[Wikimedia-l] Re: The launch of the Content Partnerships Helpdesk

[Peter Coombe via Wikimedia-l]

> This means we have a WMF project that is officially using NC and ND
licenses. Something which was supported by the Strategy 2030, at least in
part.

As far as I know this was only ever in a first iteration draft
recommendation

of
the Strategy process, and faced strong opposition

so
went no further.

With regards to this particular image the Diff footer and Commons file page

both
indicate it is in fact released under CC-BY-SA 4.0. The caption on Diff
should probably be adjusted to avoid confusion.

Peter / the wub


On Fri, 9 Sept 2022 at 18:20, James Heilman  wrote:

> Hey Eric
>
> Great initiative. Was reading the diff post and what popped out
> immediately was that the image used is licensed NC ND :-)
> https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/09/02/do-you-want-support-with-content-partnerships-the-helpdesk-is-here-to-help/
>
> This means we have a WMF project that is officially using NC and ND
> licenses. Something which was supported by the Strategy 2030, at least in
> part.
>
> We at Wiki Project Med Foundation have started NC Commons
>  to help facilitate the use of NC
> and ND licensed material within mediawiki installs. Not all countries, like
> the US, release government content public domain. Most, if they use openish
> licenses actually go with NC ones such as South Africa which we have here
> .
>
> We are looking for help with batch uploading of NC and ND licensed
> material to NC Commons. We are working to move the data storage to Internet
> Archives as part of a collaboration with them to cut down on our hosting
> costs after which we want to look at importing Ted Talks and Khan academy
> videos.
>
> Best
> James
>
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2022 at 6:05 AM Eric Luth  wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> A while back, Wikimedia Sverige announced the upcoming Helpdesk of the
>> Content Partnerships Hub, a service to support Wikimedians that want to
>> work with partners to share content on the Wikimedia platforms.
>>
>> Now, when the Helpdesk is finally up and running, the next thing needed
>> are your requests for help!
>>
>> I just published a blog post on Diff
>> 
>>  [1]
>> where I try to outline the process. A lot is still under development, but
>> you can already now read more on the Helpdesk portal on Meta
>>  [2].
>>
>> The basic idea, however, is that anyone that wants support with a project
>> sends an email to *helpd...@wikimedia.se *. Describe
>> what you want to do and what you want to achieve, and in what way it
>> contributes to filling a gap on the platforms, and the Helpdesk will do
>> what it can to help. The support can be anything from technical and batch
>> uploads to policy-making or advocacy. We look forward to getting your
>> proposals!
>>
>> We also want to invite Wikimedians to join the work. We plan to establish
>> working groups to support with anything from communication to advocacy and
>> actual uploads. If you are a volunteer or an affiliate that wants to
>> support, please reach out as well! You can email *helpd...@wikimedia.se
>>  *for this as well.
>>
>> Best
>> *Eric Luth*
>> Projektledare engagemang och påverkan | Project Manager, Involvement and
>> Advocacy
>> Wikimedia Sverige
>> eric.l...@wikimedia.se
>> +46 (0) 765 55 50 95
>>
>> Stöd fri kunskap, bli medlem i Wikimedia Sverige.
>> Läs mer på blimedlem.wikimedia.se
>>
>> [1]
>> https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/09/02/do-you-want-support-with-content-partnerships-the-helpdesk-is-here-to-help/
>>
>> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Content_Partnerships_Hub/Helpdesk
>> ___
>> 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/J746QTCGPKQMM3XQMLN2LD4J7CJ73C63/
>> 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/DRXB5C7RKPN3CIA

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New Wikimedia Foundation has soft launched!

[Peter Coombe]

Hi Lodewijk,

I'm not sure exactly what, if any, other sites this new privacy policy
might cover. However I can confirm that the WMF fundraising infrastructure
remains under the existing Donor Privacy Policy:
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Donor_privacy_policy/en

Thanks,
Peter

-- 
Peter Coombe
Fundraising Production Manager
Wikimedia Foundation

On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 20:00, Lodewijk  wrote:

> I can imagine that this alternate privacy policy is actually covering a
> wider range of sites that are non-wiki, such as the fundraising
> infrastructure and the survey websites, voting websites etc. Rather than
> having a different privacy policy for each of those instances, I think it
> is actually clearer to have two policies: one for the content delivery (the
> 'wikis') that have practically zero cookie tracking to the best of my
> knowledge and one for the other websites that may require other methods to
> be functional.
>
> As a sidenote, I think it actually could be a totally fair statement to say
> that wikimediafoundation.org is, relative to the content projects, not a
> 'major site' of the WMF. It is supporting infrastructure at best. (no
> offense :) )
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 7:23 AM Chico Venancio 
> wrote:
>
> > Indeed an special watered down privacy policy is strange. It is worth
> > noting that the standard privacy policy[1] does not state that it only
> > applies to "wiki based websites" but instead lists what it does and does
> > not cover[2], the only interpretation that allows a separate policy for
> the
> > new website weirdly leaves* https://wikimediafoundation.org/
> > <https://wikimediafoundation.org/> as being defined to not be a major
> site
> > of WMF. *
> >
> > Irregardless of possible poor wording of both privacy policies, I find it
> > strange that the main website for WMF has a tracking pixel and forces
> > visitors to provide users' personal information (as defined by either
> > privacy policies) to Google and Wordpress.com.
> >
> > Perhaps this is something WMF could revisit?
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Chico Venancio
> >
> > [1]https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy
> > [2]https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy#coverage
> >
> >
> >
> > 2018-08-06 2:06 GMT-03:00 Yair Rand :
> >
> > > There are several more issues I've noticed with the new website:
> > > * According to the notice at the bottom, the company "Automattic Inc."
> is
> > > receiving all sorts of data about all visitors to the site, including
> > > location information, cookie data, data from pixel tags/web beacons
> used
> > to
> > > track visitors and target ads on other WordPress sites, and other data.
> > > * The "non-wiki privacy policy of the Wikimedia Foundation" linked at
> the
> > > bottom is different than the regular privacy policy. Why is this?
> > > * Much of the content is essentially English-Wikipedia-only. "Visit The
> > > Teahouse for a friendly place to learn about editing" Most Wikipedias
> > don't
> > > have teahouses or equivalents.
> > > * In "Wikimedia projects": "Wikipedia - All the world's knowledge". See
> > > [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of
> > information]].
> > > * "Working with partners like Google, the Metropolitan Museum of Art,
> and
> > > UNESCO, Wikimedia...". I don't think most Wikimedians are okay with the
> > WMF
> > > describing Google as among its partners. Nor the Met or UNESCO, for
> that
> > > matter.
> > > * In the "Technology" section, there's a paragraph devoted to bragging
> > > about how NASA has an internal Mediawiki wiki. I don't think that
> belongs
> > > there.
> > > * The actual Wikimedia Foundation Mission is kind of buried deep in the
> > > site. The Mission is the definitive version of what the WMF is supposed
> > to
> > > be doing, and I really think it should be highlighted somewhere in a
> more
> > > prominent position.
> > >
> > > "The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage
> people
> > > around the world to collect and develop educational content under a
> free
> > > license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and
> > > globally.
> > >
> > > In collaboration with a network of chapters, the Wikimedia Foundation
> > > provides the essential infrastructure 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New Wikimedia Foundation has soft launched!

[Peter Coombe]

On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 21:45, Saint Johann  wrote:

>
> — Donation information website features multilingual text, but it’s
> designed in such a way that most of people won’t know how to use it.
> (https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/Problems_donating)
>
>
Thank you for this feedback. You're not the only person to raise concerns
about the usability of the translations bar on donate.wikimedia.org. We're
going to look into some alternatives.
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201446


>
> ___
> 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] Timeline of recent events at the Wikimedia Foundation

[Peter Coombe]

Thank you so much for working on this timeline Molly. A beautiful
presentation of an ugly situation!

Peter

On 23 February 2016 at 07:06, GorillaWarfare <
gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 2:03 AM, Theo10011  wrote:
>
> > Please consider (for later) either linking or making a wiki version for
> > Meta. Thanks for making this effort.
> >
>
> I intend to make a Mediawiki-friendly version once real life is out of the
> way.
>
> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

[Peter Coombe]

(resending to thread with subject line, apologies if this comes through
twice!)

Hi all, just wanted to weigh in on a few things brought up in this and the
other threads.

* The coffee cup stock image was a mistake and miscommunication with a
contractor. IANAL but my understanding is that they had a license from the
stock photo company, so the use was legal, but not free use as we would
like. Once we became aware there was a problem, we stopped using the image
and switched to the current lightbulb graphics. We'll certainly be more
careful about this in future.

* A number of people have suggested using
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cup_of_Coffee.svg, which is a very
nice image but unfortunately seems to be lacking permission and is pending
deletion from Commons. We've found some other alternative freely licensed
coffee cup images, but for now the lightbulb graphics are doing very well
so we're concentrating on them.

* In the past we have tested a few banners which focused on highlighting
great images from Commons (with attribution of course). [1] Unfortunately
these didn't perform as well as our other banners, but it's something we
would like to revisit in future. We have also been testing using Commons
images in some of our emails to past donors, which has seen more success.

* Uploading fundraising banner images to donate.wikimedia.org was simply a
pragmatic decision. Because these images are so widely seen, they could be
a tempting target for vandalism. Uploading to Commons would require
protecting them, which is an extra step that's easy to forget, and would
also require granting Commons administrator or staff rights to multiple
people. We could have used wikimediafoundation.org, but it was thought
better to keep all the fundraising images together, and avoid overloading
that project with something it wasn't really intended for. When we produce
artwork or an image that is Commons worthy, we share it there.

* Not showing the banner again if someone donated is a great suggestion,
and in fact it's something we already do by setting cookies when people
reach the Thank You page.

Thanks,
Peter

[1] You can see some examples here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising#2015-2016_Q1_Update

-- 
Peter Coombe
Fundraising Production Manager
Wikimedia Foundation


On 3 December 2015 at 17:54, rupert THURNER 
wrote:

> One feedback I got today is to not display the banner any more if the
> person donated.
> On Dec 3, 2015 16:37, "Liam Wyatt"  wrote:
>
> > TL;DR - we've reached "peak banner", how do we change the fundraising
> > model to be about working smarter, not just pushing harder. This needs
> > to be part of a broader process that involves strategic planning
> > transparency, endowment discussions, editor-recruitment, etc. Not just
> > about fullscreen advertising.
> >
> > I, along with many here, am dismayed that the banners are now at the
> > stage of being fullscreen. However, as others have mentioned, the
> > actual text of the request has been adjusted following a reasonably
> > collaborative process to identify text that is both effective and
> > acceptable to the community. Also, the fundraising team have been
> > placed in the difficult position of being told to raise a LOT more
> > money without being given more methods to do so.[1] Naturally then,
> > there is a point where the existing methods reach their maximum
> > effectiveness, and capacity is stretched to the point where awkward
> > mistakes happen.[2]
> >
> > At this point, I suspect we've reached "peak banner".
> >
> > Rather like "peak oil" - after drilling the same oil reserve for a
> > long time, you have to pump exponentially harder to maintain a steady
> > flow.[2] Furthermore, the harder you pump today, the more difficult it
> > will be tomorrow. I think we've reached that point with the
> > fundraising advertising and emails. We know that the donation amounts
> > are decreasing, but the budget is increasing. There are many suggested
> > reasons for the decreased supply (relevant parables for this include
> > "killing the goose that laid the golden egg" and "the boy who cried
> > wolf"). So it's now time to talk about pumping smarter, not harder.
> >
> > An important part of that shift is the recently-opened (but longtime
> > mooted) discussion about an endowment. I commend Lisa's essay[3] as an
> > excellent start to formulating a long-term plan. There are many
> > important questions that would need to be answered as part of that
> > strategy. People interested in this really ought to read her thoughts
> > on creating a "growing endowment" and the advantages/ch

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method

[Peter Coombe]

On 13 December 2013 14:00, David Gerard  wrote:

> On 13 December 2013 11:43, Steven Walling 
> wrote:
>
> > Who's to say if the work involved in accepting bitcoins, monitoring
> > transactions, converting them, etc. will be worth the actual donations we
> > receive in bitcoin? Developing and maintaining payments systems doesn't
> > come for free. Fundraising and finance staff at WMF work extremely hard
> to
> > keep these systems running smoothly, and I for one don't think it's worth
> > adding yet another potential system to build/maintain just to placate
> > bitcoin devotees who want us to help promote their libertarian fantasy
> > project.
>
>
> This is probably the key point: will it be worth the resources? How do
> comparable charities that accept Bitcoin do?
>
> I'm sceptical about Bitcoin in general, but if it was worth it, then sure.
>
> (If you have reliable payment conversion, the acceptance bit is easy.
> Hardest bit is someone to supply reliable and trustworthy conversion
> from Bitcoins to dollars. e.g. Mt. Gox wouldn't pass the sniff test
> IMO. Some Bitcoin operations are *terrifyingly* naive, as if
> financial-quality computer system reliability had never been thought
> of.)
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>

Anecdotally:

From Reddit in March this year (not sure whether the situation has changed
or not)
"So far we're spending more money on accountants handling the non-trivial
reconciliation of our BTC transactions than revenue we're making in
Bitcoin, haha. Hopefully it will get better."
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/19t3uq/hey_rbitcoin_you_asked_for_some_stats/


From the Humble Indie Bundle (a collection of indie computer games)
"It [bitcoin] represents less than 0.1% of our sales for Humble Indie
Bundle 8, which is pretty surprising for me"
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1fex7h/were_humble_indie_bundle_8_creators_of_thomas_was/ca9l01t


Peter / the wub
(speaking in a strictly personal capacity)
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Wikipedia Gap

[Peter Coombe]

The English Wikipedia has attempted a (non-exhaustive) list at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Systemic_bias

Peter


On 9 December 2013 07:35, Romaine Wiki  wrote:

> In various research and media articles is written that in several subject
> groups Wikipedia is missing a lot of articles and those groups are
> relatively unrepresented.
>
> How can we as Wikipedia get clear which subject groups are missing?
>
> How can we get lists of less represented subject groups and the articles
> in those groups?
>
> Let us get practical, ow can we fill the gap?
>
>
> Greetings,
> Romaine
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner obscuring site interface

[Peter Coombe]

Love it! Looks like there's more than one banner too:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/store_news/store_gd_g1_QG5Z.png

--
Peter Coombe
Fundraising Production Coordinator
Wikimedia Foundation


On 8 December 2013 19:52, MZMcBride  wrote:

> Largely unrelated: it looks like xkcd (<http://xkcd.com>) has spoofed the
> "DEAR WIKIPEDIA READERS" donation banner as part of its store campaign:
> <http://imgs.xkcd.com/store_news/store_gd_d5_FyaR.png>. :-)
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> 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
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] Fundraising banner obscuring site interface

[Peter Coombe]

I'm not aware that there ever was such an agreement. Annoyance to users is
certainly something that we do try to minimise, and we've actually rejected
a number of designs so far this year for that reason. However we thought
carefully about this banner before testing it and considered it okay for a
few reasons:

* We've actually heard anecdotal feedback from users that they meant to
donate but were missing/forgetting the banner once they scrolled down to
read the article.
* The floating tab takes up only a very small portion of the screen, and
does not overlap with the article.
* Fundraising banners are no longer displayed to logged in users, who are
the main users of the sidebar.
* There is a prominent close button.

Our donor services team haven't seen any negative emails about this banner.
Moreover adding the floating tab results in an increase in donations of
roughly 15%, one of the biggest improvements we have found so far this
year. So we hope this will help us to reach our target sooner, and annoy
fewer users overall.

--
Peter Coombe
Fundraising Production Coordinator
Wikimedia Foundation


On 8 December 2013 18:50, MZMcBride  wrote:

> Hi.
>
> I thought there was an explicit agreement that fundraising banners will
> not obscure the site interface, as it's bad for usability and annoys users.
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/111477931 seems to
> break this agreement. What's going on?
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> 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
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] An idea that may improve Wikipedia's fundraising

[Peter Coombe]

Yes MZ, agreed that this is would be good to have documented on meta. In
fact this has been raised in our internal discussion already.

At the moment one of my side projects is a major overhaul of the
fundraising pages on meta, and I plan to incorporate aims and principles
into this prominently. I'm hoping to post a draft in the next few weeks,
and will post to this list when I do.
On 19 Aug 2013 05:57, "MZMcBride"  wrote:

> Matthew Walker wrote:
> >In the past days there's been discussion internal to the fundraising team
> >-- it appears that the 'fundraising principles' I thought we held are not
> >uniformly held by others. In this particular instance it seems that gift
> >premiums are not entirely off the table. I've been told that the reason we
> >have not done them in the past is mostly due to technical limitations. The
> >current view is that we should keep our options open to future
> >experimentation if the situation allows.
>
> Hi.
>
> I think establishing fundraising principles and documenting them at
> Meta-Wiki would still be a great idea. Would you be able to start such a
> page if one doesn't exist already?
>
> Outside of purely fundraising techniques, establishing what is and is not
> appropriate for fundraising banners would also be nice to have. For
> example, are splash pages off the table? CentralNotice has previously been
> used to completely block out the site, so it's certainly technically
> possible. What about banners that obstruct or obfuscate article content?
> Are these ever acceptable? Is it okay to stretch the truth if it brings in
> more money (e.g., "Wikipedia Executive Director")?
>
> I think clarity as to what the Wikimedia Foundation fundraising team
> considers appropriate or off-limits in order to reach its goals is
> very important to have.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [X-POST] Universal Language Selector(ULS) Deployment - Phase 1

[Peter Coombe]

What is the rationale for moving ULS from the personal toolbar to the
interlanguage links on some sites? I find this change odd:

* makes location and appearance of ULS inconsistent between sites
* personal toolbar seems the conventional place for per-account settings
and tools
* features it is replacing like WebFonts live in the personal toolbar
* interlanguage links are something rather different, taking the user to a
wholly different site

Pete / the wub


On 5 June 2013 20:52, Runa Bhattacharjee wrote:

> Hello,
>
> The Universal Language Selector (ULS)[1] provides a flexible way to
> configure and deliver language settings like interface language,
> fonts, and input methods (keyboard mappings). It combines the features
> of two earlier Mediawiki extensions Narayam[2] and WebFonts[3]. From
> June 11, 2013 on, ULS will be made available to all Wikimedia wikis in
> 5 phases[4].
>
> # Phase 1: In the first phase, ULS will replace the Narayam and
> WebFonts extensions on 84 wikis[5]. User preferences from the replaced
> extensions will not be preserved. Affected communities will be
> informed by the Wikimedia Language Engineering team of the upcoming
> change.
>
> # Phase 2: In the 5 weeks that follow, ULS will be deployed on
> Wikipedias in size 11-20,
>
> # Phase 3: All projects without language versions
>
> # Phase 4: English language Wikipedia
>
> # Phase 5:  All other wikis
>
> The ULS can be visible in two ways:
>
> 1. In the sidebar for wikis with language versions, like Wikipedia, or
> 2. In the personal toolbar at the top of wiki pages for wikis without
> language versions, like Wikimedia Commons and Meta-Wiki.
>
> Based on the geographic location of users, the initial set of language
> preferences is presented. Users can set the input methods and fonts to
> that they want to use. Logged-in users can also change the language
> for the MediaWiki menu items.
>
> ULS is already available on several Wikimedia wikis like Wikimedia
> Commons[6] and Meta-Wiki[7]. The beta installation of English
> Wikipedia on Wikimedia Labs[8] shows what will be available as the
> look and feel. A cog icon is present in the “Languages” section of the
> sidebar menu. Clicking the cog icon opens the Language settings panel
> that can be used to set the display and input settings.
>
> Please have a look at the Universal Language Selector feature
> description[9] or the Frequently Asked Questions[10] for more detailed
> information.
>
> Thank you.
>
> regards
> Runa
>
> [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:UniversalLanguageSelector
> [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Narayam
> [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:WebFonts
> [4]
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/UniversalLanguageSelector/Deployment/Planning
> [5]
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/UniversalLanguageSelector/Deployment/Planning#List_of_affected_wikis_.2884.29
> [6] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/
> [7] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
> [8] http://en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org/
> [9] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Universal_Language_Selector
> [10] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Universal_Language_Selector/FAQ
>
> --
> Language Engineering - Outreach and QA Coordinator
> Wikimedia Foundation
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Runab_WMF
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] בקשה למרואיין-> translation tool

[Peter Coombe]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_machine_translation_applicationslists
a few free/open ones.

Pete / the wub


On 12 March 2013 13:15, Mathieu Stumpf wrote:

> Le 2013-03-11 22:05, Nathan a écrit :
>
>> I too thought the gmail translate worked really well, until I saw Asaf
>> suggest they stop using bad words - which I guess gmail stripped out,
>> because I didn't see any!
>>
>
> Hey by the way, do you know good free/libre translation tools? Especialy
> when it come to idiomatic locutions, the best free(/non-libre) online tool
> I currently know is linguee[1] which built a translation database, mainly
> with UN documents.
>
> I don't know for the statute of UN documents, but the idea to give you a
> set of human translated equivalents is very interesting. And I think it may
> be an idea to launch such a project within wikimedia, based on "not a
> moving target text" translations, like texts on wikisource for example.
> Would that interest anyone else ?
>
> [1] https://www.linguee.com/
>
> --
> Association Culture-Libre
> http://www.culture-libre.org/
>
> __**_
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org 
> Unsubscribe: 
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: "Big data" benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

[Peter Coombe]

On 4 January 2013 13:03, Fred Bauder  wrote:
>
> The MUD I reference has both a MUD school where a presumably new user
> goes through the basic game moves and is instructed in them and, much
> more interesting and engaging, a complex Newbie zone where the new player
> faces an increasing complex series of challenges which successfully
> accomplish learning by doing. The coding on the particular MUD generously
> rewards every "right" move with "experience", "money", and other goodies.
> This is all very nanny and I doubt the average highly educated user who
> is a university professor or professional could accept being put to
> school in this manner in a compulsory way before being allowed to edit,
> but it could be available as an option. We could even have a "practice"
> wiki which was set up in this way as an option. Probably no one would use
> it though, I suppose, so whatever is done would probably have to be on
> the main site. It would be a sandbox, but a more active and monitored
> one, actually a set of practice articles in sandboxes.
>

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Adventure
which is a project very much along these lines. I'm not sure what the
current status of that is, but it definitely seems like a good
approach for at least some groups of newbies.

Pete / the wub

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] deliberately lowered fundraising growth rate (was: Fundraising updates?)

[Peter Coombe]

On 21 December 2012 17:00, James Salsman  wrote:
>> How do you see the fiduciary responsibilities of the board playing into
>> fundraising targets?
>
> The employees of the board share their fiduciary responsibilities.
>
>> Are you suggesting the Board has a duty to raise as
>> much money as possible?
>
> No. When actual fundraising far exceeded expectations, it was scaled
> back to meet expectations based on the nonquantative predictions of
> the Chief Revenue Officer. That is questionable behavior to say the
> least, and suggests that the current leadership does not want to
> continue to grow the organization to reach the full potential of the
> current programs. In addition to the pageview growth continuing at
> exponential rates, much of the Strategic Plan has been abandoned in a
> recent reorganization, while employees other than executives are paid
> far less than typical technology workers in San Francisco, and some of
> the best performing Foundation efforts, such as the Education Program,
> are so woefully understaffed that they continually cause serious
> problems for the community. Have you seen how few Education Program
> article talk page templates contain the correct date? Meanwhile, the
> senior staff's most vaunted projects are behind schedule and lack
> meaningful community volunteer participation. The leadership has not
> been able or willing to address these issues.
>
>> I'm also curious why you highlight "deliberately
>> slowing fundraising" despite the 32% increase in revenue goals for the
>> 12-13 fiscal year. That is an aggressive increase, even if less aggressive
>> proportionally than we've seen in prior years.
>
> If pageviews weren't increasing at double that rate, projects were on
> time, and junior staff didn't have to live in high crime area Oakland
> hovels, I would be less concerned.
>

Costs don't scale linearly with pageviews. Nor do donations,
especially when you consider that much of that growth in pageviews now
comes from the 'Global South' (where people generally have less
disposable income to donate) and from mobile devices (which we don't
really fundraise on, although I believe this is something WMF wants to
work on next year).

Peter / the wub
(a personal view)

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] photography restrictions at the Olympics

[Peter Coombe]

Unfortunately people will still be bombarded with coverage of it from
everywhere else, so probably a futile gesture.

We may not be able to get photos of the glamorous sporting events to
illustrate our articles, but there are plenty of associated events
that ought to be documented which the IOC can't prevent you from
photographing and freely licensing: transport gridlock, surface-to-air
missiles on rooftops, soldiers drafted in to cover security etc etc.
;)

Pete / the wub

On 26 July 2012 13:53, Anthony  wrote:
> It's time to black out coverage of the olympics.
>
> This would be a blackout that could actually make a difference.
>
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Lodewijk  wrote:
>> Would it make sense to start a more thorough long term lobby on this issue?
>> Considering that this will be a returning issue every two years, I guess
>> that would be worth the trouble...
>>
>> Lodewijk
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wiki Travel Guide

[Peter Coombe]

On 10 April 2012 05:32, Strainu  wrote:
> În data de 9 aprilie 2012, 21:17, Ziko van Dijk
>  a scris:
>> One might get problems with policies such as NOR and NPOV. I suppose
>> that they should be applied on Wiki Travel Guide, as on Wikipedia,
>> Wikibooks and other Wikimedia sites.
>
> If using these as they are now would be a precondition for hosting the
> project at wikimedia, then Wikivoyage is better of on its own. I'm not
> that familiar with the rules of these different sites, but the
> articles did not strike me as extremely neutral - but not clearly
> partisan either. Most of them are very near that balance that makes
> them appealing to a large public while keeping them serious.
>

No Original Research shouldn't be an issue, we already have Wikinews
accepting original reporting.

Neutral Point of View might be a more delicate area. You probably
couldn't write a travel guide using the same standards of NPOV as used
on Wikipedia, and if you could it would most likely be very dull. As
far as I know all the existing projects follow some form of NPOV, but
it isn't actually enshrined in the Foundation's mission statement,
vision or values.

https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission_statement
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Vision
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Values

Peter

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l