It appears that Affiliate agreements with the Wikimedia Foundation are
not published on-wiki in a consistent way.
Though the standard templates are available, these have varied over
time, so at a minimum to understand which Chapter/Thorg/User Group has
currently agreed which legally binding
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 01:00, Gregory Varnum wrote:
> Our next Wikimedia monthly activities meeting will be on 22 February 2019.
> More information will be available on Meta-Wiki:
> But wait?!? What about
any of them by
> glaringly public flaws.
> To my mind Steve Walling has it right - the very nature of Wikipedia is
> maybe the best protection there could be, even against the absurdly
> unlikely circumstance of a United States government takeover of Wikipedia.
Dear fellow Wikimedians, please sit back for a moment and ponder the following,
For those of us not resident in the US, it has been genuinely alarming
to see highly respected US government archives vanish overnight,
reference websites go down, and US legislation appear to drift to
"Liaisons will ensure that the voices and perspectives of these
communities are heard and considered in the Movement Strategy Process"
Question 1: Was there not feedback last year from volunteer
coordinators (or whatever the title was) that their voices were lost,
and that their time felt wasted;
itor be agreeable, I suggest that the next step is for
> > > > > someone
> > > > > > who has the ability to converse in Amharic to contact the Amharic
> > > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > and find out why the block has been issued, how
Do we have cross project policies to govern or limit local policies
for the use of sysop tools? I would like to pass on policy advice, and
any past cases folks here would like to highlight that set a
The case below is illustrative, though based on my recall of several
On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 at 21:35, Yaroslav Blanter wrote:
> I have written a long text today (posted in my FB)
Facebook, is that still a thing? Gah, whatever is being posted there,
many of us Wikipedians are never going to see it. It would be nice to
see more people writing decent essays as blog
rable fraction of them. And annoy the hell out of everyone
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 15:33, Fæ wrote:
> So, no lear
ct. I get the impulse to get in and I know if I am
> busy with other things. Reminder of something in the future get lost
> Den 2018-10-26 kl. 10:22, skrev Fæ:
> > Saw this message today. Almost all readers of this list will find a
> > br
Saw this message today. Almost all readers of this list will find a
broadcasted 30 minutes reminder equally useless.
Please revisit this part of the WMF comms plan.
On Thu, 25 Oct 2018, 18:35 Greg Varnum, wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> Reminder that this month’s Wikimedia Monthly
On Mon, 22 Oct 2018 at 00:34, effe iets anders wrote:
> Hi Pine,
> I would also suggest not to get overly bureaucratic with this :) If the
> public meeting you refer to requires a large attendance, the 14 days makes
> sense for example - but I cannot recall many meetings of that style.
n analysis of
the OurMine hack (11 November 2016)
Thank you for helping out with better community communication,
On Fri, 4 May 2018 at 10:40, Fæ wrote:
> On 4 May 2018 at 01:27, John Bennett wrote:
> > Hello,
Agree with Jane. Wow. For those unaware, Antoine Musso is a WMF
Software developer, which you would never know based on their email
Hey fellow long-term unpaid volunteers. Remember that the WMF was
created by us not that long ago, and had a single mission, to support
us volunteers and
I have been trying to work how the WMF or its suppliers have chosen to
use pixel tracking methods on Wikimedia projects, and exactly what
data is tracked, who can access it and if it ever gets officially
deleted, but failed so far.
There was some past speculation that some banners were using
On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 at 13:29, Mario Gómez wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:26 PM, Fæ wrote:
> > On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 at 13:12, Mario Gómez wrote:
> > No it is not "fair", it is a way of dismissing equality for LGBT+
> > people b
On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 at 13:12, Mario Gómez wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 1:41 PM, Fæ wrote:
> > However when you choose to derail a discussion that is no more and no
> > less than same sex couples being treated equally and being given equal
> > access for
Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 at 11:18, Mario Gómez wrote:
> Hi Fæ,
In Wikipedian fashion, let us stick to the published statement by
Wikimedia Israel without making unnecessary inferences. WMIL made a
positive statement to support equality, and we know that equality is
repeated in the Wikimedia Values and echoed in the developing future
Congratulations to the Wikimedia Israel board for taking positive
action for equality.
Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 at 08:57, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel
On 7 May 2018 at 10:01, FRED BAUDER wrote:
> Women editors might have something to add about nursing and the history of
> nursing that adds gender-specific value, increasing our coverage of the
> subject. So a workshop at a nursing convention might be valuable.
On 4 May 2018 at 01:27, John Bennett wrote:
> Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours warning you
> of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I wanted to let
> you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is
On 2 May 2018 at 17:53, Strainu wrote:
> 2018-05-02 1:51 GMT+03:00 Woubzena Jifar :
>> 3. On your third point of having the 1st - 15th of the month be an open
>> application time, this is also an experiment. We hope that this focused,
>> clear timeline
On 20 March 2018 at 15:36, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.loks...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 20 March 2018 at 15:03, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.loks...@gmail.com>
>> > Descriptio
amed pre-existing Affiliates
within the scope of the proposed new UG.
> Kirill Lokshin
> Chair, Affiliations Committee
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 7:11 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wro
Support the request that AffCom share their understanding of the scope
and authority of the announced User Group.
From the wording of "represent Wikimedia UK in Wales", the UG is
not independent of WMUK and consequently acts as a Chapter subsidiary.
As far as I am aware, there is no other
On 15 March 2018 at 16:01, Todd Allen <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fae, I really like that flowchart. Is it linked somewhere that uploaders
> can see it?
1. Happy to rediscover Clipboard History plugin in Chrome. It saves
the frustration of hunting around, or rewording, a reusable snippet of
wikitext on Commons image pages.
2. As part of a Commons discussion on copyright, for the first time in
a couple of years created a flowchart, and experienced
On 23 August 2017 at 05:03, John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
> Hi list members,
> The list admins (hereafter 'we', being Austin, Asaf, Shani and I, your
> humble narrator) regularly receive complaints about the frequent
> posters on this list, as well as about the unpleasant
On 7 February 2018 at 11:06, Felix Nartey wrote:
> Congratulations Wikimedia Sweden!
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Leinonen Teemu
>> Heja Sverige! Congratulations!
>> Making me happy this week,
>> - Teemu
>> On 7 Feb 2018, at
On 4 February 2018 at 06:13, Pine W wrote:
> P.S. Do people like these "What's making you happy this week" emails? Few
> people respond to them, so I don't know whether people like them, feel that
> they are a nuisance, or are indifferent. If you would like to share
On 21 November 2017 at 15:00, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> I'm interested to see how we can make our conferences, not least
> Wikimania, and other events more green and, particularly, use less
> I see from:
Gerard, apart from you, has anyone written "no: this is wrong and I will do
everything in my power to see this plan dismissed for the crap I think it
Unless you are using Trumpist tactics of spreading fake news to deride and
smear others, please source any controversial quotes.
gt; confident that this is a typo of a kind. It does not match with how I know
> the people in charge of this process.
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 12:51 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 26 Oct 2017 09:00, "Nicole Ebber" <nicole.eb...@wikime
On 26 Oct 2017 09:00, "Nicole Ebber" wrote:
Today marks the final milestone of phase 1 of our movement strategy
process. Over the past eight months, many of you, of your peers,
colleagues, partners and friends have contributed to an endeavor that
for this thread if there is a
> possibility to ask Jimbo personally.
> On Oct 21, 2017 3:48 PM, "Fæ" <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 21 October 2017 at 13:05, Isaac Olatunde <reachout2is...@gmail.com>
> On Oct 21, 2017 12:45 PM, "Fæ" <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 25 April 2017 at 22:59, Jimmy Wales <jimmywa...@wikia-inc.com> wrote:
>> > Today I announced a new initiative, outside of my Wik
On 21 October 2017 at 12:44, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25 April 2017 at 22:59, Jimmy Wales <jimmywa...@wikia-inc.com> wrote:
>> Today I announced a new initiative, outside of my Wikimedia activities,
>> to combat fake news. It is important to me that I
On 25 April 2017 at 22:59, Jimmy Wales wrote:
> Today I announced a new initiative, outside of my Wikimedia activities,
> to combat fake news. It is important to me that I share directly with
> all of you information about this new initiative early on.
> The new
On 18 October 2017 at 18:32, Brian Wolff wrote:
> Fae wrote:
>>Does the minus symbol in "-60.0%" mean anything? Being a retention
>>percentage, I do not understand how it can be negative unless
>>potential volunteers are getting rejected at the door before they can
On 18 October 2017 at 12:12, Brian Wolff wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Srishti Sethi wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>> I would like to share the first edition of the New Developers Quarterly
>> Report that the Developer Relations team has
Could we keep the announcements list for announcements as per its limited
scope please? 
If someone could recommend an on-wiki page or email for Raju Narisetti,
this may be useful for those who wish to send personal congratulations or
thank you notes.
In light of the recent discussion of
Taking María's statement on behalf of the WMF by itself, there are a
couple of simple in-line questions about handling governance I would
like to make, based on my experience with a number of governance
issues both within and outside of Wikimedia related organizations.
I'm sticking to this being
claim to represent and to be blunt, simply alienating.
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Ziko's point may not fit the rigid Americanocentric ideal of everything
> > must be positive, fantastic, yeehaw-we-are-number-one, but
Ziko's point may not fit the rigid Americanocentric ideal of everything
must be positive, fantastic, yeehaw-we-are-number-one, but he's spot on
with how the foundations remain flawed.
Only ever hearing congratulations and thanks can get you to a win, but will
never keep you there.
Return to the
On 27 September 2017 at 10:01, Jane Darnell wrote:
> We don't need to ban statements when we can just deprecate them with a
> reason. I think the whole point is to allow differing views equal weight,
> based on sourced statements. By allowing statements to reside side-by-side
Several emails on this topic have been essay length, including some from
list moderators. If post limits are halved, this may become more common.
Many readers, especially those like me viewing on a phone when scanning
through emails, will skip essays which are several screens long. Please
Who has access to the logs, and for how long will the logs be retained?
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
Getting back to the proposed rules, the list moderators have always had
flexibility to use judgement. Creating extra bureaucracy is unlikely to be
a healthy 'fix', I would much rather first see the mods take whatever
action they feel is necessary to run a welcoming email list, and only start
Yes! I intended to post to the UK list, and thought I had until reading
On 20 Aug 2017 15:59, "Lodewijk" wrote:
Maybe a silly question, but is there no more specialized forum that would
The Canmore database, https://canmore.org.uk, describes itself as the
"online catalogue of the National Record of the Historic Environment.
It holds detailed information and archive images for more than 300,000
places in Scotland." Canmore is part of Historic Environment Scotland
James, thank you for making a public statement. It sets a healthy tone
for good governance and transparency of how interests are managed.
Does anyone know if WMF board members will ever be required to make
public statements about perceived conflicts of loyalties, or indeed
As it happens, as part of my early career in avionics, I was
responsible for the software side of the flight certification of the
first inflight entertainment systems, both for CAA and FAA. Unless the
interpretation of regulations has significantly changed, the snapshot
of Wikipedia(s) would have
July 2017 at 02:12, geni <geni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28 July 2017 at 21:36, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Nobody believes that claiming copyright on 2,000 year old works
> And this is where your failure to understand English and Welsh law and
> the hi
unchallenging for the British Library's public relations department.
If we see blatant copyfraud, the community should be free to call it
what it is.
On 28 July 2017 at 22:03, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28 July 2017 at 21:59, Fæ <fae...@gmail.
etter than your
> over-excited claims of "fraudulent" conduct and it would be wise to
> actually find out what the BM's stance is before criticising it, or calling
> for social media campaigns to change it.
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Fæ <fa
elieves that claiming copyright on 2,000 year old works is
something that a British National Institution would want to defend.
The issue is expressed in that one sentence, an essay is really not
needed to explain it. So "I'm right, everyone else is wrong" does not
describe what this is ab
but to be honest, I'm not going to.
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The Tullie House Museum in Carlisle has a number of objects on loan
> > from the British Museum, and it appears that it is only th
The Tullie House Museum in Carlisle has a number of objects on loan
from the British Museum, and it appears that it is only those
objects that have any restrictions on photography. I took photographs
of two of these (without any flash), as the restrictions are
shockingly obvious cases of
I have views on both votes, but I'll just share one, as I no longer
feel that sharing any more of my viewpoint about the WMF board and its
elections here or on-wiki would be welcome, or make any difference
apart from helping to paint a bigger target on my back.
Having James back on the board is
The WMF has a large legal fund to support volunteers and projects like
Commons, which from my memory has only ever been paid out on a couple
of occasions (if anyone has a link to a list, I love to see it). At
least part of the 89,000 USD mentioned seems suitable for this
side would help.
> Op 30 jun. 2017 15:16 schreef "Fæ" <fae...@gmail.com>:
>> Could an unpaid volunteer who is not a WMF employee, or contractor, or
>> consultant, please have a go at answering my polite request for links
On 27 June 2017 at 12:31, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27 June 2017 at 04:33, Anna Stillwell <astillw...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>> * How much is this timeline extension projected to cost, and from what
>>> source are the fun
On 27 June 2017 at 04:33, Anna Stillwell wrote:
>> * How much is this timeline extension projected to cost, and from what
>> source are the funds being drawn? (Note that this doesn't assume that the
>> decision was a bad one, but I very much want to know the source
The elected candidates are ideal, making me feel confident that the
values and aspirations of the wider Wikimedia volunteer community will
be well represented in the coming year.
As previously mentioned, Alice and Jimmy were the main political
players in excluding Doc James from board
no, even "he or she" is
considered hostile. Sorry, I consider this an egregious case of
special pleading and first-world-problemism. How about instead lets
worry about how we are unwelcoming to women. That's a lot bigger
To see who said what, go to the RfC. :-)
I browsed through the bee mites example. Though a bot or tool can be
good for mass uploading thousands of images from a 'flat' archive
source, i.e. each image has a catalogue record to take suitable data
from, the species web pages and diagrams gain a lot of their value by
illustrating the page
Along with the public announcement to the press about Wikitribune, was
the story that you had immediately resigned from The Guardian's board
because the new company "will compete for staff, stories and
donations". Will you be resigning from the WMF board of trustees
Itzik has put it nicely. The volunteers in Affcom are committed folks,
and it is reassuring that multiple steps are taken to encourage
struggling affiliates to meet the basic requirements.
Running a chapter is a hard burden for a small group of volunteers,
particularly if relying on volunteers to
> If a language doesnt have a gender neutral way to express an individual
> then we should be encouraging speakers to find alternative ways which can
> best express our neutral position
> On 8 April 2017 at 20:32, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
Slight tangent, were figures published on how much money was paid to
the WMF using this Amazon scheme? It feels like the sort of
information that should be easily available.
On 11 April 2017 at 11:50, Lodewijk wrote:
> Perhaps because that is where the
> That phrasing raised an uproar on the French pump. So I replaced the term by
> "nous" (we). Seems to settle things.
> Clearly the French speaking community is not ready to adopt the gender
> neutral specific language accross the francophones projects. Alt
, go focus on
something more fun.
Wikimedia LGBT+ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
On 5 April 2017 at 11:44, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
reconsider. Users will leave if you start messing
> with how they address other users.
> On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 7 April 2017 at 06:39, Anders Wennersten <m...@anderswennersten.se>
>> > So
On 7 April 2017 at 06:39, Anders Wennersten wrote:
> So when it comes to how we use them in documents related to WIkipedia, is to
> not use any of them. It is a little bit more complicated but it is quite
> possible. "The person who takes a photo should" etc
Thanks for raising the different language problems. I'm aware of it,
though I only edit in English.
Last weekend I was much enlightened by sitting down with a German
trans contributor, who was showing me the system language problems on
the German Wikipedia, and together we started having fun
> Le 05/04/2017 à 12:52, Fæ a écrit :
>> I'm taking that further by
>> proposing that we stick to a neutral gender for all our policies and
>> help pages. In practice this means that policies avoid using "he or
>> she" and stick to "they" or
On 6 April 2017 at 08:59, Laura Hale <la...@fanhistory.com> wrote:
> Hi Fae,
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> * https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#
One of the unplanned outcomes from the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin,
was that the various discussions over /feeling/ more welcoming in our
language presumptions for
I am happy this week to be writing up an interview about the recent
experience of being a young Wikipedian and coming out as a trans
person, discovering our wiki communities a welcoming and positive
As an older married gay guy, it gives me a whole new perspective on
the social value
Would you be so kind and answer the question Lodewijk asked. We are all
aware that things are not perfect but what is it that can be done to
On 20 March 2017 at 10:58, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In practice
In practice what we (Wikimedians) see from WMF communications programmes is
widely spread announcements and sometimes an anonymous survey, again widely
spread. This is literally not 'communication', it is 'broadcasting'.
For communication to be meaningful, your message must not only be sent to
l"? I seems to recall
> hearing about days when useful discussions happened here.
> On Feb 27, 2017 10:18 AM, "Fæ" <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> They have been repeatedly asked to stick to one account and refused to
>> do so. I suggest yo
sic interaction in an online setting - be
> On Feb 27, 2017 9:32 AM, "Fæ" <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Could someone with an appropriate level of managerial authority within
>> the WMF, such as an HR manager, confirm that staff accounts, which ar
* Crickets *
If you were expecting a reply to the suggested "Agreement from the WMF
to reform the system", perhaps it needs to be raised in a more formal
fashion somewhere where WMF Legal or the CEO might feel they need to
On 20 February 2017 at 08:55, Pine W
Could someone with an appropriate level of managerial authority within
the WMF, such as an HR manager, confirm that staff accounts, which are
supposed to be identified with "(WMF)", are intended to be used for an
employee's job or contract role, rather than for personal editing and
On 26 February 2017 at 18:12, Pax Ahimsa Gethen
> Thank you for sharing that Rachel Nabors post, David; bookmarked. I think
> some on this list are missing the point that codes of conduct are necessary
> to help provide a welcoming and safer environment for
Based on this email discussion there are a number of factual issues:
1. Though there is a page on Meta about WMF global bans, it includes no
explanation of the procedure that is followed by WMF employees. More about
this has been said by informal email and published here. A key benefit of
Spot on. If it is a criminal act, remember that WMF legal are paid to
protect the WMF, the police are there to handle crime, which includes
protection of a victim.
On 18 Feb 2017 11:11, "Tim Landscheidt" wrote:
Robert Fernandez wrote:
Were I a "predatory individuals victimizing underage editors" there would
be a reason to threaten me with a ban for replying to questions from other
editors on my home talk page. But I am not. James' bad faith is
On 16 Feb 2017 14:22, "Robert Fernandez"
On 15 February 2017 at 06:21, Pine W wrote:
> Is it possible to have the records moved from the
> spreadsheet to Meta? I thought I once saw a record of these actions on
> Meta, but can't remember exactly where.
The unmaintained old wikitable is at:
On 14 February 2017 at 23:44, James Alexander <jalexan...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:53 AM Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Usecases are appearing, thanks to
> actions that circumvent community processes may be inappropriate. For that
> reason, I would like to see most requests for WMF accounts to get
> permissions of admin or higher for community wikis go through the same
> community vetting process as community members do.
a form referencing
> Do you have a screenshot of what you are seeing?
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 3:41 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The link given in the email (https://scholarships.wikimedia.org/apply)
>> and the same link giv
The link given in the email (https://scholarships.wikimedia.org/apply)
and the same link given at
https://wikimania2017.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships send the
applicant to a form designed for applications for the 2016 Wikimania.
Is this intentional or are applicants using this form going to be
I missed the link, for those wanting to refer to it, I suggest you
keep a bookmark as it's very non-obvious and cannot be found by normal
On 14 February 2017 at 13:11, Fæ <
The WMF grants special rights to employees on a case-by-case basis,
by-passing the normal community driven process to grant admin,
developer and other rights. A few years ago the WMF officially
committed to making this process transparent, and maintains a public
Google Spreadsheet  so that
+1 on the request for links to all the past meeting agendas and
publicly published minutes. I will be very interested to read any
declarations of conflicts of interest. The board is intended to
eventually control $100,000,000, so should be seen to be applying
absolutely the most transparent and
Could we have a confirmation from AffCom that the list of formerly
active affiliates on meta is "official", i.e. the definitive public
reference list, and is maintained?
If it is officially maintained,
Looking at the archive, 16% of the posts to this single thread were by
Gerard Meijssen. This first and only post from me on this is to agree
with Yaroslav that it has been over-cooked and to point out that a
better forum for this type of extended chatter is Facebook; at least
until someone does
1 - 100 of 483 matches
Mail list logo