[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open letter of support for Les sans pagEs

[Jasper Deng]

Long-time lurker stepping in for a little.

“Stay in your lane”—no, just no. Communities and our organizations are
deeply intertwined and their relationship with each other is crucial to
their success. If that means swaying hiring decisions, then so be it.

I have not fully read the details either but this particular reply  is
simply not warranted.

On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 4:17 AM Lane Chance  wrote:

> Responding to LGBTQ minority communities raising legitimate, evidence
> based, concerns of systemic bias with "stay in your lane"?
>
> I don't think I've read anything more tone deaf.
>
> The give away is "Without having looked into the actual substance". Do
> the research before rushing to punch down the voice of minority
> groups.
>
> Lane
>
> On Mon, 19 Sept 2022 at 01:25, Yair Rand  wrote:
> >
> > Without having looked into the actual substance of whatever dispute is
> going on among frwiki and LSP, I want to put forward some good general
> principles:
> > * The individual hiring and firing decisions of our organizations should
> be under the exclusive jurisdiction of the entities assigned those
> responsibilities. Public community pressure should not be able to get
> someone fired or hired, or prevent any particular hiring or firing
> decision. A public protest against someone's hiring is unproductive and
> damages the collaborative environment.
> > * Responding to a community's attitude by sending out a monodirectional
> communication, organized off-wiki and listing supporters' affiliate
> positions, is basically the most conflict-oriented way possible to approach
> this.
> >
> > How an affiliate manages their individual hires is the affiliate's
> business. HR activities are complicated, and do not need to be handled in
> the public sphere. If an affiliate wants to hire whoever, the community
> doesn't get to veto it.
> >
> > How a community reacts to an affiliate's actions is their own business.
> Affiliates do not get a say in local community affairs. A usergroup's or
> chapter's collective opinion is completely irrelevant in a community
> dialogue. If the community wants to ban someone, or even the entire
> membership of a group, they can do that, and affiliates don't get to veto
> it.
> >
> > (Seriously: It doesn't matter if you're the WMF's Board Chair, the CEO,
> or whatever, you don't get an extra vote in an RfC.)
> >
> > (It should go without saying that hostile/uncivil behaviour, harassment,
> and accusations of bad faith are not acceptable.)
> >
> > Everyone, please stay in your lane. This is like the only place on
> Wikimedia where we clearly even _have_ obvious distinct lanes, it should be
> manageable.
> >
> > -- Yair Rand
> >
> >
> > ‫בתאריך יום ו׳, 16 בספט׳ 2022 ב-4:30 מאת ‪WM LGBT‬‏ <‪
> wikimedial...@gmail.com‬‏>:‬
> >>
> >> Link:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_letter_of_support_for_Les_sans_pagEs
> >>
> >> Over 35 Wikimedia organisations and many individual Wikimedians have
> >> signed in support of the initiative of our Wikimedia Affiliate Les
> >> sans pagEs professionalising their work by hiring Nattes à chat as
> >> executive director to continue their longstanding work addressing
> >> systemic bias on Wikipedia and our sister projects and groups.
> >>
> >> Les sans pagEs should be free and supported to create a better
> >> quality, more complete French-language encyclopedia, representative of
> >> different perspectives and lived experiences, instead of having to
> >> defend their work against baseless accusations of malpractice.
> >>
> >> Please ask on the meta discussion page if you would like to add your
> >> Wikimedia organisation or name in support.
> >>
> >> On behalf of
> >> Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group
> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org,
> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/UWTGWAJERTSNWYLQXEERNA4GUQO6T6RG/
> >> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/VBM52FLSYEC4MC5CNZSP3TN7UAANQXZA/
> > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimed

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[Jasper Deng]

Gbfv, this would be good in theory except it's not scalable, and
furthermore the English Wikipedia community has not been a fan of pending
changes as implemented by
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs .

The thing with open proxy blocks in general is that many are made in direct
response to abuse, particularly global blocks. So it would not help much
even if we did have the appetite and will to relax the no open proxies
policy.

On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 5:37 PM  wrote:

> Another somewhat obvious solution: instead, or before, of blocking, make
> the edits coming from one of the (too) dangerous IPs go through a reviewal
> process before getting published; hopefully a very quick one.
> In theory this would be against the original Wikipedia ideas, but I saw
> that it's something already practiced in some cases, and anyway blocking
> seems enormously worse than requiring a review before publication.
>
> By the way, I now realized that the current Wikipedia is already very
> different than what I believed, and it works just because it does *not*
> really allow anyone to make edits.
> Before deciding where to go from here I'd suggest you to reflect on what's
> worse: to forbid anonymity or require reviews; I believe most normal people
> are more interested in privacy than immediate publication of edits.
>
> Kind regards,
> Gabriele
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/MGWLTHPK3TTFOK2PQZCYRS567GGQCN64/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/JF6VXUHN7HR5TAHPUXEEUJ2WIYQFTNUL/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [LGBT] Best practices for awarding scholarships

[Jasper Deng]

Hello all,

Speaking as an admin of Wikidata, someone having an item on the project
should never be a criterion for a scholarship. That would not be fair to
those who weren't lucky enough to get an item (I would probably delete any
item made on any of you (in this thread) unless you meet one of our
notability guidelines -- which are less strict than Wikipedia but still
essentially must pass CSDA7). Not everyone is comfortable having their
information on an item, and in most cases no one will be able to verify
that information even if the person consents, since it most likely won't
have reliable sourcing.

Wikidata is emphatically not a LinkedIn or Facebook for us. It's a
knowledgebase for the whole world.

I also think all the ethics about posting someone's private information on
Wikidata is kind of off-topic in this thread. It shouldn't be a basis of
anyone's application anywhere. It's fundamentally not fair. Metrics for
conferences should be fair while furthering the conference's objectives.

On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 4:48 AM Henry Wood 
wrote:

> Risker
>
> > I've never created a Wikidata profile about anyone, not even someone who
> is
> > widely known.
>
> I did not say you had.  I said that the common view on the projects
> you support is that the consent of the person written about is not
> necessary and that volunteers have a right to create that material.
> Indeed, I would go further, and say that it is not unknown for
> subjects who object to personal information being published to be
> treated with scorn, contempt and ridicule.  Do you accept that, and if
> so, do you condone it?
>
> > No, I would never create an article about a Wikimedian - or a Wikidata
> > profile either - unless they are clearly and obviously notable outside of
> > our little microcosm.
>
> Is the subject being a Wikimedian relevant to whether or not material
> should be published?
>
> > Further, I think it's terrible use of Wikidata to use it to store what
> are
> > essentially the personnel records of Wikimedia volunteers.
>
> Indeed, in some jurisdictions it is likely to be unlawful.
>
> Henry
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place

[Jasper Deng]

I would support increased moderation too, except that sockpuppetry on email
lists is trivial (do we really want to go into the mess of implementing
CheckUser for email headers?).


On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 9:24 PM, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton <
rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com> wrote:

> But this behaviour that you are saying is so Wikimedia Movement, the name
> is totally correct. And expect a block, because they are free, but they
> "need to act in the name of the community, to stop 'trolls'". ;)
>
>
> On 16 June 2014 00:51, Dennis Pierri  wrote:
>
> > Agreed, this list has seen too much personal confrontation, fights and
> > general shit and nothing really productive lately, by the way, be
> > ready for the shit storm from those who feel alluded.
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 10:33 PM, billinghurst 
> > wrote:
> > > I am looking for a productive mailing list that discusses matters of
> > > importance to the Wikimedia community. That the people on such a list
> can
> > > have these discussions politely, respectfully, and with concern for
> > others
> > > in that the words that say, and attitudes taken.  I want to see
> > > announcements, I want to see a higher quality of conversation on what
> > > should be a flaglist in the mailing list space of Wikimedia.
> > >
> > > We don't have it. One gets to the point of utter frustration with this
> > > list, and it is time that the backstabbers, frontstabbers,
> bitchfighters,
> > > venal, conceited, etc. need a place to kill each other with as much
> venom
> > > as possible, but not under the more impressive and specific name of
> > > wikimedia-l. So please rename this list, and take all its people to
> > > something befitting the behaviour seen.  Then please produce a clean
> list
> > > for those who don't have to have the antics of these unbearable,
> > > egotistical, and apparently intolerant and chauvinistic people, and
> > please
> > > don't let them join that list.  They can have their shithole and revel
> in
> > > it. They know who they are and they would feel ashamed if they had a
> > > modicum of interest outside of themselves.
> > >
> > > If that is not possible, then those of who us who want a higher quality
> > > discussion will unsubscribe, and be unrepresented and unheard. Another
> > win
> > > for the trolls, and a sad reflection on the direction.
> > >
> > > Regards, Billinghurst
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Dennis Pierri
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton
> rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com
> +55 11 979 718 884
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Venture Beyond

[Jasper Deng]

If only you made this an actual verbal speech! That's how inspiring I find
this statement :).


On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Vishnu  wrote:

> +1 Lila. Best wishes.
>
> Vishnu
>
>
> On Tuesday 03 June 2014 10:52 AM, Lila Tretikov wrote:
>
>> A month ago, I met some of you for the first time at the WMF’s monthly
>> metrics meeting. Officially, today is my first day as Executive Director
>> of
>> the Foundation. In practice, it’s a day like many others: Today and in the
>> future, we’ll keep working together towards our mission.
>>
>> When I first started learning about Wikimedia, I thought to myself: this
>> will be different. Now, seeing the world from within the information Big
>> Bang , I know: it is.
>>
>> Every second the universe of information is expanding around us, and
>> Wikimedia is a major force that turns this information into knowledge. It
>> is beholden to no one, yet accountable to each and every human being. We,
>> the people who create knowledge and bring it to every corner of the world,
>> are the ones that help it expand. We, the people who read and learn, are
>> the ones that hold the power to make this world a better place.
>>
>> I often speak about human experience. Most have understood this as talking
>> about user experience: the way we access the information or contribute
>> knowledge. You are — partially — right. But what I mean is bigger than
>> that.
>>
>> What I am after is our connection to the world and each other through
>> knowledge. What I’d like us to do is to think big. Think beyond ourselves.
>> Think about humanity as a whole. Because you can. Because Wikimedia is the
>> place to transcend the now and to build the future.
>>
>> This means that what’s ahead is bigger than any one of us. Yet, together,
>> we can make it happen. It means thinking beyond ourselves. It means
>> thinking as a student in Cambodia learning about Khmer poetry
>> > 9A%E1%9E%98%E1%9E%84%E1%9F%89%E1%9E%BB%E1%9E%99>,
>> or a doctor in France writing about infectious diseases
>> . This means
>> empathy,
>> altruism and compassion. It means making things accessible, friendly and
>> easy for everyone.
>>
>> This is what makes Wikimedia big.
>>
>> This is what makes each of us bigger than we could ever be.
>>
>> This is the what. Our job, as the community and the Foundation, is to
>> build
>> the how. Where is the will, there is a way. We are here to walk it.
>>
>> Let’s think big.
>>
>>
>> *Lila Tretikov 
>> Executive
>> Director*
>> ___
>> 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,
>> 
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is Wikipedia Really 90% Wrong

[Jasper Deng]

I am pretty sure that a "90% wrong" figure would fail an elementary
statistical test of significance...


On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 12:55 PM, James Heilman  wrote:

> The journal article by Hasty et al published on May 1st 2014 basically took
> ten Wikipedia articles and ten “researchers” (either medical students or
> residents). Each Wikipedia article was then assessed by two of these
> researchers to try to determine how many statements of fact they contained.
> The first issue was that the number of statements of fact each reviewer
> found sometimes differed by nearly 100%. They than took these individual
> facts and the “researchers” compared them with the peer reviewed literature
> as found on pubmed or the medical website Uptodate. They did not check to
> see if the sources Wikipedia was using were high quality or were accurately
> reflected. Additionally medical students and residents are hardly experts
> in medical research.
>
> No errors in Wikipedia are mentioned directly in the original journal
> article. When I spoke with the lead author he declined to release the
> underlying data for us at Wikipedia to correct the “errors” they had found
> stating that he may 1) wish to publish more on the topic and 2) wished to
> protect the researchers. So much for independent verifiability in science.
> Hasty did make some claims to the popular press about errors on Wikipedia.
> Some of the facts he mentioned however accurately reflected some of the
> best available peer reviewed sources. For example he claimed that blood
> pressure should only be checked twice to make the diagnosis of hypertension
> and that when we state three times we are wrong. However look at the
> National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (previous known as the
> National Institute of Clinical Health / NICE) on page 7 in this document
> http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/CG18background.pdf It is thus a
> little
> ironic that the Telegraph, a UK paper, repeated this incorrect statement
> and the BBC covered the story so uncritically.
>
> Wikipedia has strong recommendations for what counts as a suitable source.
> We recommend the use of secondary sources published in well respected
> journals from the last 3-5 years, position statements of national or
> internationally recognized medical bodies or major textbooks. Is Wikipedia
> a perfect source? No, but it is just as good as many and better than most
> other sources out there. Or else why would the world be using it? Hasty's
> work did not have a comparison group. Basically he invented a new method to
> test the quality of medical content and then only applied this new method
> to one source, Wikipedia. Without a comparator this single data point is
> meaningless. I am curious what he would have found if he would have applied
> this to a NICE guideline or emedicine?
>
> We recently surveyed our top contributors and asked about their
> backgrounds. What we found was that 52% have either a masters, PhD, or MD.
> Another 33% have a BSc. About half are health care providers. 82% are male,
> 9% are female and 9% classified themselves as other or would rather not
> say. This is very similar to results published by Nusa Faric in her
> master's thesis. Additionally we are working with a number of organizations
> including: the National Institute of Health, the Cochrane collaboration,
> and the UCSF college of medicine among others to improve Wikipedia’s health
> care content.
>
> What Hasty did show was 1) the peer reviewed literature does not agree with
> itself (ie different peer reviewed sources come to different conclusions
> which is no surprise to anyone that has read much of it) 2) the peer review
> process is sometimes flawed as he was able to publish a "peer reviewed"
> article whose data does not support its conclusions. As someone who has
> read a lot of the peer reviewed literature this is also not surprising.
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> ___
> 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,
> 
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Jasper Deng]

I mean, you referred to Lila as a potential source of change in the
community's problems in your email right before mine on this thread. If you
meant the community of the wikis, I'm just saying that it wouldn't really
be kosher according to our current practices.


On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> Yes, we did talk on IRC. But what are you referring to? I wasn't
> referring to you anywhere. I don't even remember talking about WMF's
> role in the community. I guess if you have a log of that part of the
> conversation, you should post it now. I may have a log in my own
> client, if you don't mind my posting it.
>
> I think it's becoming abundantly clear why I think it's best if I
> don't interact with WMF employees in private.
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Jasper Deng 
> wrote:
> > Wil, we talked about this on IRC, so I won't repeat what I said. But
> what I
> > did *not* say is that the foundation tends to let the community do what
> it
> > wants, and it would be against that long-standing tradition for staff to
> > try to force a change in the community.
> >
> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:
> >
> >> First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
> >> uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
> >> the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
> >> petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
> >> doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
> >> personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
> >> Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
> >> I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
> >> call on what he puts on his own site.
> >>
> >> Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
> >> but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
> >> leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
> >> point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
> >> charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
> >> it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
> >> here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
> >> problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
> >> going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
> >> that's all just my opinion.
> >>
> >> I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
> >> so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
> >> to the list this time. :)
> >>
> >> ,Wil
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Pete Forsyth 
> >> wrote:
> >> > Dear Lila,
> >> >
> >> > I think many of us are interested in how you will engage with the
> >> Wikimedia
> >> > community, what kind of outcomes you will seek, and what kind of
> tactics
> >> > you will employ in seeking those outcomes.
> >> >
> >> > Can you please clarify whether you believe it is possible for somebody
> >> with
> >> > a close connection to you to influence public perceptions in
> >> > disproportionate, and significant, ways? If so, do you consider it a
> >> > legitimate option for you to (privately) assert your right to
> establish
> >> > yourself in your new position, rather than letting them take the lead?
> >> >
> >> > I think what has happened in the last few days is extraordinary. I've
> >> never
> >> > seen anything like it. While I am sure that Wil's intentions are good,
> >> > frankly, if his desire had been to sabotage your new job, I can't
> imagine
> >> > what more effective path he could have chosen.
> >> >
> >> > I'm not sure if this link has any meaning to you, as you are still
> >> getting
> >> > to know the various people and dynamics in the community. But I wonder
> >> what
> >> > others think of it. Does anybody know if the following quote is
> accurate?
> >> > And regardless of whether it's accurate or not -- the events of the
> last
> >> > week have certainly made it seem plausible, haven't they?
> >> >
> >> &

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A personal note.

[Jasper Deng]

Wil, we talked about this on IRC, so I won't repeat what I said. But what I
did *not* say is that the foundation tends to let the community do what it
wants, and it would be against that long-standing tradition for staff to
try to force a change in the community.

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:18 PM, Wil Sinclair  wrote:

> First off, I said that about Greg, and I firmly believe it. He's
> uncovered many controversies at Wikipedia. In fact, his article was
> the first to be critical of Lila's appointment, and- save the rather
> petty comment about airline fees at the end- was pretty on-point. That
> doesn't mean that I agree with everything Greg says, just that I
> personally am glad someone is saying it. He added *Wil Sinclair*,
> Partner of Lila Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director);
> I'd prefer he just leave it at "Wil Sinclair," but it's really his
> call on what he puts on his own site.
>
> Now, I don't know what Lila thinks of this- and I don't want to know-
> but I would really like to understand if there is a chance for any
> leader to change the concerning aspects of the WP community at this
> point. I know that if there is, it's likely to be a very strong,
> charismatic leader like Lila. But if there isn't, then so be it and
> it's better to know now. And I'm pretty sure that if the community
> here wants positive change, it has to be ready to talk about the hard
> problems- no matter who brings them up. Whatever happens, Lila is
> going to land on her feet; no one need worry about her. But, again,
> that's all just my opinion.
>
> I know you didn't ask me for a response, but this mail is all about me
> so I felt justified chiming in. Thanks for (intentionally) taking it
> to the list this time. :)
>
> ,Wil
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Pete Forsyth 
> wrote:
> > Dear Lila,
> >
> > I think many of us are interested in how you will engage with the
> Wikimedia
> > community, what kind of outcomes you will seek, and what kind of tactics
> > you will employ in seeking those outcomes.
> >
> > Can you please clarify whether you believe it is possible for somebody
> with
> > a close connection to you to influence public perceptions in
> > disproportionate, and significant, ways? If so, do you consider it a
> > legitimate option for you to (privately) assert your right to establish
> > yourself in your new position, rather than letting them take the lead?
> >
> > I think what has happened in the last few days is extraordinary. I've
> never
> > seen anything like it. While I am sure that Wil's intentions are good,
> > frankly, if his desire had been to sabotage your new job, I can't imagine
> > what more effective path he could have chosen.
> >
> > I'm not sure if this link has any meaning to you, as you are still
> getting
> > to know the various people and dynamics in the community. But I wonder
> what
> > others think of it. Does anybody know if the following quote is accurate?
> > And regardless of whether it's accurate or not -- the events of the last
> > week have certainly made it seem plausible, haven't they?
> >
> > Is this really the best way for the new Executive Director to be
> introduced
> > to the Wikimedia community and the world?
> >
> >
> >- * is lucky to have people like Greg [Kohs]; even if he
> >never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well aware
> that
> >he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for
> >investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word, and I
> >personally thank him for that.* - *Wil Sinclair*, Partner of Lila
> >Tretikov (Wikimedia Foundation executive director) - May 22, 2014
> >
> >
> >
> http://mywikibiz.com/index.php?title=Directory%3AGregory_J._Kohs&diff=463158&oldid=462896#Cheers
> >
> > -Pete
> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Lila Tretikov 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> This is a personal note to clarify a some questions that recently came
> up,
> >> specifically in the context of my role as the incoming ED.
> >>
> >>
> >> My partner Wil and I are partners in our private lives. We have always
> both
> >> been extremely independent, and we respect that in each other. That
> said we
> >> have different roles: I am the Executive Director with responsibilities
> >> towards the Foundation and the movement, and he is an independent
> community
> >> member with his own voice.
> >>
> >> I make my decisions using my own professional judgement in conjunction
> with
> >> input from the community and staff. I don’t consult Wil on these
> matters,
> >> ask him to do anything on my behalf or monitor his engagements with the
> >> community. When I speak here, it is in my capacity as an ED.
> >>
> >> Wil, on the other hand, has a very strong personal interest in the
> >> community and agreat deal of curiosity about how the Wikimedia
> >> projectswork. It is very important to him that he remains an
> >> independent individual
> >> able to speak 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] extend mediawiki software to allow append a "group", and "COI" to an edit

[Jasper Deng]

I think this doesn't really address the core issues that surround this
hotly debated topic of paid editing. No further comment.


On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:

> Hoi,
> Why ?
> Thanks.
>  GerardM
>
>
> On 22 February 2014 21:13, Gryllida  wrote:
>
> > I do mind 5 and 6, since their submissions would be deleted aggressively.
> > I feel that you may introduce a marker if you want, but not a separate
> > queue.
> >
> > On Sun, 23 Feb 2014, at 2:25, rupert THURNER wrote:
> > > hi,
> > >
> > > could wmf please extend the mediawiki software in the following way:
> > > 1. it should knows "groups"
> > > 2. allow users to store an arbitrary number of groups with their
> profile
> > > 3. allow to select one of the "group"s joined to an edit when saving
> > > 4. add a checkbox "COI" to an edit, meaning "potential conflict of
> > interest"
> > > 5. display and filter edits marked with COI in a different color in
> > history
> > > views
> > > 6. display and filter edits done for a group in a different color in
> > > history views
> > > 7. allow members of a group to receive notifications done on the group
> > page,
> > >or when a group is mentioned in an edit/comment/talk page.
> > >
> > > reason:
> > > currently it is quite cumbersome to participate as an organisation. it
> is
> > > quite cumbersome for people as well to detect COI edits. the most
> > prominent
> > > examples are employees of the wikimedia foundation, and GLAMs. users
> tend
> > > to create multiple accounts, and try to create "company accounts". the
> > main
> > > reason for this behaviour are (examples, but of course valid general):
> > > * have a feedback page / notification page for the swiss federal
> archive
> > > for other users
> > > * make clear that an edit is done private or as wmf employee
> > >
> > > this then would allow the community to create new policies, e.g. the
> > german
> > > community might cease using company accounts, and switch over to this
> > > system. this proposal is purely technical. current policies can still
> be
> > > applied if people do not need something else, e.g. wmf employees may
> > > continue to use "sue gardner (wmf)" accounts.
> > >
> > > what you think?
> > >
> > > best regards,
> > > rupert
> > > ---
> > > swissGLAMour, http://wikimedia.ch
> > > ___
> > > 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 mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

[Jasper Deng]

"I imagine that once IPv6 is widely in use, this problem will go away
and we'll be able to turn on all notifications (including Thanks) for
anonymous editors."

Not completely correct when it comes to public computers and mobile IPs.


On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Oliver Keyes  wrote:

> For 1: because it'd be impossible to accurately associate notifications
> with the person, I assume.
>
>
> On 10 January 2014 12:11, Isarra Yos  wrote:
>
> > On 10/01/14 19:21, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
> >
> >> These are two reason we don't have Thanks for anonymous editors:
> >> 1. Anonymous editors don't get notifications
> >> 2. Multiple editors often share the same IP address
> >> Problem #2 isn't as prominent as it use to be, but there are still many
> >> large companies and schools that connect to the internet through a
> single
> >> IP. I imagine that once IPv6 is widely in use, this problem will go away
> >> and we'll be able to turn on all notifications (including Thanks) for
> >> anonymous editors.
> >>
> >> Ryan Kaldari
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> 
> >>
> >
> > 1. Why not?
> > 2. A time limit might help resolve that with ipv4 addresses. Alternately,
> > thanks could potentially be nice even if they didn't make the edit
> > themselves, since it's the general feeling and such, so just letting that
> > through for ipv4 addresses might be an option.
> >
> > Mind I'm mostly just echoing something someone else said on IRC just now,
> > but they seem like interesting points to me.
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Oliver Keyes
> Product Analyst
> Wikimedia Foundation
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Data privacy, encrypted links and recent change captures

[Jasper Deng]

SSL makes it more difficult; some private wikis are already restricted to
SSL. We also have to consider that irc.wikimedia.org has a recent changes
feed.

At minimum, the transit links should be encrypted if feasible. A good
reason not to encrypt is that it's extra performance overhead.


On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 11:10 PM, John Vandenberg  wrote:

> We know NSA wants Wikipedia data, as Wikipedia is listed in one of the
> NSA slides:
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:KS8-001.jpg
>
> That slide is about HTTP, and the tech staff are moving the
> user/reader base to HTTPS.
>
> As we learn more about the NSA programs, we need to consider vectors
> other than HTTP for the NSA to obtain the data they want.  And the
> userbase needs to be aware of the current risks.
>
> One question from the "Dells are backdored"[sic] thread that is worth
> separate consideration is:
>
> Are the Wikimedia transit links encrypted, especially for database
> replication?
> MySQL has replication over SSL, so I assume the answer is Yes.
>
> If not, is this necessary or useful, and feasible ?
>
> However we also need to consider that SSL and other encryption may be
> useless against NSA/etc, which means replicating non-public data
> should be avoided wherever possible, as it becomes a single point of
> failure.
>
> Given how public our system is, we don't have a lot of non-public
> data, so we might be able to design the architecture so that
> information isnt replicated, and also ensure it isnt accessed over
> insecure links.  I think the only parts of the dataset that are
> private & valuable are
> * passwords/login cookies,
> * checkuser info - IPs and useragents,
> * WMF analytics, which includes readers iirc, and
> * hidden/deleted edits
> * private wikis and mailing lists
>
> Have I missed any?
>
> Are passwords and/or checkuser info replicated?
>
> Is there a data policy on WMF analytics data which prevents it flowing
> over insecure links, and limits what is collected and ensures
> destruction of the data within reasonable timeframes?  i.e. how about
> not using cookies to track analytics of readers who are on HTTP
> instead of HTTPS?
>
> The private wikis can be restricted to https, depending on the value
> of the data on those wikis in the wrong hands.  The private mailing
> lists will be harder to secure, and at least the English Wikipedia
> arbcom list contain a lot of valuable data about contributors.
>
> Regarding hidden/deleted edits, the replication isnt the only source
> of this data.  All edits are also exposed via Recent Changes
> (https/api/etc) as they occur, and the value of these edits is
> determined by the fact they are hidden afterwards (e.g. don't appear
> in dumps).  Is there any way to control who is effectively capturing
> all edits via Recent Changes?
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dells are backdored

[Jasper Deng]

"How does that tie us to x86?"

We don't use Xen, nor is that guaranteed to give us acceptable performance.

"closer to $70"

Please justify that claim (that would be the cost of the CPU or hard disk
alone). You haven't even given us a compelling reason to spend any money at
all on this.


On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 10:25 PM, James Salsman  wrote:

> >... Wikimedia Labs uses x86 hardware virtualization (just one example)
>
> How does that tie us to x86?
>
> http://www.eweek.com/servers/arm-server-chips-get-xen-virtualization-support/
>
> >... a conservative $200/server estimate
>
> I have been recommending hardware which costs closer to $70 per
> "server" depending on storage and cache architecture options.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dells are backdored

[Jasper Deng]

"It's not like we have anything special (or x86-specific, Jasper!)
other than very high bandwidth."

Wikimedia Labs uses x86 hardware virtualization (just one example). We
already have transit linkages that include fiber, and new fiber is far from
cheap.

You persist in ignoring the costs of buying equipment. In terms of orders
of magnitude, ~500 servers * $200 per server = $100,000 already. That is a
conservative $200/server estimate that also doesn't take into account labor
and other costs. To the level we'd want it, it's at least one more order of
magnitude more expensive (no, we're not going to recover the costs by
selling our existing servers).


On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 10:10 PM, James Salsman  wrote:

> > Maximum 100 Mbps ethernet connection
>
> We should be using fiber, which also costs less power and is orders of
> magnitude faster.
>
> If the words "enterprise-class" actually mean something more than
> "much larger markup than purchasing components" then go with something
> like http://www.marvell.com/company/news/pressDetail.do?releaseID=3576
>
> For example, maybe the http://www.mitac.com/business/gfx_servers.html
> people have benchmarks representative of our DB/cache usage patterns.
> It's not like we have anything special (or x86-specific, Jasper!)
> other than very high bandwidth.
>
> At least put out an RFP, please.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dells are backdored

[Jasper Deng]

"but the fact is it
doesn't cost more money to switch to ARM, and you jettison a bunch of
legacy x86 crap that nobody uses but take millions of transistors
which need to be powered."

ARM is not compatible with a lot of our software, and besides if we really
wanted power efficiency we could instead buy Intel's 14nm chips.
Virtualization also helps.

New servers always cost a lot, and it's not trivial to switch over hundreds
of boxes. That's because you're not going to make ARM CPUs work as drop-in
replacements.


On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 7:55 PM, James Salsman  wrote:

> When this came up last time, it turned out that there was some kind of
> a deal in place, and certainly many if not most published pictures of
> the Wikimedia data center feature rows of shiny Dell logos.  But Dell
> does support Microsoft and the NSA, obviously, and also supports some
> very creative accounting methods to avoid paying taxes with tax
> havens. Dell's corporate structure adventures are not the sort of
> corporate behavior concordant with a mission to empower anyone other
> than Dell stockholders.
>
> If you don't like Cubietrucks, then how about RADXA? At least with
> http://dl.radxa.com/rock/docs/hw/RADXA_ROCK_schematic_20130903.pdf
> you know exactly what you're getting and it doesn't cost a huge power
> bill. We still failover when machines go out of service, and sure the
> caches would have different RAM configurations, but the fact is it
> doesn't cost more money to switch to ARM, and you jettison a bunch of
> legacy x86 crap that nobody uses but take millions of transistors
> which need to be powered. Why ask our donors to keep all those useless
> transistors warm?
>
> And as much as I personally appreciate Wikimedia staff, I am inclined
> to agree with the sentiment that perhaps we should hire more staff
> until we get some who believe that it wouldn't cost $100,000 to
> transition to less expensive hardware. And maybe some people who know
> how to order chassis?
>
> Best regards,
> James
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dells are backdored

[Jasper Deng]

The WMF's servers have nothing to do with Microsoft.

There do exist alternative processor architectures, not even just ARM
(Itanium (probably too expensive), Tilera (massively parallel)), but I
don't think migrating our software (particularly Labs'
virtualization-related software) to them is trivial.

One should also ask whether the NSA is snooping on our transit links and
our peering IXPs (Google is encrypting their own fiber, as well as their
transit links, for that reason).


On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:55 AM, James Salsman  wrote:

> Can we please stop paying the Microsoft and NSA taxes and start buying
> datacenter equipment which costs a lot less? Cubieboard/Cubietrucks for
> instance?
>
> Ref.:
>
> http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/catalog-reveals-nsa-has-back-doors-for-numerous-devices-a-940994.html
>
> Best regards,
> James
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and Internet2

[Jasper Deng]

Thanks for the feedback, Leslie.

Yeah it's more about having direct connections. I guess we can't really use
it to increase bandwidth except to people already on their network, but
those who are on the network do tend to use our sites a lot, since they
often have to do research.

I'm not clear on whether we would be merely peering with them or actually
adding another data link, since (for instance) Missouri University set up
their own IXP just to connect to their network. But peering seems to
achieve the desired result.


On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 3:24 AM, Leslie Carr  wrote:

> FYI  -
>
> Also while I would see a benefit in peering, I would probably use the
> transit or partial transit bgp group, since this is being like a
> transit network, and I wouldn't want to overrule our better paths to
> their downstream AS'es
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Leslie Carr 
> Date: Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 1:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and Internet2
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
>
>
> As the network person, I don't really see any benefit in joining
> internet2, though I would see a benefit in possibly peering with them
> at Equinix Ashburn, since according to their looking glass they have a
> more direct connection to several AS'es than we do.
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 5:49 AM, Jasper Deng 
> wrote:
> > Sneakernets are not particularly convenient. If the organizations of the
> > net wanted to use that for data transfer, the net wouldn't exist.
> >
> > But I still think Wikimedia could increase/streamline accessibility to
> its
> > information. It probably couldn't happen, but they have more than enough
> > capacity to serve our content alone from eqiad (replacing or augmenting
> our
> > existing links). Wikimedia also develops new ways to reach more people
> > (such as MediaWiki mobile) like many of the organizations.
>
> Internet2 is not set up as a true transit network, so this would not work.
>
> >
> > Another information organization that's participating is JSTOR, which I
> > think is comparable to our projects as a source of information, so I
> think
> > we can benefit from it.
> >
> > I'd respectfully disagree, as a Wikidata editor, that Commons is the only
> > large database, because it may be large in terms of file size, but
> Wikidata
> > has more tangible "hard" machine-readable data, with much more to come.
> >
>
> But from a network perspective, wikidata is a small database since it
> is text... and the only benefit of joining internet2 is the network
> connection.
>
>
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 4:41 PM, geni  wrote:
> >
> >> On 12 October 2013 21:41, Jasper Deng 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > We could change that. Suppose a university wants to request the entire
> >> > knowledgebase of Wikidata or another project, or if we need to do a
> mass
> >> > transfer of data from them.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Still not significant.  The only really large database we have is the
> >> commons image database and a sneaker net might be the most practical
> option
> >> there.
> >>
> >> --
> >> geni
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >>
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> Leslie Carr
> Wikimedia Foundation
> AS 14907, 43821
> http://as14907.peeringdb.com/
>
>
> --
> Leslie Carr
> Wikimedia Foundation
> AS 14907, 43821
> http://as14907.peeringdb.com/
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and Internet2

[Jasper Deng]

Sneakernets are not particularly convenient. If the organizations of the
net wanted to use that for data transfer, the net wouldn't exist.

But I still think Wikimedia could increase/streamline accessibility to its
information. It probably couldn't happen, but they have more than enough
capacity to serve our content alone from eqiad (replacing or augmenting our
existing links). Wikimedia also develops new ways to reach more people
(such as MediaWiki mobile) like many of the organizations.

Another information organization that's participating is JSTOR, which I
think is comparable to our projects as a source of information, so I think
we can benefit from it.

I'd respectfully disagree, as a Wikidata editor, that Commons is the only
large database, because it may be large in terms of file size, but Wikidata
has more tangible "hard" machine-readable data, with much more to come.


On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 4:41 PM, geni  wrote:

> On 12 October 2013 21:41, Jasper Deng  wrote:
>
> > We could change that. Suppose a university wants to request the entire
> > knowledgebase of Wikidata or another project, or if we need to do a mass
> > transfer of data from them.
> >
>
>
> Still not significant.  The only really large database we have is the
> commons image database and a sneaker net might be the most practical option
> there.
>
> --
> geni
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and Internet2

[Jasper Deng]

We could change that. Suppose a university wants to request the entire
knowledgebase of Wikidata or another project, or if we need to do a mass
transfer of data from them.


On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:

> Jasper Deng, 12/10/2013 21:34:
>
>  Instead of passing through others' routing domains, we would have a
>> direct link/BGP session with them (should be feasible given the
>> proximity of their IXP).
>>
>
> <http://noc.net.internet2.edu/**uploads/j_/cI/j_cIw5DZ0TaRa-**
> EArTqANg/internet2-cps-**20090909.pdf<http://noc.net.internet2.edu/uploads/j_/cI/j_cIw5DZ0TaRa-EArTqANg/internet2-cps-20090909.pdf>>
> suggests they're already peering at Ashburn. But seriously, such networks
> are about transfering datasets like 800 TB of oceanic and atmospheric data
> from one continent to another, their traffic with WMF is just peanuts.
>
> Nemo
>
> __**_
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org 
> Unsubscribe: 
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@**lists.wikimedia.org
> ?subject=**unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and Internet2

[Jasper Deng]

From http://www.internet2.edu/about/ I see that they are also focused on
research.

From that, I got the impression that like us, they are committed to the
accessibility of knowledge. They state on their website that without them,
many college researchers may not be able to get the information they need.

They can always use their normal connection to access us, but having a
direct connection could improve this access.


On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
wrote:

> Jasper Deng, 12/10/2013 01:53:
>
>  I then read the
>> website and found that Wikimedia's and their missions go together very
>> well; part of it is the commitment to sharing and spreading information.
>>
>
> Where did you get this impression? I've read a few pages and to me it just
> seems the typical research network body.
> It's easy to see it from their international partners:
> http://internet2.edu/**international/partners/<http://internet2.edu/international/partners/>
> The only overlap I see is in defending net neutrality
> http://www.internet2.edu/**government/<http://www.internet2.edu/government/>but
>  it's secondary in their work.
>
> 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>

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and Internet2

[Jasper Deng]

I'm wondering whether Wikimedia has ever considered participating in the
Internet2 research network (Wikipedia
article;
official website ).

I had found out about it after reading a news article about how Missouri
University changing its 10 Gbit/s connection to 100 Gbit/s. I then read the
website and found that Wikimedia's and their missions go together very
well; part of it is the commitment to sharing and spreading information.
While they are focused on developing new technologies and that isn't
exactly Wikimedia's primary focus, I see big potential for Wikimedia to
benefit from participation on the network, as it could make our information
more accessible to researchers on the network.

When thinking about why Wikimedia wasn't participating, I noticed the costs
of membership. Wikimedia would participate as an Affiliate, which according
to the membership
page,
consists of "Non-profit organizations that are research- and/or
education-oriented, with a strong interest in Internet2's mission and
goals. They are committed to promoting the development and deployment of
advanced Internet applications and network services in the conduct of
research and education." (sounds like us!). For us, as a level 4 affiliate
(since our operating budget is certainly below 100 million US dollars a
year) , we would pay $10,000/yr.

I previously spoke to Ironholds about this, but neither he nor I know
whether the WMF has previously considered it.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,