[Wikimedia-l] Re: Affiliations Committee's standing on hubs and its role in the process

2022-07-17 Thread Wojciech Pędzich

Dear all,

AffCom’s response here is to a specific Hub pilot project, not 
necessarily the long-term future of Hubs, and hence the initial 
statement published on July 11. AffCom is comprised of a body of 
volunteers from across the Movement who have joined the Committee from 
various projects and who have a wide range of experience across 
opportunities and challenges when Wikimedia groups gather and formalize.


We do not see the situation in which Hubs are emerging as any threat to 
the communities that already exist.  Hubs, in their structure, can be 
seen as a variety of affiliates who are gathering together to create 
something new. In this manner, AffCom is definitely in a position to 
help Hubs grow and prosper. While structures similar to the current 
discussion on Hubs have previously existed, there is an advantage in 
having Hubs work officially as structures similar to Affiliates, and 
this is where the word “pilot” comes in. This is intended to indicate 
the beginning of having Hubs as established structures with the current 
infrastructure of communities that already exists.


Kind regards
Wojciech, on behalf of AffCom

W dniu 12.07.2022 o 11:13, Gnangarra pisze:
As hubs are not replacing the relationship between affiliates and 
affcom, hubs purpose is to serve its community across multiple 
countries.  I can see the value in Affcom sharing some of its 
experiences but I caution against the building of deeper power 
structures that widen the gap between individual contributors, the 
BOT, and the WMF.   That gap will get even wider once the global 
council is put in place, there are already significant communication 
problems, made worse by the lack of project experience within the WMF 
staff, its contractors, and the BOT


For many years these hubs have successfully existed outside Affcom 
control, I think there should be greater respect shown to hubs for 
that work treating hubs as pilots is itself disrespectful. Outside of 
Europe where EU law allows cross border responsibility, hubs 
governance structures face considerable legal hurdles from insurance 
to individuals being required to make themselves subject to the laws 
of another jurisdiction to hold a position of responsibility.




This discussion should be naturally a discussion done by the
community and not by the Affcom itself, naturally, like it's
happening for the whole strategy.

I wholeheartedly support this point, these discussions need to run 
independent Affcom.


On Tue, 12 Jul 2022 at 16:34, Philip Kopetzky 
 wrote:


Hi Wojciech,

thanks for this statement, it will definitely be helpful to have
AffCom's insights into the current affiliates network when talking
about hubs. While approval by the WMF BoT is one option, wouldn't
that require a hub to be a formal organisation? Otherwise the BoT
would be involved in micro-managing project grants that are
funding some of the hub pilots.

It would also be helpful to design the process in a way that has
the Global Council in mind where in its absence the WMF BoT acts
in its absence, to make clear that this is only a temporary
solution because of how slow progress on the movement charter has
been in the last two years.

Best,
Philip

On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 at 20:54, Wojciech Pędzich
 wrote:

During the strategic meeting of the Affiliations Committee
(AffCom) in
Paris on June 24-26, members discussed how AffCom may be able
to support
the movement in relation to the upcoming Hubs pilot process.
We reviewed
two issues – whether it was within AffCom’s remit to
contribute to the
Hub pilot process and if so, what our involvement might look like.

AffCom has, since its inception in 2004, worked directly with all
Affiliates across the movement, i.e.: User Groups, Chapters, and
Thematic Organizations. Our role, as it has evolved, is to
support these
different entities as they come into being and then as they
grow, ensure
that they integrate best practices and with a view to long-term
sustainability. This has provided AffCom with both a broad
overview, as
well as a deep understanding, of the various challenges faced by
affiliates across a range of circumstances that include
socio-cultural
issues and affiliate-based conflicts. Hubs are intended to
function as
formal movement bodies constituted by existing groups and/or
affiliates,
able to  use Wikimedia trademarks to present their
association. They
will need to be independent, legally constituted Affiliates,
recognised
by the Board of Trustees. This introduces a significant and
exciting new
Affiliate model to our movement and AffCom would welcome the
opportunity
to bring our institutional knowledge

[Wikimedia-l] Affiliations Committee's standing on hubs and its role in the process

2022-07-11 Thread Wojciech Pędzich
During the strategic meeting of the Affiliations Committee (AffCom) in 
Paris on June 24-26, members discussed how AffCom may be able to support 
the movement in relation to the upcoming Hubs pilot process. We reviewed 
two issues – whether it was within AffCom’s remit to contribute to the 
Hub pilot process and if so, what our involvement might look like.


AffCom has, since its inception in 2004, worked directly with all 
Affiliates across the movement, i.e.: User Groups, Chapters, and 
Thematic Organizations. Our role, as it has evolved, is to support these 
different entities as they come into being and then as they grow, ensure 
that they integrate best practices and with a view to long-term 
sustainability. This has provided AffCom with both a broad overview, as 
well as a deep understanding, of the various challenges faced by 
affiliates across a range of circumstances that include socio-cultural 
issues and affiliate-based conflicts. Hubs are intended to function as 
formal movement bodies constituted by existing groups and/or affiliates, 
able to  use Wikimedia trademarks to present their association. They 
will need to be independent, legally constituted Affiliates, recognised 
by the Board of Trustees. This introduces a significant and exciting new 
Affiliate model to our movement and AffCom would welcome the opportunity 
to bring our institutional knowledge and experience to assist in their 
development.


Recognising the principles of subsidiarity, the committee would like to 
offer its support as an advisory body for the Hubs piloting process, 
working with the community to develop a process that will lead, 
ultimately, to their approval by the WMF Board of Trustees.



Wojciech Pędzich
on behalf of AffCom
___
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/JKTUL7UPO3U37WNFF4B4B5SNDTXFR62P/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Polish Wikipedia - blackout for 24h

2018-07-04 Thread Wojciech Pędzich
Starting today, 15:00, Polish Wikipedia has been blacked out for its
readers and editors for 24 hours, in response to unfavourable changes
proposed to EU copyrigh directive.

Wojciech Pędzich
Secretary of the Board, Wikimedia Polska
___
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 Polska - new Board

2018-06-10 Thread Wojciech Pędzich
Dear all,



following yesterday's General Assembly of Wikimedia Polska Association,
held in Katowice, a new composition of the Board and other statutory bodies
of the chapter have been established.



 Tomasz "Polimerek" Ganicz decided to resign his long-standing position on
the Board, after 13 years of service - as the Board's Treasurer (first term
of Wikimedia Polska ever) and President (ever since then). Two other
members - Jarosław "Powerek38" Blaszczak and Tomasz "Elfhelm" Skibiński -
have also left the Board. The current composition of the statutory bodies
of the Association for the term 2018-2020 is as follows:



== Board ==



* Michał "Aegis Maelstrom" Buczyński, President

* Małgorzata “Maire” Wilk, Vice-President

* Paweł “Yarl” Marynowski, Vice-President

* Piotr “PMG” Gackowski, Vice-President

* Marek “Masti” Stelmasik, Treasurer

* Wojciech Pędzich, Secretary

* Jacek “Phinek” Fink-Finowicki, Member of the Board



== Revision Board ==



* Juliusz “Julo” Zieliński
* Karol “Karol007” Głąb

* Maciej “Maikking” Król



== Internal Court ==



* Tomasz “Polimerek” Ganicz

* Maria “Gytha” Drozdek

* Julia “Lantuszka” Koszewska


All the best!

Wojciech
___
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] Lower page views

2018-01-23 Thread Wojciech Pędzich
In order to have at least a partial answer we would need to know how the
pageviews relate to actual database traffic I assume? That would explain
Google and I do not know whether there are any other services worldwide
that use the datastram without actually displaying pages.

Wojciech

2018-01-23 11:55 GMT+01:00 Anders Wennersten :

> We are seeing a steady decrease of page views to our projects (Wikipedia).
> Nov-Dec-Jan it is decreasing in a rate of 5-10% (year-year), and for big
> languages like Japanese,  Spanish close to 10%, or some months even more
> [1]
>
> Is there any insights of why this is so? Could it be that Google take over
> accesses with their ever better way of showing results direct  (but then
> also with showing extracts of Wikipedia articles) . Or that our interface
> on mobiles is inferior so we miss accesses from mobiles (now being 54% of
> total). Or horror of horror that users look for facts on all new sites with
> fake news instead of Wikipedia?
>
> Anders
>
> [1] https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthlyCombined.htm
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
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] machine translation

2017-05-03 Thread Wojciech Pędzich
It does depend a lot on the engagement level of the human behind the 
keyboard. When I deal with machine-translated text, I simply wonder 
whether the someone behind the keyboard took efforts to actually read 
the piece.


Now whether this would work if limited to namespaces outside "main" - I 
do not want to demonise the issue, but if the person submitting the text 
for machine translation does not read it, what will stop them from a 
quick ctrl+c / ctrl+v? Just asking.


Wojciech

W dniu 2017-05-03 o 09:33, Yaroslav Blanter pisze:

Creating machine translations only in the draft space (or in the user space
in the projects which do not have draft) could help.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Pharos 
wrote:


I think it all depends on the level of engagement of the human translator.

When the tool is used in the right way, it is a fantastic tool.

Maybe we can find better methods to nudge people toward taking their time
and really doing work on their translations.

Thanks,
Pharos

On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:


Content translation with Yandex is also a problem in Bengali Wikipedia.
Some users have grown a tendency to create machine translated meaningless
articles with this extension to increase edit count and article count.

This

has increased the workloads of admins to find and delete those articles.

Yandex is not ready for many languages and it is better to shut it. We
don't need it in Bengali.

Regards
On May 3, 2017 12:17 AM, "John Erling Blad"  wrote:


Actually this _is_ about turning ContentTranslation off, that is what
several users in the community want. They block people using the

extension

and delete the translated articles. Use of ContentTranslation has

become

a

  rather contentious case.

Yandex as a general translation engine to be able to read some alien
language is quite good, but as an engine to produce written text it is

not

very good at all. In fact it often creates quite horrible Norwegian,

even

for closely related languages. One quite common problem is reordering

of

words into meaningless constructs, an other problem is reordering

lexical

gender in weird ways. The English preposition "a" is often translated

as

"en" in a propositional phrase, and then the gender is added to the
following phrase. That gives a translation of  "Oppland is a county

in…"

  into something like "Oppland er en fylket i…" This should be "Oppland

er

et fylke i…".

(I just checked and it seems like Yandex messes up a lot less now than
previously, but it is still pretty bad.)

Apertium works because the language is closely related, Yandex does not
work because it is used between very different languages. People try to

use

Yandex and gets disappointed, and falsely conclude that all language
translations are equally weird. They are not, but Yandex translations

are

weird.

The numerical threshold does not work. The reason is simple, the number

of

fixes depends on language constructs that fails, and that is simply

not a

constant for small text fragments. Perhaps if we could flag specific
language constructs that is known to give a high percentage of

failures,

and if the translator must check those sentences. One such language
construct is disappearances between the preposition and the gender of

the

following term in a prepositional phrase. If they are not similar, then

the

sentence must be checked. It is not always wrong to write "en jenta" in
Norwegian, but it is likely to be wrong.

A language model could be a statistical model for the language itself,

not

for the translation into that language. We don't want a perfect

language

model, but a sufficient language model to mark weird constructs. A very
simple solution could simply be to mark tri-grams that does not

already

exist in the text base for the destination as possible errors. It is

not

necessary to do a live check, but  at least do it before the page can

be

saved.

Note the difference in what Yandex do and what we want to achieve;

Yandex

translates a text between two different languages, without any clear

reason

why. It is not to important if there are weird constructs in the text,

as

long as it is usable in "some" context. We translate a text for the

purpose

of republishing it. The text should be usable and easily readable in

that

language.



On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Amir E. Aharoni <
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:


2017-05-02 18:20 GMT+03:00 John Erling Blad :


Brute force solution; turn the ContentTranslation off. Really

stupid

solution.


... Then I guess you don't mind that I'm changing the thread name :)



The next solution; turn the Yandex engine off. That would solve a
part of the problem. Kind of lousy solution though.

What about adding a language model that warns when the language

constructs

gets to weird? It is like a "test" for the 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Polska Conference and Board update

2016-06-05 Thread Wojciech Pędzich
On June 3-5, the Polish Wikimedia chapter held its annual Wikimedia 
Polska Conference, including the General Assembly of Members (June 4). 
As it was the end of the current term for the Board, seven Board members 
were elected for the next term, 2016-2018:


* Tomasz Ganicz / Polimerek, President
* Michał Buczyński, Aegis Maelstrom, Vice-President
* Marek Stelmasik / Masti, Treasurer
* Wojciech Pędzich / Wpedzich, Secretary
* Małgorzata Wilk / Maire
* Tomasz Skibiński / Elfhelm
* Jarosław Błaszczak / Powerek38

The new Revision Commitee was also elected, as well as the Internal 
Court. The relevant Metapage and chapter page have been updated, but if 
you'd care to update some language versions, you're invited.


https://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/W%C5%82adze/en


Kind regards,
Wojciech Pędzich / User:Wpedzich


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
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 Announcements] Executive transition planning

2016-02-25 Thread Wojciech Pędzich

W dniu 2016-02-25 o 20:01, Brad Patrick pisze:

Best of luck to the Board moving forward with this process. You have a lot of 
work ahead.

Brad


I am keeping my fingers crossed for the Board, in the time to come their 
decisions will certainly have impact on the wiki-world. Also, I am 
keeping my fingers crossed for Lila, and her future endeavours.


Wojciech / [[User:Wpedzich]]

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,