Re: [Wikimedia-l] Rethink of observability (Mingli Yuan)
This is an interesting topic about RecentChanges and its many uses and variants. I'm copying Analytics, EE and Research lists because I hope that some of our colleagues from these lists will hop over to Wikimedia-l to participate in this discussion. [a] In particular I would call my colleagues' attention to this section of Mingli's email: Content is only one aspect to observe, people are another: * Who are the experts on some topics? * Who are my buddies on some articles? * Who did help me to improve an article originally I wrote? In all, we may reshape our technical infrastructure in this direction for new spaces of participation. And finally, one open question for the system designer: * Towards better content and community, what is the most important things we want our user to observe? I'll just note here some observability work on user contributions that has been done or is in progress. 1. User Analysis Tool [b], similar to the legacy tool by User:X!. Be sure to look at the Future plans tab. 2. Listen to Wikipedia [c] visualization tool of recent changes, mostly for aesthetics but there may be ways to adapt some of the ideas or code used here for other interesting purposes. 2. Snuggle [d] which is a tool that helps to identify good-faith and bad-faith new editors. 4. Finding a Collaborator [e] is a current research project, also see [f] a visualization example. As part of this work the researchers seem to have formulated a way of quantifying an editor's impact, although I haven't seen the formula yet. As you probably know the quality of edits and editors is a topic that gets discussed repeatedly. 5. WikiStats [g] which provides high-level statistics about Wikimedia projects. 6. WikiMetrics [h] cohort analysis, has a lot of potential for expanding its tool set. 7. For code and related technical contributions see [i]. 8. There are a variety of tools next to users' requests at English Wikipedia's Requests for Permissions page [j] such as WikiChecker [k] and automated edits logs [l]. This is a good discussion and I would be happy to have an office hour meeting for live chat. Pine [a] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-June/072507.html [b] https://tools.wmflabs.org/supercount/index.php [c] http://listen.hatnote.com/ [d] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Snuggle [e] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator [f] https://depts.washington.edu/reflex/ [g] https://stats.wikimedia.org [h] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimetrics [i] http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/ [j] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions [k] http://en.wikichecker.com/user/?t=Jimbo%20Wales [l] https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoedits/index.php?user=Jimbo%20Waleslang=enwiki=wikipediabegin=end= ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia
I think having a two part RfC with the first part discussing the minimum conditions the community would like VE to meet before having a discussion about more widely enabling VE in the second portion of the RfC makes sense. This raises the possibility that as VE becomes more and more functional that the community will incrementally approve of wider default use over time and different presentations of VE to editors. There are a lot of options for how extensively VE could be enabled and how it can be presented to users with the community's consent, which we can discuss in the second portion of the RfC. I have a draft for that portion off-wiki that I will tweak depending on how the first portion looks before I put it on-wiki for other editors to review. Risker, would you like to set up the first portion of this, if this arrangement sounds good to you? Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia
Asaf, I agree in some ways. ENWP's email list is a backwater though, and since the discussion that got me thinking about this issue started on this list it made sense to me to keep it on this list. Also, other wikis' experiences with VE are relevant. My personal experience with VE has most recently been on Meta. Also, you may remember that I suggested that a recent and much more intensive discussion about Commons would have been better elsewhere than this list, but a lot of it stayed here. The volume of this conversation about VE is pretty low. There should be a single standard on this list, not separate standards for Commons and ENWP. However, I agree that we don't need to keep this conversation here. Risker and anyone else who's interested, please continue on my ENWP talk page or start a thread somewhere like VP-T. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia
GerardM, Yes, if Asaf or someone else wanted to have a low-frequency discussion about VE on Hebrew Wikipedia or some other wiki on this list I think that would be ok too. IMO this is a high-traffic general-purpose list, but Asaf is right that taking discussions to a more specific place is appreciated by others who may not want to get 50 emails about a local issue. Let's continue discussion about VE on English Wikipedia on the pages I suggested. Thanks, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Signpost is (sort of) published
Hi Andy, The password isn't a single point of failure in the sense that Jarry and Ed both had the password and either of them might have become available to publish hours or days later, but I felt the Signpost was already late, we had enough material to publish, and waiting another week would mean we would lose the work that had gone into the Traffic Report and we would need to reformat the Featured Content Report to add another week's worth of material. This is the first time I have felt confident enough to make a decision to publish in Ed's absence with Tony's agreement, so this is the first time I have needed the password. Tony and I now have the password. I hope that future publications are normal even if Ed is absent. Thanks for your interest in the Signpost. Do you have any other questions? Pete, thanks for your comments. It is good to feel that the Signpost's all-volunteer staff is appreciated. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] 2015 strategic plan
Thanks Phoebe. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Edit #1 and Challenge #1 - user privacy
Hi Lila, My read of the *new* Privacy Policy is that nonpublic emails sent to WMF should remain nonpublic unless the user gives consent to the contrary. The policy states that We may share your information for a particular purpose, if you agree. Otherwise emails are considered personal information and their redistribution is restricted. See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy#share-to-experiment and https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy#Access_to_and_release_of_personally_identifiable_information So, please do not take the view that Otherwise, we will consider them public if you do not hear back from someone who has contacted you. The general practice in the community is that emails are considered private by default. Private doesn't mean absolutely private, for example it's common for members of certain committees to circulate emails among themselves, but those emails don't usually get forwarded outside of the group or republished without opt-in permission from the sender. Similarly, WMF may circulate emails internally. User privacy is a big deal in this community. Perhaps you know more about the Privacy Policy than I do, but my understanding is that your announced plans are inconsistent with the current and draft policies. Fortunately, that is easy to fix in this situation. I am glad you have taken an interest in the experiences of new editors. (: Pine Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 11:22:21 -0800 From: Lila Tretikov l...@wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Edit #1 and Challenge #1 Message-ID: CAByo0cFFWkuHm=_iy0zc598_asmhr2aocu2pa_mcws-feth...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 All, It'd be wonderful to be able to share these stories publicly in the future. I'm going to reach out to those who have already shared their experiences with me to confirm they're comfortable with sharing. If you're not comfortable with sharing your story, or want to withhold your name, please let me know in your email. Otherwise, we will consider them public, so we can build on your experiences and share them widely! Thank you! Lila ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Edit #1 and Challenge #1 - user privacy
Hi Nathan, what you're describing is an opt-out practice. I believe that the practice should be opt-in. Take this with a grain of salt. I participate in some grantmaking and administrative groups and I err on the side of privacy, but I'm fairly confident that the Privacy Policy applies in this case and that the practice should be opt-in for republication, even if not explicitly required by policy, because it's the more conservative and more courteous approach. In general this community is conservative about privacy issues, although we are also interested in transparency, which makes for an interesting mix of priorities. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] FW: Edit #1 and Challenge #1 - user privacy
I was contacted off-list about this situation by someone who wants to remain anonymous but has given me permission to forward their input to the list. I am not a copyright expert and this isn't professional legal advice. It would be interesting to hear what WMF Legal thinks about republishing emails, both from the privacy angle and the copyright angle. Thanks, Pine Pine, why not just suggest she invite respondents to adopt a free license, instead of reinventing the wheel? Like...I'd like to have the right to republish these stories, but it's up to the respondents. If you're willing, please explicitly state that you release these under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license; or, if you'd rather not be identified, under the CC-0 license. We have these tools for a reason :) ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] 2015 strategic plan
Hi, can someone with knowledge of WMF's thinking expand on this statement from Lila? Starting the process for our next strategic planning exercise, which will be different from last time, and focused on improving our ability to react quickly and adjust as necessary to opportunities and challenges. Is this implying that the entire strategic plan will focus on agility, or that agility will be a priority in the next strategic plan? Also, how was this decision reached? Thanks, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] A personal note
Thank you for the explanations, Lila, Molly, and everyone else. Wil, I happen to be waiting on an email right now so I have a few minutes to spare. If you need clarification on anything that has been said in this discussion I am happy to meet you on IRC or have a Skype conversation. I would suggest that this thread is consuming a lot of bandwidth in this email list and we should move the discussion elsewhere. We can also talk on your talk page, although I think your more conversational style is better suited to IRC or Skype. Cheers, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Participating on Wikipediocracy
I will say, in Lila's defense, that I've been impressed with what I've seen of her in public. (: However, Wil, I agree with points others have made. I'm concerned that you're going to create drama with what you're doing here, and make Lila's and WMF's jobs more complicated. I am assuming good faith that you are well-intentioned, but I am worried, not so much for your sake but for the community's, Lila's, and WMF's. I would like to show you some options for places where the style of conversation you are using would be a better fit, where you can ask questions and have discussions, and which are less politically sensitive than this list is. Of course you are welcome on this list if you have cross-wiki suggestions or can't get questions answered elsewhere, and I respect your right to free speech, but I would ask you to consider these suggestions. On English Wikipedia, you will find friendly and helpful people at our Teahouse. [1] For questions and realtime help you can also visit #wikipedia-en-help on Freenode IRC. If you want to get to know Wikipedians, I suggest that you join local volunteer meetups such Wiknic if there is one in your area. In those circumstances most people are happy to socialize. [2] If you are able to attend WikiConference USA in New York, I think you would enjoy it. [3] If you want to have electronic conversations that are more chatty and less formal than the discussions on this list, I suggest IRC. #wikipedia-en is a high profile channel and many of the questions that you asked here could be discussed in there. And as I said above, for realtime help you can visit #wikipedia-en-help. However, I ask as a personal favor that you don't have conversations in #wikimedia-office which is the main WMF channel. I can't stop you from talking there any more than I can take away your free speech rights, but I think any communications in there from you would create more complications. I feel it's ok for you or any Wikipedian in good standing to talk on WO if they want, but engaging in semi-official diplomacy is a very different matter, if that's what you're doing (I haven't checked your edits and I don't want to). There may come a time when you have the community's trust and can act in high-profile ways with the support of the community, but at the moment the discussion on this email list tells me that your actions are creating complications to the start of Lila's tenure in ways that have me worried. To use an analogy, imagine Michelle Obama saying in public that her personal opinion is that Barack Obama should have diplomatic talks with insert hostile country here or revoke insert executive order here, or that she personally has been conducting outreach to insert hostile country here without going through the State Department. That would create complications for Barack Obama and lots of other people, even though Michelle has a right to communicate her views. I am available to answer questions if you have any for me. You can ask on my Meta talk page, on my English Wikipedia talk page, through email, or set up a time to meet me on IRC or Skype. I'm sure other participants in this discussion would also be willing to talk with you in places other than this list. If I have misunderstood your position please correct me. I appreciate your interest in Wikipedia and I hope you will be a net positive to the community. (: Pine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wicnik [3] http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/Main_Page ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Fwd: Bad usage of money in Brazil
Hi Rodrigo, Thank you for these questions. There have been questions about the India program as well, so these questions about Brazil can be added to the list of issues for WMF to investigate. I am not personally familiar with either of the Brazil or India catalyst programs, but I suggest that you contact Asaf or Anasuya if you don't get a response on this list or on the discussion page within two days. Thank you again for bringing up these questions. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Commons' frontpage probably shouldn't prominently feature a decontextualised stack of corpses.
Hi Kevin, My comment here expresses my personal opinion only. I understand how bringing this issue to Wikimedia-l could seem appropriate because Commons is a project that has an unusual degree of cross-wiki influence and activity. While it's ok to notify Wikimedia-l that this issue is being discussed, the main body of the discussion should stay on-wiki on Commons [1]. Per the essay about wikidrama on English Wikipedia [2] and the Principle of Least Drama, it is best not to make the same point in multiple places, as split discussions are often more difficult to follow and spread the drama to more places. Also, when placing notices of discussions from other wikis to this list, I think it is best to follow the detailed guidelines for Requests for Comment from English Wikipedia [3] which ask users to write a brief, neutral statement of the issue. In general, cross-wiki and cross-list *advocacy* (not mere notification) from anywhere else to this mailing list could be considered canvassing [4]. I think you were well-intentioned in posting a notice to this list but I would ask you to do it a bit differently in the future. Thank you for raising the issue for discussion. I think you have good points, and you should make them on Commons, where it appears that other Commons contributors agree with you that this situation could have been handled differently [1]. Pine [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page#Dead_bodies.3F [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Drama [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Canvassing ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Commons' frontpage probably shouldn't prominently feature a decontextualised stack of corpses.
I apologize for that formatting mess. Emails that look beautiful in my Hotmail editing window get mangled when I send them to lists, and this seems to happen on a regular basis. I'll try sending this again. -- Hi Kevin, My comment here expresses my personal opinion only. I understand how bringing this issue to Wikimedia-l could seem appropriate because Commons is a project that has an unusual degree of cross-wiki influence and activity. While it's ok to notify Wikimedia-l that this issue is being discussed, the main body of the discussion should stay on-wiki on Commons [1]. Per the essay about wikidrama on English Wikipedia [2] and the Principle of Least Drama, it is best not to make the same point in multiple places, as split discussions are often more difficult to follow and spread the drama to more places. Also, when placing notices of discussions from other wikis to this list, I think it is best to follow the detailed guidelines for Requests for Comment from English Wikipedia [3] which ask users to write a brief, neutral statement of the issue. In general, cross-wiki and cross-list *advocacy* (not mere notification) from anywhere else to this mailing list could be considered canvassing [4]. I think you were well-intentioned in posting a notice to this list but I would ask you to do it a bit differently in the future. Thank you for raising the issue for discussion. I think you have good points, and you should make them on Commons, where it appears that other Commons contributors agree with you that this situation could have been handled differently [1]. Pine [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page#Dead_bodies.3F [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Drama [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Canvassing ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Commons' frontpage probably shouldn't prominently feature a decontextualised stack of corpses.
Hi Keegan, I looked for equivalent Meta policies before posting the links to English Wikipedia. Canvassing is referenced on Meta and Commons although there is no page on Meta or Commons specifically describing a canvassing policy that I see. Perhaps there should be, since both wikis seem to have an unwritten rule against canvassing. I believe I was clear that the RfC guidelines and the Drama essay are from English Wikipedia but I think they are the best practice to follow here, and that this is my opinion only. I agree that posting a notification to this list was appropriate, but not with forking or moving the discussion to here. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Thank you
Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 07:57:15 -0300 From: Everton Zanella Alvarenga everton.alvare...@okfn.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thank you! Message-ID: caoumejbfrsrnbcai-sj6b8eensfqdaftf-nwefmzseyqi5d...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 2014-05-02 4:56 GMT-03:00 David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com: On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Lila Tretikov l...@wikimedia.org wrote: I've been warned that joining the Wikimedia movement is a bit like drinking from a firehose, and so I'd consider myself, right now, to be excited, curious, optimistic, and just a tiny little bit daunted. Actually it is more like this :-) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=316AzLYfAzw This video should be at WMF job positions page! Welcome, Lila! I wish you lots of patience. An old message I sent here I recommend: https://www.mail-archive.com/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/msg05071.html Warm regards from Brazil. Do vstrechi, Tom David, thank you. That video is right on target. I can't decide if I should laugh or sigh. Tom, that's an intriguing idea, and it's good to hear from you. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Thank you!
Thank you for joining us and for your message, Lila. Many of us have great hope for you and your work with us. Pine Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 17:39:42 -0700 From: Lila Tretikov l...@wikimedia.org To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Thank you! Message-ID: cabyo0ceug2gwwhyznatnf+gtzqqfoumocemom5hq-1t2ngr...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi everyone, I want to thank you all for the best wishes you've expressed since the announcement. I am very excited to be joining you as the new Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation. Let me tell you why I'm joining. Like everyone, I've been a Wikipedia reader for years. I use it to get background on events in the news, to look up quick facts and satisfy my curiosity, and to better understand the world around me, every day. My nine year old son, like many children around him, has grown up with Wikipedia as his native resource for knowledge. It is incredible. But I also realize that as an educated person living in a rich part of the world, I have access to a wide range of information resources. That's not true for everyone. For people who are less economically fortunate, or who live in parts of the world where access to information is heavily constrained, Wikipedia is even more critical. It is an utterly unique resource that opens possibilities for more equitable and open world. That's why I want to work for the Wikimedia Foundation: to help grow the availability of free, unbiased information for everyone around the world, in their own language, unimpeded by censorship or other forms of interference. It's a colossal mission and I am glad and humbled to be playing a leadership role in helping to achieve it. I’m excited to bring my passion for building products that people love and growing innovative, high-performing organizations to the Foundation. In getting oriented I’ve done lots and lots of reading, and had some wonderful conversations with Board members, Sue, and the C-level team. I met a lot of staff today at the Metrics Meeting, and I'm hoping to meet them all before the end of this month. I've been warned that joining the Wikimedia movement is a bit like drinking from a firehose, and so I'd consider myself, right now, to be excited, curious, optimistic, and just a tiny little bit daunted. Thank you again for personally welcoming me to your incredible world. I have been lucky to have had great opportunities to join with amazing people on big quests. This is the largest quest and I am thrilled to be on it with all of you. I want to extend my gratitude to Sue for the incredible work she has done and all the time she has committed to help bring me on-board. To all of you for your warm welcome. And my deepest thanks to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees for giving me this extraordinary opportunity. Truly yours, Lila ___ 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] Wikimedia Foundation Report, February 2014
Thanks Tilman. I asked a question on the Annual Plan talk page that's relevant here as well, and anyone who knows the answer can respond, especially while Anasuya is busy. Can someone explain the difference between the functions of the LE and PED groups, and is there a plan to integrate them? Thanks, Pine === Grantmaking Learning and Evaluation, and Program Evaluation Design === /(The Program Evaluation and Design group, formerly situated in the Programs department, became part of the Grantmaking department in February, see announcement QA https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/QA_Frank_Schulenburg_announcement_February_2014)/ * Concluded the alpha *test of Fluxx http://fluxx.io/, the grantmaking software*, and worked collaboratively with Fluxx labs to fix the reported bugs and enhance the user experience based on the current workflow of WMF grants programs. * Started a community discussion on ArWp to set up *a new micro-grants program pilot https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/ARWP_small_individual_grants_pilot* that would directly support the needs of individual contributors via microgrants from the Wikimedia Foundation for access to sources. * Prepared development work on *Wikimetrics* (with Analytics), with a contract starting 3/3/2014. * In partnership with IEG, set up three Grantmaking portals (IEG, IdeaLab, and Grants:Start) for *translation*. Developed best practices and a workflow for separating translatable content from template structure and style in grantmaking portals (see Translatable Content Template https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:TCT). * In partnership with IEG, began to draft *IdeaLab sprint planning https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Build/March-June_2014_sprint_plan*. Focusing on technical requirements and impact evaluation criteria. * Grants Programs: o Annual Plan Grants: published *cost-benefit survey results https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/Feedback_and_continuous_improvement_of_the_FDC_process/Cost-Benefit_Survey* o Project Event Grants: Launched work with consultancy Inspire to *map out the spending over time* and prepare potential framework * Released revised and expanded *learning module for Wikimetrics https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programs:Evaluation_portal/Learning_modules/1Wikimetrics_Training_Overview* * Developed plans for pre-conference workshop sessions for *Wikimedia Conference 2014* https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programs:Evaluation_portal/News#upcoming-events * Hosted two evaluation and learning *virtual meet-ups*: o The first presented by Jaime Anstee: Program tracking and reporting toolkit (February 13, At least 9 program leaders, 4 GLEE, and 4 PED team members attended live; current youtube view count: 24) View the toolkit https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programs:Evaluation_portal/Library/Tracking_and_Reporting_Toolkit or the recording https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmQ50zm_CtA o The second presented by Jessie Wild and Siko Bouterse: How to be a Star IEG Grantee (February 19), attended by at least 7 program leaders, 5 from GLEE, and 1 PED member (view count at 25) View the report https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Learning/Round_1_2013/Impact or the recording https://plus.google.com/events/c5sud44lefi4nv9cpqu4hck9qec Revenue for the month of January is $3.42MM versus plan of $0.01MM, approximately $3.41MM or 58,335% over plan. Year-to-date revenue is $38.17MM versus plan of $45.04MM, approximately $6.87MM or 15% under plan. Can we please use the word fiscal if we don't mean calendar year? Expenses for the month of January is $3.97MM versus plan of $4.53MM, approximately $559K or 12% under plan, primarily due to lower personnel expenses, capital expenses, internet hosting, legal fees, grants and travel expenses partially offset by higher outside contract services and payment processing fees. Year-to-date expenses is $22.75MM versus plan of $27.39MM, approximately $4.64MM or 17% under plan, Cash position is $54.67MM as of January 31, 2014. Imagine a world in which the Foundation wanted to make life easier for volunteers. ___ 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] The Economist: Wikipeaks? The popular online encyclopedia must work out what is next
Here's a recent article from The Economist. Some of the reader comments about the article were interesting, especially considering the population that is likely to be reading and commenting about an article in The Economist. http://www.economist.com/news/international/21597959-popular-online-encyclopedia-must-work-out-what-next-wikipeaks Pine ___ 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] Because you don't hear it enough
An editor wrote this on Jimbo's talk page. I hope you will appreciate this as much as I do. Because you don't hear it enough I love it here. I love Wikipedia. It's got its problems - lots of them. It has its issues. It's not perfect. But that, in its way, is the point. It's not a complete encyclopedia, it's an encyclopedia that you, and I, and everyone else on the planet (and maybe people not on it) are welcome to edit, as long as we're trying to make it a better encyclopedia. It is flawed, but that is the essence of humanity's works. So I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for making this magical, wonderful, flawed, human endeavor. - Jorgath (talk) (contribs) 19:24, 2 April 2014 (UTC) ___ 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] Feedback on the last 2 years
Hi Christophe, Thank you for these interesting emails. I'm cc'ing Anasuya on this discussion with the hope that what you've learned can be disseminated to other Wikimedia affiliates, especially new or aspiring chapters. Is the decision matrix that you use for your programs available in English? I would like to have a copy of it on Meta along with these emails. I am interested in this subject partly because of the discussion about WMF's Annual Plan and partly because there are occasional discussions about forming a new thematic organization or chapter in my region. Thanks, Pine ___ 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Adrianne Wadewitz (User:Wadewitz)
Hi all, As you may have heard, we recently lost Adrianne Wadewitz (User:Wadewitz) to a climbing accident. Adrianne served on the board of the Wiki Education Foundation. She had a Ph.D. in English Literature and was a Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow at the Center for Digital Learning and Research at Occidental College. You can watch a video of her discussing Wikipedia at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Impact_of_Wikipedia_Adrianne_Wadewitz.webm. You may recognize her from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Impact_Of_Wikipedia.webm. Relevant links are below. Condolences are being left on her talk page on English Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wadewitz. Her partner has posted on her talk page that memorial services will be held Monday, April 14 in Los Angeles and Saturday, April 26 in Indiana. Pine * https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikimedian_activist_Adrianne_Wadewitz_dies * http://www.hastac.org/blogs/cathy-davidson/2014/04/10/remembering-adrianne-wadewitz-scholar-communicator-teacher-leader * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wadewitz ___ 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 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] OpenSSL vulnerability
I'm cross-posting this email from Wikitech-l from Greg Grossmeier. I think wide distribution is appropriate especially for contributors who may use vulnerable off-wiki communication tools with their Wikimedia password or for Wikimedia activity. -- Yesterday a widespread issue in OpenSSL was disclosed that would allow attackers to gain access to privileged information on any site running a vulnerable version of that software. Unfortunately, all Wikimedia Foundation hosted wikis are potentially affected. We have no evidence of any actual compromise to our systems or our users information, but as a precautionary measure we are resetting all user session tokens. In other words, we will be forcing all logged in users to re-login (ie: we are logging everyone out). All logged in users send a secret session token with each request to the site and if a nefarious person were able to intercept that token they could impersonate other users. Resetting the tokens for all users will have the benefit of making all users reconnect to our servers using the updated and fixed version of the OpenSSL software, thus removing this potential attack. As an extra precaution, we recommend all users change their passwords as well. Again, there has been no evidence that Wikimedia Foundation users were targeted by this attack, but we want all of our users to be as safe as possible. Thank you for your understanding and patience, Greg Grossmeier ___ 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] Strategic goals of Wikimania
Have there been any discussions of the link between the purposes that Wikimania serves and the Strategic Plan? I'm interested in thinking about what kinds of resources are appropriate for Wikimania especially regarding attendance for grants committee members. To make the case for significant committee attendance I think I need to know what the strategic purposes of Wikimania are. (: Thanks, Pine ___ 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] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690
I'll discuss my original email to Arbcom more specifically. I asked them to check if Sandole had been using an undisclosed account for Harvard-related editing and if discussing that account on this list would have amounted to outing. However, I no longer have a reason to think that Sandole was using that account, so I don't see a need for Arbcom involvement and neither does WTT. He has given me permission to say on this list that it's not committee business and therefore we won't be commenting on the matter. There are still unanswered questions but none that need to involve Arbcom at this time. Pine Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 07:32:23 -0400 From: Risker risker...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690 of WMF funding Message-ID: CAPXs8yTt4ZOLE0YbNqpYp1HPip0bFius-1N9J_wxewWg5=u...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I'm still a bit confused as to why you reported this to Arbcom (Wikipedia in residence programs, paid editing, and general review of accounts are all outside of their purview), or what they're supposedly looking at. This is a community and WMF issue, and I do not see anything at all for Arbcom to do here. In fact, I'd be concerned if they're poking around on this when there are several matters well within their mandate that are not apparently being addressed. Risker/Anne On 2 April 2014 03:07, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote: Although much of my original email to Arbcom about this situation is outdated, I can report that Arbcom is having a look at this situation. I don't think there is any action needed on their part at the moment. I am only relaying my personal views and not speaking on their behalf. While we wait for further answers and documentation about this issue, I hope those who have some spare time will look at the proposed Annual Plan for the next fiscal year. I am glad WMF is providing good opportunities for community and public input. Pine ___ 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] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690 of WMF funding
Thanks Sue. I think there are ways WiRs could add valuable content directly such as doing mass uploads of archived documents to Commons, or add article content as happened here. However I don't think it's a good idea for WMF to involve itself so much with content generation, and the manner in which this project was started and managed had problems as you described. I think that WiRs need a higher level of training and supervision than happened here, especially if the WiR is not already an established Wikimedia contributor and familiar with the relevant policies for their work. Could WMF also discuss the copyright issues involved? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Timothysandole#Copyright_release_for_excerpts_from_reports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Russia%E2%80%93United_States_relations#Recent_removal_of_apparent_copyright_violation:_context https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russia%E2%80%93United_States_relationsdiff=601379035oldid=524953814 Thanks, Pine ___ 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] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690 of WMF funding
Before we start thinking about the implications for WiR in general or WMF's relationship with Stanton, I think we should focus on establishing the facts of what happened here. After we have a good understanding of the facts we can discuss the implications. I'm still waiting for Arbcom to get back to me before I comment more extensively. I'm guessing that they may take awhile if they need to establish consensus among themselves before responding. Pine ___ 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] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690 of WMF funding
Thanks Erik. I am going to be discussing this in private with the English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee before making further comments here. Pine ___ 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] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690 of WMF funding
As important as this issue is let's remember that the big picture mission is to have high quality content that is easy and free to access. WMF management has a lot to handle in addition to this investigation and the Sandole situation shouldn't consume such a large portion of management's time that other priorities get neglected. For example I heard that WMF is very close to finally appointing a new ED and they're also working on VE, Flow, mobile, grants, legal issues, the Annual Plan, and a million other things that we also care about. I may have more to say about the Sandole situation after I hear back from Arbcom. Pine ___ 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] Annual Plan process
Some time ago I requested a timeline for the Annual Plan process. It's now up on Meta in case anyone else is curious. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan Pine ___ 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] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690 of WMF funding
Russiavia, thanks for your efforts to make a comprehensive report. It's certainly worth reading, although I am refraining from personally reaching major conclusions until after we have heard more details from WMF. Regarding Timothy Sandole's qualifications for the job, he could have been an experienced Wikipedian who had solid editing experience in an anonymous account before he registered the Sandole account for the purpose of Belfair-related editing. I hope this is the case. I'm surprised that Belfair would hire him if he knew very little about copyright, but Belfair may not have had enough experience with Wikipedia to know what questions to ask. I hope that WMF asks basic questions about copyright if someone will be editing for pay or training new editors. It's very problematic to hear from Timothy that anyone at WMF was his direct boss. This raises lots of red flags and adds more complex problems. This is also one of the reasons I hope WMF Legal is aware of this situation because I can think of multiple types of liability this could create. I would encourage WMF not to rush the process of investigating what happened here including what seem to be contradictory statements in WMF documents and from WMF employees. It would be best to get a comprehensive report even if that takes a week or two. I appreciate WMF investigating this and that WMF board members have taken an interest. Pine ___ 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] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690 of WMF funding
That's a very interesting blog post, and at first glance situation looks bad in a number of ways. I'm bothered by the lack of reporting as well as the COI issues involved. Anasuya, at I don't think the $53,690 number is the right one, but regardless of how much money was involved, can you look at this issue, figure out what happened from start to finish, and respond to the other questions raised in this discussion? Can you confirm what the amount of money involved was, clarify why Sandole was listed as a WMF Fundraiser contractor which implied that he raised money for WMF instead of being a grantee receiving money from WMF, that the money came entirely from Stanton, how it was accounted for in the financial statements referenced by Tomasz, and what reports were produced that may have been sent back to Stanton or WMF about what the outcomes of the grant were? I would also be interested in knowing what COI rules were established as conditions of this grant, by Stanton, Harvard, and/or WMF. It would be interesting to get full copies of any contracts or grant award documents although that may be appropriate for review by the Board in private. I'm also CCing this to Garfield and WMF Legal. It looks like something went very wrong here. Thanks, Pine ___ 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] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690 of WMF funding
Hi Jan-Bart, I'm saying that this looks bad and asking what happened. I directed my email to the people who I think are in the best positions to respond or would want to look at this for themselves. There is a point at which asking questions becomes trolling or wasting resources but I think the consensus here is that this situation should be investigated. Please assume good faith (: Pine ___ 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Honoring deceased Wikimedian Ihor Kostenko (user Ig2000)
In case anyone on WikimediaAnnounce-l missed the news: http://wikimediaukraine.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/in-memoriam-of-ihor-kostenko/ https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/02/24/wikipedia-ihor-kostenko-dies/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-02-26/Special_report Memorials are being left on Ihor's talk page: https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%B1%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8F_%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D1%83%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B0:Ig2000 James Alexander posted this quote on Wikimedia-l: Whether our lives and our deaths were for peace and a new hope or for nothing we cannot say, it is you who must say this. We leave you our deaths. Give them their meaning. We were young, they say. We have died; remember us. --Archibald MacLeish User:Wnt has proposed that we create an annual award in Ihor's name. ...If the editor desired, he could accept the award at a WMF event in a public way, but the news of the selection could always be released first on February 20, so that reporters covering these stories would always take a moment to explain who Ihor Kostenko was and what the day means. And just maybe, by educating more people before a conflict comes to a head, some day one of these award winners will have stayed some future sniper's hand and saved some other Ihor, even if we will never know it. -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_158#Death_of_a_Wikipedian I hope that we can honor Ihor in a way that takes no sides with regard to geopolitics while memorializing Ihor's life and promoting values which are important to the Wikimedia movement. RIP Ihor. Pine ___ 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 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] Fwd: [Wikimedia Announcements] (press release)
Hi LiAnna, who wrote the FAQ for the press release? I have some concerns. Thanks, Pine Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:19:42 -0800 From: LiAnna Davis lda...@wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikimedia Announcements] (press release) Frank Schulenburg named executive director of new Wiki Education Foundation Message-ID: caejbvqzsiesxhw8hjrv51cile5tldu3b86t1xkgpo4dotu9...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Forwarding on for those of you not on the Wikimedia Announcements list. -- Forwarded message -- From: Jay Walsh jwa...@wikimedia.org Date: Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 1:16 PM Subject: [Wikimedia Announcements] (press release) Frank Schulenburg named executive director of new Wiki Education Foundation To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org Passing along for your information. This release is posted on the WMF wiki at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/Frank_Schulenburg_named_executive_director_of_new_WEF An accompanying QA can also be found here: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/QA_Frank_Schulenburg_announcement_February_2014 --- Frank Schulenburg named executive director of new Wiki Education Foundation (San Francisco, California) 12 February 2014 -- The Wiki Education Foundation, a new nonprofit organization that supports the Wikipedia Education Program in the United States and Canada, has named Frank Schulenburg as its inaugural executive director. Schulenburg, formerly senior director of programs at the Wikimedia Foundation, will begin his new role February 18, 2014. I look forward to leading the Wiki Education Foundation, said Schulenburg. We are off to a great start, and will build on the strong success of the Wikimedia Foundation's Wikipedia Education Program to further engage educators, researchers and students to provide more high-quality content for Wikipedia's readers. Started by the Wikimedia Foundation in 2010, the Wikipedia Education Program encourages students to contribute content to Wikipedia articles on course-related subjects as part of classroom assignments developed by their faculty and instructors. Over the past four years, more than 6,000 students in the United States and Canada have contributed content to Wikipedia as part of the Wikipedia Education Program, adding the equivalent of 36,600 printed pages of content to Wikipedia and significantly increasing the amount of high-quality content that Wikipedia offers its half-billion readers. In response to that success and to give the program more focused and specialized support, in 2012 the Wikimedia Foundation began a process to spin off the United States and Canada work into its own, independent nonprofit organization. The resulting Wiki Education Foundation was created in late 2013, and Schulenburg will be its first executive director. The Wiki Education Foundation will continue to support the Wikipedia Education Program in the United States and Canada, and will develop additional programs to promote academic research and teaching that engage with Wikipedia. I am delighted that Frank has agreed to lead the Wiki Education Foundation as executive director, said Dr. Diana Strassmann, Carolyn and Fred McManis Distinguished Professor in the Practice at Rice University and chair of the board of the Wiki Education Foundation, who began using Wikipedia as a teaching tool in her classes in 2007. Under Frank's leadership, the Wiki Education Foundation will continue to expand engagement among educators, students, and Wikipedia, and will continue to diversify the community of Wikipedians, while improving the quality and depth of Wikipedia. Frank is the perfect person to lead the Wiki Education Foundation, said Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Sue Gardner. Frank's a very experienced Wikipedia contributor with a long track record of inventing and leading successful programs that make Wikipedia better and more useful for its readers. I am sorry we will lose him from the Wikimedia Foundation, but I look forward to seeing the Wiki Education Foundation thrive and succeed under his leadership. A longtime Wikipedian and an employee of the Wikimedia Foundation since 2008, Schulenburg has focused on broadening participation and developing the public understanding of Wikipedia, especially among subject matter experts. He has spoken globally about efforts to increase the relevance of Wikipedia in academia. In 2006, he founded Wikipedia Academy, an event aimed at cultivating dialogue between Wikipedia contributors and academics. In 2009, he initiated the Bookshelf Project, which created the first educational materials for new Wikipedia contributors. In 2010 he designed and implemented the Wikipedia Education Program. From 2012 on he was a member of the executive
[Wikimedia-l] Annual Plan development
What is the plan for community and board involvement in the development phases of the Annual Plan? Pine ___ 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] My choice for ED
If the transition team declined the entire first panel of candidates I think we can AGF that they're being careful. Also, it's wrong to take out current complaints with WMF on the executive candidates who may want to make positive change. Pine Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 11:31:45 + From: Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] My choice for ED Message-ID: CAE4f==c3qct78+j8bvnseu9aff0m7t3oftijl8seokf6svy...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 To me, these proposals always sound a bit like: We want this person to be resilient and good-humoured. So we're going to punch all our possible candidates in the face a few times and see where they want to go from there. I know that's not the intention, but it's certainly the plausible effect... Andrew. On Monday, 3 February 2014, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','martijnhoeks...@gmail.com'); wrote: I understand your reasoning, but we already have an extremely difficult time finding a suitable candidate. While such community vetting would definitely weed out the people we don't want, it will also slim down the pool we do want, which currently sits around a cool 0. I don't think we can afford that either. On Feb 1, 2014 4:47 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: I'm sure dismissively calling people's legitimate concerns playing with (a) toy will help greatly in that regard. If someone's going to apply for a job where they'll be scrutinized by a large volunteer community, it is not unreasonable to determine if they can withstand that type of scrutiny by a real world test, nor to find whether they'll be responsive and direct to concerns brought up when that happens. The community has had enough of diplomatic null statements with lots of words, and should be. Someone needs to give an answer, not just blather on and wind up saying nothing concrete at all. It is right for the community to be fed up with that and demand that a candidate go through that process. Yes, it would be hard. Yes, it would discourage some applicants. Those are the applicants we want to discourage. We want someone who fits well with our particular project, and who will be responsive and direct with our volunteer community. They are the underpinnings of every project WMF undertakes. Todd Allen On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Tony Souter to...@iinet.net.au wrote: Folks: are we still playing with this toy? I've sat here and watched this discourse - variously frivolous, slightly insulting, and embarrassing - and said nothing in the hope it would just fizzle away. But amazingly, it's still here. We have to accept that while crowdsourcing is the genius of Wikipedia and a few of its sister projects, it's totally inappropriate for choosing the executive director of a big, prominent Foundation that lives in a competitive, complex, and often negative jungle. There's a bunch of reasons for doing this largely away from the gaze of the rest of the world. Do I really need to spell them out? It would be good to move on to more useful and practical topics. Tony On 02/02/2014, at 1:32 AM, Benjamin Lees emufarm...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 3:29 AM, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote: Chad, I wonder if Rory has been considered. (: Given his history of biting newbies, I'm not sure he'd be in a good position to help solve the editor retention problem. ___ ___ 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] ED profile
Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote: ... a large part will never be contacted as a potential candidate, simply because they are not close to matching the profile Is the profile documented or subjective? I think that this is the only written profile being used. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Executive_Director_Transition_Team/Position_description Pine ___ 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] ED qualifications
Actually, I think that we should consider it a strength in an individual to refuse to consider applying for a position where every aspect of their career and personal life would be microscopically examined by thousands of people. Self-respect is a positive attribute. Risker Risker, let's look on the bright side say that a high profile job like this one requires resilience. (: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_resilience Pine ___ 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] Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 118, Issue 2
Hi Rupert, I agree that individual outreach can be effective. How do you suggest that we get a substantial number of our existing editors to feel motivated to recruit new editors? I think our problems with editor retention are widespread enough that they need to be addressed on a meta scale, even if that is simply to find effective ways of motivating existing users to assume good faith, be civil, and invite new people to edit on an individual basis. Pine Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 12:14:45 +0100 From: rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] New year's plans for editor engagement Message-ID: cajs9az_zyndu8jeeeahzjekiu3rieh7vcrj2vwuddwf9a0o...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 hi pine, as a volunteer, my personal stance is that editor engagement is best experienced on a personal, pragmatic, and not-meta level. let me give an example: when i met anasuya sengupta last year i was very impressed by her. such a nice and welcoming person to talk to. such a bright person, making intelligent suggestions to topics we have. she told us at wikimedia ch, that we do not reach the volunteers very well - basically 50 times more people edit wikipedia than the ones willing to engage in any form with an organisation around the movement, like wikimedia.ch. besides that, she is kind of the dream wikimedian who would be able to correct two of the most prominent editor statistics: she is woman, she is from india. and she is educated, she is organized, she is successful. after meeting, i did what i usually do, look on the contributions. to my great surprise, anasuya seems not have any billable edits (billable is, in my personal definition, an edit on a page where a donor would click and give money, so no talk page, meta, etc.). she as well does not seem to write open source software used by the movement. i cannot say if she really does not edit - she just does it in a way that a regular volunteer like me would not notice. funny enough, anasuya sits for one and a half years next to sue gardner in the san francisco office of the wikimedia foundation. sue gardner supported the editor engagement program, and the india program, she put efforts in making wikipedia nicer for women. and wmf put hundred thousands of dollars into efforts which basic target is to win anasuya as a contributor. happy new year as well! rupert. ps: if this mail is the cause to have one additional editor, its goal is fullfilled ;) and if every volunteer convinces one person to become wikimedia volunteer this year, you, pine, will write a different mail at the beginning of 2015. On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:32 AM, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote: We had a good 2013 year for readership statistics, fundraising, website reliability, and many other metrics. We are continuing to have challenges with our editor population declining. Statistics are at http://reportcard.wmflabs.org. WMF discussed some of the research around these issues a monthly metrics meeting. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/2013-07-11 . We have thousands of new accounts registered each month. However we are still losing more active editors than we gain each month. To date WMF and the chapters haven't solved this problem although resources are being spent on it. Projects include Echo, VisualEditor, Snuggle, GettingStarted, and education outreach. Some discussion of these issues for English Wikipedia is happening at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Editor_Retention#Possible_paths.2C_after_some_thoughts . Also check out the book review that is being published in this week's Signpost https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piotrus/Sandbox/Notes#.C5.BBycie_Wirtualnych_Dzikich, and the 2010 editor study results https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Editor_Survey_Report_-_April_2011.pdf . I hope there will be many and sustained conversations in 2014 about questions such as these: * What should WMF, Jimmy, chapters and affiliates, and the online communities do differently regarding editor retention in 2014 and beyond? * What non-technical initiatives should be done to improve editor recruiting and retention? * How can we make Wikipedia editing be as mainstream as playing mobile games? I would like to see WMF take leadership on this issue and make a big push in 2014-2015 to make mobile editing a popular activity. * Since negative feedback is a major reason that editors leave, should we review how we revert and warn editors, how we handle content disputes, and how we deal with editors who are uncivil or disruptive? * How can we be a community that is efficient while being civil and hospitable? In the next Annual Plan I hope that someone at WMF will be appointed
Re: [Wikimedia-l] New year's plans for editor engagement
Sorry. Email subject line corrected. Hi Rupert, I agree that individual outreach can be effective. How do you suggest that we get a substantial number of our existing editors to feel motivated to recruit new editors? I think our problems with editor retention are widespread enough that they need to be addressed on a meta scale, even if that is simply to find effective ways of motivating existing users to assume good faith, be civil, and invite new people to edit on an individual basis. Pine Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 12:14:45 +0100 From: rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] New year's plans for editor engagement Message-ID: cajs9az_zyndu8jeeeahzjekiu3rieh7vcrj2vwuddwf9a0o...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 hi pine, as a volunteer, my personal stance is that editor engagement is best experienced on a personal, pragmatic, and not-meta level. let me give an example: when i met anasuya sengupta last year i was very impressed by her. such a nice and welcoming person to talk to. such a bright person, making intelligent suggestions to topics we have. she told us at wikimedia ch, that we do not reach the volunteers very well - basically 50 times more people edit wikipedia than the ones willing to engage in any form with an organisation around the movement, like wikimedia.ch. besides that, she is kind of the dream wikimedian who would be able to correct two of the most prominent editor statistics: she is woman, she is from india. and she is educated, she is organized, she is successful. after meeting, i did what i usually do, look on the contributions. to my great surprise, anasuya seems not have any billable edits (billable is, in my personal definition, an edit on a page where a donor would click and give money, so no talk page, meta, etc.). she as well does not seem to write open source software used by the movement. i cannot say if she really does not edit - she just does it in a way that a regular volunteer like me would not notice. funny enough, anasuya sits for one and a half years next to sue gardner in the san francisco office of the wikimedia foundation. sue gardner supported the editor engagement program, and the india program, she put efforts in making wikipedia nicer for women. and wmf put hundred thousands of dollars into efforts which basic target is to win anasuya as a contributor. happy new year as well! rupert. ps: if this mail is the cause to have one additional editor, its goal is fullfilled ;) and if every volunteer convinces one person to become wikimedia volunteer this year, you, pine, will write a different mail at the beginning of 2015. On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:32 AM, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote: We had a good 2013 year for readership statistics, fundraising, website reliability, and many other metrics. We are continuing to have challenges with our editor population declining. Statistics are at http://reportcard.wmflabs.org. WMF discussed some of the research around these issues a monthly metrics meeting. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/2013-07-11 . We have thousands of new accounts registered each month. However we are still losing more active editors than we gain each month. To date WMF and the chapters haven't solved this problem although resources are being spent on it. Projects include Echo, VisualEditor, Snuggle, GettingStarted, and education outreach. Some discussion of these issues for English Wikipedia is happening at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Editor_Retention#Possible_paths.2C_after_some_thoughts . Also check out the book review that is being published in this week's Signpost https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piotrus/Sandbox/Notes#.C5.BBycie_Wirtualnych_Dzikich, and the 2010 editor study results https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Editor_Survey_Report_-_April_2011.pdf . I hope there will be many and sustained conversations in 2014 about questions such as these: * What should WMF, Jimmy, chapters and affiliates, and the online communities do differently regarding editor retention in 2014 and beyond? * What non-technical initiatives should be done to improve editor recruiting and retention? * How can we make Wikipedia editing be as mainstream as playing mobile games? I would like to see WMF take leadership on this issue and make a big push in 2014-2015 to make mobile editing a popular activity. * Since negative feedback is a major reason that editors leave, should we review how we revert and warn editors, how we handle content disputes, and how we deal with editors who are uncivil or disruptive? * How can we be a community that is efficient while being civil and hospitable? In the next Annual Plan I hope
[Wikimedia-l] New year's plans for editor engagement
We had a good 2013 year for readership statistics, fundraising, website reliability, and many other metrics. We are continuing to have challenges with our editor population declining. Statistics are at http://reportcard.wmflabs.org. WMF discussed some of the research around these issues a monthly metrics meeting. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/2013-07-11. We have thousands of new accounts registered each month. However we are still losing more active editors than we gain each month. To date WMF and the chapters haven't solved this problem although resources are being spent on it. Projects include Echo, VisualEditor, Snuggle, GettingStarted, and education outreach. Some discussion of these issues for English Wikipedia is happening at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Editor_Retention#Possible_paths.2C_after_some_thoughts. Also check out the book review that is being published in this week's Signpost https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piotrus/Sandbox/Notes#.C5.BBycie_Wirtualnych_Dzikich, and the 2010 editor study results https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Editor_Survey_Report_-_April_2011.pdf. I hope there will be many and sustained conversations in 2014 about questions such as these: * What should WMF, Jimmy, chapters and affiliates, and the online communities do differently regarding editor retention in 2014 and beyond? * What non-technical initiatives should be done to improve editor recruiting and retention? * How can we make Wikipedia editing be as mainstream as playing mobile games? I would like to see WMF take leadership on this issue and make a big push in 2014-2015 to make mobile editing a popular activity. * Since negative feedback is a major reason that editors leave, should we review how we revert and warn editors, how we handle content disputes, and how we deal with editors who are uncivil or disruptive? * How can we be a community that is efficient while being civil and hospitable? In the next Annual Plan I hope that someone at WMF will be appointed as a point person for promoting all editor engagement initiatives and regularly initiate discussions such as this one. Closing thought: Whatever the weather We must move together from a Marshall Plan poster, https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/File:Marshall_Plan_poster.JPG, seen on the English WikiQuote main page on December 31, 2013. Happy new year, Pine ___ 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] Ombudsman Commission applications
Hi Maggie, what's happening with the Ombudsman Commission scope RFC? Thanks, Pine Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 06:04:09 -0800 From: Maggie Dennis mden...@wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, Functionaries email list for the English Wikipedia functionaries...@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Ombudsman Commission applications Message-ID: camuth1y1gkyu4zxk8xzjc-hkpxlvm+t+0j9oy3wrtwu5fm1...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi It's coming close to time for annual appointments of community members to serve on the Ombudsman commission. This commission works on all Wikimedia projects to investigate complaints about violations of the privacy policy, especially in use of CheckUser tools, and to mediate between the complaining party and the individual whose work is being investigated. They may also assist the General Counsel, the Executive Director or the Board of Trustees in investigations of these issues. For more on their duties and roles, see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission This is a call for community members interested in volunteering for appointment to this commission. Commissioners should be experienced Wikimedians, active on any project, who have previously used the CheckUser tool OR who have the technical ability to understand the CheckUser tool and the willingness to learn it. They are expected to be able to engage neutrally in investigating these concerns and to know when to recuse when other roles and relationships may cause conflict. (In the past, commissioners have turned in other roles that could cause conflict.) Commissioners are required to identify to the Wikimedia Foundation and must be willing to comply with the appropriate board policies (such as the access to non-public data policy and the privacy policy). This is a position that requires a high degree of discretion and trust. If you are interested in serving on this commission, please drop me a note detailing your experience on the projects, your thoughts on the commission and what you hope to bring to the role. The commission is deliberately quite small, so slots are limited, but all applications are appreciated. The deadline for applications is January 1. Any timezone. :) Please feel free to pass this invitation along to any users who you think may be interested. Thank you! Maggie -- Maggie Dennis Senior Community Advocate Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. ___ 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] Readers love you
Thanks very much, Megan. It's very nice to hear this.
Pine
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2013 19:42:06 -0800
From: Megan Hernandez mhernan...@wikimedia.org
To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Readers love you
Message-ID:
CAE1+vxPHbrLaibiteyEq8QBdK51K4DJw6fU5fX6=a1uaass...@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Hi everyone,
Each year that we run the fundraiser, readers write in really lovely notes.
Please take two minutes to listen to our readers.
Enjoy!
The story I like to tell is that whilst I had heard of Wikipedia but only
looked at it a few times thereafter, when the 2004 Tsunami occurred the day
after Christmas, mainstream news organisations (TV, newspapers) were all
away from their offices. That day I turned to Wikipedia to try to
understand the scale of the event. It was Wiki editors 'on the ground' that
created the sort of information and coverage usually considered the
province of rolling news organisations only. This I now dub my 'Wiki
Epiphany'.
Wikipedia is an amazing service. Almost always, I am able to find
information on subjects I am interested in. Thanks and Kudos to all staff
and volunteers!!
My world has been opened up time and time again by Wikipedia. From studying
Detroit and computer programming to finding unbiased information on
America's history, Wikipedia has been a beacon of free speech and
information for over ten years. Sometimes, I just sit in awe of the fact
that the greatest accomplishment of man was assembled mostly by volunteers,
people who just wanted to make the world a better place.
Its made life easier for me and expanded my knowledge by allowing me to
more easily find trusted and verified information on the internet. It
organizes all the noise out there on the web and gives a great concise to
the point fact summary of what I want to know. Thank you and thank you to
the millions of volunteer editors. Wikipedia is a necessity in my life and
not just a luxury.
Wikipedia is a source of unbiased information. The caveats and notes from
the editors alert to questionable information. The links within the
articles are amazingly helpful and have led me on wonderful information
expeditions.
I'd like to thank the entire staff of wikipedia and its editors for my high
school graduation.
It's impossible to put in words. I cannot imagine Planet Earth without it
[Wikipedia]. It has changed my life forever.
My 17 year old son uses you constantly. You have made him a smarter human
being.
You guys are ^^%$#* unbelievably awesome, keep it up!
web sites like Wikipedia are invaluable and I felt it my duty to try help
even if only a tad.
so much of the Internet has turned into self serving and unreliable junque;
so I am very, very grateful for the Wiki resource.
I regard W as the best and most reliable source of information available
anywhere. I don't know how you do it so please keep on with your Excellence
}i{ That;s a butterfly for you
This is one of the best things on the internet. It goes back to the
original development of the internet and has remained ethical and true to
its origins. There appears to be no discrimination and it is available to
everyone at no cost.
I am 60 years old and I am still so cruious and interested in so many
things. Wikipedia gives me reasonable information whenever I may want it.
I use wikipedia all the time and credit it more toward my education than
college did!
It's nice to see humanity get together without any external forces for a
common good!
I am inspired by the high quality of Wikipedia and the high ideals of its
founder and its myriad contributors and editors. What a magnificent
collaborative human achievement you are building!
It has simultaneously answered and given me more questions than I can
comprehend.
This represents to me what college should be like. Free and collective
knowledge by and for all.
When I want to know something, I google it and 99% of the time Wikipedia
has what I want to know. Even drinking arguments, about what Biff from Back
to the Future is doing now, are solved by Wikipedia. It's all there.
Without Wikipedia I would be about 30% less intelligent. :(
it is like a gift from the gods of knowledge
I am a teacher and a writer, and I am amazed how often Wikipedia is useful
to me. I consider Wikipedia to be one of the great democratic projects
maybe ever, and it is one of the reasons why I try to stay optimistic about
the world. Thank you.
I honestly feel like the next generation of humans in general, will be much
smarter than the previous because of this site. Well, at least they will
know a whole lot more useless shit. I've heard (don't know for sure if it's
true, doesn't matter) that the bigger a person's brain is, typically, the
smarter that person is. So, if that is true, I think it's likely that
because of this
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Overloaded with CentralNotices
For English Wikipedia I also feel that the FDC banner is annoying and probably not very useful for editors or effective for requesting community input. A watchlist notice would be more proportionate but even that is a stretch because FDC is far removed from most editors' on-wiki interests. The FDC's work is important but I think requests for community input should be better targeted. Along the lines of what Nemo said, I think recruiting editors to become active in affiliates would be a better on-wiki action and an indirect way to get more comments on FDC proposals. There could also be work done to have more affiliates do peer reviews of each others' budgets. Pine Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 10:37:18 +0100 From: Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Overloaded with CentralNotices (Tilman Bayer) Message-ID: 5270d34e.5080...@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Jane Darnell, 30/10/2013 09:30: I second your skepticism. Especially since most Dutch Wikipedians have no idea what WMNL is, according to a survey. Good point. Maybe all those who care about a chapter and its spending are already members of the chapter so that they can participate in the assembly which decide on it (and related online discussions)? :) If we want greater community review of their spending, perhaps it would make sense to run campaigns for community members to join the chapter. Maybe other people have different experiences, but the associations I know of usually try to convince you to join the association (it's cool for X! you are important for Y!) and then they try to gradually involve you more; I've never seen an association on a street distributing dozens-pages books hey! do you want to review our budget? it's great fun! we value your input. Nemo ___ 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] Office hour with WMF researchers
Yes, logs for all office hours are at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Office_hours#Office_hour_logs. Please consider joining the wiki-research-l mailing list if you're not already subscribed. Pine Reminder, office hour is happening now. Hi, I have missed the announcement, but I would have enjoyed to join. Are there some minutes or transcript of the Office hours? Thank you. Cristian ___ 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] Office hour with WMF researchers
Reminder, office hour is happening now. Pine From: deyntest...@hotmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org; e...@lists.wikimedia.org; wiki-researc...@lists.wikimedia.org; wikitech-annou...@lists.wikimedia.org; wikimedia-...@lists.wikimedia.org CC: analyt...@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Office hour with WMF researchers Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 00:15:16 -0700 Hi everyone, WMF researchers have agreed to participate in an office hour. This will be in the same format as the meeting we had in April 2013 with researcher introductions followed by open QA and discussion. The currently scheduled participants are: * Henrique Andrade, Brazil Data and Experiments Consultant (Grantmaking Catalyst programs) * Aaron Halfaker, Research Analyst (Analytics) * Jonathan Morgan, Learning Strategist (Grantmaking Learning and Evaluation) * Aaron Shaw, Assistant Professor, School of Communication, Northwestern University * Dario Taraborelli, Senior Research Analyst, Strategy (Analytics) The meeting will be on IRC in #wikimedia-office on Monday, September 23 at 1800 UTC / 1100 PST. Please spread the word and join if you are interested. Pine ___ 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] Thoughts on Admin Rights on WMF Wiki (and other things)
Sigh. This is a difficult situation. I don't think anyone has suggested that firing Gayle or Philippe should happen. However, I have concerns about keeping Gayle in the Chief Talent and Culture Officer position. I directed that concern to her and I want to hear what she thinks. There may be good reasons to keep her in that position, on the other hand it might be better if she had some time to learn in a WMF position for which she's a better fit at the moment. At a top 5 website I think the performance expectations for C-level positions are high with good reason. I have significant concerns when someone with many years of leadership development experience makes the kind of mistakes that she appears to have made, especially when that person is the C-level officer that is supposed to be the subject matter expert in that area for all of WMF and that person is heavily involved in selecting the next ED. My experiences with Gayle prior to this one were positive and I've heard good things about her from others, but this situation should be examined with great care. I currently hope that Gayle stays with WMF, but perhaps in a different position for awhile with the option of returning to the C-level some distance in the future. I want to hear what Gayle thinks. My views at this point are based on the incomplete information that's publicly available, and there are important unanswered questions in this situation. I hope we learn more from Gayle. I know that the easy thing to do is to drop this issue and move on to the next problem, but I agree with Thomasz that easy thing to do isn't necessarily the best thing to do. Sometimes the best things and the right things involve asking hard questions and having difficult conversations. I think it's probably tough on a lot of us to read and participate in this discussion. On-wiki discussions about whether people should be de-adminned or blocked are often public, and while I think it's appropriate that we have this difficult conversation in public since the actions that started this situation were public, this is an awfully difficult situation and I'm sorry that we're all in it. We need to deal with it as best we can. I wish it was easy. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] Thoughts on Admin Rights on WMF Wiki (and other things)
I don't know what to do. I lost sleep thinking about this situation last night. I think I'm still in shock and I'm frustrated. The normal situation on wiki is to have this kind of discussion in public for actions that happen on any wiki that I know of. There were similarly public discussions about what happened in WMUK. Maybe that's wrong. I don't know. I worried that if I said nothing that it would be wrong, and I worry that saying something is wrong too. I'm withdrawing from this discussion for now. I wish I knew what the right thing to do was. I'm very sorry. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quarterly reviews of high priority WMF initiatives
Tilman, Is there a schedule for these reviews on Meta? Also, did Grants have a review recently? Thanks, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thoughts on Admin Rights on WMF Wiki (and other things)
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 20:33:57 +0200 From: Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: Gayle Karen Young gyo...@wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thoughts on Admin Rights on WMF Wiki (and other things) Message-ID: 519e6115@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Just in case someone wonders, Gayle Karen Young, 23/05/2013 06:22: [...] goal was to ensure that the function of a wiki adminstrator, which is often identified with community self-governance, is clearly mapped against the governance model of the site: [...] [...] doesn't answers the questions on the table at all. Especially as the governance model of the site doesn't exist at all and nobody has any idea of who is going to take care of it. Or in other words: Tomasz W. Kozlowski, 13/05/2013 02:04: Gayle Karen Young wrote: Hello folks, [...] Gayle So what did you want to say? I haven't been able to find any answers to any questions that have been asked by so many people in this thread. So, to quote yourself, you committed criticism and now you're insisting with stonewalling, with a flavour of defensiveness. I admit that my knowledge of Gottman is limited to a recent magazine article I read by chance a few days ago, so I may be wrong, but it seems to me that there's little room to do worse in this relationship. Nemo Nemo, I think someone posted a list of good questions in this thread awhile back. I tried to find them but I gave up after ten minutes. If you can find them would you please repost them? If you can't find them either then I'd ask you to repeat the questions that you remember and think are most important. Gayle, I am going to be frank. I think I know a little more about you and your work than the average member of this list does. I appreciate your explanations and apologies, but I'm continuing to have a hard time with this situation. With your many years of leadership experience, and in your position as Chief Culture and Talent Officer, it's shocking that you would implement such a significant change in the unprofessional way that you did, and of all people I would have expected you and Philippe (Director of Community Advocacy) to be acutely aware of our consensus-based culture and how to implement changes in a diplomatic and professional way. This situation has been a disaster for WMF-Community relations, and I'm sorry to say that my feeling is that the credibility of you and Philippe has been harmed beyond repair. Do you think you should continue to be WMF's Chief Culture and Talent Officer? I have a hard time believing that you should continue in that role after this disaster, but I want to hear your point of view. Thanks, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Spanish Wikipedia first million
Felicitaciones a la española Wikipedia! http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fogos_artificiais.jpg Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patience
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 12:47:08 -0700 From: Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patience Message-ID: 519537bc.6000...@frontier.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed On 5/16/2013 11:52 AM, ENWP Pine wrote: I agree that patience is a very important virtue in some situations, such as when we coach newbies or seek consensus among many people. But it's sometimes not a virtue, such as in many crisis situations. As a metrics and performance enthusiast, I feel that it's possible to have an appropriate mix of patience and impatience, and people should be appropriately accountable for their performance. I suppose it depends what implications you attach to those words, but I would not recommend using impatience when what you really want is urgency. In my experience, the self-discipline that goes into everyday patience can actually remain a virtue in crisis situations as well, as it may help you remain clear-headed and make better decisions than you would if you let the circumstances overwhelm your ability to think rationally. And as Fred points out, a big part of my message relates especially to making emergencies out of things that are not. I also do not believe that patience is in any way incompatible with accountability. Patience does not require ignoring commitments, discarding performance evaluation, or even disregarding agreed timeframes. However, it does mean that the results of the evaluation should be well-considered and any consequences appropriate to the circumstances. Impatience tends to drive us to choose excessive consequences, like a lot of the somebody should be fired kind of talk over things that are honest mistakes. --Michael Snow I think I understand your distinction between urgency and impatience in the sense that the former doesn't necessarily imply the brusqueness that the latter can. Whether a situation is an emergency is sometimes subjective. I think that someone on this list pointed out that something that's a crisis for one entity may be viewed as a minor issue by another entity. I agree that employment consequences for poor performance should be carefully considered prior to implementation. However, sometimes demoting or firing someone is appropriate, even if a poor decision was an honest mistake. Serious negligence is unacceptable. On the other hand, it's also a good idea do praise and celebrate success and good performance, as we're doing now with regards to Spanish Wikipedia's significant milestone. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Patience
I agree that patience is a very important virtue in some situations, such as when we coach newbies or seek consensus among many people. But it's sometimes not a virtue, such as in many crisis situations. As a metrics and performance enthusiast, I feel that it's possible to have an appropriate mix of patience and impatience, and people should be appropriately accountable for their performance. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comments on compliance and the FDC Round 2 decisions
Thanks a lot for the replies, Anasuya and Jessie. It will be interesting to see the evolution and impact of WMF grantmaking in the months and years ahead. Pine Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 15:43:15 -0700 From: Anasuya Sengupta asengu...@wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comments on compliance and the FDC Round 2 decisions Message-ID: CAKK0PRxtmW8tyq=O_bCyCA696H8ObvCtgBTm==4wfpoeth3...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Pine, My apologies for the tardiness of this reply; I've been away in India with family and am only just back. It's an important question to ask, because the Grantmaking team's programs - including the FDC process - have and are being set up with a strong self-evaluation component. We exist to support our movement through grants and shared knowledge as key resources, and we can only do this well if we're good at listening and learning ourselves. Overall, we're looking at multiple feedback mechanisms (including surveys and discussion groups at conferences like WMConf, Wikimania). As an example, we did a survey of the FDC Round 1 process which we shared in Milan, and used as a way to get more face-to-face feedback. This helps us know both broad and specific areas that we need to improve on and to do so quickly and appropriately. One thing to keep in mind with grantmaking programs is that process feedback is easily and quickly incorporated (like wiki-tables that made life miserable for FDC Round 1 applicants and we could improve for Round 2 applicants). However, substantive feedback (like the nature of questions, or entirely new sections of inquiry) need to be incorporated at the end of the year for the new year, so that the nature of the proposal doesn't change dramatically over the year, or from one round to the next: it's not fair on either the new folks applying, or the committee reviewing the proposals. We intend to do surveys of all our major grantmaking programs over the next few months, so that we have a good baseline against which to measure our progress as a team. Again, it's useful to remember that our proposal processes might seem 'heavy' to many in the movement, but they're pretty light-weight (with the possible exception of wiki-tables) in comparison to other grantmaking processes that are far more demanding for far smaller grant amounts. As a comparison, in the human rights and social justice grantmaking world, most grants are in the range of 5,000-50,000 USD. For the FDC in particular, the FDC Advisory Group will assess the first year, and towards the end of the second year (March 2014), give the Board a recommendation on whether the mechanism works (or not) and should continue (or not). The FDC Ombudsperson also gives an annual report which is independent and autonomous on the FDC process.[1] With these various inputs, the staff and FDC will create a report for Year 1 which we hope will be shared back with the community at Wikimania. Other forms of external or independent assessments will also be part of our process: Kevin Gorman's retrospective of the grants program so far, for instance, was really useful and we've already incorporated several of his recommendations.[2] With the Program Evaluation team, we're also going to get much better at sharing the good and best practices that already exist in the movement, and at pointing out work that's relevant from other movements. Finally, we're planning some internal and external research to better provide guidance to grant applicants on issues like potential growth trajectories and useful ways of thinking about moving from entirely volunteer to staffed groups. We're obviously not working on this in isolation - there has already been some good thinking within the movement on this - and we'd be glad to be in conversation with anyone who wants to work with us on these issues. The Grantmaking team is a work in progress - we didn't exist in our present form last year, we've essentially restructured and reconfigured ourselves over the past few months, set up the FDC and IEG processes, and learnt rapidly about what works (and what might not) - and we're always open to feedback. If people are uncertain about who to reach out to, please do get in touch with me: as the person who heads the Grantmaking team, (some element of) the buck does stop with me. :-) thanks, Anasuya [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Framework_for_the_Creation_and_Initial_Operation_of_the_FDC#FDC_Ombudsperson [2]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Retrospective_2009-2012 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comments on compliance and the FDC Round 2 decisions
Asaf, Thank you for sharing your perspective. This situation is complicated. I think it should be reviewed by an uninvolved third party, probably the FDC ombudsperson. I think it would take significant time and a lot of emails in this thread to accomplish what a review by the ombudsperson could accomplish in a faster and more thorough manner. Would you or someone else from the Grants staff please address the more broader questions that I raised earlier? I realize that these may have been easily overlooked due to the high volume of email on this list recently, so I'll repeat here. Several interesting comments have been made in this thread regarding the value of a more holistic evaluation of the FDC and GAC processes with regards to chapters especially regarding the hiring of a chapter's first full time employee. There have also been comments made regarding the heavy nature of the FDC grant application process. Would the WMF staff please indicate whether a review of these concerns is under consideration, if so, how they plan to conduct the review? I think you partially addressed these questions in your response but I would appreciate a more direct reply from you, Anasuya, Jessie, or anyone else in the Grantmaking and Programs group. Please feel free to fork into a separate thread if you like. Thanks, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] Office hour with WMF researchers
Reminder, meeting starts in about 10 minutes. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour with WMF researchers
Hi Mathieu, I think that WMF has used a tool like this in the past for an office hour with Sue. For this research office hour, I believe that two researchers and I agreed on this time, and then J-Mo recruited additional WMF participants. So there's more than one way to go about scheduling an office hour. If there's significant interest, such as with Sue's office hours, then it's possible to have multiple office hours scheduled at different times about the same subject. If there's a lot of interest in this research office hour then we can schedule additional sessions, perhaps on a recurring basis, if the WMF staff agree to that. Pine Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:37:43 +0200 From: Mathieu Stumpf psychosl...@culture-libre.org To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour with WMF researchers Message-ID: f44ce9f2ff76c0c6dca5c5438a971...@culture-libre.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Le 2013-04-17 21:11, ENWP Pine a écrit : Hi everyone, We'll meet on IRC in #wikimedia-office on April 22 at 1800 UTC. Please join us. I won't be able to join, but I wish I was able to do so. Did you use a shedule software such as [1] to organize this event? If not, please consider using one in the future. [1] http://framadate.org/index.php?lang=en_GB Note that this website is powered by a free software, so Wikimedia may install its own instance if needed. Kind regards, mathieu -- 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
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour with WMF researchers
Credit goes to J-Mo for enthusiastically supporting this idea. I mused that I'd like to have a WMF researcher for an office hour, and largely thanks to J-Mo's suggestions and recruiting, there will be a panel's worth of researchers and analysts. Thanks also to the people at WMF who made time on their schedules for this discussion. For those who are unable to attend, the office hour will be logged. Hopefully we'll have a good crowd at the meeting. (: Pine BTW, this looks amazing. Thanks to you all for organizing it. I will be travelling, but hope to see more office hours like this, perhaps also including outside/partner researchers studying related issues. SJ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] Office hour with WMF researchers
Hi everyone, WMF researchers have agreed to participate in an office hour about WMF research projects and methodologies. The currently scheduled participants are: * Aaron Halfaker, Research Analyst (contractor) * Jonathan Morgan, Research Strategist (contractor) * Evan Rosen, Data Analytics Manager, Global Development * Haitham Shammaa, Contribution Research Manager * Dario Taraborelli, Senior Research Analyst, Strategy We'll meet on IRC in #wikimedia-office on April 22 at 1800 UTC. Please join us. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour with Jessie Wild from Global Learning Evaluation
Reminder, discussion starting in about 10 minutes. We're in #wikimedia-office. Pine From: deyntest...@hotmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Office hour with Jessie Wild from Global Learning Evaluation Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 19:53:37 -0700 Hi everyone, Jessie plans to be available on IRC on April 15, 1800-1900 UTC. I plan to be there with questions about WMF program planning and evaluation, and I hope many of you are also able to attend the discussion. Cheers, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour with Jessie Wild from Global Learning Evaluation
Changed due to meeting collision. We'll be in #wikimedia-office-learningeval. Pine From: deyntest...@hotmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: RE: Office hour with Jessie Wild from Global Learning Evaluation Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 10:51:53 -0700 Reminder, discussion starting in about 10 minutes. We're in #wikimedia-office. Pine From: deyntest...@hotmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Office hour with Jessie Wild from Global Learning Evaluation Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 19:53:37 -0700 Hi everyone, Jessie plans to be available on IRC on April 15, 1800-1900 UTC. I plan to be there with questions about WMF program planning and evaluation, and I hope many of you are also able to attend the discussion. Cheers, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] Office hour with Jessie Wild from Global Learning Evaluation
Hi everyone, Jessie plans to be available on IRC on April 15, 1800-1900 UTC. I plan to be there with questions about WMF program planning and evaluation, and I hope many of you are also able to attend the discussion. Cheers, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour inside out (program evaluation)
Hi Asaf, WSC made several points here that address your question and that are very similar to my own views. http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-March/124824.html After re-reading my email to Jessie and looking again at some of the recent WMF Monthly Reports, I think I may be making some assumptions about how Programs and Evaluations works that may be incorrect. Jessie, would you be willing to have an IRC office hour? I think that might address my questions and concerns faster than a prolonged email discussion on this list, although it has the disadvantage that fewer people are able to participate. Please email me off-list if you're willing to set up a time when we're both available. Thanks, and happy Easter. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Adopt a page
Hmm. Once again, I largely agree with WSC. Unless I'm missing something, this idea is largely about fundraising, and I think it could introduce more problems than it solves. The evidence that I've seen suggest that WMF is very successful at fundraising, but has ongoing difficulties with making progress toward the goal to get 200,000 active editors by 2015. So, I see little reason to implement page adoption if the goal is to fundraise, but if there is something about the proposal that's relevant to improving the active editor count from the current 85,000, I'd be interested in at least learning more about that. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour inside out (program evaluation)
Hi Jessie, Thanks for following up. I think Gayle will be responding to this thread also, but she is a little busy right now as I think we can all understand. In the meantime, I hope that you add to your list of all places receiving movement funding resources any major projects within WMF. I think the situation with AFT5 repeating some errors from IEP which were well documented by a consultant that WMF hired, which tells me there is need for improvement within WMF. I think WMF should get its own house in order before, or at least concurrently, with looking at evaluations and accountability for outside organizations like chapters. May I ask, if you're working on things like the Learning Portal, what are Frank and other people within the programs and evaluations group working on? I'm interested in seeing a list of the current initiatives, what their goals are, when they started, who the task leads are, and what progress has been made so far. I think Frank's appointment was in August 2012 and it would be great to get an overview about what's been happening in Programs and Evaluations a since then. I've been hoping to see that information in the WMF monthly reports but I've seen surprisingly little info in the past few reports. Thanks, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour inside out (program evaluation)
Hi WSC, I agree with you on several points, although I think I am more supportive of holding project supervisors accountable for problems. I hope that WMF is paying attention to this conversation. I'll be very interested in hearing what Gayle has to say. After hearing from Gayle, I may have some questions for Frank. Cheers, Pine -- If we try out a new initiative and it turns out not to work we should not regard that trial as a mistake. Rather as something we have tested and found not to work. Our focus should be on what we should learn from such experiments, not who we should blame and fire. One of the downsides of a hire and fire culture is that people who are running a failing project have a vested interest in keeping it going until they can move on to something else. It is much healthier if such people have the attitude that ending a failing project as soon as it is clearly failed is a positive thing to do. More importantly a culture of willingness to end experiments that have failed would have seen both the IEP and the AFT killed far more quickly with far less waste and angst in the process. One of the things that the IEP and the AFT had in common was that they required a lot of support from the existing editor community, and they were seen by some as disrespectful to the existing community because of their substantial cost in editor time. (Disclosure, I was one of the early critics of the AFT, but IEP I largely ignored until February 2012 when I made a number of proposals in edits on Meta, for example http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=IEP%2FMeasure_of_successdiff=3384211oldid=3345498- but I found that no-one else was editing the IEP pages there). Another thing they had in common was that they were top down initiatives in a community that works better with approaches that stem from the community and start by seeing consensus. If we truly want to learn from these two, I would suggest running an election on meta where editors can lobby for the next initiative. This is what I'd hoed that the Strategy wiki would foster, and it might have done if the Strategy debate had been on Meta rather than hidden on a separate wiki made more complex by liquid threads. Maybe the result would be Global watchlists, maybe it would be software changes to resolve more edit conflicts without losing edits (both currently languishing as low priorities in Bugzilla). The important thing is that the resulting initiative would be likely to make a positive difference to the project and unlikely to share the fate of liquid threads, the IEP or the AFT. WSC ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
James, If you're interested in starting a broader discussion about the usefulness of arbcoms and alternatives to them, and the relationship of Jimbo to arbcoms, I think the best place to do that is at Meta. There have also discussions there about asking for some kind of outside intervention in the Russian Wikipedia due to infighting there, so your request for this kind of discussion already has a parallel on Meta. But the consensus seems to be that outsiders shouldn't overrule the decision of a project's arbcom. I think it would take a significant Meta RFC to come up with a mechanism that changes this situation, and right now I think that's highly unlikely. If you are dissatisfied with a decision made by ENWP Arbcom and you think that the constitutional arrangements for ENWP Arbcom should be changed, I think you are best served by having that discussion on ENWP and/or on the ENWP email list. This is a long way of saying that I agree with Maria and Risker. I feel that the tone of Risker's first email should have been more respectful, but I also understand that Risker and Arbcom probably get an endless series of complaints and keeping one's composure in that situation can be difficult. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour inside out (program evaluation)
Tom, I'm glad that you studied the IEP. Gayle, I would be interested in hearing about the topics that you're covering during your training sessions for WMF supervisors, especially whether you make sure that every supervisor has had an opportunity to learn about the experience of IEP. My impression is that the AFT5 leadership didn't make connections between IEP and AFT5 during the AFT5 design and planning. I'm not sure if this is because the AFT5 program leadership never read the IEP report, or if it's because the AFT5 leadership didn't see how lessons from IEP could be relevant to the AFT5 program. I hope that every program leader at WMF makes a point of learning about IEP early in their leadership career. I think IEP is a very useful case study in program management. Thanks, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:00:05 +0100 From: nemow...@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org CC: deyntest...@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Will Beback, Arbcom and Community oversight ENWP Pine, 24/03/2013 18:39: If you're interested in starting a broader discussion about the usefulness of arbcoms and alternatives to them, and the relationship of Jimbo to arbcoms, I think the best place to do that is at Meta. [...] I doubt it, the page would get deleted. Nemo An RFC about the topics that I mentioned would be within scope for Meta, although I'm not predicting a successful RFC. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour inside out (program evaluation)
Tom, Thanks for the good email. It's important to learn from mistakes, but admitting mistakes does not absolve someone from accountability. When people are being paid to do something right or to achieve a certain outcome, and that doesn't happen or it happens late, it's sometimes a very good and appropriate thing to consider replacing them for the sake of the organization and the program. In the case of IEP, the consultant said that firing people would have been premature. I'm not sure that I would have reached the same conclusion, and I think if I had been on WMF's board at the time that this report was released, I might have had things to say about holding individual employees accountable. But in the here and now, I am mostly interested in making sure that lessons from this program are deeply embedded into the institutional memory of WMF throughout the organization and on a long-term basis. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 108, Issue 82
Peter, thanks, I agree on that point. Taking calculated risks is much different from being negligent. Some risks work and some don't, and that can be OK in some contexts. Pine From: Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour inside out (program evaluation) Message-ID: EB1424C3329A454784D1EDE5684713D7@peter Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=UTF-8; reply-type=original Make interesting mistakes. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour inside out (program evaluation)
And speaking of mistakes, I need to remember to change the subject lines of my emails to this list. Pine From: deyntest...@hotmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: RE: Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 108, Issue 82 Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 15:35:58 -0700 Peter, thanks, I agree on that point. Taking calculated risks is much different from being negligent. Some risks work and some don't, and that can be OK in some contexts. Pine From: Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour inside out (program evaluation) Message-ID: EB1424C3329A454784D1EDE5684713D7@peter Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=UTF-8; reply-type=original Make interesting mistakes. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quarterly reviews of high priority WMF initiatives
Awesome. Thank you, Maryana and Steven! Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour inside out (program evaluation)
I agree that the general ideas about IEP and AFT5 were worth considering, but I get the impression that there were preventable shortcomings in their designs and planning, and it bothers me a lot that I think I see *similar* flaws in the two programs. I get the impression that lessons from the IEP's catastrophic failure were not absorbed by the AFT5 planners and designers. I would need to do a deep dive comparison of IEP and AFT5 before I'm sure of the commonalities in planning and design problems, but I sure hope that someone at WMF is looking at this and shares the lessons widely. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quarterly reviews of high priority WMF initiatives
Tilman, Thanks, it's great to see the momentum here in Mobile Contributions. Was there any discussion about how to convert the selfies uploaders and people who sign up for the watchlist feature into more active contributors? This seems like an opportunity to make progress on what I think should be the #1 WMF-wide priority right now, which making progress on the active contributor statistics. Pine -- Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 16:32:54 -0700 From: Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quarterly reviews of high priority WMF initiatives Message-ID: CAPDdKA6M+PLM7OHfJNKQcNVp_cS0EUEeBMATjvS=jjydv01...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Minutes and links to slides from this week's Quarterly Review meeting of the mobile contributions team have been posted at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Mobile_contributions,_2013-03-18 On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi folks, to increase accountability and create more opportunities for course corrections and resourcing adjustments as necessary, Sue's asked me and Howie Fung to set up a quarterly project evaluation process, starting with our highest priority initiatives. These are, according to Sue's narrowing focus recommendations which were approved by the Board [1]: - Visual Editor - Mobile (mobile contributions + Wikipedia Zero) - Editor Engagement (also known as the E2 and E3 teams) - Funds Dissemination Committe and expanded grant-making capacity I'm proposing the following initial schedule: January: - Editor Engagement Experiments February: - Visual Editor - Mobile (Contribs + Zero) March: - Editor Engagement Features (Echo, Flow projects) - Funds Dissemination Committee We’ll try doing this on the same day or adjacent to the monthly metrics meetings [2], since the team(s) will give a presentation on their recent progress, which will help set some context that would otherwise need to be covered in the quarterly review itself. This will also create open opportunities for feedback and questions. My goal is to do this in a manner where even though the quarterly review meetings themselves are internal, the outcomes are captured as meeting minutes and shared publicly, which is why I'm starting this discussion on a public list as well. I've created a wiki page here which we can use to discuss the concept further: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews The internal review will, at minimum, include: Sue Gardner myself Howie Fung Team members and relevant director(s) Designated minute-taker So for example, for Visual Editor, the review team would be the Visual Editor / Parsoid teams, Sue, me, Howie, Terry, and a minute-taker. I imagine the structure of the review roughly as follows, with a duration of about 2 1/2 hours divided into 25-30 minute blocks: - Brief team intro and recap of team's activities through the quarter, compared with goals - Drill into goals and targets: Did we achieve what we said we would? - Review of challenges, blockers and successes - Discussion of proposed changes (e.g. resourcing, targets) and other action items - Buffer time, debriefing Once again, the primary purpose of these reviews is to create improved structures for internal accountability, escalation points in cases where serious changes are necessary, and transparency to the world. In addition to these priority initiatives, my recommendation would be to conduct quarterly reviews for any activity that requires more than a set amount of resources (people/dollars). These additional reviews may however be conducted in a more lightweight manner and internally to the departments. We’re slowly getting into that habit in engineering. As we pilot this process, the format of the high priority reviews can help inform and support reviews across the organization. Feedback and questions are appreciated. All best, Erik [1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Vote:Narrowing_Focus [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Office hour inside out (program evaluation)
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 13:31:57 -0700 From: Frank Schulenburg frank.schulenb...@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Tomorrow: Office hour inside out (program evaluation) Message-ID: cakoobqbk6rcui1bthp41mbvjtdzdqvvsjrlgsfywxuuogap...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi folks, Tomorrow at 17:00 UTC, I will be holding an office hour about program evaluation on #wikimedia-office. The target audience for this office hour will be chapter representatives and volunteers who are currently running (or planning to run) programs and programmatic activities. You'll find some background information about why program evaluation might be worth talking about in my most recent blog post on the Foundation's blog: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/03/01/lets-start-talking-about-program-evaluation/ As we all know, most office hours follow a certain rule: there's one poor staffer who is getting grilled by the people on the IRC channel – people ask a variety of questions and the staff person tries to answer every question in a limited amount of time. It's a lot of fun (I guess, at least for the people who're asking the questions) and it has been a good way of direct communication between WMF employees and the community. Now, this office hour will be different. Not that I don't enjoy being grilled for one hour :-) I've done IRC office hours several times before and I always enjoyed answering questions. The reason for this office hour to be different is that I want to _listen to you in the first place_. I would like to learn more about * _your_ thoughts about why evaluation might be important * _your_ experiences with making evaluation a part of program design * _your_ hopes and fears when it comes to increasingly evaluating programs and programmatic activities in the future * _your_ ideas and feedback on evaluation practices Ideally, we would have some people in the room tomorrow who have done some kind evaluation in the past or who are planning to embark on evaluation work in the near future. With that said – if you have no idea about what program evaluation is and you'd like to learn more about it, you're invited as well! Or maybe you're just curious to see if this office hour inside out is going to play out well ;-) I'm looking forward to meeting you tomorrow at 17:00 UTC, Frank I'd encourage people who are interested in this subject to read up on program management and related subjects. This sort of management has been studied extensively in academia and in business, and in some ways I feel that WMF has catch-up work to do and lacks expertise, although I'm hopeful that WMF is trying to improve in this area. I'd also suggest that people read the report about projects that encountered significant problems at WMF, particularly the IEP, and a more recent example is the mixed reception to AFT5. I hope that program managers at WMF learn both good practices and what to avoid. I also hope that WMF ties program metrics to evaluations for the responsible supervisors when considering whether to continue or renew employment contracts, as well as when considering promotions. Cheers, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mid-Year Financial Statements
Thomas, I agree with you that it would make sense to have a more thoroughly defined reserve policy, but I also caution against micromanaging the reserve. I believe that I said in my previous email directed to Erik that I'm wondering what the downside is of having some underspend for payroll due to hiring that happens later than planned. Unless the underspend is significant enough that it should impact the targets used by the Annual Fundraiser in a significant way, believe that the underspend isn't much of a concern. The issue that worries me about delayed hiring is the possibility of delays or disruptions to program schedules. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mid-Year Financial Statements
Erik, Thanks for the explanation. Let me ask about this issue from another angle. Is it much of a problem to have a requisition planned to fill early in the year with the possibility that it won't be filled until late in the year? The delay likely provides some excess financial capacity but I don't know if the amount would be large enough to be significant. Also, similar one of your points, I wonder about the downsides to unrealistically precise predictions of when requisitions will be filled. I imagine that HR has unplanned turnover during the year that they are tasked to deal with, and demanding that they fill planned vacancies on a tight schedule might have the undesirable effect of limiting their flexibility to deal with unplanned vacancies as turnover happens. Pine -- Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 00:58:12 -0700 From: Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mid-Year Financial Statements Message-ID: caeg6zhmd4dntsec+-f+z4yjapd2pbxrgo+pt27clw1+-hs8...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:12 PM, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote: Hm, I guess a planning problem could be the root cause, but since Erik seems to be saying that WMF has found a number of good candidates outside of SF and yet the statement in the FAQ for the mid-year financials said that the competition in the SF region for engineers is the reason for WMF hiring being slower than planned On the tech side, we've filled 11 position in the first half of 12-13, and we'll have filled another 6 by end of March. I'm confident that we'll have filled at least about 20 positions by the end of the fiscal (some of those are replacements for people who've left rather than new positions). We've also made 9 of 10 planned conversions of temporary contractors. While the competition for local talent does affect our velocity to some extent, I actually don't think the problem is with hiring velocity per se (we're hiring at a pretty reasonable rate), but rather with being more data-driven in how we construct the estimates for the plan, both in terms of # of requisitions, and in terms of calculating the spend for the planned hires. In the 12-13 Plan (and that was also largely the process before), hiring managers were generally asked to fill in estimated start dates for each hire. These estimates, with a little buffer to correct for a known tendency to optimism, were then used as the basis for the financial input into the plan. That may sound reasonable, but it essentially turns the question of hiring velocity into guesswork at the level of the individual hiring manager. Moreover, it has had a weird incentivizing effect of budgeting hires as early as possible, because that would give hiring managers the runway to open a position early, and the buffer to fill any backlogged requisitions in the second half of the fiscal year. If you review the hiring plan on the last page of the 12-13 plan, you'll notice that almost all start dates are in the first half of the fiscal. That's risk mitigation -- but not a very good way to do it. For 13-14, I've asked for finance and HR to work with us in applying performance metrics based on our hiring velocity and attrition rate in 12-13 against the hiring plan for the purpose of estimating the actual dollar spend. I've applied those same metrics to our total req # ask, as well. Instead of attaching unrealistically precise timing to each position, we'll develop a hiring plan that's focused on an a rough overall prioritization of requisitions. So there's definitely potential for a more accurate estimation while moving away from false precision. That said, I always caution people about the delusions of planning. An exercise like the Narrowing Focus this year was both very necessary, but has also had a significant impact on the organization as a whole and many planned expenditures, for example. We need to retain the flexibility to make conscious decisions that deviate from the plan, and the realism to acknowledge uncertainty. On the second point, while we have a record to look back on, obviously we don't really know what our true hiring velocity and attrition rate are going to be for 2013-14, and we can reasonably expect to be off by a few positions. I would much rather acknowledge that explicitly in the plan than pretend that this uncertainty doesn't exist. For this reason, I've proposed to Sue an explicit stage-gating of a set of hires. By that I mean that we would unlock a set of requisitions (we're considering building out a new team that could be easily gated) only if specific hiring objectives are met by a given date, and we'd clearly flag the associated expenses as being stage-gated in this fashion. I don't know if Sue or the Board will accept that proposal
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mid-Year Financial Statements
Hm, I guess a planning problem could be the root cause, but since Erik seems to be saying that WMF has found a number of good candidates outside of SF and yet the statement in the FAQ for the mid-year financials said that the competition in the SF region for engineers is the reason for WMF hiring being slower than planned, I'm having a hard time figuring out what is truly causing hiring to be slower than planned. After hearing Erik's comments, I'm not getting the feeling that the competition in the SF area for engineering talent should be a reason for hiring being slower than planned, so I too would appreciate some further explanation about why there is a disconnect between the plan and the pace of hiring. Pine Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:13:36 +0100 From: Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mid-Year Financial Statements Message-ID: caltqccck4tr92usclaajnmdrzpzcysjgdufjdsp-a_h5xgy...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Garfield, Thanks for sharing the report. Once again, there is a significant underspend. Does that concern you? It seems the WMF is consistently not fully utilising its capital (so, either, you're fundraising too much or doing too little). It often seems to be the case that the underspend is due to not hiring new staff as quickly as expected. The FAQ mentions that the plan was overly ambitious. Do you have a plan in place to ensure your future annual plans include more realistic projections of hiring and other spending? On 11 March 2013 20:17, Garfield Byrd gb...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hello: The mid-year financial statements of the Wikimedia Foundation are available at the Wikimedia Foundation - Financial Reports page.http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Financial_reports This report is for the period from July 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012. Please contact me with any questions. Regards, Garfield Byrd -- Garfield Byrd Chief of Finance and Administration Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext 6787 415.882.0495 (fax) www.wikimediafoundation.org 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* ___ 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
[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikimedia Education] School of Open has launched!
Boldly forwarding an email that was sent to the Wikimedia Education list. Pine -- Forwarded message -- From: Jane Park janep...@creativecommons.org Date: Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:05 PM Subject: [Wikimedia Education] School of Open has launched! To: Wikimedia Education educat...@lists.wikimedia.org Hey guys, in case you haven't seen School of Open launched its first set of courses today, including several on Wikipedia/Wikimedia: http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/37179. Sign up for these facilitated courses this week (sign-up will remain open through Sunday, March 17). These courses will start the week of March 18 (next week!). To sign up, simply click the “Start Course” button under the course’s menu navigation on the left. Copyright 4 Educators (US) – Sign up if you’re an educator who wants to learn about US copyright law in the education context. Copyright 4 Educators (AUS) – Sign up if you’re an educator who wants to learn about Australian copyright, statutory licenses and open educational resources (OER). Creative Commons for K-12 Educators – Sign up if you’re a K-12 educator (anywhere in the world) who wants to learn how to find and adapt free, useful resources for your classroom, and incorporate activities that teach your students digital world skills.Writing Wikipedia Articles: The Basics and Beyond – Sign up if you want to learn how to edit Wikipedia or improve your editing skills — especially if you are interested in and knowledgeable about open educational resources (OER) (however, no background in this area is required). All other courses are now ready for you to take at any time, with or without your peers. They include: Get a CC license. Put it on your website – This course is exactly what the title says: it will help you with the steps of getting a CC license and putting it on your work. It’s tailored to websites, although the same steps apply to most other works. Open Science: An Introduction – This course is a collaborative learning environment meant to introduce the idea of Open Science to young scientists, academics, and makers of all kinds. Open Science is a tricky thing to define, but we’ve designed this course to share what we know about it, working as a community to make this open resource better.Open data for GLAMs (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, Museums) – This course is for professionals in cultural institutions who are interested in opening up their data as open culture data. It will guide you through the different steps towards open data and provide you with extensive background information on how to handle copyright and other possible issues.Intro to Openness in Education – This is an introductory course exploring the history and impacts of openness in education. The main goal of the course is to give you a broad but shallow grounding in the primary areas of work in the field of open education.A Look at Open Video – This course will give you a quick overview of some of the issues, tools and areas of interest in the area of open video. It is aimed at students interested in developing software, video journalists, editors and all users of video who want to take their knowledge further. Contributing to Wikimedia Commons – A sister project of Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons is a repository of openly licensed images that people all over the world use and contribute to. This challenge gets you acquainted with uploading your works to the commons.Open Detective – This course will help you explore the scale of open to non-open content and how to tell the difference. And more… check out all the courses at http://schoolofopen.org/. -- Jane Park Project Manager Creative Commons the School of Open, a collaboration with P2PU: http://schoolofopen.org/ Like what we do? Donate: https://creativecommons.net/donate/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] MediaWiki data browser
There seems to be considerable interest on this email list about WikiData and similar projects, so I think some people may be interested in this proposal at Individual Engagement Grants. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/MediaWiki_data_browser. Note that the community comment period is closed and the Committee has finished its evaluations of all IEG proposals that passed the initial eligibility screening. Further work is being done by WMF. The scheduled announcement date for grant selections from this IEG round is March 29. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mid-Year Financial Statements
Garfield, Thanks for the report. Congrats again to the fundraising team for what they accomplished this for this round of fundraising. The QA for the mid-year report talks about a hiring pace that is slower than planned, and says We attribute this to the fact that the market for engineers is extremely competitive in San Francisco right now. I'd like to ask you or Gayle about how aggressive WMF is about recruiting outside of SF. I think there are probably engineers at large tech companies outside of SF who would enjoy a change of culture from their current employers to WMF if they're willing to take a pay cut. I think that they would be good candidates for the recruiting team, so I'd strongly encourage aggressive recruiting outside of San Francisco. Thanks, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] 2014 calendar of POTY 2012 top twelve
(: A 2014 calendar of the top twelve from the 2012 POTY contest would be a great addition to the Wikimedia shop! Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] Feedback wanted on Individual Engagement Grant proposals
Reminder to all that feedback is welcome on Individual Engagement Grant proposals. The public comment phase ends on February 22. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG#ieg-reviewing Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation named Knight News Challenge winner
This is great news. Congratulations to those who worked on this grant proposal. I'm always glad to hear that progress continues to be made at making Wikimedia content more accessible and/or editable on mobile. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] This is an encyclopedia
Tom, I too like that work of Catherine. I have it on my userpage also. Pine - Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 10:41:26 -0200 From: Everton Zanella Alvarenga ezalvare...@wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, Mailing list do Cap?tulo brasileiro da Wikimedia. wikimediab...@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] This is an encyclopedia Message-ID: caexlhe_d2mylt5bhj75mogaqe24yjkgcqcqrgod9ox_y1sx...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 THIS IS AN ENCYCLOPEDIA One gateway to the wide garden of knowledge, where lies The deep rock of our past, in which we must delve the well of our future, The clear water we must leave untainted for those who come after us, The fertile earth, in which truth may grow in bright places, tended by many hands, And the broad fall of sunshine, warming our first steps toward knowing how much we do not know. *Catherine Munro* inspired by *This is a printing officehttp://infoshare1.princeton.edu/rbsc2/ga/unseenhands/labels/wardePrintOffice.html *, by Beatrice Warde http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatrice_Warde http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CatherineMunro Just discovered from a wikipedian friend from Kenya. Tom -- Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom) A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more useful than a life spent doing nothing. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Aaron Swartz is dead - memorials
Numerous Wikipedians are leaving memorials on AaronSw's user talk page on English Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AaronSw I've also added a link to there from Aaron's entry in WP:RIP. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Compromise?
James, Is there evidence that WMF has a worrisome talent retention problem? Gayle seems to think that the answer is generally no. If there is evidence to the contrary that has more weight than anecdotal Glassdoor reviews, I would be interested in seeing that evidence. I would distinguish between motivation and performance. Highly motivated people may perform poorly and/or perform in ways that are inconsistent with the organization's interests. Consider the cases of financial professionals who were so highly motivated that they were willing to risk criminal prosecutions and serious harm or outright demise of their organizations. I get emails every week from the SEC and almost all of them seem to include announcements of legal actions brought by the SEC against people who were highly motivated and made decisions that are questionable at best. Also consider the case of someone who may be highly financially motivated to get a degree in engineering but lacks the math skills to do so. Very highly motivated people may be unable to achieve their performance objectives or may take significant, potentially illegal and unethical risks to achieve those objectives. Looking mainly at the abstracts, I think the final study that you linked is the most relevant of the set to the discussion here. In that case a financial incentive was added in addition to whatever other incentives already existed for the reviewers to complete their work. But I would argue that doing the same work faster is more analogous to the rule-based work, rather than the creative work, discussed in the video that Erik linked. I am not opposed to WMF offering performance bonuses - money, recognition, PTO, greater discretion, conferences, training, desirable assignments - but in general I think you seem to be overstating the nature of WMF's issues with retaining personnel. Also, I would distinguish between incentives to perform and incentives to remain with the organization. On the accountability side, I do think that there's room for improvement, and the employee survey data seem to agree with that. I support the consideration of making personnel changes if important targets are not met or issues do not receive adequate responses. (I am currently concerned about the Board, as I have mentioned elsewhere). But that's a different issue than the alleged talent retention problem for paid staff. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] compromise?
James, I'm a little confounded as to why you're still looking to Glassdoor as your primary source of information on employee satisfaction after Gayle indicated that she has much more comprehensive data on this subject from the employee survey. Also, I will stand up and say that I, for one, am not a fan of WMF trying to match market pay in the SF area. I am interested WMF in retaining qualified and motivated employees, and I am interested in employee job satisfaction which includes pay as only one of many factors. If pay was a widespread problem then I'm sure Gayle and Eric would be seeing that. I expect that, as with many nonprofits, the mission of the nonprofit and the satisfaction of working on the mission with like-minded people will compensate for the lower monetary compensation. It seems to me that your concerns about HR issues have been generally well addressed by Eric and Gayle. Gayle has also agreed to do an IRC office hour, which would be a good opportunity for you to ask more questions if you're still not clear on the applicability of Glassdoor vs. the applicability of the employee survey data. Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 16:19:25 +0200 From: Strainu strain...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org, wiki-researc...@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-researc...@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices) Message-ID: CAC9meR+Ap=3pn5jn4yadjmagzsnblntw8iqrmjksupgr5nm...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Pine, It might be because of the alcohol I've ingested these last days, but - what are you proposing exactly? Hapy new year, strainu I wasn't proposing any specific action. I was thinking, Big Data is a cool topic, it's a big topic in its own right, it's relevant to several aspects of Wikimedia, and other people might be interested in reading about it or thinking about it in relation to work that they're doing or priorities that they have. Happy new year, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF trustee activity levels
Nathan, I agree that other qualitative and quantitative information would be helpful and I hope that Sj or other trustees will comment on the level of trustee engagement. From what I've seen in the public records, the attendance of WMF trustees at Board events seems to be fairly good, but that says nothing about whether trustees were asking valuable questions and contributing substantially to conversations with staff and other trustees. I am wondering if we could have live broadcasts of the non-confidential portions of Board meetings, similar to how the monthly live metrics meetings are broadcast. Would anyone on the board or from staff (Sue? Geoff?) like to comment on that idea? Thanks, Pine Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 16:52:32 -0500 From: Nathan nawr...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF trustee activity levels Message-ID: calkx9dqxurtpzd-degvem2s3fcveopcdff4fetrhomhygxv...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 The obvious point, which has been made many times on this list over the years, is that activity on mailing lists or meta is not a good proxy for measuring the activity of a member of the board. The best measure would be engagement with the duties of the board (which don't include posting on the lists or being an active editor). We'd need peer evaluations and meeting attendance records to really get to that. If we had that information, I know it would figure in my voting for board elections. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] WMF trustee activity levels
Sj, I'm addressing this question to you because you seem to be the most active trustee in the areas where I checked for trustee activity, and also because you were one of the authors of the “Building a lasting movement” workshop submission to Wikimania 2012. I would also be interested in hearing comments from other trustees. This information is from April 2012 to present, showing the number of posts and edits by each trustee. Trustee Meta usernameWikimedia-lMeta Combined Kat WalshMindspillage 8 13 21 Jan-Bart de Vreede Jan-Bart 16 47 63 Stu West Stu0 4 4 Bishakha Datta Bishdatta 30 34 64 Jimmy Wales Jimbo Wales0 3 3 Ting ChenWing 0 2 2 Samuel Klein Sj 107 751 858 Matt Halprin Mhalprin 0 5 5 Alice WeigandLyzzy 12 241 253 Patricio Lorente Patricio.lorente 7 26 33 I would appreciate hearing your comments about these statistics and about trustee activity levels in general. Do each of the trustees demonstrate a strong personal interest in the health and direction of the Foundation and the volunteer community? Do each of the trustees participate actively at Board meetings? Do each of the trustees proactively and regularly communicate with Foundation staff, volunteer contributors, and/or organizations which have significant interactions with the Foundation or the content projects? Personally, I feel that a vibrant, engaged, and proactive board is important for the health of any public nonprofit organization, and for “building a lasting movement” for the near future and for future generations. I think of Wikipedia as a digital “wonder of the world” and a remarkable work of civilization. I hope that the trustees take a strong personal interest in the health and future of Wikipedia, its sister projects, and the foundation and people that sustain and build them. Thank you, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quarterly reviews of high priority WMF initiatives
Eric, This is great. I think this initiative may lead to benefits on multiple fronts. Thank you for this good news! Cheers, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] News24 (.za): SA learners lobby for free Wikipedia
Thanks for forwarding. I'll forward this to link to the Signpost staff. I love the concept of Wikipedia Zero and I'm glad to hear that users are finding it valuable. Pine Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:33:00 + From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] News24 (.za): SA learners lobby for free Wikipedia Message-ID: caj0tu1gm+bnkopusucngtahcx1rdjpqer+joehsbadxmzku...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Wikipedia Zero is popular! This sort of thing should remind us why we bother doing all of this. http://www.news24.com/Technology/News/SA-learners-lobby-for-free-Wikipedia-20121210 - d. -- ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l End of Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 105, Issue 20 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Announcement: Wikimedia Foundation restructure (Global Dev Engineering)
This reorg sounds reasonable to me as Sue has presented it. Since I've spent a number of hours studying WMF's org chart, financials, and related documents, I'd be bold here and answer some questions that have been asked on this list. Let me make an important disclaimer: I am not a member of WMF's staff or on the board of any WMF organization so these answers are 100% unofficial. (: The FDC is the Funds Dissemination Committee. You can learn about them at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee The C-team refers to C-level staff. This is a term borrowed from corporate lingo. C refers to chief as in chief executive officer and chief financial officer but usually also means positions such as general counsel and, in WMF's case, Vice President of Engineering. There is an English Wikipedia article about this topic at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-level. Mathieu asked, On the other hand, don't you fear a reaction from contributors who could feel wronged when they see some people got money where they get nothing? There are already contributors who have applied for grants and were denied. What may change are what grants are available, who awards them, and what criteria are used for awarding them. Regarding the WMF org chart: you can see an approximation of it at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors Regarding what WMF's strategy is: you can find information about it at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Movement_Strategic_Plan_Summary. You can also find annual and monthly documents such as monthly reports and the most recent annual plan at https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home . Cheers, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF narrowing focus (was Re: Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 105, Issue 1)
Thanks Sue. I am cautious when there are specific cuts such as Fellowships in exchange for indeterminate benefits. That makes a cost-benefit analysis difficult to do. Maybe this is a good tradeoff, but from the information that's publicly available, I'm still particularly concerned about the loss of the Fellowships. Could those be funded by increasing the amount of the fundraising goal? Some of the other possible tradeoffs and outsourcing do make sense to me. The loss of the fellowships is my main concern. Looking at the bright side, I would be very glad if one of the benefits from narrowing focus is that the progress of the Visual Editor is hastened. Thanks, Pine From: Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 105, Issue 1 Message-ID: CAGZ0=LNMvd+mYRLyRxOVxcFMPcHhhD4iUaxodgFF6dw=mmd...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Pine, We haven't articulated specific and measurable benefits: that's why you haven't gotten an answer to your question. That's because the Narrowing Focus exercise is not a one-off immediate-term event: it's a longer-term decision which will have multiple implications in this year and in future years. The Board approved the general principle: that narrowing focus would benefit the organization, which had been spread too thinly. But, the precise implications won't be known until the process begins to play out. For example, we've made a decision to outsource some of the WMF work associated with Wikimania, but until we define the terms of the outsourcing, we can't know what the exact implications will be. (Because we don't know what it will cost, or what work the contractor/consultant will be able to do. We *will* know those things in future, and I could make educated guesses about them now, but we can't know with certainty until we run an RFP process or similar.) Upshot: this is a long-term-focused decision, and it'll take a while for the implications to begin to play out. I've told the Board we shouldn't expect to see too much in the way of benefits in 2012-13 (the current fiscal year) because there will be work required to execute the various components of it, which will offset whatever gain we might otherwise have seen this year. We may see a little pay-off this year, but mostly it will start to happen in 2023-14. Thanks, Sue On Dec 2, 2012 3:56 PM, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote: Tilman, Thanks, I always like reading these reports. Again, I'd like to ask what specific and measurable benefits the changing focus changes will accomplish. I've been asking this for awhile. Thanks, Pine Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 15:55:37 -0800 From: Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation Report, October 2012 Message-ID: CAPDdKA5QRw_+kn=Pdb9Ryc9= vpoeztxxbgfz5kwncphee7m...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Hi all, please find below the WMF report for October 2012, in plain text. As always, the editable and formatted version has been published on Meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Report,_October_2012 and the reports are being posted on the Wikimedia blog, too: https://blog.wikimedia.org/c/corporate/wmf-monthly-reports/ As usual, we are also publishing a separate Highlights summary. Please consider helping non-English-language communities to stay updated, by providing a translation: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights,_October_2012 Many thanks those who have translated the September Highlights into Arabic, Breton, Czech, German, Spanish, French, Piedmontese, Russian, Ukrainian, Chinese and Telugu! While still focussing on WMF activities, the Highlights include a small selection of the most noteworthy events from the whole movement. Suggestions for the soon to be published November issue are welcome until Wednesday (December 5) at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Highlights Regards, Tilman -- ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 105, Issue 1
Tilman, Thanks, I always like reading these reports. Again, I'd like to ask what specific and measurable benefits the changing focus changes will accomplish. I've been asking this for awhile. Thanks, Pine Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 15:55:37 -0800 From: Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation Report, October 2012 Message-ID: CAPDdKA5QRw_+kn=Pdb9Ryc9=vpoeztxxbgfz5kwncphee7m...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Hi all, please find below the WMF report for October 2012, in plain text. As always, the editable and formatted version has been published on Meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Report,_October_2012 and the reports are being posted on the Wikimedia blog, too: https://blog.wikimedia.org/c/corporate/wmf-monthly-reports/ As usual, we are also publishing a separate Highlights summary. Please consider helping non-English-language communities to stay updated, by providing a translation: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Highlights,_October_2012 Many thanks those who have translated the September Highlights into Arabic, Breton, Czech, German, Spanish, French, Piedmontese, Russian, Ukrainian, Chinese and Telugu! While still focussing on WMF activities, the Highlights include a small selection of the most noteworthy events from the whole movement. Suggestions for the soon to be published November issue are welcome until Wednesday (December 5) at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Highlights Regards, Tilman -- ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] Recent Research report: collaboration between editors of different political affiliations, predicting box office revenue, the Essjay controversy, and more
There are a number of interesting topics in this month's Recent Research report. The detailed list of contents for the Research Report may intrigue some readers of Wikimedia-l and Research-l. The report is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2012-11-26/Recent_research. More information about the report is available at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter. Personally, I was most appreciative of the information under Being Wikipedian is more important than the political affiliation. Quoting from the report: Based on an analysis of a sample of 1390 editors with known political affiliation – either US Democrat or Republican – (the authors) conclude that although the social identity of editors is strongly reflected in their editorial interests – that is, the topics on which they are more active – but that being Wikipedian dominates the political affiliation when it comes to user pages. In contrast with other social media e.g., blogosphere, where cross-party interactions are very much underrepresented, it appears that Wikipedian dialogues between editors from opposing parties are relatively profound and notable. On the day before the US presidential election, the paper's results were highlighted on the Wikimedia blog under the headline In divisive times, Wikipedia brings political opponents together. Recent Research report topics for November 2012: Early prediction of movie box-office revenues with Wikipedia data Readability of the English Wikipedia, Simple Wikipedia, and Britannica compared Wikipedia favors established views and scientifically backed knowledge Trust, authority and credentials on Wikipedia: The case of the Essjay controversy Being Wikipedian is more important than the political affiliation Eye-tracking study: Readers look at TOC first, then infobox Edit categories in featured and non-featured articles How the TV schedule influences Wikipedia pageviews A truthfulness verification system based on Wikipedia Characterizing Wikipedia traffic One-year article ratings dump released Measuring countries' visibility on Wikipedia Ratio of African Wikipedia readers rising, but still low --Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
