subscriber
behaves inappropriately (e.g., does the person get unsubscribed, is there
an appeal mechanism, what's the complaints mechanism, do affiliates who
have a member "unsubscribed" get to replace that person with someone else,
etc.)
Risker/Anne
___
Thank you to the members whose terms are complete, and congratulations to
Wikimedia Espana on their new board. Best wishes to the new members!
Risker/Anne
On 4 October 2015 at 19:38, Tito Dutta wrote:
> Best wishes and congrats.
>
> On 5 October 2015 at 04:09, Dennis Tob
lessen the impact of the scheduling conflict.
Risker/Anne
On 21 August 2015 at 16:22, Michael Peel wrote:
> From my perspective, this strikes me as part of the reason why national
> organisations are well suited to running the Wikimedia fundraising
> campaigns rather than a global organis
eral-hundred of us we might be able to
come up with a solution that works to accommodate both groups.
Risker/Anne
On 20 August 2015 at 01:19, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> Yes, Andrew is right. Navigation is a very important focus point of
> organising every Wiki Loves Monuments.
>
> The com
On 11 August 2015 at 18:05, Robert Rohde wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Risker wrote:
>
> > Who said the problem was on enwiki?
>
>
> If you think this issue is only a problem in some specific place or class
> of wikis, then say so. Otherwise, I would have t
Who said the problem was on enwiki?
On 11 August 2015 at 17:58, Robert Rohde wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Risker wrote:
>
>
> > There are situations where not even the administrators of a particular
> > community should be allowed to edit a page. A good
o that from the back door, and Superprotect is probably the prettied-up
interface so others can do it), and if there's a problem that serious it is
going to ahve to remain in a broader range of hands.
Risker/Anne
On 11 August 2015 at 17:27, Pine W wrote:
> Most of the time, admins beha
significantly elevated levels of protection above
'all administrators on Project ABC', although they may call for another
level of protection that can be customizable to allowing a much smaller
group or specific individuals to be the only editors.
Risker/Anne
On 11 August 2015 at 16:43, Romaine W
being addressed within the
relevant community, or (as in this case) are not being discussed in the
relevant community at all, is not really appropriate, and I for one would
appreciate if you'd stop doing that.
Risker/Anne
On 26 July 2015 at 17:45, Pine W wrote:
> Pinging WMF Legal to ask a
se positions; it
wasn't a good situation for either the engineers or the WMF. Or, to twist
an old expression, it's not good use of resources to try and make a silk
purse out of a Cray supercomputer.
Best wishes to Damon.
Risker/Anne
On 2 July 2015 at 22:06, Pine W wrote:
> I thi
een better,
and I wonder about other geographically large countries where this would
also be more workable.
Risker
On 28 June 2015 at 01:17, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> I infer that you would have preferred a single US chapter from the start,
> wouldn't you?
>
>
> Il 28/06
One has to
wonder if some other countries, especially those with a large number of
Wikimedians or a massive geographic area, might wish they had gone with
regional affiliates rather than a national one.
Risker/Anne
On 27 June 2015 at 23:26, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> I know the confederated approac
ng to exist five
years from now in the way that we know them today...)
Risker/Anne
On 22 June 2015 at 13:41, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> Magnus pointed the way forward when he started MediaWiki. When you look
> into the whole stack of his data related tools, you will find how they ma
des some form of my
username. I can imagine the subjects of some of our biographical
articles thinking the same way. Who knows, this might actually sell...
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ma
rence in the movement than having a seat on the board would have, and
certainly would be making more difference than being on the FDC would
have. I think there's a fair amount of truth in that.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list,
t talking about
diversity, but very poor at implementing it.
Risker/Anne
On 6 June 2015 at 13:55, MF-Warburg wrote:
> I still think it was a big mistake (of the electcom? I don't remember, but
> /someone/ pushed it through without discussions) in the 2013 election to
> abolish the Schul
On 3 June 2015 at 19:11, Michael Peel wrote:
>
> > On 3 Jun 2015, at 23:48, Risker wrote:
> >
> > On 3 June 2015 at 18:42, Michael Peel wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>> By the way, my understanding is that the practice of generating a
> public
>
there is a right to examine
the list of individuals who can vote at the office of the local senior
election official for a few weeks afterward, and then at the national
election office once any challenges have been completed. Of course in
places where voting is mandatory, the failure to vote is goi
x27;m
not aware.
Risker/Anne
On 3 June 2015 at 18:14, Michael Peel wrote:
>
> > At the link, you can find
> > List votes: Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees Elections 2015
> > https://vote.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:SecurePoll/list/512
>
> I personally don't
Minor correction: Appeals are due JUNE 8, 2015, not July 8.[1]
Risker/Anne
(Member of the FDC)
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Information#Calendar
On 1 June 2015 at 11:18, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote:
> Hello Wikimedians,
>
> The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) me
reassess
whether or not those goals are appropriate, there does not seem to be a
well-articulated long-term vision in this plan. Instead there is the
suggestion that the organization may change course quite significantly, and
that projects intended to take 3 or 4 quarters to accomplish migh
Chen20471018752.17%
FDC Ombudsman ElectionCandidateSupportNeutralOpposeSupport Ratio
S/S+OUser:Kirill Lokshin - Kirill Lokshin37062710478.06%User:NickK - Mykola
Kozlenko33366110775.68%
Risker
On 15 May 2015 at 19:48, Gregory Varnum wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> On behalf of the 2015 Wikimedia F
hat have put so
> much time and energy into making this happen, the list is extensive and my
> gratitude is with you all.
>
Congratulations and thank you to you, Keegan, and to all who have worked on
this project over successive years. Here's hoping the process goes smoothly!
Risker/Ann
candid report. If it's an indication of a
> change in communication style, I like it.
>
> Good to have it available on Meta as well as in pdf format (I think the pdf
> is very nicely done).
>
>
I agree, pretty much. This is probably the best 'big picture" look at t
it unreadable for me, a person with fairly normal
vision. The Commons page should probably also have a link to the Meta
page.
Risker/Anne
On 2 April 2015 at 16:35, Jan Ainali wrote:
> Risker: For your convenience:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ainali/sandbox
>
>
>
ry Street
> San Francisco, CA 94105
>
> +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635
> +1 (415) 712 4873
> kma...@wikimedia.org
>
>
Thank you very much for telling us about this, Katherine. I am unable to
read the file on Commons (the print is far too faint, and also quite
small), and I real
he schema. (I'm assuming it
has something to do with the accounts being very old, but it sure looks
weird.)
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists
March 19. You have no reason to believe that the draft report hasn't been
completed. Perhaps you could hold your concerns about deadlines being
missed until the final report is due.
Risker/Anne
On 1 March 2015 at 21:06, Pine W wrote:
> Keegan,
>
> May I point out that the term on t
hat he "can't
keep his word" is a rather overblown reaction to a major change in the
process in which you seem to have invested a lot of yourself in the past.
I have no real thoughts about whether this very different way of seeking
community input into strategy is better or worse. I
quot; when smaller departments have
"Chiefs" and the other focus departments have VPs?The organizational
chart is getting a bit tricky to follow. :-)
Risker/Anne
On 19 February 2015 at 17:15, Lila Tretikov wrote:
> Dear Wikimedians,
>
> Among the WMF’s top priorities
script and see the results there.
I'll admit to sharing Rich's curiosity about who was most thanked.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.
e the reserve for future needs of the
organization and movement, including the possibility of adjustments in
fundraising methods as appropriate. "
Risker/Anne
[1]
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2014-11-21#Executive_Update_from_F
.well, as I say, this is not a good result.
People were putting Wikipedia on Adblock because of those banners, and they
were doing it long after the goal had been reached.
I'd say I was speechless, but actually I am working extremely hard to hold
my tongue here, awaiting an explan
27;ve read, or a single objection I've
seen raised, that wasn't about how unnecessary it is to focus on women. I
don't think we've ever heard that about the global south, or non-European
languages, or a lot of other areas where there are acknowledged biases.
Risker/Anne
On
list?
Risker/Anne
On 3 January 2015 at 13:35, Lila Tretikov wrote:
> For everyone here: I've asked our Grantmaking team to comment and clarify
> the details of this plan.
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Lodewijk
> wrote:
>
> > Answering to Teemu and Chris:
> >
#x27;s little doubt in my mind that more and more people
are blocking those banners already - the more annoying they get, the more
people block them, and the smaller the potential contribution pool. We're
starting to chase our own tails here.
Risker/Anne
__
> - d.
>
>
It's not doing that for me (Canada, using an old IE browser). However, it
IS ignoring my previously set "don't show me this again" cookie.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://
Fae, Steven hasn't been a WMFstaffer for some months. Luis is, but he
appears to be speaking in his staff role.
Risker/Anne
On 11 December 2014 at 13:14, Fæ wrote:
> Making defamatory comments about Commons volunteers on this list is
> not terribly productive, nor a very nice thing
rth investigating, and Lisa Gruwell has already answered
some locally-specific issues. But there were a lot of reasons why this
option was heavily restricted in the past, and it wasn't just because
certain chapters were having governance issues.
Risker/Anne
staffers, but this is a lot
better than the version we saw just under a week ago.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscrib
information was required than is needed for any other means of payment that
I've ever used. Banks in Canada regularly call their customers for
transactions under $5 because fraud is so common - and that is with chip
cards and PINs.
Risker
On 1 December 2014 at 00:08, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
antee.
Risker/Anne
On 26 November 2014 at 15:06, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
> Hoi,
> Lodewijk when the funding process stifles innovation and, it does by
> design. The process is suboptimal. When the argument is made that the
> chapters are second class citizens BECAUSE they are fo
difficult if not impossible for many users (particularly if they
don't have administrator permissions for the site) to lift the
filter/block. Getting donations is not more important than keeping the
sites accessible.
Please reconsider.
Risker/Anne
On 26 November 2014 at 15:33, MZMcBride
Actually, as I recall, email alerts for changes in articles has never been
activated on English Wikipedia.
Risker/Anne
On 12 November 2014 22:53, Anthony Cole wrote:
> Agree with all that, Svetlana - though we don't have a button at the top of
> articles making it easy for reader
Very exciting news.
Risker/Anne
On 5 November 2014 14:19, Pierre-Selim wrote:
> Kudos \o/ and keep on the good work!
>
> Pierre-Selim
> Message d'origine
> De: Lydia Pintscher
> Envoyé: mercredi 5 novembre 2014 19:09
> À: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Répondre à: W
Thanks very much for developing this Fae, it's a great idea.
Risker/Anne
On 17 October 2014 03:37, Fæ wrote:
> Due to recent vandalism a new report on Commons for page patrollers
> has been started at
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:F%C3%A6/BLP_overwrites>.
Which organizational values are you speaking about, Pine? The identified
Wikimedia values[1] do not really speak to financial investment strategy.
Risker
[1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Values
On 14 October 2014 14:18, Pine W wrote:
> Yes, thanks, those are relevant policies.
g
it an elected position would lead to a somehow better process for
identifying the next Wikimania location.
Risker/Anne
On 10 October 2014 10:44, Fæ wrote:
> On 10 October 2014 14:58, Lodewijk wrote:
> > If you're interested in discussing the future of Wikimania, perhaps it
>
Log of this office hours:
http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/%23wikimedia-office/20141009.txt
(Will also be posted on Meta)
Risker
On 9 October 2014 15:54, Philippe Beaudette wrote:
> This is happening in #wikimedia-office on the freenode network in about
> five. :-)
>
>
&
On 7 October 2014 00:57, John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Risker wrote:
>
>
> IMO the election must be run by a third party, as happened prior to
> 2013, by SPI.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_in_the_Public_Interest
> Adequate staf
o vote, or shouldn't have been allowed to vote using a staff account, when
that was in the eligibility criteria for many previous elections (not just
the 2013 one) is just rude. As best I can tell, there were no concerns
expressed in the lead-up the 2013 election about WMF staff having franchise.
Risk
f the applicable wikis where people might be posting are not included
in the SUL grouping (for example, FDC wiki or other non-public wikis,
Foundation wiki, etc).
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.o
to expect
that questions relevant to the responsibility of the team will receive a
response.
Risker/Anne
On 5 October 2014 14:13, Pine W wrote:
> Hi Tilman,
>
> Thanks for redirecting the thanks to Anna and Maria.
>
> Erik mentioned quarterly reviews accounting for c
cally checked for those types of duplicate votes, and would have
de-activated the earliest vote(s) keeping only the last one. As it
happens, nobody did that; the only votes we needed to strike were test
votes.[1]
Risker/Anne
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2013
pedia* standards:
formatting, manual of style, reliable sources as references (as opposed to,
say, blogs). It doesn't contain most of the elements of peer review seen
for scientific papers.
Risker/Anne
On 3 October 2014 15:56, Erlend Bjørtvedt wrote:
> But remember: all Wikipedia arti
tly Damon served as VP of
> Engineering at Edmodo, Inc., an educational content network, and was
> responsible for all web, platform, and mobile engineering, security,
> IT operations, support, and QA efforts.»)
>
> Welcome Damon!
>
>
I am admittedly amongst the lazy, so
jects, and wonder why editors at your project think that the current
level of participation is too low. I also don't understand why you find
your watchlist flooded using the current discussion process, but this may
be a difference in preferences or in the setup of your specific project.
Riske
osurgeons. They're going to wave the flag that they're focusing on
a specific aspect of medicine. It's what we do with the diversity
conference, and with the hackathons, too. You're not losing anything by
changing the name: you're recognizing the specialty focus of the
We do have a community centre. It's called Meta. It may not be a very
elegant one, and there are definitely parts that can be improved, but it's
our virtual community centre.
Risker/Anne
On 11 September 2014 19:54, Richard Symonds <
richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
>
d get a lot out of it?
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
This is the same problem. It's usurping the Wikimedia name, and this
proposal also usurps the Meta (all communities communication forum) name.
It is neither for Wikimedia (as a whole) nor for Meta. It's for designa
s,
but it's not that. "Wikimedia Affiliates Conference" will do fine.
Risker/Anne
On 11 September 2014 15:12, Ilario Valdelli wrote:
> On 11.09.2014 20:48, Isarra Yos wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm part of the Wikimedia movement, but there are no chapters nearby, nor
#x27;s going to be just as
much an issue for Flow as it would be if we just turned on those email
messages today. Looks brilliant on paper, but reality is a different
thing.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://me
e majority of people in this thread have signed their posts.
Indeed, Jon Davies' "+1" in response to this post had a 588-character
signature line, presumably added to his mail client preferences.
Risker/Anne
On 8 September 2014 11:43, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
> Hello,
>
&g
ticle
histories contain their username or IP (a form of automatic signature), so
I'm not convinced that there's an expectation on the part of new users that
anything they write anywhere will automatically be signed.
Risker/Anne
On 8 September 2014 10:24, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
newbies to participate on many of the
larger Wikimedia projects. There are lots of ways that we can make it
easier. The most obvious one is automatic signing of comments, and it is
something that we have technically been able to impose for years; sinebot
didn't come into existence in a vacuum.
Risk
On 8 September 2014 00:46, John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
> . e.g. once it is
> beta quality, I am sure Jimmy Wales will want it enabled on his user
> talk page, which would increase exposure to, and acceptance of, Flow.
>
>
...or possibly far less complaining on his page. :
cial interaction has
changed significantly, or that those with a low level of contribution to
discussion space are doing so because they find the *technology*
unappealing.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.
ch about the frills
(no matter how well they are executed) and focusing instead on what the
new "system" doesn't do. This is the real parallel between Flow and Visual
Editor - focusing on the "difference" between the new product and that it
was intended to replace, instea
rface (that would be VisualEditor), and to recognize that wikitext
editing needs to remain in existence as well. Adding a third one whose
primary purpose will be to talk about the content being created using the
other two is counterintuitive at best.
Risker/Anne
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Flow
y that it may not be possible to come up with a product
that is actually useful on the projects we have to replace the discussion
system we have. It seems that the Flow team has assembled the ingredients
to make a chocolate cake with the hope that it will be a suitable
replacement for vegetable stew.
30. Indeed, I'm not entirely clear why this isn't happening
onwiki, but I suppose there may be a reason for that which doesn't come
through in the original email.
Risker/Anne
On 4 September 2014 15:34, Bence Damokos wrote:
> Thank you for the suggestion, Anne!
>
> As so
A gmail address?
I am sure if you ask nicely the committee can be granted a wikimedia.org
email address through Mailman that will allow more than one person to
handle applications. It could probably be done pretty quickly.
Risker/Anne
On 4 September 2014 14:35, Carlos M. Colina wrote:
> D
Wasn't the creation of the DRAFT namespace at least in part a response to
concerns raised at ACTRIAL, in particular new, poorly developed articles
showing up in mainspace?
Risker/Anne
On 1 September 2014 19:08, Joe Decker wrote:
> This, to the best of my knowledge, represents the ent
Given the mission is sharing information, I'd suggest that if we have a 95%
drop in readership, we're failing the mission. Donations are only a means
to an end.
Risker/Anne
On 24 August 2014 22:57, MZMcBride wrote:
> Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> >First, let's m
of the systems that
developers and engineers work with on a daily basis do not permit edit
summaries, so adding what for many of us is an automatic and routine
comment is for some of them a rare and unusual event. (Perhaps they should
set their work account preferences to be "reminded" to inclu
orp/image.asp?FILE_TYPE=ELF&FILE_NAME=D201408\2014224\E0091608.TIF
President: Scott Perry
Vice President: Ann Perry
Secretary: Danielle Lewis
Someone else can figure out how to copy/paste.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
ht
On 21 August 2014 09:18, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
> On 21.08.2014 14:26, Risker wrote:
>
>> On 21 August 2014 05:31, Strainu wrote:
>>
>> ...
>
>>
>> I went to look at some of those same articles using my smartphone with the
>> "desktop&
y're suitable for
mobile devices. If they're hardly ever being used, we need to reconsider
their existence. Perhaps this becomes some sort of "meta data" tab from
articles. The current format isn't sustainable, though.
Risker/Anne
On 18 August 2014 03:53, Pete Forsyth wrote:
> Risker, some replies below:
>
>
As I stated in my response, although the WMF failed to predict that this
would be a hot issue, I predicted it clearly in February, and so did
another longtime community member. (If anybody wants to see t
On 17 August 2014 20:25, Pete Forsyth wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Risker wrote:
>
> > Well, hold on here.
> >
> >
> > On 17 August 2014 19:55, Pete Forsyth wrote:
> >
> > > I think it is also a problem to look at this in terms of &
ndreds of times the size of the WMF. I cannot think of any
software I have used in the last 20 years that has not had "bugs" or
unsatisfactory UI elements or seems to miss a functionality I'd like to
have. It is unreasonable to hold a comparatively very small organization
to a s
one of hundreds
of projects. The technology and engineering groups generally work at a
global level because they affect all projects; it's rare that they're doing
something for one project only.
There are lots of opportunities for community members to interact and to
test software in
sborne."
Nothing in that quote says that it is a Wikipedia article that is
"hidden".
Risker/Anne
On 3 August 2014 00:12, Fæ wrote:
> On 2 August 2014 23:49, Risker wrote:
> > I'm not sure you're correct about what is being "disappeared", Fae.
article is involved.
Risker/Anne
On 2 August 2014 23:27, Fæ wrote:
> Re:
> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/aug/02/wikipedia-page-google-link-hidden-right-to-be-forgotten
>
> If Google "disappearing" a Wikipedia article is a notable news event,
> wouldn't
any rate.
>
>
Me too, Andrew. I think we actually do need some sort of checklist or
guidance document on how to deal with these sorts of issues. In this
particular case, it had the added element of affecting readers possibly
even more so than editors, so some thoughts on how to involve
readers
together - WMF,
developers, and community members from all sorts of projects - to get them
right. We need to go back to that perspective. Everyone does. Not just
the WMF - our community does too.
Risker/Anne
On 14 July 2014 01:40, Pine W wrote:
> Hi Gryllida,
>
> As I said on the Arbcom
Actually, Trillium Corsage, I'd say that's a reason for banning you again.
It's a very serious allegation you're implying about a longstanding member
of our community.
Risker
On 11 July 2014 14:24, Trillium Corsage wrote:
> Hi Fae,
>
> I was banned from t
There's a easy, clearly accessible, one-click option for disabling
MediaViewer, Todd. Scroll to the bottom of the screen. Click "disable".
Done - it automatically changes your preference.
Risker/Anne
On 11 July 2014 02:44, Todd Allen wrote:
> Risker,
>
> I'm a
roblems associated with them. We're not at that level at all here. I
agree with John Vandenberg's comments that a clear roadmap and prioritized
list of next steps is probably required for MediaViewer.
Risker/Anne
On 11 July 2014 00:56, Todd Allen wrote:
> If you don't want to
What project(s) are you working on?
Risker
On 3 July 2014 18:12, Leigh Thelmadatter wrote:
> I am, at this moment, trying to give a workshop on Wikipedia to professors
> and they are having their own user pages being speedily deleted by
> Tarawa1943 and Taichi We have se
Okay, that's enough, Trilliium. You've now made a personal attack against
an identifiable individual based on gossip and rumour.
Stop.
Risker
On 29 June 2014 10:18, Trillium Corsage wrote:
> Pine,
>
> An analogous argument to the one you're making is: someone who in
On 17 June 2014 12:56, phoebe ayers wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Risker wrote:
>
>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I'm so very disappointed in the Board and the WMF for this TOU amendment,
> > which was obviously written to quell concerns ab
On 16 June 2014 20:48, phoebe ayers wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Risker wrote:
>
> > Not quite sure what you're shouting about, Gerard. The amendment clearly
> > gives individual projects the right to have an alternative to this
> > particular sec
since the primary
target project couldn't come to consensus on a policy, everyone else gets
stuck with one designed for enwiki.
Risker
On 16 June 2014 13:58, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> WOW,
> CAN SOMEONE WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO SO CLARIFY IF THIS WILL GET A
> HEA
rs of this forum to start moderating your posts.
Just stop, Pete. And everyone else, please stop responding and let these
threads die.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikime
on on any registrations
for any WMF projects, and I question whether or not it's an appropriate one
unless there is some specific reason to ask (e.g., accommodation
arrangements). Therefore, there is no accurate method to assess the number
of women who attended.
Risker/Anne
__
ipedia and Wikimedia projects, but he was put in a
situation that was well outside his comfort level. Wikipedia, Wikimedia and
the conference itself were inaccurately portrayed by a media outlet. We
all know it happens all the time; it's why we look for multiple reliable
sources in our articl
On 3 June 2014 12:25, David Gerard wrote:
> On 3 June 2014 16:37, Risker wrote:
>
> > Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an
> RFC,
> > we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so
> > that there is s
ople would
naturally base their opinions on their personal experiences from that very
early period.
Risker/Anne
On 3 June 2014 12:15, Edward Saperia wrote:
> Sounds like your suggestion would be a perfect contribution to some kind of
> community discussion to try and decide a framework to d
On 3 June 2014 09:05, Risker wrote:
>
>
> On 3 June 2014 03:02, ENWP Pine wrote:
>
>> Because VE has repeatedly been mentioned in this list as something that
>> is improving and may help us with acquisition of editors and their
>> knowledge, I have started to dra
201 - 300 of 468 matches
Mail list logo
