmail.com>
> > escreveu:
> >
> > > I can only reiterate what Lodewijk said - I'm trying to find the
> approach
> > > and goals in the decision to acknowledge user groups that seem to be an
> > > integral part (or from an outside perspective, should be) of the
> national
> > > chapter. In the past this has been an indicator of personal conflicts
> > > within a chapter or user group and AffCom perpetuating these conflicts
> by
> > > setting up competing affiliates (the situation in Albania being a
> recent
> > > example of this).
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Philip
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 06:33, effe iets anders <
> effeietsand...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would like to note that one of the contacts of this user group is
> > > > Vladimir Medeyko, the director of Wikimedia Russia. I'm assuming
> > > > comfortably that this application happened in full

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

This is a very interesting strategy for any well developed affiliate. It
allows :

* decentralization, and stronger local groups, now as full fledged
affiliates
* more seats in Berlin and other conferences
* more votes in the ASBS election
* less financial burden over the national chapter, and additional funding
for local activities.

Huge and well established chapters like WMDE could easily set up dozens of
local affiliates, with great advantage.

Paulo



A sexta, 4 de out de 2019, 08:04, Philip Kopetzky 
escreveu:

> I can only reiterate what Lodewijk said - I'm trying to find the approach
> and goals in the decision to acknowledge user groups that seem to be an
> integral part (or from an outside perspective, should be) of the national
> chapter. In the past this has been an indicator of personal conflicts
> within a chapter or user group and AffCom perpetuating these conflicts by
> setting up competing affiliates (the situation in Albania being a recent
> example of this).
>
> Best,
> Philip
>
>
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 06:33, effe iets anders 
> wrote:
>
> > I would like to note that one of the contacts of this user group is
> > Vladimir Medeyko, the director of Wikimedia Russia. I'm assuming
> > comfortably that this application happened in full coordination with
> > Wikimedia Russia.
> >
> > The question about process is still an interesting one though (what is
> > nowadays the approach of Affcom, and what are the considerations) when a
> > user group application comes in from a geographic area with an active
> > affiliate at a 'higher level' (in this case, a country). You could
> continue
> > the comparison with what happens if an application would come in from
> South
> > of Nevsky (a neighborhood in St. Petersburg).
> >
> > Lodewijk
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 3:29 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > paulospern...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Wikimedia NYC is a very different situation, there is not a national
> > > chapter in the US, so it's not a cell of anything.
> > > Just to clarify: Saint Petersburg eventually could not be a cell, but
> the
> > > way it is presented (to promote Wikimedia RU activities in SP, with
> same
> > > Wikimedia RU people), it's basically a cell.
> > >
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > Yuri Astrakhan  escreveu no dia quinta,
> > 3/10/2019
> > > à(s) 23:06:
> > >
> > > > What about Wikimedia NYC?  (I'm not sure of its organizational
> status)
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 6:03 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > > paulospern...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Wales is a whole country complete with it's own language, I don't
> > > believe
> > > > > it compares with a city UG.
> > > > >
> > > > > Paulo
> > > > >
> > > > > Andy Mabbett  escreveu no dia quinta,
> > > > 3/10/2019
> > > > > à(s) 22:53:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 20:45, Paulo Santos Perneta
> > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Why isn't it a department of Wikimedia Russia, if apparently
> it's
> > > > > > basically
> > > > > > > a cell of Wikimedia Russia?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's a curious precedent.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The precedent was already set, in March 2017, by Wikimedia
> > Community
> > > > > > User Group Wales (c/f Wikimedia UK).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Andy Mabbett
> > > > > > @pigsonthewing
> > > > > > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ___
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > h

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Wikimedia NYC is a very different situation, there is not a national
chapter in the US, so it's not a cell of anything.
Just to clarify: Saint Petersburg eventually could not be a cell, but the
way it is presented (to promote Wikimedia RU activities in SP, with same
Wikimedia RU people), it's basically a cell.

Paulo

Yuri Astrakhan  escreveu no dia quinta, 3/10/2019
à(s) 23:06:

> What about Wikimedia NYC?  (I'm not sure of its organizational status)
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 6:03 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Wales is a whole country complete with it's own language, I don't believe
> > it compares with a city UG.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > Andy Mabbett  escreveu no dia quinta,
> 3/10/2019
> > à(s) 22:53:
> >
> > > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 20:45, Paulo Santos Perneta
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Why isn't it a department of Wikimedia Russia, if apparently it's
> > > basically
> > > > a cell of Wikimedia Russia?
> > > >
> > > > It's a curious precedent.
> > >
> > > The precedent was already set, in March 2017, by Wikimedia Community
> > > User Group Wales (c/f Wikimedia UK).
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andy Mabbett
> > > @pigsonthewing
> > > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Wales is a whole country complete with it's own language, I don't believe
it compares with a city UG.

Paulo

Andy Mabbett  escreveu no dia quinta, 3/10/2019
à(s) 22:53:

> On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 20:45, Paulo Santos Perneta
>  wrote:
>
> > Why isn't it a department of Wikimedia Russia, if apparently it's
> basically
> > a cell of Wikimedia Russia?
> >
> > It's a curious precedent.
>
> The precedent was already set, in March 2017, by Wikimedia Community
> User Group Wales (c/f Wikimedia UK).
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I don't see a problem with sending several representatives to the Wikimedia
Summit, instead of 1, as would be the case if there was only Wikimedia
Russia (that would be a Wikimedia Summit problem). But cells of Wikimedia
Russia or other national chapters voting for ASBS elections is a different
thing, as it unfairly duplicates the vote of the communities that follow
that strategy.

Paulo

Mārtiņš Bruņenieks  escreveu no dia quinta, 3/10/2019
à(s) 21:04:

> Hello!
>
> There are different aspects to this trend.
> In upcoming CEE Meeting in Belgrade there will be 9 people from different
> affiliates based in Russia. There are other examples you can explore in
> official participant list from other countries, too [1]
>
> As long as there is no system abuse, I see this as a valid way for Erzya
> language or different Albanian language communities in different countries
> to grow their capacity.
> It might not seem fair, but on the other hand it can seem unfair that in
> the past both large and small affiliates could send 2 representatives each.
>
>  Mārtiņš
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_CEE_Meeting_2019/Participants/List
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:46 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Why isn't it a department of Wikimedia Russia, if apparently it's
>> basically a cell of Wikimedia Russia?
>>
>> It's a curious precedent.
>>
>> Paulo
>>
>> Asaf Bartov  escreveu no dia quinta, 3/10/2019
>> à(s) 20:41:
>>
>>> Ziko: Yes, it is about the major Russian city.  And one of its listed
>>> contacts is the longstanding president of Wikimedia Russia itself.
>>>
>>> Philip: this is not an example of a large country being "split up",
>>> since Wikimedia Russia is still around, and was not broken up.  It is also
>>> not the first user group operating within Russia, nor even the first group
>>> with a geographic remit.[1]
>>>
>>>A.
>>>
>>> [1] e.g. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Don_Wikimedians_User_Group
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:34 PM Ziko van Dijk 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello Philip,
>>>>
>>>> I was asking the same question - isn't there already a Wikimedia
>>>> Rossiya -
>>>> but I guess this is the User Group of Saint Petersburg in Florida (USA),
>>>> not Sankt Peterburg in Russia.
>>>> Oh wait... this IS about the city in Russia!
>>>>
>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards
>>>> Ziko
>>>>
>>>> Am Do., 3. Okt. 2019 um 16:15 Uhr schrieb Philip Kopetzky <
>>>> philip.kopet...@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>> > Hi Kirill,
>>>> >
>>>> > so it seems like geographically large countries are being split up
>>>> into
>>>> > different user groups - do you think that this is a viable model for
>>>> the
>>>> > future or just happened because of certain circumstances within the
>>>> Russian
>>>> > community? Would your template allow a User Group from Rome, Paris,
>>>> Munich
>>>> > or Sydney for example?
>>>> >
>>>> > Best,
>>>> > Philip
>>>> >
>>>> > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 12:20, Kirill Lokshin >>> >
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > Hi everyone!
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
>>>> recognized
>>>> > > [1] the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group [2] as a
>>>> Wikimedia
>>>> > User
>>>> > > Group. The group aims to unite Wikimedians living in St.
>>>> Petersburg, to
>>>> > > support the development of content on topics related to St.
>>>> Petersburg
>>>> > > across different Wikimedia projects, to promote the Wikimedia
>>>> projects
>>>> > and
>>>> > > movement in St. Petersburg, and to build partnerships between the
>>>> > Wikimedia
>>>> > > community and cultural, scientific, educational, and media
>>>> institutions
>>>> > in
>>>> > > St. Petersburg.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>>>> > >
>>>> > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Why isn't it a department of Wikimedia Russia, if apparently it's basically
a cell of Wikimedia Russia?

It's a curious precedent.

Paulo

Asaf Bartov  escreveu no dia quinta, 3/10/2019 à(s)
20:41:

> Ziko: Yes, it is about the major Russian city.  And one of its listed
> contacts is the longstanding president of Wikimedia Russia itself.
>
> Philip: this is not an example of a large country being "split up", since
> Wikimedia Russia is still around, and was not broken up.  It is also not
> the first user group operating within Russia, nor even the first group with
> a geographic remit.[1]
>
>A.
>
> [1] e.g. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Don_Wikimedians_User_Group
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:34 PM Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
>
>> Hello Philip,
>>
>> I was asking the same question - isn't there already a Wikimedia Rossiya -
>> but I guess this is the User Group of Saint Petersburg in Florida (USA),
>> not Sankt Peterburg in Russia.
>> Oh wait... this IS about the city in Russia!
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Ziko
>>
>> Am Do., 3. Okt. 2019 um 16:15 Uhr schrieb Philip Kopetzky <
>> philip.kopet...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> > Hi Kirill,
>> >
>> > so it seems like geographically large countries are being split up into
>> > different user groups - do you think that this is a viable model for the
>> > future or just happened because of certain circumstances within the
>> Russian
>> > community? Would your template allow a User Group from Rome, Paris,
>> Munich
>> > or Sydney for example?
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Philip
>> >
>> > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 12:20, Kirill Lokshin 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi everyone!
>> > >
>> > > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
>> recognized
>> > > [1] the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group [2] as a Wikimedia
>> > User
>> > > Group. The group aims to unite Wikimedians living in St. Petersburg,
>> to
>> > > support the development of content on topics related to St. Petersburg
>> > > across different Wikimedia projects, to promote the Wikimedia projects
>> > and
>> > > movement in St. Petersburg, and to build partnerships between the
>> > Wikimedia
>> > > community and cultural, scientific, educational, and media
>> institutions
>> > in
>> > > St. Petersburg.
>> > >
>> > > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Kirill Lokshin
>> > > Chair, Affiliations Committee
>> > >
>> > > [1]
>> > >
>> >
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
>> > > [2]
>> > >
>> >
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
>> > > ___
>> > > Affiliates mailing list
>> > > affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>> > >
>> > ___
>> > 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,
>> 
>
>
>
> --
> Asaf Bartov
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
> https://donate.wikimedia.org
> ___
> Affiliates mailing list
> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>
___
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] WMF work environment

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

A surprising amount of staff turnover, and the relation between WMF and the
communities extremely eroded by a row of bad moves and general bad attitude.

I was told I'm too new to this, and it was worst during superprotect, but
it's still mind-boggling why what was supposed to be a symbiotic and happy
relation ends up being a sort of intermitent nightmare.

I guess that ultimately the fault and responsibility is ours, as a
community, for failing to elect BoT members in the last years more
competent in directing the ED and avoiding those situations (which, for the
most part, seem to be generally avoidable in an aftermath analysis, though
lessons seem to be hard to learn).

Best,
Paulo


Pine W  escreveu no dia quarta, 2/10/2019 à(s) 21:09:

> Hello,
>
> Something I am sensing from multiple sources, sometimes more through
> implication than specific statements, is that there is a sense of turmoil
> in WMF. I think that some amounts of internal politics and staff turnover
> are normal, but over the past few months I am sensing an increase in
> internal turmoil. I am noticing the departures of some staff people that I
> personally like and respect. I am wondering if WMF Talent and Culture or
> maybe someone on the ED's office would be willing to comment regarding
> these issues. I'm not intending to add additional stress to people who are
> generally competent and are trying to do good work. I would like to better
> understand the degree of turmoil (perhaps my impressions are incorrect),
> what might be causing the turmoil, and whether the turmoil is good or bad.
> Hopefully any increase in turmoil is temporary, but I am somewhat
> concerned. If staff are focused too much on internal WMF issues then this
> may affect their productivity on projects that support the community, and
> having highly stressed or discouraged staff would be a problem.
>
>
> Thank you,
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Outcomes of the Harmonization Sprint in Tunis

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hi Henry,

Apparently things have changed since then: "
*The timeline will shift and we are looking into options for another round
of community input.*" (Nicole)

These are promising news from the core team, I hope this new round of
community input goes forward.

Best,
Paulo

Henry Wood  escreveu no dia quarta, 2/10/2019
à(s) 15:42:

> Paulo,
>
> There is nothing more for us to do, since community input closed on
> the 15 September.  The community will next be consulted on the
> implementation of the recommendations after they are finally agreed.
>
> Henry
>
> On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 18:08, Paulo Santos Perneta
>  wrote:
> >
> > " A second iteration of draft recommendations [4] was published on Meta
> > just before the sprint for
> > the communities’ information." - It's quite unclear what are we supposed
> to
> > do with this, since those recommendations most probably became outdated
> in
> > the course of the Tunis meetings in the days following their publication.
> > Are we supposed to do anything at all with them?
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia segunda,
> > 30/09/2019 à(s) 17:27:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > We recently held the harmonization sprint in Tunis [1], where
> > > representatives from each working group met in person to continue
> bringing
> > > nine separate sets of draft recommendations into one set. The event
> also
> > > brought together staff members from the Wikimedia Foundation and
> Wikimedia
> > > Deutschland, the WMF Chair of the Board of Trustees, and members of the
> > > core team. A longer narrative report will be published in the coming
> weeks;
> > > in the meantime, see a short day-by-day report on Meta, photos on
> commons
> > > [2], and check out the hashtag #hs2030 on Twitter [3].
> > >
> > > In the lead up to the meeting, the working groups were busy refining
> their
> > > draft recommendations based on feedback received at in person events
> from
> > > Wikimedians across the movement as well as on wiki, via email, and on
> > > social media since March of this year. They had also begun identifying
> > > overlaps in each other’s recommendations and content. A second
> iteration of
> > > draft recommendations [4] was published on Meta just before the sprint
> for
> > > the communities’ information.
> > >
> > > At the sprint, we continued to group recommendations based on
> > > commonalities. From there, we looked at what kinds of structures would
> need
> > > to be in place to deliver the Wikimedia 2030 vision. A first, rough
> > > grouping of recommendations came together at the sprint. But what
> became
> > > clear during the event was that before it’s possible to create a
> coherent
> > > and actionable set of recommendations, fundamental principles that
> underpin
> > > the path towards 2030 need to be formalized.
> > >
> > > The core team is currently processing the discussion materials and
> > > outcomes. Analysis of the current draft recommendations will continue
> so as
> > > to create one unified set. The timeline will shift and we are looking
> into
> > > options for another round of community input.
> > >
> > > I would like to make clear that the reason we were not able to achieve
> our
> > > initial goal in Tunis was due to a lack of clarity and guidance on the
> core
> > > team’s part. Still, the time was not wasted and important, honest
> > > conversations were had. The working group members, as ever, devoted an
> > > enormous amount of energy and care in the lead up to and during the
> event,
> > > and demonstrated their deep understanding of the challenges and
> > > opportunities in our movement. We are extremely grateful for all their
> > > effort. In short, the harmonization sprint underlined the high level of
> > > work and dedication every single working group member has put into
> getting
> > > the movement strategy to its current point, and the passion to shape
> the
> > > future of the diverse and inclusive movement we envision.
> > >
> > > We have valuable lessons to take from this event and incorporate into
> the
> > > overall process and the next steps. We will share these with you all as
> > > soon as possible. If you have questions in the meantime, please feel
> free
> > > to reach out to me.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Nicole
> > >
> >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Outcomes of the Harmonization Sprint in Tunis

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

" A second iteration of draft recommendations [4] was published on Meta
just before the sprint for
the communities’ information." - It's quite unclear what are we supposed to
do with this, since those recommendations most probably became outdated in
the course of the Tunis meetings in the days following their publication.
Are we supposed to do anything at all with them?

Best,
Paulo

Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia segunda,
30/09/2019 à(s) 17:27:

> Hi everyone,
>
> We recently held the harmonization sprint in Tunis [1], where
> representatives from each working group met in person to continue bringing
> nine separate sets of draft recommendations into one set. The event also
> brought together staff members from the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia
> Deutschland, the WMF Chair of the Board of Trustees, and members of the
> core team. A longer narrative report will be published in the coming weeks;
> in the meantime, see a short day-by-day report on Meta, photos on commons
> [2], and check out the hashtag #hs2030 on Twitter [3].
>
> In the lead up to the meeting, the working groups were busy refining their
> draft recommendations based on feedback received at in person events from
> Wikimedians across the movement as well as on wiki, via email, and on
> social media since March of this year. They had also begun identifying
> overlaps in each other’s recommendations and content. A second iteration of
> draft recommendations [4] was published on Meta just before the sprint for
> the communities’ information.
>
> At the sprint, we continued to group recommendations based on
> commonalities. From there, we looked at what kinds of structures would need
> to be in place to deliver the Wikimedia 2030 vision. A first, rough
> grouping of recommendations came together at the sprint. But what became
> clear during the event was that before it’s possible to create a coherent
> and actionable set of recommendations, fundamental principles that underpin
> the path towards 2030 need to be formalized.
>
> The core team is currently processing the discussion materials and
> outcomes. Analysis of the current draft recommendations will continue so as
> to create one unified set. The timeline will shift and we are looking into
> options for another round of community input.
>
> I would like to make clear that the reason we were not able to achieve our
> initial goal in Tunis was due to a lack of clarity and guidance on the core
> team’s part. Still, the time was not wasted and important, honest
> conversations were had. The working group members, as ever, devoted an
> enormous amount of energy and care in the lead up to and during the event,
> and demonstrated their deep understanding of the challenges and
> opportunities in our movement. We are extremely grateful for all their
> effort. In short, the harmonization sprint underlined the high level of
> work and dedication every single working group member has put into getting
> the movement strategy to its current point, and the passion to shape the
> future of the diverse and inclusive movement we envision.
>
> We have valuable lessons to take from this event and incorporate into the
> overall process and the next steps. We will share these with you all as
> soon as possible. If you have questions in the meantime, please feel free
> to reach out to me.
>
> Best regards,
> Nicole
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Harmonization_Sprint
> [2]
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_2030_Harmonization_Sprint
> [3] https://twitter.com/search?q=%23hs2030
> [4]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
>
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Adviser International Relations
> Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
> teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> https://spenden.wikimedia.de
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> ___
> 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 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please reconsider!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I've no idea what you mean by " second iteration". I was told by Work Group
members that those are the recommendations that were used as starting
points for the discussions by the Work Groups at Tunis last weekend.

Therefore, all that is most probably outdated stuff by now (it was already
outdated by the time it was posted).
I really don't know what happens to the discussions going on there, but I
don't believe they will be taken into account, since by now those
recommendations have already advanced to somewhere else.

Best,
Paulo

Mario Gómez  escreveu no dia quarta, 25/09/2019
à(s) 08:45:

> The recommendations from the second iteration are available now:
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
>
> Looking at the formatting with discussion links and so on, I assume
> community feedback is still welcome. It would be good to announce this in
> wikimedia-l, meta main page, etc.
>
> Best,
>
> MarioGom
>
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 3:48 PM Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Recently, the "draft recommendations" of the strategy working groups have
> > been published. As Nicole informed us, they are "key tools" for the
> future
> > of the movement. These documents are the result of one year of work of
> the
> > working groups.
> >
> > If I am not mistaken, the Wikimedia volunteers now have one month to give
> > feedback. In October, the process of refining and finalizing has to be
> > ready, and in November, the movement will have to start with implementing
> > the recommendations.
> >
> > Having seen now more of the documents, my conclusion can only be one: the
> > documents are simply not ready for this stage of the process. They are
> much
> > more unready than they should be for being put to the eyes of the
> Wikimeda
> > volunteers.
> >
> > There are documents in which there is only one question answered, by one
> > sentence. Other documents don't show that any research has been used to
> > back the statements. Many obvious arguments and links are missing. At
> least
> > at one occasion I read as an answer to an important question: "todo".
> >
> > The proposals often give the impression that they are not thought
> through.
> > There should be quotas for admins, but we see nowhere an explanation how
> > that would relate to the right to remain anonymous. There is the
> statement
> > that minorities sometimes can only express themselves with ND and NC
> > content, but the two links in the document hardly back that claim. After
> > years in which the Wikimedia organizations and other free and open
> content
> > organizations taught us that NC is problematic, now such a drastic
> change?
> >
> > And there is this already infamous sentence: Instead of being informed
> > about the possible negative impacts of NC and ND, we only read: "All
> change
> > has negative connotations to some members of the community."
> >
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9
> >
> > I find it stunning that there was nobody who went through the documents
> > before publication and said: we cannot publish this sentence, it is
> giving
> > a very bad impression about our attitude towards the community (= the
> very
> > same people we are asking to invest their time for giving feedback).
> >
> > This does not mean that all documents or all sections and recommendations
> > are unusable or damaging. I also cannot judge about the efforts invested,
> > as I have no insight in the inner workings. But it is very frustrating
> for
> > me to read the documents and often have to guess what they actually mean.
> > And it seems to me, given the comments on the user pages on Meta Wiki, on
> > this list, on de:WP:Kurier and on Facebook, that I am not the only one
> who
> > feels this frustration.
> >
> > Therefore, I ask the people responsible: please reconsider the timeline.
> If
> > these documents are the result of one year work, then the documents will
> > not be ready within two and a half months. Consider several months for
> the
> > working groups to use the present feedback for a redraft, and then give
> the
> > Wikimedia volunteers at least the same amount of time for giving feedback
> > again.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: 

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

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hey Gregory,

Are you planing to include Portuguese in the list of target languages?

Best,
Paulo

Gregory Varnum  escreveu no dia segunda,
23/09/2019 à(s) 18:32:

> I am not entirely sure how this connects to the topic of the thread.
>
> However, I feel I should note that we are indeed interested in translating
> into other languages, and have been seeking people to help with translation
> of the website and other organization materials:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Organization_communications_translators_group
>
> I do not want to derail this conversation, so will leave it at that and
> encourage you to utilize that page or the website's Meta-Wiki page to
> discuss this further, as this thread seems to be about other topics.
>
> -greg
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:28 AM Ferdinando Traversa <
> ferdi.trave...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Please note that Foundation website is translated in French, but not in
> > many other languages (including Italian, mine)...
> > I don’t know why they don’t give the chance to translate.
> >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation joins the global climate strike

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello,

I totally support Illario words: "if the option is to pay 500 long travels
for scholarships by flight to attend a single event or to pay 500 travels
for the staff of WMF to attend several regional conferences,  the answer
will be in favor of the second option which is more sustainable and more
efficient." and what Fae and others have been saying all along. It makes
much more sense to restrict global meetings and events to the minimum
essential, and support instead regional events, which are way more cheaper,
democratic, sustainable (in all ways) and have a much less significant
carbon footprint. By inviting Wikimedians from nearby countries, WMF staff
and very selected international scholarships we can still be able to
provide great "flesh-and-bones" interaction, and can eventually coordinate
with other groups of Wikimedians from any part of the world through
videoconferencing. In this last Wikimania in Stockholm, I was actually able
to successfully participate remotely in a panel there, along with 2 other
remote fellows (me in Madeira Island, one in Israel and another in Mexico):
https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2019:Education/Education_%26_Libraries:_Opportunities_Explored

Of course, presential attendance and interaction is still crucial, as we
(generally) are not hermits editing from caves, and it has a fundamental
effect in local community capacity and structure building, but that can be
done at a regional (rather than national, as travel costs and footprint do
not  respect national boundaries) level.
For those reasons, I believe there should be a strong strategic focus on
funding regional conferences in the Wikimedia Movement, and was somewhat
disappointed when the organizing teams at Wikimania 2019 and the last Wiki
Education conference at the Basque country apparently had not also focused
on this regional approach (if it existed, it either was not explicit, or I
couldn't find it), with a weighting factor on scholarships related to the
proximity/vicinity of attendants.

I agree that it is very cool to be immersed in a sea of diversity and
cultural interchange at Wikimedia events, with people coming from all parts
of the world, but that is not sustainable, and as has been mentioned, that
group of attendants is not necessarily representative of the active
Wikimedian communities. More regional events, building up a strong regional
Wikimedia structure, and limiting global events to the very essential, is
the way to go IMO.

Best,
Paulo

Fæ  escreveu no dia segunda, 23/09/2019 à(s) 13:10:

> Imagine a world where instead of going through security for 2 or 3
> hours, flying for 4 hours and travelling by train and bus to get to
> and from airports in order to enjoy a physical meeting with fellow
> Wikimedians, you simply got a bus or train and travelled for an hour
> to a fun meeting place where you met several fellow Wikimedians in
> your country, and together spend the day playing around with immersive
> conferencing to workshop, discuss and learn from fellow Wikimedians in
> other countries. All this and still get home to spend the night in
> your own bed, feed your cat, or meet your kids coming back from
> school.
>
> That's "making time and space for both" while taking real measurable
> action for climate change by reducing our entirely avoidable numbers
> of international flights.
>
> The truth is, that despite discussing this since Wikimania events
> started, and in that time technology making doing this is almost as
> simple as an Affiliate hiring headsets for mobile phones, we have
> never even trialled decent immersive virtual conferencing spaces for
> productive conferencing.
>
> Fae
>
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 12:57, Rebecca O'Neill 
> wrote:
> >
> > Is it, perhaps, that the value a lot of people derive from these events
> is
> > not just the conference itself, but the ability to meet fellow
> Wikimedians
> > face-to-face and make meaningful contacts and even friendships that may
> > never otherwise have come about? I'm all about virtual, but there is
> value
> > in physical events, and I would say that we should make time and space
> for
> > both.
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 12:54, Ilario Valdelli 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Yes
> > >
> > > We dont give all scholarships for that reason while for regional
> Wikicon we
> > > receive more requests and we fill the amount immediately.
> > >
> > > It's not an opinion that in our events people prefer to arrive by
> train and
> > > not by flight. We see it as soon we receive the expenses report and
> when we
> > > ask the reason the answer is the climate change.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > >
> > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019, 13:25 Gabriel Thullen, 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I am a Swiss member, and I did go to Wikimania (and did a small
> > > > presentation).
> > > >
> > > > I think that you need to clarify you statement:
> > > > "In Wikimedia CH we cannot give scholarships for Wikimania because
> people
> > > > would not do long trips."
> > > >
> > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Partial blocks update

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hi,

How and where can one request enabling this at the Portuguese Wikipedia?

Paulo

James Forrester  escreveu no dia sexta,
20/09/2019 à(s) 02:01:

> On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 17:16, Steven Walling 
> wrote:
>
> > How do we see which wikis have partial blocks deployed already / are
> > planning to have it deployed?
>
>
> On a technical level, this is defined as wgEnablePartialBlocks in config,
> which is currently:
>
>
>- Meta;
>- MediaWiki.org;
>- test wikis;
>- all Wikisources (except Old Wikisource), all Wikivoyages, and all
>Wiktionaries; and
>- most of the big Wikipedias: Arabic, Bengali, German, Farsi, Finnish,
>French, Hebrew, Hungarian, Italian, Japanese, Polish, Russian, Serbian,
>Telugu and Chinese.
>
> Changes can be tracked in https://noc.wikimedia.org/conf/index.php (but
> the
> files are large and not very friendly).
>
>
> > And is there any way administrators can request deployment?
> >
>
> I'll leave that to the brilliant Anti-Harassment Tools team.
>
> J.
> --
> *James D. Forrester* (he/him  or they/themself
> )
> Wikimedia Foundation 
> ___
> 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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hi Diane,

If there will be a new discussion (and rightly so), what happens to the
"harmonization sprint in Tunis on 20-22 September" mentioned by Nicole in
her messages?
I don't believe there will be much to harmonize between the new discussion
with the community takes place.

Best,
Paulo


Diane Ranville  escreveu no dia sexta,
13/09/2019 à(s) 14:20:

> Hi Andy,
>
> Working groups are currently working off-wiki on a new version that will
> soon be submitted to discussion again. Current versions are indeed not
> being updated (I think they are not meant to be).
> If you want to reach out directly to the diversity working group, I suggest
> using their mailing list : wg2030-divers...@wikimedia.org
>
> Best,
> Diane
> (community strategy liaison for the french speaking community)
>
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> Garanti
> sans virus. www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 2:28 PM Andy Mabbett 
> wrote:
>
> > The section remains unchanged. Is anyone planning to update it?
> >
> > On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 at 14:29, Andy Mabbett 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 at 19:48, Jeff Hawke 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 7:41 PM Andy Mabbett <
> > a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 at 09:55, Jeff Hawke 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > the WG then collate them and decide the final form of the
> > > > > > recommendations, to be implemented by the WMF
> > > > >
> > > > > This seems to be missing a rather crucial intermediate step; the
> one
> > > > > where the recommendations are accepted, or not, by the wider
> > Wikimedia
> > > > > community.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >  That step is not mentioned at
> > > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions#What_steps_will_take_place_in_the_next_few_months_to_put_a_decision-making_process_in_place
> > ?
> > >
> > > But it is alluded to further down that page, albeit with an apparent
> > > assumption that the recommendations will (all) be implemented:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions#What_are_the_steps_that_will_take_place_between_recommendations_being_published_and_implementation
> > ?
> > >
> > > In the light of Nicole's recent - and reassuring - email:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2019-August/093303.html
> > >
> > > perhaps that section could be updated to reflect that:
> > >
> > >"[recommendations not needing the legal authority of the board] will
> > > then be further delegated to other community mechanisms and
> > > structures for approval or further consultation."
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andy Mabbett
> > > @pigsonthewing
> > > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Andy Mabbett
> > @pigsonthewing
> > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I only started following WMF stuff more closely around 2 years ago, but I
don't remember it being this permanent state of crisis as it is now, with
an ever increasing - now, apparently at an accelerating pace too -
detachment from the onwiki communities.
This is tiresome and distracting for those of us who are volunteers at the
Wikimedia projects, but it's certainly painful too for the WMF staff.

What's going on with the WMF?

Paulo

Pine W  escreveu no dia segunda, 9/09/2019 à(s) 07:59:

> It crosses my mind that I would think that some of the WMF office staff
> would also be getting tired of crisis, conflict, and unwelcome surprises.
> These types of problems are unlikely to ever be fully prevented, but I
> would think that the parade of difficulties in the past few months would
> also be testing the patience of at least some people inside of WMF who
> might like to not have a new earthquake to deal with on what seems like a
> biweekly basis.
>
> Pine
>
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 8, 2019, 17:59 Yair Rand  wrote:
>
> > The broad proposal was clearly rejected. The community has not authorized
> > the Wikimedia Foundation to let any organization speak under Wikipedia's
> > name. If a formal RfC is to be held to make a final decision (perhaps
> with
> > the question subdivided, per Pine), I recommend delaying it for a while
> so
> > we might have a chance for some respite from permanent crisis mode.
> >
> > The summary, in my opinion, is not adequate, and skips many of the most
> > significant arguments. (The talk page itself skips some, after the WMF
> had
> > a large portion of the talk page moved to a different page, including a
> > string of "strong oppose"s. Those who participated in the removed
> sections
> > were not counted in the WMF's count, for some reason.)
> >
> > I do not understand what is going on within the Foundation regarding
> KPIs,
> > but I get the impression that groups were required to establish metrics
> of
> > some kind, without any actual oversight on how those metrics would work.
> > Thus, we get things like the branding proposal's "anything less than 1800
> > users posting statements in opposition will be considered strong support,
> > 1800-2700 will be considered substantial support, 2700-3600 opposed will
> be
> > considered moderate support". Similar things have been happening
> elsewhere,
> > eg, for the WMF's "Space" project. (Speaking of which, holding a
> discussion
> > on a private off-wiki forum is not a valid method of community decision
> > making, for branding or otherwise.)
> >
> > -- Yair Rand
> >
> >
> >
> > ‫בתאריך שבת, 7 בספט׳ 2019 ב-20:54 מאת ‪Pine W‬‏ <‪wiki.p...@gmail.com
> ‬‏>:‬
> >
> > >  I too think that an RfC is a good option here. I suggest having
> multiple
> > > questions in the RfC. Questions could include, "What should the
> > > organization that is currently known as the Wikimedia Foundation be
> > > named?", "Should there be a unifying brand for the online projects such
> > as
> > > Wikipedia, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Commons?", "If there is a unifying
> > brand
> > > for the online projects then what should it be?", "Should there be a
> > > unifying brand for affiliates?", and "If there is a unifying brand for
> > > affiliates then what should it be?"
> > >
> > > Overall I think that the report on Meta
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_research_and_planning/community_review/results
> > > >
> > > makes for good reading as background information for an RfC.
> > >
> > > I want to caution against trying to make too many big decisions at
> once.
> > > There is already a strategy process underway which has consumed a
> > > considerable number of volunteer hours, and the community has precious
> > > little capacity relative to normal operational demands without this
> > ongoing
> > > strategy process being piled on top of everything else that people want
> > the
> > > community to do. There seems to be infinite demand for free skilled
> > labor,
> > > but a finite supply of that same labor. I encourage both WMF and the
> > > community to think carefully about which questions to prioritize so
> that
> > we
> > > are not all overstretched and a significant number of problems slip
> > through
> > > the cracks because collectively there were not adequate human resources
> > to
> > > thoughtfully address so many questions in a narrow period of time and
> > > develop consensus regarding how to move forward.
> > >
> > > Pine
> > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

After the last disastrous WMF intervention in Wikipedia - Framgate - I
believe the timing is just perfect for the WMF to go forward with this fit
of creativity of branding themselves as the "Wikipedia Foundation".

It's one after another, and never stops.

Best,
Paulo

Yaroslav Blanter  escreveu no dia sexta, 6/09/2019 à(s)
18:25:

> I agree with Fae. I strongly oppose the proposal, and I somehow used to
> assume that our opinion would be asked in a structured way.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:03 PM Fæ  wrote:
>
> > If the WMF is going to make statements that are not derived from all
> > the demonstrable facts, perhaps the community should now respond with
> > a completely unambiguous RFC on meta so there can be no doubt?
> >
> > Something along the lines of:
> > "The WMF have employed Wolff Olins for rebranding advice, and they
> > recommend that Wikimedia rebrands itself around the word "Wikipedia"
> > and projects like Wikimedia Commons are renamed to "Wikicommons" to
> > ensure marketing of the projects can easily be delivered by the WMF.
> > Do you support or oppose this rebranding programme?"
> >
> > With a straightforward RFC to keep on linking to in every discussion
> > on every venue, we might then have tangible evidence of whether "There
> > is considerable support for the branding proposal" or "There is
> > considerable opposition for the branding proposal" is factual. Rather
> > than drifting along for months with the debate and unhappiness that
> > comes from arguing both sides of a mostly political case without
> > firmly verifiable evidence available or relying on complex and less
> > credible stats from surveys that are likely to suffer from embedded
> > bias, especially considering the already banked investment in
> > consultancy that drives the need to change something, to prove the
> > spent money had impact and "value".
> >
> > P.S. Zack and others, it's best to avoid the word "collaboration" when
> > communicating with an international group. It has unfortunate history
> > and gives the impression that you are quoting views from collaborators
> > rather than holding open collegial discussion.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Fae
> >
> > On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 at 17:19, Diane Ranville  >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I agree with Pine.
> > > There is a majority of people who actually oppose the rebranding
> > > proposition.
> > > I don't quite understand why this is still going forward (except that
> it
> > is
> > > difficult to acknowledge a mistake and take steps backwards - but it is
> > > sometimes necessary).
> > > Have other options even been considered?
> > >
> > > -speaking in my own name here-
> > >
> > > Diane
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:35 AM Pine W  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello Zack,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the report on Meta.
> > > >
> > > > I am troubled by your statement in this email that "There is
> > considerable
> > > > support for the brand proposal and general appetite to improve our
> > > > movement’s branding system." What that statement appears to omit is
> > that,
> > > > according to the report on Meta, there is also considerable
> opposition
> > to
> > > > the rebranding proposal.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Can you explain why you characterized the proposal as having
> > "considerable
> > > > support" without in the same sentence acknowledging what appears to
> be
> > > > considerable opposition?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Of the three top-level metrics that the report on Meta displays that
> > > > measure community and affiliate support or opposition regarding the
> > > > rebranding proposal, one of the three metrics is in favor and two of
> > the
> > > > three metrics are opposed. If this was an RfC, and I was using those
> > > > measures of sentiment to evaluate support and opposition regarding
> the
> > RfC,
> > > > I would probably close the current rebranding proposal as declined.
> > > >
> > > > Pine
> > > >
> > > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019, 20:49 Zack McCune 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > *Summary* - We want your help with a voluntary, OPT-IN design
> > process for
> > > > > movement branding.  Please join the in-depth discussion group, or
> > watch
> > > > for
> > > > > updates on Meta-Wiki.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello all,
> > > > >
> > > > > After 4 months of community consultation, spanning dozens of
> > affiliates,
> > > > > several mailing lists, community conferences, and Meta-Wiki, I am
> > pleased
> > > > > to share a summary of feedback on the proposed 2030 movement brand
> > > > strategy
> > > > > [1].
> > > > >
> > > > > From more than 319 comments, representing 150 individual
> > contributors and
> > > > > 63 affiliates, we assessed 6 major themes in feedback:
> > > > >
> > > > >1.
> > > > >
> > > > >Reducing confusion
> > > > >2.
> > > > >
> > > > >Protecting reputation
> > > > >3.
> > > > >
> > > > >Supporting 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

 time.
> > > >
> > > > J
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:47 PM Jeff Hawke  >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> James
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks for that.  As a member of the Board, would you clarify the
> > > Board's
> > > >> position on whether it is prepared to see the final Recommendations
> > > >> implemented irrespective of any disagreement from the community?
> > > >>
> > > >> Jeff
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:05 PM James Heilman 
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> I for one do not agree with Jan-Bart's prior position.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> James
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 4:40 AM Jeff Hawke <
> geoffey.ha...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Paulo,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> You suggest that "things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia
> > > community
> > > >>>> does not approve some of the recommendations".  You may recall
> that
> > > >> just
> > > >>>> five years ago, Jan-Bart de Vreede, then chair of the WMF Board,
> > > >>> expressed
> > > >>>> the opinion
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)=prev=9585319
> > > >>>> over
> > > >>>> a much less dramatic change.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> All of this is going to require change, change that might not be
> > > >>>> acceptable to some of you. I hope that all of you will be a part
> of
> > > >> this
> > > >>>> next step in our evolution. But I understand that if you decide to
> > > >> take a
> > > >>>> wiki-break, that might be the way things have to be. Even so, you
> > have
> > > >> to
> > > >>>> let the Foundation do its work and allow us all to take that next
> > step
> > > >>> when
> > > >>>> needed. I can only hope that your break is temporary, and that you
> > > will
> > > >>>> return when the time is right.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I presume this is a good summary of the WMF position today.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Jeff
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:06 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > >>>> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the
> Wikimedia
> > > >>>>> community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the
> WGs
> > > >>> 8and
> > > >>>>> their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around
> > > >>> December.
> > > >>>>> Therefore, after 15 September or so, the Wikimedia community will
> > > >> only
> > > >>> be
> > > >>>>> dealing with those recommendations again when they are already in
> > the
> > > >>>>> process of implementation.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> It's quite easy to predict that things will not get pretty if the
> > > >>>> Wikimedia
> > > >>>>> community does not approve some of the recommendations that pass
> > all
> > > >>> the
> > > >>>>> way till implementation phase.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Paulo
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia quinta,
> > > >>>>> 22/08/2019
> > > >>>>> à(s) 11:58:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Dear all,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Thank you for your engagement and input. It’s been great seeing
> so
> > > >>> much
> > > >>>>>> attention on movement strategy and collaborative efforts for
> > > >> build

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

" I hope the wider community will engage with and provide feedback to the
core group" - At the meta pages everybody can see the community is engaging
very actively, it's WG and core group engagement there which is very low or
null. And we are already only some 3 weeks before the window for community
engagement closes. How can this look good and inspiring?

I also don't understand why people keep saying that "many of the
recommendations are fine" - Those obviously are not the problem. The
problem is that we, as the wider community, are now seeing the final draft
for some quite egregiously controversial recommendations, and there is not
any indication that they will be removed or adapted in a consensus with the
community. Some crucial WGs such as Roles & Responsibilities seem to have
reduced the output to 3 complex theoretical models that we are supposed to
evaluate in some few days. This can't be right.

Paulo

James Heilman  escreveu no dia sábado, 24/08/2019 à(s)
09:51:

> @ Benjamin I have never said that I would "consider overriding the
> community in such a massive way". What I have said is that I hope the wider
> community will engage with and provide feedback to the core group who is
> working on developing the strategy. Much of the draft is really good, some
> requires more discussion and some adjustments.
>
> James
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 11:12 PM Benjamin Ikuta 
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > It is disturbing that you would even consider overriding the community in
> > such a massive way.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 23, 2019, at 9:44 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
> >
> > > The board will be discussing this of course. We do not have a group
> > > position at this point in time.
> > >
> > > J
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:47 PM Jeff Hawke 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> James
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for that.  As a member of the Board, would you clarify the
> > Board's
> > >> position on whether it is prepared to see the final Recommendations
> > >> implemented irrespective of any disagreement from the community?
> > >>
> > >> Jeff
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:05 PM James Heilman 
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I for one do not agree with Jan-Bart's prior position.
> > >>>
> > >>> James
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 4:40 AM Jeff Hawke 
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Paulo,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> You suggest that "things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia
> > community
> > >>>> does not approve some of the recommendations".  You may recall that
> > >> just
> > >>>> five years ago, Jan-Bart de Vreede, then chair of the WMF Board,
> > >>> expressed
> > >>>> the opinion
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)=prev=9585319
> > >>>> over
> > >>>> a much less dramatic change.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> All of this is going to require change, change that might not be
> > >>>> acceptable to some of you. I hope that all of you will be a part of
> > >> this
> > >>>> next step in our evolution. But I understand that if you decide to
> > >> take a
> > >>>> wiki-break, that might be the way things have to be. Even so, you
> have
> > >> to
> > >>>> let the Foundation do its work and allow us all to take that next
> step
> > >>> when
> > >>>> needed. I can only hope that your break is temporary, and that you
> > will
> > >>>> return when the time is right.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I presume this is a good summary of the WMF position today.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Jeff
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:06 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > >>>> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the Wikimedia
> > >>>>> community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the WGs
> > >>> 8and
> > >>>>> their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around
> > >>>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello James,

If we can do that together, it is not evident from the timeline sent by
Nicole. How can we " collaborate with each other", "the wider community
engage with the proposals that have been made", and we together "develop a
final document that the majority of us in all parts of the movement can
support" if after 15 September or so we will be excluded from the entire
process that will led to the final recommendations?

All we can do is to comment on this very preliminary draft, kind of
shouting in the dark in the hopes that someone would hear, with very little
dialogue with the people that will be defining them, if at all.

Paulo

James Heilman  escreveu no dia sexta, 23/08/2019 à(s)
12:09:

> To clarify on this, yes we need to make changes as a movement, but we need
> to do so in collaboration with each other. My hope is that the wider
> community will engage with the proposals that have been made. And that we
> can develop a final document that the majority of us in all parts of the
> movement can support.
>
> James
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 5:04 AM James Heilman  wrote:
>
> > I for one do not agree with Jan-Bart's prior position.
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 4:40 AM Jeff Hawke 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Paulo,
> >>
> >> You suggest that "things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia community
> >> does not approve some of the recommendations".  You may recall that just
> >> five years ago, Jan-Bart de Vreede, then chair of the WMF Board,
> expressed
> >> the opinion
> >>
> >>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)=prev=9585319
> >> over
> >> a much less dramatic change.
> >>
> >> > All of this is going to require change, change that might not be
> >> acceptable to some of you. I hope that all of you will be a part of this
> >> next step in our evolution. But I understand that if you decide to take
> a
> >> wiki-break, that might be the way things have to be. Even so, you have
> to
> >> let the Foundation do its work and allow us all to take that next step
> >> when
> >> needed. I can only hope that your break is temporary, and that you will
> >> return when the time is right.
> >>
> >> I presume this is a good summary of the WMF position today.
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:06 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> >> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the Wikimedia
> >> > community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the WGs
> 8and
> >> > their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around
> December.
> >> > Therefore, after 15 September or so, the Wikimedia community will only
> >> be
> >> > dealing with those recommendations again when they are already in the
> >> > process of implementation.
> >> >
> >> > It's quite easy to predict that things will not get pretty if the
> >> Wikimedia
> >> > community does not approve some of the recommendations that pass all
> the
> >> > way till implementation phase.
> >> >
> >> > Paulo
> >> >
> >> > Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia quinta,
> >> > 22/08/2019
> >> > à(s) 11:58:
> >> >
> >> > > Dear all,
> >> > >
> >> > > Thank you for your engagement and input. It’s been great seeing so
> >> much
> >> > > attention on movement strategy and collaborative efforts for
> building
> >> our
> >> > > future. Here are a couple of follow up responses and clarifications.
> >> > >
> >> > > DRAFTS
> >> > > As pointed out in my previous email, the documents we recently
> shared
> >> are
> >> > > recommendation drafts. They are not final, and not complete, but
> >> working
> >> > > documents that are currently being refined by the working groups.
> Some
> >> > > answers still read like stubs that are longing for further
> >> development,
> >> > > others are very detailed and will become more focused over the next
> >> few
> >> > > weeks. We still decided to publish everything at once, to give
> >> everyone a
> >> > > full picture of the variety of topics and offer an insight into
> >> multiple
> >> > > progress levels.
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Except that this time they don't "hope that all of you will be a part of
this next step in our evolution", since Wikimedia community input ceases
around 15 September in what has been constantly defined as a very
preliminary draft, with very low to null engagement from the WGs, and next
time we'll see that, it will be already the finished product under
deployment.

Not good.

Paulo

Jeff Hawke  escreveu no dia sexta, 23/08/2019 à(s)
11:40:

> Paulo,
>
> You suggest that "things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia community
> does not approve some of the recommendations".  You may recall that just
> five years ago, Jan-Bart de Vreede, then chair of the WMF Board, expressed
> the opinion
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)=prev=9585319
> over
> a much less dramatic change.
>
> > All of this is going to require change, change that might not be
> acceptable to some of you. I hope that all of you will be a part of this
> next step in our evolution. But I understand that if you decide to take a
> wiki-break, that might be the way things have to be. Even so, you have to
> let the Foundation do its work and allow us all to take that next step when
> needed. I can only hope that your break is temporary, and that you will
> return when the time is right.
>
> I presume this is a good summary of the WMF position today.
>
> Jeff
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:06 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the Wikimedia
> > community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the WGs 8and
> > their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around December.
> > Therefore, after 15 September or so, the Wikimedia community will only be
> > dealing with those recommendations again when they are already in the
> > process of implementation.
> >
> > It's quite easy to predict that things will not get pretty if the
> Wikimedia
> > community does not approve some of the recommendations that pass all the
> > way till implementation phase.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia quinta,
> > 22/08/2019
> > à(s) 11:58:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > Thank you for your engagement and input. It’s been great seeing so much
> > > attention on movement strategy and collaborative efforts for building
> our
> > > future. Here are a couple of follow up responses and clarifications.
> > >
> > > DRAFTS
> > > As pointed out in my previous email, the documents we recently shared
> are
> > > recommendation drafts. They are not final, and not complete, but
> working
> > > documents that are currently being refined by the working groups. Some
> > > answers still read like stubs that are longing for further development,
> > > others are very detailed and will become more focused over the next few
> > > weeks. We still decided to publish everything at once, to give
> everyone a
> > > full picture of the variety of topics and offer an insight into
> multiple
> > > progress levels.
> > >
> > > I would also like to reiterate that movement values, priorities and
> > > community conversation processes are high on our radar. A
> recommendation
> > to
> > > change the existing license model, for example, will not just go
> through
> > a
> > > quick approval process, but lead to a deeper exploration into the
> > reasoning
> > > behind it: What problems are we trying to tackle, and what could be
> ways
> > to
> > > mitigate them? Such recommendation would then rather suggest to look
> into
> > > different measures to ensure indigenous knowledge is included in the
> > > Wikimedia ecosystem, deploy research and further consultation, instead
> of
> > > rushing to a quick fix.
> > >
> > > INTEGRATION
> > > The working groups are taking input that they gathered at Wikimania and
> > via
> > > different movement channels and incorporating it into the next
> iteration
> > of
> > > their recommendations. These documents will then serve as a basis for
> > > harmonization across working groups.
> > >
> > > The input that we are gathering comes in on different levels. Some of
> it
> > > targets structural level changes or emphasizes specific principles or
> > > values, while other feedback is more on the programmatic side or
> already
> > > addressing implementation. Structural input will continue to be
> > considered

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the Wikimedia
community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the WGs 8and
their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around December.
Therefore, after 15 September or so, the Wikimedia community will only be
dealing with those recommendations again when they are already in the
process of implementation.

It's quite easy to predict that things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia
community does not approve some of the recommendations that pass all the
way till implementation phase.

Paulo

Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia quinta, 22/08/2019
à(s) 11:58:

> Dear all,
>
> Thank you for your engagement and input. It’s been great seeing so much
> attention on movement strategy and collaborative efforts for building our
> future. Here are a couple of follow up responses and clarifications.
>
> DRAFTS
> As pointed out in my previous email, the documents we recently shared are
> recommendation drafts. They are not final, and not complete, but working
> documents that are currently being refined by the working groups. Some
> answers still read like stubs that are longing for further development,
> others are very detailed and will become more focused over the next few
> weeks. We still decided to publish everything at once, to give everyone a
> full picture of the variety of topics and offer an insight into multiple
> progress levels.
>
> I would also like to reiterate that movement values, priorities and
> community conversation processes are high on our radar. A recommendation to
> change the existing license model, for example, will not just go through a
> quick approval process, but lead to a deeper exploration into the reasoning
> behind it: What problems are we trying to tackle, and what could be ways to
> mitigate them? Such recommendation would then rather suggest to look into
> different measures to ensure indigenous knowledge is included in the
> Wikimedia ecosystem, deploy research and further consultation, instead of
> rushing to a quick fix.
>
> INTEGRATION
> The working groups are taking input that they gathered at Wikimania and via
> different movement channels and incorporating it into the next iteration of
> their recommendations. These documents will then serve as a basis for
> harmonization across working groups.
>
> The input that we are gathering comes in on different levels. Some of it
> targets structural level changes or emphasizes specific principles or
> values, while other feedback is more on the programmatic side or already
> addressing implementation. Structural input will continue to be  considered
> in forthcoming iterations of the recommendations. Programmatic input will
> be documented and taken forward to inform the implementation.
>
> TIMELINE
> We wanted to get the English drafts out as soon as possible and the
> translations on a rolling basis, so that Wikimania participants could read
> and prepare to engage in person. Over the next few weeks, we will do
> targeted, public outreach to online project communities in multiple
> languages. We are soliciting feedback to shape the overall direction of the
> recommendations through mid-September. Working Groups are already working
> on identifying gaps and overlaps with other groups to prepare for
> harmonization.
>
> At the harmonization sprint in Tunis on 20-22 September, we will bring 3
> representatives from each Working Group together to work to develop a more
> coherent set of recommendations. The group will be supported by
> facilitators and external advice, as well as the core team. We have also
> invited María Sefidari, Katherine Maher, Ryan Merkley, Valerie D’Costa
> (Wikimedia Foundation) and Abraham Taherivand (Wikimedia Deutschland) to
> the sprint. They contribute expertise and experience from their work and
> leadership in the movement and beyond. They will be active listeners and
> can challenge recommendations by pointing out risks and consequences on the
> organizational and movement level. They also participate as the
> representatives of organizations that may be impacted by the
> recommendations. Involving them early is important so they can anticipate
> any possible changes for their staff and programs, and plan for
> implementation.
>
> Our aim is to release recommendations in November 2019, and present them to
> the Board of Trustees for approval in December. We will need the legal
> authority of the board for some of the recommendations, while others will
> then be further delegated to other community mechanisms and structures for
> approval or further consultation.[1] There will be additional public
> consultation activities around implementation that will be discussed and
> owned across the movement.
>
> WORKING GROUPS
> We have chosen the working group model to ensure that the process that
> embarks to make significant changes to our movement structures is owned by
> the community. Members of the nine working group were selected by 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcoming Ryan Merkley to the Wikimedia Foundation

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Glad to have someone from CC onboard, welcome Ryan!

Paulo

Katherine Maher  escreveu no dia terça, 13/08/2019
à(s) 23:02:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I’m excited to let you all know that Ryan Merkley, formerly CEO of
> Creative Commons, is joining the Wikimedia Foundation as my new chief of
> staff.
>
> Many of you have met Ryan before -- at CC Summit, Wikimania, Wikimedia
> Summit, or MozFest. He’s a leader in open source, open knowledge, and
> free-culture communities, and for the past five years, he’s been the CEO of
> Creative Commons, initiating programs like CC search to index all 1.6
> billion licensed works online. He’s passionate about the power of the
> commons, and the role that everyone can play in making it sustainable and
> open to all. I couldn’t be happier he’s now bringing this passion and
> experience to our movement.
>
> In Ryan’s own words, “My heart has always been in open communities, and
>  the power of collective acts --  that is, the things that people can only
> do when they work together, like building a commons of free knowledge for
> every person.”
>
> For now, Ryan’s two top priorities will be bolstering the work of the
> movement strategy team and supporting the Board. He’ll support the strategy
> core team to move the Working Group recommendations into implementation
> within the community and Foundation over the course of the coming year.
> He’ll also serve as Board liaison to the Board of Trustees, strengthening
> the connections, communications, and coordination between Trustees and the
> Foundation. Internally, he’ll support the office of the Executive Director,
> acting in my stead on various projects.
>
> I’m excited by this new role for an old friend of the open community. Ryan
> knows our movement well. He has spent many hours with many Wikimedians, and
> understands the centrality of the community to the Wikimedia mission and
> identity. His background as a partner to Wikimedia, and a leader in the
> broader open movement will be invaluable to our work, and confirmation of
> the importance of community experience in Foundation leadership.
>
> Ryan doesn’t start in his new role until Monday, September 16th. However,
> he will be at Wikimania, so for those of you attending, please say hi, and
> join me in welcoming him to Wikimedia!
>
> Katherine
>
> P.S. This announcement can also be found on our news page:
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2019/08/13/wikimedia-foundation-welcomes-ryan-merkley-as-chief-of-staff-to-the-office-of-the-executive-director
>
> --
>
> Katherine Maher (she/her)
>
> Executive Director
>
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
> ___
> Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately
> directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
> community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ___
> WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
> wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello Leila,

Just two quick notes on what you've said:
*" We should get comfortable thinking about these trade-offs as we think
about how to bring more diverse people and content to the project" - I face
this argument constantly in my life as an active Wikimedian. University
teachers tell we can have all papers from their university on Commons,
Wikisource, if we allow NC-ND. VIPs tell me they will give a number of
exclusive materials, given that they are blocked from commercial use.
Professional photographers, same story. To all of them I explain this is a
question of a basic principle of the project, the principle of Free
Knowledge, and that this is the essence, this is at the core of Wikimedia
projects, and can't be negotiated. This is how I've been understanding our
communities general thinking and ideals for the many years I've been
around, so changing that to accommodate more diversity really seems
something absolutely alien to our mission as Wikimedians, independently of
the merits of the content that could be incorporated in the projects that
way.
*In order to protect local folklore from "undue exploitation", Mozambique
government has decided that all manifestations of folklore in the country
are protected by copyright, and that they own that copyright. Result: we
end up with an huge cultural gap in Mozambique at the Wikimedia projects.
Not only in Mozambique, but in a number of other countries that apply
similar legal restrictions to this kind of cultural materials.

The solution for both cases has been, for well more than a decade, to
include that content as necessary under special provisions in some of our
projects - SEE EDP at
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy -
depending on approval of the project local community. So the solution for
that problem already exists for long, and this is not only reinventing the
wheel, but doing so at the expense of our most dear core principles and
mission.

Best,
Paulo


Leila Zia  escreveu no dia quinta, 15/08/2019 à(s)
05:42:

> Hi Paulo,
>
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 6:38 PM Paulo Santos Perneta
>  wrote:
> >
> > If they don't have legal resources, then it is pointless to use NC ND for
> > the content, as they will not be suing anyone that ignores the license
> and
> > commercializes it anyway.
>
> In practice, this can happen. Two points to keep in mind:
>
> * Building trust and relationships with new communities may require
> taking steps that we may not have been taking so far. People operate
> in different contexts and they have varying experiences, and we may
> sometimes have to change the way we do things to include them and
> their knowledge. We should get comfortable thinking about these
> trade-offs as we think about how to bring more diverse people and
> content to the project. (I'm not arguing that we should do what this
> proposal says at this point. We should discuss it though in the talk
> page.)
>
> * Having some legal pathway can be attractive to some folks, /even if/
> they don't exercise it. This is an assurance that they can have some
> control over their culture and the narratives around it and I can see
> how this can be important for some marginalized communities. This
> middle step may be needed. Also, if the legal pathway is there, they
> can always some day decide to pursue it.
>
> > If such knowledge can't be freely shared, then it has no place in
> Commons,
> > in my opinion. If that makes it less visible, then that is the problem of
> > the communities that don't share it freely. One cannot have both things
> at
> > the same time.
>
> Two points again: ;)
>
> * Re Commons or not is something we should discuss in the talk pages.
> Peter had some really good points early on on this thread about the 3
> different options available.
>
> * This won't be only their problem. It will be our shared problem. If
> Commons ends up not being the solution, we shouldn't stop there. We
> should think through what else we can do to make bringing of their
> knowledge to Wikimedia projects happen. While I don't know what the
> answers are, I know that we should try more. From a narrow research
> perspective: this is immensely important for addressing Wikimedia's
> knowledge gaps for the sake of our own immediate users but also for
> the sake of indirect users of Wikimedia content. Wikimedia is imo one
> of the cornerstones of the Web. The content we collectively bring to
> Wikimedia projects is no longer /just/ used directly on Wikipedia
> (even that alone is enough argument to attempt to find solutions for
> the kind of gaps we're talking about). It's being used by a variety of
> technologies to build algorithms and machines that have impact on
> people's l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please reconsider!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I subscribe Ziko's request to redefine the timeline of Strategy 2030, for
the stated reasons. Not only it looks absurd, looking at the quality of the
published materials, which are obviously not fit for a final discussion on
this mater, but also because there's no rush to present results already in
October.
Rushing to present a final set of recommendations, without proper
discussion, risks producing a faulty and immature document, facing a
barrage of resistence from the part of the community when trying to
implement the recommendations, and basically destroy more than 1 year of
hard work from everyone involved (core team, WGs, liasion, and the part of
the community who involved itself on the process).

I endorse the request to the Strategy 2030 Core Team: Please review your
schedule, and adjust your timetable, so to allow some reasonable time for
that draft to be discussed and properly finished.

Best,
Paulo

Ziko van Dijk  escreveu no dia quarta, 14/08/2019 à(s)
14:48:

> Hello,
>
> Recently, the "draft recommendations" of the strategy working groups have
> been published. As Nicole informed us, they are "key tools" for the future
> of the movement. These documents are the result of one year of work of the
> working groups.
>
> If I am not mistaken, the Wikimedia volunteers now have one month to give
> feedback. In October, the process of refining and finalizing has to be
> ready, and in November, the movement will have to start with implementing
> the recommendations.
>
> Having seen now more of the documents, my conclusion can only be one: the
> documents are simply not ready for this stage of the process. They are much
> more unready than they should be for being put to the eyes of the Wikimeda
> volunteers.
>
> There are documents in which there is only one question answered, by one
> sentence. Other documents don't show that any research has been used to
> back the statements. Many obvious arguments and links are missing. At least
> at one occasion I read as an answer to an important question: "todo".
>
> The proposals often give the impression that they are not thought through.
> There should be quotas for admins, but we see nowhere an explanation how
> that would relate to the right to remain anonymous. There is the statement
> that minorities sometimes can only express themselves with ND and NC
> content, but the two links in the document hardly back that claim. After
> years in which the Wikimedia organizations and other free and open content
> organizations taught us that NC is problematic, now such a drastic change?
>
> And there is this already infamous sentence: Instead of being informed
> about the possible negative impacts of NC and ND, we only read: "All change
> has negative connotations to some members of the community."
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9
>
> I find it stunning that there was nobody who went through the documents
> before publication and said: we cannot publish this sentence, it is giving
> a very bad impression about our attitude towards the community (= the very
> same people we are asking to invest their time for giving feedback).
>
> This does not mean that all documents or all sections and recommendations
> are unusable or damaging. I also cannot judge about the efforts invested,
> as I have no insight in the inner workings. But it is very frustrating for
> me to read the documents and often have to guess what they actually mean.
> And it seems to me, given the comments on the user pages on Meta Wiki, on
> this list, on de:WP:Kurier and on Facebook, that I am not the only one who
> feels this frustration.
>
> Therefore, I ask the people responsible: please reconsider the timeline. If
> these documents are the result of one year work, then the documents will
> not be ready within two and a half months. Consider several months for the
> working groups to use the present feedback for a redraft, and then give the
> Wikimedia volunteers at least the same amount of time for giving feedback
> again.
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
> ___
> 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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

If they don't have legal resources, then it is pointless to use NC ND for
the content, as they will not be suing anyone that ignores the license and
commercializes it anyway.

If such knowledge can't be freely shared, then it has no place in Commons,
in my opinion. If that makes it less visible, then that is the problem of
the communities that don't share it freely. One cannot have both things at
the same time. If it is notable, we may try to accommodate it in some
projects that allow that kind of content under an exception policy.

In any case, I don't believe it is in Wikimedia scope to worry about the
possible misuses people can do of the content we provide, and much less to
subvert our license policy in order to avoid stuff we should not be worried
with in first place.

Best,
Paulo


A quarta, 14 de ago de 2019, 23:27, Lucas Werkmeister <
m...@lucaswerkmeister.de> escreveu:

> I doubt that the communities in question are likely to have the same
> legal resources available to them as The Coca-Cola Company, so I must
> admit I don’t find this argument entirely convincing. Asking them to
> share their content, but then leaving them alone in the face of any
> problems arising from it, sounds more like reinforcing the status quo
> than promoting knowledge equity to me. And note that the law may not be
> written in their favor in the first place, so suggesting them to “secure
> their concerns in a legal way” may require a lengthy legislative process
> first, with uncertain outcome.
>
> (I must admit that I haven’t yet read the articles linked in the draft,
> so this email is phrased rather vaguely. I hope it still makes sense.)
>
> Cheers,
> Lucas
>
> On 14.08.19 23:51, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> > All this stuff about misappropriation and unwanted commercial use of
> > certain content which is being used to justify the inclusion of NC/ND CC
> > licenses in Commons and other Wikimedia projects, really isn't Wikimedia
> > concern. If some communities object to certain types of use on content
> > produced by them, they should secure them in the law, same way as
> personal
> > image rights, trademarks, etc. No one at Commons cares if the Coca-Cola
> > logo we host there, which is both PD-old and PD-textlogo, is misused by
> 3rd
> > parties to sell some other cola beverage as if it was the original one.
> > That's Coca Cola concern, not ours, and they are absolutely free to sue
> the
> > infractor. If those communities object to certain uses, first they secure
> > their concerns in a legal way, then act upon it. As it is now, anyone who
> > get access to that content in a legal way and wants to share it, can do
> it
> > freely at Commons, and nobody at Commons is going to delete it just
> because
> > some other people, which have not any legal right over that content,
> claim
> > that using it commercially is against their beliefs or traditions.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > geni  escreveu no dia quarta, 14/08/2019 à(s) 22:22:
> >
> >> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 21:34, Aron Manning 
> wrote:
> >> .
> >>> The draft already refers to 2 articles (1
> >>> <https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/20/us/slave-photographs-harvard.html
> >,2
> >>> <
> >>
> https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c0043945-852b-4d7e-94ad-1859f91ba418
> >>> )
> >>> that explain the need for ND. I'll ask for further sources that show
> the
> >>> benefits of NC and ND licensed materials.
> >>>
> >>> Aron
> >>
> >> 1 refers to images that are public domain in terms of copyright and
> >> the latter is mostly talking about trademark or stuff so broad that
> >> you couldn't usefuly copyright it in the first place. ND isn't a
> >> useful protection in these cases (it might be of some use for current
> >> individual artists but they can publish their work elsewhere).
> >>
> >> ___
> >> 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://l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

All this stuff about misappropriation and unwanted commercial use of
certain content which is being used to justify the inclusion of NC/ND CC
licenses in Commons and other Wikimedia projects, really isn't Wikimedia
concern. If some communities object to certain types of use on content
produced by them, they should secure them in the law, same way as personal
image rights, trademarks, etc. No one at Commons cares if the Coca-Cola
logo we host there, which is both PD-old and PD-textlogo, is misused by 3rd
parties to sell some other cola beverage as if it was the original one.
That's Coca Cola concern, not ours, and they are absolutely free to sue the
infractor. If those communities object to certain uses, first they secure
their concerns in a legal way, then act upon it. As it is now, anyone who
get access to that content in a legal way and wants to share it, can do it
freely at Commons, and nobody at Commons is going to delete it just because
some other people, which have not any legal right over that content, claim
that using it commercially is against their beliefs or traditions.

Paulo

geni  escreveu no dia quarta, 14/08/2019 à(s) 22:22:

> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 21:34, Aron Manning  wrote:
> .
> > The draft already refers to 2 articles (1
> > ,2
> > <
> https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c0043945-852b-4d7e-94ad-1859f91ba418
> >)
> > that explain the need for ND. I'll ask for further sources that show the
> > benefits of NC and ND licensed materials.
> >
> > Aron
>
> 1 refers to images that are public domain in terms of copyright and
> the latter is mostly talking about trademark or stuff so broad that
> you couldn't usefuly copyright it in the first place. ND isn't a
> useful protection in these cases (it might be of some use for current
> individual artists but they can publish their work elsewhere).
>
> ___
> 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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

" I don't want people to feel that their ideas are being casually
dismissed" - Don't worry, it is not "their ideas. As Nicole Ebber
explained, those recommendations resulted from a lot of different inputs,
and none of them is supposed to be the brainchild of anyone inside the WGs.
If they are nonsense, don't be afraid to go there and tell/write what you
think.

Paulo

Pine W  escreveu no dia terça, 13/08/2019 à(s) 22:09:

> I have what seems to be a minority opinion so far. I think that hosting NC
> and ND media is worth considering. If the Commons community does not want
> media with those licenses to be on Commons then I think that Peter's
> suggestion is good.
>
> A tricky issue may be whether to allow NC and NC media on Wikipedias, where
> the media could get a lot of visibility but also cause additional licensing
> complexity beyond what we already have with the English Wikipedia fair use
> exception. This issue would need some deliberation, but any outcome
> wouldn't be a blocker to a new repository for hosting NC and ND media.
>
> I have some bigger concerns with a few of the other strategy proposals and
> I am thinking about how to engage with the people who made those proposals.
> I don't want people to feel that their ideas are being casually dismissed,
> nor do I want to have hostility between the WGs and the wider community. I
> would prefer to have constructive discussions, but I don't know how best to
> do that at this point. I think that waiting a week or two for tempers to
> cool might be good before engaging.
>
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

" To distribute many of the function now at WMF in SF to different
locations in the world (whereof 50% in Global south)" - Distributing work
now being paid with US wages to US staff at SF to people at the Global
South paying "Global South wages" sounds a lot like moving the factories
from San Francisco to Dhaka because wages are much lower there, while
parading it as moving towards "diversity" and "inclusion".

Paulo

Anders Wennersten  escreveu no dia segunda,
12/08/2019 à(s) 18:31:

> I want to express my appreciation for the work being done and the result.
>
> I am not able to get to grips with all parts of the recommendation but
> as I understand there are two key messages:
>
> *To distribute  many of the function now at WMF in SF to different
> locations in the world (whereof 50% in Global south). I find this is
> most appropriate, both to lessen the feeling of We-them, but also to get
> more salaried people spread over the World. It is also a natural
> development as out organisation mature over time
>
> *To really go, without any compromise for the discussion in the movement
> in our communities must be held in a civil tone and in a friendly
> atmosphere  where respect for everyone is a key. I believe also this is
> long overdue and necessary when we now are over 15 years of age.
>
> I love these two issues and hope it will be implemented in full.
>
>   Anders
>
>
>
> Den 2019-08-12 kl. 17:51, skrev Nicole Ebber:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > We would like to offer further clarification that the recommendations for
> > Wikimedia 2030 [1] that were shared earlier with you are indeed drafts.
> > They represent discussions around a wide array of topics that the nine
> > thematic working groups, affiliates and communities had identified
> > important for our movement’s future. They are the product of
> conversations
> > over many months with a variety of stakeholders, and the working groups
> are
> > eager to hear from you. The draft recommendations are neither final nor
> > complete, but a continuation of an ongoing conversation happening across
> > wikis, platforms, surveys, meetings, and meet-ups. As such, constructive
> > feedback and solution-oriented suggestions are welcomed. The draft
> > recommendations are based on contexts that deserve due review and
> > reflection, and are the result of the efforts of many, rather than single
> > individuals.
> >
> > Many of the draft recommendations underline structural changes needed for
> > the growth and expansion of a movement like ours. Many are representative
> > of wider societal, historical and global dynamics around us. Please take
> > the time to review the draft recommendations in their entirety, pose
> > questions, hear from others, and in the spirit of collegial
> collaboration,
> > offer suggestions that you think can address the issues at hand. This is
> a
> > process for all of us to shape our shared future, together; let’s keep
> > engaging and challenging one another in this same spirit.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Nicole
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> >
> > On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 15:49, Todd Allen  wrote:
> >
> >> "And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> >> incorporate
> >> indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> >> licensing scheme?"
> >>
> >> We can't and no one can.
> >>
> >> Knowledge, ideas, and concepts cannot be copyrighted to begin with. Now,
> >> specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the underlying
> >> facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on
> >> Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse
> >> without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work
> under
> >> an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place
> for
> >> it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But even
> >> then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter
> what
> >> one does.
> >>
> >> Todd
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky <
> philip.kopet...@gmail.com
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
> >> You're
> >>> the only one telling people to shut up here.
> >>>
> >>> And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> >> incorporate
> >>> indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> >>> licensing scheme?
> >>> ___
> >>> 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] [Affiliates] Introducing our newest thematic organisation, Wikimedia Medicine

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Those are really great news to the "health" of our movement,
congratulations and thanks to all those who helped making this a reality! :D

Paulo

Shani Evenstein  escreveu no dia quarta, 31/07/2019
à(s) 18:05:

> Thank you, Kirill, and all who have been involved in making this a
> reality!
>
> It's an exciting moment in our growth as an organization and we are
> thrilled to be recognized as a Thematic Organization.
> As Kirill mentioned, we do hope that this will lead the way for the
> scaling of other cross-movement thematic efforts.
>
> We look forward to continuing working with affiliates in the movement and
> especially expanding our collaborations with affiliates we haven't had the
> chance to work closely with, as we scale our efforts worldwide. If you are
> interested in working with us, please feel free to contact us at:
> wikiproject...@gmail.com
>
> We look forward to meeting some of you in the Health Space at Wikimania
> , where you'll be able
> to find out more about what we've been doing and how you can join forces
> with us.
>
> Best,
>
> Shani Evenstein
> Chairperson, Wikimedia Medicine.
>
>
>
> ---
> *Shani Evenstein Sigalov*
> * Lecturer, Tel Aviv University.
> * EdTech Innovation Strategist, NY/American Medical Program, Sackler
> School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University.
> * PhD Candidate, School of Education, Tel Aviv University.
> * OER & Emerging Technologies Coordinator, UNESCO Chair
>  on Technology,
> Internationalization and Education, School of Education, Tel Aviv
> University .
> * Chairperson, Wikimedia Medicine
> .
> * Chairperson, Wikipedia & Education User Group
> .
> * Chairperson, The Hebrew Literature Digitization Society
> .
> * Chief Editor, Project Ben-Yehuda .
> +972-525640648
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 6:58 PM Rajeeb Dutta  wrote:
>
>> Great news and many many congratulations to Wikimedia Medicine and all
>> the people involved in making this happen.
>> Thanks Kirill for the update.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Rajeeb Dutta.
>> (U: Marajozkee)
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On 31-Jul-2019, at 9:16 PM, camelia boban 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Many congratulations to Wikimedia Medicine, so happy for this
>> > recognition.
>> >
>> > Camelia, WikiDonne User Group
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > *Camelia Boban*
>> >
>> > *| Java EE Developer |*
>> >
>> > *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation
>> > Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
>> > Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne Project ideator*
>> >
>> > *Diversity Space @ Wikimania 2019 Co-Lead*
>> > WMIT - WMSE - WMCH - WMAR Member
>> >
>> > M. +39 3383385545
>> > camelia.bo...@gmail.com
>> > *Aissa Technologies* * | *Twitter
>> >  *|* *LinkedIn
>> > *
>> > *Wikipedia  **|
>> **WikiDonne
>> > UG * | *WikiDonne Project
>> >  *
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Il giorno mer 31 lug 2019 alle ore 17:25 Kirill Lokshin <
>> > kirill.loks...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>> >
>> >> Hi everyone!
>> >>
>> >> I'm very happy to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of
>> Trustees
>> >> has approved the recognition of Wikimedia Medicine [1] as a Wikimedia
>> >> thematic organisation.
>> >>
>> >> Over the past several years, Wikimedia Medicine has successfully
>> planned
>> >> and executed a significant program portfolio, attracting new
>> contributors
>> >> and forming partnerships with both movement affiliates and external
>> >> institutional partners around the world.  Wikimedia Medicine is an
>> >> ambitious, innovative, and highly effective organization that has
>> >> demonstrated a substantial record of independent programmatic impact
>> and
>> >> continues to foster innovation and collaboration with numerous other
>> >> entities across the Wikimedia movement.
>> >>
>> >> Wikimedia Medicine's efforts to deliver critical medical information to
>> >> underserved and underrepresented communities reflect the principles of
>> >> infrastructure and inclusiveness espoused in the Wikimedia movement
>> >> strategic direction, and represent a key potential area of growth for
>> >> emerging movement communities.  The recognition of Wikimedia Medicine
>> as a
>> >> Wikimedia thematic organisation reinforces the our movement’s shared
>> >> commitment to this direction, and will support Wikimedia Medicine's
>> future
>> >> partnerships with high-profile government 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikipedians of Goa User Group

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Splendid news, congratulations Wikipedians of Goa!! :D

Frederick: It was really great and a privilege meeting you at CC Global
Summit. We at WMPT are very much looking forward to partner with you in
Wikimedia projects, specially those related to lusophony!

Best,

Paulo




Kirill Lokshin  escreveu no dia quarta,
31/07/2019 à(s) 16:41:

> Hi everyone!
>
> I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> [1] the Wikipedians of Goa User Group [2] as a Wikimedia User Group. The
> group aims to build content related to Goa in all possible languages, to
> conduct Wikipedia-related training in Goa, and to help build and sustain
> the Konkani Wikipedia.
>
> Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>
> Regards,
> Kirill Lokshin
> Chair, Affiliations Committee
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Wikipedians_of_Goa_User_Group
>
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedians_of_Goa_User_Group
> ___
> Affiliates mailing list
> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>
___
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] An updated design for the Wikimedia Foundation website

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hey Greg,

Looks way nicer than the previous version. The thing always moving may be a
little bit annoying after some time, maybe it could have a stop button, and
it would be nice if we could slide it on our will. But the drawing is very
cool.

+1 to change the bright canary yellow box to a more discrete colour (like a
pale yellow, maybe).

Best,
Paulo



Gregory Varnum  escreveu no dia quarta, 10/07/2019
à(s) 02:32:

> Hello!
>
> Today, we are  thrilled to share an updated visual design style on the
> Wikimedia Foundation website (wikimediafoundation.org)!
>
> This updated design was developed by the Wikimedia Foundation’s Product
> design team. We worked on feedback from Meta-Wiki, emails, Phabricator, and
> hundreds of conversations paired with user testing with people in the
> target audiences for the website. We are incredibly appreciative of the
> great care that team has taken in making strategic, data-led design
> decisions and really helping us amplify the website's ability to convey our
> story to people generally unfamiliar with Wikimedia.
>
> We have also expanded on the information about the website on its Meta-Wiki
> page,[1] and updated the public mirror of the code base to reflect the
> technical changes made to the site for this updated design.[2]
>
> Thank you to the now hundreds of people that have been involved in helping
> us build a website for the Foundation which we can be proud of!
> -greg & the Wikimedia Foundation Communication team
>
> = A bit more about the site =
>
> == How is the site doing? ==
>
> Since the site's soft launch in July 2018, traffic has continued to
> increase. There has also been a significant increase in donations collected
> via this website. Two key audiences, potential staff and partners, have
> shared positive feedback on the site’s content and organization, enabling
> them to find jobs and contact key teams respectively. Additionally, user
> testing has shown a positive response to the content and overall
> architecture of the site.
>
> == What brought us here ==
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation Communications department has been collecting
> feedback on the Foundation's website since late 2016 and beginning in
> early 2017 has been working on addressing the backlog of issues related to
> the website. The original Foundation site, launched in 2004, did not have a
> clear audience, and as a result was not effectively serving any of the
> hundreds of uses people saw for it. Maintaining the site's content beyond
> English had become a growing problem - leaving visitors with different
> information, depending on which language they were using, on basic details
> like our address and executive staff. Additionally, the site had over
> 17,000 pages - a vast majority of which were either out of date or no
> longer in use.
>
> In 2017-18, the Communications department ran a "Discovery" process to help
> inform our decision making. This process included reviews of methods used
> by other organizations, assessment of our current communication channels,
> collecting feedback at Wikimania, and interviews with dozens of volunteers,
> donors, contractors, and staff. The resulting report[3] and recommendations
> helped identify the objectives and audiences of the website,[1] and were
> utilized throughout the initial design and development of the new website.
>
> Shortly after the soft launch, the department began working with the
> Product department's design team to perform user testing, process feedback
> collected in the weeks following the soft launch, and collect additional
> feedback to help us make informed decisions. They helped us collect and
> process feedback from hundreds of individuals within and outside of the
> movement.
>
> Based on feedback, they conducted user testing and developed the updated
> design we deployed this morning. We will continue to use a data and
> feedback informed decision making in managing the site. Given the external
> audience nature of the site, it has consistently proven important to take
> the time to collect feedback and data from a wide variety of sources -
> including volunteers, press, donors, partner organizations, and readers of
> the projects.
>
> == What comes next ==
>
> More languages! The Communications department will continue to work on
> content development and expanding translations to additional languages. If
> you are interested in our plans for translations, please check out the
> information shared recently about the Organization communications
> translators group.[5]
>
> == Providing feedback ==
>
> The Communications department will continue to monitor the talk page for
> the Foundation's website on Meta-Wiki.[6] Additionally, I will be attending
> Wikimania in Stockholm and available to chat with folks.[7]
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_website
> [2] https://github.com/wikimedia/wikimediafoundation-org
> [3]
>
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimediaindia-l] Fwd: Open Letter to Affiliations Committee : Wikimedia India's Demand For A Fair And Transparent Hearing

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello,

Reading about these developments in India has been absolutely painful, and
a sad reminiscent of a number of past situations.

Most of all, the case with Wikimedia Portugal, when AffCom started imposing
restrictions and "mediation plans" without having any kind of official
hearing with the chapter; the whole environment of secrecy and power/fear
games; the prerogative of making all kinds of unsubstantiated affirmations,
presented as if they were god's truth; the notice of suspension for the
chapter, based on information which remains to be substantiated till today;
the feeling of hopelessness.

Then the old, cold case of Brazil, where back in 2010, like in India, the
WMF decided to experiment with local WMF representations, with very tragic
consequences, heavily disturbing the progress of the local Wikimedia
community, and hindering its progress for about a decade; the reckless
approval by AffCom, and subsequent WMF support of clone/conflicting local
affiliates with the one (s) already existing in the region; and the way it
was unilaterally "solved" by AffCom, dismantling a community which was
hanging around Wikimedia since 2008.

And then the recent case which happened to myself where an old and
exclusively Wikipedia-related case was somehow morphed and cooked in secret
inside WMF, deceitfully presenting it as affiliate related, and secretly
judged, with false accusations and sanctions issued without even informing
the target of what was happening.

One thing common to all those situations is the environment of secrecy and
obscurity cultivated by AffCom, completely at odds with the values of the
Wikimedia Movement - starting with the way AffCom deceitfully defines and
presents itself - "a Wikimedia community-run committee" [1], when it is all
but run by the Wikimedia community. It's not even chosen by the community,
to start with, but by the committee itself. But the main question probably
is: Why is AffCom cultivating all this environment of secrecy and obscurity
in what should be straightforward and clear proceedings? What may be
secretive at all, in the quest of a group of Wikimedians to become an
affiliate? Why those processes do not occur in daylight from their start
till the end - with the obvious exception of sensitive information
involving privacy, such as real names? And then - who is AffCom accountable
to? Who oversees AffCom? The BoT? Are they monitoring AffCom? Does the BoT
agrees with this way of acting?

All this cult of secrecy by AffCom and other powers-that-be inside WMF
creates a very unhealthy and toxic environment for everyone. I personally
appreciate and hold in high esteem a number of members of AffCom, possibly
the majority of them. And it has been very much mind-boggling watching the
way AffCom choses to act as a whole. I've suggested to the Strategy WG of
Roles & Responsibilities that AffCom should be wholly redefined, to make it
more transparent, community-connected and accountable. The way it is now, I
don't believe it is properly filling and complying with its role.

I really hope things improve, and our Wikimedian brothers at WMIN - who I
believe have made the right decision of bringing their case into the
clarity of daylight - will manage to revert the suspension and continue
working for a world of free knowledge accessible to everyone, despite the
difficulties they are passing through at this moment.

And it would be much more motivating for everyone if we could get out of
this kind of Age of Darkness at AffCom (and WMF in general).

[1] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee

Best,
Paulo


Abhinav srivastava  escreveu no dia terça, 9/07/2019
à(s) 08:10:

> Hi Lodewijk,
>
> I will try and simplify
>
> (a) *What is the exact and complete set of reasons that Affcom put the
> chapter on suspension?*
> This has been listed under six bullet points in my initial mail. I
> encourage you and everyone reading here to have a look at them. I have
> further shared a synopsis for the same again in part (c) along with WMIN
> responses.
>
> (b)* what additional complaints are part of the big picture ?*
> The trouble of having a Staff-based organisation (CIS-A2K) at national
> level where there is lesser transparency such that there MoU is not in
> public domain [1] and the trouble caused to India Chapter like attribution
> grabbing for WMIN's self-financed projects etc. [2]
>
> (c) w*hat is the response from WMIN.*
>  Our primary concern remains that Affcom on a good-faith could have asked
> for a clarification and if found they could have proceeded with the
> suspension. They took an official position without even hearing us once.
> There basis has been further described again in brief
>
> * Legal Structure : Affcom asked WMIN to resolve their necessary financial
> licenses. WMIN informed them that Government directives [3] have been
> restrictive in this regard, however, to keep the movement active,
> activities have been happening by members self-financing 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

What exactly has the English Wikipedia accepted? As far as I know we don't
known on what the WMF thinks they failed. It is just speculation and
personal opinions.

Paulo

A quinta, 4 de jul de 2019, 10:11, Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> escreveu:

> Hoi,
> I am astounded that you write as if the WMF is at fault in this. What I
> find is that in stead of pointing to the WMF, it is first and foremost the
> community of the English Wikipedia who accepted the unacceptable and
> finally has to deal with consequences. True to form, no reflection on en.wp
> practices and the blame is conveniently put elsewhere.
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 10:48, Peter Southwood  >
> wrote:
>
> > Gerard,
> > Is your response to my email intended to have any relevance to my
> > statement? If so please clarify.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> > Sent: 04 July 2019 09:59
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
> >
> > Hoi,
> > The community is responsible for its actions. It is widely acknowledged
> > that the English Wikipedia is a toxic environment. The community has not
> > taken this on board, has not fixed the damage. At some stage an
> inflection
> > point exists where the community if forced to reflect. Sadly, the English
> > Wikipedia has proven to be unable to get its house in order nor does it
> > show reflection that give hope for a better future.
> > Thanks,
> >GerardM
> >
> > On Thu, 4 Jul 2019 at 09:32, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The board does not manage WMF. It is not their fault when a department
> > > does something stupid if they had no warning that it was likely to
> > happen.
> > > People who signed off on the ban decision may have reason to apologise,
> > > others not.  The board is responsible for ensuring that the damage is
> > fixed
> > > and taking reasonably practicable precautions for preventing a
> > recurrence.
> > > Due diligence is their duty, not exhaustive diligence or
> micromanagement.
> > > Cheers, Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Pine W
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2019 10:29 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block
> > >
> > >  Hello Wikimedia-l colleagues,
> > >
> > > I hope that your day is going well.
> > >
> > > There are some updates regarding the topics that we are discussing in
> > this
> > > thread. I am writing this email in a personal capacity.
> > >
> > > As a reminder, the English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee published an
> > > open letter on 30 June that was directed to the WMF Board
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Community_response_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation%27s_ban_of_Fram=904149076=904147649
> > > >.
> > > I will share a few quotes from that statement before providing some
> > > updates, and finally making some personal comments.
> > >
> > > I am retaining the font styles that Arbcom used in its letter.
> > >
> > > * "As of 30 June, two bureaucrats, 18 administrators, an ArbCom clerk,
> > and
> > > a number of other editors have resigned their positions and/or retired
> > from
> > > Wikipedia editing in relation to this issue."
> > >
> > > * "If Fram’s ban—an unappealable sanction issued from above with no
> > > community consultation—represents the WMF’s new strategy for dealing
> with
> > > harassment on the English Wikipedia, it is one that is fundamentally
> > > misaligned with the Wikimedia movement’s principles of openness,
> > consensus,
> > > and self-governance."
> > >
> > > * "*We ask that the WMF commits to leaving behavioural complaints
> > > pertaining solely to the English Wikipedia to established local
> > processes.*
> > > Those unsuitable for public discussion should be referred to the
> > > Arbitration Committee. We will solicit comment from the community and
> the
> > > WMF to develop clear procedures for dealing with confidential
> allegations
> > > of harassment, based on the existing provision for private hearings in
> > the
> > > arbitration policy. Complaints that can be discussed publicly should be
> > > referred to an appropriate community dispute resolution process. If the
> > > Trust & Safety team seeks to assume responsibility for these cases,
> they
> > > should do so by proposing an amendment to the arbitration policy, or an
> > > equivalent process of community consensus-building. Otherwise, we would
> > > appreciate the WMF’s continued support in improving our response to
> > > harassment and hostility on the English Wikipedia
> > >
> > > * "We feel strongly that this commitment is necessary for the
> Arbitration
> > > Committee to continue to perform the role it 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

The files were mainly kept because most of them were considered to be
utilitarian objects, but IMO the rationale was correct, as all of them are
modern props from the Lord of the Rings movie series.

Personally, I think it could be interpreted or construed as some kind of
petty revenge from Fram on Rama (every day wikipolitics) , but technically
the nominations were correct, indeed.

And it is very true that the Commons community is completely independent
from the English Wikipedia, and fiercely adamant defenders of that
independence. Someone being a sysop on the English Wikipedia, or on any
other Wikipedia project generally count zero on content decisions there.

In this specific case, it is absolutely irrelevant that Fram is or was a
sysop at wiki.en.

Best,
Paulo

A sexta, 28 de jun de 2019, 15:09, Todd Allen 
escreveu:

> I think many Commons users would be flatly insulted by the idea that they
> wouldn't take action against something done on Commons because an English
> Wikipedia admin did it. Commons is as fiercely protective of its
> independence as EN-WP is.
>
> And this elides a crucial question: Were the deletion nominations largely
> correct or incorrect? If someone nominates a bunch of entirely appropriate
> files for deletion, that could certainly be construed as harassment or at
> minimum poor judgment on the nominator's part, but if the complaint is "I
> uploaded a bunch of inappropriate stuff and I got caught", that's
> appropriate maintenance work. So, were those files mainly deleted, or kept?
>
> Todd
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 4:22 AM Isaac Olatunde 
> wrote:
>
> > Nobody seems to be insinuating that Fram is lying. It's just plain
> > stupidity to demonize the WMF's action solely on their part of the story
> > alone. Fram has penchant  for irritating  people he disagrees  with and
> > it's possible they have crossed the line.
> >
> > Recently there was an AbCom case against Rama,  an English Wikipedia
> > administrator (now desysoped),  Commons administrator and oversighter.
> > While the case was ongoing,  Fram began to follow this user to an extent
> > that they began to mass-nominate for deletion the user's uploads on
> > Commons, a behavior the user considered as stalking and harassment. Some
> > users including myself requested that Fram stay away from Rama and their
> > uploads. A behavior  like this would normally  get users blocked but
> > nobody  felt the reason to ban or blocked Fram partly because they wear
> the
> > English Wikipedia's admin hat.
> >
> > This incident is barely a month ago.
> >
> > I am unsure if this form part of the reasons for the ban but I have no
> > enough reasons to think that the ban was unjustifiable.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Isaac
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 10:15 AM Benjamin Ikuta  > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Why do you doubt Fram? What do you think happened? And why can't the
> WMF
> > > say even so much as a, "That's not accurate."?
> > >
> > > You really think he's just outright lying?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jun 14, 2019, at 4:03 PM, David Gerard  wrote:
> > >
> > > > If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even plausible,
> > > > let alone the story, then you're less competent than I have
> previously
> > > > considered you to be.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 18:47, Todd Allen 
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> According to Fram, the WMF told him his "interaction ban" was for
> > > >> maintenance tagging two articles, yes (and when I looked at the
> diffs,
> > > the
> > > >> maintenance tags were accurate and necessary). So, either Fram is
> > lying
> > > or
> > > >> omitting something (and the WMF, for whatever reason, is not
> > challenging
> > > >> him on it), the WMF lied to Fram, or they did indeed sanction him
> for
> > > what
> > > >> they told him they sanctioned him for.
> > > >>
> > > >> Todd
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 4:37 AM David Gerard 
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> and you're *seriously* positing that the WMF would ban an admin for
> > > >>> doing only what you describe?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 11:32, Todd Allen 
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > >  The only case of "harassment" apparently cited here was "I kept
> > > writing
> > >  garbage articles, and someone kept flagging them as garbage!
> > > Harassment!
> > >  Bad!"
> > > 
> > >  If you don't want your articles to be flagged as garbage, FIND
> YOUR
> > > >>> SOURCES
> > >  PRIOR TO WRITING THEM, AND CITE THEM. That's rather a requirement
> > > anyway.
> > >  The editor in question repeatedly failed to do that, repeatedly
> had
> > > her
> > >  articles flagged for failure to do that, and regarded that as
> > > >>> "harassment"
> > >  rather than her own failure to follow the English Wikipedia's
> > > policies.
> > >  Next time, she needs to find the sources first, and write the
> > article
> > > >>> only
> > >  after she has them in hand.
> > > 
> > >  Todd

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Not really demonizing WMF, but healthily not trusting at face value what
they say, specially given WMF quite messy record at that.

The WMF interference in that Wikipedia community was completely out of
process, and to the moment lacking any justification worth of that name.
IMO it is OK for that community to take the measures they deem as
appropriate to prevent such kind of interference in the future.

Best.
Paulo


A sexta, 28 de jun de 2019, 11:22, Isaac Olatunde 
escreveu:

> Nobody seems to be insinuating that Fram is lying. It's just plain
> stupidity to demonize the WMF's action solely on their part of the story
> alone. Fram has penchant  for irritating  people he disagrees  with and
> it's possible they have crossed the line.
>
> Recently there was an AbCom case against Rama,  an English Wikipedia
> administrator (now desysoped),  Commons administrator and oversighter.
> While the case was ongoing,  Fram began to follow this user to an extent
> that they began to mass-nominate for deletion the user's uploads on
> Commons, a behavior the user considered as stalking and harassment. Some
> users including myself requested that Fram stay away from Rama and their
> uploads. A behavior  like this would normally  get users blocked but
> nobody  felt the reason to ban or blocked Fram partly because they wear the
> English Wikipedia's admin hat.
>
> This incident is barely a month ago.
>
> I am unsure if this form part of the reasons for the ban but I have no
> enough reasons to think that the ban was unjustifiable.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Isaac
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019, 10:15 AM Benjamin Ikuta  wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Why do you doubt Fram? What do you think happened? And why can't the WMF
> > say even so much as a, "That's not accurate."?
> >
> > You really think he's just outright lying?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jun 14, 2019, at 4:03 PM, David Gerard  wrote:
> >
> > > If you really think Fram's framing of events here is even plausible,
> > > let alone the story, then you're less competent than I have previously
> > > considered you to be.
> > >
> > > On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 18:47, Todd Allen  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> According to Fram, the WMF told him his "interaction ban" was for
> > >> maintenance tagging two articles, yes (and when I looked at the diffs,
> > the
> > >> maintenance tags were accurate and necessary). So, either Fram is
> lying
> > or
> > >> omitting something (and the WMF, for whatever reason, is not
> challenging
> > >> him on it), the WMF lied to Fram, or they did indeed sanction him for
> > what
> > >> they told him they sanctioned him for.
> > >>
> > >> Todd
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 4:37 AM David Gerard 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> and you're *seriously* positing that the WMF would ban an admin for
> > >>> doing only what you describe?
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 11:32, Todd Allen 
> wrote:
> > 
> >  The only case of "harassment" apparently cited here was "I kept
> > writing
> >  garbage articles, and someone kept flagging them as garbage!
> > Harassment!
> >  Bad!"
> > 
> >  If you don't want your articles to be flagged as garbage, FIND YOUR
> > >>> SOURCES
> >  PRIOR TO WRITING THEM, AND CITE THEM. That's rather a requirement
> > anyway.
> >  The editor in question repeatedly failed to do that, repeatedly had
> > her
> >  articles flagged for failure to do that, and regarded that as
> > >>> "harassment"
> >  rather than her own failure to follow the English Wikipedia's
> > policies.
> >  Next time, she needs to find the sources first, and write the
> article
> > >>> only
> >  after she has them in hand.
> > 
> >  Todd
> > 
> >  On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:14 AM Robert Fernandez <
> > >>> wikigamal...@gmail.com>
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > > If someone is able to harass someone for years and nothing is done
> > then
> > > clearly community procedures are not “perfectly adequate”
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 11:36 AM Fæ  wrote:
> > >
> > >> This misses the point, as others have highlighted already.
> > >>
> > >> The WMF can and /should/ globally and permanently ban paedophiles,
> > >> terrorists, system hackers and people making multiple cross-wiki
> > >>> death
> > >> threats or threats of suicide. There are perfectly good and
> > >> understandable reasons as to why the evidence behind these attacks
> > >>> and
> > >> threats would be kept unpublished, it's seriously personal or
> > >>> criminal
> > >> stuff.
> > >>
> > >> The WMF making topic bans, interaction bans and limited project
> > >> specific bans against Wikipedians is a brand new invention, which
> > >>> goes
> > >> against the pre-existing understanding that the WMF do not replace
> > >> existing and perfectly adequate community agreed procedures for
> > >> banning bad behaviour on our projects. Once full time WMF
> employees
> > >> start doing in parallel what 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

The interface seems to be completely static. Then there seems to be some
kind of possible interaction, which I was unable to see, as it requires
registration and registration is not working for Firefox ATM.

Maybe it is open in the sense that it shows to everyone what is there, but
participation seems to be in a not wiki way and strictly controlled (by the
WMF, apparently).

Paulo

A quarta, 26 de jun de 2019, 11:32, Lucas Werkmeister <
m...@lucaswerkmeister.de> escreveu:

> Why do you consider Wikimedia Space a closed platform?
>
> Cheers,
> Lucas
>
> On 26.06.19 11:27, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> > I also generally discuss what I can offwiki (using a number of channels,
> > but mainly Telegram) , and leave to onwiki discussions what is strictly
> > necessary, but it has much more to do with the slowness and lack of
> > usability of the wiki talk system, than with a toxic environment.
> >
> > That being said, the wiki talk appears to me as the main bastion
> protecting
> > openness in our projects. We may discuss a lot offwiki, but a summary of
> it
> > is always presented onwiki and can be challenged by the onwiki community
> > that do not have an offwiki presence, which is considerably large and an
> > essential part of the process too.
> >
> > I understand that some people who have an habit of discussing and
> arranging
> > everything offwiki are not prepared to face resistance from the onwiki
> > communities when their new apparently wonderful and flawless idea is
> > presented there, but that is truly and essentially part of the process,
> and
> > if they are unable to live with that, they should consider refraining to
> > take part on it, instead of trying to artificially bend a system which
> was
> > designed to be onwiki and open to submit itself to offwiki and closed
> > platforms. I am seeing this kind of discussions and proposals at the
> > Community Health strategy work group, for instance.
> >
> > In the case at hand, I would like to understand specifically why the
> choice
> > of mounting yet another platform, and a non wiki and closed one, instead
> of
> > improving the existing one, wiki and open, at Outreach.
> >
> > As for the WMF, despite what Amir has said, which possibly refer to
> > different visions, or even dissidents among WMF staff ranks, at the end
> of
> > the day there still is only one WMF, the one directed by the ED and
> > presided by the BoT, the same one which issues those software releases,
> and
> > the same one which issues the secretive and out of process punishments
> > which are causing so much controversy these days.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > A quarta, 26 de jun de 2019, 08:27, Ziko van Dijk 
> > escreveu:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Frankly, I am surprised by the announcement, too. Maybe I do not spend
> >> enough time on wikis and mailinglists? :/
> >>
> >> In general I am very curious for this new platform. I find it quite ...
> >> telling or a bad signal that many wikipedians started to prefer
> discussing
> >> wiki topics on Facebook (1) rather than on the village pumps. Including
> me.
> >> One of the reasons is the toxic atmosphere on many wiki pages, while the
> >> Facebook groups are moderated.
> >>
> >> Kind regards
> >> Ziko
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Am Mi., 26. Juni 2019 um 09:19 Uhr schrieb geni :
> >>
> >>> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 22:19, Yair Rand  wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm getting so many red flags.
> >>>>
> >>>> Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no
> >>> community
> >>>> involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing
> >> wikis?
> >>>> WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF
> employee?
> >>>> Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
> >>>> (Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside
> Wikimedia
> >>>> spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki
> >>> mailing
> >>>> list?
> >>>>
> >>>> Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Yair Rand
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> While I agree that a good tracking mount, a reasonable telescope and
> >>> some CCDs wou

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

I also generally discuss what I can offwiki (using a number of channels,
but mainly Telegram) , and leave to onwiki discussions what is strictly
necessary, but it has much more to do with the slowness and lack of
usability of the wiki talk system, than with a toxic environment.

That being said, the wiki talk appears to me as the main bastion protecting
openness in our projects. We may discuss a lot offwiki, but a summary of it
is always presented onwiki and can be challenged by the onwiki community
that do not have an offwiki presence, which is considerably large and an
essential part of the process too.

I understand that some people who have an habit of discussing and arranging
everything offwiki are not prepared to face resistance from the onwiki
communities when their new apparently wonderful and flawless idea is
presented there, but that is truly and essentially part of the process, and
if they are unable to live with that, they should consider refraining to
take part on it, instead of trying to artificially bend a system which was
designed to be onwiki and open to submit itself to offwiki and closed
platforms. I am seeing this kind of discussions and proposals at the
Community Health strategy work group, for instance.

In the case at hand, I would like to understand specifically why the choice
of mounting yet another platform, and a non wiki and closed one, instead of
improving the existing one, wiki and open, at Outreach.

As for the WMF, despite what Amir has said, which possibly refer to
different visions, or even dissidents among WMF staff ranks, at the end of
the day there still is only one WMF, the one directed by the ED and
presided by the BoT, the same one which issues those software releases, and
the same one which issues the secretive and out of process punishments
which are causing so much controversy these days.

Best,
Paulo

A quarta, 26 de jun de 2019, 08:27, Ziko van Dijk 
escreveu:

> Hello,
>
> Frankly, I am surprised by the announcement, too. Maybe I do not spend
> enough time on wikis and mailinglists? :/
>
> In general I am very curious for this new platform. I find it quite ...
> telling or a bad signal that many wikipedians started to prefer discussing
> wiki topics on Facebook (1) rather than on the village pumps. Including me.
> One of the reasons is the toxic atmosphere on many wiki pages, while the
> Facebook groups are moderated.
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Am Mi., 26. Juni 2019 um 09:19 Uhr schrieb geni :
>
> > On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 22:19, Yair Rand  wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm getting so many red flags.
> > >
> > > Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no
> > community
> > > involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing
> wikis?
> > > WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF employee?
> > > Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
> > > (Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside Wikimedia
> > > spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki
> > mailing
> > > list?
> > >
> > > Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?
> > >
> > > -- Yair Rand
> > >
> >
> >
> > While I agree that a good tracking mount, a reasonable telescope and
> > some CCDs would be a better use of the money (there are some
> > satellites I want pics of) I don't see anything particular nefarious
> > here. Improving communications is a long term goal and shifting away
> > from mediawiki appears on the face of it a good way to do that (we are
> > after all on a mailing list at the moment. In practice experience
> > suggests that most people are too busy doing what they are already
> > doing to get involved in such projects and that mediawiki is so
> > central to what we are do that most people are pretty comfortable with
> > it.
> >
> >
> > So this falls well within the WMF’s nominal goals and is a fairly
> > understandable approach. I still think we would be better off spending
> > the money on the kit needed to get a pic of Kosmos 482.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > geni
> >
> > ___
> > 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: