Content on the Simple English Wikipedia is indeed very uneven. Though most
of the project’s articles are stubs with not many issues, there are a lot
of mid-size articles with sourcing and/or accuracy problems.
And given the nature of Simple English, our good articles are not really
I also want to note something about question 10.
It's incredibly amusing that, on a list of questions for arguably the most
senior position the community has any say in, names for Wikimedia projects
(and referring to Wikimedia projects as a whole) are written incorrectly.
The bit: "WikiSpecies,
Independent of my opinions on the validity of such a new Wikimedia project,
there is currently an experiment of similar goals (and potentially
structure) over at Twitter:
It would be optimal if you did not continue to use this thread in an
attempt to draw attention to your block. Were someone to open your list of
contributions on the English Wikipedia, they would find a bunch of
suppressed edits, some on arbcom pages, and a block placed referring
> On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 2:24 PM Gnangarra wrote:
>> tend to agree there should be a mobile friendly version, the article
>> should be visible at the same time. What wording is used it definitely
>> should not have religious actions or symbology in it... t
I opened a browser I’m not logged in on to see what these ads were.
Here is the text, unedited, of the second ad I was shown (after closing the
“Hi reader . Sorry for the interruption, but this Saturday Wikipedia
really needs your help. This is the 3rd appeal we've shown you. 98% of our
If someone states that something is unclear, they very obviously intend
“unclear” to apply to their perception of it.
For example, I just used the words “very obviously.” That is my perception,
my opinion, what I gathered from the information available to me. Should I
note “it is my opinion
Is this funded by the WMF? I noticed it in the list of "promoters" but was
unable to discern whether there was funding involved.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 4:00 PM Gopa Vasanth
> *(feel free to forward the message as is to your friends, family members
> > attacks and harass contributors repeatedly, many of these people are
> > protected by other at AN/I or large followings that ensure they are
> > untouchable.
> > Just like this thread dismissing problems when they are rais
I fail to understand how requiring public report of publicly-occurring
harassment is a problem.
If people are being harassed constantly via off-wiki communication,
emailing a local admin team or T is definitely the best thing to do if
they don’t want to make it public in an on-wiki report.
More generally, conduct issues are handled locally. We do not have a
central authority to handle issues like this; local communities are, in the
vast majority of cases, capable of handling conduct problems of it’s
editors. Not to mention that T would be incapable of handling every minor
With regard to the issue Facebook is having, if that were to become an
issue on Wikimedia projects something likely would have happened already.
The majority of disturbing content is handled by volunteers, and that which
T handles is often sent to them by volunteers.
Also, given the relatively
Agreed. There is no way to get around the fact that some people oppose our
message of free access to our projects for everyone, and the actions we
make in favor of that goal are often political.
However, there is a very large gap between publicly supporting such
policies as a less regulated
t; Foundation, there must be a published transparent governance review by
> >> the WMF board of trustees to examine and agree on this significant
> >> operational change to the public Foundation strategy and the terms for
> >> the CEO.
> >> Thank y
> Link to Phabricator task to implement the banner:
> CC: María Sefidari as WMF Chair.
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 05:50, K. Peachey wrote:
> > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T250508
It seems that they just gave a link to that website, which...eh...
When I opened it, I heard one sentence of the stream before I stopped it
and read the rest of the webpage: "and then we give thanks to spirit, for
the air we breathe, for the earth..." After reading the rest of the
As it appears my earlier email was not approved by the moderators:
I'm in agreement with Fæ on this.
The text and videos given on the subject of the new "interconnection" focus
is all extremely vague. I don't see how this is a change from previous
branding, or how the idea of "interconnection"
I’m in agreement with Fæ here.
I just checked and wikipedia.org’s Alexa ranking is 13. That’s very
different from the 5 last time I checked, but it could be due to a number
of temporary factors. If there is evidence of a marked decrease in traffic
independent of the Coronavirus and other issues,
Speaking as a person within the great state of Vermont, (not included in
This mailing list has a lot of people on it, many of which are not within
the United States, if not most. And of those who are in the United States,
there’s a large chance that they’re not in one of those
The IRC channels where public, on-topic discussions are held usually have
public logging, like #wikimedia-office. And regardless of the channel,
discussions within them have no bearing on onwiki actions. In other words,
binding decisions cannot be made solely on IRC. That is very different
I've sent in multiple emails about this issue already, the last one about a
week ago. I was given a response within a few hours; a boilerplate
explaining why one might be seeing banners after they had donated, and
explaining my options on how to hide them.
I had not donated, and I did not mention
Is this the right time to plug Timeless?
It is, well, timeless. Looks modern too.
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 18:22 John Erling Blad wrote:
> Try holding your cellphone vertically.
> tor. 12. des. 2019, 22.38 skrev Todd Allen :
> > Erm, I remember what websites looked like in 1996. I even made
Mail list logo