[Wikimedia-l] Re: The new Signpost is out!

2022-10-04 Thread Peter Southwood
+1

There will always be mails that some people will not be interested in. Often 
most of them. This does not mean that they are not relevant to the list. We can 
delete them without reading them if they are not relevant to us.

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Nathan [mailto:nawr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 03 October 2022 21:27
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: The new Signpost is out!

 

Gerard, 

 

It's a widely shared mailing list. Its members have a wide range of interests. 
As some have expressed, that includes an interest in the Signpost. Many posts 
on many topics posted to this list may not be relevant for you or other 
subscribers. That's the nature of a shared, public resource. Simply skip over 
the Signpost messages in your inbox. 

 

~Nate

 

On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 3:09 PM Gerard Meijssen  
wrote:

Hoi,

Be realistic. A newsletter across the Wikimedia Movement would promote existing 
newsletter that mostly in a language people do not understand. 

 

It does not change my point that I do not want to read promotions for a product 
that is not representative while it assumes that it does reflect a relevant 
opinion. An opinion that is mostly negative in its aspirations.

Thanks,

   GerardM

 

 


 

  width=

Virus-free. 

 www.avg.com

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/KW26U2TW5BLANFDRH5JQIV65F6ZBJ65I/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: The new Signpost is out!

2022-10-04 Thread Peter Southwood
Not sure how that would work.

P

 

From: Gregory Varnum [mailto:gregory.var...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 03 October 2022 22:30
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: The new Signpost is out!

 

The Meta-Wiki based tech newsletter is available in a fair number of languages. 
Perhaps a Meta based truly cross-project newsletter could utilize Meta-Wiki?s 
translation setup to avoid an English-only usage?

-greg

 

___

Sent from my iPhone - a more detailed response may be sent later.





On Oct 3, 2022, at 9:09 PM, Gerard Meijssen  wrote:

?

Hoi,

Be realistic. A newsletter across the Wikimedia Movement would promote existing 
newsletter that mostly in a language people do not understand. 

 

It does not change my point that I do not want to read promotions for a product 
that is not representative while it assumes that it does reflect a relevant 
opinion. An opinion that is mostly negative in its aspirations.

Thanks,

   GerardM

 

On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 at 20:28, Rexogamer  wrote:

It might be worth creating a unified "Newsletters across the Wikimedia 
movement" email, consisting of the Signpost and any other 
newsletters/publications produced/released by community members that month - 
are there any other "newspapers"/publications created by Wikimedia communities 
and released on a regular basis?

 

- Sophie (User:Remagoxer)

 

On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 at 19:2 3, Risker  wrote:

Hi Gerard (and everyone else) - 

 

I join with others in saying that links to other newsletters published on our 
various projects, and in various languages, would be a really valuable addition 
to this list.  Many of us would really like to learn about what different 
projects consider to be important. I'd really like to encourage that other 
newsletter links be posted on this list.  

 

Risker/Anne  

 

On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 at 07:31, Gerard Meijssen  wrote:

Hoi,

The problem with the arguments made in the Signpost is that they represent 
English Wikipedia and adhere to what some consider what the pov of Wikipedia 
should be. As a pov it is fine but I do consider it not a publication that is 
representative. As such I do not need the advertisements for its publication.

Thanks,

  

 

On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 at 06:50, WereSpielChequers  
wrote:

While the Signpost is hosted on the English Wikipedia and started as very much 
an EN Wiki venture, it aspires to be of more general interest. Looking at that 
specific issue, yes there is much that is mainly English Wikipedia focused, 
including a small contribution of mine. But some of the content, such as about 
the WMF elections is of general community interest, and at least one story is 
about Wikimedia Commons rather than Wikipedia.

 

WSC 

 




Message: 2
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2022 16:35:35 +0200
From: Gerard Meijssen 
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: The new Signpost is out!
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Message-ID:

Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="c55e2e05e9fa0636"

Hoi,
De Signpost is een publicatie van de Engelse Wikipedia. Waarom wordt de
Wikimedia mailing list daarmee lastig gevallen?
Vriendelijke groet,
   GerardM

On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 at 14:26, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

 

Name: not available


End of Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 613, Issue 1
***

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/EW26JDC3PO2J4TO4K7VODOJ7R4CI75JR/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WGGKF3VFLEDRBQHLNHXZOA4L6ZLNJ6JK/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/OEAR5Y24T2FMU6Y4BUUHVSDPHGIFMTVP/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Leadership Development Working Group is ready for community feedback!

2022-09-17 Thread Peter Southwood
I, too, would appreciate such enlightenment, Cheers, Peter

 

From: Andreas Kolbe [mailto:jayen...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 16 September 2022 20:48
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Leadership Development Working Group is ready for 
community feedback!

 

Dear Ivan,

 

I am very sorry, but I honestly don't understand what any of this is for, and 
why the WMF is spending money on defining leadership – money collected under 
the pretence that money is urgently needed to keep Wikipedia online – given 
that community feedback to this initiative to date seems to be largely negative.

 

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Leadership_Development_Working_Group

 

It is not like the world lacks definitions of leadership. Aren't we spending 
donors' money to reinvent the wheel here?

 

Could I refer back to an interesting thread Samuel Klein started a while back, 
titled "Simplifying governance processes"? 

 

https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/thread/7UVDBQTEWTR3ZNYLEP5TWAOVHF372OEL/#YRALVPPHAWMMATDUSUTZVBHG2CXOKAU6

 

To me, at least, what Samuel and others said in that thread seemed to be 
pertinent to initiatives like this one. Samuel started by saying, 

 

"Dear Board (and all), The growing complexity of governance efforts is 
defeating us. Process creep is an existential threat for projects like ours – 
it is self-perpetuating if not actively curtailed, as it filters out people who 
dislike excess process. There's a reason 'bureaucrats' and 'stewards' have 
unglamorous titles. Global governance in particular seems to be suffering from 
this now. Let's try to scale it back!"

 

He received no reply from the WMF, at least not here on this list where he 
posted. 

 

It seems to me we are spending a great deal of money to produce words – but not 
words in Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikisource etc., that the public enjoys and 
finds valuable, but words on Meta talking about ourselves in the best 
navel-gazing tradition.

 

Now, maybe I have this all back to front and am simply clueless ... so if 
someone feels like enlightening me, please do!

 

Best,

Andreas 

 

On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 4:33 PM Ivan Martínez  wrote:

TL;DR: The draft leadership definition[1] prepared by the Leadership 
Development Working Group is ready for community feedback! Please share your 
feedback on Meta[2], the feedback form[3] or the Movement Strategy Forum[4]. 
You can also directly mail us at  leadershipworkinggr...@wikimedia.org. The 
feedback will be collected till October 6, 2022.  

 

Hello everyone!

 

I hope you are aware that the Leadership Development Working Group[5] has been 
working over the past few months to formulate and find ways to nurture the 
leadership of our movement. The Leadership Development Working Group (LDWG) is 
a group of Wikimedia volunteers representing different communities, languages, 
roles, and experiences. We are pleased to inform the community that our draft 
definition of leadership is now available for community feedback. This first 
draft definition of leadership was written after months of discussion, 
learning, and sharing from our community perspective. The Wikimedia Movement, 
which is by nature diverse and distinctive in its own way, is expressly 
addressed by this definition.

 

Please consider going through the definition and letting us know what you think 
by October 6, 2022. The draft definition includes a general definition of 
leadership and subcategories that elaborate on the actions, qualities, and 
outcomes of good leadership. 

 

There are many places where you can express your ideas, suggestions, and 
comments, such as the meta talk page[2], the feedback form[3], and Movement 
Strategy Forum Post[4]. You can also directly mail us at  
 
leadershipworkinggr...@wikimedia.org. 

 

You can check if the general definition, and the subcategories align with your 
idea of leadership in the movement. You can also try finding the gaps, maybe 
some qualities of a leader or anything else are missing in the draft definition 
or you can check if the definition applies to all cultural, linguistic, 
community or other contexts of the movement and share your thoughts with us.

 

Together, let's celebrate the movement's diverse and distinctive leadership! 

 

Cheers!

 

[1]  
 
Link to the draft definition on meta 

[2]  
 
Link to meta talk page 

[3]   Link to the feedback form

[4] 

  Link to the Movement Strategy Forum post 

[5]   
Link to the meta page of LDWG


 

-- 

Iván Martínez
Voluntario - Wikimedia México A.C.
User:ProtoplasmaKid 


[Wikimedia-l] Re: Is GoogleTV violating Wikipedia's license?

2022-08-31 Thread Peter Southwood
Agree that they could shake the tree a bit. I hope you will encourage them
to do that if you make it to the board. Cheers, Peter

-Original Message-
From: Andy Mabbett [mailto:a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk] 
Sent: 30 August 2022 14:39
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: F. Xavier Dengra i Grau
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Is GoogleTV violating Wikipedia's license?

On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 at 10:18, Peter Southwood
 wrote:

> If I understand the CC-by-sa licence correctly, Wikipedia and WMF
themselves do not
> own the copyright, it is owned by the contributors who created the text.
They can take
> this up with Google,

All of the above is true.

> the WMF cannot

That is not true. The WMF cannot sue Google as a copyright holder.
However, there is nothing stopping WM from raising the issue with
Google, and gently reminding them of their obligations. Indeed, that
would probably be more effective than individual editors doing so.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
https://pigsonthewing.org.uk
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
message/LZVQOHEGOFOAVKGLI52HYJ5245YVQXBY/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/FZDQVUGHATAFYYQB5H3LP4QBYAYOWHKL/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org


[Wikimedia-l] Re: Is GoogleTV violating Wikipedia's license?

2022-08-30 Thread Peter Southwood
If I understand the CC-by-sa licence correctly, Wikipedia and WMF themselves do 
not own the copyright, it is owned by the contributors who created the text. 
They can take this up with Google, the WMF cannot. If you are one of those 
contributors you can approach Google as misusing your copyright.

Cheers,  Peter

 

From: F. Xavier Dengra i Grau via Wikimedia-l 
[mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 29 August 2022 19:00
To: Wikimedia Mailing List; le...@wikimedia.org
Cc: F. Xavier Dengra i Grau
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Is GoogleTV violating Wikipedia's license?

 

Hi all,

 

I want to bring a legal concern here on Google's misuse of our content. It came 
up today 

  on Twitter that the GoogleTV app had linked a movie description text in 
Catalan language (which in principle it should be good news regarding language 
normalization). However, shortly after a wikipedian colleague realised that the 
text was fully taken by the Catalan Wikipedia. Once I downloaded the app by 
myself, I double-checked that Google does not specify anywhere (or at least 
that I could find minimally visible) that those lines belong to Wikipedia: 
neither the origin, the license, nor a link to the full article or to the CC 
license.

 

I'd like to recall the licensing footpage on Wikipedia (Text is available under 
the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 3.0 

 ) and its conditions, as well as to ask others to check whether there's more 
situations like this one. It's worth noting how wrong this is to minoritised 
language Wikipedias: not only the legal issue itself, but also the lack of 
legitimate clicks and views that we end up losing, the confusion and 
misunderstandings from the readers that think this is a win by Google (the 
example I shared, with both screenshots enclosed), and even a subsequent 
chicken-and-egg situation that can lead to deleted articles by some users 
thinking that the content was stolen from Google and not actually the opposite.

 

I remember that there was a previous thread here, not so long ago, about the 
problems of Google taking over our data and therefore diminishing clicks to the 
Wikimedia projects. Considering that I am fully against the GAFAM-drift that 
the WMF is increasingly adopting by benefiting from Google in our human, 
economical and digital structures, I prefer to share it here as well -and not 
only to the legal team of the WMF (cced). 

 

Kind regards,

 

Xavier Dengra

 

 

 


 

  width=

Virus-free. 

 www.avg.com

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/PB7W2FI5L6AAWYDI37VTWD6UGUNYTFWN/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Small joy of the day: Txikipedia

2022-06-24 Thread Peter Southwood
I took a look at Vikidia, thought I could do something for them, signed up with 
an account, read what I could find of the guidance, and created an article on 
Underwater diving, following the rules as I understood them, using properly 
attributed CC-by-sa content from Simple English Wikipedia as a basic framework, 
and was busy expanding it when it was deleted without discussion by user 
Ajeje_Brazorf with the edit summary (Please don't copy from simple wikipedia}, 
and no explanation why not. If I had done that on English Wikipedia I would 
risk losing my admin bit. If that is how new users are routinely treated there 
that encyclopedia is doomed. I will not be back to waste my time there. Cheers, 
Peter

 

From: Mathias Damour [mailto:mathias.dam...@gmx.fr] 
Sent: 24 June 2022 00:00
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Small joy of the day: Txikipedia

 

Ok, I did read your message too fast... I nevertheless know Simple English 
Wikipedia.

 

I think that SEWP was created like it is, partly by fear of creating a project 
openly directed to children, and I'm afraid it precisely make it not so 
compelling for them.

 

> The thing is, as the main English Wikipedia more specialist, and therefore 
> more complicated, we have a Simple English Wikipedia that we shouldn’t let 
> languish in the hopes of creating a children's encyclopedia out of whole 
> cloth.

 

Actually, Vikidia in english does exist, with 4,035 articles !

https://en.vikidia.org

Unfortunately, the developpment of the wikis for children is very uneven, and 
it seems hard to overcome the delay when they were launched later one than 
another or missed their launch. For exemple I know about two or three unlucky 
attempts in german before Klexikon* (and I beleive German had or has a very 
good potential for such a project - demography and cultural ground favourable 
to children participation and their freedom of information). Yet it was in 
Dutch that Wikikids was launched early and is now quite big and active.

 

They may be a way to promote a existing (or to be launched) wiki encyclopedia 
for children, to "use the momentum of Wikipedia to make it easier to discover" 
as just said Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga, but somewhat different from the way 
they chooses on the Basque Wikipedia : That would be to let appear the kid 
equivalent article in the "In other projects" section.

 

Or maybe a very active work both in promotion and gathering a substantial set 
of core articles (picking the best/most usefull, most viewed articles from 
several kids wikis and Simple English Wikipedia, translating...)

 

**

*- the original "Wikikids" proposal as a Wikimedia project was made by german 
speaking wikipedians in early 2005 : 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2005-January/015108.html 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikikids=89757 but was 
chilled down by the reactions on this list...

- Grundschulwiki was launched in december 2005, it still exists but is 
restricted to works done in primary classroom and therefore is not much 
developped : 
https://grundschulwiki.zum.de/index.php?title=Hauptseite=prev=history

- a 2010 project ended as they were told to request a Simple German Wikipedia 
and then denied to open it: 
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redaktion_Medizin/Projekt_Kinderleicht 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Simple_German_3

Meanwhile Wikikids.nl was launched in March 2006 and Vikidia in French in 
November 2006.

 

  

Envoyé: jeudi 23 juin 2022 à 21:15
De: "Neurodivergent Netizen" 
À: "Wikimedia Mailing List" 
Objet: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Small joy of the day: Txikipedia

The English Wikipedia has a “plain language” wikipedia, the Simple English 
Wikipedia. It’s targeted not only towards children, but also towards people who 
aren’t fluent in English and/or have learning disabilities. A few “internet 
hack” memes say “If you can’t understand the Wikipedia article, change en to 
simple!” Basically, the English Wikipedia community has two very 
general-to-slightly-specialist encyclopedias.

 

Unfortunately, I’ve witnessed in years past that the Simple English Wikipedias’ 
activity level was, shall we say, wanting. I hope that’s changed; I suspect 
kids would enjoy learning to research for the purpose of writing on Simple 
before moving on to the so-called “real” English Wikipedia, but that might 
require some assistance that might not always exist offline. I think Simple 
would certainly be a good place to start making Wikipedia more accessible to 
8-10 year olds.

  

From,

I dream of horses

She/her

 


 

  

On Jun 23, 2022, at 11:40 AM, Mathias Damour  wrote:

  

Hi,
  

 De: "WereSpielChequers" 

A childrens' encyclopaedia written for nine year olds would surely be very 
different than one written for thirteen year olds. And content that parents of 
fourteen year olds thought was age inappropriate in Alabama might be 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Small joy of the day: Txikipedia

2022-06-24 Thread Peter Southwood
Yes, I find it more difficult to write for Simple English, because it
(Simple English) is not my first language and I do not think in it, and the
words I would normally use for the topics I prefer are not invented there
and have to be worked around, so it is translation a lot of the time. There
is no major obstacle other than money and contributors to creating a simple
version encyclopaedia in any other language  in a non WMF environment. 

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga [mailto:galder...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: 24 June 2022 09:59
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Small joy of the day: Txikipedia

 

Just a reminder that Simple English Wikipedia exists, but there are no
Simple _ Wikipedia versions and there won't be. So that may be a
solution for English (it is not, as writing in Simple Wikipedia is way more
complex than doing at the regular one, because you must change the language)
but not for the other languages. There's where especial places for children
may work.

 

Have a good day,

Galder

  _  

From: Neurodivergent Netizen 
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 6:13 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Small joy of the day: Txikipedia 

 

I don't disagree with trying to make language more understandable in
general, though.

 

Right, but like I’m saying, we have the Simple Wikipedia already. 

 

From,

I dream of horses

She/her

 

 

 





On Jun 23, 2022, at 8:57 PM, Clover Moss 
wrote:

 

I don't disagree with trying to make language more understandable in
general, though. If there was a children's version, it might be useful for
things like math articles. I remember looking up stuff like the quadratic
formula when I was in high school, seeing way more advanced mathematics than
I was used to and just giving up that Wikipedia could be a useful resource
for that. Obviously Wikipedia isn't the end-all be-all for everything and it
shouldn't be (obviously it wasn't meant to help me with homework either),
but I do agree with the general principle expressed that WereSpielChequers
that Wikipedia should be written for a general audience and that's what
considered inappropriate is variable depending on your life circumstances. 

 

On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 9:57 AM WereSpielChequers
 wrote:

Hi,

 

I'm curious as to what level of reading skill you are writing this for and
also what level of understanding/adulthood. 

 

I see these as two different issues and both are likely to vary sharply
especially between different countries with very different education
systems. 

 

A childrens' encyclopaedia written for nine year olds would surely be very
different than one written for thirteen year olds. And content that parents
of fourteen year olds thought was age inappropriate in Alabama might be
thought appropriate or even bowdlerised by parents of ten year olds in
London.

 

In other words, are you sure that one single childrens' encyclopaedia is the
answer to either the problem of reading age or age appropriate content?

 

Where I think that Wikipedia could and should change re this is in our use
of jargon. To my mind a "general interest" english language encyclopaedia
should be written in plain English. I suspect other language versions have
similar issues.  Perhaps if we focussed more on this we would make it easier
for those who wish to create childrens' versions.

 

Regards

 

WSC

 

On Thu, 23 Jun 2022 at 13:03, 
wrote:

Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit
 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/wikimedia-l.lists.wikimedia.org/

You can reach the person managing the list at
wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Small joyy: Txikipedia  of the da(Neurodivergent Netizen)



--

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 17:13:33 -0700
From: Neurodivergent Netizen 
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Small joy of the day: Txikipedia
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Message-ID: <8c62ada1-09ee-46ff-b27d-389b6bb3e...@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Apple-Mail=_9EEB7F4B-E2E5-42FB-AED5-C7C07107CEF2"

>> That wouldn't be a wise choice that WMF host such a wiki if it brings the
risk of being legaly attacked on that ground, even for bad reasons and
unsuccessfully, whereas it never happened to Vikidia in 15 years (and very
few kind of bad buzz like "look what they teach to the children").

And of course, any WMF-affiliated wiki would be more at-risk simply because
of the association with the more well-known Wikipedia.

> The document is not really public yet. :-)

I think I can wait until it’s public and proofread. :-)

From,
I dream of horses
She/her





> On Jun 22, 2022, at 1:45 PM, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> At 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Research Showcase June 15

2022-06-09 Thread Peter Southwood
Hi Yaroslav, 

That is what I would guess too, I was wondering if anyone had gone to the 
trouble of analysing the situation more rigorously. It seems that it might be 
less easy to get useful and reliable data on what sources are available, and 
particularly those not available, by language, which would be quite a strong 
constraint on coverage. For example, one on the biggest historical constraints 
on coverage of women in science is lack of sources, so no matter how much we 
might want to improve coverage it is just more difficult to do it, this problem 
even applies to men in some lower profile fields. and we have not yet plucked 
all the low hanging fruit, even on English Wikipedia. Sometimes it looks like 
the research also mainly goes for the low hanging fruit. After all, why 
wouldn’t they?

There is also the matter of free access vs paywalled and paper only which can 
be quite difficult if you are nowhere near a suitable library, which also puts 
Europe and North America ahead in the game. What numbers of Wikipedians would 
have access to any given source, by language and geographical distribution, 
would also be an interesting topic for analysis. All these things ae barriers 
to contribution in some fields.

Cheers, 

Peter

 

From: Yaroslav Blanter [mailto:ymb...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 09 June 2022 09:05
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Research Showcase June 15

 

Hi Peter,

 

from my (admittedly from more than ten years ago) experience with the Russian 
Wikipedia, articles are often translated from other language Wikipedias, with 
references just taken over and not being independently checked (perhaps it is 
checked that an online reference is still available, but not its content). I 
also see my articles on the English Wikipedia being translated to other 
languages, even when they have Dutch or Russian references which I do not 
expect the translators to be able to read. This is an anecdotal evidence though.

 

In addition, there are very few projects where the main population is 
monolingual, in almost all cases the bulk of the editors speak also a major 
language which is used like lingua franca (like Russian for the Chuvash 
Wikipedia, or perhaps Spanish for the Quechua Wikipedia). This makes the 
problem less acute.

 

Best

Yaroslav

 

On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 8:44 PM Peter Southwood  
wrote:

Interesting research. Maybe I just missed it, but I didn’t notice any 
discussion of relation of availability of reliable sources to coverage in 
different languages. In English Wikipedia we are not allowed to write about 
topics which are not covered by suitable sources, but there may also be more 
and a wider range of sources available in English, and English Wikipedia is 
also written by people with a wider range of languages, making more non-English 
sources available. Is there any research on comparing  this tendency in other 
languages? If there is no-one editing a Wikipedia who can read a source, no-one 
can write about its content. It can be very difficult to find sources for some 
topics, and it would be unsurprising if geographical topics in an area where a 
given language is not spoken are not covered in that language.

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Emily Lescak [mailto:eles...@wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 08 June 2022 15:13
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org; analyt...@lists.wikimedia.org; 
wiki-researc...@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Research Showcase June 15

 

Hi all,

The next Research Showcase, Wikipedia's Languages, will be live-streamed 
Wednesday, June 15, at 4:00 AM PST/11:00 AM UTC. View your local time here 
<https://zonestamp.toolforge.org/1655290800> . 

YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZQM1dtn3g0

You are welcome to ask questions via YouTube chat or on IRC at 
#wikimedia-research. 

This month's presentations: 

Quantifying knowledge synchronisation in the 21st century

By Jisung Yoon (Pohang University of Science and Technology)

Humans acquire and accumulate knowledge through language usage and eagerly 
exchange their knowledge for advancement. Although geographical barriers had 
previously limited communication, the emergence of information technology has 
opened new avenues for knowledge exchange. However, it is unclear which 
communication pathway is dominant in the 21st century. Here, we explore the 
dominant path of knowledge diffusion in the 21st century using Wikipedia, the 
largest communal dataset. We evaluate the similarity of shared knowledge 
between population groups, distinguished based on their language usage. When 
population groups are more engaged with each other, their knowledge structure 
is more similar, where engagement is indicated by socio-economic connections, 
such as cultural, linguistic, and historical features. Moreover, geographical 
proximity is no longer a critical requirement for knowledge dissemination. 
Furthermore, we integrate our data into a mechanistic model to 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Research Showcase June 15

2022-06-08 Thread Peter Southwood
Interesting research. Maybe I just missed it, but I didn’t notice any 
discussion of relation of availability of reliable sources to coverage in 
different languages. In English Wikipedia we are not allowed to write about 
topics which are not covered by suitable sources, but there may also be more 
and a wider range of sources available in English, and English Wikipedia is 
also written by people with a wider range of languages, making more non-English 
sources available. Is there any research on comparing  this tendency in other 
languages? If there is no-one editing a Wikipedia who can read a source, no-one 
can write about its content. It can be very difficult to find sources for some 
topics, and it would be unsurprising if geographical topics in an area where a 
given language is not spoken are not covered in that language.

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Emily Lescak [mailto:eles...@wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 08 June 2022 15:13
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org; analyt...@lists.wikimedia.org; 
wiki-researc...@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Research Showcase June 15

 

Hi all,

The next Research Showcase, Wikipedia's Languages, will be live-streamed 
Wednesday, June 15, at 4:00 AM PST/11:00 AM UTC. View your local time here 
 . 

YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZQM1dtn3g0

You are welcome to ask questions via YouTube chat or on IRC at 
#wikimedia-research. 

This month's presentations: 

Quantifying knowledge synchronisation in the 21st century

By Jisung Yoon (Pohang University of Science and Technology)

Humans acquire and accumulate knowledge through language usage and eagerly 
exchange their knowledge for advancement. Although geographical barriers had 
previously limited communication, the emergence of information technology has 
opened new avenues for knowledge exchange. However, it is unclear which 
communication pathway is dominant in the 21st century. Here, we explore the 
dominant path of knowledge diffusion in the 21st century using Wikipedia, the 
largest communal dataset. We evaluate the similarity of shared knowledge 
between population groups, distinguished based on their language usage. When 
population groups are more engaged with each other, their knowledge structure 
is more similar, where engagement is indicated by socio-economic connections, 
such as cultural, linguistic, and historical features. Moreover, geographical 
proximity is no longer a critical requirement for knowledge dissemination. 
Furthermore, we integrate our data into a mechanistic model to better 
understand the underlying mechanism and suggest that the knowledge "Silk Road" 
of the 21st century is based online.




The Language Geography of Wikipedia

By Martin Dittus

Every language is a system of being, doing, knowing, and imagining. With over 
7,000 active languages in the world, how many languages are fully represented 
online? To answer this question, digital non-profit Whose Knowledge? initiated 
the first ever report on the State of the Internet's Languages. As part of this 
report, Martin Dittus and Mark Graham have investigated the languages of 
Wikipedia. Wikipedia began with a single English-language edition more than two 
decades ago, and now offers more than 300 language editions, which places it at 
the forefront of digital language support. However, this does not mean that 
speakers of these languages get access to the same content: Wikipedia’s 
language editions vary widely in scale. We further find that this inequality is 
also reflected in Wikipedia’s geographic coverage: not all places are captured 
in every language. Wikipedia's coverage often follows the global distribution 
of speakers of the respective language. Yet even when we account for the 
distribution of language populations, certain language communities are much 
more strongly represented on Wikipedia than others. As a consequence, we find 
that for many countries in Africa, Central and South America, and South Asia, 
most of the content about those countries is in a foreign language, often a 
European-colonial language. In other words, in many of these places, people may 
need to be able to speak a second (possibly foreign) language in order to 
access Wikipedia information about their own places. Why do we see these 
differences? And what can be done to improve things?

You can also watch our past research showcases here: 
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/ 
 Showcase

 

Emily, on behalf of the Research team

 

--

Emily Lescak (she / her)

Senior Research Community Officer

The Wikimedia Foundation

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 


[Wikimedia-l] Re: Fact-checking Raju Narisetti in the Indian Express

2022-06-04 Thread Peter Southwood
org/wikipedia/foundation/e/e4/Wikimedia_Foundation_2020_Form_990.pdf#page=34

[3] 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/1/1e/Wikimedia_Foundation_FY2020-2021_Audit_Report.pdf#page=5

[4] 
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/e/e4/Wikimedia_Foundation_2020_Form_990.pdf#page=29

[5] 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2022-05-29/Opinion

[6] 
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Remit_of_Planned_Gifts_to_the_Wikimedia_Endowment

 

On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 11:39 PM Megan Hernandez  
wrote:

Hi Andreas, 

 

We have followed up to your questions on the fundraising meta talk page 
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundraising#Raju_Narisetti_interview:_most_of_the_money_is_flowing_into_the_Global_South>
 . 

 

Thank you, 

 

Megan 

 

 

On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 6:52 PM Peter Southwood  
wrote:

This seems a reasonable request.

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Andreas Kolbe [mailto:jayen...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 02 June 2022 15:13
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fact-checking Raju Narisetti in the Indian Express

 

Dear all,

 

Last weekend, an interview with Raju Narisetti, titled "Wikipedia is building 
trust with transparency", was published in the Indian Express, one of the major 
daily newspapers in India.

 

For your convenience, here is an archive link for the article: 
https://archive.ph/RaCwX

 

The Indian Express link is: 
https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/raju-narisetti-interview-wikipedia-trust-transparency-7940621/

 

The article quotes Raju as saying (my emphases),

 



 

“More than 75% of the money we raise globally goes to two things. One is to 
give money back to the volunteer community so they can launch a new language. 
Two is about half of it goes to the infrastructure. You need to have databases 
and put it on the cloud and make sure it’s reliable,” he said. Although a lot 
of the money is raised in the more developed Western markets, most of it is 
actually flowing into the global south, where the growth will come in languages 
and users.

 



 

This diverged sharply from my understanding of WMF finances. So I looked at the 
records to try to fact-check these statements.

 

I found the Foundation raised $163 million in the 2020/2021 financial year.[1] 
But it actually only spent $112 million of it (69%).[1] If the WMF kept 31% of 
its revenue to itself, it obviously can't have spent "more than 75%" (i.e. over 
$120M) of the money it raised on anything. 

 

This is a trivial point. But I was even more astonished by the other statement 
in the article, that most of the money raised "is actually flowing into the 
global south". 

 

Raju was talking to an Indian audience. This article was timed to coincide with 
the start of the Indian fundraiser – Indians are currently faced with 
fundraising banners on Wikipedia as well as emails soliciting repeat 
donations.[2] So I appreciate it is a good soundbite that might motivate Indian 
citizens to reach for their purses and wallets. After all, few people in India 
feel it is their job to send financial aid to the US, right? 

 

But is this soundbite really true? 

 

To fact-check that claim, I looked at the official figures in the latest (2020) 
WMF Form 990 tax return detailing WMF spending outside the US. According to the 
Form 990 section "General Information on Activities Outside the United States", 
spending on activities outside the US amounted to a total of $20,076,181 in 
2020.[3] This means well over 80% of WMF expenditure was in the US.

 

The Form 990 also provides a breakdown by global regions, detailing the precise 
amounts the WMF spent in each region. Again, I found this paints a very 
different picture to what the Indian public has been told in the Indian Express.

 

First I added up all the amounts (Program Services, p. 29, and Grantmaking, pp. 
30–31) that were spent in Europe and North America (excluding the US). I 
arrived at a total of $14.8M – which means that 73.5% of the total spending on 
non-US activities was in these regions of the affluent north. 

 

This left only $5.3M, or about 3% of total WMF revenue in 2020/2021, for the 
entire rest of the world, which also includes countries like Saudi Arabia, 
Russia, Japan, Korea and Taiwan, which are not usually included in the Global 
South. The actual money flowing into the Global South is thus even less than 3% 
– hardly "most" of the money raised.

 

Raju mentioned the volunteers. I thought, let's leave Program Services expenses 
(which presumably would include servers and caching centres abroad) out of the 
equation and look at Grantmaking alone (pages 30 and 31 of the Form 990). 

 

The Grantmaking total for activities outside the US given in the Form 990 is 
$3,475,062.

 

Almost exactly $1.2M (35%) of that went to Europe and North America (excluding 
the US). 

 

So total grantmaking in th

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Fact-checking Raju Narisetti in the Indian Express

2022-06-02 Thread Peter Southwood
This seems a reasonable request.

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Andreas Kolbe [mailto:jayen...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 02 June 2022 15:13
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fact-checking Raju Narisetti in the Indian Express

 

Dear all,

 

Last weekend, an interview with Raju Narisetti, titled "Wikipedia is building 
trust with transparency", was published in the Indian Express, one of the major 
daily newspapers in India.

 

For your convenience, here is an archive link for the article: 
https://archive.ph/RaCwX

 

The Indian Express link is: 
https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/raju-narisetti-interview-wikipedia-trust-transparency-7940621/

 

The article quotes Raju as saying (my emphases),

 



 

“More than 75% of the money we raise globally goes to two things. One is to 
give money back to the volunteer community so they can launch a new language. 
Two is about half of it goes to the infrastructure. You need to have databases 
and put it on the cloud and make sure it’s reliable,” he said. Although a lot 
of the money is raised in the more developed Western markets, most of it is 
actually flowing into the global south, where the growth will come in languages 
and users.

 



 

This diverged sharply from my understanding of WMF finances. So I looked at the 
records to try to fact-check these statements.

 

I found the Foundation raised $163 million in the 2020/2021 financial year.[1] 
But it actually only spent $112 million of it (69%).[1] If the WMF kept 31% of 
its revenue to itself, it obviously can't have spent "more than 75%" (i.e. over 
$120M) of the money it raised on anything. 

 

This is a trivial point. But I was even more astonished by the other statement 
in the article, that most of the money raised "is actually flowing into the 
global south". 

 

Raju was talking to an Indian audience. This article was timed to coincide with 
the start of the Indian fundraiser – Indians are currently faced with 
fundraising banners on Wikipedia as well as emails soliciting repeat 
donations.[2] So I appreciate it is a good soundbite that might motivate Indian 
citizens to reach for their purses and wallets. After all, few people in India 
feel it is their job to send financial aid to the US, right? 

 

But is this soundbite really true? 

 

To fact-check that claim, I looked at the official figures in the latest (2020) 
WMF Form 990 tax return detailing WMF spending outside the US. According to the 
Form 990 section "General Information on Activities Outside the United States", 
spending on activities outside the US amounted to a total of $20,076,181 in 
2020.[3] This means well over 80% of WMF expenditure was in the US.

 

The Form 990 also provides a breakdown by global regions, detailing the precise 
amounts the WMF spent in each region. Again, I found this paints a very 
different picture to what the Indian public has been told in the Indian Express.

 

First I added up all the amounts (Program Services, p. 29, and Grantmaking, pp. 
30–31) that were spent in Europe and North America (excluding the US). I 
arrived at a total of $14.8M – which means that 73.5% of the total spending on 
non-US activities was in these regions of the affluent north. 

 

This left only $5.3M, or about 3% of total WMF revenue in 2020/2021, for the 
entire rest of the world, which also includes countries like Saudi Arabia, 
Russia, Japan, Korea and Taiwan, which are not usually included in the Global 
South. The actual money flowing into the Global South is thus even less than 3% 
– hardly "most" of the money raised.

 

Raju mentioned the volunteers. I thought, let's leave Program Services expenses 
(which presumably would include servers and caching centres abroad) out of the 
equation and look at Grantmaking alone (pages 30 and 31 of the Form 990). 

 

The Grantmaking total for activities outside the US given in the Form 990 is 
$3,475,062.

 

Almost exactly $1.2M (35%) of that went to Europe and North America (excluding 
the US). 

 

So total grantmaking in the entire rest of the world outside Europe and North 
America was $2.3M, or 1.4% of the money the WMF raised in 2020/2021. 

 

Again 1.4% is not "most of the money raised", by any stretch of the 
imagination. And the Global South only accounts for a part of that 1.4%.

 

Lastly, as Raju was speaking to the Indian public, I wanted to find out how 
much money the WMF actually spent on grantmaking in India. The Form 990 only 
gives grantmaking totals for "South Asia" – which along with India includes 
other major countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan. 

 

These totals are $75,198 (grants and other assistance to 22 individuals, 
certainly not rank-and-file Wikipedians, given the average amount) and $3,339 
(grants to organisations). This yields a total of $78,537 for all of South Asia.

 

I make that 0.048% of the WMF's 2020/2021 revenue. Only a part of that may have 
been spent in India. 

 

Please 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: To make apodictic articles

2022-05-19 Thread Peter Southwood
Which may never happen. Cheers, Peter

-Original Message-
From: suvratjai...@gmail.com [mailto:suvratjai...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 18 May 2022 06:30
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] To make apodictic articles

We have to complete all stub articles in wikipedia.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
message/7QT3WJ25LAYGQHTIYJIJBIVT4SZ5PWFA/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/PEBD6LB3GEF6M5G4LGLZCHK47SLCRMIG/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org


[Wikimedia-l] Re: Simplifying governance processes

2022-05-19 Thread Peter Southwood
+1

P

 

From: Samuel Klein [mailto:meta...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 18 May 2022 22:44
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Simplifying governance processes

 

Dear Board (and all),

 

The growing complexity of governance efforts is defeating us. Process creep 
  is an 
existential threat for projects like ours – it is self-perpetuating if not 
actively curtailed, as it filters out people who dislike excess process. 
There's a reason 'bureaucrats' and 'stewards' have unglamorous titles.

 

Global governance in particular seems to be suffering from this now. Let's try 
to scale it back!  Recent developments, all at least somewhat confusing:

 

Global Council: A three-stage vote for the drafting committee.  After 6 months 
of work in private, we know the charter will cover governance, resourcing,  
 & community.  A 
ratifiable charter by 2023 should include Council scope, then another group may 
draft an election process. Council elections would start mid-2024.

 

Conduct: Two years from first draft to realization. Custom review & revision 
process for policy, set to change ~once a year. Enforcement by another group 
(U4C), not yet defined, with an idea about annual elections for it [starting in 
2023?].

 

WMF Board: A four-stage election, with a new complex nomination template. 
Nominees evaluated by another elected 9-person Analysis Committee, followed by 
a two-stage vote.
Months of process, 16 staff facilitators.  

 

Something has to give. We don't have time for all of these to be different, 
complex affairs. 
And this complexity feels self-imposed, like trying to push spaghetti through a 
straw. 

 

~ ~ ~

Four short proposals for your consideration:

 

1. Focus discussions on the decisions we need to resolve, not on process.
We need a foundation Board & global Council for specific practical reasons. 
What challenges do they need to resolve this year?  What major issues + nuances 
are at play?

2. Make elections simple, flexible, consistent. 
Build tools and frameworks that conserve rather than soak up community time.  
Make longer processes capture proportionately detailed results. Empower a 
standing election committee.

 

3. Highlight ways people can engage with governance + prioritization, 
regionally + globally, beyond winning elections to procedural bodies. Support 
organizers + facilitators rather than hiring them out of their communities to 
facilitate on behalf of a central org.

 

4. Delegate more.  Delegate to community.  Delegate design and implementation.

Our communities excel at self-organization, and rebel against arbitrary 
mandates. Avoid language or policies that remove agency or exaggerate 
staff-community division.

 

풲♡,  SJ

 

-- 

Samuel Klein  @metasj   w:user:sj  +1 617 529 4266

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/TRFX5636NPWQ2Z4PVREVG7SNOAPPVUMW/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Are you considering running for the 2022 Wikimedia Foundation board elections?

2022-05-07 Thread Peter Southwood
Linking to a subscription article does not answer my question. Some might
consider it offensive.  Cheers, Peter

-Original Message-
From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: Friday, May 6, 2022 15:15
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Are you considering running for the 2022
Wikimedia Foundation board elections?

"I hate that word so, so much." Ava DuVernay in The New York Times, January
25, 2016.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/26/movies/ava-duvernay-on-hollywoods-inclusi
on-problem.html?partner=IFTTT&_r=0

Sent with ProtonMail secure email.
--- Original Message ---
On Friday, May 6th, 2022 at 7:25 AM, Peter Southwood
 wrote:


> In what way is "diverse people" offensive, and to whom? Cheers, Peter.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org]
> Sent: 04 May 2022 16:37
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Cc: H4CUSEG
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Are you considering running for the 2022
> Wikimedia Foundation board elections?
>
> Can we stop referring to "diverse people" please? It's offensive.
>
> Sent with ProtonMail secure email.
> --- Original Message ---
> On Wednesday, May 4th, 2022 at 3:30 AM, Lorenzo Losa ll...@wikimedia.org
>
> wrote:
>
> > Are you considering running for the Wikimedia Foundation board
> > elections? Are you unsure about that it entails, or whether it's the
> > right choice?
> > You can have a talk with a trustee (or a former trustee):
>
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Peer_sup
> port_for_potential_candidates
>
> > Remember that you can submit you candidacy until May 9:
>
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Apply_to
> _be_a_Candidate
>
> > We are looking forward a new round of skilled and diverse people to
> > join the board!
> >
> > Lorenzo
> >
> > P.S.: current and recent trustees are welcomed to add their name to the
> > list
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>
> > Public archives at
>
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
> message/LW6TCCMOQGPIIVCU6DWLK4BSUZQHEQKO/
>
> > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
> message/PNITIQUN3ULR7HNCX74N3CYMIEBEPPM3/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
message/IHSK76K26Q32KXG4UR5XXDGVU3ZLD2NC/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
message/ASGM3QX4UKYOAKZZNKM6TBWMOYCV2SH2/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/YVAOILRT2G44NGM7AZ4PBVJLUTQBS2W6/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org


[Wikimedia-l] Re: Are you considering running for the 2022 Wikimedia Foundation board elections?

2022-05-07 Thread Peter Southwood
How do you propose that relevant  competencies be recognized, defined, or
assessed? Cheers, Peter

-Original Message-
From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: Friday, May 6, 2022 15:52
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Are you considering running for the 2022
Wikimedia Foundation board elections?

Yes. We shouldn't define people by what they're not (white, cis-gendered,
male, etc.). But we should also adopt an expanded conceptualization of
"competency" that is more inclusive. What we think of as competency has been
defined by people who found their own specific skills particularly important
(and their own race better than other people's). To be inclusive means to
understand and value the competencies that people bring, in stead of
requiring that people of colour can join as long as they also have all the
"white" competencies.


Sent with ProtonMail secure email.
--- Original Message ---
On Friday, May 6th, 2022 at 2:59 AM, Lorenzo Losa 
wrote:


> On mer, 2022-05-04 at 14:36 +, H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l wrote:
>
> > Can we stop referring to "diverse people" please? It's offensive.
>
>
> I'm sorry for that.
>
> If I understand it right - and correct me if I'm wrong - you are saying
> that calling someone a "diverse person" is labeling that person in a
> bad way. This is a fair point. Diversity relates to a multitude, not to
> an individual.
> To rephrase my sentence: we need trustees who are individually skilled
> and experienced, forming a board that is collectively diverse - that is
> able to express and create space for different perspectives and ideas.
>
> Lorenzo
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
message/IJHKZYD7YDC7KQNAHJRJRSLIUCYANO2Q/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
message/2AF725BB7LMS7EFMNHB6ITYFDXBBSW2W/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/NYWU7OLMF3M5O3JQACO4TMR4XEEDN4JS/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org


[Wikimedia-l] Re: Are you considering running for the 2022 Wikimedia Foundation board elections?

2022-05-06 Thread Peter Southwood
In what way is "diverse people" offensive, and to whom? Cheers, Peter.

-Original Message-
From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 04 May 2022 16:37
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Are you considering running for the 2022
Wikimedia Foundation board elections?

Can we stop referring to "diverse people" please? It's offensive.

Sent with ProtonMail secure email.
--- Original Message ---
On Wednesday, May 4th, 2022 at 3:30 AM, Lorenzo Losa 
wrote:


> Are you considering running for the Wikimedia Foundation board
> elections? Are you unsure about that it entails, or whether it's the
> right choice?
> You can have a talk with a trustee (or a former trustee):
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Peer_sup
port_for_potential_candidates
>
> Remember that you can submit you candidacy until May 9:
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Apply_to
_be_a_Candidate
>
> We are looking forward a new round of skilled and diverse people to
> join the board!
>
> Lorenzo
>
> P.S.: current and recent trustees are welcomed to add their name to the
> list
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
message/LW6TCCMOQGPIIVCU6DWLK4BSUZQHEQKO/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
message/PNITIQUN3ULR7HNCX74N3CYMIEBEPPM3/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/IHSK76K26Q32KXG4UR5XXDGVU3ZLD2NC/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org


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

2022-05-03 Thread Peter Southwood
And who will do all this tedious work? Cheers, Peter

 

From: g...@tiscali.it [mailto:g...@tiscali.it] 
Sent: 01 May 2022 20:01
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Open proxies and IP blocking

 

Another somewhat obvious solution: instead, or before, of blocking, make the 
edits coming from one of the (too) dangerous IPs go through a reviewal process 
before getting published; hopefully a very quick one. 
In theory this would be against the original Wikipedia ideas, but I saw that 
it's something already practiced in some cases, and anyway blocking seems 
enormously worse than requiring a review before publication. 

By the way, I now realized that the current Wikipedia is already very different 
than what I believed, and it works just because it does *not* really allow 
anyone to make edits. 
Before deciding where to go from here I'd suggest you to reflect on what's 
worse: to forbid anonymity or require reviews; I believe most normal people are 
more interested in privacy than immediate publication of edits. 

Kind regards, 
Gabriele 

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/RZ6KIYQKTYQSMFSJV6XVHSAF224Y22DC/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: [African Wikimedians] Re: Africa Knowledge Initiative (AKI) Community Engagements

2022-04-29 Thread Peter Southwood
I am encouraged that it is as many as 27000, How was this number calculated? 
Cheers, Peter (one of the 27000)

 

From: Felix Nartey [mailto:fnar...@wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 29 April 2022 15:05
To: Mailing list for African Wikimedians
Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List; Shupai Mchuchu; hlezi.mo...@wikimedia.org.za; 
tshepiso.ngal...@wikimedia.org.za
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [African Wikimedians] Re: Africa Knowledge 
Initiative (AKI) Community Engagements

 

Thanks Bobby and Douglas for your interest. Sorry, I missed the time in my 
earlier email, the details for the office hour are as follows:

 

Event: AKI Office Hour

Date: 4th May 2022

Time: 3:00pm to 4:00pm GMT+00

Link: https://wikimedia.zoom.us/j/87653338679

 

Looking forward to seeing you all soon!

 

Warmest regards,

 

On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 12:04 PM Douglas Scott  
wrote:

Thanks Felix. I would love to attend. What time on 4 May 2022 will the open 
office hour take place? I seem to have missed that bit.

 

Regards,


Douglas.

 

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 at 12:42, Bobby Shabangu  wrote:

Thanks for sharing this Felix, 

 

Our chapter is definitely getting involved and we shall see you at the 4 May 
meeting. 

 

Best, 

Bobby Shabangu

 

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 at 11:57, Felix Nartey  wrote:

More than 1 billion people live on the continent of Africa but just about 27 
thousand Africans contribute to the African story on Wikipedia. 

 

Are you ready to help put back the African narrative in the hands of its people?

 

The partnership & community programs team at the WMF is forming a partnership 
with the African Union to encourage content creation from the continent. The 
project seeks to empower Wikimedia communities on the continent by creating 
access to the network and the resources of the AU.

 

You can read more about the project in our recently published diff post 

 .[1] Please do not hesitate to contact us via campai...@wikimedia.org if you 
have further questions or join us at the AKI office hour on 4 May 2022 

  to meet partner institutions, engage and contribute to making this 
storytelling project a success! [2]

 

Best,

[1] - 
https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/04/21/setting-our-sights-on-knowledge-equity-with-the-african-union/

[2] - https://wikimedia.zoom.us/j/87653338679

-- 

 


  

 

Felix Nartey

Senior Program Officer, Campaigns 

  Wikimedia Foundation 

 

 

___
African-Wikimedians mailing list -- african-wikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to african-wikimedians-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

___
African-Wikimedians mailing list -- african-wikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to african-wikimedians-le...@lists.wikimedia.org




 

-- 

Douglas Ian Scott
司道格
Skype:  douglas0scott
South African mobile number: +27 (0)79 515 8727

___
African-Wikimedians mailing list -- african-wikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to african-wikimedians-le...@lists.wikimedia.org




 

-- 

 


  

 

Felix Nartey

Senior Program Officer, Campaigns 

  Wikimedia Foundation 

 

 

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/YCBMDD7OUDL4R37IMKYTX5E6TLLLZYWE/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and UCoC Enforcement Guidelines

2022-04-26 Thread Peter Southwood
When someone is blocked for NOTHERE, it is judged on what they have done, we 
generally don’t care what they claim to have intended, as there is no way to 
prove or disprove such claims. Cheers, Peter

 

From: Stella Ng [mailto:s...@wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 25 April 2022 17:38
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and 
UCoC Enforcement Guidelines

 

Hello Everyone,

 

I appreciate the questions and concerns regarding intent - I’m going to 
reference Jan Eissfeldt here, the Global Head of Trust and Safety, and how he 
interpreted this concern during the last CAC conversation hour on April 21st 
(https://youtu.be/3cd2FxovdXE)

 

As mentioned previously, the UCoC was created to establish a minimum set of 
guidelines for expected and unacceptable behavior. The policy was written to 
take into account two main points: intent and context. It trusts people to 
exercise the reasonable person standard - which indicates that based on a 
reasonable person’s judgment of the scenario, the personalities behind it, and 
the context of the individuals involved in, as well as any extrapolating 
information, could make a call on an enforcement action.

 

This is not a new way of working for many of our communities. For instance, 
guidelines against “Gaming the system” exist in 26 projects, most if not all of 
which refer to deliberate intention or bad faith.

 

We do not believe that the crafters of the UCoC were looking for people to 
engage in any form of law interpretation or anything complex, but instead, to 
exercise their experience using the parameters of what a reasonable person 
would be expected to tolerate in a global, intercultural environment. 

 

Regards,

Stella

 

 

On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:14 AM Peter Southwood  
wrote:

This question has been asked before, and so far no workable answer has been 
suggested. Cheers, Peter.

 

From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 20 April 2022 19:44
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and 
UCoC Enforcement Guidelines

 

Stella, how are the community members who review situations supposed to 
establish the mens rea of the accused? Intent is one of the hardest things to 
prove in criminal cases, and we're going to rely on volunteers to get it right? 
We should not look at intent at all, consider only the actual harm that 
occurred and focus on remediation, harm reduction and rehabilitation in stead 
of punishing people. 

 

Vexations

 

Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com/>  secure email. 

 

--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, April 19th, 2022 at 2:24 PM, Stella Ng  wrote:



Hello Andreas and Todd, 

 

I am not Rosie, but I believe I can field this. 

 

First, as a reminder to all, the UCoC was created to establish a minimum set of 
guidelines for expected and unacceptable behavior. However, it does not make 
existing community policies irrelevant. Currently, communities in our global 
movement may have different policies around the disclosure of private 
information (“doxxing”), specifically taking into context what is going on on a 
day-to-day basis, as well as relationship and political dynamics (such as the 
position of power or influence) that the individuals involved could have. 
Depending on the specific context of your examples, interpretation and action 
could differ widely under those doxxing policies. 

 

What would be contextually consistent across the communities, however, is the 
UCoC. If we look specifically at section 3.1, which is what doxxing is nested 
under, what is important to note is context - specifically that if the 
information is provided or the behavior is “intended primarily to intimidate, 
outrage or upset a person, or any behaviour where this would reasonably be 
considered the most likely main outcome” (emphasis added). The next sentence 
expands further that “Behaviour can be considered harassment if it is beyond 
what a reasonable person would be expected to tolerate in a global, 
intercultural environment.” (emphasis added) The policy as written is pretty 
clear that both intent and what is often called in law the “reasonable person 
<https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/reasonable_person#:~:text=Noun=(law)%20A%20fictional%20person%20used,due%20care%20in%20like%20circumstances.%22>
 ” test applies. This is one of the reasons that the Enforcement Guidelines are 
built around human review since application of policy will always require 
judgment. The community members who review situations will hopefully read the 
text in context within the policy and will also have experience in 
understanding the parties involved, their unique dynamics within their 
respective communities, and their own project policies on doxxing as COI, as 
they will have the experience of dealing with the day to day. 

 

However, it is likely t

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and UCoC Enforcement Guidelines

2022-04-25 Thread Peter Southwood
This question has been asked before, and so far no workable answer has been 
suggested. Cheers, Peter.

 

From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 20 April 2022 19:44
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and 
UCoC Enforcement Guidelines

 

Stella, how are the community members who review situations supposed to 
establish the mens rea of the accused? Intent is one of the hardest things to 
prove in criminal cases, and we're going to rely on volunteers to get it right? 
We should not look at intent at all, consider only the actual harm that 
occurred and focus on remediation, harm reduction and rehabilitation in stead 
of punishing people. 

 

Vexations

 

Sent with ProtonMail   secure email. 

 

--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, April 19th, 2022 at 2:24 PM, Stella Ng  wrote:




Hello Andreas and Todd, 

 

I am not Rosie, but I believe I can field this. 

 

First, as a reminder to all, the UCoC was created to establish a minimum set of 
guidelines for expected and unacceptable behavior. However, it does not make 
existing community policies irrelevant. Currently, communities in our global 
movement may have different policies around the disclosure of private 
information (“doxxing”), specifically taking into context what is going on on a 
day-to-day basis, as well as relationship and political dynamics (such as the 
position of power or influence) that the individuals involved could have. 
Depending on the specific context of your examples, interpretation and action 
could differ widely under those doxxing policies. 

 

What would be contextually consistent across the communities, however, is the 
UCoC. If we look specifically at section 3.1, which is what doxxing is nested 
under, what is important to note is context - specifically that if the 
information is provided or the behavior is “intended primarily to intimidate, 
outrage or upset a person, or any behaviour where this would reasonably be 
considered the most likely main outcome” (emphasis added). The next sentence 
expands further that “Behaviour can be considered harassment if it is beyond 
what a reasonable person would be expected to tolerate in a global, 
intercultural environment.” (emphasis added) The policy as written is pretty 
clear that both intent and what is often called in law the “reasonable person 

 ” test applies. This is one of the reasons that the Enforcement Guidelines are 
built around human review since application of policy will always require 
judgment. The community members who review situations will hopefully read the 
text in context within the policy and will also have experience in 
understanding the parties involved, their unique dynamics within their 
respective communities, and their own project policies on doxxing as COI, as 
they will have the experience of dealing with the day to day. 

 

However, it is likely the standards could be clarified further in the round of 
Policy review that will be conducted a year after the completion of Phase 2.

 

Regards,

Stella

 

 

On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 11:02 PM Todd Allen  wrote:

Actually, you're technically even breaching it saying it here, since the 
mailing list is "outside the Wikimedia projects".

 

I would agree that this needs substantial clarification, especially regarding 
both spammers and already-public information.

 

Regards,

 

Todd Allen

 

On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 12:02 PM Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

Dear Rosie,

 

Could you kindly also look at and clarify the following passage in the 
Universal Code of Conduct:

 

· Disclosure of personal data (Doxing): sharing other contributors' private 
information, such as name, place of employment, physical or email address 
without their explicit consent either on the Wikimedia projects or elsewhere, 
or sharing information concerning their Wikimedia activity outside the projects.

 

As written, the first part of this says that contributors must no longer state 
– on Wikipedia or elsewhere – that a particular editor appears to be working 
for a PR firm, is a congressional staffer,[1] etc.

 

The second part forbids any and all discussion of contributors' Wikimedia 
activity outside the projects. (For example, if I were to say on Twitter that 
User:Koavf has made over 2 million edits to Wikipedia, I would already be in 
breach of the code as written.)

 

Thanks,

Andreas

 

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Congressional_staffer_edits

 

On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 5:09 PM Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight 
 wrote:

Hello,

 

The Community Affairs Committee of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees 
would like to thank everyone who participated in the recently concluded 
community vote on the 

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

2022-04-25 Thread Peter Southwood
“the block message only shows up when I try to save the page”

That is just inexcusable. Symbolic of complete indifference to other people’s 
time wasted. Why would a new editor treated like this ever bother to try again? 
 Block message with explanation and alternatives (with links) should come up 
when the person tries to open to edit, and page should not open to edit.

 

Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that “anyone” can edit if:

*very long list of conditions that apply…

*list of hoops that you must jump through to get access…

 

Cheers, Peter

 

From: Bence Damokos [mailto:bdamo...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 20 April 2022 21:59
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

 

Beyond the mentioned countries, this is also affecting those who have opted in 
to Apple’s Private Relay, which I expect will be somewhat popular/default once 
out of beta status. I myself am unable to edit for example - and half the time 
I am not bothered to workaround the issue and just give up the edit. 

 

Also, annoyingly, the block message only shows up when I try to save the page 
(at least on mobile), not when I start the edit, again, leading to unnecessary 
frustration.

 

Best regards,

Bence

On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 at 20:42, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
 wrote:

Yes, it's getting frequent and not only from people in Africa. 

 

I ended up to trouble-shoot these problems by mails or direct messaging on 
Facebook more and and more frequently, maybe with simple users who just know me 
or have my contact. Sometimes it looks like sharing the duties of a sysop or a 
steward with no power. 

 

It's getting less and less clear how pros and cons are calculated exactly, but 
you just get the feeling that some users really care a lot about this policy 
and you just have to deal with the consequences, no matter how time-consuming 
it's getting.

 

A.M.

 

Il mercoledì 20 aprile 2022, 20:34:36 CEST, Amir E. Aharoni 
 ha scritto: 

 

 

I don't have a solution, but I just wanted to confirm that I agree fully with 
the description of the problem. I hear that this happens to people from 
Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya and some other countries almost every day.

 

The first time I heard about it was actually around 2018 or so, but during the 
last year it has become unbearably frequent.

 

A smarter solution is needed. I tried talking to stewards about this several 
times, and they always say something like "we know that this affects certain 
countries badly, and we know that the technology has changed since the 
mid-2000s, but we absolutely cannot allow open proxies because it would 
immediately unleash horrible vandalism on all the wikis". I'm sure they mean 
well, but this is not sustainable.


--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore

 

 

‫בתאריך יום ד׳, 20 באפר׳ 2022 ב-21:21 מאת ‪Florence Devouard‏ <‪ 
 fdevou...@gmail.com‏>:

Hello friends

Short version : We need to find solutions to avoid so many africans being 
globally IP blocked due to our No Open Proxies policy.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking

 

Long version : 

I'd like to raise attention on an issue, which has been getting worse in the 
past couple of weeks/months. 

Increasing number of editors getting blocked due to the No Open Proxies policy 
[1]
In particular africans.

In February 2004, the decision was made to block open proxies on Meta and all 
other Wikimedia projects. 

According to the no open proxies policy : Publicly available proxies (including 
paid proxies) may be blocked for any period at any time. While this may affect 
legitimate users, they are not the intended targets and may freely use proxies 
until those are blocked [...]

Non-static IP addresses or hosts that are otherwise not permanent proxies 
should typically be blocked for a shorter period of time, as it is likely the 
IP address will eventually be transferred or dynamically reassigned, or the 
open proxy closed. Once closed, the IP address should be unblocked.

According to the policy page, « the Editors can be permitted to edit by way of 
an open proxy with the IP block exempt flag. This is granted on local projects 
by administrators and globally by stewards. »

 

I repeat -> ... legitimate users... may freely use proxies until those are 
blocked. the Editors can be permitted to edit by way of an open proxy with the 
IP block exempt flag <-- it is not illegal to edit using an open proxy


Most editors though... have no idea whatsoever what an open proxy is. They do 
not understand well what to do when they are blocked.

In the past few weeks, the number of African editors reporting being blocked 
due to open proxy has been VERY significantly increasing. 
New editors just as old timers.
Unexperienced editors but also staff members, president of usergroups, 
organizers of edit-a-thons 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and UCoC Enforcement Guidelines

2022-04-25 Thread Peter Southwood
This question has been asked before, and I have never seen a reasonably 
practicable proposal for managing the problem. Cheers, Peter

 

From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 20 April 2022 19:44
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and 
UCoC Enforcement Guidelines

 

Stella, how are the community members who review situations supposed to 
establish the mens rea of the accused? Intent is one of the hardest things to 
prove in criminal cases, and we're going to rely on volunteers to get it right? 
We should not look at intent at all, consider only the actual harm that 
occurred and focus on remediation, harm reduction and rehabilitation in stead 
of punishing people. 

 

Vexations

 

Sent with ProtonMail   secure email. 

 

--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, April 19th, 2022 at 2:24 PM, Stella Ng  wrote:




Hello Andreas and Todd, 

 

I am not Rosie, but I believe I can field this. 

 

First, as a reminder to all, the UCoC was created to establish a minimum set of 
guidelines for expected and unacceptable behavior. However, it does not make 
existing community policies irrelevant. Currently, communities in our global 
movement may have different policies around the disclosure of private 
information (“doxxing”), specifically taking into context what is going on on a 
day-to-day basis, as well as relationship and political dynamics (such as the 
position of power or influence) that the individuals involved could have. 
Depending on the specific context of your examples, interpretation and action 
could differ widely under those doxxing policies. 

 

What would be contextually consistent across the communities, however, is the 
UCoC. If we look specifically at section 3.1, which is what doxxing is nested 
under, what is important to note is context - specifically that if the 
information is provided or the behavior is “intended primarily to intimidate, 
outrage or upset a person, or any behaviour where this would reasonably be 
considered the most likely main outcome” (emphasis added). The next sentence 
expands further that “Behaviour can be considered harassment if it is beyond 
what a reasonable person would be expected to tolerate in a global, 
intercultural environment.” (emphasis added) The policy as written is pretty 
clear that both intent and what is often called in law the “reasonable person 

 ” test applies. This is one of the reasons that the Enforcement Guidelines are 
built around human review since application of policy will always require 
judgment. The community members who review situations will hopefully read the 
text in context within the policy and will also have experience in 
understanding the parties involved, their unique dynamics within their 
respective communities, and their own project policies on doxxing as COI, as 
they will have the experience of dealing with the day to day. 

 

However, it is likely the standards could be clarified further in the round of 
Policy review that will be conducted a year after the completion of Phase 2.

 

Regards,

Stella

 

 

On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 11:02 PM Todd Allen  wrote:

Actually, you're technically even breaching it saying it here, since the 
mailing list is "outside the Wikimedia projects".

 

I would agree that this needs substantial clarification, especially regarding 
both spammers and already-public information.

 

Regards,

 

Todd Allen

 

On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 12:02 PM Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

Dear Rosie,

 

Could you kindly also look at and clarify the following passage in the 
Universal Code of Conduct:

 

· Disclosure of personal data (Doxing): sharing other contributors' private 
information, such as name, place of employment, physical or email address 
without their explicit consent either on the Wikimedia projects or elsewhere, 
or sharing information concerning their Wikimedia activity outside the projects.

 

As written, the first part of this says that contributors must no longer state 
– on Wikipedia or elsewhere – that a particular editor appears to be working 
for a PR firm, is a congressional staffer,[1] etc.

 

The second part forbids any and all discussion of contributors' Wikimedia 
activity outside the projects. (For example, if I were to say on Twitter that 
User:Koavf has made over 2 million edits to Wikipedia, I would already be in 
breach of the code as written.)

 

Thanks,

Andreas

 

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Congressional_staffer_edits

 

On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 5:09 PM Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight 
 wrote:

Hello,

 

The Community Affairs Committee of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees 
would like to thank everyone who participated in the recently concluded 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Collection / Special:Book usage

2022-04-19 Thread Peter Southwood
I used to use it, but then it broke so I stopped using it. Just one of the 
things that died out because no-one could be bothered to maintain it.  Cheers, 
Peter

 

From: Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga [mailto:galder...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: 17 April 2022 17:47
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Collection / Special:Book usage

 

No one or very few use it, because you can't save a book. I had some teachers 
in our university courses who used it to download what their students did, but 
since the WMF decided to break it, evidently they are not using it anymore. I 
repeat: it worked and it was broken in purpose. So now we have an option to 
create a book but no actual book can be created, besides printing it with 
PediaPress.

 

2022(e)ko api. 17(a) 09:59 erabiltzaileak hau idatzi du ("Amir E. Aharoni" 
):

> On Sun, Apr 17, 2022, 09:29 Strainu  wrote:
> >
> > The correct question is: does it still do anything of value?
> ‫בתאריך יום א׳, 17 באפר׳ 2022 ב-10:42 מאת ‪Jan Ainali‏ 
> <‪ainali@gmail.com‏>:
>
> Even with all output options broken it is still a decent user interface for 
> creating and organizing collections of articles.

This may well be true, but I'm wondering how much is it *actually* used. I know 
I never use it, but it's possible that thousand of other people do. If it's 
true, then everything is fine. I can't find a log of its usage, or a statistics 
page that shows how often do people use this feature.

 

It currently appears in at least two prominent places:

1. "Create a book" link in the desktop sidebar (in some wikis; I don't see it 
in the English Wikipedia, but I do see it in Swedish and Basque).

2. "Extensions used by Wikimedia - Main" group in translatewiki.net, which 
means that volunteer localizers are asked to translate it with (relatively) 
high priority.

 

If only, say, five people use it in the whole Wikimedia universe, then perhaps 
someone should consider downgrading its prominence or maybe removing it 
entirely.

 

On translatewiki, I can move it from "Extensions used by Wikimedia - Main" to 
"Extensions used by Wikimedia - Advanced" or even to "Extensions used by 
Wikimedia - Legacy", but again, before I do this, I'd like to make sure that 
it's not actually used by a lot of people.


--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore

 

 

  _  


  AVG logo

This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software. 
www.avg.com   





___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/URQCEBEG5QSKLOAMOTSPKIX6ZINGFTG7/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Register for Contribuling – Conference on minority languages and free participative software

2022-04-13 Thread Peter Southwood

Thanks Remy, Natacha, That abstract was useful. Do you know of any articles on 
any Wikipedia covering the topic?  closest I can find on en: is Cultural 
hegemony


Cheers, Peter

 

From: GERBET Remy via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 13 April 2022 11:15
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: GERBET Remy
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Register for Contribuling – Conference on minority 
languages and free participative software

 

Hi Peter, :) 

Thank you Natacha for your answer. You're right. Non-hegemonic languages are 
the ones that are not associated with a country or people that imposes itself 
on other cultures or claims any kind of control over the rest of the world. So 
that would be most existing languages. I used the word non-hegemonic to imply 
that those who are interested in language diversity online would probably find 
useful people and information at this conference.

Best, 

--

Rémy Gerbet

Directeur exécutif

Executive director

  +33 1 42 36 26 24

  +33 7 84 37 91 04

-

WIKIMEDIA FRANCE
Association pour le libre partage de la connaissance
 <http://www.wikimedia.fr/> www.wikimedia.fr

 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1234174880> 28 rue de Londres, 75009 PARIS

Le 2022-04-13 10:55, Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l a écrit :

Hi, maybe this can explain a little 
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1056492612444316 

 

I think basically Chinese, Russian, Arabic, Spanish, French and English can be 
categorized as hegemonic. 

 

Kind regards,

 

Nattes

 

 

 

 

Le 13 avr. 2022 à 10:24, Peter Southwood  a écrit 
:

Hi Remy,

It might help if you defined what you mean by a non-hegemonic language. I would 
not think it a term familiar to most readers, and it is poorly covered by a 
google search.

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: GERBET Remy via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 12 April 2022 13:27
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: GERBET Remy
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Register for Contribuling – Conference on minority 
languages and free participative software

 

Dear all,

If you speak a non-hegemonic language or are interested in minority languages 
in general, please come join us on April 22 at  
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ContribuLing_2022> ContribuLing!

Wikimedia France 
<https://www.wikimedia.fr/les-inscriptions-pour-contribuling-sont-ouvertes/>  
and Wikimedia Morocco <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_MA_User_Group> 
 teamed up with the INALCO <http://www.inalco.fr/en/welcome-inalco-website> , 
BULAC <https://bulac.hypotheses.org> , NTeAlan <https://ntealan.org/>  and 
Idemi Africa <https://idemi.africa/>  to put together this second yearly 
edition of the conference. The focus is on free participative software that 
help document minority languages.

We will have some projects around Wikipedia, Wikidata and Lingua Libre, of 
course, but some conferences and workshops will also introduce participants to 
tools outside the Wikimedia movement, as complementary solutions.

We will cover a vast array of languages, from Japanese, Teochew (China), 
Atikamekw (Canada), Marseillais (France) to Fong (Benin) and Tshiluba (DRC). 
Other sessions will showcase multilingual platforms that can be used for a 
family of languages or for all languages.

The event will be translated live into English for participants joining us on 
zoom.

If you are interested, please feel free to register here: 
https://framaforms.org/contribuling-2022-registration-form-1648203716 
<https://framaforms.org/contribuling-2022-registration-form-1648203716> 

 The program and further details are available on meta: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ContribuLing_2022/Program 
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ContribuLing_2022/Program> 

 For any further information, please contact contribul...@framalistes.org.

Best,

--

Rémy Gerbet

Directeur exécutif

Executive director

  +33 1 42 36 26 24

  +33 7 84 37 91 04

-

WIKIMEDIA FRANCE
Association pour le libre partage de la connaissance
 <http://www.wikimedia.fr/> www.wikimedia.fr

 <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1234174880> 28 rue de Londres, 75009 PARIS

 


 
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient>
 

Virus-free.  
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient>
 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/7THQTTBCDTUM5

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Register for Contribuling – Conference on minority languages and free participative software

2022-04-13 Thread Peter Southwood
Hi Remy,

It might help if you defined what you mean by a non-hegemonic language. I would 
not think it a term familiar to most readers, and it is poorly covered by a 
google search.

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: GERBET Remy via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 12 April 2022 13:27
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: GERBET Remy
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Register for Contribuling – Conference on minority 
languages and free participative software

 

Dear all,

If you speak a non-hegemonic language or are interested in minority languages 
in general, please come join us on April 22 at  
 ContribuLing!

Wikimedia France 
  
and Wikimedia Morocco  
 teamed up with the INALCO  , 
BULAC  , NTeAlan   and 
Idemi Africa   to put together this second yearly 
edition of the conference. The focus is on free participative software that 
help document minority languages.

We will have some projects around Wikipedia, Wikidata and Lingua Libre, of 
course, but some conferences and workshops will also introduce participants to 
tools outside the Wikimedia movement, as complementary solutions.

We will cover a vast array of languages, from Japanese, Teochew (China), 
Atikamekw (Canada), Marseillais (France) to Fong (Benin) and Tshiluba (DRC). 
Other sessions will showcase multilingual platforms that can be used for a 
family of languages or for all languages.

The event will be translated live into English for participants joining us on 
zoom.

If you are interested, please feel free to register here: 
https://framaforms.org/contribuling-2022-registration-form-1648203716 
 

 The program and further details are available on meta: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ContribuLing_2022/Program 
 

 For any further information, please contact contribul...@framalistes.org.

Best,

--

Rémy Gerbet

Directeur exécutif

Executive director

  +33 1 42 36 26 24

  +33 7 84 37 91 04

-

WIKIMEDIA FRANCE
Association pour le libre partage de la connaissance
  www.wikimedia.fr

  28 rue de Londres, 75009 PARIS

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/7THQTTBCDTUM5NZB6XK4EJI3AFVBS4KT/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: An Open Letter to Maryana Iskander

2022-04-12 Thread Peter Southwood
I sympathise with a lot of what you say, but do you have a workable alternative 
to reliable sources as currently defined? Peter

 

From: Frederick Noronha [mailto:fredericknoro...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 11 April 2022 21:19
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Maryana Iskander

 

  

 

https://www.opensourceforu.com/2022/01/an-open-letter-to-maryana-iskander/


 

-- 


 April 2022  | Frederick Noronha. 784 Saligao 403511 Goa
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa | M (after 2pm) +91 9822122436 Twitter @fn
  1  2 | 
 3  4  5  6  7  8  9  |   
fredericknoron...@gmail.com
10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Books. Words. Photos. Wikipedia. Networks
17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | PHOTOS:   
https://flickr.com/photos/fn-goa/
24 25 26 27 28 29 30  | VIDEOS:   http://t.ly/58ji 


 


 

 Mailtrack

Sender notified by 
 

 Mailtrack 

12/04/22, 12:45:14 am



  

 

  

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/L2MR7GFRAQW53QSCD2RB5FYFB753MKNB/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open letter on negating race and ethnicity as "meaningful distinctions" in the UCoC

2022-04-12 Thread Peter Southwood
Race and ethnicity have already proven to be controversial in this context, and 
will probably continue to be controversial, but maybe less so if appropriately 
defined. Anyway, those who make the decisions carry the ethical responsibility, 
even if they can avoid legal responsibility. Cheers, Peter

 

From: Benjamin Lees [mailto:emufarm...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 12 April 2022 10:36
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Open letter on negating race and ethnicity as 
"meaningful distinctions" in the UCoC

 

On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 1:06 AM Peter Southwood  
wrote:

Definitions of terminology makes sense in any document that is intended as an 
enforceable guide to behavior. Without them, whose definition applies? Cheers, 
Peter

 

No document defines all its terms.  It's particularly unnecessary to define 
race and ethnicity in the context of how they're used in the UCoC because the 
terms are only used in conjunction with other terms that fill in whatever gaps 
might exist even under narrow definitions.  Discussions about [[Who is a Jew?]] 
are a red herring here.

 


 
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient>
 

Virus-free.  
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient>
 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/DFYGI5SEL6AX76YNY7F5FNKWV2IBJVOA/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open letter on negating race and ethnicity as "meaningful distinctions" in the UCoC

2022-04-10 Thread Peter Southwood
Definitions of terminology makes sense in any document that is intended as an 
enforceable guide to behavior. Without them, whose definition applies? Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Lane Chance [mailto:zinkl...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 11:17
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Open letter on negating race and ethnicity as 
"meaningful distinctions" in the UCoC

It would make the UCoC easier to understand if there was a glossary on
the same page. A chosen definition of "race" or "ethnicity" being used
in the context of this policy document may not be the same as exists
in the reader's head, how they describe their own identity, or as
might be used on their local language Wikipedia. This could then be
the place to distinguish the relevance to the policy of race versus
racism.

In this thread we see stated as a fact that Jews are an ethnicity but
not a race, which could cause a big argument in its own right. See the
"Whoopi Goldberg" incident.

Lane

On Sat, 9 Apr 2022 at 01:19, Zachary T.  wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I think there's a misinterpretation here. Saying that race and ethnicity 
> aren't meaningful distinctions among people doesn't mean that racism doesn't 
> exist. That's a lot of negatives, but the way I see it, it's just recognizing 
> that race is in fact a social construct, and thus because of that it isn't 
> truly meaningful. I would suggest using inherently meaningful to clear up the 
> confusion here, because I think that more clearly expresses the sentiment.
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 4:23 PM Maggie Dennis  wrote:
>>
>> Hello, Anasuya and Whose Knowledge.
>>
>>
>> (Context for those who don’t know me: I am the Vice President of Community 
>> Resilience & Sustainability, and among others I oversee the team shepherding 
>> the UCoC process.)
>>
>>
>> Thank you very much for raising this issue. Foundation staff have been 
>> discussing this as well with the same points that you have raised, and it is 
>> something we’ve been thinking about how to address.
>>
>>
>> As probably many of you know, the plan all along had been to get the UCoC 
>> policy, to get the enforcement approach, and then to see how they work 
>> together in operation. Our plan has been to review the policy and 
>> enforcement approach together a year after the ratification of Phase 2. 
>> However, we decided to prioritize a slower approach to Phase 2 to make sure 
>> it was functional out the gate especially for the functionaries and 
>> volunteers who enforce it, as a result of which the timeline we had imagined 
>> for Policy review has been considerably pushed back. If we had made our 
>> preliminary time plan, we would have started testing these out months ago. 
>> The Policy and Enforcement Guidelines would have been ripe for review 
>> sometime around November 2022.
>>
>>
>> As you all know, the vote has just concluded on the UCoC Phase 2. In the 
>> vote, community members were asked if they supported it as written or not, 
>> with the ability to provide feedback either way - with the notion that the 
>> feedback would help us focus on major blockers to the enforcement approach. 
>> I have already spoken to several members of the Board about some of the 
>> concerns that have been raised about the enforcement guidelines; we’ve 
>> spoken about this passage in the Policy, too. I know from my conversations 
>> with the Board that they want to get this done right, not just get it done - 
>> and they are very open to understanding these major blockers.
>>
>>
>> The project team is compiling a report for the Board on the challenging 
>> points surfaced during the vote. We think the enforcement guidelines are a 
>> very good first draft for the enforcement pathways, but–based on the 
>> comments we’ve seen–we are very aware there may be more work ahead before we 
>> reach a Board ratified version of those guidelines. As this passage in 
>> policy is not necessary to achieve the goal of the UCoC - which is to forbid 
>> harassment and attacks based on personal factors including race and 
>> ethnicity - our intention has been to recommend to the Board that the 
>> passage in question be reviewed simultaneously with any further Phase 2 
>> enforcement workshopping, instead of waiting for the “year in operation” 
>> review intended.
>>
>>
>> I still think it makes sense to review how the enforcement guideline and 
>> policy work together to see how they are functioning once they have a trial 
>> period. But I ALSO don’t think it makes any sense to hold off on reviewing a 
>> passage from policy that community members (including some community members 
>> who are Foundation staff) strongly agree may be actively harmful just 
>> because Phase 2 is taking longer than anticipated.
>>
>>
>> I also want to say that I have spoken to some of the individuals who were 
>> involved in writing the UCoC and understand fully that the intent of the 
>> composers was to avoid any 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Sanctions against the Russian Federation; support for Ukrainian Wikimedians

2022-03-03 Thread Peter Southwood
Yes, that is what we are supposed to do and supposed to be good at. Cheers, 
Peter

 

From: Ilario Valdelli [mailto:valde...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 02 March 2022 10:31
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Sanctions against the Russian Federation; support 
for Ukrainian Wikimedians

 

I agree and I think that the best support is to offer a neutral and complete 
information against any kind of propaganda.

 

This is what Wikimedia can do better.

 

Kind regards

 

On Tue, 1 Mar 2022, 23:21 Valentin Nefedov,  wrote:

Thanks for your support! The best "sanctions" WMF can implement is raising 
awareness about the whole situation. For example, the promotion of Ukraine's 
Cultural Diplomacy Month 2022 
 . 
About Russian Wikipedia: unfortunately, most likely it will get banned in the 
Federation. More than 70 Russian Wikipedians wrote open letter to us on our 
village pump 

  where they condemned the invasion, so WMF might support people who signed 
this letter legally because of possible threats.

 

Best regards,

Renvoy

 

вт, 1 бер. 2022 р. о 22:57 James Heilman  пише:

I wonder if a banner raising awareness regarding the existence of offline apps 
specifically Kiwix for when communication goes down would be useful?

 

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.kiwix.kiwixmobile 

 =en_CA=US

 

We also have Internet in a Box, with instruction on how to build your own here

 

https://mdwiki.org/wiki/WikiProjectMed:Internet-in-a-Box

 

James

 

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 2:37 PM GorillaWarfare 
 wrote:

+1 on the "what can we all do to help?" question. On the VPN topic, I suspect 
the functionary teams will be pretty open to granting IPBE for folks editing 
from that region. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IP_block_exemption#Used_for_anonymous_proxy_editing
 has details if anyone needs it.




– Molly White (GorillaWarfare)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GorillaWarfare

she/her

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZYJG2NIRGKQESE4ZRQJRZODURYDGZ55F/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org




 

-- 

James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/OJBWUCGPUDA6BROQPCHVYMQQIGC2V73G/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/2VGRC3NI5GWCUMUMBBG463RZS7JREZIB/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/7SOMY3VMIF4D4H2COBAASOQ5WMPPCJBE/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Seeking community recommendations for Equity Fund grantees

2022-01-25 Thread Peter Southwood
Good points, these. I hope someone will answer them.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Inductiveload [mailto:inductivel...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 26 January 2022 02:36
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Seeking community recommendations for Equity Fund
grantees



On 25 January 2022 17:11:59 GMT, Nadee Gunasena 
wrote:
> I've shared more
>information about how we'll be sharing the recommendations and making
>decisions about the grantees on Meta in response to your comment there:
>https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Knowledge_Equity_Fund#Concerns.

Besides how the grants are allocated in the first place, something I do not
see on that page is the clear description of how the success of the grants
are measured and reported, auditing of expenditures and when the results are
due. 

>From the Meta page:

> The Equity Fund is focused on supporting groups outside of the movement
whose work will impact and improve knowledge equity on the Wikimedia
projects over the long term. 

Thus I imagine a good part of the results will be able to be tied to long
term changes that will be measurable as some kind of wiki engagement? If the
results are not expected to manifest "on-wiki", where and when are they
expected to manifest? Obviously, "long term" implies no final results
"soon", but responsible management means that the outcomes of interest are,
of course, known already along with a plan for follow-up analysis. 

No self-respecting organisation would spend over $7 million without even a
way to tell if the money is being spent as promised, or no way to tell if
the project is working or has lasting effects. 

For context, it's enough money to keep the servers on for years, or, as
about 50 person-years of payroll and overhead expenditure, keep a modest dev
team trucking for a decade or so. The story of what knowledge-societal good
has been done with this amount of money will be absolutely fascinating to
anyone with an interest in knowledge equity, and critical to justifying
support for similar initiatives in future. The analysis and accurate
reporting of the outcomes of these grants is at least as valuable to future
similar efforts as the grants themselves. Imagine the utterly disastrous
effect it would have if it were impossible to showcase the success: it could
undermine the whole idea of knowledge equity in general as a worthwhile
financial cause, and within the wiki movement, it would badly injure the
concept that funds donated in good faith are spent carefully.

I look forward to reading in detail about what outcomes have been selected
to be tracked, how and why that selection was made, how each grant is
expected and hoped to affect them, and when and how we may be expected to
find out how it went, both "on the ground" for the grantees and in terms of
the already-set outcomes. These are all things that must already have been
carefully documented. 

Down the road, a thorough breakdown of how it actually did go and how it can
be done better, if possible, for future rounds will be a cornerstone of
best-practice for knowledge equity initiatives for years to come.

Cheers,

--IL
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
message/TGZK3JNX4FLBZIIQB6GUBXL7IMPE4CV2/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/4LDLMPMZAXEIDDBZH5P3ZUUK66YRGZQ3/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org


[Wikimedia-l] Re: "content was" when deleting pages - is it useful?

2022-01-17 Thread Peter Southwood
If the reason for deletion was to suppress undesirable content, why would one 
want part of it to remain viewable? Cheers, Peter

 

From: Vi to [mailto:vituzzu.w...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 17 January 2022 23:45
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: "content was" when deleting pages - is it useful?

 

On it.wiki we removed both this and "the only editor was..." which proved to be 
misleading for newcomers, e.g. "I don't think that being the sole editor is a 
valid reason for this deletion".

 

Vito

 

Il giorno lun 17 gen 2022 alle ore 15:19 Amir E. Aharoni 
 ha scritto:

Hallo!

 

There's an old MediaWiki feature: When an administrator deletes a page, a bit 
of its content is automatically added to an edit summary. This is later 
viewable in deletion logs.

 

If you edit in the English, German, or Italian Wikipedia, then you haven't 
actually seen this feature in years, because administrators in these wikis 
essentially removed it by locally blanking the system messages that make it 
work.

 

In many other wikis, however, this feature is still working.

 

Is it actually useful? Or should it perhaps be removed?

 

Here's a Phabricator task about it:

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T299351

 

If you have an opinion, weigh in there or here.

 

Thanks!


--
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 -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/4ZONY3L5LEPO45POJ2SWTPHKFFIJ63UR/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/VSGPRXX2MQKPG7PBYZAQHSONNLQAUNWE/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wikitech-l] Re: Uplifting the multimedia stack (was: Community Wishlist Survery)

2022-01-01 Thread Peter Southwood
“until a couple months ago, we didn't have backups for the media files”

How is that even possible?

Cheers, Peter

 

From: Amir Sarabadani [mailto:ladsgr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 01 January 2022 08:42
To: Wikitech-l
Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List; Wikimedia Commons Discussion List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wikitech-l] Re: Uplifting the multimedia stack 
(was: Community Wishlist Survery)

 

 

 

On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 12:42 AM Strainu  wrote:

> So where is the best current place to discuss scaling Commons, and all that 
> entails? 

My impression is that we don't have one. All we hear is "it needs to be 
planned", but there is no transparency on what that planning involves or when 
it actually happens.

> I'd be surprised if the bottleneck were people or budget 

The main problem I see is that we end up in this kind of situation. Scaling and 
bug fixing critical features should be part of the annual budget. Each line of 
code deployed to production wikis should have an owner and associated 
maintenance budget each year. Without this, the team will not even commit 
reviews - see the thread on wikitech a few months back where a volunteer 
programmer willing to work on Upload Wizard was basically told "We will not 
review your code. Go fork." 

 

There is "code stewardship program" and its goal is to find owners for 
components that don't have an owner (or undeploy them). Sometimes it's 
successful, sometimes it's not. I have been asking for a maintainer for 
FlaggedRevs for four years now, beta cluster is suffering from a similar 
situation, etc. etc. It takes time to find an owner for everything, to fill the 
gaps in places we don't have a team to handle those (e.g. Multimedia, you can't 
just hand over that to team responsible for security for example). More info at 
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_stewardship_reviews


> Some examples from recent discussions  

Also improvements to the Upload Wizard. There are quite a few open items in 
Phab on this. 

+1 


I really hope you will have better luck than others with bringing this issue up 
in the priority list for next year - multimedia support is growing more 
outdated by the minute. 

Honestly, the situation is more dire than you think. For example, until a 
couple months ago, we didn't have backups for the media files. There was a live 
copy in the secondary datacenter but for example if due to a software issue, we 
lost some files, they were gone. I would like to thank Jaime Crespo for pushing 
for it and implementing the backups.

 

But I beat my drum again, it's not something you can fix overnight. I'm sure 
people are monitoring this mailing list and are aware of the problem.

 

Best


Strainu 

Pe joi, 30 decembrie 2021, Samuel Klein  a scris:
> Separate thread.  I'm not sure which list is appropriate. 
> ... but not all the way to sentience.
>
> The annual community wishlist survey (implemented by a small team, possibly 
> in isolation?) may not be the mechanism for prioritizing large changes, but 
> the latter also deserves a community-curated priority queue.  To complement 
> the staff-maintained priorities in phab ~
> For core challenges (like Commons stability and capacity), I'd be surprised 
> if the bottleneck were people or budget.  We do need a shared understanding 
> of what issues are most important and most urgent, and how to solve them. For 
> instance, a way to turn Amir's recent email about the problem (and related 
> phab tickets) into a family of persistent, implementable specs and proposals 
> and their articulated obstacles.
> An issue tracker like phab is good for tracking the progress and dependencies 
> of agreed-upon tasks, but weak for discussing what is important, what we know 
> about it, how to address it. And weak for discussing ecosystem-design issues 
> that are important and need persistent updating but don't have a simple 
> checklist of steps.
> So where is the best current place to discuss scaling Commons, and all that 
> entails?  Some examples from recent discussions (most from the wm-l thread 
> below):
> - Uploads: Support for large file uploads / Keeping bulk upload tools online
> - Video: Debugging + rolling out the videojs player
> - Formats: Adding support for CML and dozens of other common high-demand file 
> formats
> - Thumbs: Updating thumbor and librsvg
> - Search: WCQS still down, noauth option wanted for tools
> - General: Finish implementing redesign of the image table
>
> SJ
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 6:26 AM Amir Sarabadani  wrote:
>>
>> I'm not debating your note. It is very valid that we lack proper support for 
>> multimedia stack. I myself wrote a detailed rant on how broken it is [1] but 
>> three notes:
>>  - Fixing something like this takes time, you need to assign the budget for 
>> it (which means it has to be done during the annual planning) and if gets 
>> approved, you need to start it with the fiscal year (meaning July 2022) and 
>> then hire (meaning, write JD, do recruitment, 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-30 Thread Peter Southwood
Is the community wishlist not for for projects run by volunteers? Volunteers do 
what they choose, employees do what they are paid for. Keeping the Wikis 
functional should be the work of employees and the WMF. 

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Gnangarra [mailto:gnanga...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 29 December 2021 07:37
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us 
and prepare

 

Kaya


Instead of putting resources into making more tools, how about putting more 
resources into sustainability. For a large part of the last 12 months Commons 
has been unable to upload large files, bulk upload tools falling over have been 
hampering efforts to engage with GLAMs.   Every other aspect of the WMF work 
has been put on hold while reviews into the systems take place. I think it's 
time to put new development on hold or at least limit priority and capacity 
then focus efforts on updating and upgrading existing tools. If those tools 
cant be fixed, rewrite them from scratch

 

Gnangarra

 

On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 12:08, Szymon Grabarczuk  
wrote:

The Community Wishlist Survey 2022 
  starts in 
less than two weeks (Monday 10 January 2022, 18:00 UTC 
 ). 
We, the team organizing the Survey, need your help.

*   Translate important messages 

  and/or
*   Promote the Survey 
  among 
anyone and everyone you know who has an account on wiki. Promote the Survey on 
social media, via instant messaging apps, in other groups and chats, in your 
WikiProject, Wikimedia affiliate - wherever contributors with registered 
accounts may be.
*   You may also start thinking about ideas for technical improvements or 
even writing them down in the CWS sandbox 
 .

Why are we asking? 

*   We have improved the documentation 
 . It's 
friendlier and easier to use. This will mean little if it's only in English.
*   Thousands of volunteers haven't participated in the Survey yet. We'd 
like to improve that, too. Three years ago, 1387 people participated. Last 
year, there were 1773 of them. We hope that in the upcoming edition, there will 
be even more - if you help us with translations. Also, you are better than us 
in contacting Wikimedians outside of wikis. We have prepared some images to 
share. More to come.

What is the Community Wishlist Survey? 

 

It's an annual survey that allows contributors to the Wikimedia projects to 
propose and vote for tools and platform improvements. Long years of experience 
in editing or technical skills are not required. 

 

Thank you for your time and attention. To those who have participated in the 
Survey - many thanks for your dedication.

 

See you in January!

 


  

 

Szymon Grabarczuk (he/him)

Community Relations Specialist

Wikimedia Foundation 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/XL37Y7D6N65ZXU7W43XP5KO5HFTK2CD7/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org




 

-- 

GN.

 2021

Celebrating 20 years of Wikipedia

 

 

Wikimania: Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! 
Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not 
specified.  
https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra

Noongarpedia: Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not 
specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! 
Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified. 
 
https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
My print shop: Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not 
specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! 
Filename not specified.  
https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u

 

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-29 Thread Peter Southwood
Fair comment. If you want to keep editors, make sure they have functioning 
tools. Is this not one of the reasons WMF was originally formed?

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: DerHexer via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 29 December 2021 12:11
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: DerHexer
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us 
and prepare

 

I have to agree with Gnangarra: Why should keeping one of our major projects 
running require a global popularity vote? The way how the various problems on 
Commons are (not!) handled by WMF and others is not acceptable anymore. We 
don't need a poll to detect that! It's not a wish we have, it's a demand we 
make: Get Commons fixed now, as soon as possible! And I don't care who does: 
WMF, WMDE, anybody else.

 

It's nice to have additional ressources for popular community wishes but clean 
up your own backyard first!

 

Best,

DerHexer (Top 10 contributor on Commons, Commons administrator, Steward)

 

 

Am Mittwoch, 29. Dezember 2021, 10:32:22 MEZ hat Amir Sarabadani 
 Folgendes geschrieben: 

 

 

The wishlist survey is defined as:

> The Community Wishlist Survey is an annual survey that allows contributors to 
> the Wikimedia projects to propose and vote for tools and platform improvements

 

That doesn't necessarily translate into just "new tools". The community can 
wish for better support of multimedia stack and improvements on the multimedia 
platform and If it gets enough votes, I'm hopeful it'll be picked up.

 

On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:02 AM Željko Blaće  wrote:

Nice. This looks much better than before. Previously it felt so many people had 
high hopes for projects that are outside of capacities that are committed to 
this project. I feel this needs to be a super clear fact from the start and not 
ask for the global community to commit XYZ number of hours in the actions of 
promoting, translating, proposing and decision making processes when developers 
can commit far less back to the same community. Otherwise it feels like 
unbalanced work from a more holistic perspective, but this is also 
non-exceptional...no? 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org



-- 

Amir (he/him)

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines  
 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZSZM4BRNWV3NIQ6RH66QBFFINLKMOIKG/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/X7GPV3LXCL647SEO6PE7EOBUHG53QB3U/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: Auction at Christie's

2021-12-06 Thread Peter Southwood
Cue extended rant by somebody that the board, Foundation comms and/or legal 
staff have no authority and/or are not competent to advise on this in 1, 2, 3 
...
Cheers,
P

-Original Message-
From: Andy Mabbett [mailto:a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk] 
Sent: 06 December 2021 15:35
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Marketing Mail] [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: Auction at 
Christie's

On Mon, 6 Dec 2021 at 07:36, Peter Southwood
 wrote:
>
> Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Quite. As Jimmy notes in the WP:AN discussion which has already been linked to:

   I was instructed to inform the community by the Board of the WMF
and advised by
   the Foundation comms and legal staff that a post to wikimedia-l and
to my talk
   page would be the right way to do it... I can equally imagine that
if I had defied the
   board and refused to communicate with the community about it, someone would
   be getting inflamed over that.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/RFWB4IYYPDXNSU7HHSXAILXWG325IGST/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/JZZMIRA3LKZ2ZLS7MRIOZI2AELVVHPC3/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: Auction at Christie's

2021-12-05 Thread Peter Southwood
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Cheers,

P

 

From: Adam Wight [mailto:adam.m.wi...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 03 December 2021 17:32
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Marketing Mail] [Wikimedia-l] Re: Auction at Christie's

 

This is a good opportunity for us to take a look at the new conflict of 
interest policies [1], in light of preventing this sort of email in the future. 
 In my opinion, the WMF Board had the right idea—this is a personal project, 
and broadcasting to a movement list gives a strong sense of capitalizing on 
fame and networks, at the expense of nudging us towards venal boosterism.

 

I'm sure this was an innocent idea and something good will be done with the 
money, but that's beside the point, we're not a forum for major donor press 
releases.  Thank you for sharing some of the thought process behind your post.

 

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest_policy/2021_updates

 

On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 3:10 PM Jimmy Wales  wrote:

Hi all,

I am writing to let you know that I am doing an auction with Christie’s auction 
house, commencing today and closing on December 15th. 

We’re auctioning two things - the original Strawberry iMac that I used during 
the founding time period of Wikipedia, and an NFT artwork that I created to 
commemorate the earliest moment of Wikipedia.

A bit of Q

**What is an NFT?**

NFT stands for ‘non fungible token’, there is a fairly thorough article about 
it on English Wikipedia   
.

**What is this NFT exactly?**

I saw earlier in the year that Tim Berners-Lee did an NFT of “the original 
source code of the web”.   In his own words: “"I’m selling a picture that I 
made, with a Python program that I wrote myself, of what the source code would 
look like if it was stuck on the wall and signed by me.”

I thought I should try to push forward from that and so instead of just doing a 
picture (screenshot) of what Wikipedia looked like when I first installed the 
Usemod software and typed “Hello, World!” I would prefer to do something 
interactive.

The artistic concept is not just to see what Wikipedia looked like to me in 
that moment, but to relive the experience: here is this incredible vulnerable 
thing, a wiki, and you dream of it becoming an encyclopedia for the whole 
world, but will it?  Will it be taken over by vandals and trolls instantly?  
What policies will you need?  What kind of community can you attract? 

**Will any portion of the proceeds go to the WMF?**

The Wikimedia Foundation board has explicitly asked that I not pledge any funds 
to Wikimedia.  (They aren’t asking me not to donate, just not to pledge to do 
so up front.)  I am pledging to donate to “help support a variety of charities 
working in the free culture world.”  I’ll decide after we see how it goes in 
terms of what exactly I’ll do!  (Advice welcome!  I’d be interested in a 
community process to help choose.)

I’ve worked with the WMF per the board’s instructions on getting approval on 
all the marketing materials to make sure that it’s clear that this is a 
personal project of mine and not a WMF thing at all.  I believe the WMF will 
also post about that.

**What about the environmental costs of creating an NFT?**

Ethereum is moving from 'Proof of Work' to 'Proof of Stake', which requires a 
lot less energy per NFT - I’m happy to see that and hope it happens soon.

In the meantime, I’ve looked for the highest estimate of the amount of 
electricity consumed to mint an NFT.  I’ve found an estimate that the average 
NFT minting consumes 340kWh.  For scale, my friend has a Tesla Model X, and 
340kWh would charge it about 3 ½ times.  This is roughly 81.6 kg of CO2.  For 
further comparison an economy-class ticket to NYC from London generates about 
1800 kilograms of CO2. (Citation needed, and very happy for anyone with 
expertise to help me improve these calculations.)

While I generally think it is better not to generate emissions than to generate 
and offset, I also think that generating withOUT offsetting is much worse.  So 
I’ll be finding the most pessimistic estimate of the CO2 that I’ve generated 
and offset it by 5x.

** What is the estimate for the auction? **

Christie’s was unable to offer any public estimate for either the computer or 
the NFT.  I can sincerely say that I have absolutely no idea what to expect.  
Given the current state of the NFT market, I’m very hopeful that some crypto 
whale will find this irresistible, who knows though?

I’ll be around for the next 8 hours or so to answer any questions but to keep 
it all centralized, let’s keep it on my English wikipedia talk page, 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jimbo_Wales  
 


Article at Christie’s website here:


[Wikimedia-l] Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: Closing the comment period for the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Draft Guidelines and next step

2021-11-27 Thread Peter Southwood
Fair comment. 
P

-Original Message-
From: nosebagb...@gmail.com [mailto:nosebagb...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 27 November 2021 13:04
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Marketing Mail] [Wikimedia-l] Re: Closing the comment period for
the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Draft Guidelines and next step

Hello,

I would make a couple of notes here:

One is that when you say "comment period will end", that can't be of the
process. 

There are numerous open questions that we have yet to see any draft policy
text on - they can't go into the final document without chance for open
review and further revision. 

While I've heard bits about how they will be discussed, we've seen nothing
formal and nothing in writing. 

Please let me know BEFORE the 29th how that will be handled to the
community's expectations. As the inherently most controversial bits (that's
why they were open questions!) the actual next needs MORE time to review
than the aspects already there, not less. 

Yours,

Nosebagbear
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/
message/GD5CSLNTF7XBCQVCEZT7CGD7XHQ2PRIQ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/SXTXR5H2SIO7YTK74GSJX66CWC2PMWFN/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org


[Wikimedia-l] Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: License for Wikifunctions and Abstract Wikipedia

2021-11-25 Thread Peter Southwood
This is a strong argument for CC-by-sa whenever possible to push for 
verifiability and traceability. The credit is secondary, almost irrelevant 
compared to being able to track down the origins.

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Andreas Kolbe [mailto:jayen...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 25 November 2021 14:52
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Marketing Mail] [Wikimedia-l] Re: License for Wikifunctions and 
Abstract Wikipedia

 

Thanks. The key question to my mind is whether abstract content and the 
resulting foreign-language text output should be CC0 (like Wikidata) or CC 
BY-SA (like Wikipedia). 

 

The difference is that with CC0, re-users do not have to credit Wikimedia or 
Wikipedia for the material they use. Voice assistants like Amazon Alexa, Apple 
Siri and Google's Assistant along with search engines like Google and Bing 
would no longer have to say that they got the material from a Wikimedia 
project. They would also be free to copyright any derivative works.

 

I think both of these results are undesirable, for reasons aptly described by 
Heather Ford in her Wikipedia@20 chapter, "The Rise of the Underdog".[1] 

 

Here is one part of the chapter that speaks to this:

 

---o0o---

 

"... Wikipedia’s facts are now increasingly extracted without credit by 
artificial intelligence processes that consume its knowledge and present it as 
objective fact.

 

"As one of most popular websites in the world, it is tempting in 2020 to see 
Wikipedia as a top dog in the world of facts, but the consumption of 
Wikipedia’s knowledge without credit introduces Wikipedia’s greatest 
existential threat to date. This is not just because of the ways in which 
third-party actors appropriate Wikipedia content and remove the links that 
might sustain the community in terms of contributions of donations and 
volunteer time. More important is that unsourced Wikipedia content threatens 
the principle of verifiability, one of the fundamental principles on which 
Wikipedia was built.

 

"Verifiability sets up a series of rights and obligations by readers and 
editors of Wikipedia to knowledge whose political and social status is 
transparent. By removing direct links to the Wikipedia article where statements 
originate from, search engines and digital assistants are removing the clues 
that readers could use to (a) evaluate the veracity of claims and (b) take 
active steps to change that information through consensus if they feel that it 
is false. Without the source of factual statements being attributed to 
Wikipedia, users will see those facts as solid, incontrovertible truth, when in 
reality they may have been extracted during a process of consensus building or 
at the moment in which the article was vandalized.

 

"Until now, platform companies have been asked to contribute to the Wikimedia 
Foundation’s annual fund-raising campaign to “give back” to what they are 
taking out of the commons.[23] 
  But 
contributions of cash will not solve what amounts to Wikipedia’s greatest 
existential threat to date. What is needed is a public campaign to reinstate 
the principle of verifiability in the content that is extracted from Wikipedia 
by platform companies. Users need to be able to understand (a) exactly where 
facts originate, (b) how stable or unstable those statements are, (c) how they 
might become involved in improving the quality of that information, and (d) the 
rules under which decisions about representation will be made.

 

"Wikipedia was once recognized as the underdog not only because it was 
underresourced but also, more importantly, because it represented the just 
fight against more powerful media who sought to limit the possibilities of 
people around the world to build knowledge products together. Today, the fight 
is a new one, and Wikipedia must adapt in order to survive.

 

"Sitting back and allowing platform companies to ingest Wikipedia’s knowledge 
and represent it as the incontrovertible truth rather than the messy and 
variable truths it actually depicts is an injustice. It is an injustice not 
only for Wikipedians but also for people around the world who use the resource 
— either directly on Wikimedia servers or indirectly via other platforms like 
search."

 

---o0o---

 

There is a lot at stake in this discussion.

 

Andreas

 

 

[1] https://hfordsa.medium.com/rise-of-the-underdog-92565503e4af

 

 

 

On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 9:25 PM Denny Vrandečić  
wrote:

Hello all,

Here is a conversation and decision we need to have before launch of 
Wikifunctions:

How should the contents of Abstract Wikipedia and Wikifunctions be licensed?

Since the discussion is expected to be potentially complicated, let us keep a 
single place of record for discussing this question:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia/Licensing_discussion

We would like the discussion to go on for four weeks and that we have some form 
of 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: Small gratitude to our fellow wikimedians

2021-11-09 Thread Peter Southwood
Seems a reasonable idea. Cheers, Peter

 

From: Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
[mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 09 November 2021 14:16
To: 'Wikimedia Mailing List'
Cc: Alessandro Marchetti
Subject: [Marketing Mail] [Wikimedia-l] Re: Small gratitude to our fellow 
wikimedians

 

 

Yes, a user status/right “deceased" is IMHO important. It was also the reason 
why I expected a SUL policy to be created soon or later. I tried two or three 
time to raise the issue since 2016.

 

Now some projects block accounts, but it's not a standard process. It has to be 
fixed soon or later. At the moment, a relative can reuse an old account in 
theory on another platform, if they wish to do so. For example I find archive 
of images of my deceased partner and despite the user being blocked on a local 
wikipedia, I start to upload them on Commons in their name. Everybody has their 
way to cope with grief. Do we accept this or not?

 

Alessandro

Il martedì 9 novembre 2021, 10:17:51 CET, Geert Van Pamel  
ha scritto: 

 

 

I do find this an excellent proposal.

 

Wouldn’t it be good to also implement a user status/right “deceased” to 
identify those accounts?

 

This information could be shown to their user rights page e.g. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:UserRights/Geertivp?

 

One could get a list of volunteers that are no longer amongst us via 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ListUsers.

 

Geert Van Pamel

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines  
 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/VVK2TIYRJ56RL7JB2SDBZ2VPLZLSC7L3/


To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/SB672P4RHNHF3F3E7TIDXBT56ZKQMUJ4/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: About raising money

2021-09-28 Thread Peter Southwood
I think perhaps you attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained 
by incompetence. 

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Todd Allen [mailto:toddmal...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 28 September 2021 10:01
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Marketing Mail] [Wikimedia-l] Re: About raising money

 

It's not only that.

 

When the WMF uses its funds to actively act against its volunteer community 
(ACTRIAL, MEDIAVIEWER, FRAMBAN, and more lately UCOC), that raises issues 
beyond disgust. The projects we spent our time building are now actively being 
used to do things we don't want to do. It is not just that WMF is using its 
money on frivolous or useless projects (though that would be a problem), it is 
that WMF is using its funds from what we built to actively punch us in the face 
and act against us.

 

If WMF were using its funds to take trips out to Barbados for no reason, 
well--we'd probably still be irritated about that. But use our funds to 
actively stomp on our volunteer community, and ignore what they say?

 

Well that's not just disgust. That's anger, and that's what you're seeing.

 

Regards,

 

Todd Allen

 

On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 2:51 PM Guillaume Paumier  
wrote:

Hi,

 

(Sending this as a personal opinion, albeit one informed by my work on revenue 
strategy in the past few years.)

 

Discussions about fundraising in the Wikimedia movement often involve the same 
arguments over time. My theory, after observing and participating in those 
discussions for 15 years, is the following.

 

Objections to Wikimedia fundraising (and, more broadly, revenue generation) 
tend to stem from three main sources:

* the moral superiority of financial disinterest

* outlandish budgets and fundraising goals

* improper means used to raise money.

 

The first one is relatively simple. A significant number of us find any 
relationship between money and free knowledge viscerally disgusting. We've been 
editing as volunteers for years, devoting our free time to the advancement of 
humankind through knowledge. We have done so through countless acts of 
selflessness. Our financial disinterest is inextricably woven into our identity 
as Wikimedians. The Foundation should only raise the minimum funds required to 
"keep the lights on." Anything more is an attempt to profit from our free 
labor, and that's revolting. 

 

This is not unlike discussions of business models in the libre software 
community; we can also see those arguments surface in discussions around paid 
editing. I will leave the moral argument aside, because little can be done to 
change individual identities and moral judgments of money. But let's name them 
explicitly, in hopes that we can separate them from more fact-based arguments, 
if we are willing and able.

 

The second point of contention is how much we raise. To those of us who 
remember the early years ("May we ask y'all to chip in a few dollars so we can 
buy our second server?!"), raising $150+ million a year these days seems 
extravagant, and probably always will. The much smaller budgets from our past 
act as cognitive anchors, [1] and in comparison recent budgets appear greedily 
outsized. Instead of being outraged by the growth of the budget, we should 
instead ask ourselves how much money we really need.

 

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring_(cognitive_bias)

 

And the fact is that, as a movement, we need as much money as we can get to 
advance our mission. Our vision is so ambitious and expansive that it is also 
bound to be inevitably expensive. This is something that the Board understood: 
shortly after endorsing the Strategic Direction in 2017, they directed the 
Foundation to prepare to raise more funds than usual, to be able to move 
towards our collective vision for 2030. [2] My fellow members of the working 
group on Revenue Streams for movement strategy also understood the scope of the 
movement's ambitions: the first guiding question for our work was how to 
"maximize revenue for the movement". [3]

 

[2] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/November_2017_-_Statement_endorsing_future_resourcing_and_direction_of_the_organization

[3] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Revenue_Streams#Guiding_Questions

 

People who attended the meeting of strategy working groups in Berlin in early 
2018 might remember a thought exercise led by the Revenue Streams group. In it, 
we estimated that coming closer to our vision would probably require an annual 
budget for the movement in the vicinity of a billion dollars. There is nothing 
intrinsically outrageous about that amount, as long as the money advances the 
mission efficiently and equitably. The International Committee of the Red Cross 
had a global budget of $1.6 billion in 2016.


And that's the heart of the argument about fundraising goals; it's less about 
how much we raise, and more about what we spend it on. Moral argument aside, 

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikipedia issues in UNDARK.org #Opinion article to check...

2021-08-30 Thread Peter Southwood
Are these “facts of the matter” available for evidence focused rational 
consideration?

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Mike Godwin [mailto:mnemo...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 30 August 2021 02:30
To: Andreas Kolbe
Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikipedia issues in UNDARK.org #Opinion article to 
check...

 

Andreas writes

 

On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 11:12 AM Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

But unless I am totally misreading you, your attitude sounds a lot like "Why 
should anyone care (or have cared) about Croatian and all these other languages 
spoken in some countries at the other end of the world?" If that does reflect 
your sentiment, then your mindset seems very much out of tune with WMF thought 
today.

 

The most generous assessment of this gloss is that you are, in fact, totally 
misreading me. The less generous assessments I leave to the rhetorically 
inclined reader.  

 

I am not sure you are actually interested in an answer here, but what I did do, 
for what it's worth, was to make sure that the WP Signpost and WP Kurier 
covered the story when it first broke, mention it repeatedly over the years in 
my writing on WO and in the Signpost, as well as in correspondence with 
journalists and academics, and submit the aforementioned idea to the WMF – to 
have experts review human rights topics' coverage in Wikipedia language 
versions that may be subject to undue political influence, and publicly report 
the results. I think that's about all you could have reasonably expected me to 
have done here.

 

I also think it is reasonable to expect you not to default to presuming things 
about the motives of WMF personnel in the absence of evidence. But that's 
me--I'm evidence-focused. 

 

The fact of the matter is that for about a decade, one of Wikipedia's top-50 
language versions promoted extremist content, with the WMF's full knowledge. 
That is Not A Good Thing, whether you work for the WMF or not, and you have 
given no discernible reason why what was done this year could not have been 
done years ago, when the WMF was first made aware of the situation.

 

Your characterization of "the fact of the matter" is morally confused. To wit, 
you want to imply that if some people at WMF knew something about what was 
happening in the Croatian Wikipedia, it follows that WMF institutionally 
decided, as a matter of policy, not to do what you wish they might have done. 
You do not have "the facts of the matter" that demonstrate such an 
institutional decision took place.

 

Once again, you default to moral condemnation, and it seems self-evident that 
you're doing so because it's cheaper and easier than understanding what might 
actually have happened.

 

Mike Godwin

 

 

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WJV5JTVLXWRJR47IM37FSPBZLA5AT6S7/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikipedia issues in UNDARK.org #Opinion article to check...

2021-08-18 Thread Peter Southwood
Gerard,

With whom do you beg to differ?

P

 

From: Gerard Meijssen [mailto:gerard.meijs...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 17 August 2021 09:32
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikipedia issues in UNDARK.org #Opinion article to 
check...

 

Hoi,

I beg to differ. If anything the WMF needs to focus us more on the imbalance 
that exists between the fundamental bias toward English versus all other 
languages. For me the easiest picking is to share in the sum of the knowledge 
that is available to us. To get there simple goals like "a nine year old is 
able to find pictures in Commons" are fundamental. As it is, this is not even 
considered. 

Thanks,

   GerardM

 

On Tue, 17 Aug 2021 at 08:46, Peter Southwood  
wrote:

And it is based on a fundamental misconception of the legally mandated role of 
the WMF. Everything based on this false premise, fails.

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Željko Blaće [mailto:zbl...@mi2.hr] 
Sent: 17 August 2021 06:18
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia issues in UNDARK.org #Opinion article to 
check...

 

...considering recent discussions on Wikimania and here, this is maybe a useful 
opinion piece from  https:// 
UNDARK.org/2021/08/12/wikipedia-has-a-language-problem-heres-how-to-fix-it/ 


It is packed with good insights and while I do not agree with all this, the 
final sentence feels kind of brilliant: ... to achieve its stated mission to 
“help everyone share in the sum of all knowledge,” they might first need to 
create the sum of all Wikipedias.

 

Best Z. Blace

 

 


 
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient>
 

Virus-free.  
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient>
 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/KYVKAVWN4EEFQ7OLAZYEPUXZA2PJLB7M/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/UGJ4SMD76OOHM45VDGN7YP3H5T5DNDSD/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikipedia issues in UNDARK.org #Opinion article to check...

2021-08-17 Thread Peter Southwood
And it is based on a fundamental misconception of the legally mandated role of 
the WMF. Everything based on this false premise, fails.

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Željko Blaće [mailto:zbl...@mi2.hr] 
Sent: 17 August 2021 06:18
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia issues in UNDARK.org #Opinion article to 
check...

 

...considering recent discussions on Wikimania and here, this is maybe a useful 
opinion piece from  https:// 
UNDARK.org/2021/08/12/wikipedia-has-a-language-problem-heres-how-to-fix-it/ 


It is packed with good insights and while I do not agree with all this, the 
final sentence feels kind of brilliant: ... to achieve its stated mission to 
“help everyone share in the sum of all knowledge,” they might first need to 
create the sum of all Wikipedias.

 

Best Z. Blace

 

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/KYVKAVWN4EEFQ7OLAZYEPUXZA2PJLB7M/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Blocking users for Palestinian flag

2021-07-02 Thread Peter Southwood
The problem is which political opinions would be acceptable on a user page, and 
who gets to decide this. We are expected to edit neutrally, so expressing a 
political opinion on a user page could be  considered a declaration of 
partisanship which could extend to editing behaviour.  

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Frederick Noronha [mailto:fredericknoro...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 30 June 2021 00:57
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Blocking users for Palestinian flag

 

Just seeking clarity:

Is there anything wrong with expressing a political opinion on a userpage? 

A lot of our badges, flags, icons might have some or the other political 
history behind them, just that these are seen as more "normal" by today's 
standards. At one time, slavery too was considered quite legal.

Can't this be discussed in the public domain?

FN

 

On Wed, 30 Jun 2021 at 03:34, Gereon Kalkuhl  wrote:

Dear 4nn1|2,

Thank you for informing us about the incident. But to be clear: You write that 
it's about a Palestinian flag. Yet actually it's about a flag with a statement: 
free Palestine. There's a difference. And a member of the Persian Wikipedia 
removed the deletion request on Commons and kept the file on the same day. I'm 
not judging anything here, but please be more precise in your accusations.

Thank you,
Gereon

Am 29.06.2021 um 20:34 schrieb Amir Sarabadani:

If anyone is interested to know about this incident. Send me a private message 
and I can explain better.

 

Best

 

On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 8:17 PM 4nn1l2 <4nn1l2.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Wikimedians, 

 

Persian Wikipedia has reached a new level in their arbitrary and nonesense 
adminship. They have blocked me for placing a Palestinian flag on my userpage 
(of course they have already removed it from my userpage and you need to see a 
previous revision of my userpage).

 

https://fa.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A8%D8%B1:4nn1l2
 

 =32191672

 

Another user has nominated the file for deletion on Commons!

 

I am admin on Commons myself and I'm fed up with how fawiki is managed. They 
block users for the most friviolous reasons.

 

What does this mean?

 

Yours faithfully,

User:4nn1l2

 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/QKGG6JWW5S4SI4Q5XN5ZUXG5FPE5JOKE/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org



-- 

Amir (he/him)

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/TCKQO6QDYJJGGJUYG623C7KRQHQPIUVQ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/UAHL5ZUAFLXOFFWLSIUXHIK5UHWRIB2N/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org




 

-- 

 

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

_/  FN * फ्रेड्रिक नोरोन्या * فريدريك نورونيا‎ +91-9822122436 

_/  See a different Goa here, via 

_/  https://youtube.com/c/frederickfnnoronha

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

 

 


 

 

Virus-free.  

 www.avg.com 

 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WDBOEJIAM4T72JYZQ2VFBHEP4FGAGEAY/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Affiliations Committee Call for Candidates - June 2021

2021-05-17 Thread Peter Southwood
Is all this stuff somewhere on Meta?

 

From: Isaac Olatunde [mailto:reachout2is...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 17 May 2021 01:07
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Affiliations Committee Call for Candidates - June 
2021

 

To add to Risker's question, which subcommittee is responsible for appointing 
new members of the affiliation committee? Or are new members selected or 
appointed by the WMF board?

 

Regards

 

Isaac

 

On Sun, 16 May 2021, 22:11 Risker,  wrote:

Thanks, Jeffrey; it's a start.  Perhaps asking specific questions will be more 
helpful.

 

Which subcommittee is responsible for:

*establishing standards for new affiliates (differentiated by type) and 
existing affiliates?  Are they the same group, or is this responsibility split?
*   collecting  and reviewing information to verify that the affiliates are 
meeting their standards?
*   supporting and encouraging existing affiliates to meet those standards?
*   assisting in the ongoing development of affiliates
*   determining whether an affiliate has fallen so far below standard that 
it can no longer continue?
*   revoking the approval of an affiliate (or recommending revocation - in 
which case, to whom does it make the recommendation?)
*   advocating within the movement on the value of the affiliate system

Does the Affiliates Committee continue to be a committee of the WMF Board of 
Trustees?  

 

Is it expected to have any role in recommendations about funding (or 
denying/withdrawing funding) to new and existing affiliates, now that the FDC 
has essentially been eliminated, either as a group or through one or the other 
of its subcommittees?

 

What range of conflict resolution tools will be available to the conflict 
subcommittee?  

 

 These were the first questions that came to me when I first saw your email.  I 
would not be surprised if others have more questions. 

 

Risker/Anne

 

On Sun, 16 May 2021 at 15:03, Jeffrey Keefer  wrote:

Risker-

 

Thank you for question on this. 

 

The descriptions are being revised, but let me try to briefly summarize them so 
there is something to work with for now. 

 

The Recognitions Subcommittee is involved with helping new Affiliates (User 
Groups, Chapters, and Thematic Organizations) to form and be recognized groups 
within the Movement. This involves clarifying their scope and ensuring there is 
no confusion in overlap of intentions. 

 

The Conflicts Subcommittee helps Affiliates when conflicts arise within or 
between Affiliates, including attempts to resolve these issues or ideally 
prevent them if possible. 

 

I hope this is helpful, even in this shortened form. 

 

Thank you. 


-

Jeffrey
User:FULBERT

 





On May 16, 2021, at 12:09 AM, Risker  wrote:

 

Jeffrey, could you please link to a description of the roles and 
responsibilities of members of the two subcommittees?  You've mentioned the 
expected skillset for each, but have not explained what they are actually 
expected to be responsible for. 

 

Thanks,

 

Risker/Anne

 

On Sat, 15 May 2021 at 14:41, Jeffrey Keefer  wrote:

The Affiliations Committee 
  – 
the committee responsible for guiding volunteers in establishing Wikimedia 
chapters, thematic organizations, and user groups – is looking for new members!

The main role of the AffCom is to guide groups of volunteers that are 
interested in forming Wikimedia affiliates. We review applications from new 
groups, answer questions and provide advice about the different Wikimedia 
affiliation models and processes, review affiliate bylaws for compliance with 
requirements and best practices, and update the Wikimedia Foundation Board of 
Trustees as well as advise them on issues connected to chapters, thematic 
organizations and Wikimedia user groups.

The committee consists of five to fifteen members, selected at least once every 
year, to serve two-year terms. 

Being a part of the AffCom requires communication with volunteers all over the 
world, negotiating skills, cultural sensitivity, and the ability to understand 
legal texts. We look for a mix of different skill sets in our members. 

Responsibilities

*   Availability of up to 5-8 hours per month

*   Participate in monthly one and two-hour voice/video meetings

*   Commitment to carry out assigned tasks in a given time.

*   Facilitate and support communications

*   Affiliate Support and growth

Required and Recommended Abilities, Skills, Knowledge for Affiliations 
Committee Members

Strong interpersonal relationship among members of the committee and also with 
the Wikimedia community members. Across all committee members, there are 
additional relevant skills as well as requirements which help to support the 
committee and its sustainability which include both required and relevant 
general skills

Required

*   Fluency in English
*   

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board Ratification of Universal Code of Conduct

2021-02-20 Thread Peter Southwood
In what way would this clarify anything? Common sense is not so common, and 
sometimes is not even rational. Reasonable person at least provides some 
conditions for testing, though is also clearly not very useful in a 
multicultural environment.

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Arthur Cheung
Sent: 20 February 2021 20:33
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board Ratification of Universal Code of Conduct

 

Dear all,

 

Please allow me to add a solution to issue 1 as a brilliant colleague reminded 
my mistake for not putting any solution for that problem.

 

My ideal solution is to replace the word "reasonable person" with some 
equivalent words like "common sense" though that is not accurate as "reasonable 
man". The criteria will not be removed along with the replacement of the word 
"reasonable person". The 7 examples in current version are definitely not 
problematic and I would encourage to make such a list.

 

The reason is that for users from out of common law world, they might need a 
little bit training to get the sense of judgment. That is a waste of manpower 
and time and, makes the Code not universal enough. I would like to see more 
documents, even with examples, to explain and form the mind of "commons sense". 
That great fellow said we may make some FQA, and I think that is a great 
solution.

 

I apology for any inconvenience caused by that. If there is any other issue, 
you may find me on Telegram or by email.

 

Best Regards,

Arthur Cheung 
User:だ*ぜ (Dasze)

Board Member of Wikimedia Community User Group Hong Kong (WMHKG)

Telegram: @Dasze





Arthur Cheung  於 2021年2月20日 P.M.11:50 寫道:

 

Dear all,

 

I would like to share some ideas regarding UCoC and experience while I was 
acting as an administrator of Chinese Wikipedia chatting groups. Please first 
allow me to introduce myself: I used to be a former drafter of Chinese 
Wikipedia IRC protocol (Zhwiki’s IRCPOL) but abandoned to continue the work for 
the reason of massive problems existing in Chinese Wikipedia members that makes 
me feel unable and powerless to change through improving local protocols.

 

Within my knowledge and experience, and apart from political disputes, I have 
found several problems that might not or seldom occurred in the anglophone 
communities:

 

1. Non-Universal Usage:

The rules as to harassment stated that "Behaviour can be considered harassment 
if it is beyond what a reasonable person would be expected to tolerate in a 
global, intercultural environment". That requires the administrators for the 
knowledge of "reasonable man test". Such a test is widely and commonly used, 
and regarded as the objective test in the common law world. However, it is 
unfriendly for people from countries adopting legal systems other than the 
common law system. Those people shall be familiar with the test which is 
relatively depending on a subjective judgment of an admin on a certain issue. 
The uncertainty of the test is confirmed in various appeal cases in which the 
House of Lords held that the Court of Appeal made mistakes in adopting this 
test. Without a declaration of the certain standards or necessary training, I 
think it is inappropriate to use the term "reasonable man" since the test, 
which was already being adopted in Zhwiki’s IRCPOL before the UCoC was 
well-drafted and completed, has been proved its unfriendliness to those who 
come from China and Taiwan where both jurisdictions are of the Continental Law.

 

2. Connective Penalties in Instant Messaging (IM) and on Wikimedia Projects 

The user’s behaviours in IM may affect people’s view of that user. However, it 
is unclear whether the restriction on Wikimedia Projects can be given directly 
to a user breached the UCoC or, breached policies and guidelines in IM (such as 
canvassing). Without Safe and Trustee team or Stewards or Ombudsman Commission, 
can the administrators (admins) use the messages in IM as evidence to punish 
the wrongdoers in Wikipedia or other projects? I wish the Community and the 
Board may clarify that in UCoC.

 

3. Refusal of User Rights:

Some admins disagree with the point that users have the right of freedom of 
speech but adopted the rules of "Wikipedia:User access level" which the right 
for using instant messaging is a user access level and can be withdrawn. That 
causes admins to prefer to use the restriction and penalty which is beyond the 
reasonable proportionality for groups' order and peacefulness. That may cause 
the problem of admins’ preference on rules to be adopted for punishment purpose 
rather than for educational purpose in certain events. For example, I have seen 
that several Chinese Wikipedian involved in oral conflicts which the admin 
somehow prefer to warn and mute both sides for the reason of civility, instead 
of dispute resolving. User rights might be a blocker for admins and bureaucrats 
to think of a 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

2020-10-01 Thread Peter Southwood
If things are as bad as that then there should be and might already be an 
offshore backup, possibly more than one, as it is a no-brainer, and I don’t 
think WMF tech management  and the board are stupid, and nor are those who 
would wish to prevent it from happening. But plausible deniability. Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Christophe Henner
Sent: 30 September 2020 23:07
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moving the technical infrastructure out of the US

Hi everyone,

Options to mitigate any risks are numerous, especially when it comes to
content distribution (private/semi-private/public/delegated/federated/a mix
of everything) but given the current context I would restrain from having
this as a public / community discussion.

We, community members, would most probably have great inputs but when one
is dealing with this kind of topic, designing contingencies plan, one has
to be ful of what information can be public. I have no idea whether staff
is working on such a topic, and it is better that way.

But we, as community members and awesome human beings, must be mindful of
some things:

   - The people in charge of that topic are mostly US Citizens. The current
   political and social climate is most probably draining their energy.
   Imagine having to manage it both from a personal and professional
   standpoint. Top that doing it for something as important as our projects.
   We cannot fathom their anxiety levels and should not add any to it.
   - Sending email about this topic, they have to read it. They most
   probably have to discuss, debate and balance whether they should answer or
   not. Imagine adding that to the first point.
   - They know for a fact, remember a lot of community members are staff,
   that community could be helping. But they can't ask for it.
   - Top all of that with them knowing that whatever course of action they
   might pick, it comes with a toll. Whether it is to talk about it here, and
   perhaps hinder their efforts, or not talk about it here and be perceived as
   ignoring the community.
   - Top all of that with the stress of trying to do their job in a global
   pandemic situation that might have them with loved ones at risk. Or with
   the need to care daily for young / elderly people.
   - Top that with the fact that they most probably all have relatives that
   at best are in financial struggle, or health struggles or are managing with
   the loss of loved ones.

Take a pause. Try to step in that space. Imagine how you would feel.
Multiply that by a hundred.

I would recommend we (community members) restrain from talking about it.
Perhaps what could be helpful, I am saying could, is for the people that do
actually have knowledge on those topics to just say they are available to
help if needs be with your area of expertise.

If no one at the Foundation acknowledges this thread or your emails, it is
ok. It doesn't mean you are not valued, it means that you are being spared
from that weight. We can provide support, but we should be mindful not to
increase their current level of stress.

Please all take care of yourselves, loved ones and each other

PS: I said staff, but read it as "anyone with an official Wikimedia
Foundation capacity". I know for a fact how those situations can be hard to
manage when you are a volunteer board member in the shadow too.


--
Christophe


On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 at 21:32, Steven Walling 
wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 12:22 PM Nathan  wrote:
>
> > Well, to Steven's point that you might need a jurisdiction where
> corporate
> > officers and employees aren't subject to extradition... I believe Germany
> > does in fact have an extradition treaty with the United States.
> >
>
> The chapters do seem like the obvious potentially viable easy
> solution here, if WMF set up that contingency plan.
>
> For instance, if WMDE did take over in an emergency, then the critical
> difference is that Germany doesn't extradite its own citizens to the US. So
> there'd just have to be a complete handoff of primary hosting to outside
> the US and some kind of agreement for WMDE (or pick your chapter) to take
> over operational control. There's probably a lot that real lawyers, of
> which I am not one, would know better here.
>
>
> > So far the criteria I'm hearing from the comments here:
> >
> > 1) Politically stable
> > 2) Liberal political environment
> > 3) Strong protections against government interference in relevant
> > operations
> > 4) Section 230-like protection against liability for user content
> > 5) No natural disasters like fires, floods, hurricanes, volcanoes, etc.
> > 6) Strong technological sophistication - preferably a robust technology
> > industry that can supply local talent for WMF needs
> > 7) Protections in the law for data privacy
> > 8) Availability of renewable energy sources and other resources that
> allow
> > for 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [feedback requested] Taxonomy of knowledge gaps

2020-09-26 Thread Peter Southwood
Good points. 
Are these maybe covered in a future stage of the project?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Samuel Klein
Sent: 26 September 2020 19:26
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [feedback requested] Taxonomy of knowledge gaps

Thank you Leila -- I appreciate the reflection and the update here.  The
paper is thorough and methodical in its approach, which makes it easier for
me to see a problem (for my own ideas):

I don't see a focus on the primary tremendous *gaps *-- which for content
is depth + breadth + freshness, and for contributors is reach, and for
readers is reach in much of the world.
I do see an excellent discussion of systemic *bias*, but mostly treated as
*static* bias of what is there, and less *dynamic* bias of what we exclude
or disallow or discourage.

I left detailed feedback on meta
.
I would welcome any help in aligning the way I think about this w/  your
work (if that's desired).
Perhaps best to address there, since it is all about refactoring and may
benefit from that.  But I am posting the heart of it below for completeness:

===
Here are the first things I think of around coverage gaps.  Only the 0th
item seems to directly fit the current taxonomy...

0) exclusion via lack of awareness, interest, or expertise
1) exclusion via deletionism
2) exclusion via topic notability norms (including pop culture + current
events)
3) exclusion via source notability + limiting source formats
4) exclusion via license pessimism
5) exclusion via file format (!) and codec pessimism
6) exclusion of dense specialist knowledge via review bottlenecks
7) exclusion via knowledge type [model, dataset, map layer]
8) exclusion / rejection via behavior on the projects
9) exclusion / rejection under 1-4 via differential application of policy

Some of these, like file-format and review-bottleneck exclusion, are
primarily technical restrictions.
Some of these, like the first ~4 above, are social+regulatory+technical
restrictions that could be alleviated with simple tools (including
extensions, alternatives, and sandboxes) -- just as nupedia's social
restrictions were alleviated w/ the technical solution of a wiki for the
drafting stage.
And the last two are purely social restrictions, projecting systemic bias
in the community of practice onto who joins and what contributions are
welcomed. I'd like to see that subset of gaps addressed directly, and not
split up across other parts of a taxonomy.

===
Wiki♥, Sam.
___
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, 



-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Moderation notice

2020-09-13 Thread Peter Southwood
Unfortunately I think all these points are valid. These behavious do not 
improve communication for many of us. There seems to be a choice between 
freedom of expression and effective communication in a multicultural group. 
There is theoretically the option of asking for clarification, but it is often 
ignored. Sometimes bluntly refused, and sometimes claimed not to be necessary.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Eduardo Testart
Sent: 12 September 2020 22:45
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice

Hi All,

I just wanted to give my opinion on how to make things more civil and
gentle in general, and also to add clarity to the threads. As a non-English
native speaker, there are many things I consider do not help at all in
written discussions in general in any given list, most of the time when
these things are done, then everything turns challenging, complicated, or
sadly blatantly uncivil:

1) Irony
2) Jokes
3) Long and numerous paragraphs (extensive writing)
4) Acronyms

I believe these things are very important to pay attention too and should
be avoided, no matter what we are feeling or thinking about any specific
subject. Not doing so regularly leads to conflictive states, and paying
attention to the latter and restraining from doing so normally contributes
to open discussions.

I believe also that helps a lot to reduce:
5) Sayings and expressions

Maybe all this resonates with someone, and if not, it's also ok :]


Cheers!

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 1:00 PM Asaf Bartov  wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 6:50 PM Dan Szymborski 
> wrote:
>
> > As long as people are going to continue to talk about me and imply that
> I'm
> > actually *harassing* people, then I feel I have a right to defend myself.
> >
>
> Nobody ever denied you that right.
>
> I brought up that the UCoC standard is a reasonable person standard, not a
> > "most offended person" standard and this was never addressed. Instead, I
> > was demeaned by being placed on a special moderation protocol. Asaf
> Bartov
> > threatened me that if I continued to defend myself -- even as people
> > continued to discuss me -- that *I'm* hijacking the thread.
>
>
> What I actually wrote to you, and I quote, was:
>
> "I also must insist that you not hijack this thread, which is for
> discussing the draft UCoC.  If you see value in bringing up your concerns
> on those other matters on this list, please do so on separate threads.
> Since you have expressed the opinion that this UCoC draft is illegitimate,
> I suggest there is really no reason for you to post further on this thread,
> leaving it for those who *would* like to discuss it."
>
> I then did indeed threaten that *if you continue to disrupt the UCoC
> thread*, your messages won't be let through. As you can see, your latest
> letter, since it was no longer disrupting the UCoC thread, *was* let
> through.
>
> I asked Asaf if Koerner was given a similar warning for a very long, smug,
> > patronizing screed about me as on-topic. Bartov reiterated that nobody
> else
> > was given any warning about off-topic communication. Only *I* am not
> > allowed to talk about *my* apparent offense.
> >
>
> Since now you quote a question you asked privately, I will quote the answer
> I gave you:
>
> 
> "No, I did not warn Ms. Koerner about thread hijacking, because the very
> problem with thread hijacking is that once the change of topic is made,
> people legitimately want to respond. I have not observed Ms. Koerner
> *initiating* a thread hijack.
>
> I do encourage you to continue contributing on the list, including in
> criticizing whatever flaws you find in the Foundation's actions.  I
> certainly find such flaws myself.
>
> But again, as a professional, perhaps you can be less ornery and more
> measured in expressing the *substance* of your concerns. It would at the
> very least be no less effective, and perhaps more so."
> 
>
>A.
> --
> Asaf Bartov 
> ___
> 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,
> 
>


-- 
Eduardo Testart
(56)(98) 293 5278 Móvil
___
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, 



-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com



Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation and affiliates disclosing salaries on job ads & the effect of this on workplace equity

2020-09-12 Thread Peter Southwood
This is the point I was working on. I also have no confident answer to this 
problem, but have a gut feel it is somewhere in between the extremes. There is 
also the point that most people have some choice in where they live, though I 
do not have any useful suggestion of how that should be factored into the 
calculation. San Francisco does seem to be a rather expensively arbitrary 
choice of address, which may be influencing the way the foundation operates. 
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Dan Garry (Deskana)
Sent: 12 September 2020 18:38
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation and affiliates disclosing salaries on job 
ads & the effect of this on workplace equity

On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 12:39, Nathan  wrote:

> Shouldn't two candidates for the same position for the same company get
> roughly the same salary, regardless of where they live?
>

I don't know. Maybe.

Within the US, there are markets where decent, experienced software
engineers earn half of what a software engineer in San Francisco would
earn, and they would also probably have a comparable quality of life.
Outside the US, there are markets out there where the going rate
for decent, experienced software engineers is 15 times less than the going
rate for a software engineer in San Francisco. Due to the relative decrease
in purchasing power, the salary that's 15 times lower gives these people a
good quality of life comparable to (or possibly even better than) life in
San Francisco. Is it exploiting them to pay them 15 times less given that
their quality of life is the same, or even higher, than people in San
Francisco? Would it be fair to people in San Francisco, or other locations,
to do this? Should the Wikimedia Foundation pay people in this market 15
times more than they would earn at another company? As Gergő said, would
that be a responsible use of donor funds?

I don't have the answer to these questions. They are very hard questions
where there is no obviously correct answer.

Dan
___
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, 



-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Foundation and affiliates disclosing salaries on job ads & the effect of this on workplace equity

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
On one side it would be nice to pay equal rate for equal work, on the other
would be equal personal benefit for equal work. Then there is the economics
of getting value for money, and the politics of diversity. It is a tricky
issue.
Cheers,
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Nathan
Sent: 11 September 2020 14:10
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation and affiliates disclosing salaries on
job ads & the effect of this on workplace equity

I'm sure it will vary considerably. Does that matter? When measuring
internal equity, do we measure based on how expensive of a  lifestyle each
employee leads?

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020, 7:46 AM Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Should they? Their cost of living expenses may vary considerably.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf
> Of Nathan
> Sent: 11 September 2020 13:39
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation and affiliates disclosing salaries
on
> job ads & the effect of this on workplace equity
>
> Dan,
>
> Shouldn't two candidates for the same position for the same company get
> roughly the same salary, regardless of where they live?
>
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2020, 7:00 AM Dan Garry (Deskana) 
> wrote:
>
> > Asking candidates for their current salary is prohibited in San
Francisco
> > as of July 2018 [1] which means that, as a San Francisco based
> > organisation, the Foundation will undoubtedly not be doing this. To my
> > knowledge, this wasn't done by the Foundation before either, but we can
> > confidently state that it won't be done now.
> >
> > There are some complexities in disclosing salary ranges for the
> Foundation.
> > One practice that can be used for encouraging diversity in candidate
> > applications is to specify that a position is open to candidates with a
> > wide range of experience and in all locations in the world, in which
case
> > the salary range posted will be so large that it will basically be
> > meaningless. On the other hand, another good practice for encouraging
> > diversity is to source internally for senior positions, which opens up
> more
> > junior roles that can be sourced externally, in which case a salary
range
> > can be more meaningful and helpful. It's hard to figure out what the
> right
> > balance is.
> >
> > Regardless, more public transparency in salary banding would be good to
> > see.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > [1]:
> >
> >
>
>
https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-
> updates/pages/san-francisco-bans-salary-history-questions.aspx
>
<https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local
-updates/pages/san-francisco-bans-salary-history-questions.aspx>
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 10:44, Chris Keating 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Good morning everyone!
> > >
> > > There's a campaign(1) for nonprofits to disclose the salaries, or at
> > least
> > > salary ranges, on job ads.
> > >
> > > An increasing body of evidence(2) shows that practices like not
> > disclosing
> > > expected pay, and requiring applicants to disclose their current
> salary,
> > is
> > > harmful to equity in the workplace.
> > >
> > > Not disclosing salaries affects pay levels within the organisation -
> > > because white men are usually relatively confident in negotiating
their
> > > salaries upwards, so tend to end up with a better deal.
> > >
> > > It can also affect the diversity of candidates who apply. Candidates
> who
> > > have stronger networks within the industry they're moving into (again,
> > more
> > > commonly white men with privileged social and educational backgrounds)
> > also
> > > have clear expectations because they are 'in the know' about industry
> > > norms, while people who don't, find the lack of salary information a
> > > barrier to application. (After all, why take the time and effort to
> apply
> > > for a job when you have no idea how the likely pay compares to your
> > current
> > > employment?)
> > >
> > > I know practices vary within the movement - I believe the WMF never
> > > mentions salaries on ads, and I don't know whether the range is
> disclosed
> > > to applicants or not - some chapters I know do advertise a salary.
> > However,
> > > I'd urge all entities within the movement that hire staff to disclose
> the
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
There was no clear statement of "this is the problematic text and this is why 
it is considered unacceptable", which is a thing that I consider a reasonable 
expectation, as it is possible to learn from it, understand it, pass 
constructive criticism or agreement, and use as it a precedent for future 
expectations.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Adam Wight
Sent: 11 September 2020 11:56
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

> Is there somewhere we can refer to the list of offensive and unacceptable
> expressions, and how they are determined?

There were been several explanations already.  It's possible to use mild 
words in a cruel way, for example a father telling their child "You've 
always had beans for brains."  Editors are aware of this simple truth 
and any feigned outrage must be disingenuous.

It's interesting that I've voiced some extremely harsh criticism of the 
WMF, even suggesting that the editors form a union and sue for control 
of the Board, yet I've never once been moderated.  Had my job threatened 
perhaps, but never blocked.

The point here is that petty hostility only achieves the goal of 
creating an unpleasant and unwelcoming environment.  If you (speaking to 
the people here who are critical of the UCoC) want to make real change, 
please organize yourselves somewhere else, come up with a coherent 
argument, and present it here.  The constant attrition of "why can't I 
say 'fart'?" is tiresome and dilutes any conversation of substance.

Kind regards,
U:Adamw


___
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, 



-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Foundation and affiliates disclosing salaries on job ads & the effect of this on workplace equity

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
Should they? Their cost of living expenses may vary considerably. 
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Nathan
Sent: 11 September 2020 13:39
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation and affiliates disclosing salaries on
job ads & the effect of this on workplace equity

Dan,

Shouldn't two candidates for the same position for the same company get
roughly the same salary, regardless of where they live?

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020, 7:00 AM Dan Garry (Deskana)  wrote:

> Asking candidates for their current salary is prohibited in San Francisco
> as of July 2018 [1] which means that, as a San Francisco based
> organisation, the Foundation will undoubtedly not be doing this. To my
> knowledge, this wasn't done by the Foundation before either, but we can
> confidently state that it won't be done now.
>
> There are some complexities in disclosing salary ranges for the
Foundation.
> One practice that can be used for encouraging diversity in candidate
> applications is to specify that a position is open to candidates with a
> wide range of experience and in all locations in the world, in which case
> the salary range posted will be so large that it will basically be
> meaningless. On the other hand, another good practice for encouraging
> diversity is to source internally for senior positions, which opens up
more
> junior roles that can be sourced externally, in which case a salary range
> can be more meaningful and helpful. It's hard to figure out what the right
> balance is.
>
> Regardless, more public transparency in salary banding would be good to
> see.
>
> Dan
>
> [1]:
>
>
https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-
updates/pages/san-francisco-bans-salary-history-questions.aspx
>
> On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 10:44, Chris Keating 
> wrote:
>
> > Good morning everyone!
> >
> > There's a campaign(1) for nonprofits to disclose the salaries, or at
> least
> > salary ranges, on job ads.
> >
> > An increasing body of evidence(2) shows that practices like not
> disclosing
> > expected pay, and requiring applicants to disclose their current salary,
> is
> > harmful to equity in the workplace.
> >
> > Not disclosing salaries affects pay levels within the organisation -
> > because white men are usually relatively confident in negotiating their
> > salaries upwards, so tend to end up with a better deal.
> >
> > It can also affect the diversity of candidates who apply. Candidates who
> > have stronger networks within the industry they're moving into (again,
> more
> > commonly white men with privileged social and educational backgrounds)
> also
> > have clear expectations because they are 'in the know' about industry
> > norms, while people who don't, find the lack of salary information a
> > barrier to application. (After all, why take the time and effort to
apply
> > for a job when you have no idea how the likely pay compares to your
> current
> > employment?)
> >
> > I know practices vary within the movement - I believe the WMF never
> > mentions salaries on ads, and I don't know whether the range is
disclosed
> > to applicants or not - some chapters I know do advertise a salary.
> However,
> > I'd urge all entities within the movement that hire staff to disclose
the
> > expected salary ranges for posts they are advertising, as part of their
> > commitment to equality, diversity and inclusion.
> >
> > Thanks for reading,
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > (1): https://showthesalary.com/
> > (2): e.g. at https://showthesalary.com/resources/
> > ___
> > 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,


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
I would call this fair comment, and parallels can be drawn between how the UCoC 
may be used and the current discussion. Without clear statement on why a 
decision is made it cannot be properly understood, accepted or improved, and we 
end up in the usual spiral of speculation, accusation and bad feelings by all.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Benjamin Ikuta
Sent: 11 September 2020 13:16
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review



Thanks for the reply. 

I took a look at it and found it terribly vague. 

Depending on subjective interpretation, I can imagine it being used to justify 
whatever judgement is to be made. 

I am no more enlightened. 



> On Sep 11, 2020, at 4:05 AM, Alphos OGame  wrote:
> 
> Hello everyone,
> 
> What I want to read : comments on the UCoC.
> What I don't want to read : a barrage of *insert adjective, whether laudative 
> or criticizing* reply after reply after reply after reply on the comments of 
> one or more of the subscribers of this list.
> 
> I understand the initial comments shocked some of you, and some may want to 
> defend freedom of expression and  others yet criticize actions past or 
> current by the Foundation, but still, I'd rather we'd compartmentalize and, 
> instead of bickering about something the list mods have already given what 
> seems to be a rather decent decision, talk about the Universal Code of 
> Conduct, as I still haven't wrapped my head around it.
> 
> Please, no more back and forth, no more inanity, no more four mails an hour.
> Thank you…
> 
> Roger / Alphos
> 
> 
>> Le 11 sept. 2020 à 12:22, Quim Gil  a écrit :
>> 
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 9:31 AM Benjamin Ikuta 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Please, enlighten me.
>> 
>> Here is an alternative suggestion. Check the UCoC draft and see whether you
>> see room for improvement or disagree with anything specific in it. This is
>> a productive way to compare your personal understanding of civility against
>> the understanding of civility the UCoC offers for the entire movement. If
>> you have ideas to improve the draft, share them, if possible on the Meta
>> page where the main discussion is happening.
>> 
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Draft_review
>> 
>> 
 On Sep 10, 2020, at 11:39 PM, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
 Am Fr., 11. Sept. 2020 um 08:07 Uhr schrieb Benjamin Ikuta
 :
> Is there some context that makes this much worse than it seems, or do I
>>> have a deeply flawed understanding of civility?
 Well, are you open to consider the possibility that the latter might
 theoretically be the case, at least partially?
 Kind regards
 Ziko
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Quim Gil (he/him)
>> Senior Manager of Community Relations @ Wikimedia Foundation
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF
>> ___
>> 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, 



-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
In that case, can we please have an explanation of exactly how the relevant
text was found to be inappropriate, as this is patently unclear, and
apparently the reason for all this debate. I have my own speculation, but as
it is speculation, it would be inappropriate to publicise unless there is no
official explanation.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Asaf Bartov
Sent: 11 September 2020 11:46
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

No, it is not "forbidden words" that are the problem, and we have no
intention of maintaining a list.

We expect list subscribers to maintain civil discourse, which does include
avoiding vulgarity, and expressing oneself with respect to both one's
interlocutors (or addressees of criticism) and the broader audience.

Happily, this is something more than 99 percent of subscribers manage to do
without effort.

As I have repeatedly clarified, respectful discourse absolutely does not
preclude criticism. Indeed, it is liable to make the criticism more likely
to be heard.

   A.

On Fri, 11 Sep 2020, 12:26 Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Is there somewhere we can refer to the list of offensive and unacceptable
> expressions, and how they are determined?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf
> Of Anders Wennersten
> Sent: 11 September 2020 10:33
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review
>
> There are many of us on this list who have given the feedback we find
> that expression offensive and unacceptable.
>
> Do not forget the readers of this list comes from may different cultures
> and if you and the people close to you find it "acceptable" it is not a
> valid judgment for all, and why do you want us to leave this list just
> so you can use a language like that. (I certainly would if that was
> accepted as a norm)
>
> The language on this list is English, it means we non-native have to
> adjust our entries to a unfamiliar language. It mean we have to limit
> our means of expression (we will not be experts on nuances).  You who
> are native English speaker have all the advantages, would it then be too
> hard for you to adjust you language to what is acceptable to us others?
>
> Anders
>
>
> Den 2020-09-11 kl. 09:31, skrev Benjamin Ikuta:
> >
> > Please, enlighten me.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sep 10, 2020, at 11:39 PM, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
> >
> >> Am Fr., 11. Sept. 2020 um 08:07 Uhr schrieb Benjamin Ikuta
> >> :
> >>> Is there some context that makes this much worse than it seems, or do
I
> have a deeply flawed understanding of civility?
> >> Well, are you open to consider the possibility that the latter might
> >> theoretically be the case, at least partially?
> >> Kind regards
> >> Ziko
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> a.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>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
>
> ___
> 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
> Unsubsc

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
Is there somewhere we can refer to the list of offensive and unacceptable
expressions, and how they are determined?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Anders Wennersten
Sent: 11 September 2020 10:33
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

There are many of us on this list who have given the feedback we find 
that expression offensive and unacceptable.

Do not forget the readers of this list comes from may different cultures 
and if you and the people close to you find it "acceptable" it is not a 
valid judgment for all, and why do you want us to leave this list just 
so you can use a language like that. (I certainly would if that was 
accepted as a norm)

The language on this list is English, it means we non-native have to 
adjust our entries to a unfamiliar language. It mean we have to limit 
our means of expression (we will not be experts on nuances).  You who 
are native English speaker have all the advantages, would it then be too 
hard for you to adjust you language to what is acceptable to us others?

Anders


Den 2020-09-11 kl. 09:31, skrev Benjamin Ikuta:
>
> Please, enlighten me.
>
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2020, at 11:39 PM, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
>
>> Am Fr., 11. Sept. 2020 um 08:07 Uhr schrieb Benjamin Ikuta
>> :
>>> Is there some context that makes this much worse than it seems, or do I
have a deeply flawed understanding of civility?
>> Well, are you open to consider the possibility that the latter might
>> theoretically be the case, at least partially?
>> Kind regards
>> Ziko
>>
>>
>>
>>> a.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,

> ___
> 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,


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com



___
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] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
It is not yet clear that the use of the words "fart" or "flatulence" are the 
actual issue. Context matters, but we do not know the full context yet, as the 
reasons have not been explained, leaving us with little option but to 
speculate. We are experiencing a failure of communication as much, or more, 
than a failure of civility.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Todd Allen
Sent: 11 September 2020 09:14
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

Except, apparently, if someone says "fart". For godsakes, that's about the
mildest of language you could ask for. I could use far stronger about this
whole farce.

If the "UCoC" means that people can't say "fart" because someone might get
their feewings hurted, then I've very well been right to strongly oppose it.

Todd

On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 3:45 AM Asaf Bartov  wrote:

> As you can see, Dan, your choice of imagery, appreciated and encouraged in
> less buttoned-up journalism, is offensive to some subscribers here.  Your
> strong criticism of the Foundation, on the other hand, is perfectly
> acceptable.
>
> As a professional wordsmith, I am confident you can continue to voice this
> criticism while employing milder imagery, or indeed dispensing with
> figurative language entirely.
>
> A.
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 12:31 PM Dan Szymborski 
> wrote:
>
> > I am absolutely flabbergasted that a generic reference of an organization
> > to flatulence, something we see in rated-G television isn't considered
> > "collegial" enough yet the actions that the WMF has taken over the last
> 18
> > months, many of which were pushed by people on this list *are* considered
> > collegial.
> >
> > If a joke that would be appropriate for a four-year-old leads to special
> > moderation, what action ought be taken for someone on the list pushing
> the
> > failure of a collaborative process that WMF is foisting upon the
> community?
> > One of the people "doth protesting too much" about the reference is also
> > someone banned from English Wikipedia for a whole litany of *actual*
> things
> > that took up countless hours of community time, including making legal
> > threats based on finding offense in normal Wikipedia actions.
> >
> > I am a longtime, accredited journalist, possibly even slightly respected
> in
> > the field -- though there's always that risk of Dunning-Kruger -- who has
> > written for a ton of outlets and there's not an editor in the world that
> > I've worked with who would've asked me to change the *very* gentle
> wording.
> > If anything, I was too mild. *I'm* grossly offended by the WMF's actions
> > over the last 18 months. *I'm* grossly offended by the perversion of a
> free
> > information movement being converted into a third-tier social media app.
> > *I'm* grossly offended by board policies that empower the vested, the
> > connected, the politically adept to judge the weak and the voiceless.
> *I'm*
> > grossly offended by the people here who cheerfully announce the board
> > arbitrarily changing board terms or that the community has no actual say
> in
> > what the *community* (not the board) built. The Wiki movement is far
> bigger
> > than the WMF; which is a good thing because I can't imagine it being
> > smaller than the board's self-dealing petty bourgeoisie affair.
> >
> > No, I didn't mean petit.
> >
> > Yet I don't call for anyone to be silenced because, well, disagreeing
> > vigorously is what adults are able to do.
> >
> > It matters not if this message is censored by the list overlords. One of
> > the few benefits of being a journalist is that combination of
> > self-righteousness and having myriad ways to prevent an opinion from
> being
> > suppressed on dubious grounds.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 2:55 AM Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l <
> > wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > A code of conduct id something many of us have asked the WMF to write
> for
> > > many years. We are asking the WMF to take an active part in stopping
> > > abusive behaviors in our community.
> > >
> > > On fr wiki, many admins say they are tired of conflicts and that they
> did
> > > not enroll to deal with them. A code of conduct could help then take
> > action
> > > because it offers a frame.
> > >
> > > This is COMPLETELY different with the branding process.
> > >
> > > We are one of the few projects in the open source world without a code
> of
> > > conduct.
> > >
> > > So thank you for this draft, thank you for opening up for discussions,
> > and
> > > I hope the language will remain respectful.
> > >
> > > I believe moderators should ban from this list the person who spoke
> about
> > > « wmf flatulence ».
> > >
> > >
> > >  I dont want to read that type of language among people who are
> > supposedly
> > > asked to write neutral enccyclopedias.
> > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board of Wikimedia Chile / Nuevo directorio de Wikimedia Chile

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
Good luck to all of you
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Rocío Consales
Sent: 10 September 2020 20:39
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] New board of Wikimedia Chile / Nuevo directorio de 
Wikimedia Chile

[*Spanish below*]

Comrades:


I hope everyone is in good health. I write to inform you of the update of
the Wikimedia Chile board. I have submitted my resignation to the
presidency, since I obtained a scholarship to study in Spain. The new
president of WMCL is Carlos Figueroa, whom the whole team has great esteem
and confidence in to continue with the multiple projects that the chapter
has ahead. Luis Cristóbal Carrasco, a very enthusiastic member, who we know
will be a great contribution to this administration, joins the board.


The new board consists of:
President: Carlos Figueroa
Vicepresident: Marco Correa
Secretary: Claudio Loader
Treasurer: Osmar Valdebenito
Board member: Dennis Tobar
Board member: Luis Cristóbal Carrasco


The team is fully aware of the lack of gender diversity in the board, but
it has been done and will continue to work with the commitment to solve
this problem in the near future. The work related to reducing the gender
gap has been transversal in all our activities and in the administrations
of our chapter, and we sincerely hope as a team that the steps that have
been taken in that direction will soon bear fruit.


It only remains for me to thank the trust placed in me by the partners and
the entire team, and wish the best of success to the new structure of the
board of directors.


Sincerely,

Rocío Consales

___


Camaradas:


Espero que todos se encuentren bien de salud. Escribo para informar la
actualización del directorio de Wikimedia Chile. He presentado mi renuncia
a la presidencia, ya que obtuve una beca para estudiar en España. El nuevo
presidente de WMCL es Carlos Figueroa, a quien todo el equipo le tiene una
gran estima y confianza para seguir adelante con los múltiples proyectos
que el capítulo tiene por delante. Ingresa al directorio Luis Cristóbal
Carrasco, socio muy entusiasta que sabemos será un gran aporte a esta
administración.


El nuevo directorio se compone por:
Presidente: Carlos Figueroa

Vicepresidente: Marco Correa

Secretario: Claudio Loader

Tesorero: Osmar Valdebenito

Director: Dennis Tobar

Director Luis Cristóbal Carrasco


El equipo está completamente consciente de la falta de diversidad de género
en el directorio, pero se ha hecho y seguirá trabajando con el compromiso
de solventar este problema en el futuro próximo. El trabajo relacionado a
disminuir la brecha de género ha sido transversal en todas nuestras
actividades y en las administraciones de nuestro capítulo, y esperamos
sinceramente como equipo que los pasos que se han dado en esa dirección
pronto rindan frutos.


Solo me queda agradecer la confianza depositada en mí por los socios y todo
el equipo, y desear el mayor de los éxitos a la nueva estructura de la
junta directiva.



Un abrazo,

Rocío Consales
___
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, 



-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Moderation notice

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
Lukas, If you could explain exactly what your objection was, it lets all of us 
understand better where the line was drawn. That allows discussion to be 
focused on reality rather than speculation, which could get us closer to an 
acceptable code of conduct, instead of fuelling paranoia.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Lukas Mezger
Sent: 10 September 2020 20:30
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice

Hello,

As one of the list subscribers who contacted the list moderators about the
messages in question, please let me second the sentiment that this list
should welcome discourse that is honest and frank while remaining
constructive and civil. Being subscribed to this list can be stressful for
some of us at times, so please keep that in mind when contributing.
Thank you, and kind regards,

Lukas


--

Dr. Lukas Mezger
Vorsitzender des Präsidiums / chair of the Supervisory Board

Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 260 – (0151) 268 63 931
http://wikimedia.de

Bleiben Sie auf dem neuesten Stand! Aktuelle Nachrichten und spannende
Geschichten rund um Wikimedia, Wikipedia und Freies Wissen im Newsletter: Zur
Anmeldung <https://www.wikimedia.de/newsletter/>.

Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
http://spenden.wikimedia.de

Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207

Am Do., 10. Sept. 2020 um 18:19 Uhr schrieb Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>:

> Is the objection to the words he used or to the way he used them?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf
> Of Asaf Bartov
> Sent: 09 September 2020 21:57
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice
>
> Dear Wikimedians,
>
> List subscriber Dan Szymborski has been placed under moderation, due to
> posts with unacceptable language.
>
> I remind everyone that criticism is appropriate and welcome on this list,
> so long as it remains civil and respectful of the people involved.
>
>Asaf (volunteer capacity)
>on behalf of Wikimedia-l list moderators
> --
> Asaf Bartov 
> ___
> 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>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
>
> ___
> 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>


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Moderation notice

2020-09-10 Thread Peter Southwood
Is the objection to the words he used or to the way he used them?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Asaf Bartov
Sent: 09 September 2020 21:57
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice

Dear Wikimedians,

List subscriber Dan Szymborski has been placed under moderation, due to
posts with unacceptable language.

I remind everyone that criticism is appropriate and welcome on this list,
so long as it remains civil and respectful of the people involved.

   Asaf (volunteer capacity)
   on behalf of Wikimedia-l list moderators
-- 
Asaf Bartov 
___
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,


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com



___
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] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Peter Southwood
For a UVoC to be helpful, it would have to be sufficiently clear  about what is 
unacceptable, and why it is unacceptable, and would itself have to be 
sufficiently clear and acceptable to be seen as fair by the communities who 
would be bound by it. This is not easy to do, and the talk page already 
illustrates how far the draft is from an acceptable state of clarity. I am not 
saying it cannot get there, but it will take more work. Possibly a lot more 
work, and it does not appear to be getting there fast.

What Anders says about the use of a simplified subset of English has value. 
Words should be used that are easily translatable, even when this may require 
more words to be used to make a point.

Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Jackie
Sent: 10 September 2020 16:16
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

Dan,

I am so glad you have given us a real-world example as to how a Universal
Code of Conduct would be super helpful. It would provide you with a clear
understanding of how your comments impacted others. It wasn't just your use
of the word "flatulence" (which, funny enough, I had to reference spelling
from your email because I have *never* written this word in any
correspondence). As a parent, I certainly understand the place of such
words in juvenile humor, but your use here was to implicate an organization
of professionals is simply operating in bad faith. That sort of comment is
hostile and denigrates people who *actually* work very hard to empower
people in the free knowledge movement.

This language serves to alienate people from participation and sews
discord. These mailing lists are already missing a lot of the people who
*should* be at the table in these discussions. The mailing lists are rather
homogeneous in participation because of responses like this call for
discussion. I hope the future means we move to something more inclusive and
covered by a Code of Conduct.

In a situation like this where someone has said something offensive, a CoC
would provide a process for everyone to follow and understand. The people
reporting the concern would have avenues on which to do so without facing
public backlash and the steps for reviewing reports would be clear. Based
off of other CoC examples, this often includes who will respond to such
concerns and how they will respond. CoCs often go further to clearly
identify which steps will be taken for certain offenses and what response
and support the original person reporting the issue can receive. I feel
education is a huge part of CoC violation response. Perhaps the person
violating the CoC can do better after becoming aware of how their behavior
impacts others and still be a valuable member of the community.

If you are still genuinely confused about how what you said is offensive, I
am more than happy to discuss this with you via phone or video chat. I find
that text-based communication provides complications for discussions about
emotional topics. I can see you feel passionate about this situation and
upset about the result.

Best,

Jackie

On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 7:23 AM Joseph Seddon 
wrote:

> Wikipedia has been a third tier social media platform since its inception.
> Luckily we are better known for being an encyclopedia.
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 10:31 AM Dan Szymborski 
> wrote:
>
> > I am absolutely flabbergasted that a generic reference of an organization
> > to flatulence, something we see in rated-G television isn't considered
> > "collegial" enough yet the actions that the WMF has taken over the last
> 18
> > months, many of which were pushed by people on this list *are* considered
> > collegial.
> >
> > If a joke that would be appropriate for a four-year-old leads to special
> > moderation, what action ought be taken for someone on the list pushing
> the
> > failure of a collaborative process that WMF is foisting upon the
> community?
> > One of the people "doth protesting too much" about the reference is also
> > someone banned from English Wikipedia for a whole litany of *actual*
> things
> > that took up countless hours of community time, including making legal
> > threats based on finding offense in normal Wikipedia actions.
> >
> > I am a longtime, accredited journalist, possibly even slightly respected
> in
> > the field -- though there's always that risk of Dunning-Kruger -- who has
> > written for a ton of outlets and there's not an editor in the world that
> > I've worked with who would've asked me to change the *very* gentle
> wording.
> > If anything, I was too mild. *I'm* grossly offended by the WMF's actions
> > over the last 18 months. *I'm* grossly offended by the perversion of a
> free
> > information movement being converted into a third-tier social media app.
> > *I'm* grossly offended by board policies that empower the vested, the
> > connected, the politically adept to 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Peter Southwood
Anders, I think you are referring to jargon. I agree that it should be avoided 
in the interests of clarity and ease of reliable translation. 
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Anders Wennersten
Sent: 10 September 2020 16:48
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

I want to echo Jackies two mail

The community for svwp is not so big and complicated issues on conduct 
are uncommon. But when they occur we often get caught in argument like " 
you who claim to decide over svwp CoC are just a small kabal of some 
10-120 admins, you are unrepresentative and the enwp CoC says 
otherwise". It will be of big help for us when we need not go into 
detailed discussion over every abuse, but can refer to the UCoC (and not 
just ToU).

And wordings... We consist of people form many different culture and 
language, so what one small group can be seen as acceptable wording can 
be seen as offensive to other.

When I worked in the Swedish global company Ericsson, the interal 
language was English. But in reality that internal vocabulary only used 
5-10% of the English words, and never puns or sarcasm, and often rather 
blunt expressions than too "flowery". I think something similar must be 
what we use in our internal communication of Wikimedia. And that will be 
welcome for all non-native English people, but can be harder for native 
English people. I have given feedback to top WMF people when the used 
too complicated/flowery sentences that made it hard for non-natives to 
understand what was said.

Anders


Den 2020-09-10 kl. 16:16, skrev Jackie:
> Dan,
>
> I am so glad you have given us a real-world example as to how a Universal
> Code of Conduct would be super helpful. It would provide you with a clear
> understanding of how your comments impacted others. It wasn't just your use
> of the word "flatulence" (which, funny enough, I had to reference spelling
> from your email because I have *never* written this word in any
> correspondence). As a parent, I certainly understand the place of such
> words in juvenile humor, but your use here was to implicate an organization
> of professionals is simply operating in bad faith. That sort of comment is
> hostile and denigrates people who *actually* work very hard to empower
> people in the free knowledge movement.
>
> This language serves to alienate people from participation and sews
> discord. These mailing lists are already missing a lot of the people who
> *should* be at the table in these discussions. The mailing lists are rather
> homogeneous in participation because of responses like this call for
> discussion. I hope the future means we move to something more inclusive and
> covered by a Code of Conduct.
>
> In a situation like this where someone has said something offensive, a CoC
> would provide a process for everyone to follow and understand. The people
> reporting the concern would have avenues on which to do so without facing
> public backlash and the steps for reviewing reports would be clear. Based
> off of other CoC examples, this often includes who will respond to such
> concerns and how they will respond. CoCs often go further to clearly
> identify which steps will be taken for certain offenses and what response
> and support the original person reporting the issue can receive. I feel
> education is a huge part of CoC violation response. Perhaps the person
> violating the CoC can do better after becoming aware of how their behavior
> impacts others and still be a valuable member of the community.
>
> If you are still genuinely confused about how what you said is offensive, I
> am more than happy to discuss this with you via phone or video chat. I find
> that text-based communication provides complications for discussions about
> emotional topics. I can see you feel passionate about this situation and
> upset about the result.
>
> Best,
>
> Jackie
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 7:23 AM Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
>> Wikipedia has been a third tier social media platform since its inception.
>> Luckily we are better known for being an encyclopedia.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 10:31 AM Dan Szymborski 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I am absolutely flabbergasted that a generic reference of an organization
>>> to flatulence, something we see in rated-G television isn't considered
>>> "collegial" enough yet the actions that the WMF has taken over the last
>> 18
>>> months, many of which were pushed by people on this list *are* considered
>>> collegial.
>>>
>>> If a joke that would be appropriate for a four-year-old leads to special
>>> moderation, what action ought be taken for someone on the list pushing
>> the
>>> failure of a collaborative process that WMF is foisting upon the
>> community?
>>> One of the people "doth protesting too much" about the reference is also
>>> someone banned from English Wikipedia for a whole litany 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice

2020-09-10 Thread Peter Southwood
You read my mind...
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Gnangarra
Sent: 10 September 2020 13:50
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice

one measure of good judgement would those decline the opportunity to be a
list administrator :D

On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 19:41, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Good judgement is often such a subjective thing, Everyone thinks they have
> it. A bit like the Dunning-Kruger effect.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf
> Of Asaf Bartov
> Sent: 10 September 2020 12:55
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice
>
> I would say first and foremost, good judgment. As measured by the person's
> track record on-wiki and on this list.
>
> Preferring to err on the side of caution, people under community
sanctions,
> or who have themselves been moderated for on-list misconduct, need not
> apply.
>
>A.
>
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2020, 12:58 Peter Southwood 
> wrote:
>
> > Asaf,
> > What are the criteria for eligibility as moderator for this list?
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf
> > Of Asaf Bartov
> > Sent: 10 September 2020 11:07
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice
> >
> > Indeed, there is a potential conflict of interest here.  This is why I
> > strongly tend to leniency, *especially* when unacceptable discourse
> > coincides with criticism of the Foundation.  In this case, we received
> > requests from two list subscribers to moderate Dan.  We did so, while
> > underscoring that it was *not* for criticizing the Foundation.
> >
> > I think I have something of a track record of supporting open debate and
> of
> > encouraging and engaging with criticism of the Foundation.  I think
there
> > is indeed plenty to criticize; the Foundation is far from flawless.
> >
> > But people don't have to endure coarse language and vitriol at the same
> > time.  By all means, express disappointment, lack of confidence,
> suspicion,
> > whatever, but do it in a civil manner.  Dan can continue to do as well,
> of
> > course. I have already let one message of this through moderation.
> >
> > All that said, it would of course have been better if we had a couple of
> > list-admins more, without ties to the Foundation, so perhaps it is time
> to
> > recruit them.  Is anyone interested?
> >
> >A.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 1:56 AM Todd Allen  wrote:
> >
> > > Erm, wait. He said what, "fart"?
> > >
> > > It's not a particularly good look for a WMF employee to be moderating
> > > someone critiquing the WMF, especially when, while their statement may
> > have
> > > been strongly worded, it used pretty mild language. This should either
> be
> > > undone, or at least decided upon by someone who doesn't work for WMF.
> > > That's a substantial conflict of interest.
> > >
> > > Todd
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:57 PM Asaf Bartov 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear Wikimedians,
> > > >
> > > > List subscriber Dan Szymborski has been placed under moderation, due
> to
> > > > posts with unacceptable language.
> > > >
> > > > I remind everyone that criticism is appropriate and welcome on this
> > list,
> > > > so long as it remains civil and respectful of the people involved.
> > > >
> > > >Asaf (volunteer capacity)
> > > >on behalf of Wikimedia-l list moderators
> > > > --
> > > > Asaf Bartov 
> > > > ___
> > > > 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
> > > http

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Peter Southwood
Are those things not already covered by the terms of use?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Amir Sarabadani
Sent: 10 September 2020 13:22
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

I just want to say while I agree IMO there's a growing disconnect in some
parts of WMF with the communities but it's not happening here. In fact it's
also the other way around. Some people in communities and some communities
in general have been growing too disconnected from the framework they are
working in. In the past two weeks I had to go head to head to two
communities on my volunteer developer/sysadmin role and I had to explain no
matter the consensus, you can't enable an extension that would bring down
(literally) not just your wiki but also 900 other ones or ban IP editing
which is widely considered against founding principles of Wikimedia.

Communities are self-governed but they have limits, you can't change the
privacy policy and give admins access to IP, you can't change copyright
policy or terms of use and I don't see any problem with adding one more
framework to make sure we would have a healthier movement (Each community
IMO should build on top of UCoC and won't just rely on it for conduct
policies but this would be the least, the base, the foundation, ..., you
get the idea). Thank you for coming to my TedTalk.

On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 11:45 AM Asaf Bartov  wrote:

> As you can see, Dan, your choice of imagery, appreciated and encouraged in
> less buttoned-up journalism, is offensive to some subscribers here.  Your
> strong criticism of the Foundation, on the other hand, is perfectly
> acceptable.
>
> As a professional wordsmith, I am confident you can continue to voice this
> criticism while employing milder imagery, or indeed dispensing with
> figurative language entirely.
>
> A.
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 12:31 PM Dan Szymborski 
> wrote:
>
> > I am absolutely flabbergasted that a generic reference of an organization
> > to flatulence, something we see in rated-G television isn't considered
> > "collegial" enough yet the actions that the WMF has taken over the last
> 18
> > months, many of which were pushed by people on this list *are* considered
> > collegial.
> >
> > If a joke that would be appropriate for a four-year-old leads to special
> > moderation, what action ought be taken for someone on the list pushing
> the
> > failure of a collaborative process that WMF is foisting upon the
> community?
> > One of the people "doth protesting too much" about the reference is also
> > someone banned from English Wikipedia for a whole litany of *actual*
> things
> > that took up countless hours of community time, including making legal
> > threats based on finding offense in normal Wikipedia actions.
> >
> > I am a longtime, accredited journalist, possibly even slightly respected
> in
> > the field -- though there's always that risk of Dunning-Kruger -- who has
> > written for a ton of outlets and there's not an editor in the world that
> > I've worked with who would've asked me to change the *very* gentle
> wording.
> > If anything, I was too mild. *I'm* grossly offended by the WMF's actions
> > over the last 18 months. *I'm* grossly offended by the perversion of a
> free
> > information movement being converted into a third-tier social media app.
> > *I'm* grossly offended by board policies that empower the vested, the
> > connected, the politically adept to judge the weak and the voiceless.
> *I'm*
> > grossly offended by the people here who cheerfully announce the board
> > arbitrarily changing board terms or that the community has no actual say
> in
> > what the *community* (not the board) built. The Wiki movement is far
> bigger
> > than the WMF; which is a good thing because I can't imagine it being
> > smaller than the board's self-dealing petty bourgeoisie affair.
> >
> > No, I didn't mean petit.
> >
> > Yet I don't call for anyone to be silenced because, well, disagreeing
> > vigorously is what adults are able to do.
> >
> > It matters not if this message is censored by the list overlords. One of
> > the few benefits of being a journalist is that combination of
> > self-righteousness and having myriad ways to prevent an opinion from
> being
> > suppressed on dubious grounds.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 2:55 AM Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l <
> > wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > A code of conduct id something many of us have asked the WMF to write
> for
> > > many years. We are asking the WMF to take an active part in stopping
> > > abusive behaviors in our community.
> > >
> > > On fr wiki, many admins say they are tired of conflicts and that they
> did
> > > not enroll to deal with them. A code of conduct could help then take
> > action
> > > because it offers a frame.
> > >
> > > This is 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice

2020-09-10 Thread Peter Southwood
Good judgement is often such a subjective thing, Everyone thinks they have
it. A bit like the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Asaf Bartov
Sent: 10 September 2020 12:55
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice

I would say first and foremost, good judgment. As measured by the person's
track record on-wiki and on this list.

Preferring to err on the side of caution, people under community sanctions,
or who have themselves been moderated for on-list misconduct, need not
apply.

   A.

On Thu, 10 Sep 2020, 12:58 Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Asaf,
> What are the criteria for eligibility as moderator for this list?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf
> Of Asaf Bartov
> Sent: 10 September 2020 11:07
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice
>
> Indeed, there is a potential conflict of interest here.  This is why I
> strongly tend to leniency, *especially* when unacceptable discourse
> coincides with criticism of the Foundation.  In this case, we received
> requests from two list subscribers to moderate Dan.  We did so, while
> underscoring that it was *not* for criticizing the Foundation.
>
> I think I have something of a track record of supporting open debate and
of
> encouraging and engaging with criticism of the Foundation.  I think there
> is indeed plenty to criticize; the Foundation is far from flawless.
>
> But people don't have to endure coarse language and vitriol at the same
> time.  By all means, express disappointment, lack of confidence,
suspicion,
> whatever, but do it in a civil manner.  Dan can continue to do as well, of
> course. I have already let one message of this through moderation.
>
> All that said, it would of course have been better if we had a couple of
> list-admins more, without ties to the Foundation, so perhaps it is time to
> recruit them.  Is anyone interested?
>
>A.
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 1:56 AM Todd Allen  wrote:
>
> > Erm, wait. He said what, "fart"?
> >
> > It's not a particularly good look for a WMF employee to be moderating
> > someone critiquing the WMF, especially when, while their statement may
> have
> > been strongly worded, it used pretty mild language. This should either
be
> > undone, or at least decided upon by someone who doesn't work for WMF.
> > That's a substantial conflict of interest.
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:57 PM Asaf Bartov 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Wikimedians,
> > >
> > > List subscriber Dan Szymborski has been placed under moderation, due
to
> > > posts with unacceptable language.
> > >
> > > I remind everyone that criticism is appropriate and welcome on this
> list,
> > > so long as it remains civil and respectful of the people involved.
> > >
> > >Asaf (volunteer capacity)
> > >on behalf of Wikimedia-l list moderators
> > > --
> > > Asaf Bartov 
> > > ___
> > > 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>
> >
>
>
> --
> Asaf Bartov 
> ___
> 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>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing lis

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice

2020-09-10 Thread Peter Southwood
Asaf,
What are the criteria for eligibility as moderator for this list?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Asaf Bartov
Sent: 10 September 2020 11:07
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice

Indeed, there is a potential conflict of interest here.  This is why I
strongly tend to leniency, *especially* when unacceptable discourse
coincides with criticism of the Foundation.  In this case, we received
requests from two list subscribers to moderate Dan.  We did so, while
underscoring that it was *not* for criticizing the Foundation.

I think I have something of a track record of supporting open debate and of
encouraging and engaging with criticism of the Foundation.  I think there
is indeed plenty to criticize; the Foundation is far from flawless.

But people don't have to endure coarse language and vitriol at the same
time.  By all means, express disappointment, lack of confidence, suspicion,
whatever, but do it in a civil manner.  Dan can continue to do as well, of
course. I have already let one message of this through moderation.

All that said, it would of course have been better if we had a couple of
list-admins more, without ties to the Foundation, so perhaps it is time to
recruit them.  Is anyone interested?

   A.

On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 1:56 AM Todd Allen  wrote:

> Erm, wait. He said what, "fart"?
>
> It's not a particularly good look for a WMF employee to be moderating
> someone critiquing the WMF, especially when, while their statement may
have
> been strongly worded, it used pretty mild language. This should either be
> undone, or at least decided upon by someone who doesn't work for WMF.
> That's a substantial conflict of interest.
>
> Todd
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:57 PM Asaf Bartov  wrote:
>
> > Dear Wikimedians,
> >
> > List subscriber Dan Szymborski has been placed under moderation, due to
> > posts with unacceptable language.
> >
> > I remind everyone that criticism is appropriate and welcome on this
list,
> > so long as it remains civil and respectful of the people involved.
> >
> >Asaf (volunteer capacity)
> >on behalf of Wikimedia-l list moderators
> > --
> > Asaf Bartov 
> > ___
> > 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,
> 
>


-- 
Asaf Bartov 
___
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,


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com



___
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] Moderation notice

2020-09-10 Thread Peter Southwood
Is there a record somewhere of what unacceptable language was used and
against what standard it was judged to be unacceptable? 
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Asaf Bartov
Sent: 09 September 2020 21:57
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice

Dear Wikimedians,

List subscriber Dan Szymborski has been placed under moderation, due to
posts with unacceptable language.

I remind everyone that criticism is appropriate and welcome on this list,
so long as it remains civil and respectful of the people involved.

   Asaf (volunteer capacity)
   on behalf of Wikimedia-l list moderators
-- 
Asaf Bartov 
___
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,


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com



___
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] Institutional memory @ WMF

2020-08-28 Thread Peter Southwood
Maybe you could take on an official historian.
Cheers,
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Delphine Ménard
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 19:06
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Institutional memory @ WMF

Dan, you're right, it's a bit of all, formal and informal, and it is
important that we keep this process flexible. This allows us to adapt to
changing circumstances and a movement which well... moves. :-)

This fiscal year, Talent & Culture (HR) will be working on streamlining the
onboarding experience at the Foundation. This is why I joined the Talent &
Culture department, to coordinate this project and contribute my Wikimedia
experience. One of my mandates is to tackle the piece of onboarding that
takes into account our history as a movement, our common failures and
successes and the cultural pieces that are at the heart of our relationship
with each other (Individuals in the community, Foundation, affiliates,
external partners...).

Our movement is complex, and there are no amount of explanations that will
portray its richness. I will be working to make sure that new hires at the
Foundation know to ask the right questions at the right time and to the
right people to minimize errors. Of course, I want to set realistic
expectations, this will not happen in a day, nor will it happen in a year
only. My goal is to start a process that will change and evolve with time,
as does our movement.

If any of you have any questions about how we are working on this, or want
to contribute ideas, please talk to me offlist!

Best,

Delphine

Le mer. 26 août 2020 à 14:40, Dan Garry (Deskana)  a
écrit :

> On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 12:16, Strainu  wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the response Dan!
> >
> > A rigorous study is IMHO impossible, since we're lacking a rigorous
> > definition of the limits between WMF and community.
> >
>
> Absolutely agreed.
>
>
> > OK, but how is this done precisely? Are there written docs? Mentors?
> > Is cross-team help common? Or is this kept at the anecdotal level ("oh
> > yeah, you should also keep in mind..." )?
> >
>
> In my experience, all of the above. What is done exactly depends on the
> situation, but all of those things you've listed can and do happen,
> depending on the nature and size of the project, the people involved, and
> so on. People keep their eye out, through both formal and informal
> mechanisms, and help out if they think they can.
>
> I don't want to go into specific details, as I'm doing it purely from
> memory and might misremember things, and things might've changed since I
> left the WMF two years ago. To be clear, I'm not under any kind of
> non-disclosure agreement, I just don't want to be inaccurate.
>
> Dan
> ___
> 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,
> 
>


-- 
*Delphine Ménard* (she/her)
Lead Orientation Specialist
User:Delphine_(WMF)
Wikimedia Foundation 
___
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, 



-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Institutional memory @ WMF

2020-08-28 Thread Peter Southwood
This is the sort of information that should be in the official history.
Cheers,
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Pete Forsyth
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 22:37
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Institutional memory @ WMF

Correction:

It's been pointed out that I erred in two significant ways when discussing
Katherine's background: Prior to becoming CEO, she was Chief Communications
Officer, which is a more senior position than the one I named; and, where I
said that prior to her time at WMF her career was "largely in
communications," I was simply mistaken. Her background is covered in her
Wikipedia bio, and is indeed quite varied.

I regret both of those errors.

Pete

>
___
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,



-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Universal Code of Conduct Drafting Committee - Call for participation

2020-08-04 Thread Peter Southwood
Thanks,
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Christel Steigenberger
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 12:50
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Universal Code of Conduct Drafting Committee - Call 
for participation

Hi Peter,

Thank you for coming back to me with this clarifying question and comment.
And sorry for having broken the threading with my previous mail.

The community feedback will be mainly gathered on Meta, but we will try and
reach out to communities on different channels on- and off-wiki to
encourage them to take part in the process. We will also accept comments
that come in through other channels and post them in aggregate form on
Meta, if users are not comfortable going there themselves. While we are
already spending time and energy to prepare for outreach in different
languages, we are also aware of the fact that we cannot do this alone. We
appreciate every bit of help from you and others on the mailing list, to
spread the word that the community comment period will be between August 24
and September 23 and to help us translate the content in more languages
than we alone might be able to do. If you know of good channels to spread
the word, or know about people willing and able to translate the content
into lesser known languages, please let us know!

Within the drafting committee we have people speaking 12 different
languages that I am aware of - and possibly more. Besides English and
Arabic, those are five European, three African and two Indic languages. In
addition we have hired facilitators from the community who speak Arabic,
Georgian, Persian, Russian and Swahili and we will be getting help from the
translator’s pool in our communications department.

Please always feel free to let us know of other ideas to improve the
process for community feedback gathering!

Best regards,
Christel

Christel Steigenberger (she/her)

Trust and Safety Specialist

Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>



On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 8:44 PM Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Hi Christel
> I am glad to hear that, and I hope that proper consultation will occur
> with all potentially affected parties, in places where they can comment and
> point out problems on user friendly or at least familiar software, over at
> least a reasonably representative range of languages, and with sufficient
> time to discuss issues without  an excessively tight deadline.
> Speaking of which, what is the language spread  of the drafting committee?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Christel Steigenberger
> Sent: 31 July 2020 17:48
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Universal Code of Conduct Drafting Committee -
> Call for participation
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> I hear and understand your worries. I’d like to reassure you that we are
> very aware of the fact that no single person and no selected group of
> people can speak for the community as a whole. This is one of the big
> challenges all such efforts have to tackle. Representation here is not
> meant in the sense of legal or political representation. But by speaking
> for themselves, we hope that volunteers and staff coming from different
> language communities, holding different roles within the movement and
> bringing different experiences of engagement with the movement into the
> process will at least bring diverse valuable perspectives to the creation
> of the draft for the Universal Code of Conduct.
>
> Before they start drafting, they are already now working their way through
> a reading kit which will make them familiar with the input from the
> movement strategy process as well as prior community consultations our team
> has done at regional Wikimedia conferences and Wikimania as well as through
> facilitated conversations with 19 different language communities. The data
> is published on Meta here
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Community_feedback_at_conferences
> and here
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Initial_2020_Consultations
> .
> This community feedback will inform the drafting process.
>
> This draft will then be brought to the communities for review starting
> August 24, as outlined in the timeline here:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct#Timeline. We are
> still looking for ways to make more people aware of this important part of
> the process. Please spread the word of this upcoming community comment
> period, to help us get wider participation!
>
> I hope the above makes sense to you, looking forward to your engagement
> with the draft end of August and in September,
>
> Christel Steig

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Universal Code of Conduct Drafting Committee - Call for participation

2020-08-01 Thread Peter Southwood
Hi Christel
I am glad to hear that, and I hope that proper consultation will occur with all 
potentially affected parties, in places where they can comment and point out 
problems on user friendly or at least familiar software, over at least a 
reasonably representative range of languages, and with sufficient time to 
discuss issues without  an excessively tight deadline.
Speaking of which, what is the language spread  of the drafting committee?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Christel Steigenberger
Sent: 31 July 2020 17:48
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Universal Code of Conduct Drafting Committee - Call 
for participation

Hi Peter,

I hear and understand your worries. I’d like to reassure you that we are
very aware of the fact that no single person and no selected group of
people can speak for the community as a whole. This is one of the big
challenges all such efforts have to tackle. Representation here is not
meant in the sense of legal or political representation. But by speaking
for themselves, we hope that volunteers and staff coming from different
language communities, holding different roles within the movement and
bringing different experiences of engagement with the movement into the
process will at least bring diverse valuable perspectives to the creation
of the draft for the Universal Code of Conduct.

Before they start drafting, they are already now working their way through
a reading kit which will make them familiar with the input from the
movement strategy process as well as prior community consultations our team
has done at regional Wikimedia conferences and Wikimania as well as through
facilitated conversations with 19 different language communities. The data
is published on Meta here
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Community_feedback_at_conferences
and here
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Initial_2020_Consultations.
This community feedback will inform the drafting process.

This draft will then be brought to the communities for review starting
August 24, as outlined in the timeline here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct#Timeline. We are
still looking for ways to make more people aware of this important part of
the process. Please spread the word of this upcoming community comment
period, to help us get wider participation!

I hope the above makes sense to you, looking forward to your engagement
with the draft end of August and in September,

Christel Steigenberger (she/her)

Trust and Safety Specialist

Wikimedia Foundation 
___
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, 


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Universal Code of Conduct Drafting Committee - Call for participation

2020-08-01 Thread Peter Southwood
Alternative to what?
Cheers 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: 30 July 2020 20:46
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Universal Code of Conduct Drafting Committee - Call 
for participation

Hoi,
So what is your alternative, what do you have as an alternative?
Thanks,
  GerardM

On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 20:24, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Hi Christel,
> I wish the committee well, and success in coming up with a workable
> policy. This is fine as long as no assumption is made that these people
> represent the communities in any way other than for themselves. They may be
> fine people and may even have excellent ideas and skills suited to the
> task, but they are not our representatives, and we expect to be consulted
> regarding the results of this work. I understand that this may be your
> intention anyway, but we have seen too many fiascos  resulting from a small
> group of people coming up with some proposal and WMF declaring this to be
> "movement policy" or something to that effect.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Christel Steigenberger
> Sent: 30 July 2020 19:49
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Universal Code of Conduct Drafting Committee -
> Call for participation
>
> Hello everyone,
>
>
> We are happy to announce that the Universal Code of Conduct drafting
> committee has been assembled. We had 26 volunteers apply, either by
> publicly signing up on the Meta page, or by sending an email. Volunteers
> from 18 different countries applied, speaking 11 different languages.
>
> We had Wikimedian applicants with different levels of experience on-wiki,
> from someone who started editing only last year to people who have been
> editing for more than 18 years and/or have more than 300,000 edits.
> Applicants held a variety of different roles within the movement, and also
> informed us about interesting and relevant experiences in their real-life
> careers. It was very hard to narrow down from this diverse and extremely
> qualified pool of applicants.
>
> For the final selection, two aspects guided the decision making - we want a
> committee that at the one hand will represent important parts of the
> movement. Prolific editors as well as Wikimedians whose strength is more in
> organizing events, wikimedians from different demographics, contributors
> from small and large wikis, and people holding different roles within the
> movement. We also wanted a group of people who will collaborate with one
> another effectively and create the best possible Universal Code of Conduct
> for the Wikimedia movement. Experience has taught us that committees that
> are too large find it difficult to work effectively, so we decided to cap
> the number of seats to 6 volunteer seats and 3 staff seats.
>
> More information on the Committee and its new members can be found on Meta
> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Drafting_committee
> >
> [1], and a timeline for their work is available on the main UCoC page
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct> [2]. Please
> note that more chances for engagement are coming up during the community
> draft review period starting from August 24.
>
> Best regards,
> Christel
>
>   [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Drafting_committee
>
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct
>
> Christel Steigenberger (she/her)
>
> Trust and Safety Specialist
>
> Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
> ___
> 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>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
> ___
> 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 lis

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Universal Code of Conduct Drafting Committee - Call for participation

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Southwood
Hi Christel,
I wish the committee well, and success in coming up with a workable policy. 
This is fine as long as no assumption is made that these people represent the 
communities in any way other than for themselves. They may be fine people and 
may even have excellent ideas and skills suited to the task, but they are not 
our representatives, and we expect to be consulted regarding the results of 
this work. I understand that this may be your intention anyway, but we have 
seen too many fiascos  resulting from a small group of people coming up with 
some proposal and WMF declaring this to be "movement policy" or something to 
that effect.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Christel Steigenberger
Sent: 30 July 2020 19:49
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Universal Code of Conduct Drafting Committee - Call 
for participation

Hello everyone,


We are happy to announce that the Universal Code of Conduct drafting
committee has been assembled. We had 26 volunteers apply, either by
publicly signing up on the Meta page, or by sending an email. Volunteers
from 18 different countries applied, speaking 11 different languages.

We had Wikimedian applicants with different levels of experience on-wiki,
from someone who started editing only last year to people who have been
editing for more than 18 years and/or have more than 300,000 edits.
Applicants held a variety of different roles within the movement, and also
informed us about interesting and relevant experiences in their real-life
careers. It was very hard to narrow down from this diverse and extremely
qualified pool of applicants.

For the final selection, two aspects guided the decision making - we want a
committee that at the one hand will represent important parts of the
movement. Prolific editors as well as Wikimedians whose strength is more in
organizing events, wikimedians from different demographics, contributors
from small and large wikis, and people holding different roles within the
movement. We also wanted a group of people who will collaborate with one
another effectively and create the best possible Universal Code of Conduct
for the Wikimedia movement. Experience has taught us that committees that
are too large find it difficult to work effectively, so we decided to cap
the number of seats to 6 volunteer seats and 3 staff seats.

More information on the Committee and its new members can be found on Meta

[1], and a timeline for their work is available on the main UCoC page
 [2]. Please
note that more chances for engagement are coming up during the community
draft review period starting from August 24.

Best regards,
Christel

  [1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Drafting_committee

[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct

Christel Steigenberger (she/her)

Trust and Safety Specialist

Wikimedia Foundation 
___
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, 


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

2020-07-21 Thread Peter Southwood
Could even be that no-one has gotten around to writing any policies and 
guidance,  and everyone is just winging it with very little oversight. How 
could we know?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Dennis During
Sent: 20 July 2020 00:15
To: effeietsand...@gmail.com; Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

I think he's looking for openness. That doesn't require one to
psychoanalyze him; just a straightforward reading of what he has said,
especially in the context of wikidom. If there is some reason why OTRS
isn't important enough to merit policies, supervision, and transparency,
that should be easy to explain. If there is some other reason why we
shouldn't trouble our little heads about it, it should be possible to try
to explain that.

On Sun, Jul 19, 2020, 18:01 effe iets anders 
wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 7:55 AM Andy Mabbett 
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 at 09:03, effe iets anders  >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I rather have
> > > that people make their assumptions explicit so that you have an
> > opportunity
> > > to clarify, and use that as the basis for further conversation.
> >
> > You seem to be assuming - wrongly - that I have made assumptions which
> > I have not made explicit.
> >
> > Ironically, you have not explicitly stated your assumption.
> >
> > > My reading of this discussion is that there is a lot of 'secrecy'
> assumed
> >
> > No secrecy is being assumed. Too much secrecy is being observed.
> >
> > > where it is probably more a lack of existence of policies in the way
> Andy
> > > would like them to exist. This is a known problem with OTRS.
> >
> > It may well be that some policies that should exist, do not, or are
> > ''de facto'' without being written down. But until we see a
> > comprehensive list of those that do exist and are written, how can we
> > know?
> >
> > > I feel comfortable sharing that the set of OTRS-wide 'policies' that is
> > on
> > > the wiki, is probably of little interest to this matter.
> >
> > I am very interested in seeing all those 'policies'; as others have
> > said they are.
> >
> > As noted earlier in this thread, I do not see how I could be any more
> > clear about my wish to see them.
> >
> > > This is why I
> > > noted that Jonatan's response could be misleading, because it implies
> all
> > > kind of secrecy that doesn't exist.
> >
> > It stated, not implied, that "the Confidentiality Agreement all OTRS
> > agents sign" prevented him from answering some of the questions asked
> > on-wiki in February, and quoted at the start of this thread.
> >
> > > There are actually a few policies
> > > linked at [[m:OTRS ]], that are
> > > simply copied there (Access, Activity policies).
> >
> > That page, and those linked from it, do not answer the questions to
> > which I have already referred.
> >
> > > There is some stuff about
> > > privacy, confidentiality and how to deal with mailing lists. Imho
> nothing
> > > that exciting.
> >
> > Perhaps not exciting to you; but I and others argue that such content
> > should nonetheless be public. We have been told that OTRS agents are
> > discussing the matter on their private email and IRC channels, but
> > then... Nothing.
> >
> > > OTRS is an immensely diverse system, and I don't think it's helpful to
> > try
> > > to analyze that with overly broad questions.
> >
> > I do not accept that questions such as, for example:
> >
> >5 how is OTRS overseen, and who by?
> >
> >7 what is the process for the community to remove an
> >   individual's OTRS permissions, if they fail to uphold
> >   or abide by policy?
> >
> >9 which individuals can make someone an OTRS agent,
> >   or remove their permissions?
> >
> >10 how are the individuals in #9 appointed and overseen?
> >
> > are "overly broad"; but if you think they are, how would you narrow their
> > focus?
> >
> >
> First of all: you're framing my words and taking them out of context. I'm
> not going to waste further energy on that.
>
> Answering that would require me to actually understand what the underlying
> issue is that you want to solve. I've given up on that.
>
> Lodewijk
>
>
> > --
> > 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,
> > 
> ___
> 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] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

2020-07-21 Thread Peter Southwood
That is what I thought, so referring someone to ANI is not helpful, or is there 
an ANI for OTRS specifically?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: 11 July 2020 10:59
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

Hoi,
How can OTRS be part of Wikipedia, it is there for any and all projects.
Thanks,
  GerardM

On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 at 10:48, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Context is necessary to understand this.
> If OTRS part of Wikipedia? If not, Which ANI?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Aron Manning
> Sent: 11 July 2020 09:23
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system
>
> On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 at 19:52, Jonatan Svensson Glad <
> gladjona...@outlook.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 8. if an individual has been acting contrary to policy, what is the
> > process for reviewing and if necessary overturning their past actions
> > (including contacting and apologising to their correspondents)?
> > I’m unable to answer this due to the Confidentiality Agreement all OTRS
> > agents sign.
>
>
> I recall one experience with OTRS in which I've received this brief answer:
>
> > Report them to ANI and hope you're not *hit in the face with a
> boomerang*.
> >
> > Yours sincerely, ...
>
> The individual did not apologize in further correspondence and I haven't
> thought about contacting OTRS since then.
>
>
> Aron
> ___
> 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>

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

2020-07-18 Thread Peter Southwood
Seems to me that if someone does not specify a motivation, we leave it as that 
- no motivation. It you want to know what it is, you ask. You may get an 
answer, but sometimes it is not particularly relevant, as the question may be 
worth asking for whatever reason because the answer could be useful anyway.
This strikes me as one of those questions. I would be interested to know the 
answers, because they would be illuminating and useful. It does not really 
matter to me what Andy was thinking about at the time other than wanting an 
answer to a reasonable, neutrally expressed question about something I 
considered should be freely available somewhere in the system. What was 
surprising is how long it has taken to get what little information has been 
forthcoming, but that has little bearing on why the question was asked in the 
first place.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Pete Forsyth
Sent: 17 July 2020 23:17
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

Andy, I agree with you on the substance -- that we should get to a place
where there are clearly articulated policies, with widespread buy-in, that
are reliably adhered to.

It's the interpersonal stuff that I feel is distracting in a public
discussion. If you feel it's worthwhile to talk that stuff through, I'd be
happy to do so offlist. But I won't discuss it further on this list, which
amounts to asking our colleagues in the Wikimedia world to endure something
they don't need to. I've already told you I regret my mistaken remark about
your intentions, so if you like, we could leave it at that.

Anyway, for the list -- what would you propose as a next step that you or I
could take, without relying on anybody else in the short term? Can you
think of anything? Or does that strike you as completely impossible? I am
rather skeptical that this particular 20-post thread has moved any hearts
or minds (but perhaps you have reason to disagree with that - ?)

-Pete
--
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 12:41 PM Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 at 17:19, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
>
> > Since it seems
> > that multiple people are misunderstanding you on this point, I wonder
> > whether there's anything you could do to express your views on this point
> > more clearly.
>
> Here is the entire post I made to Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard on 27 February:
>
> #~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#
>
> We need answers to the following questions (some asked, but not
> answered, above, some arising from that discussion):
>
> 1. what are OTRS' rules and policies?
> 2. where are those rules and policies documented, and why are they not
> public?
> 3. where are those rules and polices discussed and decided?
> 4. what is the process for getting those rules and policies changed
> (or reworded for clarity)?
> 5. how is OTRS overseen, and who by?
> 6. what is the approval process for an individual to become an OTRS agent?
> 7. what is the process for the community to remove an individual's
> OTRS permissions, if they fail to uphold or abide by policy?
> 8. if an individual has been acting contrary to policy, what is the
> process for reviewing and if necessary overturning their past actions
> (including contacting and apologising to their correspondents)?
> 9. which individuals can make someone an OTRS agent, or remove their
> permissions?
> 10. how are the individuals in #9 appointed and overseen?
>
> Clearly, the equivalent for these exists on Commons, and our sister
> projects. OTRS agents can not expect to act without equivalent levels
> of transparency and accountability, even if individual transactions
> are confidential.
>
> #~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#
>
> Please tell me which parts of it could be more clear, and how.
>
> You certainly did not seem to be concerned about a lack of clarity in
> it, when you replied:
>
>Excellent list, Andy. I concur... I think it would be very much in
> the interests of OTRS
>agents and the Wikimedia movement overall to address this list of
> questions in a
>forthright way, and make some adjustments (such as publishing
> policies and a process
>for amending policies)
>
> shortly after I posted it.
>
> Or did you have some other unclear post in mind?
>
> --
> 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,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

2020-07-11 Thread Peter Southwood
Quite possible I am mistaken, but I thought OTRS was separate from WP, which 
would make en:wp:ANI irrelevant.
Chreers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Aron Manning
Sent: 11 July 2020 10:55
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 at 10:48, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Context is necessary to understand this.
> If OTRS part of Wikipedia?

I don't understand that question.
The cited answer was received from .

If not, Which ANI?
>
The OTRS volunteer referred to [[en:wp:ANI]].

Cheers,
Aron


On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 at 10:48, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Context is necessary to understand this.
> If OTRS part of Wikipedia? If not, Which ANI?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Aron Manning
> Sent: 11 July 2020 09:23
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system
>
> On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 at 19:52, Jonatan Svensson Glad <
> gladjona...@outlook.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 8. if an individual has been acting contrary to policy, what is the
> > process for reviewing and if necessary overturning their past actions
> > (including contacting and apologising to their correspondents)?
> > I’m unable to answer this due to the Confidentiality Agreement all OTRS
> > agents sign.
>
>
> I recall one experience with OTRS in which I've received this brief answer:
>
> > Report them to ANI and hope you're not *hit in the face with a
> boomerang*.
> >
> > Yours sincerely, ...
>
> The individual did not apologize in further correspondence and I haven't
> thought about contacting OTRS since then.
>
>
> Aron
> ___
> 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>

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

2020-07-11 Thread Peter Southwood
Context is necessary to understand this.
If OTRS part of Wikipedia? If not, Which ANI?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Aron Manning
Sent: 11 July 2020 09:23
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system

On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 at 19:52, Jonatan Svensson Glad 
wrote:

> 8. if an individual has been acting contrary to policy, what is the
> process for reviewing and if necessary overturning their past actions
> (including contacting and apologising to their correspondents)?
> I’m unable to answer this due to the Confidentiality Agreement all OTRS
> agents sign.


I recall one experience with OTRS in which I've received this brief answer:

> Report them to ANI and hope you're not *hit in the face with a boomerang*.
>
> Yours sincerely, ...

The individual did not apologize in further correspondence and I haven't
thought about contacting OTRS since then.


Aron
___
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] Citizendium shutting down

2020-07-05 Thread Peter Southwood
If it was just a matter of money to keep the servers running, I would say yes, 
but if they have no editors there would not be a lot of point. We could offer 
an archive, and assimilation.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Joseph Seddon
Sent: 04 July 2020 23:19
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Citizendium shutting down

Is there any merit in us helping them continue to exist?

Seddon

On Sat, Jul 4, 2020 at 10:13 PM David Gerard  wrote:

> here's the discussion:
>
> https://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Forum_Talk:Technical_Issues#Any_further_thoughts.3F
>
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2020 at 22:11, David Gerard  wrote:
> >
> > Front page:
> >
> > > This wiki was unsuccessful in achieving its original goals (see
> https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-Wikipedia-and-Citizendium).
> A dedicated few writers have continued working in the wiki, improving
> articles that they believe are useful, and which for various reasons
> probably could not be written in Wikipedia. On or about Sept. 30, 2020, we
> plan to end Citizendium as a public "open" project, yet (possibly) keep the
> wiki running and editable by a combination of donations and subscriptions.
> How this might occur is still being examined.
> >
> > Original announcement
> >
> https://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Welcome_to_Citizendium=100864611=100857010
> >
> > basically - nobody's editing anything any more, and the money's running
> out.
> >
> >
> > - d.
>
> ___
> 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,
> 



-- 
Seddon

*Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
*Advancement (Fundraising), Wikimedia Foundation*
___
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, 


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Wikimedia servers

2020-06-29 Thread Peter Southwood
That is plausible, I am in Cape Town
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Joseph Seddon
Sent: 29 June 2020 16:40
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers

From reports I am seeing on facebook it seems this problem is localised on
our Africa based users?

Regards
Seddon

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:05 PM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> I get this:
>
> The connection has timed out
>
> The server at en.wikipedia.org is taking too long to respond.
>
> The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a
> few moments.
> If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer’s network
> connection.
> If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make
> sure that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.
>
> After a long wait. Been like this for several hours now.
> Most sites no problem
> Cheers,
> P
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Amir Sarabadani
> Sent: 29 June 2020 15:31
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers
>
> Hey,
> Can you elaborate more? I can access the website and graphs seems okay:
>
> https://grafana.wikimedia.org/d/RIA1lzDZk/application-servers-red-dashboard?orgId=1=now-3h=now
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:24 PM Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > ___
> > 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>
>
>
>
> --
> Amir (he/him)
> ___
> 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>
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
> ___
> 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>



-- 
Seddon

*Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
*Advancement (Fundraising), Wikimedia Foundation*
___
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>

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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 servers

2020-06-29 Thread Peter Southwood
I get this:

The connection has timed out

The server at en.wikipedia.org is taking too long to respond.

The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a few 
moments.
If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer’s network 
connection.
If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make sure 
that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.

After a long wait. Been like this for several hours now.
Most sites no problem
Cheers,
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Amir Sarabadani
Sent: 29 June 2020 15:31
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers

Hey,
Can you elaborate more? I can access the website and graphs seems okay:
https://grafana.wikimedia.org/d/RIA1lzDZk/application-servers-red-dashboard?orgId=1=now-3h=now

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:24 PM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Peter
>
> ___
> 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>



-- 
Amir (he/him)
___
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>

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Wikimedia servers

2020-06-29 Thread Peter Southwood
Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?

Cheers,

Peter

___
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] Board update on Branding: next steps

2020-06-29 Thread Peter Southwood
Dunning and Kruger identified the effect, unfortunately they did not identify a 
cure.
Cheers,
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: 29 June 2020 12:36
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps

Hoi,
Just analyse the text, read the arguments. When you express an opinion, it
warrants analysis. When this is not permitted it follows that you can not
argue based on what people state. To what extend do you allow for the
exchange of arguments when you do not allow for reading and commenting on
what has been expressed?

For the record I do value WereSpielChequers, he is imho an accomplished
Wikimedian who I respect.

When you tell me that I cannot comment on what people write, how do you
expose a bias. What does it do for a freedom of expression? What I bring
are arguments that you do not refute by dismissing them.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 11:43, Benjamin Lees  wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:56 AM Gerard Meijssen  >
> wrote:
>
> > Dear WereSpielChequers, the thing with bias is that it shows in the
> choices
> > made. You are a Wikipedian, do not really care for the other projects and
> > you make that plain in what you say.
> >
>
> This sort of assumption-making about other list participants' motives is
> completely unwarranted.[1]  You've been doing it repeatedly.  Please stop.
>
> [1] As regards WereSpielChequers, it is also demonstrably false.  He has
> nearly 500,000 edits on Commons.
> ___
> 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, 


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Board update on Branding: next steps

2020-06-29 Thread Peter Southwood
So far it has been an ongoing process. No obvious reason to expect a change.
Cheers,
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Dan Szymborski
Sent: 28 June 2020 18:13
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps

Question about the timeline: will the community's opinions be ignored at
the July or at the August meeting? Or is this considered a continual
process? This information would help people with their planning.

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 8:37 PM Zack McCune  wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> We want to confirm that the Brand Project team has been directed by the
> Board to develop new branding options and to evaluate those options with
> communities. We invite your perspectives.
>
> We are asking that you continue to participate in the process which
> includes completing the survey, available in 7 languages.[1] Your
> participation in this survey will not be calculated as support for a
> change.
>
> We have been alerted to the Community open letter on renaming. We will take
> that information into the process.
>
> The Board will consider all the options, including the option to do
> nothing, and make a decision at their August meeting.
>
>-
>
>Zack & the Brand Project team
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Naming_convention_proposals
>
>
> On Friday, June 26, 2020, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> > The timeline is pretty clear. Glad to know about the special board
> meeting
> > in early July. Other than the open letter there was a straw poll also:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_
> > brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Community_feedback_and_straw_poll
> > The early July briefing, I hope that will be presenting all the aspects
> and
> > opinions.
> >
> > Thanks
> > User:Titodutta
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 04:57, Nataliia Tymkiv 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I want to share with you the next steps of the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board
> > > of Trustees about the Brand Project.
> > >
> > > Originally the Board meeting dedicated to the brand project was
> supposed
> > to
> > > happen no earlier than October. The expected outcome from the project
> > were
> > > the recommendations on what the rebranding should look like - from
> > changing
> > > fonts/logos to renaming. And if there is going to be a renaming - to
> > what.
> > > Of course, the Board’s role is not in approving a change in fonts, but
> > if a
> > > recommendation to rename was to be made - the Board’s role would have
> > been
> > > to make a decision on that recommendation. The timeline has now been
> > > changed, and the renaming part of rebranding will be discussed in our
> > > August meeting.
> > >
> > > Moreover, the Board will meet in early July to receive a briefing about
> > the
> > > project and talk about the process between June 2018 - June 2020. The
> > > consolidated materials on what the brand project team has been working
> on
> > > for a while now will be presented to the Board, and these materials are
> > > also going to be posted publicly. The more-strategic conversation is
> > > planned for the August meeting. Time to prepare the materials is
> needed,
> > > and the ongoing conversations need to be summarised, so the Board can
> > have
> > > an in-depth discussion about this, before making any kind of decision.
> > >
> > > We would like to continue with the survey [1] - we have discussed the
> > > possibility of technical changes to the survey with an additional
> option
> > > like “no renaming is needed” (not the exact words, mind you), but with
> > more
> > > than 700 respondents it is not methodologically sound to change the
> > survey
> > > now. Staff have confirmed to the Board that responses to the survey
> will
> > > not be calculated as support for a change. The survey was only designed
> > to
> > > collect feedback on the possible renaming options, not as a yes/no vote
> > on
> > > whether to adopt them.
> > >
> > > Thus the timeline on rebranding for the next 6-7 weeks is as follows:
> > >
> > > * Early July - special Board meeting with the Brand project team to
> > review
> > > and discuss the process so far, and for the Board members to receive
> the
> > > briefing on discussions happening;
> > >
> > > * July - consolidated materials prepared for the July meeting will be
> > > posted publicly after the meeting;
> > >
> > > * August 5th - the Board meeting on renaming part of the rebranding,
> not
> > > about the process. The Board will make the decision about whether to
> > stop,
> > > pause, or continue the work on this, within the framework of a
> discussion
> > > on strategic goals, tensions and tradeoffs, and potential next steps.
> > >
> > > * August (after the meeting) - the Board statement on the next steps
> > about
> > > the Brand project.
> > >
> > > I also want to 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps

2020-06-27 Thread Peter Southwood
It is not methodologically sound to continue using a survey which is unfit for 
purpose, regardless of how many people have responded. It is ethically 
questionable to continue using a survey which simply does not allow for the 
possibility of being completely wrong when this possibility has been brought up 
so many times by so many interested and affected parties.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Nataliia Tymkiv
Sent: 27 June 2020 01:27
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps

Dear all,

I want to share with you the next steps of the Wikimedia Foundation Board
of Trustees about the Brand Project.

Originally the Board meeting dedicated to the brand project was supposed to
happen no earlier than October. The expected outcome from the project were
the recommendations on what the rebranding should look like - from changing
fonts/logos to renaming. And if there is going to be a renaming - to what.
Of course, the Board’s role is not in approving a change in fonts, but if a
recommendation to rename was to be made - the Board’s role would have been
to make a decision on that recommendation. The timeline has now been
changed, and the renaming part of rebranding will be discussed in our
August meeting.

Moreover, the Board will meet in early July to receive a briefing about the
project and talk about the process between June 2018 - June 2020. The
consolidated materials on what the brand project team has been working on
for a while now will be presented to the Board, and these materials are
also going to be posted publicly. The more-strategic conversation is
planned for the August meeting. Time to prepare the materials is needed,
and the ongoing conversations need to be summarised, so the Board can have
an in-depth discussion about this, before making any kind of decision.

We would like to continue with the survey [1] - we have discussed the
possibility of technical changes to the survey with an additional option
like “no renaming is needed” (not the exact words, mind you), but with more
than 700 respondents it is not methodologically sound to change the survey
now. Staff have confirmed to the Board that responses to the survey will
not be calculated as support for a change. The survey was only designed to
collect feedback on the possible renaming options, not as a yes/no vote on
whether to adopt them.

Thus the timeline on rebranding for the next 6-7 weeks is as follows:

* Early July - special Board meeting with the Brand project team to review
and discuss the process so far, and for the Board members to receive the
briefing on discussions happening;

* July - consolidated materials prepared for the July meeting will be
posted publicly after the meeting;

* August 5th - the Board meeting on renaming part of the rebranding, not
about the process. The Board will make the decision about whether to stop,
pause, or continue the work on this, within the framework of a discussion
on strategic goals, tensions and tradeoffs, and potential next steps.

* August (after the meeting) - the Board statement on the next steps about
the Brand project.

I also want to acknowledge receiving the Community open letter on renaming
[2] that was posted this week. Thank you for this statement on the position
of those of you who signed. I know there are other perspectives, and that
some would agree with it who have not signed it, and that there are also
some who would not agree. We expect that the Board meetings and
communication after them will address the concerns raised in the letter.

Stay safe,
antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv
Acting Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

[1] https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9G2dN7P0T7gPqpD

[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_open_letter_on_renaming


*NOTICE: You may have received this message outside of your normal working
hours/days, as I usually can work more as a volunteer during weekend. You
should not feel obligated to answer it during your days off. Thank you in
advance!*
___
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, 


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Board update on Branding: next steps

2020-06-27 Thread Peter Southwood
That is a really poorly designed survey unless it has been changed since I last 
saw it. 
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Zack McCune
Sent: 27 June 2020 02:37
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps

Dear all,

We want to confirm that the Brand Project team has been directed by the
Board to develop new branding options and to evaluate those options with
communities. We invite your perspectives.

We are asking that you continue to participate in the process which
includes completing the survey, available in 7 languages.[1] Your
participation in this survey will not be calculated as support for a change.

We have been alerted to the Community open letter on renaming. We will take
that information into the process.

The Board will consider all the options, including the option to do
nothing, and make a decision at their August meeting.

   -

   Zack & the Brand Project team

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Naming_convention_proposals


On Friday, June 26, 2020, Tito Dutta  wrote:

> Greetings,
> The timeline is pretty clear. Glad to know about the special board meeting
> in early July. Other than the open letter there was a straw poll also:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_
> brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Community_feedback_and_straw_poll
> The early July briefing, I hope that will be presenting all the aspects and
> opinions.
>
> Thanks
> User:Titodutta
>
>
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 04:57, Nataliia Tymkiv 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I want to share with you the next steps of the Wikimedia Foundation Board
> > of Trustees about the Brand Project.
> >
> > Originally the Board meeting dedicated to the brand project was supposed
> to
> > happen no earlier than October. The expected outcome from the project
> were
> > the recommendations on what the rebranding should look like - from
> changing
> > fonts/logos to renaming. And if there is going to be a renaming - to
> what.
> > Of course, the Board’s role is not in approving a change in fonts, but
> if a
> > recommendation to rename was to be made - the Board’s role would have
> been
> > to make a decision on that recommendation. The timeline has now been
> > changed, and the renaming part of rebranding will be discussed in our
> > August meeting.
> >
> > Moreover, the Board will meet in early July to receive a briefing about
> the
> > project and talk about the process between June 2018 - June 2020. The
> > consolidated materials on what the brand project team has been working on
> > for a while now will be presented to the Board, and these materials are
> > also going to be posted publicly. The more-strategic conversation is
> > planned for the August meeting. Time to prepare the materials is needed,
> > and the ongoing conversations need to be summarised, so the Board can
> have
> > an in-depth discussion about this, before making any kind of decision.
> >
> > We would like to continue with the survey [1] - we have discussed the
> > possibility of technical changes to the survey with an additional option
> > like “no renaming is needed” (not the exact words, mind you), but with
> more
> > than 700 respondents it is not methodologically sound to change the
> survey
> > now. Staff have confirmed to the Board that responses to the survey will
> > not be calculated as support for a change. The survey was only designed
> to
> > collect feedback on the possible renaming options, not as a yes/no vote
> on
> > whether to adopt them.
> >
> > Thus the timeline on rebranding for the next 6-7 weeks is as follows:
> >
> > * Early July - special Board meeting with the Brand project team to
> review
> > and discuss the process so far, and for the Board members to receive the
> > briefing on discussions happening;
> >
> > * July - consolidated materials prepared for the July meeting will be
> > posted publicly after the meeting;
> >
> > * August 5th - the Board meeting on renaming part of the rebranding, not
> > about the process. The Board will make the decision about whether to
> stop,
> > pause, or continue the work on this, within the framework of a discussion
> > on strategic goals, tensions and tradeoffs, and potential next steps.
> >
> > * August (after the meeting) - the Board statement on the next steps
> about
> > the Brand project.
> >
> > I also want to acknowledge receiving the Community open letter on
> renaming
> > [2] that was posted this week. Thank you for this statement on the
> position
> > of those of you who signed. I know there are other perspectives, and that
> > some would agree with it who have not signed it, and that there are also
> > some who would not agree. We expect that the Board meetings and
> > communication after them will address the concerns raised in the letter.
> >
> > Stay safe,
> > antanana / 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is the Wikimedia-movement apolitical?

2020-04-26 Thread Peter Southwood
Of course not, we have a strong bias in favour of  freedom of information, 
accuracy, and verifiability to reliable sources. Also, officially, civil 
discourse and decision by consensus. It is written into our basic policies 
(speaking as an en: Wikipedian, other projects may differ). Most policy will 
impose some kind of bias. As soon as there is something one may not do, or must 
do, there is a bias.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Tito Dutta
Sent: 26 April 2020 01:43
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is the Wikimedia-movement apolitical?

Greetings,
It is asked: "are we apolitical?" A spin-off question: "are we unbiased?"
On Wikipedia, we (are to) provide and serve knowledge/information, not any
particular view(s)

Thanks
Tito Dutta



On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 at 00:34, Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Agreed. There is no way to get around the fact that some people oppose our
> message of free access to our projects for everyone, and the actions we
> make in favor of that goal are often political.
>
> However, there is a very large gap between publicly supporting such
> policies as a less regulated internet, copyright advocacy, etc., and Earth
> Day Live's endorsed viewpoint.
>
> If they were solely about Earth Day, we'd have no issues, as the few people
> who oppose Earth Day are probably living in the mountains somewhere with a
> half dozen solar panels and tinfoil hats to protect themselves from the
> flying saucers surveying the flat earth.
>
> The problem I have with Earth Day Live is that, were the Wikimedia
> Foundation to publicly endorse those views, it would inherently be
> isolating of people who do not share them. For example, there were many
> people on the endorsed streams advocating for all industries to have unions
> and a universal $15 minimum wage. Ignoring the fact that it's specifically
> American and was shown to everyone globally, I do not support either of
> those policies for various reasons (primarily that much of my work is done
> for under $15/hr, and I would likely lose some of those jobs), and should
> not be forced at odds with the WMF's party line.
>
> If the Foundation begins publicly endorsing certain policies or viewpoints
> that are not directly a part of the mission which we all agree with and
> work towards, people who disagree with those viewpoints would be forced
> into opposition of the foundation intended to represent the work they
> volunteer for Wikimedia projects. Our intention is to deliver unbiased
> information to people, and if the Foundation has a declared political
> stance other than our mission statement, it also opens the Foundation to
> legitimate criticism on claims of bias.
>
> There is also the argument of timelessness. Two hundred years ago there was
> a very different political landscape with very different arguments taking
> place. Two hundred years from now, provided humanity still exists, would
> likely be very different than today. Assuming that the WMF and Wikipedia
> will still be around, is it better to attempt to remain out of political
> advocacy (with the exception of our mission), or to take distinct political
> stances whenever the political field shifts? I fall in the former category.
>
> Best regards,
> Chris Gates
> (User:Vermont)
>
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 12:45 PM Camelia Boban 
> wrote:
>
> > Absolutely agree with both. Everything we do in the wiki movement (as
> > everything we do in our whole life) has (also) a political meaning.
> > As we have certain goals and we take certain positions.
> >
> > Camelia
> >
> > --
> > *Camelia Boban*
> >
> > *| Java EE Developer |*
> >
> >
> >
> > *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia Foundation*
> > Diversity WG for Wikimedia Strategy 2030
> > *Interwiki Women
> >  | **Wiki
> > Loves Sport  | Wiki
> > Loves
> > Fashion *
> > WMIT  - WMSE
> >  - WMAR
> >  - WMCH
> >  Member
> >
> > M. +39 3383385545
> > camelia.bo...@gmail.com
> > *Aissa Technologies* * | *Twitter
> >  *|* *LinkedIn
> > *
> > *Wikipedia  **|
> > **WikiDonne
> > UG * | *WikiDonne Project
> >  *
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Il giorno sab 25 apr 2020 alle ore 18:12 Rebecca O'Neill <
> > rebeccanin...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> >
> > > Well said. 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

2020-04-23 Thread Peter Southwood
The entertainment industry has more influential lobbyists?
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
James Salsman
Sent: 20 April 2020 23:40
To: Wikimedia Mailing List; Yaroslav Blanter
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

Yaroslav,

How do you feel about the system of compulsory royalties they have to pay
for both academic journals and news journalism in Germany? See e.g.
https://www.vgwort.de/die-vg-wort.html

In the U.S., we pay musicians for their works played on the radio, in
public venues, and pirated, all out of taxpayer funds. Does anyone
understand why we don't pay journalist and scientists the same way?

Best regards,
Jim


On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 1:52 PM Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:

> As an actively publishing researcher, I just know that mandating open
> access publishing would mean that the author pays the (huge) publication
> fee rather than the library pays the subscription. In an ideal world, the
> universities would refund the fees, and will get subsidy from the
> governments, In our real world, the researchers will have to pay everything
> out of their own pocket, with some of them losing all possibilities to
> publish, for the lack of funds. I tried to raise this before, and the
> universal reply was that this is my problem, not the problem of the
> society. I do not expect anything else this time.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:34 PM Shani Evenstein 
> wrote:
>
> > Jake, well written and nicely put.
> > Is this online somewhere, where we can share it further?
> >
> > Best,
> > Shani.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > *Shani Evenstein Sigalov*
> >
> > * Lecturer, Tel Aviv University.
> > * EdTech Innovation Strategist, NY/American Medical Program, Sackler
> School
> > of Medicine, Tel Aviv University.
> >
> > * PhD Candidate, School of Education, Tel Aviv University.
> > * Azrieli Foundation Research Fellow.
> > * OER & Emerging Technologies Coordinator, UNESCO Chair
> >  on Technology,
> > Internationalization
> > and Education, School of Education, Tel Aviv University
> > .
> >
> > * Member of the Board of Trustees
> > ,
> > Wikimedia
> > Foundation .
> > * Chairperson, The Hebrew Literature Digitization Society
> > .
> > * Chief Editor, Project Ben-Yehuda .
> >
> > +972-525640648
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:27 PM Pete Forsyth 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Jake,
> > >
> > > How can we most effectively support your excellent effort with this?
> > >
> > > -Pete
> > > --
> > > Pete Forsyth
> > > User:Peteforsyth on Meta, English Wikisource, English Wikipedia, etc.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 1:22 PM Tito Dutta 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > > Very well-written and well-supported by statistics. Thanks for
> sharing.
> > > > Regards.
> > > > User:Titodutta
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:41 AM Jake Orlowitz 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > My Letter to the U.S. Office for Science and Technology Policy
> > > regarding
> > > > a
> > > > > proposal for federally mandate open access to publicly-funded
> > > research...
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia is one of the ten most popular websites in the world.
> Each
> > > > month
> > > > > 200,000 editors improve over 6 million articles. This vital public
> > > > > information is viewed on 1 billion unique devices as our pages are
> > > loaded
> > > > > by people around the globe 7,000 times per second.
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia is the "free encyclopedia", both in its open CC-BY-SA
> > > licensing
> > > > > as well as the unpaid contributions of its volunteer editors. Yet
> > > > > Wikipedia's hundreds of thousands of editors struggle to access
> > > scholarly
> > > > > research. And, if they are able to read and cite it, then hundreds
> of
> > > > > millions of readers cannot verify or explore it for deeper
> research.
> > > > >
> > > > > Citations are the bridge between Wikipedia articles and a broader
> > > > landscape
> > > > > of reliable, secondary sources. Citations not only allow readers to
> > > > verify
> > > > > the reliability of the facts they find in Wikipedia; through
> > citations
> > > > > readers can also deep-dive into any given topic by exploring the
> > books,
> > > > > scholarly publications, and news stories referenced in an article.
> > > > >
> > > > > A recently released dataset of all citations with identifiers in
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > found that less than half of the official versions of scholarly
> > > > > publications cited with an identifier in Wikipedia are freely
> > available
> > > > on
> > > > > the web. This chasm of for editors and for readers is a tragedy of
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposal towards a multilingual Wikipedia and a new Wikipedia project

2020-04-20 Thread Peter Southwood
One of the advantages of this project is that the best of each Wikipedia can be 
used, allowing smaller Wikipedias to concentrate on topics of local interest 
and importance which are not in the other language wikipedias, and these can be 
used in the major wikipedias, expanding their diversity if they meet the 
inclusion criteria.
Another advantage is that the structure of the articles can be engineered to be 
inherently more neutral.
Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Denny Vrandecic
Sent: 20 April 2020 17:23
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposal towards a multilingual Wikipedia and a new 
Wikipedia project

Thank you, Scott,

this is a great and important question. I go into more detail about the
changes to the incentives structures for the contributors in the
Wikipedia @ 20 essay here:

https://wikipedia20.pubpub.org/pub/vyf7ksah

In short: it relies heavily on getting the user experience just right, and
this will be one of the hardest parts of the project. But there are a few
forces that conspire to improve the incentives for the contributors, such
as more reach, making a current and complete Wikipedia in a smaller
language editions seem feasible, reactivating previous contributors, and
tailor a user experience for mobile devices.

In the end, only the future will tell, but I certainly hope that this will
lead to a vibrant and large community with thousands of contributors.

Stay safe,
Denny



On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 4:54 PM Info WorldUniversity <
i...@worlduniversityandschool.org> wrote:

> Denny, and Wikimedians,
>
> How to maintain the diversity of contributions, edits, individual knowledge
> generators / writers, et al, on the human side of Wikipedia, by many
> different language communities if these were to grow, I wonder? Is this
> already part of your proposal, which I haven't come across yet? Thank you
> for this great development!
>
> Cheers,
> Scott
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 5:49 PM Denny Vrandečić 
> wrote:
>
> > Elevator pitch:
> >
> > Many Wikipedia language editions have large gaps in knowledge. We want to
> > close these gaps by allowing to create and maintain content in one place
> > and allow the Wikipedias to use this content if they choose so, instead
> of
> > doing that in each of the Wikipedia language editions individually. This
> > will allow more people to access and create more knowledge in more
> > languages in the Wikipedias.
> >
> > In order to do this, we need to represent the content in a way that can
> be
> > translated to many different natural languages with high fidelity. We do
> > this by introducing a new project that allows to create, maintain,
> > catalogue and evaluate functions as a new form of knowledge the
> communities
> > work on. This will allow completely new use cases, and allow more people
> to
> > share in more forms of knowledge than today.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 2:48 PM Andy Mabbett 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 01:52, Denny Vrandečić 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > As some of you know, I have been working on the idea of a
> multilingual
> > > > Wikipedia for a few years now.
> > >
> > > What's the elevator pitch for this?
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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,
> > > 
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
>
> --
> - Scott MacLeod - Founder & President
> - https://twitter.com/WorldUnivAndSch
> - World University and School
> - http://worlduniversityandschool.org
> - http://scottmacleod.com
>
> - CC World University and School - like CC Wikipedia with best STEM-centric
> CC OpenCourseWare - incorporated as a nonprofit university and school in
> California, and is a U.S. 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt educational organization.
> ___
> 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] Summary of the Brand Project presentation

2020-04-18 Thread Peter Southwood
I agree. It did not seem to say anything much. 
Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Fæ
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2020 3:06 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Summary of the Brand Project presentation

Have now watched "interconnection". It did not seem to say anything
tangible apart from stuff like you find 'interconnection in nature' in
the 2 minutes. It was produced to a good standard.

Sorry, it was not encouraging. The question remains of how much this
is costing the movement in WMF funding and valuable Wikimedia
community time without any clear outcomes being defined that the
Wikimedia community wants or could use to benefit the core value of
adding to the sum of human knowledge. Why the "rebranding" project
continues at this time remains an enigma.

We have gone ahead and added the video to Commons. If superseded it
will remain useful as a snapshot as of 16 April.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Our_unified_concept_interconnection.webm

Thanks,
Fae

On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 09:57, Samir Elsharbaty
 wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
> Yesterday, the 2030 Brand Movement Project presented the unified concept
> that will guide the upcoming branding proposals. Thanks to the 224
> attendees who watched the presentation live! Participants brought a great
> stream of comments and questions (averaging 8 per minute!) that helped
> clarify important points.
>
> The unified concept, “interconnection”, was arrived at after many community
> workshops, exercises, and conversations. “Interconnection” distills the 23
> distinct concepts generated in workshops into a single word that links
> together the insights and definitions from the participants, and at the
> same time adds more meaning to the answer to the question who are we? This
> concept will not be a public or visible part of branding, but rather a
> guiding idea.
>
> Take a look at the video explaining interconnection as a unified concept
> [1].
>
> You can watch the full presentation video, together with the lively
> discussion that accompanied it [2]. Most of the questions were answered
> during the presentation (including questions about the project scope, the
> upcoming naming convention proposals, and the RfC), but there wasn't enough
> time to answer them all. Questions are being compiled on the Brand Network
> talk page on Meta [3].
>
> The team will be hosting a follow-up office hour next week to answer the
> rest of the questions. Participation details will be shared on the Brand
> Network talk page. The session will be recorded and shared, and answers
> will be covered on the project pages. If you have a different question
> you’d like to ask, feel free to add it to the page or bring it to the
> office hour.
>
> PS: As soon as these videos are ready for Commons we will upload them
> there, and we will notify about this on the Brand Network talk page as well.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Samir & the Brand Project team
>
> [1]
> https://brandingwikipedia.org/2020/04/16/our-unified-concept-interconnection/
>
> [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS72O6Si94Q
>
> [3]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Brand_Network#Unified_concept:_Interconnection
>
> Samir Elsharbaty (he/him)
>
> Community Brand and Marketing coordinator
>
> Wikimedia Foundation 
> ___
> 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, 
> 

--
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
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] Що робить вас щасливими цього тижня? / What's making you happy this week? (Week of 5 April 2020)

2020-04-15 Thread Peter Southwood
A very interesting proposal for a new wiki by  Denny Vrandečić  at 
https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.04733 (What's making me happy this week)
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Pine W
Sent: 15 April 2020 08:36
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Що робить вас щасливими цього тижня? / What's making you 
happy this week? (Week of 5 April 2020)

* Preface *

Hello,

I regret that I need to start this email by communicating that
Clovermoss is on an unplanned absence. [1] I hoped that she would
return by now and that she would send this email.

I think that one WMYHTW thread is enough for one week, so I will not
start a thread for the week of 12 April.

The main content for this email is adapted from Clovermoss, and the
text is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0
Unported License. [2]


* Main content *

I realize that this week has been difficult for many around the world.
I have mentioned this in previous weeks, but I think it's vital to
express my sympathies each and every time. A pandemic like this has
global ramifications, and I think it's important to recognize that for
a lot of people, this week could have been one filled with hardship.
There are people who have been laid off from their jobs, parents who
are doing their best to take care of their children, students who have
had to start taking classes online, and an endless amount of other
unique situations.

This week, some important milestones have been reached across the
Wikimedia Movement. The Ukrainian Wikipedia [3] has reached the 1
million article milestone. That's a huge milestone to reach, so I wish
to congratulate everyone who contributes there! I asked Ата, an active
contributor to the Ukrainian Wikipedia, about how this milestone
affects the project. [4] I found her response insightful, and I am
thankful for it.

In addition, the The Wikimedia Community of the Kazakh language User
Group has officially been recognized by the Affiliations Commitee. For
more information, see [5] and [6].

I have also discovered inspiring off-wiki initiatives, such as the
Mozilla Open Source Support Team (abbreviated as MOSS) launching a
COVID-19 Solutions Fund. Awards of up to $50,000 are being offered to
open source technology projects. [7]


* Closing comments *

Translations of the subject line of this email would be appreciated on
Meta. [8] Thanks to User:Ата [9] for the Ukranian translation.

What’s making you happy this week? You are welcome to write in any
language. You are also welcome to start a WMYHTW thread next week.


Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Clovermoss
[2] 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License
[3] https://uk.wikipedia.org/
[4] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:%D0%90%D1%82%D0%B0=prev=19952931
[5] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Wikimedia_Community_of_Kazakh_language_User_Group
[6] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_of_Kazakh_language_User_Group
[7] 
https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2020/03/31/moss-launches-covid-19-solutions-fund/
[8] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine/WMYHTW_translations
[9] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:%D0%90%D1%82%D0%B0

___
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, 


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Proposal towards a multilingual Wikipedia and a new Wikipedia project

2020-04-14 Thread Peter Southwood
Based on my first read-through of the paper, I think this would be something 
worth doing. 
Cheers, 
Peter.

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Denny Vrandecic
Sent: 14 April 2020 02:53
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Proposal towards a multilingual Wikipedia and a new 
Wikipedia project

As some of you know, I have been working on the idea of a multilingual
Wikipedia for a few years now. Two other publications on this are here, I
have bothered you with mails about it here previously too:

https://research.google/pubs/pub48057/

https://wikipedia20.pubpub.org/pub/vyf7ksah

I've also been giving talks about the topic in several places about this
idea, some of them have also been recorded:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzVA7YLwhTE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLiJ6E9sG6U=PLQVG_tuf3Q2fji-CwqEDRJpZuf23wevrq=13

I gathered some awesome feedback in those few years (also from some members
of this list, thank you!), and I also implemented a few prototypes trying
out the idea, learning a lot from that.

All of this has helped to sharpen the idea and come up with a more concrete
proposal. In short, the proposal is that we do a two-step approach: first,
allow for capturing Wikipedia content in an abstract notation, and second,
allow for creating functions that translate this abstract notation into
natural language (For simplicity, I gave this two steps names, Abstract
Wikipedia for step 1, and Wikilambda for step 2. I realize that both names
are not perfect, but that is just one of the many things that we can figure
out together on the way).

I wrote up this proposal in a paper, which I uploaded to my Website almost
two weeks ago, and I also submitted it to Arxiv. And as soon as it was
published on Arxiv, I wanted to share it with you and see what you folks
think (I wanted to wait for it as Arxiv would allow the URLs to remains
table - my Website has gone down before and might so again).

https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.04733

The new proposal is much more concrete than the previous proposals (and
therefore there is much more to criticize). Also, obviously, nothing of
this is set in stone, and just like the names, I am very much looking
forward to hear suggestions for how to improve the whole thing, and I will
blatantly steal every good idea and proposal. I am not even sure what a
good venue for this discussion is, I guess, eventually it should be on
Meta?, but also about that I would like to hear proposals.

Abstract Wikipedia is a proposed extension to Wikidata that would capture
the content next to the Wikidata items. Think of it as a new namespace,
where we could create, maintain, and collaborate on the abstract content.
Similar to the Wikidata-bridge, there should be a way to allow
contributions from the Wikipedias to flow back without too much friction.
The individual Wikipedias - and I cannot stress this enough - have the
choice to use some or any or all or none of the content from Abstract
Wikipedia, but I most definitely do not expect the content of the current
Wikipedias to be replaced by this. In fact, I have no doubt that any decent
article in any language Wikipedia will remain superior to the outcome of
the proposed new architecture by far. This is a proposal for the places
where the current system left us with gaps, not a proposal to turn the
parts that are already brilliant today dull and terrible tomorrow.

Wikilambda is a proposed new Wikimedia project that allows us to share in a
new form of knowledge assets, functions. You can think of it as similar to
Modules or Templates, but a bit extended, with places for tests, different
languages, evaluation, and also for all kind of functions, not only those
that are immediately useful for one of the Wikimedia projects, and most
importantly, shared among the projects. So one of the first goals would be
to increasingly allow fo a place to have global templates, another idea
that has been discussed and asked for for a very long time. Wikilambda,
just as Wikidata, is expected to start as a project supporting the
immediate needs of the sister projects, and over time to grow to a project
that stands on its own merits as well.

We don't really have an effective process for starting new projects, so I
am trying to follow a similar path that we took for Wikidata back then. And
back then it all started with Markus Krötzsch, me and others talking about
the idea to anyone who would listen until everyone was bored of hearing it,
trying out prototypes, and then talking about it even more, and improving
all of it constantly based on your feedback. And then making increasingly
concrete proposals until we managed to show some kind of consensus from the
communities, you, and the Foundation to actually do it. And then, well, do
it.

So, I've done some of the talking, with researchers, with the public, with
some of you, and also with folks at the Foundation, to figure out what next

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

2020-04-10 Thread Peter Southwood
on the latest information.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > Samir
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://w.wiki/LEF
> > > >
> > > > Samir Elsharbaty (he/him)
> > > >
> > > > Community Brand and Marketing coordinator
> > > >
> > > > Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 4:43 AM Gnangarra 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > This does have feeling of a company creating a financial
> relationship
> > > with
> > > > > the Foundation as way to bypass or backdoor a community ban thats
> > been
> > > > > reviewed already.   Over the years I've worked with many users who
> > been
> > > > > blocked and help them become productive contributors but before
> they
> > > start
> > > > > making recommendation or decisions about who we are there needs to
> be
> > > > > something done to get them back to good standing with the community
> > > first
> > > > > untiil thats taken place.It's like asking the fox to rebuild
> the
> > > hen
> > > > > house,  I just dont see how I could support anything they
> recommend.
> > > > >
> > > > > After the dollars, and t=volunteer time that has been pumped into
> the
> > > 2030
> > > > > strategy shouldnt we already know who we are, as it is that should
> > have
> > > > > been the key starting point for a strategy process. Its
> > comprehensible
> > > not
> > > > > to have known or explored that before deciding where, how, why we
> > will
> > > be
> > > > > doing anything for the next 10 years.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 24 Mar 2020 at 03:20, David Gerard 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Particularly as they've demonstrated by their actions an
> > > unwillingness
> > > > > > to work with Wikipedia properly:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive318#Review_of_User:Sn%C3%B8hettaAS_block_please
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - d.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 14 Mar 2020 at 04:34, Peter Southwood
> > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would agree with this in principle. From what I have seen so
> > > far, it
> > > > > > looks like either Snøhetta have not done their homework on how we
> > > > > operate,
> > > > > > or they have the arrogance of PR agencies, don't care, and plan
> to
> > > spin
> > > > > > their way through with smoke and mirrors, flashy pages with lots
> of
> > > buzz,
> > > > > > little content and all the dialogue they can't avoid. Maybe I am
> > > wrong,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > they have just been badly briefed. Who can tell from the outside?
> > > Block
> > > > > > evasion does not bode well for their understanding of the
> > community.
> > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > Peter
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:
> > wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org]
> > > On
> > > > > > Behalf Of Pine W
> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, March 13, 2020 8:13 PM
> > > > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a
> > movement?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > First, a disclaimer that these comments aren't directed
> > personally
> > > at
> > > > > > > you, Essie.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Even if money was unlimited, I thought that Snøhetta deserved
> the
> > > > > > > community's trust, and I felt that WMF was a good steward of
> > > resources
> > > > > > > (all of which are questionab

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

2020-03-15 Thread Peter Southwood
Fair enough, I agree that the bias towards the English Wikipedia exists. It is 
natural and to be expected within English Wikipedia, but should not exist 
elsewhere in the Wikimedia community. I also agree that sometimes a regional 
bias exists because people from that region add more content, and we tend to 
add the content we know and care about and for which we have sources. I also 
agree that making Wikipedia the primary brand is likely to increase bias and 
tend to marginalise the non-Wikipedia projects even more.
Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: 15 March 2020 12:47
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

Hoi,
Back your pardon. I do not blame the English Wikipedia for the
shortcomings of other Wikipedias. It does a reasonable job at informing an
English reading public. The point that I make is that we do not consider
how the bias towards English Wikipedia prevents us from reaching out and
sharing in the sum of all knowledge.

There is documentation that Cebuan Wikipedia articles are well presented
and provide a more complete coverage of the knowledge domains it covers.
Also please remember that all US places were added to English Wikipedia by
bot.

When I document bias, it is for you to understand that this bias exists. I
stopped writing in English Wikipedia because the American perspective was
more relevant that an international perspective.

At stake in this thread is making Wikipedia a central brand. I indicated
earlier that those living the English Wikipedia reality are not aware of
the negative effects of its bias. In effect you tell me to do something
about it. Well, I have been blogging about Wikimedia for the last 15 years
[1] and I learned that documentation may be relevant but it is unlikely to
make people see what is in front of them.
Thanks,
  GerardM

[1] https://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/

On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 at 11:16, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> It is grossly unrealistic to blame English Wikipedia and its editing
> community for what you appear to consider the shortcomings of other
> Wikipedias. En: does not require or pressurise other projects to comply
> with its editorial standards, which are those developed by en:WP, and for
> en:WP. Other projects are free to set and use their own standards for
> content, within the general WMF terms of use, and generally do. If they
> choose to emulate en:WP that is their prerogative.
> If you think that Cebuan Wikipedia does a better job of informing on the
> subject matter it covers than other projects, and would like to convince
> other projects that this is a realistic and rational opinion, and that they
> should follow that example, you are free to produce documentary evidence
> from experts that this is the case, and present it to the editing
> communities of those projects for consideration.
> If Commons are exceeding their remit by refusing to host material that is
> not used on en:WP, that is not the policy or the fault of the en:WP
> community who have no authority over Commons.
> As a general rule, when discussing a topic where there is scope for
> confusion, there is less likely for confusion to occur when you are
> sufficiently specific when referring to the ambiguous entities.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: 15 March 2020 08:37
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?
>
> Hoi,
> By making the point that there is no Wikipedia AND that almost universally
> but particularly people who buy into English Wikipedia consider Wikipedia
> English Wikipedia, I expected that this is understood. I then address
> English Wikipedia specifically because it is its conventions that prevent
> the sum of all our knowledge to be shared.
>
> Just to make that point specific, Cebuan Wikipedia does a better job
> informing on the total of the subject matters it covers, it is a project of
> a father who wants his children to have access to knowledge in their
> maternal language. From a Wiki point of view he deserves praise and
> gratitude in stead he gets scorn because it is against English Wikipedia
> conventions. Furthermore the approach of using data to bring knowledge in
> other languages is frustrated from within WMF.  We could do a better job, a
> job that will work for any language but it is actively discouraged. The
> result is that we do NOT share in the sum of all knowledge, not even the
> knowledge that is available to us. In other words, English Wikipedia
> conventions prevent us from working towards our stated goal.
> Thanks,
>Gerar

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

2020-03-15 Thread Peter Southwood
The question then is whether it is the community of English Wikipedia exerting 
this influence, or WMF failing to allocate resources fairly, and if so, why? Is 
it just that the massive internet presence of English Wikipedia exerts an 
irresistible gravitational attraction on the resources like a black hole?
Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Aron Demian
Sent: 15 March 2020 12:25
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

My 2 cents: Imho the pressure from English Wikipedia on other projects of
the movement is very realistic in many kinds of matters, that I've
experienced myself too. Other projects are not independent socially or
culturally, the rules, practices, expectations and editorial behaviour is
strongly related to that on enwp with all its positive *and* negative
benefits. Often the negative benefits seem to outweigh the positive,
unfortunately.

Aron

On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 at 11:17, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> It is grossly unrealistic to blame English Wikipedia and its editing
> community for what you appear to consider the shortcomings of other
> Wikipedias.

En: does not require or pressurise other projects to comply with its
> editorial standards, which are those developed by en:WP, and for en:WP.
> Other projects are free to set and use their own standards for content,
> within the general WMF terms of use, and generally do. If they choose to
> emulate en:WP that is their prerogative.
> If you think that Cebuan Wikipedia does a better job of informing on the
> subject matter it covers than other projects, and would like to convince
> other projects that this is a realistic and rational opinion, and that they
> should follow that example, you are free to produce documentary evidence
> from experts that this is the case, and present it to the editing
> communities of those projects for consideration.
> If Commons are exceeding their remit by refusing to host material that is
> not used on en:WP, that is not the policy or the fault of the en:WP
> community who have no authority over Commons.
> As a general rule, when discussing a topic where there is scope for
> confusion, there is less likely for confusion to occur when you are
> sufficiently specific when referring to the ambiguous entities.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: 15 March 2020 08:37
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?
>
> Hoi,
> By making the point that there is no Wikipedia AND that almost universally
> but particularly people who buy into English Wikipedia consider Wikipedia
> English Wikipedia, I expected that this is understood. I then address
> English Wikipedia specifically because it is its conventions that prevent
> the sum of all our knowledge to be shared.
>
> Just to make that point specific, Cebuan Wikipedia does a better job
> informing on the total of the subject matters it covers, it is a project of
> a father who wants his children to have access to knowledge in their
> maternal language. From a Wiki point of view he deserves praise and
> gratitude in stead he gets scorn because it is against English Wikipedia
> conventions. Furthermore the approach of using data to bring knowledge in
> other languages is frustrated from within WMF.  We could do a better job, a
> job that will work for any language but it is actively discouraged. The
> result is that we do NOT share in the sum of all knowledge, not even the
> knowledge that is available to us. In other words, English Wikipedia
> conventions prevent us from working towards our stated goal.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 at 06:19, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> wrote:
>
> > Gerard, You start off by correctly specifying that Wikipedia is about 300
> > projects and make several good points about how people confuse Wikipedia
> > with English Wikipedia, how this bias adversely affects various other
> > projects, and then claim that "Wikipedia" is "universally understood to
> be
> > highly toxic".  Are you referring to all 300 odd projects, or are you
> using
> > the generic term for the specific project in the way you previously
> > objected to? Something else that is not obvious?
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> > Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2020 2:12 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subj

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

2020-03-15 Thread Peter Southwood
It is grossly unrealistic to blame English Wikipedia and its editing community 
for what you appear to consider the shortcomings of other Wikipedias. En: does 
not require or pressurise other projects to comply with its editorial 
standards, which are those developed by en:WP, and for en:WP. Other projects 
are free to set and use their own standards for content, within the general WMF 
terms of use, and generally do. If they choose to emulate en:WP that is their 
prerogative.
If you think that Cebuan Wikipedia does a better job of informing on the 
subject matter it covers than other projects, and would like to convince other 
projects that this is a realistic and rational opinion, and that they should 
follow that example, you are free to produce documentary evidence from experts 
that this is the case, and present it to the editing communities of those 
projects for consideration. 
If Commons are exceeding their remit by refusing to host material that is not 
used on en:WP, that is not the policy or the fault of the en:WP community who 
have no authority over Commons.
As a general rule, when discussing a topic where there is scope for confusion, 
there is less likely for confusion to occur when you are sufficiently specific 
when referring to the ambiguous entities.
Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: 15 March 2020 08:37
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

Hoi,
By making the point that there is no Wikipedia AND that almost universally
but particularly people who buy into English Wikipedia consider Wikipedia
English Wikipedia, I expected that this is understood. I then address
English Wikipedia specifically because it is its conventions that prevent
the sum of all our knowledge to be shared.

Just to make that point specific, Cebuan Wikipedia does a better job
informing on the total of the subject matters it covers, it is a project of
a father who wants his children to have access to knowledge in their
maternal language. From a Wiki point of view he deserves praise and
gratitude in stead he gets scorn because it is against English Wikipedia
conventions. Furthermore the approach of using data to bring knowledge in
other languages is frustrated from within WMF.  We could do a better job, a
job that will work for any language but it is actively discouraged. The
result is that we do NOT share in the sum of all knowledge, not even the
knowledge that is available to us. In other words, English Wikipedia
conventions prevent us from working towards our stated goal.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 at 06:19, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Gerard, You start off by correctly specifying that Wikipedia is about 300
> projects and make several good points about how people confuse Wikipedia
> with English Wikipedia, how this bias adversely affects various other
> projects, and then claim that "Wikipedia" is "universally understood to be
> highly toxic".  Are you referring to all 300 odd projects, or are you using
> the generic term for the specific project in the way you previously
> objected to? Something else that is not obvious?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2020 2:12 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?
>
> Hoi,
> Essie, the work done by Snøhetta centres on the notion of Wikipedia as a
> unifying brand. The problem is that Wikipedia on its own is 300 projects
> and that for many, if not most people English Wikipedia *is *Wikipedia.
>
> When we are all to be Wikipedia we will all suffer from the bias that
> English Wikipedia brings us. The problem with bias is that the negative
> effects are not felt, considered by those people who self identify with
> English Wikipedia.
>
> * Research centres on English Wikipedia, when research is done for projects
> other than English Wikipedia, it is hard to get research published
> * New functionality is almost always written for the English Wikipedia, the
> notion of the "other languages" is often not considered in the architecture
> * It is assumed that functionality works for projects other than Wikipedia,
> specific functionality is hardly ever developed
> * In OTRS, the notions of notability are hard coded for English notability.
> Consequently many pictures have been removed that were explicitly requested
> for use with Wikidata
> * there has been no marketing for other Wikimedia products - products. Many
> Wikisource books are available in final form. We do not serve a purpose
> because we do not seek an audience for them
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

2020-03-14 Thread Peter Southwood
Gerard, You start off by correctly specifying that Wikipedia is about 300 
projects and make several good points about how people confuse Wikipedia with 
English Wikipedia, how this bias adversely affects various other projects, and 
then claim that "Wikipedia" is "universally understood to be highly toxic".  
Are you referring to all 300 odd projects, or are you using the generic term 
for the specific project in the way you previously objected to? Something else 
that is not obvious?
Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2020 2:12 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

Hoi,
Essie, the work done by Snøhetta centres on the notion of Wikipedia as a
unifying brand. The problem is that Wikipedia on its own is 300 projects
and that for many, if not most people English Wikipedia *is *Wikipedia.

When we are all to be Wikipedia we will all suffer from the bias that
English Wikipedia brings us. The problem with bias is that the negative
effects are not felt, considered by those people who self identify with
English Wikipedia.

* Research centres on English Wikipedia, when research is done for projects
other than English Wikipedia, it is hard to get research published
* New functionality is almost always written for the English Wikipedia, the
notion of the "other languages" is often not considered in the architecture
* It is assumed that functionality works for projects other than Wikipedia,
specific functionality is hardly ever developed
* In OTRS, the notions of notability are hard coded for English notability.
Consequently many pictures have been removed that were explicitly requested
for use with Wikidata
* there has been no marketing for other Wikimedia products - products. Many
Wikisource books are available in final form. We do not serve a purpose
because we do not seek an audience for them
* even though internationalisation and localisation for MediaWiki is really
good, we do not consider how we can make use of data in other languages.

It is universally understood that Wikipedia is highly toxic and it may be
that for external marketing Wikipedia makes sense. Internally I will
welcome a unified message only once English Wikipedia accepts that its
consensus is not considered as "Wikipedia" consensus.. Our aim is to share
in the sum of all knowledge and it is not only in English and it is not
what English Wikipedia deems notable.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 at 18:33, Essie Zar  wrote:

> Hello Everyone,
>
> There are some new updates and opportunities to engage with the Brand
> project. Thank you to Lodewijk for bringing some attention to a few of
> these opportunities. We were actively drafting this update for this group
> when your email went out.
>
> As Zack indicated in September,[1] we have been regularly discussing with
> the members of the brand network (which people can still join )[2] ideas
> around an evolved brand system with "Wikipedia" as a center point. To
> assist in this evolution of the movement brand, we chose to partner with
> Snøhetta,[3] an internationally renowned design firm known for working on
> complex and multi-stakeholder projects like the modern Library of
> Alexandria (Bibliotheca Alexandrina) and the 9/11 Memorial in New York
> City. Snøhetta has been tasked with figuring out precisely what this
> improved brand system will look like. They will release a proposed naming
> convention for movement-wide feedback in April, and a proposed design for
> movement-wide feedback in May. [4] The result of this process will be a new
> branding system that will be opt-in for affiliates.
>
> In order to have enough knowledge and context to arrive at these proposals,
> Snøhetta is reviewing feedback from the many points at which it has already
> been given, and has created a process with built-in community involvement.
> The
> process thus far has included workshops in Norway, India and online with 97
> volunteers from the brand network (movement affiliates, volunteers,
> foundation staff, and board members) reflecting 41 nations. At the
> workshops, community participants were asked to break into small groups to
> answer the question "Who are we?". Through these workshops, groups
> developed rich concepts* that they think best represent who we are as a
> movement.
>
> Now, we would like to invite you to review the 23 concepts that came out of
> the community workshops by “liking” and providing feedback on the one(s)
> you think best represent the Wikimedia movement. You can click on any
> concept to see an expanded explanation and photos of the actual concepts
> built or selected by workshop participants.
>
> Approximate time to complete this exercise is around 10-15 min.
>
> https://brandingwikipedia.org/concepts/
>
> Feel free to leave feedback directly on Snøhetta’s website, on the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

2020-03-14 Thread Peter Southwood
I put a reply on the "What does free knowledge mean to you" questionnaire, but 
it did not turn up on the list below the edit box. Is the set of published 
replies being censored or cherry-picked to remove anything that someone does 
not like?
Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Essie Zar
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2020 12:48 AM
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

Hello Everyone,

There are some new updates and opportunities to engage with the Brand
project. Thank you to Lodewijk for bringing some attention to a few of
these opportunities. We were actively drafting this update for this group
when your email went out.

As Zack indicated in September,[1] we have been regularly discussing with
the members of the brand network (which people can still join )[2] ideas
around an evolved brand system with "Wikipedia" as a center point. To
assist in this evolution of the movement brand, we chose to partner with
Snøhetta,[3] an internationally renowned design firm known for working on
complex and multi-stakeholder projects like the modern Library of
Alexandria (Bibliotheca Alexandrina) and the 9/11 Memorial in New York
City. Snøhetta has been tasked with figuring out precisely what this
improved brand system will look like. They will release a proposed naming
convention for movement-wide feedback in April, and a proposed design for
movement-wide feedback in May. [4] The result of this process will be a new
branding system that will be opt-in for affiliates.

In order to have enough knowledge and context to arrive at these proposals,
Snøhetta is reviewing feedback from the many points at which it has already
been given, and has created a process with built-in community involvement. The
process thus far has included workshops in Norway, India and online with 97
volunteers from the brand network (movement affiliates, volunteers,
foundation staff, and board members) reflecting 41 nations. At the
workshops, community participants were asked to break into small groups to
answer the question "Who are we?". Through these workshops, groups
developed rich concepts* that they think best represent who we are as a
movement.

Now, we would like to invite you to review the 23 concepts that came out of
the community workshops by “liking” and providing feedback on the one(s)
you think best represent the Wikimedia movement. You can click on any
concept to see an expanded explanation and photos of the actual concepts
built or selected by workshop participants.

Approximate time to complete this exercise is around 10-15 min.

https://brandingwikipedia.org/concepts/

Feel free to leave feedback directly on Snøhetta’s website, on the project
talk page on Meta [5], or on the Brand Network [2], which will also be
available on Meta starting next month.

Snøhetta will use the feedback from the concepts to develop one single
concept to act as a tool that will help guide the proposals around naming
(expected for April) and around design (expected around May). They are
scheduled to begin reviewing feedback on Tuesday, 17 March, but can
continue taking feedback for a few more days if there is interest.

We also invite you to share what free knowledge means to you in Snøhetta's
open exercise. Please take a moment and share your thoughts in any of the
channels mentioned.

https://brandingwikipedia.org/2020/02/17/what-does-free-knowledge-mean-to-you/

Finally, we want to acknowledge that we have feedback, from various points
in this process so far, from several communities and in several areas of
the wikis, including Meta. We understand that some people believe that we
don’t need this project. Our shared vision is for every single human being
to freely share in the sum of all knowledge -- and that means billions of
people. There are many people and cultures we still need to reach and
include. We will need a strong well known brand to achieve the goals the
movement has set for itself and we have a lot of work to do to get us there.

Want to learn more? Check out the project hub at brandingwikipedia.org and
the project page on Meta [5]. Participate in discussions on the project
talk page, or by joining the Brand Network [2]. Also feel free to drop us a
note at brandproj...@wikimedia.org if you have questions.

Thanks!

Essie Zar

(from the movement brand identity project team)



[1]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2019-September/093382.html

[2] https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediabrandnetwork/

[3] https://snohetta.com/

[4]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project#Process

[5]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project

* What is a concept?
A tool making the complex more understandable.

Concepts make complex subjects more understandable. They manage to
consolidate vast amounts 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

2020-03-14 Thread Peter Southwood
Perhaps you do, but do the volunteer communities of the projects you would like 
to rename share this enthusiasm?
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Dennis During
Sent: 14 March 2020 00:20
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

I, for one, welcome Wikipedia Dictionary, Wikipedia Source, Wikipedia
Species, Wikipedia Commons.

Why is it, though, that others go the other way? like American Airlines
subordinating to AMR, Google to Alphabet.  Citibank went in a direction the
opposite of the way that WMF is going, with Citi becoming a prefix with
multiple uses.

On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 3:48 PM Pine W  wrote:

> Although Mike and I have differences of opinion about centralizing on
> the "Wikipedia" brand, one way in which I agree with Mike is that
> there are ways to have branding discussions that are not themselves
> controversial. Even if consensus was not reached, I for one would be
> more accepting of the process.
>
> Some departments in WMF seem to be more on board with regards to
> process than others. In particular, I think that Audiences these days
> generally does a good job, and also I like Tech News.
>
> Outside of WMF, the Wikidata team at WMDE produces very informative
> newsletters each week. They seem to do good work without spending
> money on outside consultants.
>
> So, why all of these issues in WMF Communications? I don't get it.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User: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,
> 



-- 
Dennis C. During
___
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, 


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
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] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

2020-03-13 Thread Peter Southwood
I would agree with this in principle. From what I have seen so far, it looks 
like either Snøhetta have not done their homework on how we operate, or they 
have the arrogance of PR agencies, don't care, and plan to spin their way 
through with smoke and mirrors, flashy pages with lots of buzz, little content 
and all the dialogue they can't avoid. Maybe I am wrong, and they have just 
been badly briefed. Who can tell from the outside? Block evasion does not bode 
well for their understanding of the community.
Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Pine W
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2020 8:13 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

Hello,

First, a disclaimer that these comments aren't directed personally at
you, Essie.

Even if money was unlimited, I thought that Snøhetta deserved the
community's trust, and I felt that WMF was a good steward of resources
(all of which are questionable), I don't think that this project is a
good idea. Wikidata is an increasingly important component of the
Wikiverse, and there are a some problems with WMF rebranding itself as
the Wikipedia Foundation including the risk to the communities and
affiliates from WMF's political adventures, governance problems, and
occasional high profile clashes with the community. I don't think that
the costs or the risks here make sense, I wouldn't involve Snøhetta
given its apparent block evasion on English Wikipedia, and I've been
unimpressed with WMF's handling of this process during the past few
months.

I am fine with discussions about branding, but not with this program
in its current form.

Given the choice, I would freeze this project and spending associated
with it pending a Meta RfC regarding the community's view on whether
this project should continue. If the community wants a branding
project to continue, I would let the community decide on the project's
parameters and budget, and what if any consultant should be involved.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User: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, 



___
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, 


  1   2   3   4   5   >