[Wikimedia-l] New Board of Wikimedia Canada // Nouveau conseil d'administration de Wikimédia Canada

2020-11-23 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
(Le français suit)

Last Saturday, Wikimedia Canada held its Annual General Meeting. Thanks to
all the members who participated. We are welcoming two new Board members:
Catherine Bernier, involved with the GLAM-Wiki projects with Bibliothèque
et Archives nationales du Québec (BAnQ), and Thérèse Ottawa, referent of
the WikiClub Metapeckeka (the WikiClub of the Atikamekw Community of
Manawan) and very dedicated in the project to develop the Wikipetcia
Atikamekw Nehiromowin (the Wikipedia in Atikamekw language). Benoit Rochon,
Ha-Loan Phan, and Michael David Miller were re-elected to the Board.

Wikimedia Canada is proud that its Board of Directors is still composed of
a majority of women and to welcome a member of the Atikamekw First Nation
as a director, as well as maintaining a representation from the LGBTQ+
community. We are sure that this will help us to continue and further our
efforts in terms of inclusiveness and diversity.


(Version française)

Samedi dernier, Wikimédia Canada a tenu son assemblée générale annuelle.
Merci à tou(te)s les membres qui ont participé. Nous souhaitons la
bienvenue à deux nouvelles membres du conseil d'administration : Catherine
Bernier, impliquée avec les projets GLAM-Wiki avec Bibliothèque et Archives
nationales du Québec (BAnQ), et Thérèse Ottawa, référente du WikiClub
Metapeckeka (le WikiClub de la Communauté Atikamekw de Manawan) et très
dévouée au projet de création de la Wikipetcia Atikamekw Nehiromowin (la
Wikipédia en langue atikamekw). Benoit Rochon, Ha-Loan Phan et Michael
David Miller ont été ré-élu(e)s au conseil d'administration.

Wikimédia Canada est fier que son conseil d'administration continue d'être
composé d'une majorité de femmes et d'acceuillir une membre de la Première
Nation Atikamekw comme administratice, en plus de conserver une
représentation de la communauté LGBTQ+. Nous sommes convaincu(e)s que cela
va nous permettre de continuer et de renforcer nos efforts en termes
d'inclusion et de diversité.



Jean-Philippe Béland

--
Wikimédia Canada, chapitre national soutenant Wikipédia
535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L 2P3
https://ca.wikimedia.org
i...@wikimedia.ca
--
Wikimedia Canada, national chapter supporting Wikipedia
535 Viger East Avenue, Montreal, Quebec  H2L 2P3
https://ca.wikimedia.org
i...@wikimedia.ca
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group

2020-09-01 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Good day all,

This email is to announce that we have finally produced our overdue 2019
Annual Report on Meta:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_North_American_Indigenous_Languages_User_Group/Reports/2019
.

Do not hesitate if you have any questions or suggestions.

Thanks,

JP Béland
___
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] Wikimedia Canada Annual Report 2019 // Rapport annuel 2019 de Wikimédia Canada

2020-02-17 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
(Le français suit)

Good day all,

I am pleased to share that Wikimedia Canada has published its Annual Report
2019.

It is available on Wikimedia Commons:
- in English:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMCA_Annual_Report_2019.pdf
- in French:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMCA_Rapport_annuel_2019.pdf

For those who prefer, there is also a wiki version available:
https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reports/2019 (you need to be logged with your
Wikimedia account in order to switch the language to French on the wiki).

Do not hesitate to contact me if you have any comments or questions.

Thank you all,


(Version française)

Bonjour à toutes et à tous,

J'ai le plaisir de vous annoncer que Wikimédia Canada a publié son Rapport
annuel 2019.

Celui-ci est disponible sur Wikimedia Commons :
- en anglais :
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMCA_Annual_Report_2019.pdf
- en français :
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMCA_Rapport_annuel_2019.pdf

Pour celles et ceux qui le préfèrent, il y a également une version wiki
disponible : https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reports/2019 (vous devez être
enregistré(e) avec votre compte Wikimédia afin de pouvoir changer la langue
au français sur le wiki).

N'hésitez pas à me contacter si vous avez des commentaires ou des questions.

Merci à toutes et à tous,


Jean-Philippe Béland
Wikimedia Canada / Wikimédia Canada
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimédia France new Board members

2019-12-03 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Merci et félicitations aux nouveaux membres du conseil d'administration !

Jean-Philippe Béland
Wikimédia Canada


On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 2:15 PM Nadine Le Lirzin via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> On November 16th, Wikimédia France held its annual General
> Assembly and partialy renewed its Board. We are particularly glad and
> proud of announcing that for the first time our chapter has reserved a
> seat for a candidate appointed by the community.
>
> Here is a brief
> presentation of the newly elected Board members, including the
> community-appointed seat ratified by the Assembly:
>
> * Pascale
> Camus-Walter, elected for 2 years: On Wikipedia since 2011, Pascale is a
> Wikimédia France member since 2015.
>
> * Jonathan Mouton, elected for 3
> years: Registered on Wikipedia in 2007, Jonathan is the one elected as a
> Board member by the community.
>
> * Diane Ranville, elected for 3 years:
> Wikimedian from Grenoble, Diane is committed in Wikimédia France since
> 2017.
>
> * Carole Renard, elected for 3 years: Feminist, Wikimedian
> since 2017, Carole is contributing on Wikipedia, Commons, Wikidata and
> Wikisource.
>
> * Benoit Soubeyran, elected for 2 years: Wikimedian since
> 2012, Benoit has been a librarian and a blogger for several years.
>
> This
> brings the number of women on our Board to 4 on a total of 12 members
> (Improvement in progress).
>
> The other Board members remain unchanged,
> as well as the executive bureau:
>
> * Pierre-Yves Beaudouin: President,
> whose turn will end in 1 year.
>
> * Benoît Deshayes: whose turn will end
> in 1 year.
>
> * Julien Gardet: reelected for 3 years.
>
> * Roger Gotlib:
> whose turn will end in 1 year.
>
> * Nadine Le Lirzin: Secretary, whose
> turn will end in 1 year.
>
> * Pascal Radigue: Treasurer, whose turn will
> end in 1 year.
>
> * Willie Robert: Vice-President, whose turn will end
> in 1 year.
>
> We would like to thank Marin Dubroca-Voisin, Pierre-Selim
> Huard, Pierre-Antoine Le Page, Lucas Lévêque and Hélène Masson, whose
> turns just came to an end, for having worked with us at restoring the
> good health of the Association. We know you're still around :)
>
> For the
> Board of Wikimédia France,
> Nadine Le Lirzin, Secretary
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

[Wikimedia-l] Announcement about Wikimedia Canada / Annonce au sujet de Wikimédia Canada

2019-11-10 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
(La version française suit.)

Good day all,

A few weeks ago, I announced the new composition of the Board of Directors
of Wikimedia Canada. Now, I would like to introduce its new Executive
Committee, including a new President, that was nominated at the last Board
meeting on November 4th.

The new Executive Committee of Wikimedia Canada is composed of:
- President: Lëa-Kim Châteauneuf (User:Lea-Kim
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Lea-Kim>)
- Vice President: Michael David Miller (User:BiblioQC
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:BiblioQC>)
- Secretary: Amber Berson (User:13ab37
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:13ab37>)
- Treasurer: Guillaume Lafrance (User:Glafrance
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Glafrance>)

Our new President, Lëa-Kim, is a librarian at the Direction des
bibliothèques of Montreal City and a long-time Wikimedian. She is a member
of the Board of Directors since 2017 and was the Vice President for the
last year.

She will announce her vision and her priorities for Wikimedia Canada in the
next few days on the main page of WMCA's wiki [1]. She is currently in
Cambridge, Massachusetts participating in the WikiConference North America
[2].

Until then, here are the main priority axes of Wikimedia Canada for the
upcoming year:
- Developing the Wikimedia projects in the indigenous languages of Canada,
and improving content on Wikimedia projects about the indigenous peoples of
Canada.
- Increasing the diversity of contributors to free knowledge from Canada,
especially working towards reducing the gender gap on Wikimedia projects,
both in terms of contributors and content.
- Continuing to maintain a high level of corporate maturity and
professionalism within Wikimedia Canada, and obtaining the charity status
with the federal government in order to diversify our revenue streams.
- Expanding the activities of Wikimedia Canada across the country.

If you have any questions about Wikimedia Canada, do not hesitate to
contact me, to use our main talk page [3], or to join our general mailing
list [4].

Thanks,


(Version française)

Bonjour à toutes et à tous,

Il y a quelques semaines, je vous ai annoncé la composition du nouveau
conseil d'administration de Wikimédia Canada. Maintenant, j'aimerais vous
présenter son nouveau comité directeur, incluant sa nouvelle présidente,
qui a été nommé lors de la dernière réunion du conseil d'administration le
4 novembre.

Le nouveau comité directeur de Wikimédia Canada est composé de :
- Présidente : Lëa-Kim Châteauneuf (Utilisatrice:Lea-Kim
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Lea-Kim>)
- Vice-président : Michael David Miller (Utilisateur:BiblioQC
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:BiblioQC>)
- Secrétaire : Amber Berson (Utilisatrice:13ab37
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:13ab37>)
- Trésorier : Guillaume Lafrance (Utilisateur:Glafrance
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Glafrance>)

Notre nouvelle présidente, Lëa-Kim, est une bibliothécaire de la Direction
des bibliothèques de la ville de Montréal et une Wikimédienne de longue
date. Elle est membre du conseil d'administration depuis 2017 et était la
vice-présidente depuis la dernière année.

Elle annoncera sa vision et ses priorités pour Wikimédia Canada au cours
des prochains jours sur la page principale du wiki de WMCA [1]. Elle est
présentement à Cambridge (Massachusetts) pour participer à la
WikiConférence nord-américaine [2].

Jusque là, voici les principales axes prioritaires de Wikimédia Canada pour
l'année à venir :
- Développer les projets Wikimédia en langues autochtones du Canada et
améliorer le contenu des projets Wikimédia au sujet des peuples autochtones
du Canada.
- Accroître la diversité des contributrices et des contributeurs au savoir
libre provenant du Canada avec un focus particulier pour réduire le fossé
des genres sur les projets Wikimédia, tant en termes de contributrices que
de contenu.
- Continuer à maintenir un haut niveau de maturité corporative et de
professionnalisme au sein de Wikimédia Canada et obtenir le statut de
bienfaisance auprès du gouvernement fédéral afin de diversifier nos sources
de revenus.
- Étendre les activités de Wikimédia Canada à travers tout le pays.

Si vous avez des questions au sujet de Wikimédia Canada, n'hésitez pas à me
contacter, à utiliser notre page de discussion principale [3] ou à
rejoindre notre liste de diffusion générale [4].

Merci,


Jean-Philippe Béland
Wikimedia Canada / Wikimédia Canada


[1] https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
[2] https://wikiconference.org/wiki/2019/Main_Page
[3] https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_talk:Discussions
[4] https://discussions.wikimedia.ca/lists/listinfo/general
___
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/ma

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] New Board of Wikimedia Canada

2019-10-22 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Thank you Alex.

Indeed we also have a majority of librarians on our Board with 5 of them.

JP

On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 5:00 PM Alex Stinson  wrote:

>  Congratulations! Also really exciting to see a lot of folks who have come
> through Library and GLAM outreach joining the board.
>
> Alex
>
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 3:35 PM Jean-Philippe Béland <
> jpbel...@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
>
>> Good day all,
>>
>> Wikimedia Canada held its Annual General Meeting 2019 [1] on 19 October in
>> Montreal, Quebec with online participation as well.
>>
>> We would like to introduce you 4 newly elected Board members and one
>> re-elected Board member:
>> - Amber Berson
>> - Jean-Michel Lapointe
>> - Lëa-Kim Chateauneuf
>> - Sarah Severson
>> - Stacy Allison-Cassin
>>
>> The following 3 Board members are continuing their 2-years terms until
>> next
>> year:
>> - Benoit Rochon
>> - Ha-Loan Phan
>> - Michael David Miller
>>
>> Wikimedia Canada is proud to have a majority of women on its Board. We
>> believe that we are the only Wikimedia chapter in this situation, please
>> correct me if I'm wrong. We are also happy to welcome a member of the
>> Board
>> from Western Canada. We are convinced that this will help us to increase
>> the diversity of contributors on Wikimedia projects from Canada,
>> especially
>> in regards to the gender gap, and to expand Wikimedia Canada's activities
>> and reach across all of Canada.
>>
>> The Board will elect its new Executive Committee [2], including its
>> President, at its next meeting on 4 November 2019.
>>
>> If you have any questions about Wikimedia Canada, do not hesitate to use
>> the main talk page on our wiki [3] or to send me an email directly.
>>
>> Wikimedia Canada would like to thank all members that participated at the
>> AGM and all the volunteers of the Wikimedia movement in Canada for their
>> contributions. If you would like to stay updated about Wikimedia Canada,
>> please join our mailing list [4] or visit our wiki [5].
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>>
>> Jean-Philippe Béland
>>
>> Institutional Advancement Manager, Wikimedia Canada
>>
>>
>> [1] https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Annual_General_Meeting_2019
>> [2] https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Executive_Committee
>> [3] https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_talk:Discussions
>> [4] https://discussions.wikimedia.ca/lists/listinfo/general
>> [5] https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
>> ___
>> 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,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> Alex Stinson
> Senior Program Strategist
> Wikimedia Foundation
> Twitter:@glamwiki/@sadads
>
> Learn more about how the communities behind Wikipedia, Wikidata and other
> Wikimedia projects partner with cultural heritage organizations:
> https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM
> ___
> Affiliates mailing list
> affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Wikimedia Community User Group Haiti

2019-10-21 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Félicitations au groupe d'utilisateurs de Haïti !

Jean-Philippe Béland
Wikimédia Canada


On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 12:14 PM Bobby Shabangu 
wrote:

> Congratulations to Haiti Wikimedia UG. Looking forward to seeing great
> work from that part of the world.
>
> Kind regards,
> Bobby Shabangu
>
> On 20/10/2019, Kirill Lokshin  wrote:
> > Hi everyone!
> >
> > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> > [1] Wikimedia Community User Group Haiti [2] as a Wikimedia User Group.
> The
> > group aims to strengthen Haiti's presence across the Wikimedia projects
> by
> > developing Wikipedia in Haitian Creole, training contributors throughout
> > the country, and working to raise awareness among stakeholders and
> > institutions in Haiti.
> >
> > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kirill Lokshin
> > Chair, Affiliations Committee
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Haiti
> > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wikimedia_User_Group_Haïti
> > ___
> > 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,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

[Wikimedia-l] New Board of Wikimedia Canada

2019-10-21 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Good day all,

Wikimedia Canada held its Annual General Meeting 2019 [1] on 19 October in
Montreal, Quebec with online participation as well.

We would like to introduce you 4 newly elected Board members and one
re-elected Board member:
- Amber Berson
- Jean-Michel Lapointe
- Lëa-Kim Chateauneuf
- Sarah Severson
- Stacy Allison-Cassin

The following 3 Board members are continuing their 2-years terms until next
year:
- Benoit Rochon
- Ha-Loan Phan
- Michael David Miller

Wikimedia Canada is proud to have a majority of women on its Board. We
believe that we are the only Wikimedia chapter in this situation, please
correct me if I'm wrong. We are also happy to welcome a member of the Board
from Western Canada. We are convinced that this will help us to increase
the diversity of contributors on Wikimedia projects from Canada, especially
in regards to the gender gap, and to expand Wikimedia Canada's activities
and reach across all of Canada.

The Board will elect its new Executive Committee [2], including its
President, at its next meeting on 4 November 2019.

If you have any questions about Wikimedia Canada, do not hesitate to use
the main talk page on our wiki [3] or to send me an email directly.

Wikimedia Canada would like to thank all members that participated at the
AGM and all the volunteers of the Wikimedia movement in Canada for their
contributions. If you would like to stay updated about Wikimedia Canada,
please join our mailing list [4] or visit our wiki [5].

Thank you,


Jean-Philippe Béland

Institutional Advancement Manager, Wikimedia Canada


[1] https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Annual_General_Meeting_2019
[2] https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Executive_Committee
[3] https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_talk:Discussions
[4] https://discussions.wikimedia.ca/lists/listinfo/general
[5] https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcing launch of Santali Language Wikipedia

2018-08-08 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Congratulations and thank you for sharing your experience!

JP
User:Amqui


On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Subhashish Panigrahi  wrote:

> Thank you Haidar for sharing in details about the amazing support that
> Wikimedia Bangladesh has provided to the community there. Kudos to the
> Santali community for this achievement and all the best for their
> activities. And Odia Wikimedians User Group will continue to work with them
> more in the future.
>
> Subhashish
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 8:27 PM Amir E. Aharoni <
> amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il>
> wrote:
>
> > This is a wonderful achievement. Shows that dedication and organization
> can
> > take you far. Good luck in continuing and developing it further!
> >
> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 8 באוג׳ 2018, 17:49, מאת Ali Haidar Khan ‏<
> > tonmoy...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Dear All,
> > >
> > > We are very pleased to announce the launch of Santali Language
> Wikipedia
> > (
> > > https://sat.wikipedia.org). The site has been launched on August 2,
> 2018
> > > and, after the import of pages from Wikimedia Incubator and some
> > > maintenance work, it’s now open for all. Santali Language’s own
> alphabet,
> > > Ol Chiki, has been used as the alphabet of this Wikipedia. Santali is
> > > a language in the Munda subfamily of Austroasiatic languages, spoken by
> > > around 7.4 million people in South Asia (Bangladesh, India and Nepal).
> > >
> > > This is a very special moment for us and has been made possible because
> > of
> > > the joint effort by Santali Language Wikipedian’s from Bangladesh,
> India
> > > and Nepal. Wikimedia Bangladesh and Bangla Wikimedia Community
> > > congratulates the Santali Language Community for their accomplishment
> and
> > > are honored to be a part of this tremendous achievement. Manik Soren, a
> > > dedicated Santali Wikipedian from Bangladesh, along with some very
> active
> > > Santali Language Wikipedians from Bangladesh and India has been
> > > instrumental in this effort. We would also like to thank Shabab
> Mustafa,
> > > President of Wikimedia Bangladesh and Nahid Sultan, a very active
> steward
> > > and Secretary of Wikimedia Bangladesh, for coordinating the effort in
> > > Bangladesh and Odia Wikimedians User Group for coordinating the effort
> in
> > > India.
> > >
> > > It is worth mentioning that the process of creating a Santali Language
> > > Wikipedia began in 2012 and, later on, got momentum in February, 2017.
> > Back
> > > in 2012, Wikimedia Bangladesh organized a Wikipedia meetup and workshop
> > > with the Santali Language Community in Dinajpur District of Bangladesh
> > with
> > > the goal of launching a Santali Language Wikipedia. However, that
> process
> > > slowed down after some time. Then in September 2017, Wikimedia
> Bangladesh
> > > organized another meeting with Santali Language Community in a Dhaka
> > > Wikipedia meetup where a decision was made to expedite the launch of
> the
> > > Wikipedia. Following that discussion, a workshop was organized by
> > Wikimedia
> > > Bangladesh for Santali Language Wikipedians on December 30, 2017.
> Santali
> > > Language Wikipedians from India also participated in that program
> through
> > > online discussion. Subsequently, another workshop was organized for
> > Santali
> > > Language Community in India on March 11, 2018 in collaboration with
> Odia
> > > Wikimedians User Group.
> > >
> > > After months of work, Santali Language Wikipedia got the approval of
> > > Language Committee on June 28, 2018 and finally, the Santali Wikipedia
> > site
> > > was launched on August 2, 2018.
> > >
> > > Let us congratulate and welcome the Santali Language Community.
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers!
> > >
> > > Ali Haidar Khan
> > >
> > > Executive Committee Member, Wikimedia Bangladesh
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > 
> ___
> 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] Countries that publish in public domain

2018-05-15 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Good day,

Is there a list somewhere of countries or sub-national governments that
publish the works of their employees in the public domain?

Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of the Wikitongues User Group

2018-05-11 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Hello,

Does this mean that Wikitongues will work to change it's licence to be
compatible with Wikimedia projects? Because now their content is under CC
BY-SA-NC which is incompatible with Wikimedia projects. Will the future
videos produced by Wikitongues be under CC BY-SA? I assume that if projects
are financed by a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation that we will make
sure that the content is produced under a compatible licence.

Thank you,

JP Béland
Coordinator and Founder, Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages
User Group

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 1:13 PM Rupika Sharma  wrote:

> Congratulations! This is indeed a big achievement and would go long way to
> take forward the movement for linguistic diversity!
>
> Best Wishes
> Rupika Sharma
> Co-Founder
> Punjabi Wikimedians
>
> On Fri, May 11, 2018, 10:09 PM Kirill Lokshin 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone!
> >
> > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> > [1] the Wikitongues User Group [2] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group
> is
> > working to promote and preserve linguistic diversity worldwide, and aims
> to
> > increase the scope of language content across the Wikimedia projects and
> to
> > expand their overall linguistic diversity.
> >
> > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kirill Lokshin
> > Chair, Affiliations Committee
> >
> > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/
> > Resolutions/Recognition_Wikitongues_User_Group
> > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikitongues
> > ___
> > 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,
> 
___
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] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-11 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
When we say we want to keep our current requirements, we need to ask
ourselves if we want to continue to be an encyclopedia written by
Westerners for Westerners. If that's the case, fine. But that's not what we
are claiming to be...

JP

On Fri, May 11, 2018, 09:30 Cameron, <came...@cameron11598.net> wrote:

> Well audio recordings or video recordings of oral histories and traditions
> come to mind. However I'm not sure how comfortable I am with an
> encyclopedia using such sources.
>
> Now as an aspiring historian (Only one semester left on my degree), I use
> primary sources quite often for papers, and projects however those are
> generally frowned upon for Wikipedia; mainly because Wikipedia is an
> encyclopedia not an academic journal. Good encyclopedias are typically
> sourced from secondary sources, and ocassionaly tertiary sources.
>
> Now compiling a repository of such orally transmitted histories and
> traditions would be an amazing idea for a new project in my opinion. My
> personal thought on this issue is keeping our current verifiability and
> notability requirements is a good idea. In some areas I think we include
> far too much (fan cruft anyone?).
>
> - Cameron C.
> Cameron11598
>
>  On Thu, 10 May 2018 21:34:15 -0700 peter.southw...@telkomsa.net
> wrote 
>
> If not written, how would they be referenced and verified?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 6:28 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
>
> You are missing the whole point. I'm not talking about second guessing
> sources but rather changing our narrow point of views of what we consider
> sources of knowledge. A lot of cultures are of oral tradition and not
> written.
>
> JP
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2018, 16:42 Todd Allen, <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Abandoning notability and verifiability is a wide open sign for spammers
> > and hoaxers. We have enough of that without giving them an engraved
> > invitation.
> >
> > If published sources are biased, the efforts to correct that should be
> made
> > at the source (literally) level. Just like rather than "disputing" a
> > reliable source, if we found evidence that contradicts them, we'd ask
> them
> > to correct, and then once they do we'll update the article accordingly
> > based on their correction. Wikipedia is not there to second-guess what
> > sources choose to publish or find "alternative" or "non-western" or
> > whatever else have you types of information. If our references are
> flawed,
> > the solution lies in getting them to correct what they're doing, not
> > "correcting" for any perceived bias by editors. We reflect sources, we do
> > not second-guess, dispute, or correct them.
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Peter Southwood <
> > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> >
> > > When Wikipedia was new and unknown there were not so many people
> wanting
> > > to use it for purposes that conflict with our purposes. Times change.
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 5:30 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > >
> > > If we where that septic at the beginning, we will never have started
> > > Wikipedia to begin with. Really, an encyclopedia written by anyone
> > without
> > > any authority to double check before it is published? It is doomed to
> > fail.
> > > Yes, in theory, but practice showed us otherwise. The question is not
> to
> > > remove notability and verifiability requirements, but to change those
> > > requirements to be more inclusive of different ways of sharing
> > knowledge. I
> > > think practice can show us otherwise in that case too if we are ready
> to
> > do
> > > that leap of faith, the same way we did at the beginning of Wikipedia
> > when
> > > we opened editing to anybody.
> > >
> > > JP
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 11:05 AM Peter Southwood <
> > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > One Jar'Edo Wens hoax is enough, and that lasted 10 years in spite

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-11 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
I confirm that this is not an isolated concept to Australia. I heard the
same thing about being connected to the place, starting the story by
telling who your family is, etc. from Canadian indigenous peoples.

JP

On Fri, May 11, 2018, 09:26 Gnangarra, <gnanga...@gmail.com> wrote:

> speaking solely from experience with Indigenous Australian knowledge where
> knowledge is passed orally across generations. The passing of knowledge is
> connected to place, family, and heritage when an indigenous person speak
> they first speak of their heritage, of their connect to the place, and of
> their family. This all establishes the origins of the story, the authority
> of the person to speak, and whos story they are telling.  much like a bio
> of the author in a book establishes their expertise, version, and
> publication dates sets the when
>
> when we share the oral knowledge we already have established notability and
> verifiability, when write the knowledge we dont damage or fix the knowledge
> we share just what it was at that one point and place in time.  Culturally
> the knowledge will continue to be share via the traditional methods
> regardless. We have 200 years of recordings, oppression, dispossession, and
> usurpation of indigenous knowledge that shows it still continues externally
> to written forms.
>
> If we look at someone like Daisy Bates when we digest her work its
> relatively easy to establish the differences between her work in recording
> Indigenous knowledge,  to the fictional works she sold to newspapers to
> earn a living.   That same process she used a 100 years ago works for what
> we are doing now. We dont need to invent new methods nor do we need to wait
> for western sources to catchup all we need is that leap to accept oral
> source with the traditional authentications.
>
> While this is directly related to Indigenous Australian knowledge, the
> methodology will work where we adapt to the cultural authentications of the
> knowledge source and accept them as if we would a book, or journal and cite
> them appropriately.
>
>
>
> On 11 May 2018 at 20:52, Amir E. Aharoni <amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il>
> wrote:
>
> > What are the non-Western methods?
> >
> > בתאריך יום ו׳, 11 במאי 2018, 15:49, מאת Gnangarra ‏<gnanga...@gmail.com
> >:
> >
> > > thats the bias we dont accept knowledge as genuine or authorative until
> > its
> > > been established by a westerner using western techniques.  The whole
> > point
> > > of this discussion is that such a process invariably leads to bias, to
> > > solve bias we need to shift our acceptance to alternative cultural
> > methods
> > > of establishing notability and verifiability.
> > >
> > > The point is those non western methods are able to provide the same
> level
> > > of authority as the currently accepted methods, that the to make the
> > change
> > > isnt as disastrous as is being said because we adopt the method
> > appropriate
> > > for the knowledge source rather than ignoring the knowledge until its
> > > adapted to our way
> > >
> > > On 11 May 2018 at 20:32, Peter Southwood <peter.southw...@telkomsa.net
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes, and we use those books and journal articles as sources. If they
> > are
> > > > written by an acknowledged expert or are peer reviewed, we may
> consider
> > > > them reliable sources. I don’t think this is what this discussion is
> > > about.
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Peter
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org]
> On
> > > > Behalf Of FRED BAUDER
> > > > Sent: 11 May 2018 07:19
> > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > > >
> > > > People write books and journal articles which incorporate oral
> > > traditions.
> > > > The Bible is one example. That doesn't mean we are going to remove
> the
> > > > material about Native Americans migrating through Beringia but that,
> > if a
> > > > tribe's tradition is that it was always in the Americas, that should
> be
> > > > included in its article. Probably not enough to satisfy everyone...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Fred
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Original Message -
> > > > From: Peter Southwood <peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> > > > To:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-10 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
You are missing the whole point. I'm not talking about second guessing
sources but rather changing our narrow point of views of what we consider
sources of knowledge. A lot of cultures are of oral tradition and not
written.

JP

On Thu, May 10, 2018, 16:42 Todd Allen, <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Abandoning notability and verifiability is a wide open sign for spammers
> and hoaxers. We have enough of that without giving them an engraved
> invitation.
>
> If published sources are biased, the efforts to correct that should be made
> at the source (literally) level. Just like rather than "disputing" a
> reliable source, if we found evidence that contradicts them, we'd ask them
> to correct, and then once they do we'll update the article accordingly
> based on their correction. Wikipedia is not there to second-guess what
> sources choose to publish or find "alternative" or "non-western" or
> whatever else have you types of information. If our references are flawed,
> the solution lies in getting them to correct what they're doing, not
> "correcting" for any perceived bias by editors. We reflect sources, we do
> not second-guess, dispute, or correct them.
>
> Todd
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > When Wikipedia was new and unknown there were not so many people wanting
> > to use it for purposes that conflict with our purposes. Times change.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 5:30 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> >
> > If we where that septic at the beginning, we will never have started
> > Wikipedia to begin with. Really, an encyclopedia written by anyone
> without
> > any authority to double check before it is published? It is doomed to
> fail.
> > Yes, in theory, but practice showed us otherwise. The question is not to
> > remove notability and verifiability requirements, but to change those
> > requirements to be more inclusive of different ways of sharing
> knowledge. I
> > think practice can show us otherwise in that case too if we are ready to
> do
> > that leap of faith, the same way we did at the beginning of Wikipedia
> when
> > we opened editing to anybody.
> >
> > JP
> >
> > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 11:05 AM Peter Southwood <
> > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> >
> > > One Jar'Edo Wens hoax is enough, and that lasted 10 years in spite of
> > > notability and verifiability requirements, Without the verifiability
> > > requirement  it would probably still be there. Leaps of faith are
> things
> > > that I do not generally do, I am a natural sceptic and prefer evidence,
> > and
> > > where possible, reproducible results. When the evidence is intangible,
> > the
> > > authors must take responsibility for their work, and that means track
> > > record and proof of identity.
> > > This would be more easily fitted into a new project. I do not see it as
> > > possible in Wikipedia. If the new project became recognised as a
> reliable
> > > source then Wikipedia could use it as a source, without destroying the
> > > credibility we have.
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Gnangarra
> > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:50
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > >
> > >  notability and verifiability are important,  every culture and
> language
> > > has this issue when it comes to sharing knowledge.  These culture
> manage
> > > successfully to share knowledge many of them long before the western
> > styles
> > > were developed, I'd say they are robust alternatives.  The issue is how
> > do
> > > we bring these sources into the western system, how do we respect them,
> > > how do we teach ourselves to understand that what we currently do is
> not
> > > the only.
> > >
> > > There are risks in potential abuses of every system, even our current
> > > systems have their faults and we assume good faith in the citations
> from
> > > books published but no digital.  Changing the way we consider and value
> > > alter

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-10 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
If we where that septic at the beginning, we will never have started
Wikipedia to begin with. Really, an encyclopedia written by anyone without
any authority to double check before it is published? It is doomed to fail.
Yes, in theory, but practice showed us otherwise. The question is not to
remove notability and verifiability requirements, but to change those
requirements to be more inclusive of different ways of sharing knowledge. I
think practice can show us otherwise in that case too if we are ready to do
that leap of faith, the same way we did at the beginning of Wikipedia when
we opened editing to anybody.

JP

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 11:05 AM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> One Jar'Edo Wens hoax is enough, and that lasted 10 years in spite of
> notability and verifiability requirements, Without the verifiability
> requirement  it would probably still be there. Leaps of faith are things
> that I do not generally do, I am a natural sceptic and prefer evidence, and
> where possible, reproducible results. When the evidence is intangible, the
> authors must take responsibility for their work, and that means track
> record and proof of identity.
> This would be more easily fitted into a new project. I do not see it as
> possible in Wikipedia. If the new project became recognised as a reliable
> source then Wikipedia could use it as a source, without destroying the
> credibility we have.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Gnangarra
> Sent: 10 May 2018 15:50
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
>
>  notability and verifiability are important,  every culture and language
> has this issue when it comes to sharing knowledge.  These culture manage
> successfully to share knowledge many of them long before the western styles
> were developed, I'd say they are robust alternatives.  The issue is how do
> we bring these sources into the western system, how do we respect them,
> how do we teach ourselves to understand that what we currently do is not
> the only.
>
> There are risks in potential abuses of every system, even our current
> systems have their faults and we assume good faith in the citations from
> books published but no digital.  Changing the way we consider and value
> alternative knowledge streams will take a leap of faith, the question is do
> we really want to take that leap, do we really want to share the sum of all
> knowledge, do we want to address inherent bias in our current knowledge
> networks or are we comfortable with just token efforts.
>
> Maybe the solution isnt in incorporating directly into the wikipedia but
> rather the creation of new project to bring forth these alternative
> knowledge streams
>
>
> On 10 May 2018 at 21:47, Eduardo Testart <etest...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I posted this a while ago, an investigation on gender bias where a member
> > of Wikimedia Chile was involved, in his personal capacity though:
> > https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.
> > 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4
> >
> > There are many things that can be addressed individually and as a
> movement
> > or collective, if we believe the conclusions are valid, which I
> personally
> > do, since they are supported with data and not on our personal
> impressions.
> >
> >
> > Cheers!
> >
> > El jue., may. 10, 2018 10:27, Peter Southwood <
> > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> > escribió:
> >
> > > Notability and verifiability are important. They allow us to produce
> > > reasonably reliable work. Moving away from those constraints opens the
> > > doors to extremely unreliable material. If Wikipedia is to remain open
> to
> > > anyone to edit, there do not appear to be any robust alternatives.
> Other
> > > projects may work around this problem, but would then probably not be
> > open
> > > for anyone to edit. Or can you suggest another way?
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:01
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > >
> > > "Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon of
> > > knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge."
> > >
> > > But it is what we accept as part of the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-10 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
"Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon of
knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge."

But it is what we accept as part of the canon of "knowledge" as Wikipedia
that could be improved. We have a very western approach to that saying that
it needs to be published in such books or journals to be notable enough,
when different cultures use different ways to build their canon of
knowledge.

JP
User:Amqui


On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:53 AM FRED BAUDER  wrote:

>
> - Original Message -
> From: Jane Darnell 
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> Sent: Thu, 10 May 2018 04:02:46 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
>
> ...because of our rules regarding references. Oddly,
> Wikipedia can at best only echo the systemic bias, but will never be able
> to correct it."
>
> Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon of
> knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge.
>
> The knowledge industry could do better. And when it does, Wikipedia will
> reflect that. in the meantime it is helpful if gender and other bias issues
> are noted and accommodated. Our mission is more modest than full correction
> of all bias, but we can contribute or even lead.
>
> Fred
>
>
> ___
> 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] Recognition of Grŵp Defnyddwyr Cymuned Wicimedia Cymru

2018-03-20 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
I agree with Kirill, from the WMF point of view, as long as the chapter is
informed and endorsed the creation of a user group within its covered
territory, the WMF did its due diligence. After that, it is the
responsibility of the chapter to do its homework about the local legal
framework before endorsing the creation of the user group.

That being said, I would also be interested in hearing from Wikimedia UK's
perspective on this new user group and the reasoning behind it.

Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
Coordinator, Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group


On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:37 AM 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>
> > wrote:
> > > Descriptions of user group activities on Meta shouldn't be interpreted
> as
> > > legal documents under UK law (or any other legal code, for that
> matter).
> >
> > Hi Kirill,
> >
> > In the spirit of an open and transparent process, could you please
> > provide a link to the scope of the new approved User Group is
> > published, as the one on Meta is not the one that AffCom reviewed with
> > the UG application?
> >
>
> The Affiliations Committee publishes all of our application review and
> approval resolutions on Meta; the one for the group in question can be
> found at
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_Grŵp_Defnyddwyr_Cymuned_Wicimedia_Cymru
> .
>
>
> > > Any questions regarding potential legal implications for Wikimedia UK
> > > should, of course, be directed to the chapter itself.
> >
> > This brush-off is surprising, with the clear implication that AffCom
> > has not approached WMUK with any question. I was mistaken in believing
> > that AffCom had a responsibility to consider obvious legal
> > implications, before approving a User Group that is granted the right
> > to use official logos and the name "Wikipedia" and its language
> > variants when advertising their events. It is disappointing to see
> > that AffCom does not see their official process as needing to address
> > these areas, which may well be a barrier to direct funding, legal
> > recognition or represent a risk to other named pre-existing Affiliates
> > within the scope of the proposed new UG.
> >
>
> Your implication is entirely incorrect; AffCom consulted with -- and
> received an endorsement from -- Wikimedia UK prior to approving the user
> group.  However, we are neither experts in UK charity law nor empowered to
> speak on behalf of Wikimedia UK; consequently, any questions regarding the
> chapter's legal position should be posed to the chapter, not to us.
>
> Regards,
> Kirill Lokshin
> Chair, Affiliations Committee
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] knowing English is a privilege (was Re: Paid translation)

2018-03-01 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
I think this is à propos in this discussion about how authoritative can be
the Wiktionary... here a scientific article starts by using a definition
from the Wiktionary:
http://theconversation.com/de-facebook-au-developpement-des-plantes-quand-les-reseaux-sen-melent-90891

JP


On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 9:49 AM Amir E. Aharoni 
wrote:

> 2018-02-28 23:09 GMT+02:00 James Salsman :
> >
> > > building an authoritative dictionary is considerably
> > > harder than building a (de facto) authoritative encyclopedia.
> >
> > What reason is there to think that? My any measure of editor hours, or
> > the amount of money it would take to replicate the effort, or the
> > maintenance load going forward, I'm sure that even a three shelf foot
> > encyclopedia is harder than a 100,000 word dictionary.
>
> A couple of reasons:
> * For the particular case of Wikimedia, we are using the same software for
> Wiktionary as we do for Wikipedia. It's insane. MediaWiki wasn't made for
> that. It was made for Wikipedia.
> * An *authoritative* dictionary needs authority. It must be built by a team
> of trained and certified linguists. It needs a large and systematized
> collection of citations. It's just harder to do this for a dictionary than
> for an encyclopedia. Citations for an encyclopedia these days are often
> easily googlable, and the form of an encyclopedia article is freer than the
> form of a dictionary entry, which must be super-strict.
>
> The English Wiktionary community is overcoming both of these problem
> valiantly.
>
> It is overcoming the first problem by using lots of templates and gadgets,
> which kinda work in practice, but which are hard to learn and to replicate
> for other languages, and hard for software to process.
>
> It is overcoming the second problem by being more practically useful than
> authoritative, similarly to Wikipedia. Lexicographic citations in English
> are particularly easy to google up, given that:
> * English is the #1 language on the web
> * Google is a company based in an English-speaking country and (probably)
> getting most of its revenue from English-speaking customers
> * English has a simple morphology, for which it is particularly easy to
> build a well-working search engine for
>
> However, while it's easy to google up examples for English word usage, I
> strongly suspect that googling won't produce results that will be as
> systematized as a citation database of Merriam-Webster is.
>
> Wikipedia had proved long ago that it can compete—even if not necessarily
> win—with the authority of Britannica, but Wiktionary hasn't yet proven that
> it can compete with the authority of Merriam-Webster, Oxford, Houaiss,
> Duden, etc.
>
> (The English Wiktionary is not necessarily special; I also got to use the
> French, German, and Dutch Wiktionaries a bit, and they all do it at a level
> of quality that is comparable to the English one.)
>
> Is it desirable for Wiktionary to get better? Of course it is. Can
> Wiktionary get better? Yes, and path is quite clear. Wikidata's Lexeme
> project is progressing slowly, but its direction is right. It will finally
> build a technical platform that is actually good for a dictionary.
>
> At https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T186421 I've been writing my ideas
> about how Lexical Wikidata can actually be used by editors and readers. So
> I'm very much on board with the idea of better Wiktionary. (Before you jump
> to conclusions: These ideas were not solicited by Wikidata developers. They
> are totally mine, and they are not in any way "official". I'm just writing
> them down as a brain dump, in my personal volunteering capacity, hoping
> that they will be useful to Wikidata developers.)
>
> > > We are not *teaching* encyclopedia articles.
> >
> > What is the difference between delivering the text of an encyclopedia
> > article and teaching it? Encyclopedias are not written to be
> > accompanied by a lecturer, tutor, or teacher. We even teach how to
> > write them, to students, in schools, and the students often if not
> > almost always get academic credit for their work:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Education_program/Educators
>
> Exactly: As Wikimedians, we are actively teaching people to write in
> Wikipedia (and in other Wikimedia projects), but we are not teaching the
> *subjects* of the articles. Not as Wikimedians. Some Wikimedians are also
> teachers, and they use Wikipedia articles as handouts, but this is not
> really a Wikimedia activity.
>
> As Wikimedians we just make materials available, and we teach others *to
> make them available*.
>
> > > Wikimedia should be busy getting even better at its main thing: wiki
> articles.
> >
> > Why? We are already the best at that.
>
> We may be the best, and we are definitely the most popular, but we could be
> so, so much better. And we should be.
>
> As a simple high-level example, it's still not NEARLY as easy to become a
> Wikipedia editor 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

2018-02-28 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
The Wikimedia movement is more than encyclopedias... We already have
Wikiversity for teaching, no? Are efforts to contribute to Wikiversity and
other sister projects making us lose focus? I'm not sure to understand what
you are saying.

JP

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 2:32 AM Amir E. Aharoni <
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:

> 2018-02-28 1:25 GMT+02:00 James Salsman :
>
> > > I was not trying to say that everybody
> > > should learn English. The point I was
> > > trying to make there is that knowing
> > > English is a privilege and that it is easy
> > > to not notice it.
> >
> > I agree with that, too. How is teaching language different relative to
> > the Foundation Mission than teaching subjects of encyclopedia
> > articles?
> >
> >
> We are not *teaching* encyclopedia articles. We are making it possible to
> write them and to read them. It is not the same thing as teaching subjects.
>
> Should we do teaching? Maybe, but since it's different from making it
> possible to write and read, I'm afraid it would be losing focus.
>
> Is there anything bad about teaching languages? Of course not. It's great.
> I'm just not sure that it's the right thing for Wikimedia to do, when
> Wikimedia should be busy getting even better at its main thing: wiki
> articles.
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> ‪“We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> ___
> 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] Paid translation

2018-02-27 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
I don't think it would be losing focus as it fits directly in the mission
of the movement to share the sum of human knowledge, since languages are
knowledge in themselves.

Yes I agree that Wikiversity could be used for that, but this project
really needs support to get to current standards of "online courses", and I
don't see much push in that direction.

JP


On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 2:23 PM James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Languages are taught by authoritative dictionaries (after people, and
> ahead of almost all other similar reference books.)
>
> Wiktionary has multiple teaching functions whether we want it to or
> not:
> https://curve.coventry.ac.uk/open/items/efe362e1-fe80-4c90-bc1e-4ab2d9bbae20/1/
>
> Have you seen how much Wiktionary has been growing in Brazil?
> https://blog.searchmetrics.com/us/2018/02/14/seo-world-rankings-2018/
>
> Amir, you know it would not be losing focus because of what you said
> in your talk at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_xJaqQV71s
>
> Best regards,
> Jim
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 11:14 AM, Amir E. Aharoni
> <amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:
> > Well... Not that teaching languages—big or small—is bad, but wouldn't we
> be
> > losing focus if we got into it?
> >
> > Wikibooks and Wikiversity can theoretically be places for teaching. Are
> > they good at it? Probably not. Should they be made better? Maybe.
> >
> > בתאריך 27 בפבר׳ 2018 19:52,‏ "Jean-Philippe Béland" <
> jpbel...@wikimedia.ca>
> > כתב:
> >
> > Amir,
> >
> > I agree with everything you said, especially that languages are knowledge
> > in themselves, but I must say that Wikimedia is not doing much in an
> effort
> > to teach languages to people. Why isn't there more effort at the WMF or
> as
> > a movement to try to develop a platform to teach languages?
> >
> > Jean-Philippe Béland
> > Vice President and Programs Coordinator, Wikimedia Canada
> > Coordinator, Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User
> Group
> > ___
> > 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,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > ___
> > 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

2018-02-27 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Amir,

I agree with everything you said, especially that languages are knowledge
in themselves, but I must say that Wikimedia is not doing much in an effort
to teach languages to people. Why isn't there more effort at the WMF or as
a movement to try to develop a platform to teach languages?

Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President and Programs Coordinator, Wikimedia Canada
Coordinator, Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

2018-02-24 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
I agree with the last part of Vito's message. For languages where '''all'''
the speakers speak another lingua franca, I think such process does not
have real value. The speakers will always go read in the bigger language
because the article is most likely to be better. The advantages of having
their own Wikipedia is to be able to express knowledge in their own way
according to their own culture.

Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President, Wikimedia Canada

On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 12:09 PM Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'll reply to the most recent email just for laziness.
>
> I'm doubtful for a series of reasons, most of were already expressed in a
> better way by others:
> *a remuneration in terms of quantity will weaken the quality of
> translations unless there's a strong mechanism of quality verification
> requiring a quantity of resources comparable to translations themselves;
> *articles are the result of a long process which reflects cultural identity
> of different communities, I'm not confident with transferring them to a
> different "weaker" cultures. My usage of "weaker" adjective only focuses
> about the strength of a cultural presence on the Internet;
> *articles to be translated are at high risk of reflecting the cultural
> identity (and biases) of the Western culture;
> *finally I think paid translators would hardly turn into stable
> Wikipedians.
>
> IMHO some paid editing may be better exploited in order to digitalise texts
> of unrepresented cultures (wikisource) or preserving their vocabularies
> (wiktionary).
>
> Also those languages which are secondary for all their speakers should be
> dealt with in a different fashion. I, for one, am a native speaker of
> specific variant of Sicilian, Sicilian is a secondary language to any of
> its speakers. Honestly, I'd find pointless to read the biography of
> Leonardo da Vinci in Sicilian while I can find thousands of books about him
> in Italian. Also I find this kind of translation creates a fake "literary"
> language totally detached from reality: there's no "encaustic painting" in
> Sicilian, still a Sicilian article about Leonardo will invent one.
>
> As a general principle we should always collect, rather than create,
> knowledge.
>
> Vito
>
> 2018-02-24 16:30 GMT+01:00 John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com>:
>
> > My reply can be read as a bit more harsh than intended, it was merely a
> > statement about my present experience about translators in general.
> >
> > The problem with lack of contributors (and translators) in a specialized
> > area is that there is a small community, and within this community some
> > kind of selection is made. Each time a selection is repeated the
> remaining
> > group shrinks. Specialize the selection sufficiently many times and there
> > will be no contributors (or translators) left. It is simply a game of
> > probabilities. Thus, to make such a project work it must have a
> > sufficiently broad scope for the articles. Articles about public health
> > services will probably work even for a pretty small language group, but
> > specialized medical articles might create a problem. But then you find
> > a retired
> > orthopedic surgeon like Subas Chandra Rout…
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 4:04 PM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with John that it is very difficult to turn a translator into a
> > new
> > > editor. I also agree with Jean-Philippe that it is key to have
> > involvement
> > > of the local projects and preferable if they lead the efforts. Of the
> > > languages we worked in only one explicitly requested not to be
> involved /
> > > have translations from TWB.
> > >
> > > James
> > >
> > > On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 7:59 AM, John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > You can turn it around; give added credits for translations from
> small
> > > > language projects and into the larger ones, that is a lot more
> > > interesting
> > > > than strictly translating from the larger language projects.
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 3:55 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> > > > jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I think the request for such projects should come from the
> concerned
> > > > > language projects, same for the list of articles. If not, in my
> > simple
> > > > > opinion, it is a form of coloniasm again.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jean-Philippe Bélan

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

2018-02-24 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Thank you James for this detailed feedback. It is very interesting.

JP

On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 8:27 AM James Heilman  wrote:

> We learned a few things during the medical translation project which
> started back in 2011:
>
> 1) You must start with high quality content and thus all articles are
> extensively improved before being proposed for translation.
>
> 2) A lot of languages want "less" content than is present on EN WP. Thus we
> moved to just improving and suggesting for translation the leads of the
> English articles.
>
> 3) The "Content Translation" tool developed by the WMF made efforts more
> efficient than handing around word documents. Would love to see that tool
> improved further such as having it support specific lists of articles that
> are deemed ready for translation by certain groups. Would also love the
> tool to have tracking metrics for these types of projects.
>
> 4) We used volunteer translators mostly associated with our partner
> Translators Without Borders. One issue we found was that languages in which
> their are lots of translators such as French, Spanish, and Italian there is
> often already at least some content on many of the topics in question. The
> issue than becomes integration which needs an expert Wikipedia. And for
> languages in which we have little content there are often few avaliable
> volunteers.
>
> 5) With respect to "paying per word" the problem is this would require
> significant checks and balances to make sure people are taking the work
> seriously and not simple using Google translate for the 70 or so languages
> in which it claims to work. We often had translations undergo a second
> review and the volunteers at TWB have to pass certain tests to be accepted.
>
> 6) I hired a coordinator for the translation project for a couple of years.
> The translators at TWB did not want to become Wikipedians or learn how to
> use our systems. The coordinator created account like TransSW001 (one for
> each volunteer) and preloaded the article to be translated into Content
> Translation. They than gave the volunteer translator the user name and
> password to the account.
>
> 7) Were are we at now? There are currently just over 1,000 leads of
> articles that have been improved and are ready for translation. This
> includes articles on the 440 medications that are on the WHO Essential
> List. We have worked a bit in some 100 languages. The efforts have resulted
> in more than 5 million works translated and integrated into different
> Wikipedias. The coordinator has unfortunately moved on to his real job of
> teaching high school students.
>
> 8) The project continues but at a slower pace than before. The Wikipedian
> and retired orthopedic surgeon Subas Chandra Rout has basically single
> handedly translated nearly all 1,000 leads into Odia a language spoken by
> 40 million people in Eastern India. The amazing thing is that for many of
> these topics this is the first and only information online about it. Google
> translate does not even claim to work in this language. Our partnerships
> with WMTW and medical school in Taipai continue to translate into Chinese.
> There the students translate and than their translations are reviewed by
> their profs before being posted. They translate in groups using hackpad to
> make it more social.
>
> I am currently working to re invigorate the project :-)
> James
>
> On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 5:51 AM, John Erling Blad 
> wrote:
>
> > This discussion is going to be fun! =D
> >
> > A little more than seventy Wikipedia-projects has more than 65k articles,
> > the remaining two hundred or so are pretty small.
> >
> > What if a base set of articles were opened for paid translators? There
> are
> > several lists of such base sets. We have both the thousand articles from
> > "List of articles every Wikipedia should have"[1] and and the ten
> thousand
> > articles from the expanded list[2].
> >
> > Lets say verified good translators was paid about $0.01 per word (about
> $1
> > for a 1k-article) for translating one of those articles into another
> > language, with perhaps a higher pay for contributors in high-cost
> > countries. The pay would also have to be higher for languages that lacks
> > good translation tools.
> >
> > I believe this would be an _enabling_ activity for the communities, as
> > without a base set of articles it won't be possible to build a community
> at
> > all. By not paying for new articles, and only translating well-referenced
> > articles, some of the disputes in the communities could be avoided.
> Perhaps
> > we should also identify good source articles, that would be a help.
> > Translated articles should be above some minimum size, but they does not
> > have to be full translations of the source article.
> >
> > A real problem is that our existing lists of good articles other projects
> > should have is pretty much biased towards Western World, so they need a
> lot
> > of 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

2018-02-24 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
I think the request for such projects should come from the concerned
language projects, same for the list of articles. If not, in my simple
opinion, it is a form of coloniasm again.

Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President, Wikimedia Canada


On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 9:40 AM John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Should have added that the remaining points are somewhat less interesting
> in this context. Preloading a set of articles is a bad idea, the
> translators should be able to chose for themselves. Articles should also be
> pretty broad, not very narrow technical or medical, ie vertical articles,
> as the number of editors that can handle those will be pretty small.
>
> In particular: Do not believe you can turn a teanslator into a new editor!
> You can although turn an existing editor into a translator.
>
> On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 3:34 PM, John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 1) You must start with high quality content and thus all articles are
> >> extensively improved before being proposed for translation.
> >
> >
> > Note that to much pressure on "quality" can easily kill the project.
> >
> > 3) The "Content Translation" tool developed by the WMF made efforts more
> >> efficient than handing around word documents. Would love to see that
> tool
> >> improved further such as having it support specific lists of articles
> that
> >> are deemed ready for translation by certain groups. Would also love the
> >> tool to have tracking metrics for these types of projects.
> >
> >
> > Didn't mention ContentTranslation, but it should be pretty obvious.
> >
> > 4) We used volunteer translators mostly associated with our partner
> >> Translators Without Borders. One issue we found was that languages in
> >> which
> >> their are lots of translators such as French, Spanish, and Italian there
> >> is
> >> often already at least some content on many of the topics in question.
> The
> >> issue than becomes integration which needs an expert Wikipedia. And for
> >> languages in which we have little content there are often few avaliable
> >> volunteers.
> >
> >
> > I used projects below 65k articles as an example, as the chance of
> > competing articles are pretty low.
> >
> > 5) With respect to "paying per word" the problem is this would require
> >> significant checks and balances to make sure people are taking the work
> >> seriously and not simple using Google translate for the 70 or so
> languages
> >> in which it claims to work. We often had translations undergo a second
> >> review and the volunteers at TWB have to pass certain tests to be
> >> accepted.
> >
> >
> > I'n my original email I wrote "verified good translators". It is as
> > simple as "Has the editor contributed other articles at the project?"
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 2:26 PM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> We learned a few things during the medical translation project which
> >> started back in 2011:
> >>
> >> 1) You must start with high quality content and thus all articles are
> >> extensively improved before being proposed for translation.
> >>
> >> 2) A lot of languages want "less" content than is present on EN WP. Thus
> >> we
> >> moved to just improving and suggesting for translation the leads of the
> >> English articles.
> >>
> >> 3) The "Content Translation" tool developed by the WMF made efforts more
> >> efficient than handing around word documents. Would love to see that
> tool
> >> improved further such as having it support specific lists of articles
> that
> >> are deemed ready for translation by certain groups. Would also love the
> >> tool to have tracking metrics for these types of projects.
> >>
> >> 4) We used volunteer translators mostly associated with our partner
> >> Translators Without Borders. One issue we found was that languages in
> >> which
> >> their are lots of translators such as French, Spanish, and Italian there
> >> is
> >> often already at least some content on many of the topics in question.
> The
> >> issue than becomes integration which needs an expert Wikipedia. And for
> >> languages in which we have little content there are often few avaliable
> >> volunteers.
> >>
> >> 5) With respect to "paying per word" the problem is this would require
> >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

2018-02-24 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
colonialism *


On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 9:55 AM Jean-Philippe Béland <jpbel...@wikimedia.ca>
wrote:

> I think the request for such projects should come from the concerned
> language projects, same for the list of articles. If not, in my simple
> opinion, it is a form of coloniasm again.
>
> Jean-Philippe Béland
> Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 9:40 AM John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Should have added that the remaining points are somewhat less interesting
>> in this context. Preloading a set of articles is a bad idea, the
>> translators should be able to chose for themselves. Articles should also
>> be
>> pretty broad, not very narrow technical or medical, ie vertical articles,
>> as the number of editors that can handle those will be pretty small.
>>
>> In particular: Do not believe you can turn a teanslator into a new editor!
>> You can although turn an existing editor into a translator.
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 3:34 PM, John Erling Blad <jeb...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > 1) You must start with high quality content and thus all articles are
>> >> extensively improved before being proposed for translation.
>> >
>> >
>> > Note that to much pressure on "quality" can easily kill the project.
>> >
>> > 3) The "Content Translation" tool developed by the WMF made efforts more
>> >> efficient than handing around word documents. Would love to see that
>> tool
>> >> improved further such as having it support specific lists of articles
>> that
>> >> are deemed ready for translation by certain groups. Would also love the
>> >> tool to have tracking metrics for these types of projects.
>> >
>> >
>> > Didn't mention ContentTranslation, but it should be pretty obvious.
>> >
>> > 4) We used volunteer translators mostly associated with our partner
>> >> Translators Without Borders. One issue we found was that languages in
>> >> which
>> >> their are lots of translators such as French, Spanish, and Italian
>> there
>> >> is
>> >> often already at least some content on many of the topics in question.
>> The
>> >> issue than becomes integration which needs an expert Wikipedia. And for
>> >> languages in which we have little content there are often few avaliable
>> >> volunteers.
>> >
>> >
>> > I used projects below 65k articles as an example, as the chance of
>> > competing articles are pretty low.
>> >
>> > 5) With respect to "paying per word" the problem is this would require
>> >> significant checks and balances to make sure people are taking the work
>> >> seriously and not simple using Google translate for the 70 or so
>> languages
>> >> in which it claims to work. We often had translations undergo a second
>> >> review and the volunteers at TWB have to pass certain tests to be
>> >> accepted.
>> >
>> >
>> > I'n my original email I wrote "verified good translators". It is as
>> > simple as "Has the editor contributed other articles at the project?"
>> >
>> > On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 2:26 PM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> We learned a few things during the medical translation project which
>> >> started back in 2011:
>> >>
>> >> 1) You must start with high quality content and thus all articles are
>> >> extensively improved before being proposed for translation.
>> >>
>> >> 2) A lot of languages want "less" content than is present on EN WP.
>> Thus
>> >> we
>> >> moved to just improving and suggesting for translation the leads of the
>> >> English articles.
>> >>
>> >> 3) The "Content Translation" tool developed by the WMF made efforts
>> more
>> >> efficient than handing around word documents. Would love to see that
>> tool
>> >> improved further such as having it support specific lists of articles
>> that
>> >> are deemed ready for translation by certain groups. Would also love the
>> >> tool to have tracking metrics for these types of projects.
>> >>
>> >> 4) We used volunteer translators mostly associated with our partner
>> >> Translators Without Borders. One issue we found was that languages in
>> >> which
>> &g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of the Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group

2018-02-21 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
 I forgot to include the link to the WikiLang portal on the Wikiversity:
https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Portal:Wikilang

JP


On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 1:58 PM Jean-Philippe Béland <jpbel...@wikimedia.ca>
wrote:

> I had proposed to create a project called WikiLang to teach languages on a
> Wikimedia platform, but it didn't attract enough attention so I moved the
> content to the Wikiversity and that's what you see there with the Atikamekw
> language.
>
> JP
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 11:26 AM mathieu stumpf guntz <
> psychosl...@culture-libre.org> wrote:
>
>> This is a great news, thank you Kirill, and all member of this group for
>> their work of unvaluable importance regarding language diversity.
>>
>> Are they any plane to collect traditional tales and songs in addition to
>> Lingua Libre sessions?
>>
>> By the way, I see we have Atikamekw
>> <https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Atikamekw_language> courses on
>> Wikiversity, altough it seems more like a stub. I think it would be
>> interesting to have an evaluation matrix of languages courses we have in
>> Wikimedia projects, and it might be a good idea to coordinate efforts
>> around language courses. Actually I think it could be an interesting
>> path to both attract new contributors and provide people opportunity to
>> have meaningful practical use of what they learn, if each lesson could
>> be matched with some text to translate extracted from some of our Wiki
>> projects. What is your opinion about that?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Le 13/02/2018 à 16:45, Kirill Lokshin a écrit :
>> > Hi everyone!
>> >
>> > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
>> recognized
>> > the Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group [1]
>> as a
>> > Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to support the creation and
>> > development of Wikimedia projects and other language-related free
>> knowledge
>> > initiatives in the indigenous languages of North America.
>> >
>> > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Kirill Lokshin
>> > Chair, Affiliations Committee
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_North_American_Indigenous_Languages_User_Group
>> > ___
>> > 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,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>> ___
>> 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,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of the Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group

2018-02-21 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
I had proposed to create a project called WikiLang to teach languages on a
Wikimedia platform, but it didn't attract enough attention so I moved the
content to the Wikiversity and that's what you see there with the Atikamekw
language.

JP


On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 11:26 AM mathieu stumpf guntz <
psychosl...@culture-libre.org> wrote:

> This is a great news, thank you Kirill, and all member of this group for
> their work of unvaluable importance regarding language diversity.
>
> Are they any plane to collect traditional tales and songs in addition to
> Lingua Libre sessions?
>
> By the way, I see we have Atikamekw
>  courses on
> Wikiversity, altough it seems more like a stub. I think it would be
> interesting to have an evaluation matrix of languages courses we have in
> Wikimedia projects, and it might be a good idea to coordinate efforts
> around language courses. Actually I think it could be an interesting
> path to both attract new contributors and provide people opportunity to
> have meaningful practical use of what they learn, if each lesson could
> be matched with some text to translate extracted from some of our Wiki
> projects. What is your opinion about that?
>
> Cheers
>
> Le 13/02/2018 à 16:45, Kirill Lokshin a écrit :
> > Hi everyone!
> >
> > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> > the Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group [1] as
> a
> > Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to support the creation and
> > development of Wikimedia projects and other language-related free
> knowledge
> > initiatives in the indigenous languages of North America.
> >
> > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kirill Lokshin
> > Chair, Affiliations Committee
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_North_American_Indigenous_Languages_User_Group
> > ___
> > 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,
> 
___
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] Wikipedia is an Excellent Information Source for Medical Students, Study Finds.

2017-11-02 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Could you share links or titles for those other studies if you have them
please?

And what about you editing the articles :P haha

JP

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:01 PM James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Okay so followed up with Samir. While the database of questions was
> selected by he and I, neither one of us did any specific selection
> beyond randomly selecting 25.
>
> With respect to students going and changing Wikipedia / Uptodate, I
> very much doubt they would have. There is other students that have
> found that even when medical students find errors in WP they do not
> bother fixing them. Both WP and Uptodate change slowly over time.
>
> James
>
> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland
> <jpbel...@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
> > This could have been alleviated by using a dump of Wikipedia at a
> specific
> > time throughout the study. I don't know if it was done or not, I doubt it
> > since the article do not mention it, I assume they had direct online
> access
> > to the current Wikipedia at the time of the iterations during the study.
> > Also that would lift one of the concerns in the discussion section about
> > the replicability of the study because Wikipedia evolves, a new study
> could
> > be completed with the same dump at the time of that study in order to
> > replicate the same results (however I wouldn't see the interest, but just
> > for the sake of having scientifically replicable findings).
> >
> > JP
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
> >> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi James,
> >>
> >> I finally found time to read the whole article carefully. It is a very
> >> well done article and study, in my opinion.
> >>
> >> I have one remark/question. Since the study was conducted over a length
> of
> >> time (April 2014 to December 2016), was the data analyzed to see if the
> >> increase in the results of good answers in the posttest was higher later
> >> during the study (or not) since Wikipedia (and maybe UpToDate, I am not
> >> familiar with that resource) evolves with time? Maybe even students who
> >> participated in the first iteration of this study went after to improve
> the
> >> related Wikipedia articles, thus obviously having an impact on the
> results
> >> since the information about the specific questions that you retained for
> >> the MCQ were "directly" answered on Wikipedia. Is this something that
> was
> >> considered? I do not see that consideration in the discussion section of
> >> the article.
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >>
> >> JP
> >>
> >> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:37 AM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> That bit of the paper could have been a bit clearer. I simple
> >>> downloaded 100 questions at random from a website that hosts lists of
> >>> exam question. Am checking with Samir regarding if he did any further
> >>> selection beyond that.
> >>>
> >>> James
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 2:30 AM, pajz <pajzm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > On 31 October 2017 at 17:09, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Full study available under an open license at
> >>> >> https://mededu.jmir.org/2017/2/e20/
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > If one gets to chose the questions and assemble the questionnaire
> then
> >>> > shown to all study participants, I would submit that more or less
> >>> arbitrary
> >>> > study results can be generated by, consciously or subconsciously,
> >>> picking
> >>> > the "right" questions. Curiously, the two people that "reviewed" the
> >>> > questions here were "a Wikipedia editor and administrator," and a
> >>> > "long-term volunteer editor and administrator of Wikipedia" and
> >>> "founder of
> >>> > [...] the Wiki Project Med Foundation."
> >>> >
> >>> > Not being negative or anything, but if you're trying to
> scientifically
> >>> > evaluate whether a given exam prep book improves students' grades,
> would
> >>> > you let the editors of the book prepare the test exam?
> >>> >
> >>> > Best,
> >>> > Patrik
> >>> > ___

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia is an Excellent Information Source for Medical Students, Study Finds.

2017-11-02 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
This could have been alleviated by using a dump of Wikipedia at a specific
time throughout the study. I don't know if it was done or not, I doubt it
since the article do not mention it, I assume they had direct online access
to the current Wikipedia at the time of the iterations during the study.
Also that would lift one of the concerns in the discussion section about
the replicability of the study because Wikipedia evolves, a new study could
be completed with the same dump at the time of that study in order to
replicate the same results (however I wouldn't see the interest, but just
for the sake of having scientifically replicable findings).

JP

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
> wrote:

> Hi James,
>
> I finally found time to read the whole article carefully. It is a very
> well done article and study, in my opinion.
>
> I have one remark/question. Since the study was conducted over a length of
> time (April 2014 to December 2016), was the data analyzed to see if the
> increase in the results of good answers in the posttest was higher later
> during the study (or not) since Wikipedia (and maybe UpToDate, I am not
> familiar with that resource) evolves with time? Maybe even students who
> participated in the first iteration of this study went after to improve the
> related Wikipedia articles, thus obviously having an impact on the results
> since the information about the specific questions that you retained for
> the MCQ were "directly" answered on Wikipedia. Is this something that was
> considered? I do not see that consideration in the discussion section of
> the article.
>
> Thank you,
>
> JP
>
> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:37 AM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That bit of the paper could have been a bit clearer. I simple
>> downloaded 100 questions at random from a website that hosts lists of
>> exam question. Am checking with Samir regarding if he did any further
>> selection beyond that.
>>
>> James
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 2:30 AM, pajz <pajzm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On 31 October 2017 at 17:09, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Full study available under an open license at
>> >> https://mededu.jmir.org/2017/2/e20/
>> >
>> >
>> > If one gets to chose the questions and assemble the questionnaire then
>> > shown to all study participants, I would submit that more or less
>> arbitrary
>> > study results can be generated by, consciously or subconsciously,
>> picking
>> > the "right" questions. Curiously, the two people that "reviewed" the
>> > questions here were "a Wikipedia editor and administrator," and a
>> > "long-term volunteer editor and administrator of Wikipedia" and
>> "founder of
>> > [...] the Wiki Project Med Foundation."
>> >
>> > Not being negative or anything, but if you're trying to scientifically
>> > evaluate whether a given exam prep book improves students' grades, would
>> > you let the editors of the book prepare the test exam?
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Patrik
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Wikimedia-l
>> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> James Heilman
>> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Jean-Philippe Béland
>
> [image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
> <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national
> soutenant Wikipédia
> Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
> <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter
> supporting Wikipedia
> 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L 2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
>



-- 

Jean-Philippe Béland

[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia is an Excellent Information Source for Medical Students, Study Finds.

2017-11-02 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Hi James,

I finally found time to read the whole article carefully. It is a very well
done article and study, in my opinion.

I have one remark/question. Since the study was conducted over a length of
time (April 2014 to December 2016), was the data analyzed to see if the
increase in the results of good answers in the posttest was higher later
during the study (or not) since Wikipedia (and maybe UpToDate, I am not
familiar with that resource) evolves with time? Maybe even students who
participated in the first iteration of this study went after to improve the
related Wikipedia articles, thus obviously having an impact on the results
since the information about the specific questions that you retained for
the MCQ were "directly" answered on Wikipedia. Is this something that was
considered? I do not see that consideration in the discussion section of
the article.

Thank you,

JP

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:37 AM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That bit of the paper could have been a bit clearer. I simple
> downloaded 100 questions at random from a website that hosts lists of
> exam question. Am checking with Samir regarding if he did any further
> selection beyond that.
>
> James
>
> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 2:30 AM, pajz <pajzm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 31 October 2017 at 17:09, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Full study available under an open license at
> >> https://mededu.jmir.org/2017/2/e20/
> >
> >
> > If one gets to chose the questions and assemble the questionnaire then
> > shown to all study participants, I would submit that more or less
> arbitrary
> > study results can be generated by, consciously or subconsciously, picking
> > the "right" questions. Curiously, the two people that "reviewed" the
> > questions here were "a Wikipedia editor and administrator," and a
> > "long-term volunteer editor and administrator of Wikipedia" and "founder
> of
> > [...] the Wiki Project Med Foundation."
> >
> > Not being negative or anything, but if you're trying to scientifically
> > evaluate whether a given exam prep book improves students' grades, would
> > you let the editors of the book prepare the test exam?
> >
> > Best,
> > Patrik
> > ___
> > 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 

Jean-Philippe Béland

[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national
soutenant Wikipédia
Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter
supporting Wikipedia
535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L 2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2018: Program themes, eligibility criteria and reporting deadlines

2017-10-23 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Just a quick reaction from Cornelius' message and Lodewijk's answer. I will
reply with my thoughts more in detail once I get back in Canada as I'm
still in France after the Wikiconvention.

I also think that we need a better defined official goal of the Wikimedia
Conference to address this issue. It was also my understanding that the
Wikiconference was a meeting of the official structured affiliates of the
Wikimedia movement from around the world. The questions raised about
representativity at the last Wikiconference, from my understanding, were
mainly raised on the Strategy Track, as Lodewijk also suggests, that was a
special event in 2017. I don't think the Wikiconference has the role of
defining strategy for the whole movement as a goal, but again that would
need to be identified by identifying a clear goal and intent for this
conference.

That being said, I don't think this is a good idea to say even implicitly
that affiliates are representatives of our online communities in any way.
They are independant communities and must remain that way in my opinion.

Thank you,
JP

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 20:16 Lodewijk, <lodew...@effeietsanders.org> wrote:

> That all depends on the goals that the conference sets itself, as always :)
>
> As I understood it, the conference is intended for structured and organized
> groups, rather than to be a representative forum for the whole movement. In
> 2017, I understood there to be mostly two events taking place in the same
> location - with some overlap in program. In that sense, this was quite a
> unique situation because of the strategic process.
>
> The first question would be whether you accept each challenge as a goal. If
> being representative of the whole movement becomes the goal, the structure
> probably needs to be overhauled much more, and the default invitation for
> all groups may have to be reconsidered. One representative from the
> Japanese community wouldn't cut it, then (for example).
>
> On the other side, I could also imagine a different goal, which would be to
> fill certain gaps in input diversity from the participants. This could be
> input from certain language communities, or from certain cultures where we
> even lack readership. This would make more sense to me - as it would not
> imply a representation as much. In part it would lead to a similar
> consideration and outcome, but it would force you to also consider other
> areas where input is lacking from. For example, allied movements or project
> communities beyond Wikipedia (for example, the collective of developing
> language communities in Africa or communities that are government-blocked -
> of which I'm uncertain if they are covered by affiliates). This would also
> send the message to the communities you ask to send a representative what
> you expect of such participant (if that would indeed be your goal).
>
> There could be many other goals of course, that you (plural) could have in
> mind. I'm not sure which applies best. I would suggest not to deviate from
> the official line that chapters don't represent language communities,
> though. That is, unless this official line has changed.
>
> Warmly,
> Lodewijk
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Cornelius Kibelka <
> cornelius.kibe...@wikimedia.de> wrote:
>
> > Hi Lodewijk, hi JP,
> >
> > Over the last years, we received the feedback that the Wikimedia
> Conference
> > would not be as (globally) representative as it could or should be. For
> the
> > Wikimedia Conference 2017, several “Community Leaders” were invited to
> the
> > conference to be heard for the Movement Strategy process, but the
> > selection/invitation process was not as clear as it could have been.
> >
> > To be more representative on a global scale and to have more different
> > people from different regions present at the conference, we needed clear,
> > transparent and non arbitrary criteria. However, there is no solution
> that
> > covers every possible challenge. Therefore, we chose to give this
> approach
> > – with clear criteria – at least a try for the Wikimedia Conference 2018.
> > Also, as we expect more changes in the Movement in the upcoming year,
> this
> > approach is a try for 2018 only, as an overhaul of the whole concept of
> the
> > Wikimedia Conference will be needed anyway.
> >
> > Additionally, I want to highlight this, because this was criticized in
> the
> > past as well, all regularly eligible affiliates may send at least two
> > representatives.
> >
> > I’m aware that this approach implies challenges, though. I’m happy to
> > receive suggestions on how to come up with equally clear and transparent
> > criteria.
> >
> > Best reg

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2018: Program themes, eligibility criteria and reporting deadlines

2017-10-23 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
I share the questions of Lodewijk

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 19:22 Cornelius Kibelka, <
cornelius.kibe...@wikimedia.de> wrote:

> Of course, I meant:
>
> "The registration process will start on November 24, *2017* and will end
> sharply (no exceptions), on January 15, 2018."
>
> Thank you
> Cornelius
>
> --
>
> Cornelius Kibelka
>
> Program and Engagement Coordinator (PEC)
> for the Wikimedia Conference
>
>
>
> Am 23.10.2017 18:04 schrieb "Cornelius Kibelka" <
> cornelius.kibe...@wikimedia.de>:
>
> > Dear Wikimedians, dear representatives of Wikimedia affiliates,
> >
> > A few weeks ago, we announced that the next Wikimedia Conference will
> take
> > place from April 20 to 22, 2018 at the Mercure Hotel in Berlin-Neukölln
> > (same location as in 2017). This email contains information about the
> > program themes and the Eligibility Criteria for invited affiliates
> > including the relevant reporting deadlines.
> >
> > == Program Themes ==
> >
> > As in the previous editions of the conference, the Wikimedia Conference
> > 2018 will again focus on three core themes.
> >
> >-
> >
> >Movement Strategy: In November 2017, phase 2 of the Wikimedia Movement
> >Strategy Process will start. Its main goal will be to answer the
> question
> >"How do we implement the strategic direction", which means
> identifying the
> >roles and resources needed for execution, and the activities it
> involves.
> >In order to ensure participation from the organized part of the
> movement in
> >this next phase, we will again host a three-day track on movement
> strategy.
> >This track will be designed together with the Wikimedia Foundation.
> >-
> >
> >Partnerships in the Wikimedia Movement: Wikimedia organizations and
> >groups have a wide variety of experiences and knowledge in working
> with
> >partners to achieve our mission. Based on the conversation at the last
> >Wikimedia Conference, Wikimania, and regional Wikimedia conferences,
> we aim
> >to continue to offer a space for conversations, experience sharing and
> >learning around partnerships within and outside the Wikimedia
> movement.
> >This track will be designed together with the Wikimedia Foundation’s
> Global
> >Reach & Partnerships team, WMDE’s Partnerships & Development team and
> the
> >volunteer “Partnerships group”.
> >-
> >
> >Capacity Building & Learning: The Wikimedia Conference currently is
> >one of the main spaces for learning and sharing among Wikimedia
> affiliates.
> >Again, we will host a track with sessions that are designed according
> to
> >the participants’ needs, wishes and experiences. This track will be
> >designed in close consultation with WMF’s Learning & Evaluation team,
> and
> >will complement the pre-conference Learning Days.
> >
> >
> > == Eligibility Criteria ==
> >
> > The eligibility criteria for participating in the Wikimedia Conference
> > 2018 are aligned to the Affiliates’ Agreements with the Wikimedia
> > Foundation.
> >
> > Chapters, Thematic Organizations and User Groups must have shown signs of
> > recent activity (within the last six months) and be up-to-date on their
> > reporting by the eligibility deadline (December 15, 2017). Moreover,
> > affiliates need to have been officially recognized by the Wikimedia
> > Foundation before April 19, 2017.
> >
> > == Participant number regulation ==
> >
> >-
> >
> >Chapters, Thematic Organizations and User Groups may send two
> >delegates. Chapters and Thematic Organizations which employ at least
> 0.5
> >FTE by Sep 1, 2017, may send one additional delegate who is a paid
> staff
> >member.
> >-
> >
> >Allied organizations may send two delegates.
> >-
> >
> >The biggest ten language/project communities (by numbers of active
> >editors [>5 edits/month]) that are not represented by any affiliate,
> or
> >have an affiliate, which is not eligible because it was recognized
> after
> >April 19, 2017, may send one delegate.
> >-
> >
> >   As per September 2017, the biggest communities without an
> >   (eligible) affiliate representation are the Japanese, Vietnamese,
> Tamil,
> >   Bengali, Slovak, Croatian, Hindi and Malay, Wikimedia Commons and
> >   Wikivoyage communities.
> >   -
> >
> >   The user groups West Bengal Wikimedians User Group (for the Bengali
> >   community), Hindi Wikimedians User Group (for the Hindi
> community), Wikimedia
> >   Community User Group Malaysia (for the Malay community), as well as
> >   the Commons Photographers User Group (for the Wikimedia Commons
> >   community) and the Wikivoyage Association (for the Wikivoyage
> >   communities) may send one delegate. For the language communities
> (Japanese,
> >   Vietnamese, Tamil, Slovak, Croatian), decision finding and making
> process
> >   on who will be the one person sent to the conference, need to be
> made in
> >   

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Yes it's all on Meta. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Start.

JP

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:21 PM Todd Allen <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Are those applications published anywhere? I'd be curious to see it. I'm
> not really familiar with the grant process.
>
> Todd
>
> On Oct 16, 2017 12:47 PM, "Jean-Philippe Béland" <jpbel...@wikimedia.ca>
> wrote:
>
> > My opinion is that such projects should be supported, we should encourage
> > 'be bold'. That being said, people planning projects at a large scale
> > should communicate with the concerned communities first. As such, the
> > concerns raised in this thread for example would have been raised during
> > the planning phase of that project and hopefully addressed. There is a
> > place in the application forms for grants for projects that asks to list
> > "Community Notification". The Grant Committee should look more closely at
> > that section and ensure that the communities have been notified before
> > granting any fund.
> >
> > JP
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Lodewijk <lodew...@effeietsanders.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on
> > the
> > > fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to
> > pull
> > > that leverage.
> > >
> > > The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are
> > > considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only
> > > pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how
> much
> > > of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat
> larger
> > > scale.
> > >
> > > While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
> > >
> > > Lodewijk
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> > > jpbel...@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > > There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
> > > Wikipedia
> > > > like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able
> to
> > > > keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
> > > >
> > > > Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > > Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> > > > list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether
> a
> > > > > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary
> > transmasculine
> > > > > people like myself.
> > > > >
> > > > > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this
> thread:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of
> Emily's/Keilana's
> > > > >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns
> > that
> > > > this
> > > > >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for
> in
> > > the
> > > > >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
> > > project
> > > > >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including
> not
> > > > >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
> > > > >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
> > sexist.
> > > I
> > > > >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's
> said
> > > can
> > > > >> be
> > > > >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism
> of
> > > > poor
> > > > >> wording.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
> > > > <gorillawarfarewikipedia@
> > > > >> gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through
> to
> > > > this
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
My opinion is that such projects should be supported, we should encourage
'be bold'. That being said, people planning projects at a large scale
should communicate with the concerned communities first. As such, the
concerns raised in this thread for example would have been raised during
the planning phase of that project and hopefully addressed. There is a
place in the application forms for grants for projects that asks to list
"Community Notification". The Grant Committee should look more closely at
that section and ensure that the communities have been notified before
granting any fund.

JP



On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Lodewijk <lodew...@effeietsanders.org>
wrote:

> I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on the
> fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to pull
> that leverage.
>
> The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are
> considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only
> pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how much
> of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat larger
> scale.
>
> While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> jpbel...@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
>
> > There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
> Wikipedia
> > like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to
> > keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
> >
> > Jean-Philippe Béland
> > Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> > list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
> > > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
> > > people like myself.
> > >
> > > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
> > >
> > >
> > > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
> > >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
> > >>
> > >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
> > this
> > >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in
> the
> > >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
> project
> > >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
> > >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
> > >>
> > >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
> > >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist.
> I
> > >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said
> can
> > >> be
> > >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
> > poor
> > >> wording.
> > >>
> > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
> > <gorillawarfarewikipedia@
> > >> gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
> > this
> > >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
> > her
> > >> email address.
> > >>
> > >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
> > >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
> > >> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
> > >>
> > >> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
> > to a
> > >> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
> > going
> > >> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch
> > of
> > >> stubs.
> > >>
> > >> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
> > better
> > >> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
> > shouldn't
> > >> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
> > >>
> > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > >>
> > >
> > > - Pax aka Funcrunch
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
> > >
> > >&

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
As far as i know, it is the only project that the initiative Women in red
contribute to, which is the initial subject of this thread.

It certainly is the only project where "Many of the competition articles
will just get tagged CSD - A1, A7, A9 even G2" makes any sense. I am a
sysop on several Wikimedia projects and participate in deletion regularly
and I have no clue what CSD, A1, A7, A9 and even G2 are, which are part of
the initial email of this thread, proving that it applies to only the
English Wikipedia.

So my point stands. This is not a thread about "misogyny and
under-representation of female editors" in general, even if it may
have derived that way. The initial email and the few that followed clearly
show that the authors were talking only about the English Wikipedia and
showed zero interest in including the other projects in a meaningful
general discussion about that issue, if not why using obscure terms that
only pertain to that project?

That being said, I now thank Lodewijk for making it general and inclusive.
It should have been the way this discussion was opened if it was really
meant to be a more generic theme and wanted to be inclusive of the
community as a whole.

JP



On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Robert Fernandez <wikigamal...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Is the English Wikipedia the only Wikipedia which has problems with
> misogyny and under-representation of female editors and articles? I am
> relieved to hear that!
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
> > wrote:
>
> > There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
> Wikipedia
> > like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to
> > keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
> >
> > Jean-Philippe Béland
> > Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
> > list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
> > > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
> > > people like myself.
> > >
> > > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
> > >
> > >
> > > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
> > >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
> > >>
> > >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
> > this
> > >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in
> the
> > >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
> project
> > >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
> > >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
> > >>
> > >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
> > >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist.
> I
> > >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said
> can
> > >> be
> > >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of
> > poor
> > >> wording.
> > >>
> > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
> > <gorillawarfarewikipedia@
> > >> gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to
> > this
> > >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with
> > her
> > >> email address.
> > >>
> > >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
> > >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
> > >> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
> > >>
> > >> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
> > to a
> > >> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't
> > going
> > >> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch
> > of
> > >> stubs.
> > >>
> > >> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's
> > better
> > >> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
> > shouldn't
> > >> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
> > >>
> > >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
&g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red

2017-10-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
There is so many threads on this list that are only about English Wikipedia
like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able to
keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?

Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President, Wikimedia Canada

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:

> The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
> comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
> people like myself.
>
> I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
>
>
> Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's
>> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
>>
>> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that this
>> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for in the
>> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this project
>> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including not
>> mass-producing poor-quality content).
>>
>> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
>> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist. I
>> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's said can
>> be
>> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism of poor
>> wording.
>>
>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare <gorillawarfarewikipedia@
>> gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to this
>> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue with her
>> email address.
>>
>> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some
>> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD
>> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
>>
>> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women to a
>> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia isn't going
>> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a bunch of
>> stubs.
>>
>> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's better
>> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I shouldn't
>> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
>>
>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>>
>
> - Pax aka Funcrunch
>
>
>
> On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
>
>> Is that still going on?
>>
>> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on Wikipedia.
>> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned out
>> pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, on women
>> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of them.
>>
>> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in
>> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration of
>> quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is sexist. The
>> same question would apply if the proposed articles were about Russian
>> literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just because
>> of what the subject happens to be.
>>
>> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people
>> sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all for
>> shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in this
>> thread.
>>
>> Todd
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" <wikigamal...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
>>>
>>> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these
>>> issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported, sweeping
>>> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's
>>> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest tones
>>> it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and apologies
>>> are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so much that even the
>>> way we talk about sexism is sexist.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying to
>>>> contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
>>>> To 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Emerging Communities: a proposed new definition

2017-10-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Where does the number 750,000 speakers come from? And what is the rationale
to exclude smaller linguistic communities?

I think emerging communities can have less speakers than that. A language
can be viable and alive with less speakers than that, so we are not talking
about preserving a language even if there are less speakers than that. If
the language is used in day to day life and to teach at schools, why
wouldn't it be considered for a Wikipedia and a Wiktionary even if there
are less than 750,000 speakers?

Thank you,

Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President, Wikimedia Canada

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017, 04:29 Balázs Viczián, <balazs.vicz...@wikimedia.hu>
wrote:

> Hi Asaf et All,
>
> Hope I won't get skipped because I barely talk on this list or in general
> on an international level but this proposal could have a long term effect
> on my chapter.
>
> Happy to see WMF is ready to start giving up at least a bit on geography or
> census numbers and shift focus to existing communities based on their
> actual state and health.
>
> I would suggest not stopping here but going forward by completely
> abandoning geography and such overgeneralization where the entire world can
> be described by 3 (that is three) labels.
>
> Instead evaluate each community topic by topic.
>
> Say one: governance. Even WMF itself had such a crisis, not to say the
> British, German and now the French "developed" chapters. For them, better
> organized but ever labeled "emerging" communities might have been able to
> provide support, if their category would not be discouraging them from
> stepping in.
>
> Discouraging, yup. Put your hands on your hearts and be honest. We all
> think that at least on a general level the "developed" should teach and
> support the "emerging" and not the other way around, right?
>
> Yet said governance as an example appears to be a lot more problematic for
> the ever "developed" than the ever "emerging".
>
> This proposal does not recognize such patterns but it is a big step forward
> nevertheless as it shifts more focus on the existing communities. The
> labels are in my subjective opinion are somewhat patronizing as per above.
>
> Balazs,
> from an ever "emerging" community
>
> On Sep 27, 2017 19:30, "Asaf Bartov" <abar...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> > Dear Wikimedians,
> >
> > Years ago, as part of the first Strategy process of 2009-2010, a
> > distinction entered our lives, between Global North and Global South
> > countries.  That distinction was borrowed from a United Nations agency
> > named ITU, and it was used as shorthand to refer to communities the
> > Foundation considered to need additional resources and help to achieve
> > impact on our mission of creating and sharing free knowledge.
> >
> > However, the distinction was never a very good fit for us.  It was based
> on
> > UN notions like the Human Development Index, and gave much weight to
> > nation-wide economic conditions.  Its binary nature did not allow for
> > distinguishing between countries where Wikimedia work is possible and
> > happening, albeit with difficulty, and ones where no Wikimedia work, or
> > next to none, is happening, or possible.  It also looked only at
> geography,
> > whereas much of our work is defined by language communities and not by
> > geographies.  And it was political and alienating to many people.
> >
> > In short, it was both not as useful as we needed it to be as well as
> > unloved and rejected by many.
> >
> > The Community Resources team at the Wikimedia Foundation has been
> thinking
> > about replacing that distinction with a more nuanced one, that would be a
> > much better fit with our needs, would take into account the actual state
> of
> > editing communities, would consider multiple axes beyond geography, and
> > would be less controversial.
> >
> > We began using the term "emerging communities" two years ago, first as a
> > replacement for the term Global South, but it has always been our
> intention
> > to define Emerging Communities ourselves.  Finishing the proposed
> > definition took a back seat for a while due to other priorities, but we
> are
> > ready to share the proposed definition today:
> >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement/
> > Defining_Emerging_Communities
> >
> >
> > We welcome your thoughts, on the talk page (ideally) or on this thread.
> > The definition is already our working definition, but we are open to
> > incorporating changes to both wording and substance through October 31st.
> >
&g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mailing lists (was Encyclopedic Writing Guide)

2017-09-26 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Alors nous induisons les lecteurs/trices en erreur avec des pages comme
celle-ci :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mailing_lists#Public_mailing_lists

JP


On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Michael Snow <wikipe...@frontier.com>
wrote:

> On 9/26/2017 6:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland wrote:
>
>> So what is Wikipedia-l
>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l> for? It is
>> describe "for issues specific to Wikipedia (and not sister projects such
>> as
>> Wiktionary) but affecting editions of Wikipedia in more than one
>> language".
>> Exactly what you are talking about "content about Wikipedia,
>> *particularly* when not specific to any one language"...
>>
> In terms of the original design, you are correct that wikipedia-l was
> intended for this. However, if I may attempt to restate Asaf's point, that
> list has no meaningful activity, and it is counterproductive to insist that
> people use it when this list can serve the purpose. Initiating a productive
> conversation on this list is already work enough, we should not multiply
> the effort needed by requiring that someone also revive a comatose mailing
> list.
>
> That being said, if someone else wanted to take on the second task
> (reviving wikipedia-l) and forwarded this message there, or started a
> parallel conversation, I don't think that would be particularly
> problematic. But as this situation indicates, there is a challenge involved
> in determining how to use our multiplicity of lists with adjacent and
> potentially overlapping topic areas. I suspect the activity patterns into
> which we have drifted should tell us something about the optimum
> configuration of lists and topics, in the same way that say, Wikiversity
> languishing while Wikidata flourishes should tell us something about the
> optimum number of projects we can support.
>
> --Michael Snow
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>




-- 

Jean-Philippe Béland

[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national
soutenant Wikipédia
Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter
supporting Wikipedia
535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L 2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Encyclopedic Writing Guide

2017-09-26 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
So what is Wikipedia-l
<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l> for? It is
describe "for issues specific to Wikipedia (and not sister projects such as
Wiktionary) but affecting editions of Wikipedia in more than one language".
Exactly what you are talking about "content about Wikipedia,
*particularly* when not specific to any one language"...

JP


On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Asaf Bartov <abar...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> On Sep 25, 2017 18:57, "Jean-Philippe Béland" <jpbel...@wikimedia.ca>
> wrote:
>
> This should have been posted to the Wikipedia mailing list since it doesn't
> have anything to do with the other projects or the movement in general.
>
>
> Um, no. This list is a general list, and content about Wikipedia,
> *particularly* when not specific to any one language, is welcome here.
>
> There is no active Wikipedia-only alternative to this list that would reach
> this international audience.
>
> A.
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 

Jean-Philippe Béland

[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national
soutenant Wikipédia
Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter
supporting Wikipedia
535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L 2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

2017-09-26 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
"As biases go, omitting notable subjects in the global south doesn't
have the deleterious real-world consequences that reenforcing
erroneous economic hegemony does."

How so? I don't want to go into politics topics, but with what we see
recently we clearly see the danger of thinking "less" of those cultures of
people...

JP


On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 3:31 PM, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jean-Philippe, yes, absolutely:
>
> http://blogs.oii.ox.ac.uk/policy/how-well-represented-
> is-the-mena-region-in-wikipedia/
>
> As biases go, omitting notable subjects in the global south doesn't
> have the deleterious real-world consequences that reenforcing
> erroneous economic hegemony does.
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 7:30 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland
> <jpbel...@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
> > Good day,
> >
> > This is not related to gender bias, but an observation I made from
> reading
> > this paper. Table 1 shows the different percentage of overlap between
> > different languistic versions of Wikipedia with the English Wikipedia. Do
> > anybody know if there are studies or reports focussed on that?
> >
> > For example, I notice that the Wikipedia with the less overlap from the
> > above-mentioned table is the Arabic Wikipedia. To me, it seems to
> indicate
> > another sort of bias on the English Wikipedia and other "Western"
> language
> > Wikipedias in not necessarily including biographies from those parts of
> the
> > world. Or maybe there is another "glass ceiling" not based on gender,
> > meaning that somebody from the Middle East for instance needs to be more
> > notable in average to be included on the English Wikipedia comparatively
> of
> > somebody in North America or Europe. Do we have any analysis of that? Is
> > that a question that is brought up in reflexions about bias?
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > JP
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 3:55 PM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The article was discussing the proportion of articles about specific
> >> gender and possible reasons why this situation exists. What I
> >> mentioned was simply one among many potential explanation.
> >>
> >> James
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Eduardo Testart <etest...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi again,
> >> >
> >> > I think the article is not related to paid editing, if you wish to
> >> discuss
> >> > that subject, you should probably open another thread.
> >> >
> >> > It would be nice if the discussion and comments can be kept on topic
> :)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Cheers,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > El sept. 22, 2017 3:49 PM, "James Heilman" <jmh...@gmail.com>
> escribió:
> >> >
> >> > How do we know? Those who work extensively in this topic area and are
> >> > good at picking up paid editing make an educated guess. There are well
> >> > known patterns that represent paid editing. We could likely build a
> >> > tool that could look at all BLPs and give a numerical value to the
> >> > percentage that are most likely written for pay. If you look at a
> >> > random group of new BLPs at WP:NPP you will also get a decent idea.
> >> >
> >> > James
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Andy Mabbett
> >> > <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
> >> >> On 22 September 2017 at 18:24, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> We know that a sizable proportion of articles
> >> >>> about people are paid for by the individual themselves or their
> >> >>> representative.
> >> >>
> >> >> We do? How? And what size is that "sizable proportion"?
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Andy Mabbett
> >> >> @pigsonthewing
> >> >> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> >> >>
> >> >> ___
> >> >> 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,
> >> > <mailto

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia

2017-09-25 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Good day,

This is not related to gender bias, but an observation I made from reading
this paper. Table 1 shows the different percentage of overlap between
different languistic versions of Wikipedia with the English Wikipedia. Do
anybody know if there are studies or reports focussed on that?

For example, I notice that the Wikipedia with the less overlap from the
above-mentioned table is the Arabic Wikipedia. To me, it seems to indicate
another sort of bias on the English Wikipedia and other "Western" language
Wikipedias in not necessarily including biographies from those parts of the
world. Or maybe there is another "glass ceiling" not based on gender,
meaning that somebody from the Middle East for instance needs to be more
notable in average to be included on the English Wikipedia comparatively of
somebody in North America or Europe. Do we have any analysis of that? Is
that a question that is brought up in reflexions about bias?

Thank you,

JP

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 3:55 PM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The article was discussing the proportion of articles about specific
> gender and possible reasons why this situation exists. What I
> mentioned was simply one among many potential explanation.
>
> James
>
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Eduardo Testart <etest...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi again,
> >
> > I think the article is not related to paid editing, if you wish to
> discuss
> > that subject, you should probably open another thread.
> >
> > It would be nice if the discussion and comments can be kept on topic :)
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> >
> > El sept. 22, 2017 3:49 PM, "James Heilman" <jmh...@gmail.com> escribió:
> >
> > How do we know? Those who work extensively in this topic area and are
> > good at picking up paid editing make an educated guess. There are well
> > known patterns that represent paid editing. We could likely build a
> > tool that could look at all BLPs and give a numerical value to the
> > percentage that are most likely written for pay. If you look at a
> > random group of new BLPs at WP:NPP you will also get a decent idea.
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Andy Mabbett
> > <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
> >> On 22 September 2017 at 18:24, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> We know that a sizable proportion of articles
> >>> about people are paid for by the individual themselves or their
> >>> representative.
> >>
> >> We do? How? And what size is that "sizable proportion"?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Andy Mabbett
> >> @pigsonthewing
> >> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> >>
> >> ___
> >> 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,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > James Heilman
> > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > ___
> > 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 

Jean-Philippe Béland

[imag

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Encyclopedic Writing Guide

2017-09-25 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
This should have been posted to the Wikipedia mailing list since it doesn't
have anything to do with the other projects or the movement in general.

JP


On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Anna Torres <d...@wikimedia.org.ar> wrote:

> As always!!! Thanks you so much
>
> We will review it and adapt it!!!
>
> Hugs!!
>
> 2017-09-25 13:13 GMT-03:00 Michal Lester <mles...@wikimedia.org.il>:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I’m excited to share with you our new interactive tool *teaching
> > encyclopedic writing*[1]. Encyclopedic writing differs from other kinds
> of
> > writing, such as academic, journalistic, or creative writing. In order to
> > learn how to contribute substantial content to Wikipedia, it is not
> enough
> > to learn the technicalities of using Wikipedia's interface, as taught by
> > the interactive educational software[2]. The Encyclopedic Writing Guide
> was
> > born of a need to instruct participants in our Educational projects, as
> > well as the general public, on the principles of encyclopedic writing,
> and
> > specifically those of Wikipedia. The guide is aimed at teaching the rules
> > and "best practices" that apply at various stages of contributing content
> > to Wikipedia: from choosing a topic for an article, to finding sources,
> to
> > structuring the article, and finally, the required writing style. The
> guide
> > thus teaches how to asses the encyclopedic importance of a topic, how to
> > find independent and reliable sources on that topic, how to structure the
> > information according to Wikipedia's article format, and how to produce
> > neutral and succinct writing.
> >
> > The guide is built as a website. Users are invited to choose between two
> > tracks: a track for expanding existing articles and a track for writing
> new
> > ones. In both tracks, each of the four stages is presented on a different
> > page, where the related information, tips, examples and practical tools
> are
> > concentrated. The information is presented in a basic concise form, and
> the
> > users are invited to open links and pop-ups to obtain more information
> and
> > practical examples.
> >
> > Editing Wikipedia is not just a technical skill. While learning how to
> use
> > Wikipedia's interface is necessary, it is not sufficient in order to
> learn
> > how to contribute substantial content to the platform. The Encyclopedic
> > Writing Guide is the first tool of its kind teaching how to create
> > encyclopedic content.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > *Michal Lester,*
> >
> >
> >
> > *Executive DirectorWikimedia Israel*
> > [1] https://guide.wikimedia.org.il/
> > [2] http://www.wikimedia.org.il/%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%93%D7%94/
> > ___
> > 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,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Anna Torres Adell
> Directora Ejecutiva
> *A.C. Wikimedia Argentina*
> _______
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 

Jean-Philippe Béland

[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national
soutenant Wikipédia
Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter
supporting Wikipedia
535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L 2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees appointments and officer positions

2017-08-17 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Congrats to all re-elected!

JP


On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:30 AM Shani Evenstein 
wrote:

> Thanks for the update, Christophe. Wishing the board  a productive,
> fruitful and smooth year!
>
> And Happy Wikimania, everyone, especially to all the Wikimedians who
> couldn't make it this year.
> So great that we have live-streaming this year (thanks again, Melody &
> Eddie!) and can participate and support from all ends of the world.
>
> Best,
> Shani.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Christophe Henner 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > As is customary, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees met right
> > before Wikimania and appointed new trustees and elected its officers.
> >
> > This is a rare occasion as I will not need to write a farewell email. The
> > two Board members that were finishing their terms, María and Dariusz,
> were
> > re-elected after the recent community election. And as of today, James
> > Heilman has formally rejoined the Board of Trustees.
> >
> > Today the Board also elected the officer positions. I am pleased to
> report
> > that the Board has reiterated its trust in the current officers, and both
> > María and I will continue serving as Vice Chair and Chair of the Board,
> > respectively, for another year.
> >
> > It feels a little weird to write this email as there's not much change
> from
> > last year. But I believe that stability and continuity are more than
> > welcome!
> >
> > So please, join me in "welcoming" María, Dariusz, and James as trustees
> of
> > the Wikimedia Foundation Board.
> >
> > María Sefidari began contributing to the Wikimedia projects in 2006 and
> has
> > since served in several roles across the Wikimedia movement. She was a
> > founding member of Wikimedia España and Wikimujeres Grupo de Usuarias,
> and
> > she also helped create Spanish Wikipedia's LGBT Wikiproject. She has
> served
> > on several Foundation governance committees, including the Affiliations
> and
> > Individual Engagement Grants committees. María is a professor in the
> > Digital Communications, Culture and Citizenship Master's degree program
> of
> > Rey Juan Carlos University at the MediaLab-Prado in Madrid, Spain. She
> has
> > previously served on the Board from August 2013 to July 2015, and most
> > recently joined the Board once again in January 2016. She has been
> selected
> > for a second term which will conclude at Wikimania 2020.
> >
> > Dariusz Jemielniak has held a variety of roles on Wikimedia projects,
> > including administrator, bureaucrat, checkuser, steward and ombudsman. He
> > served as the chair of the Wikimedia community’s Funds Dissemination
> > Committee for three terms and is the author of “Common knowledge?: An
> > Ethnography of Wikipedia.” Dariusz is a full professor of Management, the
> > head of the Center for Research on Organizations and Workplaces, and a
> > co-founder of the New Research on Digital Societies (NeRDS) group at
> > Kozminski University. Dariusz has been re-appointed for a second term as
> a
> > Trustee after first joining the Board in July 2015.
> >
> > James Heilman, M.D.,  has helped to found both Wikimedia Canada and
> > WikiProject Med Foundation. As an emergency physician in Cranbrook,
> British
> > Columbia, and a faculty member of emergency medicine at the University of
> > British Columbia, James is an active member of the medical community on
> > Wikimedia projects. James has also been involved in establishing
> > collaborations with several organizations, including Translators Without
> > Borders and the World Health Organization, to improve Wikimedia’s
> coverage
> > of medical content. James previously served on the Board of Trustees from
> > July to December 2015.
> >
> > Christophe Henner has been a leader within the Wikimedia community for
> more
> > than 12 years. Prior to joining the Foundation Board in 2016, he served
> as
> > Board Chair of Wikimedia France, and had been a member of the chapter’s
> > Board since 2007. During this time, he spent nearly three years in Vice
> > Chair and Chair positions. Christophe is currently the Chief Operating
> > Officer (COO) of the Blade Group, a cloud computing company headquartered
> > in France. At Blade, Christophe is scaling up operations to support the
> > company's transition from a start-up to a global company.
> > ___
> > 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
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-08 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources.

JP

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017, 05:20 John Erling Blad,  wrote:

> Policy should not have local variations, unless you want to create
> something different from Wikipedia. This is about core content policies.
> Those are no original research, verifiability, and neutral point of view.
> The one most don't follow is neutral point of view, where projects rewrite
> world history to focus on their own local view.
>
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 2:20 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
>
> > its the cultural differences that influence the policy, so who's culture
> is
> > more significant than everyone elses that will dictate the policies.
> >
> > On 8 August 2017 at 08:14, John Erling Blad  wrote:
> >
> > > Yes there are cultural differences between wikipedias on _content_, but
> > > there should be no differences on _policy_ about that content.
> > > Note also that there are some differences on use of _facts_ that are
> > highly
> > > troublesome, and that comes from relaxed core policies.
> > > Armenian genocide for example.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> > >
> > > > to quote, worth a read before even considering policies being global
> > > > http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23901/abstract
> > > >
> > > > This article explores the relationship between linguistic culture and
> > the
> > > > > preferred standards of presenting information based on article
> > > > > representation in major Wikipedias. Using primary research analysis
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > number of images, references, internal links, external links,
> words,
> > > and
> > > > > characters, as well as their proportions in Good and Featured
> > articles
> > > on
> > > > > the eight largest Wikipedias, we discover a high diversity of
> > > approaches
> > > > > and format preferences, correlating with culture. We demonstrate
> that
> > > > > high-quality standards in information presentation are not globally
> > > > shared
> > > > > and that in many aspects, the language culture's influence
> determines
> > > > what
> > > > > is perceived to be proper, desirable, and exemplary for
> encyclopedic
> > > > > entries. As a result, we demonstrate that standards for
> encyclopedic
> > > > > knowledge are not globally agreed-upon and “objective” but local
> and
> > > very
> > > > > subjective.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 4 August 2017 at 10:18, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The number of pillars depends on the language version...
> > > > > And whether some rules is called pilöar not dpes not seem to be pf
> > much
> > > > > importance
> > > > > Ziko
> > > > >
> > > > > John Erling Blad  schrieb am Do. 3. Aug. 2017 um
> > > > 14:42:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Five pillars are moot.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Gnangarra 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > The moment you have a centralised policy you take away the
> > ability
> > > to
> > > > > > > discuss, makes decisions, and achieve consensus from the
> > community
> > > > that
> > > > > > > create the projects. Importantly you create the opportunity for
> > > > banned
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > blocked editors to decide what happens in a community.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > By having a base set of simple policies in the Incubator that
> are
> > > > > > > atuomatically created when a project starts up you give them
> the
> > > best
> > > > > > guide
> > > > > > > to establishing themselves well before that project goes live,
> > > ince a
> > > > > > > project is live it has to be allowed to develop its community.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We already have the 5 pillars which are the basis for the
> > projects,
> > > > but
> > > > > > > meta is not a place that the content creating community spends
> a
> > > lot
> > > > of
> > > > > > > time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 3 August 2017 at 19:07, John Erling Blad 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Having centralized core policies would lessen the maintenance
> > and
> > > > > > > process,
> > > > > > > > not increase them.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Strainu <
> strain...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The core policies should be the ones pushed by board
> > > resolution,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > those should be the absolute minimum required to keep the
> > > > projects
> > > > > > > > > safe from a legal POV. Period. Otherwise, people with
> little
> > > > > > > > > understanding of small Wikipedias will try to push stuff
> from
> > > > > en.wp.
> > > > > > > > > Just recently someone was trying to have an RFC on meta on
> > all
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > different processes that en.wp has and ro.wp does not have,
> > > with
> > > > > > > > > little consideration on whether the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-07 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Can we access this article with no pay wall anywhere?

JP

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 9:49 AM Gnangarra  wrote:

> to quote, worth a read before even considering policies being global
> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23901/abstract
>
> This article explores the relationship between linguistic culture and the
> > preferred standards of presenting information based on article
> > representation in major Wikipedias. Using primary research analysis of
> the
> > number of images, references, internal links, external links, words, and
> > characters, as well as their proportions in Good and Featured articles on
> > the eight largest Wikipedias, we discover a high diversity of approaches
> > and format preferences, correlating with culture. We demonstrate that
> > high-quality standards in information presentation are not globally
> shared
> > and that in many aspects, the language culture's influence determines
> what
> > is perceived to be proper, desirable, and exemplary for encyclopedic
> > entries. As a result, we demonstrate that standards for encyclopedic
> > knowledge are not globally agreed-upon and “objective” but local and very
> > subjective.
> >
>
> On 4 August 2017 at 10:18, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
>
> > The number of pillars depends on the language version...
> > And whether some rules is called pilöar not dpes not seem to be pf much
> > importance
> > Ziko
> >
> > John Erling Blad  schrieb am Do. 3. Aug. 2017 um
> 14:42:
> >
> > > Five pillars are moot.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> > >
> > > > The moment you have a centralised policy you take away the ability to
> > > > discuss, makes decisions, and achieve consensus from the community
> that
> > > > create the projects. Importantly you create the opportunity for
> banned
> > > and
> > > > blocked editors to decide what happens in a community.
> > > >
> > > > By having a base set of simple policies in the Incubator that are
> > > > atuomatically created when a project starts up you give them the best
> > > guide
> > > > to establishing themselves well before that project goes live, ince a
> > > > project is live it has to be allowed to develop its community.
> > > >
> > > > We already have the 5 pillars which are the basis for the projects,
> but
> > > > meta is not a place that the content creating community spends a lot
> of
> > > > time.
> > > >
> > > > On 3 August 2017 at 19:07, John Erling Blad 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Having centralized core policies would lessen the maintenance and
> > > > process,
> > > > > not increase them.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Strainu 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > The core policies should be the ones pushed by board resolution,
> > and
> > > > > > those should be the absolute minimum required to keep the
> projects
> > > > > > safe from a legal POV. Period. Otherwise, people with little
> > > > > > understanding of small Wikipedias will try to push stuff from
> > en.wp.
> > > > > > Just recently someone was trying to have an RFC on meta on all
> the
> > > > > > different processes that en.wp has and ro.wp does not have, with
> > > > > > little consideration on whether the manpower to implement, let
> > alone
> > > > > > maintain, these processes exists. No thank you to rule pushing
> > > without
> > > > > > local context.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Having a community take a rule from en.wp is different, just as
> > long
> > > > > > as some kind of discussion happens within the community about it.
> > > Even
> > > > > > if the rule is really useless or harmful and the community did
> not
> > > > > > realize that in the beginning, at least it can evolve differently
> > > from
> > > > > > the English one. Have a centralized repository and trying to
> change
> > > > > > the rules there by consensus would be much more difficult for
> small
> > > > > > communities.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Strainu
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2017-08-02 17:05 GMT+03:00 John Erling Blad :
> > > > > > > Nearly all Wikipedia projects has virtually the same core
> content
> > > > > > policies,
> > > > > > > but with slightly different wording. Nearly all, because a lot
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > > smaller lacks them, and a lot has outdated or only partial
> > > policies.
> > > > It
> > > > > > > takes a lot of time to actually make them and keep them
> updated.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Creating and maintaining the core content policies should not
> be
> > > > > > something
> > > > > > > that small projects should invest a lot of time in, they should
> > > > simply
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > able to point to existing policies on Meta. The central
> policies
> > > > should
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > localized if necessary.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Checking Meta I find
> > > > > > > - 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-02 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
I oppose to that. Like that communities with bigger number, i.e. English,
will impose their rules to other communities. It's a basic fundamental
principle of Wikimedia projects since the beginning that every community is
independant,

JP

On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 6:19 PM John Erling Blad  wrote:

> I wonder if deviation away from a central core policy should be banned.
> That view is probably not very popular.
>
> Jeblad
>
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:
>
> > its nice idea most just usurp the english policies to start with anyway
> > when they need it so having a base line on meta would be good though
> > probably it would best to have it set up automatically in the incubator
> > stage so that they get moved across when the projects takes the big leap
> > forward and the community that develops the project can develop these
> > policies as they grow.   It also means that as part of the jump these
> pages
> > will need to have been translated as well.
> >
> > note I'm currently involved with a wikipedia in the the incubator
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2 August 2017 at 22:29, Tito Dutta  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > Some works and study was done for Indic Wikimedia projects (there are
> 24
> > > communities) after a detailed consultation and needs-assessment, please
> > > see:
> > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Indic_Wikipedia_
> > > Policies_and_Guidelines_Handbook.pdf
> > > There are three types of issues:
> > > a) Localizing policies (translating is not the only way, but localizing
> > > keeping a project in mind)
> > > b) Enforce them
> > > c) For smaller communities having a group of editors working on these
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Tito Dutta
> > > Note: If I don't reply to your email in 2 days, please feel free to
> > remind
> > > me over email or phone call.
> > >
> > > On 2 August 2017 at 19:35, John Erling Blad  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Nearly all Wikipedia projects has virtually the same core content
> > > policies,
> > > > but with slightly different wording. Nearly all, because a lot of the
> > > > smaller lacks them, and a lot has outdated or only partial policies.
> It
> > > > takes a lot of time to actually make them and keep them updated.
> > > >
> > > > Creating and maintaining the core content policies should not be
> > > something
> > > > that small projects should invest a lot of time in, they should
> simply
> > be
> > > > able to point to existing policies on Meta. The central policies
> should
> > > be
> > > > localized if necessary.
> > > >
> > > > Checking Meta I find
> > > > - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_no_original_research_policy
> > > > - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_view
> > > >
> > > > I can't find anything like "Verifiability".
> > > >
> > > > Would it be possible for Wikimedia Foundation to make some sound
> > baseline
> > > > policies, and with the option for local projects to refine those?
> > Perhaps
> > > > with assistance from editors on Wikipedia?
> > > >
> > > > Lets try to make the policies accurate, without "no original
> research"
> > > > diverging into verifiability of external sources. It should be about
> > > > original research in content on Wikipedia. Likewise, at some projects
> > > > neutral point of view has become "do not diverge from creators point
> of
> > > > view"…
> > > >
> > > > Would this be possible? It would be really nice if those baseline
> > > policies
> > > > pages could be copied to the individual projects like central user
> > pages,
> > > > so they would be "internal" to the projects. Thus the projects would
> > have
> > > > more "ownership" of them.
> > > >
> > > > The same thing apply to other meta projects (Wikipedia, Wikibooks,
> > > > Wiktionary, etc).
> > > >
> > > > Jeblad
> > > > ___
> > > > 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,
> > > 
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > GN.
> > President Wikimedia Australia
> > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyfraud by the British Museum

2017-08-01 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Exact replica should not be copyrighted in my opinion since they are not a
"creation of the mind". That being said, the changes made by the one doing
the replica can be copyrighted.

In this case of the museum, I think the person(s) doing the restoration did
a "creation of the mind" since they rebuild it without having an exact
model to copy.

JP

On Tue, Aug 1, 2017, 02:36 Yaroslav Blanter, <ymb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Actually, on Commons I had photographs deleted on the ground that the
> depicted building is a replica of an old building which went out of
> copyright, but the replica is copyrighted (despite my objection). When I
> myself nominated a photograph on the same grounds, it was kept. I do not
> particularly care which one is correct, but it would be great to have
> consistent practice.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Gordon Joly <gordon.j...@pobox.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 31/07/17 00:06, Jean-Philippe Béland wrote:
> > >  The restoration work is indeed an extensive work, but is it a
> "creation
> > of
> > > the mind", which is necessary for copyright?
> > >
> > > JP
> >
> >
> > The Cutty Sark was almost destroyed by fire, and was rebuilt. I would
> > say it a visitor attraction (of very high quality) that it is a
> > facsimile of the craft that sailed the oceans. I have visited both
> > before and after the fire (and rebuilding). Some timbers would also have
> > replaced before the fire and also planned replacement during the 2007
> > conservation closure period when the fire took place.
> >
> > Sir Arthur Evans also rebuilt an artifact, Knossos, and he used
> > concrete, which was not around in the era 1380–1100 BCE.
> >
> > Has something has been "created" by a mind? I would say yes, to both. In
> > the case of the Cutty Sark, the ship was placed in a new "dry dock" so
> > that visitors can view the hull (for example).
> >
> > Gordo
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyfraud by the British Museum

2017-07-30 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
 The restoration work is indeed an extensive work, but is it a "creation of
the mind", which is necessary for copyright?

JP


On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 2:23 PM Gordon Joly  wrote:

> On 29/07/17 02:12, geni wrote:
> > Your mistake is in assuming the only work here is from the 2000 year
> > old sculptor and bronze worker.
>
>
> Cf. The Cutty Sark and Knosos?
>
> Gordo
>
>
> ___
> 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] [Wikimediauk-l] Copyfraud by the British Museum

2017-07-28 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Ok sorry, I could only read the text of the email, I can't open the images
from here right now, my bad.

JP


On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
wrote:

> On 28 July 2017 at 13:28, Jean-Philippe Béland <jpbel...@wikimedia.ca>
> wrote:
>
> > Maybe I misunderstand what you wrote, but from what I read they do not
> > claim copyright over the objects. They only tell you "do not take
> pictures
> > of it". Even if an object is in the public domain, the actual physical
> > object is still their property and they can do whatever they want with
> it,
> > it does not have to be displayed and they don't have to allow photographs
> > of it even if it is exposed. However, if such photographs str taken, they
> > cannot restrict their distribution. This is not a case of "copyfraud"
> from
> > that point of view.
>
> If you view the images to which Fae linked, the objects are clearly
> labelled "protected by copyright". This has no basis in UK law.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 

Jean-Philippe Béland

[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national
soutenant Wikipédia
Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter
supporting Wikipedia
535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L 2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimediauk-l] Copyfraud by the British Museum

2017-07-28 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Exposed = exhibited. My French is taking over.

JP


On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
> wrote:

> Maybe I misunderstand what you wrote, but from what I read they do not
> claim copyright over the objects. They only tell you "do not take pictures
> of it". Even if an object is in the public domain, the actual physical
> object is still their property and they can do whatever they want with it,
> it does not have to be displayed and they don't have to allow photographs
> of it even if it is exposed. However, if such photographs str taken, they
> cannot restrict their distribution. This is not a case of "copyfraud" from
> that point of view.
>
> JP
>
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> "On 28 July 2017 at 13:02, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > The Tullie House Museum in Carlisle has a number of objects on loan
>> > from the British Museum,[3] 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 copyfraud, and not for any reason that
>> > might protect the works from damage.[1][2] It seems incomprehensible
>> > as to why the British Museum would ever want to make copyright claims
>> > over ~2,000 year old works especially considering they are not a
>> > money-making commercial enterprise, but a National institute and
>> > charity, with a stated objective[4] that "the collection should be put
>> > to public use and be freely accessible".
>>
>> That on of the most egregious cases I've ever seen.
>>
>> I note that the exhibition, according to the web page (your link [3]), is:
>>
>> "Funded by The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), Northwest
>> Regional Development Agency (NWDA), Renaissance Northwest and Carlisle
>> City Council."
>>
>> I wonder whether they're aware of these false claims? I should imagine
>> Julia Reda would be interested, given that EU money is involved.
>>
>> --
>> Andy Mabbett
>> @pigsonthewing
>> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Jean-Philippe Béland
>
> [image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
> <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national
> soutenant Wikipédia
> Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
> <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter
> supporting Wikipedia
> 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L 2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
>



-- 

Jean-Philippe Béland

[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national
soutenant Wikipédia
Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter
supporting Wikipedia
535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L 2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimediauk-l] Copyfraud by the British Museum

2017-07-28 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Maybe I misunderstand what you wrote, but from what I read they do not
claim copyright over the objects. They only tell you "do not take pictures
of it". Even if an object is in the public domain, the actual physical
object is still their property and they can do whatever they want with it,
it does not have to be displayed and they don't have to allow photographs
of it even if it is exposed. However, if such photographs str taken, they
cannot restrict their distribution. This is not a case of "copyfraud" from
that point of view.

JP

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
wrote:

> "On 28 July 2017 at 13:02, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The Tullie House Museum in Carlisle has a number of objects on loan
> > from the British Museum,[3] 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 copyfraud, and not for any reason that
> > might protect the works from damage.[1][2] It seems incomprehensible
> > as to why the British Museum would ever want to make copyright claims
> > over ~2,000 year old works especially considering they are not a
> > money-making commercial enterprise, but a National institute and
> > charity, with a stated objective[4] that "the collection should be put
> > to public use and be freely accessible".
>
> That on of the most egregious cases I've ever seen.
>
> I note that the exhibition, according to the web page (your link [3]), is:
>
> "Funded by The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), Northwest
> Regional Development Agency (NWDA), Renaissance Northwest and Carlisle
> City Council."
>
> I wonder whether they're aware of these false claims? I should imagine
> Julia Reda would be interested, given that EU money is involved.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 

Jean-Philippe Béland

[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national
soutenant Wikipédia
Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter
supporting Wikipedia
535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L 2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] James Heilman joins the Board Governance Committee as a volunteer and advisory member

2017-06-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
James,

That's great! Thank you very much for your involvement.

Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
Lead Organizer, Wiki Loves Earth 2017 in Canada
User:Amqui


On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 1:41 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonf...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> James
>
> Do you have a position or preliminary views you would like to share with
> the community about Board Governance?  Is there anything specific you will
> be seeking to look into, or change, or start, or stop.  Are there areas for
> improvement or is everything fine?  In particular, do you think that
> Board-Community relations need any attention from the Governance Committee?
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 3:58 AM, Anna Stillwell <astillw...@wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you so much, James. I'm so glad you are here.
> > /a
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you, Nataliia and James.
> > >
> > > This appointment continues a trend of decisions and steps from the BGC
> > > since Nataliia took the committee chair role that I think are good.
> > >
> > > Pine
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 

Jean-Philippe Béland

[image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre national
soutenant Wikipédia
Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
<https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national chapter
supporting Wikipedia
535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L 2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposed projects

2017-05-16 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
I see that Wikilang had more "interested participants" than those that you
are linking and it was purely rejected, what do you mean by majority
support?

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiLang

Thanks,

JP

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 4:58 PM Milos Rancic  wrote:

> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:29 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
> > Wikigames is not educational so not within scope.
>
> There are many educational games in the wild. They could also make us
> less boring.
>
> --
> Milos
>
> ___
> 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,