Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Clinic #009 digest (Abstract Wikipedia); #010 today at 13:00 UTC

2020-09-15 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
I don't know whether I am the only one with this problem, but when I
tried to enter the room, my computer crashed. It happened with three
different browsers.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Di., 15. Sept. 2020 um 10:58 Uhr schrieb Asaf Bartov :
>
> Dear Wikimedians,
>
> I have posted the digest for Wikimedia Clinic #009. [1]
>
> The topics discussed were:
>
> * Abstract Wikipedia
> * Translation of modules
> * Feedback on Abstract Wikipedia in various existing communities
>
> I encourage those of you interested in any of the above topics to read the
> digest. [1]
>
> Today (Sep 15th) at 13:00 UTC we will be hosting Wikimedia Clinic #010,
> with the scheduled segment again being Denny Vrandečić introducing Abstract
> Wikipedia (this time in an Asia-friendly time zone).
>
> As always, beyond this scheduled segment, there will be time to bring up
> any Wikimedia-related questions or topics other call attendees are
> interested in.
>
> The link to the call is:
> https://meet.google.com/dsd-rypz-xjf
>
> Cheers,
>
>A.
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Clinics/009
>
> Asaf Bartov (he/him/his)
>
> Senior Program Officer, Emerging Wikimedia Communities
>
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
> https://donate.wikimedia.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, 
> 

___
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 Ziko van Dijk
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, 



Re: [Wikimedia-l] Universal Code of Conduct Drafting Committee - Call for participation

2020-08-01 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
All the best to the people involved, it is an important endeavour.
Of course, we are all curious about results.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Do., 30. Juli 2020 um 19:49 Uhr schrieb Christel Steigenberger
:
>
> 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, 
> 

___
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] New essay on the ambiguity of NC licenses

2020-07-12 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
Thank you for the link, Erik, I am going to read Pete Forsyth‘s text
carefully. My thinking about the module was influenced by some WMD
publications, by Till Kreutzer and also this one:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Free_Knowledge_thanks_to_Creative_Commons_Licenses.pdf
So I learned about the problems of the module. In general I find it most
unfortunate when a reuser has to evaluate a larger work for its elements
and its different licenses - often you do not only reuse one monolithic
piece but something consisting of smaller elements, or a larger group of
elements (e.g. dozens of pictures about a topic).
The more I was surprised when in the Strategy 2030 discussions and then
recommendations the modules ND and NC were called necessary for the needs
of the Global South. Though I am not a absolute or ideological opponent of
any module, I wondered about the reasons and I never got an answer. In the
meanwhile, the modules disappeared from the recommendations, and that is
just good so.
So the problem of the NC module remains that many who apply it are not
always conscious about undesired consequences,  while some who apply it use
the module very consciously for a specific reason - e.g. in a hybrid model,
to distribute content but not to share it, to reserve commercial use
exclusively for oneself. I do not want to judge about this intention, but I
imagine that it can become problematic when your goal is to build a
knowledge *commons*.
Kind regards
Ziko





Benjamin Lees  schrieb am So. 12. Juli 2020 um 09:31:

> On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 9:20 PM Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> > Are we really sure he would have done something in any case if we did not
> > provide such options?
> >
>
> It's pretty hard to be sure about the hypothetical behavior of
> individuals.  Undoubtedly, as you say, there are some people who are *only*
> willing to submit material to us if it is NC, and thus we currently lose
> out on material from them.  Undoubtedly, as Erik says, there are also some
> people who submit material to us under a free license but would choose an
> NC license if it were available, and thus we currently gain the benefit of
> their work being freely licensed, rather than NC.  I suspect the latter
> pool is far larger than the former.
>
> When the choice is truly between a particular non-free image and not having
> any image, fair use (for projects with fair use policies) already allows us
> to use that image.  In other cases, it may be that no free image is
> available right now, but someone can go out and take one.  There would be
> much less incentive to do so if we were already using an NC image, so such
> stopgaps would likely become permanent.
>
> Of course, there will be attractive edge cases where we can fairly
> confidently say "the choice is NC or nothing".  But we cannot be ruled by
> edge cases; we must weigh them against the costs of complexity, confusion,
> and unfairness that we would be creating for ourselves (to say nothing of
> the additional headache we would create for reusers).
>
> Emufarmers
> ___
> 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] June 4 1800 Maggie Dennis office hour (with a twist)

2020-05-30 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Thanks for the link, Ciell, I easily get confused about time zones.
I am looking forward to attend on June 4th, if it is possible for me.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Fr., 29. Mai 2020 um 20:20 Uhr schrieb Ciell Wikipedia <
ciell.wikipe...@gmail.com>:

> This will be very interesting, thank you Maggie.
> (To check your local time for this office hour: click here
> <
> https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Maggie+Dennis+office+hour+%28with+a+twist%29=20200604T18=1440=1
> >)
>
>
> Vriendelijke groet,
> Ciell
>
>
> Op do 28 mei 2020 om 14:03 schreef Maggie Dennis :
>
> > Hello, all.
> >
> > With the Board’s recent statement, this seems like a good time to launch
> > the quarterly office hours I’ve been wanting to create for people who
> want
> > to talk to me about issues involving “community resilience and
> > sustainability,” including the work of Trust & Safety, whom I oversee.
> > (after months of wanting to do this I’ve come to realize that I will
> always
> > be "too busy" to feel like it's the perfect time for this. So I’m going
> to
> > do it now anyway!)
> >
> > There’ve been requests to make office hours more personal, so I will
> host a
> > Zoom hangout where people can join me, but I'll also take questions from
> > Telegram and IRC.[1] I know that finding an hour that works for everybody
> > is not going to happen, and I know from past office hours I’ve been
> > involved in that I may get far more questions than I can answer (or,
> > contrarily, nothing at all :)). Nevertheless, I will do my best to answer
> > questions posed to me in that hour by Wikimedians in good standing (not
> > Foundation or community banned) and to follow up in writing with any I
> > don’t have time for over the next few days or week or so, time allowing.
> I
> > might aggregate similar questions into a kind of FAQ. We’ll publish
> notes,
> > anonymizing those who’ve asked questions, after.
> >
> > I do, however, have the following caveats:
> >
> >-
> >
> >I can’t and won’t discuss specific Trust & Safety cases. Instead, I
> can
> >discuss Trust & Safety protocols and practices and approaches as well
> as
> >some of the mistakes we’ve made, some of the things I’m proud of, and
> > some
> >of the things we’re hoping to do.
> >-
> >
> >I will not respond to comments or questions that are disrespectful to
> >me, to my colleagues, or to anyone in our communities. I can talk
> > civilly
> >about our work even if you disagree with me or I disagree with you. I
> > won’t
> >compromise on this.
> >
> >
> > I’m not sure if I will stick with Zoom as the way I do office hours
> > forever, but I am responding to some requests for spoken interaction
> while
> > also trying to provide text options for those who prefer. I admit to
> being
> > a little camera shy myself, so this is a challenge for me! If I embarrass
> > myself too badly, I may retreat to the safety of text in future.
> >
> > I was hoping to have the Zoom link already, but while that’s being
> > expedited by our office technology team, I don’t have it yet. I wanted to
> > give interested people notice as soon as I knew the time. I’ll follow up
> > with links again at least two hours in advance.
> >
> > The meeting will be on June 4th at 1800 UTC.
> >
> > I hope to see you there.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Maggie
> >
> > [1] Zoom link; Telegram link:
> https://t.me/joinchat/DOlGIB1FRLUWqW9iB3qfTQ
> > ;
> > directions for participating in IRC:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours#How_to_participate
> >
> > --
> > Maggie Dennis
> > Vice President, Community Resilience & Sustainability
> > Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] An encyclopedia must be conservative (?)

2020-05-29 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello people, thanks for the reactions!

I actually did not mean conservative in a strict political sense, and I am
a big fan of Reagle's book. It seems to me
that some people in the movement identify strongly with the (political)
term "progressive", and, depending on their personal
circumstances, that can be very understandable. The risk is that their
thinking about WP, WM and knowledge is very much
predetermined by these political views.

On the other hand, I see the risk that some other members of the movement
think that they - and the movement - are
automatically "modern" because they use wikis. With this attitude they may
not see much need for change.

Allow me some comments between the - very interesting - lines. See below

Kind regards
Ziko


Am Fr., 29. Mai 2020 um 09:43 Uhr schrieb Amir E. Aharoni <
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il>:

> Aspect1: Fact-checking, trust, and reliability
> In non-wiki encyclopedias the writers
> are selected by the publisher: the publisher trusts the writers, and the
> readers trust the publisher's brand.  [...] The Wikpiedia attitude
> to sources, known as "Verifiability" in the English Wikipedia, solidified
> around 2005. It makes a lot of sense for a wiki encyclopedia, and it is one
> of our cornerstones, at least in the larger languages. (The details of the
> policy in each language may be different, but the general idea is the same.
> If it's significantly different in your language, please tell me.)
>

Indeed, cornerstone is a great word here. We don't check the contributors
as persons,
therefore we have to externalize the truth-question. So what does a
co-contributor check when seeing
the edit of a contributor? Not whether the contributor has thematic or
scientific competences but only whether she
has "publishing" or wirting competences - meaning, whether she is capable
of selecting good literature, using it
and writing accordingly an unpersonal encyclopedic text.

Within the wiki, it would be difficult to check whether she has scientific
competences. But it is possible to
check within the wiki whether she has writing competences, because we see
these writing competences in her previous
edits. So in Wikipedia, it works that we only care for the "wiki identity"
and "wiki status" of a contributor.

By the way, it would be an interesting research question: are there
Wikipedias that significantly differ from this cornerstone
(and other cornerstones)? In my own comparison between WP in EN, DE, NL, AF
and FY I did not find such a difference.


no access to academic publishing? Some people propose relaxing the demand
> for external reliable source for such topics, and while I'm totally on
> board with the social justice aspect of this attitude, it doesn't suggest a
> solution to the trust problem: some people will use it to enrich Wikipedia
> with information that can't be found elsewhere, but some people may abuse
> it to add made up stuff.
>

Yes, indeed. My thought was: if we allow sources of probably lesser
quality, e.g.
"grey literature" for marginalized people as an article topic, what would
that mean? That we
find it okay that a Wikipedia article about a woman is less reliable than
an article about a man?



> I have a proposed solution for this problem, and although some people would
> disagree, I call it conservative: Keep the demand for verifiability, and
> help people who have been historically disadvantaged get access to trusted
> academic institutions and conduct and publish their research outside of
> Wikipedia first.
>

Interesting. Some might ask whether this is a task of the Wikimedia
movement. (It all would depend on suitable partners and what the
role of the movement would be.)

If we see there a tunnel like this: reality - primary sources - secondary
sources - tertiary sources, then the
solution would not be at the final stage (tertiary source = Wikipedia and
its rules), but earlier, at the stage secondary sources
where there is a social filter.



> Aspect 2: Technology
> reasonably modern design principles and implementations. We are outdated in
> some ways: [...] We shouldn't be *too* progressive, though [...]
>
Talk pages are a particularly curious kind of disaster. Many Wikipedians
> tend to be very conservative about them and don't want any technology
> changes in them, but talk pages are not a continuation of any previous
> tradition of encyclopedic writing or of Internet culture—they are
> Wikipedia's own invention.


Good point, Amir. This is a dimension I have not looked at very thoroughly
in my research.
It blends in with the general question how software is interconnected to
content and to
the behaviour of the contributors. Maybe the current state of the software
used has for
some Wikipedians the function of a cultural marker or element of
self-identity.


> Aspect 3: Presentation style

[...]

> Like the bold font, it is also a typographic tradition. It
> has gotten out of hand in Wikipedia thanks to otherwise good things like
> the 

[Wikimedia-l] An encyclopedia must be conservative (?)

2020-05-27 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear fellows,

Some time ago, Joseph Reagle wrote that an encyclopedia must be
progressive. In my personal view, something "progressive" sounds to me
intuitively more sympathetic than something "conservative". But of course,
these are only two words loaden with meaning, and reality is always more
complex.

It seems to me that many Wikipedians or Wikimedians think of themselves as
being progressive and modern. Our wikis are a tribute to science and
enlightenment. Spontaneity and a laissez-faire-attitude are held in high
regard; "productive chaos" and "anarchy" are typical for wikis.

When I had a closer look at our values and ideas, I got the impression that
the opposite is true. Many attitudes and ideals sound to me more like
bureaucracy and traditionalism:
* being thorough, with regard to content and writing about it
* community spirit
* treating everyone equally without regard of the person (the highest ideal
of the Prussian civil servant)
* individual initiative
* reliability

What do you think? Is this just my personal or national background, or has
Wikipedia been build up on a different basis than we usually tell ourselves
and others?

Kind regards
Ziko
___
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] Commons

2020-05-18 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Alessandro,
Thank you for your post and its insight. I recognized the same with me: I
only make use of Wikimedia Commons in lessons if I have enough time. Also I
would introduce it only to students with a solid knowledge of English.


Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l 
schrieb am Mo. 18. Mai 2020 um 13:08:

> In the end, it's more like inducing order from other projects than caring
> about the order on Commons because there clearly can't be with people
> acting the way they do.


This is a great observation! And this phenomenon contributes to the
on-going chaos, to the work-around-culture you need to adapt to if you want
to make use of Wikimedia Commons. :-(

Kind regards
Ziko




They are also not caring for it: if you spend your time starting
> unnecessary deletion procedures instead of cleaning up categories or
> description, you obviously have your priority, so we also have ours.
>

> About the main page, we need to focus more on media files IMHO, and of
> course search is complicated but I am sure metadata can improve it.
>
> A.
> Il lunedì 18 maggio 2020, 11:33:46 CEST, Robert Myers <
> robert.my...@wikimedia.org.au> ha scritto:
>
>  Well some people do, but it is when they get trolled by other contributors
> and/or overzealous Admin comes along and deletes the file. They quickly
> lose interest, in turn telling other people not to bother.
>
> I just had another lot of photographs tagged by a troll, in which an Admin
> deletes (
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log=File:Rachel_Priest_after_the_Sydney_Thunder_vs_Adelaide_Strikers_WBBL_game_at_Robertson_Oval.jpg
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log=File:Abandoned_farm_house_in_Hillgrove_01.jpg
> ).
> These have been on Commons for two + years, using the same camera gear I
> have used over the years. If it is enough for me to give up on the project,
> it would be the same for any other user but for a newbie it is something
> that would make me run for the hills (depart quickly as possible)!
>
> On Sun, May 17, 2020 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta 
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Anecdotally, it seems people sometimes don't upload their photos to
> > Commons because they don't realize that the scope of Commons is much
> > broader than that of Wikipedia.
> >
> > Has there been, or should there be, any research into this, or why people
> > don't contribute more broadly?
> >
> > ~Benjamin
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
>
> Robert Myers
> Secretary - Wikimedia Australia
> M: +61 400 670 288
> robert.my...@wikimedia.org.au
> http://www.wikimedia.org.au
>
> Wikimedia Australia Inc. is an independent charitable organisation which
> supports the efforts of the Wikimedia Foundation in Australia. We welcome
> your support by membership or donations to keep the Wikimedia mission
> alive.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons

2020-05-18 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
I would like to support Roland's and other's remarks that Wikimedia Commons
has some serious problems and needs improvement in many ways. Some of these
problems are very difficult to overcome, such as a better, multilingual
search because we don't have all the necessary meta data.
Other problems could be dealt with in a short time. For example, the main
page (or main pages, in the different languages) has too many items and
links. General and less general links; links to content by topic; links to
other Wikimedia wikis, links to mainpages in other languages. Some of this
is repeated in the left side bar. All together, also with general wiki
function links - I counted 291 links or things to click on!

My ideal would be a clean page
* with a short explanation what the site is or does,
* and then three, four or five big items to click on: for example, "search
content", "contribute content", "learn more".
Is it a realistic dream of me that we would see such a clean-up within the
next 5 or 50 years?
Kind regards
Ziko











Am So., 17. Mai 2020 um 17:25 Uhr schrieb Alessandro Marchetti via
Wikimedia-l :

>  "there are way less people maintaining it than it is needed" is naif
> summary of what is going on. IMHO. There are people maintaining it in a way
> that is counterproductive. You can always create an efficient workflow, if
> you want it.
>
> We don't need people that delete an image of a statue in the USA because
> of no:fop even if it is a small size in a big composition and than keep the
> other ones in the category that are in any case used on enwikipedia. We
> don't need people copying and pasting quickly motivations without even
> reading them confusing countries or scenarios, as it happened (they almost
> never apologize, of course, because they are so busy). We don't need people
> that when a deletion procedure is rejected keep insisting looking at the
> contribution of an user stressing them until they find something. We don't
> need people deleting low-resolution files that were few months short form
> entering the public domain, when in the same time they could have deleted
> 100 times more of useless images. We don't need people arguing to delete
> ancient images that couldn't be proved "not to be recent" against good
> faith.  We don't need people starting deletion procedure if an image is on
> line instead of simply asking the uploader.
>
> However, it's a fact that some active members of the community created
> over the years a system where such people are encouraged to act in such a
> rigid way and probably even believe that their behaviour is necessary.
> Given these circumstances, it is not the moral duty of the silent majority
> of users to deal with the consequences of such behaviour. They can go on
> and try to delete everything the way they do and they will also deal with
> the huge amount of backlog they create wasting the time of users. It's only
> fair to me that whoever keep encouraging such unefficient workflow should
> be the one to clean the mess.
> A.
>
>
>
>
>Il domenica 17 maggio 2020, 12:15:30 CEST, Yaroslav Blanter <
> ymb...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
>  Concerning using Commons as a photo hosting, I have written a blog post
> earlier this year:
>
>
> https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/t/wikimedia-commons-as-private-photo-hosting/2866
>
> However, I can not see how it can become anything close to social media,
> nor do I think it should be. It already has a lot of garbage, and there are
> way less people maintaining it than it is needed. That it is one of the
> nastiest communities among all Wikimedia projects, with people being
> allowed to do things for which they would become instantly long-term
> blocked on other projects, does not help either
>
> Best
> Yaroslav
>
> On Sun, May 17, 2020 at 10:32 AM Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > This discussion, although started with a question "why don't people
> > contribute to Wikimedia Commons, now after actually the discussion above,
> > covers more topics. A few notes, observations and comments:
> > 1) I remember a major discussion took place somewhere on Wikimedia
> Commons
> > when one of the strategy2030 draft recommendations suggested uploading
> > non-free images on Wikimedia Commons. That discussion was also on the
> scope
> > of Wikimedia Commons. I wish I could recall where exactly it took place.
> > However, I am pretty sure that many of you have read or participated
> there.
> > Most probably there I first read the idea of "uncommon/uncommons" (or an
> > alternative version of Commons).
> > 2) Wikimedia Commons is most possibly/definitely less popular than
> > Wikipedia. I believe many editors start from Wikipedia and then move to
> > Wikimedia Commons. There is, of course, another reason, when someone
> > gradually becomes more experienced on Wikipedia, they learn they need to
> > spend some time on Wikimedia Commons for the article–photos they are
> > working on. I "personally" do "not" feel the solution of 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is the Wikimedia-movement apolitical?

2020-04-26 Thread Ziko van Dijk
I totally agree with you, Shlomi.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am So., 26. Apr. 2020 um 17:02 Uhr schrieb Shlomi Fish <
shlo...@shlomifish.org>:

> Hi Rebecca and all,
>
> On Sat, 25 Apr 2020 17:11:55 +0100
> "Rebecca O'Neill"  wrote:
>
> > Well said. Everything is political, and when the movement choses not to
> > speak out or state an opinion on something, then we are giving our
> support
> > to the status quo.
> >
> > Believing yourself to be apolitical is as much a fantasy as being
> > completely objective, it is inherently impossible.
> >
>
> While one likely cannot be completely objective, I believe that we should
> try
> to be as objective as possible, and not completely succumb to being
> subjective.
>
> I had written about it here:
>
> https://shlomif.livejournal.com/52439.html
>
> Similarly, while the WMF has some shared political stances due to its
> mission
> and objectives, it should try to avoid officially taking a stance on
> politically-tangential issues that are out of that scope and which have no
> consensus among its members, contributors and users. Otherwise, its
> effectiveness in accomplishing its mission may be reduced, and we may lose
> or
> alienate many members.
>
> Just my opinion,
>
> -- Shlomi
>
> --
>
> Shlomi Fish   https://www.shlomifish.org/
> https://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/Google-Discontinues-Services/
>
> Larry Wall *does* know all of Perl. However, he pretends to be wrong
> or misinformed, so people will underestimate him.
> — https://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Larry-Wall/
>
> Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - https://shlom.in/reply
> .
>
> ___
> 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] WMF political activism

2020-04-24 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
this is about different things. One is an opinion about Earth Day, one is
an opinion about the organization behind a specific event, and one is an
opinion about whether the WMF should link to this specific event.
For example, I am not against protecting the climate. I might have some
criticism about certain aspects of "Fridays for Future". I would be
definitely against my "Association of Historians in Germany" linking in
such a way to "Fridays for Future".
Kind regards
Ziko





Am Fr., 24. Apr. 2020 um 22:27 Uhr schrieb Robert Fernandez <
wikigamal...@gmail.com>:

> FFS who is against Earth Day?   Every organization and company
> probably mentions it or observes it in some way.  Get over yourselves.
> ___
> 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] WMF political activism, yet again

2020-04-22 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
I can confirm that I see the same also here in the Netherlands. Which is
strange, there are no general elections here before 2021...
An explanation about this link would be interesting.
Kind regards
Ziko






Am Mi., 22. Apr. 2020 um 22:50 Uhr schrieb Yair Rand :

> The WMF corporate site (wikimediafoundation.org) currently has a
> full-page ad with the text "We are watching Earth Day Live today. Will
> you?". This links to an external site with the text "Click here to sign on
> to the US Youth Climate Strike Coalition Earth Day Demands - From congress
> and the next president, we demand a People’s Bailout, a Green New Deal, and
> Land Back for Indigenous Peoples", and prompting readers to "Pledge to vote
> for our future" and to subscribe to "US Climate Strike".
>
> Everyone here already knows how unacceptable this is, and why, so I don't
> think this requires any further explanation. The WMF should immediately
> take this down, and make certain that this kind of thing can't happen
> again. They've failed yet again at preventing inappropriate
> political activism in WMF's communications, and must take serious action to
> fix this constant stream of terrible failures.
>
> -- Yair Rand
> ___
> 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] Proposal towards a multilingual Wikipedia and a new Wikipedia project

2020-04-14 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear Denny,

Thank you for your well written piece with some very intriguing ideas. I
have read most of it, and I must confess that I have not fully understand
everything about keys and contractors. Maybe I am not exactly the target
group.

I found it very sympathetic to read your own scepticisms, and obviously we
both have read the same book by Umberto Eco. :-)

Single point of failure: I am not that worried about that, according to the
"many-eyball-principle".

Single language wiki: This seems to me the biggest problem if your new wiki
(wikis) is supposed to be a place where everybody can contribute,
regardless of the native language. You think that "detailed discussions and
debates" are less likely (in the beginning). Well, for any meaningful
participation, would'nt it be important that everybody can communicate with
everybody? Whether we would use one or several languages in the wiki, the
language problem would be a limitation of the collaboration.

By the way, I think that a big part of the negative attitude, that many
(German) Wikipedians have towards Wikidata, is based on language barriers.
Another reason is that Wikipedians have build up their own status within
Wikipedia, and when they come to Wikidata, they have to start from the
beginning to build up status. The same problems we would we with regard to
("normal") Wikipedia on the one hand, and Abstract Wikipedia and
Wikilambda, on the other hand, I guess? So these wikis would be in future
linked to each other very much, but the different communities might not go
along well.

Reducing knowledge diversity: I agree that that is not so much the problem,
as the Wikipedians will decide which content to take over and which not.
What I would like to see: That as a reader, I can get an article (e.g. "San
Francisco") in different versions: a long one, a short one, one interesting
for people who live in SF, etc. In general, more modularity than now would
be great.

"We must make sure that it does not become too hard to contribute": Yes,
that is a big problem (see above). I like the idea of "outsourcing" skills;
that the people of local Wikipedia can ask people on Abstract WP and
Wikilambda. You would need enough volunteers on AWP-WL to help; and you
would need at least some people on local WP who can communicate its wishes
to the helpers on AWP-WL. For very small WP communities, that would be an
enourmous challenge.

My personal approach would be the following, based on experiences with
German language encyclopedia for children, Klexikon. It would be great for
small Wikipedias to find a corpus of ca. 3000-5000 encyclopedic articles.
Well chosen by relevance for at least most parts of the world. In
easy-to-understand English, not too long, with a good strcuture, written in
a way that you can easily translate and adapt them for your own language.
(Many people will now say: "Simple English Wikipedia already exists", but I
think it is not there yet.)

Those 3000-5000 articles would be a wonderful encyclopedia already. The
local Wikipedians would enrich the content then with some hundred or
thousand articles of their own. In my experience, you do not need millions
of articles to fulfill the knowledge hunger of most readers.

I think that your "content translation framework" approach goes a little
bit into this direction. Part of the framework could be to make suggestions
about "localization". For example, the article about "Dogs" could have a
note saying: "After this paragraph, you could add some sentences with
regard to dogs in your own country/region."

Kind regards,
Ziko






















Am Di., 14. Apr. 2020 um 02:53 Uhr schrieb Denny Vrandečić <
vrande...@gmail.com>:

> 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 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps on Wikimedia Space

2020-02-18 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Quim,

Thank you for the information. It was not quite a surprise, as we did not
hear much of Space in the last time, and I must confess myself that I only
used it in the iniatial phase and somewhat later. I feel sorry for those
who invested time and energy in it.

I am interested in a report later, about what worked and what did not work,
and maybe why.

Kind regards,
Ziko





Am Di., 18. Feb. 2020 um 11:31 Uhr schrieb Quim Gil :

> Last year, the Wikimedia Foundation launched Wikimedia Space to experiment
> with new ways to connect volunteers, increase movement participation, and
> showcase community stories. While we remain committed to this important
> goal, based on lessons learned through the Space prototype, the Foundation
> has decided to close Discuss Space. The Space blog, which continues to fill
> a need to share news for the movement by the movement, will continue in a
> new home. Please continue to submit community-focused stories [1], so that
> we may share them with the movement.
>
> To learn more about the next steps, check the full announcement at
> https://space.wmflabs.org/2020/02/18/next-steps-on-wikimedia-space/
>
> We have learned a lot from this initiative and want to thank all Space
> users [2] for their time and contributions. We also invite everyone
> interested in documenting lessons learned and discussing next steps to join
> us in taking this effort even further, either at the About Wikimedia Space
> category in Discuss [3] or the Space talk page in Meta [4].
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Space/Editorial_guidelines#How_to_get_started
> [2] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/u?period=all
> [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/c/about-wikimedia-space/2
> [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Space
>
> --
> 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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Recommendations and community conversations launching next week

2020-02-04 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
I strongly agree with what Chris wrote.
In the Strategy discussions, I have experienced and witnessed several times
that defenders of the "strategy synthesis/recommendations" do not want to
talk about an issue. They say things like:
* "this feels like défa vu"
* "you are not constructive"
* "we must look forward, not backward"
* "we don't want to talk about details now, we leave that for later"
This kind of reactions do not contribute to an atmosphere in which I feel
that my concerns are taken seriously.
Kind regards
Ziko








Am Di., 4. Feb. 2020 um 08:57 Uhr schrieb Chris Keating <
chriskeatingw...@gmail.com>:

> >
> > Superprotect is now over five years old. Superprotect's removal is now
> over
> > four years old. It was a mistake, and it was explicitly acknowledged as
> > such: the then-ED of the WMF said it had "set up a precedent of
> > mistrust". Almost all of the people involved in it are no longer
> affiliated
> > with the Wikimedia Foundation, and in fact, plenty of the staff members
> at
> > the Wikimedia Foundation were hired *after* superprotect was removed.
> >
> > I don't think bringing up superprotect in this discussion is especially
> > relevant or helpful.
>
>
> I sort of want to agree with this, but actually I think it goes a bit
> deeper.
>
> If you ask questions about the relationship between the WMF and the
> community, sooner rather than later someone will talk about Superprotect.
> If you ask any of the 1,000 people who signed the petition against
> Superprotect, most of whom are still active one way or another, then
> Superprotect will probably be the first thing out of their mouths, even
> though it happened 6 years ago. It's sufficiently ingrained in peoples'
> minds that asking these people not to talk about Superprotect is like a
> British person asking someone from the USA not to talk about the Boston Tea
> Party.
>
> In part this is because people were very angry about the issue at the time,
> and that anger was dealt with very poorly at the time.
>
> In part it's because people perceive there is nothing to prevent an
> identical situation recurring. In some ways I think this perception is
> unfair, for all the reasons you mention. But it still exists, and in part
> it exists because of things the WMF has not done.  The Foundation's
> expectations about how it interacts with the community remain fairly
> unclear and fairly undocumented, from the Board level down. I recall there
> have been some written statements of how the WMF now handles product
> features, though I think this didn't come the ED or less the Board. I don't
> believe there was ever a written review publilshed of Superprotect, while
> there are written reviews and statements lessons learned from many other
> situations that had much less impact. In short, the WMF is not seen as
> having put the issue to bed in a way that results in everyone involved
> moving on.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
> ___
> 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] Movement Strategy: Recommendations released, join the conversation

2020-01-22 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Yes, thank you Andrew, that was actually what I was looking for. It is
simply very difficult e.g. to search for a sentence that somebody quoted
when the text is shattered over several pages and then with parts hidden as
"collapsable". (I do not blame or criticise somebody for that, it is just
that different ways to present texts have pros and cons.)
Kind regards,
Ziko

Am Mi., 22. Jan. 2020 um 10:05 Uhr schrieb Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <
it...@wikimedia.org.il>:

> Thank you, Andrew. These PDF files weren't there when I looked, but thanks
> for pointing that out.
>
>
>
> *Itzik Edri*
> Chairperson (volunteer)
> it...@wikimedia.org.il
> +972-54-5878078
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 7:47 PM Andrew Lih  wrote:
>
> > There are PDF versions, which may not be easily spottable. They are the
> > bottom of the introduction page:
> >
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> >
> > Core:
> >
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Movement_Strategy_Recommendations_-_Core_document_in_English.pdf
> >
> > Extended:
> >
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Movement_Strategy_Recommendations_Extended_doc_EN.pdf
> >
> > Cover note:
> >
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Movement_Strategy_Recommendations_Cover_note_EN.pdf
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 3:14 AM Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <
> > it...@wikimedia.org.il> wrote:
> >
> > > A huge thank you to all the volunteers, staff and the core team who
> > > invested in this process unimaginable hours of work.
> > >
> > > Is there maybe a one document/pdf/printable version of the
> > recommendations?
> > > It is a long document which I personally want to read carefully and I
> > find
> > > it slightly complicated to read in the current wiki-structure.
> > >
> > >
> > > *Itzik Edri*
> > > Chairperson (volunteer)
> > > it...@wikimedia.org.il
> > > +972-54-5878078
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 6:07 AM Todd Allen 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Katherine,
> > > >
> > > > These are very disappointing. It does not seem like a bit of the
> > feedback
> > > > on earlier versions was taken into consideration at all. Can we
> expect
> > > > anything we say to matter this time around, or will we once again be
> > > > talking to the wall?
> > > >
> > > > Todd
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020, 8:24 PM Katherine Maher 
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Dear all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I wanted to share some news with you: the first version of the
> > movement
> > > > > strategy recommendations document has been published on Meta [1].
> On
> > > > behalf
> > > > > of the movement strategy working groups and recommendation
> writers, I
> > > am
> > > > > honored to present them to you. We ask you to please take a moment
> to
> > > > read
> > > > > through, review, and comment.
> > > > >
> > > > > In 2017, we set about building the future we want, together. In
> 2020,
> > > > your
> > > > > fellow Wikimedians have written and shared a framework for how we
> can
> > > > bring
> > > > > to life our vision of becoming the essential support system of the
> > > > > ecosystem of free knowledge.
> > > > >
> > > > > == Review the recommendations ==
> > > > >
> > > > > These recommendations are the result of 18 months of in-depth
> > > discussions
> > > > > and consultation among global Wikimedia community members and
> > research
> > > > > into opportunities for our future. The volunteer working groups
> [2],
> > > > > writing teams [3] and strategy liaisons [4] have all invested a
> > > > significant
> > > > > amount of energy into this, and I want to wholeheartedly thank each
> > and
> > > > > every person who contributed to creating this work.
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to encourage everyone to read this work. There are 13
> > > > > recommendations (condensed from 89), accompanied by an explanation
> of
> > > the
> > > > > principles [5] that underlie the recommendations, an outline of how
> > > these
> > > > > recommendations work together [6], as well as an overview of how
> the
> > > > > recommendations were produced and next steps [7].
> > > > >
> > > > > The core of this material is online in Arabic, English, French,
> > German,
> > > > > Hindi, Portuguese, and Spanish. We also have an overview available
> in
> > > > > Catalan, Dutch, Farsi, Hebrew, Polish, and Russian that offers a
> > > > condensed
> > > > > introduction to the recommendations material.
> > > > >
> > > > > == Share your feedback ==
> > > > >
> > > > > In order to produce a final document that is representative of and
> > > > relevant
> > > > > to the diverse project communities as well as groups and
> > organizations
> > > > that
> > > > > make up our movement, we are calling on everyone to review the
> > > > > recommendations and share their thoughts.
> > > > >
> > > > > Specifically, we ask you to look at what impact these
> recommendations
> > > > might
> > > > > have on you and your group or community’s context. Discussions 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Recommendations released, join the conversation

2020-01-21 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Anders,

Could you please explain which of the mails in this thread are problematic
in your opinion? I think that I made a factual statement in the most
neutral way.

Anders, your opinion is that the recommendations are „wonderful“. I want to
tolerate your opinion. But do you also tolerate other opinions? Or do you
think that opponents need a better „attitude“?

Kind regards,
Ziko


Anders Wennersten  schrieb am Di. 21. Jan. 2020
um 12:14:

> Sometimes I wonder if we really belong to the same movement or even live
> on the same planet.
>
> A wonderful work has been done with the recomendations, and the end
> result looks very fine, with only a few minor comments needed as far as
> I can see.
>
>   And I believe whatever we think of the endresult we should commend the
> people who have participated, both their commitment and quality of work.
>
> As a 8 hours-a- day contributor to a project, I know, as all my
> colleagues, the importance to have a positive tone in our
> communityinternal conversation and always be strong in good faith. And I
> meet that positive tone in my activities in the community and when I
> meet volunteers and  functionaries IRL. But in this list i find
> appalling negative entries as i find to  be in direct opposition to our
> movement values.
>
> So please, please use a better tone and attitude in this discussion of
> the recommendations
>
> Andersw
>
>
>
>
> Den 2020-01-21 kl. 11:49, skrev Fæ:
> > Ziko, we can vote on whatever we want, whenever we want.
> >
> > Us having a RFC on meta does not need the WMF to approve it or like it.
> An
> > openly run RFC could itself recommend a board resolution asking the
> > community appointed board members (you know, the legitimate ones that are
> > accountable to us) to reject or amend the 'recommendations' as the
> > community sees fit. The WMF board and their CEO know it is in their
> > interest to take on any firm community consensus rather than playing
> > political games to get around it.
> >
> > I suggest folks take some time out to re-review the recommendations and
> > wait for the dust to settle before deciding if we want to start a
> correctly
> > community-led process for voting on it.
> >
> > As others have expressed, I am not in the least bit inclined to give any
> > feedback on meta. It's a waste of volunteer time, as effective as
> shouting
> > out of your office window expecting to make the weather change.
> >
> > Fae
> >
> > On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 09:54, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> We now have the confirmation on a Meta Wiki talk page: the WMF is not
> going
> >> to let the communities vote on the recommendations.
> >>
> >>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations#Community_consensus
> >>
> >> Kind regards
> >> Ziko
> >>
> >> Am Di., 21. Jan. 2020 um 09:39 Uhr schrieb Yaroslav Blanter <
> >> ymb...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> We will be again talking to the wall. (Would be, I am not going to
> react
> >>> this time).
> >>>
> >>> Best
> >>> Yaroslav
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 5:06 AM Todd Allen 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Katherine,
> >>>>
> >>>> These are very disappointing. It does not seem like a bit of the
> >> feedback
> >>>> on earlier versions was taken into consideration at all. Can we expect
> >>>> anything we say to matter this time around, or will we once again be
> >>>> talking to the wall?
> >>>>
> >>>> Todd
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020, 8:24 PM Katherine Maher 
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Dear all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I wanted to share some news with you: the first version of the
> >> movement
> >>>>> strategy recommendations document has been published on Meta [1]. On
> >>>> behalf
> >>>>> of the movement strategy working groups and recommendation writers, I
> >>> am
> >>>>> honored to present them to you. We ask you to please take a moment to
> >>>> read
> >>>>> through, review, and comment.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In 2017, we set about building the future we want, together. In 2020,
> >>>> your
> >>>>> fellow Wikimedians have written and shared a framework f

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Recommendations released, join the conversation

2020-01-21 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

We now have the confirmation on a Meta Wiki talk page: the WMF is not going
to let the communities vote on the recommendations.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations#Community_consensus

Kind regards
Ziko

Am Di., 21. Jan. 2020 um 09:39 Uhr schrieb Yaroslav Blanter <
ymb...@gmail.com>:

> We will be again talking to the wall. (Would be, I am not going to react
> this time).
>
> Best
> Yaroslav
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 5:06 AM Todd Allen  wrote:
>
> > Katherine,
> >
> > These are very disappointing. It does not seem like a bit of the feedback
> > on earlier versions was taken into consideration at all. Can we expect
> > anything we say to matter this time around, or will we once again be
> > talking to the wall?
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020, 8:24 PM Katherine Maher 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I wanted to share some news with you: the first version of the movement
> > > strategy recommendations document has been published on Meta [1]. On
> > behalf
> > > of the movement strategy working groups and recommendation writers, I
> am
> > > honored to present them to you. We ask you to please take a moment to
> > read
> > > through, review, and comment.
> > >
> > > In 2017, we set about building the future we want, together. In 2020,
> > your
> > > fellow Wikimedians have written and shared a framework for how we can
> > bring
> > > to life our vision of becoming the essential support system of the
> > > ecosystem of free knowledge.
> > >
> > > == Review the recommendations ==
> > >
> > > These recommendations are the result of 18 months of in-depth
> discussions
> > > and consultation among global Wikimedia community members and research
> > > into opportunities for our future. The volunteer working groups [2],
> > > writing teams [3] and strategy liaisons [4] have all invested a
> > significant
> > > amount of energy into this, and I want to wholeheartedly thank each and
> > > every person who contributed to creating this work.
> > >
> > > I would like to encourage everyone to read this work. There are 13
> > > recommendations (condensed from 89), accompanied by an explanation of
> the
> > > principles [5] that underlie the recommendations, an outline of how
> these
> > > recommendations work together [6], as well as an overview of how the
> > > recommendations were produced and next steps [7].
> > >
> > > The core of this material is online in Arabic, English, French, German,
> > > Hindi, Portuguese, and Spanish. We also have an overview available in
> > > Catalan, Dutch, Farsi, Hebrew, Polish, and Russian that offers a
> > condensed
> > > introduction to the recommendations material.
> > >
> > > == Share your feedback ==
> > >
> > > In order to produce a final document that is representative of and
> > relevant
> > > to the diverse project communities as well as groups and organizations
> > that
> > > make up our movement, we are calling on everyone to review the
> > > recommendations and share their thoughts.
> > >
> > > Specifically, we ask you to look at what impact these recommendations
> > might
> > > have on you and your group or community’s context. Discussions are
> > > happening on-wiki in many languages, as well as in discussion groups on
> > > other, off0wiki platforms, and within movement groups and structures.
> > >
> > > This round of community conversations will run until the first week of
> > > March [8]. After this five-week period, the Core Team will publish a
> > > summary report of input from across affiliates, online communities, and
> > > other stakeholders for public review. [9] Your input will play a role
> as
> > > the recommendation writers finalize the strategy document, and move us
> > > towards discussions around implementation.
> > >
> > > You will find more information about the process in the FAQs [10], and
> > > please direct any additional questions or remarks to the respective
> meta
> > > pages.
> > >
> > > Our movement is the sum of its parts. Each member brings to it
> invaluable
> > > skills, expertise, and ideas to capture, collect, and share free
> > knowledge.
> > > And every single contribution made by every community member from the
> > > beginning has helped us grow into the global, diverse, and unique
> > movement
> > > we are today.
> > >
> > > I am honored to share this on behalf of everyone involved, and am
> looking
> > > forward to insights from across the movement over the next few weeks.
> > >
> > > Katherine
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> > > [2]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups
> > > [3]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/People#Second_phase
> > > [4]
> > >
> > >
> >
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: New roles for working group members, synthesis underway, and more

2019-11-28 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Thank you for the update, Nicole.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Do., 28. Nov. 2019 um 15:44 Uhr schrieb Philip Kopetzky <
philip.kopet...@gmail.com>:

> Yaroslav, the recommendations have always come with the caveat that the
> actual implementation depends on the communities implementing them
> themselves, adapting them to fit the needs of a specific community.
>
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 16:36, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
>
> > The recommendations must be first presented to the movement (and,
> > specifically, to the project communities) for approval, and only them
> > whatever will be approved, can be presented to the Board,
> >
> > The reverse sequence will likely result in outright rejection of
> > recommendations by the editing communities and further alienation WMF
> from
> > the communities.
> >
> > Best
> > Yaroslav
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 5:20 PM Nicole Ebber 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > I’m happy to share an overview of what’s been happening in movement
> > > strategy lately.
> > >
> > > == New roles and bringing the recommendations together ==
> > > From now until the end of the year, the focus will be on identifying
> > > the overlaps in the 89 recommendations produced by the nine thematic
> > > area working groups. The goal here is to create one synthesized set of
> > > recommendations and an accessible, digestible Movement Strategy
> > > document to be shared publicly in January.
> > >
> > > To do this, we asked working group members in October to let us know
> > > if they’d be interested in continuing to contribute to the Wikimedia
> > > 2030 Movement Strategy in one of the following roles: Writer,
> > > connector, or reviewer.[1]
> > >
> > > 15 have signed up to be writers, 10 as connectors, and 17 as
> > > reviewers. Writers will look for overlaps and similarities in the
> > > existing content to see where multiple recommendations could be merged
> > > and unified. Connectors will work closely with writers to help them
> > > improve and expand the content and assess how and where to best
> > > integrate phase 1 material, research, and community input. Reviewers
> > > will go through the synthesized recommendations and provide specific
> > > additional perspectives, expertise, contexts, and advice as needed.
> > >
> > > The writers are currently in a high period of activity, which began in
> > > early November and will run through December, with ongoing support
> > > from the connectors. Alongside bringing together the existing
> > > recommendations, they are also defining principles that underpin and
> > > guide the content of these recommendations. The writers will come
> > > together in Berlin in the first week of December to work intensively
> > > on consolidating the recommendations and finalize the work.
> > >
> > > == Next steps ==
> > > When the synthesized recommendations are ready and published in early
> > > 2020, a final round of movement conversations will take place.
> > > Movement stakeholders will have a chance to understand the path
> > > towards these recommendations and to review the semi-final document.
> > > The final recommendations will be presented to the Board of Trustees
> > > in March and subsequently to the movement for approval. The first step
> > > towards implementation will be discussing prioritization and
> > > sequencing of the recommendations, as well as agreeing upon
> > > responsibilities for bringing each recommendation to life.[2]
> > >
> > > We’ll keep you posted on future developments and more concrete steps
> > > towards approval here and on Wikimedia Space, so stay tuned!
> > >
> > > Best wishes,
> > > Nicole
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups#Synthesis_Groups
> > > [2]
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Overview/Timeline#Detailed_timeline_October_2019_to_June_2020
> > >
> > > --
> > > Nicole Ebber
> > > Leiterin Internationale Beziehungen
> > > Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> > > Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > > Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> > > https://wikimedia.de
> > >
> > > Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
> > > Menschheit teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns
> > > dabei! https://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.
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiConference North America live stream

2019-11-07 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Phoebe, thank you for the good news. We invest so much in our
conferences, that it is a pity that they often are not recorded.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Do., 7. Nov. 2019 um 20:31 Uhr schrieb phoebe ayers <
phoebe.w...@gmail.com>:

> Dear all,
> We are looking forward to WikiConference North America here at MIT in
> Cambridge, Massachusetts this weekend! We will be welcoming around 250
> people over the four-day weekend, with a museum and cultural institution
> culture crawl on Friday, conference sessions on Saturday and Sunday, and
> discussion/hackathon focused on reliability and credibility on Monday.
>
> For those who can't be here with us in person, we have a live stream
> planned of three of our session rooms on Saturday and Sunday. To access the
> stream, go here:
> http://web.mit.edu/webcast/wiki/f19/
>
> We are looking forward to sharing as much of the conference as we can with
> you all! To find out what is when, the schedule is here (all times eastern
> time):
> https://wikiconference.org/wiki/2019/Schedule
>
> We have a packed schedule with sessions about education, research,
> outreach, and more, as well as a special focus/track in our main auditorium
> on credibility and reliability in the news and media, which our partners at
> the Credibility Coalition are assisting with. As we think about the future
> of Wikipedia as a reliable source in a world where social media platforms
> and media networks are struggling with issues of misinformation and
> credibility, we hope that this program will be both timely and helpful.
>
> Let me know if you have any questions and I hope you are able to tune in
> online.
> Phoebe, for WCNA
>
>
> --
> * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers 
> gmail.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,
> 
___
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] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-07 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Sorry, people, but I would like to read an official statement of the WMF
(committee) what is the reason or rationale behind this policy to accept WM
user groups in countries where you already have a chapter. Does anybody
have a link?
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Sa., 5. Okt. 2019 um 19:16 Uhr schrieb Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulospern...@gmail.com>:

> Hi Farhad,
>
> Very interesting, thank you very much for sharing your insight.
> The advantages at an organizational level are quite obvious, indeed, and
> it's a smart way to deal with those membership limitations.
> I'm glad that the WMF & Wikimedia is abandoning the very rigid chapter
> model as the preferred one, and is evolving into more flexible and nuanced
> options and varieties, such as those confederations.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
>
> Фархад Фаткуллин / Farhad Fatkullin  escreveu no dia
> sábado, 5/10/2019 à(s) 15:38:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I can probably comment this, as a member of both Wikimedia Russia and a
> > Tatar language-specific UG.
> > On top of participation in Wikimedia Language Diversity initiative on
> > meta, I am also contemplating and working towards starting a
> > territory-specific UG for my region + an incubator UG for more
> > language-specific UG in the languages of Russia.
> >
> >
> > Wikimedians of Russia seem to see the matreshkas of (1) "global
> conference
> > - regional conference - topic-specific conferences"  & (2) WMF &
> affiliates
> > general meeting - national chapters - UGs" as natural structures, each
> > addressing different tasks, having different priorities, whilst
> cooperating
> > in various projects.
> >
> > * Wikimedia Russia legal requirements (in-person quorum for
> > decision-making, etc.) doesn't allow us to accept into membership all
> > members of all our regional, language or topic specific UGs. So our
> chapter
> > is evolving towards a mixed confederation status, selectively welcoming
> > some members from various groupings around Russia (which themselves can't
> > be neither cells nor branches of WMRU).
> >
> > * SPB is not purely a city, but a one of 85 provinces (read states) of
> the
> > Russian Federation (like my home Republic of Tatarstan, neighbouring
> > Republic of Bashkortostan with its Bashkir Wiki-grandmas, or a city of
> > Moscow).
> >
> > * Once we will spin out UG MSK, we will complete transforming Wikimedia
> > Russia into a collective entity for join tasks, working on national-level
> > advocacy & other projects.
> >
> > * We currently have 5 existing UGs, have two more filed & at least one
> > more at the preparation stage - as this is a good way to engage locally
> or
> > topically interested public into Wikimedia universe.
> >
> >
> > regards,
> > farhad
> >
> > --
> > Farhad Fatkullin - Фархад Фаткуллин Тел.+79274158066 / skype:frhdkazan /
> > Wikipedia:frhdkazan / Wikidata:Q34036417
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Affiliates] Recognition of the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group

2019-10-03 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Philip,

I was asking the same question - isn't there already a Wikimedia Rossiya -
but I guess this is the User Group of Saint Petersburg in Florida (USA),
not Sankt Peterburg in Russia.
Oh wait... this IS about the city in Russia!
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group

Kind regards
Ziko

Am Do., 3. Okt. 2019 um 16:15 Uhr schrieb Philip Kopetzky <
philip.kopet...@gmail.com>:

> Hi Kirill,
>
> so it seems like geographically large countries are being split up into
> different user groups - do you think that this is a viable model for the
> future or just happened because of certain circumstances within the Russian
> community? Would your template allow a User Group from Rome, Paris, Munich
> or Sydney for example?
>
> Best,
> Philip
>
> On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 12:20, Kirill Lokshin 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone!
> >
> > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
> > [1] the Wikimedians of Saint Petersburg User Group [2] as a Wikimedia
> User
> > Group. The group aims to unite Wikimedians living in St. Petersburg, to
> > support the development of content on topics related to St. Petersburg
> > across different Wikimedia projects, to promote the Wikimedia projects
> and
> > movement in St. Petersburg, and to build partnerships between the
> Wikimedia
> > community and cultural, scientific, educational, and media institutions
> in
> > St. Petersburg.
> >
> > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Kirill Lokshin
> > Chair, Affiliations Committee
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognition_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
> > [2]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Saint_Petersburg_User_Group
> > ___
> > Affiliates mailing list
> > affilia...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
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] Movement Strategy: Outcomes of the Harmonization Sprint in Tunis

2019-10-01 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear Nicole,
Thank you for the explanation. Maybe some more context on Meta Wiki might
make sense?
I am looking forward to see the final results.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Di., 1. Okt. 2019 um 19:08 Uhr schrieb Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulospern...@gmail.com>:

> " A second iteration of draft recommendations [4] was published on Meta
> just before the sprint for
> the communities’ information." - It's quite unclear what are we supposed to
> do with this, since those recommendations most probably became outdated in
> the course of the Tunis meetings in the days following their publication.
> Are we supposed to do anything at all with them?
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
> Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia segunda,
> 30/09/2019 à(s) 17:27:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > We recently held the harmonization sprint in Tunis [1], where
> > representatives from each working group met in person to continue
> bringing
> > nine separate sets of draft recommendations into one set. The event also
> > brought together staff members from the Wikimedia Foundation and
> Wikimedia
> > Deutschland, the WMF Chair of the Board of Trustees, and members of the
> > core team. A longer narrative report will be published in the coming
> weeks;
> > in the meantime, see a short day-by-day report on Meta, photos on commons
> > [2], and check out the hashtag #hs2030 on Twitter [3].
> >
> > In the lead up to the meeting, the working groups were busy refining
> their
> > draft recommendations based on feedback received at in person events from
> > Wikimedians across the movement as well as on wiki, via email, and on
> > social media since March of this year. They had also begun identifying
> > overlaps in each other’s recommendations and content. A second iteration
> of
> > draft recommendations [4] was published on Meta just before the sprint
> for
> > the communities’ information.
> >
> > At the sprint, we continued to group recommendations based on
> > commonalities. From there, we looked at what kinds of structures would
> need
> > to be in place to deliver the Wikimedia 2030 vision. A first, rough
> > grouping of recommendations came together at the sprint. But what became
> > clear during the event was that before it’s possible to create a coherent
> > and actionable set of recommendations, fundamental principles that
> underpin
> > the path towards 2030 need to be formalized.
> >
> > The core team is currently processing the discussion materials and
> > outcomes. Analysis of the current draft recommendations will continue so
> as
> > to create one unified set. The timeline will shift and we are looking
> into
> > options for another round of community input.
> >
> > I would like to make clear that the reason we were not able to achieve
> our
> > initial goal in Tunis was due to a lack of clarity and guidance on the
> core
> > team’s part. Still, the time was not wasted and important, honest
> > conversations were had. The working group members, as ever, devoted an
> > enormous amount of energy and care in the lead up to and during the
> event,
> > and demonstrated their deep understanding of the challenges and
> > opportunities in our movement. We are extremely grateful for all their
> > effort. In short, the harmonization sprint underlined the high level of
> > work and dedication every single working group member has put into
> getting
> > the movement strategy to its current point, and the passion to shape the
> > future of the diverse and inclusive movement we envision.
> >
> > We have valuable lessons to take from this event and incorporate into the
> > overall process and the next steps. We will share these with you all as
> > soon as possible. If you have questions in the meantime, please feel free
> > to reach out to me.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Nicole
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Harmonization_Sprint
> > [2]
> >
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_2030_Harmonization_Sprint
> > [3] https://twitter.com/search?q=%23hs2030
> > [4]
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> >
> >
> > --
> > Nicole Ebber
> > Adviser International Relations
> > Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> > Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> > https://wikimedia.de
> >
> > Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
> Menschheit
> > teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> > https://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.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Collaboration with Indonesian Air Force

2019-09-12 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear colleague,

Very interesting - I was not aware that armed forces can be a partner of
GLAM. We are curious to see the link to a Commons category.

Kind regards
Ziko van Dijk

main author of :
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesischer_Unabh%C3%A4ngigkeitskrieg



Am Do., 12. Sept. 2019 um 12:51 Uhr schrieb Biyanto Rebin <
biyanto.re...@wikimedia.or.id>:

> Dear all,
>
> We are happy to announce that Wikimedia Indonesia will collaborate with
> Indonesian Air Force to provide free access for their museum collection to
> wider audiences. We are starting to upload and provide the QR code to their
> collection.
>
> Thank Misdianto (User:NaidNdeso
> <https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pengguna:NaidNdeso>), our community member,
> who connect us with the IAF.
>
> Source:
> https://tni-au.mil.id/sajikan-informasi-digital-dispenau-gandeng-wikimedia/
> English version:
>
> https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=id=en=https%3A%2F%2Ftni-au.mil.id%2Fsajikan-informasi-digital-dispenau-gandeng-wikimedia%2F
>
> All the best from Indonesia.
>
> --
> Biyanto Rebin | Ketua Umum (*Chair*) 2016-2018
> Wikimedia Indonesia
> Surel: biyanto.re...@wikimedia.or.id
> -
> Dukung upaya kami membebaskan pengetahuan:
> https://wikimedia.or.id/sumbangan/
> <http://wikimedia.or.id/wiki/Wikimedia_Indonesia:Donasi>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please reconsider!

2019-08-24 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

the "Recommendations" are a problem because we are so late in the strategy
process. They are supposed to give the community a chance for community
input. If the quality of the "Recommendations" is so poor, then the chance
for the community to give substantial input is very limited.
In this unready state, the "Recommendations" or parts of them should not
have been published. It is not appropriate to ask the community to invest
time in reading texts that are not ready.
The experience is very frustrating.

Kind regards
Ziko



Am Do., 22. Aug. 2019 um 13:00 Uhr schrieb Nicole Ebber <
nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:

> Hi Ziko and all,
>
> Thanks for sharing your concerns and suggestions. I have posted a response
> to the other thread and hope to have addressed your questions there as
> well. Let me know if you need further clarification.
>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2019-August/093303.html
>
> Best wishes,
> Nicole
>
> On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 at 10:50, Aron Manning  wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 22:07, Jeff Hawke 
> wrote:
> >
> > > "Open community input will be accepted until September 15, after which
> > > working groups will refine and finalize their work using movement input
> > as
> > >
> >
> > I expect the drafts to be revised for new rounds of feedback within that
> > timeframe. In one week the community gathered information fundamental to
> > these drafts, but missing from the first iteration. In an agile
> environment
> > this can be incorporated into the drafts in a few days, and even in
> > wikipedian time 1-2 weeks could be enough to publish the next iteration,
> > and keep the conversation alive.
> > I hope after Wikimania the WG members will be able to dedicate time for
> > this, otherwise the tight timeline is not possible. Ideally the most
> > popular drafts would be updated weekly, or more often, answering some
> > feedback in each iteration, not necessarily all of it.
> >
> > Aron
> >
> >
> > ᐧ
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Adviser International Relations
> Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
> teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> https://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.
> ___
> 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] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please reconsider!

2019-08-16 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Let's put it this way: The "recommendations" have been presented as a kind
of "Beta". But the actual status looks more like "Alpha".
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Do., 15. Aug. 2019 um 20:03 Uhr schrieb Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>:

> I agree that a lot of review and comment is needed before some of these
> items can be considered ready for further development. The amount may
> differ, so why not use the Wikipedian method of allowing each
> recommendation to remain open for discussion as long as it is being
> actively discussed (and relevant questions remain unanswered - if questions
> are not answered  it may be necessary to close as no consensus, in which
> case probably best abandoned as a waste of time and effort).
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Paulo Santos Perneta
> Sent: 15 August 2019 13:10
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please
> reconsider!
>
> I subscribe Ziko's request to redefine the timeline of Strategy 2030, for
> the stated reasons. Not only it looks absurd, looking at the quality of the
> published materials, which are obviously not fit for a final discussion on
> this mater, but also because there's no rush to present results already in
> October.
> Rushing to present a final set of recommendations, without proper
> discussion, risks producing a faulty and immature document, facing a
> barrage of resistence from the part of the community when trying to
> implement the recommendations, and basically destroy more than 1 year of
> hard work from everyone involved (core team, WGs, liasion, and the part of
> the community who involved itself on the process).
>
> I endorse the request to the Strategy 2030 Core Team: Please review your
> schedule, and adjust your timetable, so to allow some reasonable time for
> that draft to be discussed and properly finished.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
> Ziko van Dijk  escreveu no dia quarta, 14/08/2019 à(s)
> 14:48:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Recently, the "draft recommendations" of the strategy working groups have
> > been published. As Nicole informed us, they are "key tools" for the
> future
> > of the movement. These documents are the result of one year of work of
> the
> > working groups.
> >
> > If I am not mistaken, the Wikimedia volunteers now have one month to give
> > feedback. In October, the process of refining and finalizing has to be
> > ready, and in November, the movement will have to start with implementing
> > the recommendations.
> >
> > Having seen now more of the documents, my conclusion can only be one: the
> > documents are simply not ready for this stage of the process. They are
> much
> > more unready than they should be for being put to the eyes of the
> Wikimeda
> > volunteers.
> >
> > There are documents in which there is only one question answered, by one
> > sentence. Other documents don't show that any research has been used to
> > back the statements. Many obvious arguments and links are missing. At
> least
> > at one occasion I read as an answer to an important question: "todo".
> >
> > The proposals often give the impression that they are not thought
> through.
> > There should be quotas for admins, but we see nowhere an explanation how
> > that would relate to the right to remain anonymous. There is the
> statement
> > that minorities sometimes can only express themselves with ND and NC
> > content, but the two links in the document hardly back that claim. After
> > years in which the Wikimedia organizations and other free and open
> content
> > organizations taught us that NC is problematic, now such a drastic
> change?
> >
> > And there is this already infamous sentence: Instead of being informed
> > about the possible negative impacts of NC and ND, we only read: "All
> change
> > has negative connotations to some members of the community."
> >
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9
> >
> > I find it stunning that there was nobody who went through the documents
> > before publication and said: we cannot publish this sentence, it is
> giving
> > a very bad impression about our attitude towards the community (= the
> very
> > same people we are asking to invest their time for giving feedback).
> >
> > This does not mean that all documents or all sections and recommendations
> > 

[Wikimedia-l] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please reconsider!

2019-08-14 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Recently, the "draft recommendations" of the strategy working groups have
been published. As Nicole informed us, they are "key tools" for the future
of the movement. These documents are the result of one year of work of the
working groups.

If I am not mistaken, the Wikimedia volunteers now have one month to give
feedback. In October, the process of refining and finalizing has to be
ready, and in November, the movement will have to start with implementing
the recommendations.

Having seen now more of the documents, my conclusion can only be one: the
documents are simply not ready for this stage of the process. They are much
more unready than they should be for being put to the eyes of the Wikimeda
volunteers.

There are documents in which there is only one question answered, by one
sentence. Other documents don't show that any research has been used to
back the statements. Many obvious arguments and links are missing. At least
at one occasion I read as an answer to an important question: "todo".

The proposals often give the impression that they are not thought through.
There should be quotas for admins, but we see nowhere an explanation how
that would relate to the right to remain anonymous. There is the statement
that minorities sometimes can only express themselves with ND and NC
content, but the two links in the document hardly back that claim. After
years in which the Wikimedia organizations and other free and open content
organizations taught us that NC is problematic, now such a drastic change?

And there is this already infamous sentence: Instead of being informed
about the possible negative impacts of NC and ND, we only read: "All change
has negative connotations to some members of the community."

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/9

I find it stunning that there was nobody who went through the documents
before publication and said: we cannot publish this sentence, it is giving
a very bad impression about our attitude towards the community (= the very
same people we are asking to invest their time for giving feedback).

This does not mean that all documents or all sections and recommendations
are unusable or damaging. I also cannot judge about the efforts invested,
as I have no insight in the inner workings. But it is very frustrating for
me to read the documents and often have to guess what they actually mean.
And it seems to me, given the comments on the user pages on Meta Wiki, on
this list, on de:WP:Kurier and on Facebook, that I am not the only one who
feels this frustration.

Therefore, I ask the people responsible: please reconsider the timeline. If
these documents are the result of one year work, then the documents will
not be ready within two and a half months. Consider several months for the
working groups to use the present feedback for a redraft, and then give the
Wikimedia volunteers at least the same amount of time for giving feedback
again.

Kind regards
Ziko
___
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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

2019-08-12 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Aron,

Am Mo., 12. Aug. 2019 um 22:34 Uhr schrieb Aron Manning <
aronmanni...@gmail.com>:

>
> Part of this would be the addition of NC and ND licenses. This doesn't mean
> that there will be less free content, but instead more material will be
> possible to be uploaded, from underrepresented communities. This would be a
> very welcome change.
>


The concern is that allowing NC and ND would lead to more content being
uploaded under these "unfree" conditions that otherwise would be uploaded
as "free". See the excellent brochure published by WMDE some years ago.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Free_Knowledge_thanks_to_Creative_Commons_Licenses.pdf



> The draft already refers to 2 articles (1
> ,2
> <
> https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c0043945-852b-4d7e-94ad-1859f91ba418
> >)
> that explain the need for ND. I'll ask for further sources that show the
> benefits of NC and ND licensed materials.
>
>
I fail to see how these two articles "explain the need for ND". The -
interesting - article about the daguerrotypes relates to images that are
long in the Public Domain.

Kind regards
Ziko





> Aron
>
>
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 11:25, Fæ  wrote:
>
> > The justifications for the change read as unsourced and arbitrary. In
> > particular there is no evidence that using Commons to host NC ND
> > material that may be important to minority communities, such as
> > traditional folk art, would help better to educate the public about
> > those arts when the same NC restriction would halt in its
> > tracks the general use of Commons by educators and universities. The
> > change in commons policies would have the consequence of advice to
> > educators being against using our media in lectures, study materials,
> > academic papers, academic books etc.
> >
> > The Meta page that is linked to verges on being blatantly hostile to
> > the views of the Wikimedia Commons communities
> > * Q4a. Could this Recommendation have a negative impact/change?
> > * (Answer) All change has negative connotations to some members of the
> > community.
> > This appears deliberately flippant and provocative. Bizarre.
> >
> >
>
> ᐧ
> ___
> 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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

2019-08-12 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Am Mo., 12. Aug. 2019 um 17:51 Uhr schrieb Nicole Ebber <
nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:

> Dear all,.



> As such, constructive
> feedback and solution-oriented suggestions are welcomed.


Hello Nicole,
For example, if I say that I am against NC and ND content on Commons, would
such a feedback be welcome? Or would it be dismissed as not "constructive"
and not "solution-oriented"?
Maybe you can explain to me what the actual problem is that is supposed to
be solved by ND and NC content?
Kind regards
Ziko





> > specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the underlying
> > facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on
> > Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse
> > without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work
> under
> > an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place
> for
> > it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But even
> > then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter what
> > one does.
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky <
> philip.kopet...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
> > You're
> > > the only one telling people to shut up here.
> > >
> > > And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> > incorporate
> > > indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the current
> > > licensing scheme?
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Adviser International Relations
> Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
> teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> https://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.
> ___
> 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] NC and ND content (was: Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations...)

2019-08-12 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

There was once a report in which I read: Wikimedia Commons should allow NC
and ND content because that is somehow good for "communities that are
historically prohibited from telling their stories".
Then I asked on the talk page for the reasoning behind this
demand/postulation.
The answer I got was not very substantial.
I am very open to discuss the pros and cons of e.g. opening Wikimedia
Commons to NC or ND. But sorry, I find it very difficult to have a
meaningful conversation on this basis.

Kind regards
Ziko


https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Reports/March-April_Community_Conversations_Monthly_Report


Am Fr., 9. Aug. 2019 um 20:37 Uhr schrieb Nicole Ebber <
nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:

> Dear fellow Wikimedians,
>
> They’re here! [1] We are delighted to announce the first round of
> draft recommendations for structural change within our movement have
> been published. The recommendations have been developed by the nine
> Wikimedia 2030 working groups and are a key tool to help us build the
> future of our movement.
>
> Working group members have been working tirelessly for a year to
> research the movement, analyze community input shared via community
> conversations, and gain insight into external trends. A huge thank you
> to each and every member for helping us reach this key milestone.
>
> The draft recommendations are a first look at ways we can adapt our
> movement’s structures to help us advance in our strategic direction.
> They are the starting point for conversations about what kind of
> future we want to create together.
>
> The recommendations are not final. In order to get them to that stage,
> your input is needed! We would like to hear from you all what these
> changes would mean for you in your local or thematic context, what do
> you like about them, and where you potentially see any red flags. And
> of course, always critically question whether these recommendations
> support the strategic direction.
>
> There are a few ways to do this:
> * Read through the recommendations online and provide your input
> directly on Meta. [2]
> * If you will be at Wikimania, join us in the Wikimedia 2030 space. [3]
> * Attend a Strategy Salon hosted by an affiliate where you live. [4]
> * Reach out to a Strategy Liaison in your language to share feedback,
> or lead a conversation of your own. [5]
>
> Over the next month, working groups will take the input they receive
> into the recommendations, alongside external advice and research, and
> use it to refine and finalize them. Share your views, and help shape
> what Wikimedia will look like in 2030 and beyond.
>
> If you have any questions or feedback, please feel free to get in touch.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Nicole
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> [3] https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2019:Wikimedia_2030
> [4]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/2019_Community_Conversations/Strategy_Salons
> [5]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/People/Community_Strategy_Liaisons
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Adviser International Relations
> Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
> Menschheit teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns
> dabei! https://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.
>
> ___
> 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] Introducing Wikimedia Space: A space for movement news and conversations

2019-06-26 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Frankly, I am surprised by the announcement, too. Maybe I do not spend
enough time on wikis and mailinglists? :/

In general I am very curious for this new platform. I find it quite ...
telling or a bad signal that many wikipedians started to prefer discussing
wiki topics on Facebook (1) rather than on the village pumps. Including me.
One of the reasons is the toxic atmosphere on many wiki pages, while the
Facebook groups are moderated.

Kind regards
Ziko






Am Mi., 26. Juni 2019 um 09:19 Uhr schrieb geni :

> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 22:19, Yair Rand  wrote:
> >
> > I'm getting so many red flags.
> >
> > Established by WMF via secret (non-transparent) process, with no
> community
> > involvement? Non-wiki environment, with the same scope as existing wikis?
> > WMF-decided conduct policies? Every single moderator is a WMF employee?
> > Forum using closed groups, with non-transparent communication?
> > (Closed-source software, unless I'm mistaken?) So far outside Wikimedia
> > spaces that the only place it was even _announced_ was an off-wiki
> mailing
> > list?
> >
> > Is there something the Wikimedia Foundation would like to tell us?
> >
> > -- Yair Rand
> >
>
>
> While I agree that a good tracking mount, a reasonable telescope and
> some CCDs would be a better use of the money (there are some
> satellites I want pics of) I don't see anything particular nefarious
> here. Improving communications is a long term goal and shifting away
> from mediawiki appears on the face of it a good way to do that (we are
> after all on a mailing list at the moment. In practice experience
> suggests that most people are too busy doing what they are already
> doing to get involved in such projects and that mediawiki is so
> central to what we are do that most people are pretty comfortable with
> it.
>
>
> So this falls well within the WMF’s nominal goals and is a fairly
> understandable approach. I still think we would be better off spending
> the money on the kit needed to get a pic of Kosmos 482.
>
>
>
> --
> geni
>
> ___
> 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] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
It seems to me the best that a (different) member of the WMBE board
contacts a suitable person at WMF. A public list is not the best place
for sorting these things out.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Mo., 17. Juni 2019 um 16:48 Uhr schrieb Dariusz Jemielniak
:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:26 PM Michel Vuijlsteke 
> mailto:wikipe...@zog.org>> wrote:
> In other words, the best way to ban anyone from any event is to start a
> rumour about them?
>
> My understanding is that noone was banned from an event.
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:28 PM Paulo Santos Perneta 
> mailto:paulospern...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> I've read and reread the WMBE message, and have not found anything near 
> "pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward".
>
> I'm referring to message from Caroline.
>
>
> I also do not understand why you're addressing WMBE as "Romaine" (begging the 
> question?).
>
> Can you please clarify?
>
> The message was sent from 
> romaine.w...@gmail.com account and I assumed 
> that addressing the sender as "Romaine" is appropriate.
>
> best,
>
> dj
> ___
> 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] Invitation to the May 2019 Wikimedia Monthly Activities Meeting: Thursday, May 30th, 18:00 UTC

2019-05-30 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
Thanks for the information. The Meeting is indeed usually a very
interesting broadbast, and I am looking forward to e.g. hearing about the
Data project on Commons.
By the way, do you actually read the comments in Youtube?
Kind regards
Ziko

Sasha Redkina  schrieb am Do. 30. Mai 2019 um 19:38:

> Hello everyone,
>
> This meeting will start in approximately 20 minutes.
>
> Sasha Redkina
> Front Office Coordinator
> *The Wikimedia Foundation*
> www.wikimediafoundation.org
>
>
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 5:44 PM Sasha Redkina <
> activitiesmeet...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone,
> > The next Wikimedia Monthly Activities meeting will take place on
> Thursday,
> > May 30th, 2019 at 18:00  UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC channel is
> > #wikimedia-office on https://webchat.freenode.net, and the meeting will
> > be broadcast as a live YouTube stream:
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxCFzA3PEaQ
> > 
> > We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting.
> >
> > Agenda
> > Facilitator: Samantha Lien, Wikimedia Foundation Communications Manager
> >
> >
> >- Welcome and introduction to agenda - 2 minutes
> >- Movement update - 3 minutes
> >- Structured Data on Commons: the first GLAM pilot projects! - 10
> >minutes
> >- The Wikidata Infobox on Commons - 10 minutes
> >- Wikimedia 2030 status update and opportunities to participate - 15
> >minutes
> >- Questions and discussion - 10 minutes
> >- Wikilove - 5 minutes
> >
> > Please review the meeting's Meta-Wiki page for further information about
> > the meeting and how to participate:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_monthly_activities_meetings
> >
> > The June 2019 monthly activities meeting will take place on Thursday,
> June
> > 27, starting at 18:00 UTC (11:00 Pacific Daylight Time). To sign up to
> > participate, please visit:
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_monthly_activities_meetings/Sign_up
> >
> > Thank you!
> >
> ___
> 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] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

2019-04-27 Thread Ziko van Dijk
That is an excellent point, Jennifer! This problem makes collaboration
on Commons even more difficult or unlikely.
The photographer sometimes has an unique access to the part of the
world he described with a picture. Often on Commons we simply ask the
photographer: 'where did you take the picture', or 'what is the
context' etc., because we cannot see that from the picture itself or
we cannot look it up by ourselves.
I think with wiki journalism it is quite similar.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Sa., 27. Apr. 2019 um 13:15 Uhr schrieb Jennifer Pryor-Summers
:
>
> Yaroslav
>
> I think you have identified an important point -- I hestitate to call it a
> problem -- about Commons.  We are dependent on the authority of the
> uploader of an image, say, to say what it is an image of.  If they say it
> is a certain locality, or object, we have to take their word for it (or
> not, of course).  That doesn't fit too well with the requirement on other
> projects for citation of reliable independent sources.
>
> Jennifer
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:34 AM Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
>
> > Hi Ziko,
> >
> > you could then argue that Commons is also not a collaborative project -
> > only one person takes a picture (determines the story, the position, light
> > etc), and others can at best perform some editing or add/remove categories.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Yaroslav
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:29 AM Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Philippe,
> > >
> > > Thank you for your points to which I generally can agree. Because this
> > > is an important matter to my, allow me to explain what I exactly mean.
> > >
> > > Of course, there are several tasks or layers where people can (and do)
> > > collaborate when working on journalistic content. But there is an
> > > aspect where the collaboration cannot be a collaboration of equals
> > > (which is necessary for the definition of what a wiki is).
> > >
> > > Imagine that reporter-editor P. has witnessed a speech of the mayor
> > > and reports about it, calling it e.g. "enthusiast".
> > > Stay-at-home-editor Z. reads this report and changes the word to
> > > "euphoric". P. then protests and changes it back, claiming that he has
> > > been there and knows better. So P. and Z. didn't have the same access
> > > to the world that has to be described.
> > >
> > > That would be different in the case that P. and Z. only work on
> > > material such as press releases and content from news agencies. I
> > > believe that Andrew meant this kind of work when he wrote that we
> > > don't need (another) website offering this.
> > >
> > > Another example for content unsuitable for
> > > wiki-collaboration-among-equals is an autobiography. An autobiography
> > > by definition is a personal account of what someone has experienced in
> > > her life. No other person has the same world access. Other people in a
> > > wiki can check the text for inconsistencies, orthography, structure
> > > etc. (Great.) But the person of the autobiography has always a veto
> > > right - otherwise, it wouldn't be an autobiography.
> > >
> > > An interesting question is whether fiction is suitable for
> > > collaboration (and what kind of collaboration), but that would go to
> > > far here.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Ziko
> > >
> > > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 18:26 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > > :
> > > >
> > > > Respectfully Disagree. They can formulate questions, coordinate and
> > fact
> > > > check answers... and that’s off the top of my head.
> > > >
> > > > That said I think wikinews is fundamentally not one is our success
> > > stories,
> > > > but I don’t agree with what my friend Ziko said there. There are many
> > > roles
> > > > for community there.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ziko van Dijk 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
> > > > > suitable for collaboration.
> > > > >
> > > > > Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
> > > > > the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
> > > > > on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
> > > > > l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

2019-04-27 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Yes indeed, Wikimedia Commons sees not much of collaboration in that sense.
The collaboration on Commons is of an insular kind: people don't
(much) edit other people's work, but they together contribute to the
whole wiki.
Different is collaboration where several people edit the same content
and have sometimes to discuss about choices.  But on Commons, there is
no need for that. It does not have a macrostructure in which every
item (hypertext node, article) has to be unique. In Commons, if you
see a picture of the Notre Dame cathedral and you don't like it, you
simply upload your own. Different to Wikipedia: if you see the article
"Elephant", and you don't like it, you cannot simply create a new one.

The problem is that we use the word "collaboration" often without
distinction for several kinds of collaboration.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Sa., 27. Apr. 2019 um 12:34 Uhr schrieb Yaroslav Blanter :
>
> Hi Ziko,
>
> you could then argue that Commons is also not a collaborative project -
> only one person takes a picture (determines the story, the position, light
> etc), and others can at best perform some editing or add/remove categories.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:29 AM Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
>
> > Hello Philippe,
> >
> > Thank you for your points to which I generally can agree. Because this
> > is an important matter to my, allow me to explain what I exactly mean.
> >
> > Of course, there are several tasks or layers where people can (and do)
> > collaborate when working on journalistic content. But there is an
> > aspect where the collaboration cannot be a collaboration of equals
> > (which is necessary for the definition of what a wiki is).
> >
> > Imagine that reporter-editor P. has witnessed a speech of the mayor
> > and reports about it, calling it e.g. "enthusiast".
> > Stay-at-home-editor Z. reads this report and changes the word to
> > "euphoric". P. then protests and changes it back, claiming that he has
> > been there and knows better. So P. and Z. didn't have the same access
> > to the world that has to be described.
> >
> > That would be different in the case that P. and Z. only work on
> > material such as press releases and content from news agencies. I
> > believe that Andrew meant this kind of work when he wrote that we
> > don't need (another) website offering this.
> >
> > Another example for content unsuitable for
> > wiki-collaboration-among-equals is an autobiography. An autobiography
> > by definition is a personal account of what someone has experienced in
> > her life. No other person has the same world access. Other people in a
> > wiki can check the text for inconsistencies, orthography, structure
> > etc. (Great.) But the person of the autobiography has always a veto
> > right - otherwise, it wouldn't be an autobiography.
> >
> > An interesting question is whether fiction is suitable for
> > collaboration (and what kind of collaboration), but that would go to
> > far here.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 18:26 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > :
> > >
> > > Respectfully Disagree. They can formulate questions, coordinate and fact
> > > check answers... and that’s off the top of my head.
> > >
> > > That said I think wikinews is fundamentally not one is our success
> > stories,
> > > but I don’t agree with what my friend Ziko said there. There are many
> > roles
> > > for community there.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ziko van Dijk 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
> > > > suitable for collaboration.
> > > >
> > > > Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
> > > > the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
> > > > on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
> > > > library.
> > > >
> > > > When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
> > > > is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
> > > > the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
> > > > little more.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards
> > > > Ziko
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > > > :
> > > &g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

2019-04-27 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Philippe,

Thank you for your points to which I generally can agree. Because this
is an important matter to my, allow me to explain what I exactly mean.

Of course, there are several tasks or layers where people can (and do)
collaborate when working on journalistic content. But there is an
aspect where the collaboration cannot be a collaboration of equals
(which is necessary for the definition of what a wiki is).

Imagine that reporter-editor P. has witnessed a speech of the mayor
and reports about it, calling it e.g. "enthusiast".
Stay-at-home-editor Z. reads this report and changes the word to
"euphoric". P. then protests and changes it back, claiming that he has
been there and knows better. So P. and Z. didn't have the same access
to the world that has to be described.

That would be different in the case that P. and Z. only work on
material such as press releases and content from news agencies. I
believe that Andrew meant this kind of work when he wrote that we
don't need (another) website offering this.

Another example for content unsuitable for
wiki-collaboration-among-equals is an autobiography. An autobiography
by definition is a personal account of what someone has experienced in
her life. No other person has the same world access. Other people in a
wiki can check the text for inconsistencies, orthography, structure
etc. (Great.) But the person of the autobiography has always a veto
right - otherwise, it wouldn't be an autobiography.

An interesting question is whether fiction is suitable for
collaboration (and what kind of collaboration), but that would go to
far here.

Kind regards
Ziko

Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 18:26 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
:
>
> Respectfully Disagree. They can formulate questions, coordinate and fact
> check answers... and that’s off the top of my head.
>
> That said I think wikinews is fundamentally not one is our success stories,
> but I don’t agree with what my friend Ziko said there. There are many roles
> for community there.
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 9:15 AM Ziko van Dijk  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
> > suitable for collaboration.
> >
> > Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
> > the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
> > on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
> > library.
> >
> > When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
> > is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
> > the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
> > little more.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> >
> >
> > Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
> > :
> > >
> > > The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:
> > >
> > > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> > > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct
> > > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> > >
> > > Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has always done
> > > very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite functional, use
> > > for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be a fine
> > > addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to think that
> > > given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to fill
> > > that spot.
> > >
> > > But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it isn't.
> > >
> > > Philippe
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih  wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies
> > > > that
> > > > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH)
> > are a
> > > > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand,
> > Wikipedia
> > > > is
> > > > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent to
> > me.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than
> > primary
> > > > source news g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

2019-04-26 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

One of the central problems of Wikinews is that the content is not
suitable for collaboration.

Content suitable for collaboration is related to a reality to which
the collaborators equally have access. Think if an encyclopedia based
on scholarly literature that (potentially) everybody can find in a
library.

When a journalist has spoken to her 'sources' (relevant people), she
is the one who had a special access to theses sources. The editors in
the wiki did not have this access. They can correct typos but do
little more.

Kind regards
Ziko



Am Fr., 26. Apr. 2019 um 00:43 Uhr schrieb Philippe Beaudette
:
>
> The very smart Mr. Lih sayeth:
>
> I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct
> news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
>
> [1]
> https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
>
> Me too.  In fact, I think this is something that Wikinews has always done
> very well.  It also strikes me as an excellent, and quite functional, use
> for a Wiki.  A wikivoices or wiki-interviews type project would be a fine
> addition to the ecosystem, imho.  And it is very reasonable to think that
> given its success in this area, Wikinews could very easily pivot to fill
> that spot.
>
> But a news competitor to traditional news outlets?  Nope, that it isn't.
>
> Philippe
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:05 PM Andrew Lih  wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies
> > that
> > > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH) are a
> > > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand, Wikipedia
> > is
> > > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent to me.
> >
> >
> > As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than primary
> > source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies primarily.
> >
> > I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
> > notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct
> > news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.
> >
> > [1]
> > https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel
> >
> >
> > > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way forward is
> > to
> > > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> >
> >
> > Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public. Wikipedia
> > editors are already doing a stellar job.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih  wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > > jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language) Wikipedia
> > > > seems
> > > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent with
> > its
> > > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF
> > should
> > > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jennifer,
> > > >
> > > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and the vast
> > > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that Wikinews
> > > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> > properties.
> > > >
> > > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the truth
> > > given
> > > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing direct
> > > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies that
> > > make
> > > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> > > >
> > > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > > >
> > > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this mismatch
> > > and
> > > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > > >
> > > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should
> > > celebrate
> > > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve minute
> > to
> > > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as we
> > know
> > > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of reality –
> > the
> > > > Wikipedia article.
> > > >
> > > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins of
> > > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > > [2]
> > > >
> > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > > >
> > > > -Andrew
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

2019-04-16 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
Some years ago, some volunteers have proposed a new Wikimedia wiki. It did
not turn out as expected. That‘s okay, the movement should try out thing
from time to time.
But this wiki should not be seen as an eternal obligation to be kept.
Kind regards
Ziko



Samuel Klein  schrieb am Di. 16. Apr. 2019 um 23:56:

> Jennifer -- as you say, there is a contradiction here in the self-image and
> internal narrative of the projects and movement.  A classic branding issue
> ;)
> * On the one hand, we lack clear, consistent language to talk about topical
> subprojects (what do you call 'the Current Events specialists on the major
> language Wikpiedias'?  some obvious names have already been taken)
> * On the other, for the few Names that we assign to Projects, we
> overspecify what they mean ('Wikinews is original news reporting or
> synthesis, done on a wikinews.org site').
>
> We propagate this confusion of identity to those outside the projects
> trying to understand them; which in turn leads to misunderstanding in the
> world at large, and fewer potential collaborators joining the projects:
>  I was recently at a gathering of international fact-checkers.   They
> all prized Wikipedia as a model for what rapid collective editing can
> accomplish; assumed wikinews and wikitribune were the best efforts to date
> of applying that to current events; and began an enthusiastic discussion
> about how to do it better.  When I pointed out that Wikipedias did exactly
> what they were discussing, for the most popular news, this was startling
> and satisfying to them.  However as there is no central cafe or village
> pump for current events editors, and what portals do exist are impossible
> to find for all but the most persistent, it is not obvious how to engage
> with them...
>
> This is a challenge of naming + identity that really holds us back: ways
> for people to form groups, projects, message streams; and channel,
> advertise, amplify, polish them; use them for flash projects and
> coalescence, for awareness and thanks.  We have tried many small steps in
> this direction but have never made groups or hashtags work as simple,
> functional tools of alignment.
>
> SJ
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Andrew
> >
> > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies
> that
> > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH) are a
> > poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand, Wikipedia
> is
> > a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent to me.
> > However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way forward is
> to
> > fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?
> >
> > JPS
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih  wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language) Wikipedia
> > > seems
> > > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent with
> its
> > > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF
> should
> > > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Jennifer,
> > >
> > > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and the vast
> > > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that Wikinews
> > > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental
> properties.
> > >
> > > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the truth
> > given
> > > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing direct
> > > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies that
> > make
> > > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> > >
> > > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> > >
> > > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this mismatch
> > and
> > > realize it is a poor fit.
> > >
> > > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should
> > celebrate
> > > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve minute
> to
> > > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as we
> know
> > > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of reality –
> the
> > > Wikipedia article.
> > >
> > > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins of
> > > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > > [2]
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> > >
> > > -Andrew
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

[Wikimedia-l] "The Director of the Wikipedia Community"?

2019-04-15 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Allow me some notes on the rebranding of the Wikimedia movement. It
seems that the issue becomes larger and larger, as we receive signals
that the challenge is not only to use the brands differently or invent
new brands, but also to reform the movement and its organizations (?).

Also, the "Strategic Direction" hints that the term "community" will
be used for more than for the editing community(-ies) of today. That
everything and everybody will be "community" in future ("and beyond").

This makes the "rebranding" more and more complicated. And it seems -
I like to be corrected - that in external relations both "Wikipedia"
and "community" will be much more in use. So does that mean that, in
future, the director of the Wikimedia Foundation will become the
"director of the Wikipedia community" in external relations?

In general, I understand that the only well-known brand of the
Wikimedia movement is "Wikipedia" and that we should make good use of
it. I just wonder about the consequences for the movement, and how to
indicate relatedness and otherness between the different entities and
wikis.

Kind regards
Ziko

___
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 BIG congratulations to the WikiVoyage community.

2019-04-14 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear James,

I join the congratulations and remind the audience that it was you who
played an important role to bring wikivoyage into the wikimedia
family. Congratulations!

Kind regards
Ziko

Am So., 14. Apr. 2019 um 19:45 Uhr schrieb James Heilman :
>
> Back in 2013 the WikiVoyage community joined the Wikimedia Movement after
> leaving their prior hoster and site behind.
>
> Per Alexa WikiVoyage this month passed in popularity the website they left.
> WikiVoyage is now the 14,793 most popular website in the world as opposed
> to WikiTravel at 15,821.
>
> A BIG congratulations to the WikiVoyage community :-)
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
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] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals

2019-04-10 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Thank you for taking the time to explain, Chris. Actually we need some
kind of good terms to replace some older terms, but the challenge is
that they have to fit the current situation - or, as I understand you,
to introduce a change of the current situation.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Di., 9. Apr. 2019 um 18:40 Uhr schrieb Chris Keating
:
>
> > At the occasion, we should also reconsider the expressions "chapter"
> > and "user group".
> > "Chapter" is more suitable for local divisions of a national
> > association. And "user group" sounds just like some group. We also
> > already have "user group" as a technical term in MediaWiki.
> >
>
> You may be aware that the movement strategy process is thinking about this
> issue, albeit at a broader level :)
>
> For instance one of the questions the Roles and Responsibilities group is
> looking at is "What governance and organizational structures do we need to
> support the delivery of the strategic direction?"(1)
>
> You will notice that there is no mention of chapters, user groups or indeed
> the WMF in this question. That's because there is no presumption that any
> of those bodies (or types of bodies) will continue to exist in their
> current form - the changes from the strategy process may well be much more
> profound than finessing the names of categories of entity that currently
> exist.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> (1)
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/2019_Community_Conversations/Roles_%26_Responsibilities#Scoping_questions
> ___
> 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] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals

2019-04-09 Thread Ziko van Dijk
At the occasion, we should also reconsider the expressions "chapter"
and "user group".
"Chapter" is more suitable for local divisions of a national
association. And "user group" sounds just like some group. We also
already have "user group" as a technical term in MediaWiki.
Kind regards
Ziko


Am Di., 9. Apr. 2019 um 18:17 Uhr schrieb Joseph Seddon :
>
> From what I know:
> * The global brand won't stop Wikidata being Wikidata.
> * Wikimedia Russia won't necessarily become Wikipedia Russia
>
> Seddon
>
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 4:56 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
> galder...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Think of Wikipedia Russia convincing Russian government that they are not
> > really Wikipedia Russia.
> > 
> > From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf of
> > Benjamin Ikuta 
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2019 4:21 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals
> >
> >
> >
> > What real life problems would there be?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Apr 9, 2019, at 6:11 AM, Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
> > galder...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The idea of rebranding Wikimedia to Wikipedia will create FAR more
> > problems than it solves, specially in places where identifying ourselves
> > with Wikipedia could create real life problems to affiliates. Let's think
> > on making our product better, because is not a brand problem, is an
> > obsolescence problem what we have.
> > > 
> > > From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf
> > of Gerard Meijssen 
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2019 12:36 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals
> > >
> > > Hoi,
> > > The problem is that Wikipedia has an article bound interest. Our aim is
> > to
> > > share in the sum of all knowledge and it is about subjects. In addition
> > to
> > > this the approach and `the lessons learned` in effect are used as a
> > > template on how `other` Wikipedias are to function. This bias hinder,
> > even
> > > prevent other possible approaches.
> > >
> > > Using Wikipedia to define what Wikimedia does, enforces existing bias and
> > > hinders our mission.
> > > Thanks,
> > > GerardM
> > >
> > > On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 at 11:25, James Salsman  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Elena,
> > >>
> > >> If by "branding project" you mean replacing references to Wikimedia
> > >> with Wikipedia, that is fine with me.
> > >>
> > >> Best regards,
> > >> Jim
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 1:58 AM Elena Lappen 
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi all,
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks to those of you who have participated in the branding project
> > >>> community consultation so far. We’ve received a lot of helpful feedback
> > >> via
> > >>> email, on-wiki, and in small meetings with affiliate group members and
> > >>> individual contributors.
> > >>>
> > >>> I posted this invitation to the project talk page last week [1], but
> > >> wanted
> > >>> to send a reminder here that we will be hosting a video conference
> > >> session
> > >>> to give people a chance to see the presentation, ask questions and
> > >> provide
> > >>> feedback.
> > >>>
> > >>> When? This Thursday, April 11th from 16:00-17:00 UTC.
> > >>>
> > >>> Where? https://bluejeans.com/540134391/browser, or call in using your
> > >>> closest local number [2] and enter meeting ID 540 134 391#.
> > >>>
> > >>> If you’d like to see the presentation but cannot attend, that is no
> > >>> problem—we will be posting a recording to Commons and putting the link
> > on
> > >>> the talk page afterwards.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>>
> > >>> Elena
> > >>>
> > >>> [1]
> > >>>
> > >>
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_research_and_planning/community_review#Invitation_to_join_a_video_conference_presentation
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> [2] https://www.bluejeans.com/premium-numbers
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Elena Lappen
> > >>> Community Relations Specialist
> > >>> Wikimedia Foundation
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 7:14 PM Zack McCune 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> >  :: Apologies for cross-posting to multiple mailing lists. We want to
> > >> ensure
> >  we spread the word about this opportunity to as many people as
> > >> possible. ::
> > 
> >  Hi all,
> > 
> >  We are writing today to invite you to be a part of a community review
> > >> on
> >  Wikimedia brand research and strategy.
> > 
> >  Recently, the Wikimedia Foundation set out to better understand how
> > the
> >  world sees Wikimedia and Wikimedia projects as brands.[1] We wanted to
> > >> get
> >  a sense of the general visibility of our different projects, and
> > >> evaluate
> >  public support of our mission to spread free knowledge.
> > 
> >  We launched a global brand study to research these questions, as part
> > >> of
> >  our planning toward our 2030 strategic 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikidata now officially has more total edits than English language Wikipedia

2019-03-20 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Ariel Glenn,
Thanks for the notification, very interesting. Well, we all know that
making a lot of edits on Wikidata is "easier" or happens quicker than on
Wikipedia, for various reasons. But still it is a nice milestone to
congratulate to Wikidata. Hereby. :-)
Kind regards
Ziko


Am Mi., 20. März 2019 um 07:58 Uhr schrieb Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>:

> Hoi,
> So in stead of calling us all Wikipedia, let us be known as Wikidata...
> HU
> Thanks,
>   GerardM
>
> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 at 07:48, Ariel Glenn WMF  wrote:
>
> > Wikidata surpassed the English language Wikipedia in the number of
> > revisions in the database, about 45 minutes ago today.I was tipped off
> by a
> > tweet [1] a few day ago and have been watching via a script that displays
> > the largest revision id and its timestamp. Here's the point where
> Wikidata
> > overtakes English Wikipedia (times in UTC):
> >
> > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./get_revid_info.py -d
> > www.wikidata.org -r 888603998,888603999,888604000
> > revid 888603998 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > revid 888603999 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > revid 888604000 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./get_revid_info.py -d
> > en.wikipedia.org -r 888603998,888603999,888604000
> > revid 888603998 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > revid 888603999 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > revid 888604000 at 2019-03-20T06:01:00Z
> >
> > Only 45 minutes later, the gap is already over 2000 revsions:
> >
> > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./compare_sizes.py
> > Last enwiki revid is 888606979 and last wikidata revid is 888629401
> > 2019-03-20 06:46:03: diff is 22422
> >
> > Have a nice day!
> >
> > Ariel
> >
> > [1] https://twitter.com/MonsieurAZ/status/1106565116508729345
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Inisghts from a meeting with NGO representatives

2019-02-18 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello, maybe there is a suitable place on Meta Wiki to conserve this? Later
it will be a little bit difficult to find it again on a mailinglist.
I myself find this point of view of "outsiders" very interesting and worth
to notice e.g. in strategic discussions.
Kind regards
Ziko

Am Mo., 18. Feb. 2019 um 11:41 Uhr schrieb David Cuenca Tudela <
dacu...@gmail.com>:

> Hi Bodhisattwa,
>
>
> *Governance recommendation *
> I assisted to a session on sociocracy organized by the Transition Network
> that basically blew my mind. The speaker explained how for her it has been
> always difficult to participate in decision-making because she feels that
> she is a very vocal person, and she felt that with democracy it was mostly
> about taking sides and wining or losing, which was quite disappointing for
> her. Then she started to explain the sociocratic principles of decision by
> consent, and what does that mean.
>
> What is interesting about sociocracy itself, is not the process or the
> method, but how it challenges the participants to truly understand the
> meaning of a decision, and their own relationship with it. Objections are
> seen as a gift that will help improve the proposal, once they have been
> properly understood. Normally it takes effort from the participants to
> address their own personal issues as well, because they have an impact on
> how the group can operate.
>
> Trust can be built during in person sessions, and it is necessary for the
> group to operate smoothly. Sociocracy is not for people who like to
> accumulate power, or are not able to share power with others, and that can
> drive people away. On the other hand, those who stay feel more included and
> supported by the organisation. There is also an element of celebration,
> which sometimes we forget. Taking decisions is hard work, and we should
> celebrate when we reach one.
>
> Sociocracy it is easy to grasp, but difficult to master. The members of the
> Transition Network had to undergo a training during a long time at the
> Université de Nous, to become proficient in this method. There is also a
> software that assists self-organization: https://www.holaspirit.com/
>
> Regards,
> Micru
>
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 8:45 AM Bodhisattwa Mandal <
> bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Micru,
> >
> > I am interested about your thoughts about governance recommendation for
> the
> > movement and community model of affiliates.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bodhisattwa
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 18 Feb 2019, 12:14 Фархад Фаткуллин / Farkhad Fatkullin <
> > f...@yandex.com wrote:
> >
> > > Micru,
> > > I would be interested to learn about "External perception of the
> > > movement".part of your insights.
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > from Russia with love,
> > > farhad
> > > https://ru.wikimedia.org/wiki/Smart_region
> > >
> > > --
> > > Farhad Fatkullin - Фархад Фаткуллин http://sikzn.ru/ Тел.+79274158066
> /
> > > skype:frhdkazan / Wikipedia:frhdkazan / WMRU:
> > >
> > >
> > > 18.02.2019, 02:35, "David Cuenca Tudela" :
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Last Friday I participated in a workshop in Brussels where people
> from
> > > > different NGOs met to learn from each other to foster flat,
> > > > democratic, and diverse organisations. I was one of four speakers in
> a
> > > > "world cafe" format (basically a circle where participants can
> > > > interact with the speaker). I represented the Wikimedia movement in
> > > > general, with the intention that participants would learn from our
> > > > movement, and so that I would learn from them. There were also Open
> > > > Space sessions.
> > > >
> > > > If there is interest, I can share with you my insights on any of
> these
> > > topics:
> > > > - External perception of the movement
> > > > - Recommendations to the WMF
> > > > - Governance recommendations for the movement
> > > > - Community model for affiliates
> > > > - How to increase diversity
> > > >
> > > > There is a lot to say about each topic, so please ask only about the
> > > > topic you have genuine interest in. If there is no interest, I'm ok
> > > > keeping it to myself.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Micru
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > 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] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

2017-11-14 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
I like it too, actually better than the earlier one. Looks good on the
tablet; can be clicked away (the X seems to be a little fable).
Kind regards,
Ziko


Peter Southwood  schrieb am Mi. 15. Nov. 2017
um 08:16:

> The sidebar version is less offensive than the top banner on my widescreen
> desktop. The message and text sizing is also better in the sidebar version
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Samuel Patton
> Sent: Wednesday, 15 November 2017 12:13 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short
> test
>
> Hi all, it's Sam from the online fundraising team. I wanted to give you a
> heads up about a desktop banner we'd like to test before the official
> launch of our 'Big English' fundraising banner campaign on Tuesday,
> November 28.
>
> TL;DR: A short test of a new banner concept will help us decide if it's
> worth iteration and improvement.
>
> Here's a link to the banner:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple?banner=dsk_p1_lg_right10=US=1
>
> This banner would run against our current best desktop large banner;
> here's that link:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple?banner=B1718_1101_en6C_dsk_p1_lg_template=1=US
>
> Undoubtedly, it's an unusual format; that's why we felt it appropriate to
> give you a heads up :) We haven't tried a vertical 'banner on the side' in
> recent memory, and it'll be useful to see exactly how this type of content
> performs.
>
> This test would run for 1 to 2 hours, and then we'd evaluate results to
> see if it's worth spending any more time on the concept. For now, we're
> simply hiding the banner all together below 920px, as at smaller viewports
> it begins to interfere with site navigation elements.
>
> If you have thoughts on this design, please share them here. There will be
> more opportunities for you to weigh in if this banner variant looks
> promising enough to keep testing.
>
> Regards and sincere thanks for all you do.
>
> 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.
> http://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,
> 
___
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] October 12: Strategy update - Movement direction now posted for your endorsement consideration (#26)

2017-10-21 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Sandra,

Thank you for your mail. For me, this is not specifically about Guillaume.
I referred to him as he has answered to me about "oral traditions",
supporting them.

I know that the way to this text was a long one; I have read papers on this
way and was appalled. Now I find it difficult not to believe that this is a
slippery slope.

Kind regards,
Ziko






2017-10-21 18:14 GMT+02:00 Sandra Rientjes - Wikimedia Nederland <
rient...@wikimedia.nl>:

> Hi Ziko,
>
> Just a quick reaction to the last sentence of your message where you
> express your concern about oral traditions as a source and say 'Guillaume
> emphasized that he still wants to go this way.'
>
> To some, this could give the impression that Guillaume is responsible for
> what went in the text and what did not.  As Katherine mentioned in her
> message, drafting the strategic direction was a group process. (FYI, I was
> part of that group)  Guillaume had the unenviable task of making sense of
> all the suggestions, input and comments, and produce meaningful and
> readable text.  Frankly, I don't know anyone who could have done that job
> better. So, it is not so much that 'Guillaume still wants to go this way',
> but rather 'the drafting group believes the movement-wide consultation
> points this way.'
>
> I understand your concerns - and I know that they come from your deep
> commitment to the quality and the reliability of the Wikimedia projects.
> Your comments have already started some interesting discussions - on this
> list and in other places - about how oral traditions/sources could and
> should be used in a responsible way.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Sandra Rientjes
> Directeur/Executive Director Wikimedia Nederland
>
>
>
> 2017-10-21 14:20 GMT+02:00 Ziko van Dijk <zvand...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hello Nicole,
> >
> > Thank you. I just wonder - if the rest is presented this way, people
> might
> > think that it belongs to the direction, and what the relationship between
> > both is. And I'm afraid, that later the Foundation will claim that the
> rest
> > is important or an important (authoritative) interpretation that will
> > influence the following discussions. There will be confusion what exactly
> > is endorsed an can be used (abused) in those following discussions.
> >
> > For example, I am very concerned that the "oral traditions" are still in
> > the game, especially as Guillaume emphasized that he still wants to go
> this
> > way.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2017-10-21 1:52 GMT+02:00 Nicole Ebber <nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:
> >
> > > Hi Ziko,
> > >
> > > Quick response regarding the endorsement: We will ask people to only
> > > endorse the strategic direction in the green box and the short section
> > > underneath with the next steps.
> > >
> > > Hope that helps.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Nicole
> > >
> > > On 21 October 2017 at 01:02, Ziko van Dijk <zvand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > 2017-10-20 23:10 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher <kma...@wikimedia.org>:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I am optimistic that this strategic direction provides every
> > individual
> > > > and
> > > > > entity within the Wikimedia movement something to be excited about.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello, it is not about what I might be excited about - I wonder in
> > which
> > > > ways the document will be used in a way I find problematic for the
> > > > community.
> > > >
> > > > I am still curious about the links in the "See also" section:
> > > >
> > > >- Appendix
> > > ><https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> > > > movement/2017/Direction/Appendix>:
> > > >More information about the process, research, and findings that
> led
> > to
> > > > this
> > > >outcome.
> > > >- A report of findings
> > > ><https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> > > > movement/2017/Findings>
> > > >is being written and many references on this page will be updated
> to
> > > > point
> > > >to its content.
> > > >
> > > > Are those (and the footnotes) part of the "direction" document? Will
> > > people
> > > > who endorse the document also endorse them?
> > > &g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] October 12: Strategy update - Movement direction now posted for your endorsement consideration (#26)

2017-10-21 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Nicole,

Thank you. I just wonder - if the rest is presented this way, people might
think that it belongs to the direction, and what the relationship between
both is. And I'm afraid, that later the Foundation will claim that the rest
is important or an important (authoritative) interpretation that will
influence the following discussions. There will be confusion what exactly
is endorsed an can be used (abused) in those following discussions.

For example, I am very concerned that the "oral traditions" are still in
the game, especially as Guillaume emphasized that he still wants to go this
way.

Kind regards
Ziko




2017-10-21 1:52 GMT+02:00 Nicole Ebber <nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:

> Hi Ziko,
>
> Quick response regarding the endorsement: We will ask people to only
> endorse the strategic direction in the green box and the short section
> underneath with the next steps.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Best regards,
> Nicole
>
> On 21 October 2017 at 01:02, Ziko van Dijk <zvand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 2017-10-20 23:10 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher <kma...@wikimedia.org>:
> >
> > >
> > > I am optimistic that this strategic direction provides every individual
> > and
> > > entity within the Wikimedia movement something to be excited about.
> > >
> >
> > Hello, it is not about what I might be excited about - I wonder in which
> > ways the document will be used in a way I find problematic for the
> > community.
> >
> > I am still curious about the links in the "See also" section:
> >
> >- Appendix
> ><https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> > movement/2017/Direction/Appendix>:
> >More information about the process, research, and findings that led to
> > this
> >outcome.
> >- A report of findings
> ><https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> > movement/2017/Findings>
> >is being written and many references on this page will be updated to
> > point
> >to its content.
> >
> > Are those (and the footnotes) part of the "direction" document? Will
> people
> > who endorse the document also endorse them?
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Ziko
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Beginning on October 26, we will be asking for individual contributors
> > and
> > > organized groups to endorse this new strategic direction for our
> > movement.
> > > I encourage you to spend the intervening days discussing this direction
> > and
> > > determining if you and/or your group will be endorsing it. You will
> find
> > > more information about the endorsement day and the process on the
> > > direction’s meta page next week.
> > >
> > > The endorsement concludes phase 1 of the process, and we are currently
> > > drafting the next steps of the process. The main goal of phase 2 will
> be
> > to
> > > answer the question "How do we implement the strategic direction",
> which
> > > means identifying the resources needed for execution, and the
> activities
> > it
> > > involves. A first rough overview of this phase is being developed on
> > Meta.
> > > Take a look! [2]
> > >
> > > On a different note, we have completed the move into our new office
> space
> > > at One Montgomery Tower![3] Once again, thank you to everyone on staff
> > who
> > > was involved in making the move so seamless, and to all of you for your
> > > patience over the past couple of weeks. Later this month, once we are
> > more
> > > settled in, we will be sharing photos and information about our new
> space
> > > on the Wikimedia Blog.
> > >
> > > Stay tuned!
> > >
> > > መልካም ቀን። (Amharic translation: “Have a nice day”),
> > >
> > > Katherine
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> > > movement/2017/People/Drafting_Group
> > > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_2030/Process_planning
> > > [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_headquarters
> > > ___
> > > 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/mailm

Re: [Wikimedia-l] October 12: Strategy update - Movement direction now posted for your endorsement consideration (#26)

2017-10-20 Thread Ziko van Dijk
2017-10-20 23:10 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher :

>
> I am optimistic that this strategic direction provides every individual and
> entity within the Wikimedia movement something to be excited about.
>

Hello, it is not about what I might be excited about - I wonder in which
ways the document will be used in a way I find problematic for the
community.

I am still curious about the links in the "See also" section:

   - Appendix
   
:
   More information about the process, research, and findings that led to this
   outcome.
   - A report of findings
   
   is being written and many references on this page will be updated to point
   to its content.

Are those (and the footnotes) part of the "direction" document? Will people
who endorse the document also endorse them?

Kind regards,

Ziko










> Beginning on October 26, we will be asking for individual contributors and
> organized groups to endorse this new strategic direction for our movement.
> I encourage you to spend the intervening days discussing this direction and
> determining if you and/or your group will be endorsing it. You will find
> more information about the endorsement day and the process on the
> direction’s meta page next week.
>
> The endorsement concludes phase 1 of the process, and we are currently
> drafting the next steps of the process. The main goal of phase 2 will be to
> answer the question "How do we implement the strategic direction", which
> means identifying the resources needed for execution, and the activities it
> involves. A first rough overview of this phase is being developed on Meta.
> Take a look! [2]
>
> On a different note, we have completed the move into our new office space
> at One Montgomery Tower![3] Once again, thank you to everyone on staff who
> was involved in making the move so seamless, and to all of you for your
> patience over the past couple of weeks. Later this month, once we are more
> settled in, we will be sharing photos and information about our new space
> on the Wikimedia Blog.
>
> Stay tuned!
>
> መልካም ቀን። (Amharic translation: “Have a nice day”),
>
> Katherine
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> movement/2017/People/Drafting_Group
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_2030/Process_planning
> [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_headquarters
> ___
> 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] [Strategy] September 28: Strategy update - Final draft of movement direction and endorsement process (#25)

2017-10-04 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Lodewijk and Charles,

I am now quickly responding after arriving in my hotel. The question
whether it is about Wikipedia or about knowledge - I am not sure, but I
think that it is a very useful, structuring question.

About „oral traditions“. I don‘t have my books here, but I give you an
example what I mean. I remember the case (I hope correctly) from Johannes
Fried, Der Schleier der Erinnerung.

There was a territory in Africa, occupied by the British in the 19th
century. Shortly after, they wanted to learn more about this territory.
There were no history books, but they asked the inhabitants. For example,
why is this territory divided in seven provinces. The British got the
answer: Once there was a king. He had seven sons. So he divided the
territory into seven provinces, each for every son.

Time went by. The British colonial rule changed the administrative division
of the territory. They reduced the number of provinces from seven to five.
Decades later, in the 20th century, the colonial rule came to an end.
Shortly before that, the British asked the inhabitants about the territory
again. They got to hear: Once there was a king. He had five sons. So he
divided the territory into five provinces.

The human brain and memory, and collective memory, are not unchangeble
unlike paper. They adapt. The human brain is not made to record data for
historians but to deal with life. You cannot remember everything. When
needed, your brain builds up a new story from remembered fragments and
tries to keep the new story coherent with present information.

About an „oral traditions“ project outside of Wikipedia: It has been
proposed. But it will encounter problems like any other platform for „oral
history“. It is a lot of work, it can attract extremists, and you have to
make sure that the content is actually usuable for historians or other
scientists (e.g., the person speaking must be identified correctly). And,
of course, the testimonials have to undergo the same scrutiny as any other
historical source. In my experience most scientists prefer to interview
people by themselves, under their own conditions, and being the first to
use the material.

Kind regards,
Ziko





Lodewijk  schrieb am Mi. 4. Okt. 2017 um 22:11:

> And that is where the broader Wikimedia movement could come in, to provide
> that pipeline of rigor and reliability, right? I don't know a solution
> either, but the question for the strategy is not whether we have a solution
> right now. The question would be whether the movement should work towards
> finding a solution through our ecosystem (or even beyond), and support
> that. Maybe at the end of this process, some information may end up on
> Wikipedia - if the process proves to be reliable enough. And maybe not.
>
> I also agree with the nuance by Charles, that we're talking about many
> different types of knowledge - some of which may be more suitable than
> others.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Yaroslav Blanter 
> wrote:
>
> > Yes, but if oral tradition is recorded at the academic standard, why
> should
> > we be the first publication venue? Usually these people just publish
> books
> > in academic publishing houses.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Yaroslav
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 9:51 PM, Peter Southwood <
> > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> >
> > > There may be a way to do it on another project designed for the
> purpose,
> > > but that cannot be English Wikipedia, and I doubt that any project that
> > > allows anonymous editing could manage it credibly. Oral tradition would
> > at
> > > least have to be sourced to the teller, and would have to be recorded
> by
> > a
> > > reliable and identified recorder, who can be held responsible for their
> > due
> > > diligence. This would not be an easy thing for a crowdsourced project,
> > but
> > > anything less would be like a magnet for everything we don't want.
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Chandres Wikipedia
> > > Sent: Wednesday, 04 October 2017 9:25 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Strategy] September 28: Strategy update -
> > > Final draft of movement direction and endorsement process (#25)
> > >
> > > I do not have a perfect solution to introduce oral traditions in
> > Wikipedia
> > > today, but I’m convince that we need to find a way to do it.
> > >
> > > Just to give you an illustration:
> > >
> > > Today ,a significative amount of African topics in the Wikipedia in
> > French
> > > rely only on the work of only few French historian. Without saying they
> > are
> > > not honest, I find difficult to consider that there words have really
> so
> > > more value than the words of the Ancient of the African tribes.
> > >
> > > We know for sure than oral tradition will include bias, but do not
> forget
> > > that the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Strategy] September 28: Strategy update - Final draft of movement direction and endorsement process (#25)

2017-10-04 Thread Ziko van Dijk
their structural oppression.
>
> You argue that the notions of new forms of knowledge, oral traditions, and
> Western bias were pushed by experts and by the Foundation, and didn't come
> from the communities. And yet, at the 2017 Wikimedia conference in Berlin,
> whose participants were coming from Wikimedia communities, the
> most-voted-for statement at the end of the conference was this one:
>
> *Knowledge is global: we must move beyond western written knowledge,
> towards multiple and diverse forms of knowledge (including oral and
> visual), from multiple and diverse peoples and perspectives, to truly
> achieve the sum of all human knowledge.*
> [
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2017/Documentation/Movement_Strategy_track/Day_3
> ]
>
> What I am trying to convey is that for each of your concerns, there are
> people within our movement and communities who have fought, like you are
> fighting now, for those elements to be part of the movement's strategic
> direction. And they have outweighed you. On some other topics, your opinion
> is the one that prevailed. On many topics, we all agreed. It is now time to
> accept the outcome and focus on what motivates us to contribute
> individually to parts of the strategic direction, so that we can advance as
> a movement.
>
>
>
>
> 2017-10-03 13:38 GMT-07:00 Ziko van Dijk <zvand...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hello Guillaume,
> >
> > Thank you for sharing your point of view. But I cannot agree with you
> that
> > this is a case of „negativity bias“ or „tunnel visions“ or „begrudging
> > fashion“. I have fundamental concerns about the redefinition of the
> > community and the widening of the movement‘s purpose, and I fully join
> > Frank Schulenburg‘s statement that the draft paper says hardly anything
> to
> > the average Wikipedian.
> >
> > As I do not know your prerogatives given from above, I cannot judge about
> > your personal role. I don’t want to and I have nothing against you
> > personally, on the contrary. Indeed, you took some of the most terrible
> > things from the paper - such as the „oral traditions“. But they still
> > appear as a residue in the „Appendix“, and how could it happen in the
> first
> > place that they were ever pushed forward by the WMF? Challenge 2 called
> our
> > work with reputable sources a „Western bias“. Where did that come from?
> Not
> > from the communities (my definition), but from „experts“ such as a man
> who
> > runs a company for storytelling and claims that he can trace his ancestry
> > to the middle ages via „oral traditions“!
> >
> > As Andreas pointed out, there is much more in the Appendix such as the
> > cooperations with Youtube and Google, „new incentives“ etc. and also the
> > opinion that „Wikimedia“ should become more „political“. Certainly, I was
> > against SOPA and like to see the WMF fight copyright problems. But what I
> > saw at Wikimania made me wonder about the common ground. The WMF is
> > partnering up with the ACLU that endorses the freedom of speech for the
> > KuKluxKlan. The WMF is already approaching EU laws from an American point
> > of view and dismisses the possibility that Europeans may think
> differently.
> >
> > If we keep all those things in the draft paper and in the Appendix - the
> > WMF will have carte blanche to do literally anything it likes, being a
> > social movement fighting whatever technical, political or social
> inequity.
> > But well, the WMF will claim that that is what the „community“ wants -
> > given the new definition of community, that would even be true. :-(
> >
> > Certainly, people can set up a page on Meta to express their concerns
> > about such an unready draft paper. Is this an announcement that
> > endorsements of the draft paper will be welcomed at the main gate, while
> > the concerns will have to use the backyard entrance?
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Guillaume Paumier <gpaum...@wikimedia.org> schrieb am Mo. 2. Okt. 2017
> um
> > 22:36:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> If you feel a strong urge to reject the text, there is obviously nothing
> >> preventing anyone from creating a Meta-Wiki page to that purpose.
> However,
> >> I would first ask to reflect on the process, its outcome, and where it's
> >> going.
> >>
> >> Strategy is complicated. Building a movement strategy even more so [
> >> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/05/19/wikimedia-strategy-
> >> 2030-discussions/
> >> ]. One person's 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] September 28: Strategy update - Final draft of movement direction and endorsement process (#25)

2017-10-03 Thread Ziko van Dijk
 stage of the
> process is remarkable. As Wikimedians, we often focus on what's wrong and
> needs fixing. Sometimes, our negativity bias leads us to lose focus of the
> accomplishments. This can clash with the typical American culture, but I
> think somewhere in the middle is where those respective tunnel visions
> widen and meet.
>
> One thing I've learned from Ed Bland, my co-architect during this process,
> is that sometimes things can't be perfect. Sometimes, excellence means
> recognizing when something is "good enough" and getting out of the
> asymptotic editing and decision paralysis loop. It means accepting that a
> few things annoy us so that a larger group of people is excited and
> motivated to participate.
>
> From everything I've heard and read in the past two months, the last
> version of the direction is agreeable to a large part of individuals,
> groups, and organizations that have been involved in the process. Not
> everyone agrees with everything in the document, even within the
> Foundation, and even me. But enough people across the movement agree with
> enough of the document that we can all use it as a starting point for the
> next phase of discussions about roles, resources, and responsibilities.
>
> I do hope that many of you will consider endorsing the direction in a few
> weeks. While I won't claim to know everyone involved, I think I know you
> enough, Ziko and Fæ, from your work and long-time commitment in the
> movement, to venture that there is more in this document that you agree
> with than that you disagree with. I hope that the prospect of moving in a
> shared direction will outweigh the possible annoyances. And so I hope that
> we'll endorse the direction together, even if it's in our typically
> Wikimedian begrudging fashion.
>
>
> 2017-10-02 6:56 GMT-07:00 Ziko van Dijk <zvand...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hello Katherine,
> >
> > This is actually sad news. In my opinion, the draft is far away from
> being
> > a useful and appropriate document for our future.
> >
> > The serious issues from the talk page are only partially addressed in the
> > rewrite. So I contest your claim: "The version on Meta-Wiki is based on
> the
> > feedback you offered."
> >
> > You have announced that organizations and individuals are invited to
> > endorse the draft. Will there also be a possibility to reject the draft?
> I
> > remember the 2011 image filter referendum, when the WMF asked the
> community
> > how important it finds the filter, but not giving the option to be
> against
> > it.
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image_filter_referendum/en;
> > uselang=en
> > <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image_filter_referendum/en=en
> >
> >
> > The drafts tries to enforce a new definition of the "community": "from
> > editors to donors, to organizers, and beyond". I thought that "community"
> > were people who are contributing to the wiki Wikipedia on a regular basis
> > as volunteers.
> >
> > I am very positive of having an open Wikimedia *movement*. But if in
> future
> > more or less everybody will be *community*: that is in fact abolishing
> the
> > community.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Ziko van Dijk
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2017-09-30 22:28 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher <kma...@wikimedia.org>:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Since my update last month, we have been collecting, processing, and
> > > including your most recent input into the lastest version of the
> movement
> > > strategic direction. This version is available on Meta-Wiki.[1]
> > >
> > > We're so close! The direction will be finalized tomorrow, October 1.
> > > Starting tomorrow, we will begin to invite individuals and groups to
> > > endorse our movement's strategic direction. I want to share my greatest
> > > thanks and appreciation for the work and contributions so many of you
> > have
> > > made throughout this first phase (Phase 1) of developing a shared
> > strategic
> > > direction.
> > >
> > > In the coming weeks we will be preparing for Phase 2, which will
> involve
> > > developing specific plans for how we achieve the direction we have
> built
> > > together. I do not have many more details to share right now, but will
> of
> > > course offer an update as they become available.
> > >
> > > *Strategic direction*. Thank you to everyone who provided feedback on
> the
> > > draft introduced at Wik

Re: [Wikimedia-l] September 28: Strategy update - Final draft of movement direction and endorsement process (#25)

2017-10-02 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Joseph,

We must distinguish between the community, the movement and partners of the
movement.

The Wikimedia movement is not a community, it consists of several
communities. Such as the community of Wikipedia in French, of Wikidata or
of Mediawiki.org.

Staffers of the WMF are part of the movement, as the WMF is part of the
movement, as a chapter is part of the movement. Individual staff members or
chapter board members can belong to communities.

Donors can be part of the movement, if they like to see themselves as such.
I doubt that many people who donate 10 euros think of themselves as
"community".

Staff from our GLAM partners are partners, not community, not movement.

I wonder if the WMF will say in future "we asked the community and it
approved it", what will be the meaning of "the community"?

Kind regards
Ziko





2017-10-02 16:12 GMT+02:00 Joseph Seddon <josephsed...@gmail.com>:

> Based on your definition of community does that mean that mediawiki
> developers are not part of the Wikimedia community?
>
> Are people who volunteer in the real world or teachers who incorporate
> Wikipedia into their classes not part of the Wikimedia community?
>
> Members of staff of GLAM institutions who we partner with and who
> evangelise on our behalf? Are they not part of the Wikimedia community?
>
> This more inclusive definition has long been used by some affiliates.
>
> To exclude these individuals would be against the very values of openness
> that we claim to represent and to be blunt, simply alienating.
>
> Seddon
>
> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Fæ <fae...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Ziko's point may not fit the rigid Americanocentric ideal of everything
> > must be positive, fantastic, yeehaw-we-are-number-one, but he's spot on
> > with how the foundations remain flawed.
> >
> > Only ever hearing congratulations and thanks can get you to a win, but
> will
> > never keep you there.
> >
> > Return to the talk page and use the criticism to help meaningful
> > improvements, please.
> >
> > Fae
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LGBT+
> > http://telegram.me/wmlgbt
> >
> > On 2 Oct 2017 14:56, "Ziko van Dijk" <zvand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Katherine,
> >
> > This is actually sad news. In my opinion, the draft is far away from
> being
> > a useful and appropriate document for our future.
> >
> > The serious issues from the talk page are only partially addressed in the
> > rewrite. So I contest your claim: "The version on Meta-Wiki is based on
> the
> > feedback you offered."
> >
> > You have announced that organizations and individuals are invited to
> > endorse the draft. Will there also be a possibility to reject the draft?
> I
> > remember the 2011 image filter referendum, when the WMF asked the
> community
> > how important it finds the filter, but not giving the option to be
> against
> > it.
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image_filter_referendum/en;
> > uselang=en
> >
> > The drafts tries to enforce a new definition of the "community": "from
> > editors to donors, to organizers, and beyond". I thought that "community"
> > were people who are contributing to the wiki Wikipedia on a regular basis
> > as volunteers.
> >
> > I am very positive of having an open Wikimedia *movement*. But if in
> future
> > more or less everybody will be *community*: that is in fact abolishing
> the
> > community.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Ziko van Dijk
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2017-09-30 22:28 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher <kma...@wikimedia.org>:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Since my update last month, we have been collecting, processing, and
> > > including your most recent input into the lastest version of the
> movement
> > > strategic direction. This version is available on Meta-Wiki.[1]
> > >
> > > We're so close! The direction will be finalized tomorrow, October 1.
> > > Starting tomorrow, we will begin to invite individuals and groups to
> > > endorse our movement's strategic direction. I want to share my greatest
> > > thanks and appreciation for the work and contributions so many of you
> > have
> > > made throughout this first phase (Phase 1) of developing a shared
> > strategic
> > > direction.
> > >
> > > In the coming weeks we will be preparing for Phase 2, which will
> involve
> > > developing specific plans for how we achieve the direction w

Re: [Wikimedia-l] September 28: Strategy update - Final draft of movement direction and endorsement process (#25)

2017-10-02 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Katherine,

This is actually sad news. In my opinion, the draft is far away from being
a useful and appropriate document for our future.

The serious issues from the talk page are only partially addressed in the
rewrite. So I contest your claim: "The version on Meta-Wiki is based on the
feedback you offered."

You have announced that organizations and individuals are invited to
endorse the draft. Will there also be a possibility to reject the draft? I
remember the 2011 image filter referendum, when the WMF asked the community
how important it finds the filter, but not giving the option to be against
it.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image_filter_referendum/en;
uselang=en

The drafts tries to enforce a new definition of the "community": "from
editors to donors, to organizers, and beyond". I thought that "community"
were people who are contributing to the wiki Wikipedia on a regular basis
as volunteers.

I am very positive of having an open Wikimedia *movement*. But if in future
more or less everybody will be *community*: that is in fact abolishing the
community.

Kind regards,
Ziko van Dijk





2017-09-30 22:28 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher <kma...@wikimedia.org>:

> Hi all,
>
> Since my update last month, we have been collecting, processing, and
> including your most recent input into the lastest version of the movement
> strategic direction. This version is available on Meta-Wiki.[1]
>
> We're so close! The direction will be finalized tomorrow, October 1.
> Starting tomorrow, we will begin to invite individuals and groups to
> endorse our movement's strategic direction. I want to share my greatest
> thanks and appreciation for the work and contributions so many of you have
> made throughout this first phase (Phase 1) of developing a shared strategic
> direction.
>
> In the coming weeks we will be preparing for Phase 2, which will involve
> developing specific plans for how we achieve the direction we have built
> together. I do not have many more details to share right now, but will of
> course offer an update as they become available.
>
> *Strategic direction*. Thank you to everyone who provided feedback on the
> draft introduced at Wikimania. The version on Meta-Wiki is based on the
> feedback you offered.
>
> *Endorsements*. Once the strategic direction closes tomorrow,
> organizations, groups, and individuals within the movement will be invited
> to endorse the direction, in a show of support for the future we are
> building together. We'll be sending an update next week on the process and
> timeline.
>
> *Concluding Phase 1*. Please join me in offering thanks to the volunteers,
> staff, and contractors who came together to make this possible! As we
> transition into Phase 2, some of these roles will be concluded and new ones
> created in their place. We'll keep you updated.
>
> *Wikimedia CEE Meeting 2017*. I was fortunate to join Wikimedians from
> Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) last weekend at the sixth annual Wikimedia
> CEE Meeting[2] in Warsaw, Poland. Nicole Ebber and Kaarel Vaidla led a
> series of discussions on the direction, including what it means for CEE.[3]
> Thank you our hosts, Wikimedia Polska, and to all of the attendees for such
> a wonderful event!
>
> *In other news.* I've heard from many people how much you appreciate these
> updates as a means of keeping track about what is going on. I'm talking to
> the Communications department about keeping them going once the strategic
> planning process concludes, with a focus on more general updates. Keep the
> feedback coming.
>
> Since my last update, our planet has reminded us of its incredible and
> often unforgiving strength. My thoughts, and those of many within the
> Wikimedia Foundation, are with our Wikimedia family which have been
> affected by the natural disasters of recent weeks. We have been in touch
> with our affiliates in the areas impacted, and will offer any support we
> can.
>
> Finally, as our CFO Jaime mentioned last week,[3] the Foundation is in the
> process of moving into our new office, in One Montgomery Tower. We invite
> you to visit its new page on Meta-Wiki.[4]
>
> We are at the halfway mark of this movement strategy process, and I am
> incredibly proud of the work we have done together on the strategy. Thank
> you, again, to everyone for your contributions to this process. We have
> more work ahead but should be proud of what we have achieved already.
>
> Ten cuidado (Spanish translation: “Be safe”),
>
> Katherine
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Direction
> [2]  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_CEE_Meeting_2017
> [3]
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CEE_meeting_2017_

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up

2017-08-25 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Just a general remark.

It is actually possible to create a huge website with a lot of content,
even if you are commercial. Wikia (or "Fandom powered by Wikia) is an
example, Baidu Baike another one. Maybe its not exactly the same (sort of)
people who contribute. But I find it highly speculative that a for-profit
organization cannot make a wiki encyclopedia a success, by principle.

Having that said, I personally am very happy that Wikipedia's owner is a
non profit organization. But we should not be too self-secure about our
position - a possible "Wikipedia killer" in future could indeed come from a
commercial organization. That is one important point of the discussion
around the Wikimedia strategy, that we understand that 'we' are not
'invincible'.

Kind regards,
Ziko



Peter Southwood  schrieb am Fr. 25. Aug. 2017
um 17:51:

> We should not sink to "alternative facts" Not even to the American public,
> who seem to be accustomed to them. We should provide a better example.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Sam Wilson
> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 11:38 AM
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up
>
> Peter,
>
> Fair enough, I agree that the idea that Wikimedia would have been a
> success if it'd be made commercial is crazy. "Has it crossed my mind how
> much we could have made if it had ads? Sure. But it wouldn’t be the same."
> reads to me as just a hypothetical "if it were as it is today
> *and* had ads", rather than any serious suggestion that that would ever
> have been the case. I reckon it makes sense to the non-editor people it's
> aimed at.
>
> Anyway, about my grammar nickpicking? ;-)
>
> —Sam
>
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, at 05:06 PM, Peter Southwood wrote:
> > Sam,
> > I can't get back to the banner for some reason, so I risk misquoting it.
> > Please take this into account.
> > What I find offensive is the implication that the foundation would
> > even have Wikipedia if they were doing it commercially. I and a
> > significant number of other contributors would not have helped make it
> > what it is today if it had been a commercial site. To support this
> > opinion, there do not appear to be any commercial projects of this
> > type even vaguely approaching the success of Wikipedia. The banner
> > implies that there would be a roughly equivalent project available to
> > sell. This I find offensive as it denigrates the voluntary
> > contributions done by all the unpaid contributors.
> > I see this as misrepresentation and disrespect to the crowd that is
> > the source of the product, therefore offensive.
> > It is possible that I am alone in this opinion, but I suggest that a
> > survey of the people who actually created and maintain the content of
> > Wikipedia would show that I am not.
> > At this point, I suggest that WMF do just that, run a survey to find
> > out who builds the encyclopaedia, and how they feel about this. The
> > golden rule of crowdsourcing is don’t alienate the crowd, especially
> > when they are doing your work for free. The one thing we ask in return
> > for our work is a little recognition and respect, and to know that we
> > do a thing intrinsically worth doing. Again, I realise I do not
> > necessarily speak for everyone, but suspect that I speak for many.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Sam Wilson
> > Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 10:26 AM
> > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up
> >
> > "Offensive" seems a bit over the top! Who's it offending? Seems pretty
> > okay to me, personally. :-)
> >
> > Anyway, the only thing I notice with it is that it starts with "We
> > will..." and then says "When I made..." etc. Shouldn't these pronouns
> > agree?
> >
> > —Sam.
> >
> > On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, at 04:07 PM, Peter Southwood wrote:
> > > The old style is excessively large and in your face. The new style
> > > is almost, but not quite as bad. The content remains offensive and
> > > misleading Cheers, Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org]
> > > On Behalf Of Joseph Seddon
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 5:02 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] New style banner - A heads up
> > >
> > > Hey Wikimedia-l
> > >
> > > Apologies for the short notice.
> > >
> > > I wanted to give you a heads up on a banner test that will soon be
> > > going live.
> > >
> > > We've been working on a new style of banner that is specifically
> > > designed to have the same native look and feel as the rest of the
> > > site and interface. It's intended to be understated and you'll see
> > > is very different to our currently best 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advertizing Wikimania (youtube) livestreams on centralnotice

2017-08-19 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Just briefly a short comment: visitors should be approached with messages
especially created for them. I am always sceptical of simply re-using a
content made for one context/audience for another context/audience.
Kind regards
Ziko

2017-08-19 9:25 GMT+02:00 K. Peachey :

> I notice those youtube links didn't use the nocookie domain or display
> warnings about external youtube links, example being the previous WP
> Zero Petition 
>
> On 18 August 2017 at 22:45, Lodewijk  wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Wikimania is well over, and now that everyone is slowly getting home, I'd
> > like to touch on a hallway discussion that was going on during Wikimania.
> > This was regarding the centralnotice banners advertizing a livestream of
> > Katherine's and Christophe's presentation of the draft direction for the
> > 2030 strategy.
> >
> > First a few quick facts:
> > The banners were on Fri 11 Aug shown for 1,5 hour in 'emergency mode' on
> > all English language projects (including Commons, meta) to all logged in,
> > anonimous and mobile visitors. The campaigns can be found here
> >  CentralNotice=noticeDetail=WikimaniaLive>,
> > here
> >  CentralNotice=noticeDetail=WikimaniaLiveLoggedin>and
> > here
> >  CentralNotice=noticeDetail=WikimaniaLiveMobile>,
> > for reference. The text in the banner was "Where will Wikipedia and
> > Wikimedia be in 2030? Find out LIVE from Montreal" with a link to a
> youtube
> > page with a stream  .
> >
> > I was quite taken by surprise with this, and taken aback. Here we were,
> the
> > Wikimedia community telling all these visitors of Wikipedia and other
> > projects that we are so important, that we should have them watch a
> > presentation of a first draft of a direction of a strategy that still
> needs
> > to be worked out. Not only was the text in the banner a bit misleading (I
> > didn't see much crystal bowl gazing - but rather a statement of where we
> > would like to go - but soit, I can overlook that), but it feels
> especially
> > pretentious to me. Maybe this is a cultural matter, and in other cultures
> > this kind of bragging (which is what it feels like to me) is normal.
> >
> > I could have understood an advertizement of this and other sessions to
> our
> > logged in community members - that would actually have been a nice way of
> > engaging them in an expensive conference that we would like more online
> > audience to be part of. But only this session, and then all visitors of
> > Wikimedia projects? No, thanks.
> >
> > Totally separate of the message displayed and whether we want to show it
> to
> > this kind of large audience, I was surprised that this link was pointing
> to
> > Youtube. This goes against our policies on Centralnotice
> > ,
> stating:
> > "Wikimedia Owned - Banners must link to Wikimedia controlled domains
> (owned
> > either by Wikimedia Foundation, Wikimedia affiliates or Wikimedia
> > Volunteers identified to the Wikimedia Foundation)." I guess there is a
> > very remote interpretation possible that the channel is owned by the
> > Wikimedia Foundation, and I did not see any indication that Youtube was
> > running ads on that particular channel.
> >
> > I was unable to locate any community discussions or consultation about
> > this. Could someone at the WMF share where this was discussed prior to
> the
> > decision, and could they explain their reasoning? I'm not looking to
> blame
> > anyone for this - shit happens - but I would like to see some discussion
> on
> > what we want and dont want to do in this field, so that we can actually
> > learn from this exercise. I was told in (very rapid and somewhat
> unwilling)
> > hallway discussions that this was signed off by multiple layers of
> > management at the WMF, so I assume some documented reasoning and
> > consultation is available.
> >
> > Best,
> > Lodewijk
> > ___
> > 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] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread Ziko van Dijk
The number of pillars depends on the language version...
And whether some rules is called pilöar not dpes not seem to be pf much
importance
Ziko

John Erling Blad  schrieb am Do. 3. Aug. 2017 um 14:42:

> Five pillars are moot.
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:
>
> > The moment you have a centralised policy you take away the ability to
> > discuss, makes decisions, and achieve consensus from the community that
> > create the projects. Importantly you create the opportunity for banned
> and
> > blocked editors to decide what happens in a community.
> >
> > By having a base set of simple policies in the Incubator that are
> > atuomatically created when a project starts up you give them the best
> guide
> > to establishing themselves well before that project goes live, ince a
> > project is live it has to be allowed to develop its community.
> >
> > We already have the 5 pillars which are the basis for the projects, but
> > meta is not a place that the content creating community spends a lot of
> > time.
> >
> > On 3 August 2017 at 19:07, John Erling Blad  wrote:
> >
> > > Having centralized core policies would lessen the maintenance and
> > process,
> > > not increase them.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Strainu  wrote:
> > >
> > > > The core policies should be the ones pushed by board resolution, and
> > > > those should be the absolute minimum required to keep the projects
> > > > safe from a legal POV. Period. Otherwise, people with little
> > > > understanding of small Wikipedias will try to push stuff from en.wp.
> > > > Just recently someone was trying to have an RFC on meta on all the
> > > > different processes that en.wp has and ro.wp does not have, with
> > > > little consideration on whether the manpower to implement, let alone
> > > > maintain, these processes exists. No thank you to rule pushing
> without
> > > > local context.
> > > >
> > > > Having a community take a rule from en.wp is different, just as long
> > > > as some kind of discussion happens within the community about it.
> Even
> > > > if the rule is really useless or harmful and the community did not
> > > > realize that in the beginning, at least it can evolve differently
> from
> > > > the English one. Have a centralized repository and trying to change
> > > > the rules there by consensus would be much more difficult for small
> > > > communities.
> > > >
> > > > Strainu
> > > >
> > > > 2017-08-02 17:05 GMT+03:00 John Erling Blad :
> > > > > Nearly all Wikipedia projects has virtually the same core content
> > > > policies,
> > > > > but with slightly different wording. Nearly all, because a lot of
> the
> > > > > smaller lacks them, and a lot has outdated or only partial
> policies.
> > It
> > > > > takes a lot of time to actually make them and keep them updated.
> > > > >
> > > > > Creating and maintaining the core content policies should not be
> > > > something
> > > > > that small projects should invest a lot of time in, they should
> > simply
> > > be
> > > > > able to point to existing policies on Meta. The central policies
> > should
> > > > be
> > > > > localized if necessary.
> > > > >
> > > > > Checking Meta I find
> > > > > - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_no_original_research_policy
> > > > > - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_view
> > > > >
> > > > > I can't find anything like "Verifiability".
> > > > >
> > > > > Would it be possible for Wikimedia Foundation to make some sound
> > > baseline
> > > > > policies, and with the option for local projects to refine those?
> > > Perhaps
> > > > > with assistance from editors on Wikipedia?
> > > > >
> > > > > Lets try to make the policies accurate, without "no original
> > research"
> > > > > diverging into verifiability of external sources. It should be
> about
> > > > > original research in content on Wikipedia. Likewise, at some
> projects
> > > > > neutral point of view has become "do not diverge from creators
> point
> > of
> > > > > view"…
> > > > >
> > > > > Would this be possible? It would be really nice if those baseline
> > > > policies
> > > > > pages could be copied to the individual projects like central user
> > > pages,
> > > > > so they would be "internal" to the projects. Thus the projects
> would
> > > have
> > > > > more "ownership" of them.
> > > > >
> > > > > The same thing apply to other meta projects (Wikipedia, Wikibooks,
> > > > > Wiktionary, etc).
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeblad
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello, i wrote something about a comparison of conent policies and will
have a presentation at wikicon, but at the momemt i am not at my home
computer.
Kind regards ziko

John Erling Blad  schrieb am Mi. 2. Aug. 2017 um 18:19:

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Videos of sessions at Vienna Hackathon and WikiCite

2017-05-24 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Yes, thanks Andrew! A much welcome enlargement of the audience. I was very
happy to watch.
Kind regards
Ziko

2017-05-24 22:55 GMT+02:00 Leila Zia :

> Hi all,
>
> I could not make it to Vienna for the Hackathon [1] and WikiCite [2]
> and I was happy to see that Andrew Lih has been doing some serious
> recordings [3] of the sessions. I watched the Showcase Talks [4] from
> the third day of the Hackathon which gave a nice overview of
> everything that had happened there. Sharing the links here in case
> some of you are interested to watch them as well.
>
> Thanks, Andrew! :)
>
> Best,
> Leila
>
> --
> Leila Zia
> Senior Research Scientist
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> [1]
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Hackathon_2017
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiCite_2017
> [3]
> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLN4mEhpy3b8RsYfokuzsBGnw-_KVDSfX_
> [4]
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQDSd9ewjSw=3=
> PLN4mEhpy3b8RsYfokuzsBGnw-_KVDSfX_
>
> ___
> 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] machine translation

2017-05-03 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
This seems to me like a social problem, rather than a technical one.
Shutting down the tool would be a disadvantage for those people who benefit
from the tool and do good things with it.
What is the general opinion among the Norwegians about this issue? Is there
consent about how to deal with this kind of "articles"? If most people
agree they should be speedy-deleted, this would be a useful deterrence for
those who are not careful enough when using the tool?
Kind regards
Ziko



2017-05-03 13:22 GMT+02:00 John Erling Blad :

> Agree! I also wonder if translators adapt to specific errors if they are
> repeated to often. I wonder if it works like priming the brain to a
> specific pattern.
>
> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Lodewijk 
> wrote:
>
> > Reading this, I get a strong impression the problem may very well be in
> > setting expectations for the users of this translation tool. If they
> expect
> > the automated translation to be rather good, they may get fed up more
> > easily than when they consider it primarily a glorified dictionary.
> >
> > Lodewijk
> >
> > On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 1:06 PM, David Cuenca Tudela 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Perhaps it would be a good idea to compare the translated text to the
> > text
> > > that the user wants to save.
> > >
> > > If they are more than 95% the same, that means that the user didn't
> take
> > > the effort to correct the text.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Micru
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Wojciech Pędzich 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > 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 <
> pharosofalexand...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >> 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
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikitribune!

2017-04-25 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Jimmy,

Thank you for your mail to this list; I saw the announcement earlier this
day and read the Wikitribune.com website, watched the video, and also read
a newspaper article. Honestly, I am still not quite sure whether I
understood fully what Wikitribune is supposed to be. :-)

- What is the exact purpose of the site? To produce something, or to judge
something? What is the product? Wikitribune pages with a specific kind of
information or knowledge? A label to be put on news sites?
- "Anyone can flag or fix an article and submit it for review." - Who is
going to start a segment or item on the Wikitribune site? Are people
allowed to create several items about the same issue?
- How to resolve conflicts or differences in opinion? Will there be a
statute or rule codex people can stick to? Will there be specific people in
authority about a segment or the whole site? Will people vote?
- "Supporting Wikitribune means ensuring that that [sic!] journalists only
write articles based on facts that they can verify" - how will Wikitribune
ensure that, force journalists to do that? Will Wikitribune provide a kind
of certificate for news sites?

Kind regards,
Ziko








2017-04-25 23:59 GMT+02:00 Jimmy Wales :

>
> Today I announced a new initiative, outside of my Wikimedia activities,
> to combat fake news. It is important to me that I share directly with
> all of you information about this new initiative early on.
>
> The new project  will use a wiki-style setup and experiment with
> bringing together professional journalists and community contributors to
> produce fact-checked, global news stories.  At launch, we'll be using a
> hacked version of wordpress and we'll be evaluating whether that's the
> right tool moving forward.  Wordpress has a lot to
> commend it (free software, mature platform, used by lots of newsrooms,
> active developer ecosystem) but also has some philosophy that's quite
> "top down" in a way.
> (Not many people would think in a wiki way when setting up a newsroom!)
>
> This new initiative, Wikitribune, will be a learning experience - my
> vision is one that I've had a hard time explaining... except to
> Wikimedians who tend to immediately
> get it.
>
> While I am launching this project independent from Wikipedia and the
> Wikimedia Foundation, it is my plan that this new project will work
> alongside Wikimedia in the free knowledge movement. For example, I hope
> that the numerous Wikinews/Wikinoticias/Wikinotizie/etc. communities can
> collaborate with the  Wikitribune community in way that allows both to
> learn and benefit from each other. Additionally, Wikitribune will
> utilize the same Creative Commons license (CC-BY) as other free content
> projects in
> the news space - so they can take the stories written by our
> professional journalists and communities and make use of them.
>
> You can find out more information about Wikitribune at:
> https://www.wikitribune.com
>
> Thank you for your time and I'm happy to answer questions!  (But I'm
> quite swamped with everything at the moment so please forgive me if I
> answer in bursts!)
>
> --Jimbo
>
> ___
> 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] Quality assurance of articles

2017-04-16 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello John,

Article quality is an interesting subject. I guess that it depends
extremely on what is the scientific discipline you come from, and what
questions you want to be answered. A linguist will have a very different
approach than a computer scientist, for example. If you ask me, only a
human being can judge an article if it comes to content quality and textual
quality, by the way. Maybe you want to elaborate on what are your questions?

Kind regards
Ziko





2017-04-16 9:44 GMT+02:00 Gerard Meijssen :

> Hoi,
> How can you check for consistency when you are not able to appreciate if
> certain facts (like date of death) exist and are the same? What can you say
> about sources when some Wikipedias insist on sources in their own language
> and sources in other languages you cannot read? How do you check for
> consistency when we have over 280 Wikipedias with possible content?
>
> Do know that only Wikidata approaches a state where it knows about all our
> projects and we have not, to the best of my knowledge, assessed what the
> quality of Wikidata is on interwiki links.. Case in point, I fixed an error
> today about a person that was said to be dead because a Commons category
> was not correctly linked.
>
> When you study the consistency of English Wikipedia only, you only add to
> the current bias in research.
>
> When you want to know about the half life of an error, you can find in the
> history when for instance a date was mentioned for a first time and find
> the same date in another language. This is not trivial as the format of a
> language is diverse think Thai for instance.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> On 16 April 2017 at 02:08, John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> > This is more about checking consistency between projects. It is
> > interesting, but not quite what I was asking about. It is very
> interesting
> > if it would be possible to say something about half-life of an error. I'm
> > pretty sure this follows number of page views if ordinary logged-in
> editing
> > is removed.
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > Would checking if a date of death exists in articles be of interest to
> > you.
> > > The idea is that Wikidata knows about dates of death and for "living
> > > people" the fact of a death should be the same in all projects. When
> the
> > > date of death is missing, there is either an issue at Wikidata (not the
> > > same precision is one) or at a project.
> > >
> > > When a difference is found, the idea is that it is each projects
> > > responsibility to do what is needed. No further automation.
> > > Thanks,
> > >GerardM
> > >
> > > On 15 April 2017 at 23:50, John Erling Blad  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Are anyone doing any work on automated quality assurance of articles?
> > Not
> > > > the ORES-stuff, that is about creating hints from measured features.
> > I'm
> > > > thinking about verifying existence and completeness of citations, and
> > > > structure of logical arguments.
> > > >
> > > > John
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia Foundation receives $500, 000 from the Craig Newmark Foundation and craigslist Charitable Fund to support a healthy and inclusive

2017-01-27 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

First, I am of course very happy about the attention and support from Mr.
Newmark.

But I am wondering about the special focus to "tools"; harassment is a
problem on the social level, not the technical one. Also, after all those
years in which we talk about harassment, I find it difficult to trust our
Wikimedia institutions to come with an effective approach...

Kind regards





2017-01-27 3:47 GMT+01:00 Todd Allen :

> These are all very nice sentiments. But they're phrased in very vague ways.
>
> Is there anywhere we can see the actual concrete plan for the use of these
> funds?
>
> Todd
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 7:30 PM, Samantha Lien 
> wrote:
>
> > This press release is also available online here:
> >  https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/
> > Wikimedia_Foundation_receives_$500,000_from_the_Craig_
> > Newmark_Foundation_and_craigslist_Charitable_Fund_to_
> > support_a_healthy_and_inclusive_Wikimedia_community
> >  Wikimedia_Foundation_receives_$500,000_from_the_Craig_
> Newmark_Foundation_and_craigslist_Charitable_Fund_to_
> support_a_healthy_and_inclusive_Wikimedia_community>
> >
> > And as a blog post on the Wikimedia blog here:
> >
> > https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/01/26/community-health-initiative-grant/
> >
> >
> >
> > Wikimedia Foundation receives $500,000 from the Craig Newmark Foundation
> > and craigslist Charitable Fund to support a healthy and inclusive
> Wikimedia
> > community
> >
> > Grant supports development of more advanced tools for volunteers and
> staff
> > to reduce harassing behavior on Wikipedia and block harassers from the
> site
> >
> > SAN FRANCISCO — January 26, 2017 — Today, the Wikimedia Foundation
> > announced the launch of a community health initiative to address
> harassment
> > and toxic behavior on Wikipedia, with initial funding of US$500,000 from
> > the Craig Newmark Foundation and craigslist Charitable Fund. The two seed
> > grants, each US$250,000, will support the development of tools for
> > volunteer editors and staff to reduce harassment on Wikipedia and block
> > harassers.
> >
> > Approximately 40% of internet users
> > , and as many
> > as 70% of younger users have personally experienced harassment online,
> with
> > regional studies showing rates as high as 76%
> >  releases/2016/symantec_0309_01>
> > for young women. While harassment differs across the internet, on
> Wikipedia
> > and other Wikimedia projects, harassment has been shown to reduce
> > participation on the sites. More than 50%
> >  Harassment_Survey_2015_-_Results_Report.pdf>
> > of people who reported experiencing harassment also reported decreasing
> > their participation in the Wikimedia community.
> >
> > Volunteer editors on Wikipedia are often the first line of response for
> > finding and addressing harassment on Wikipedia. "Trolling
> > ," "doxxing
> > ," and other menacing behaviors
> are
> > burdens to Wikipedia's contributors, impeding their ability to do the
> > writing and editing that makes Wikipedia so comprehensive and useful.
> This
> > program seeks to respond to requests from editors over the years for
> better
> > tools and support for responding to harassment and toxic behavior.
> >
> > “To ensure Wikipedia’s vitality, people of good will need to work
> together
> > to prevent trolling, harassment and cyber-bullying from interfering with
> > the common good,” said Craig Newmark, founder of craigslist. “To that
> end,
> > I'm supporting the work of the Wikimedia Foundation towards the
> prevention
> > of harassment.”
> >
> > The initiative is part of a commitment to community health at the
> > Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that supports Wikipedia
> > and the other Wikimedia projects, in collaboration with the global
> > community of volunteer editors. In 2015, the Foundation published its
> first
> > Harassment Survey
> >  about
> > the nature of the issue in order to identify key areas of concern. In
> > November 2016, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees issued a
> > statement of support
> >  Board_noticeboard/November_2016_-_Statement_on_Healthy_Community_Culture,_
> Inclusivity,_and_Safe_Spaces>
> > calling for a more “proactive” approach to addressing harassment as a
> > barrier to healthy, inclusive communities on Wikipedia.
> >
> > "If we want everyone to share in the sum of all knowledge, we need to
> make
> > sure everyone feels welcome,” said Katherine Maher, Executive Director of
> > the Wikimedia Foundation. “This grant supports a healthy 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Statement by Wikimedia Board on Healthy Community Culture, Inclusivity, and Safe Spaces

2016-12-08 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Christophe,

Thank you for forwarding the resolution.

"the Wikimedia Foundation should be proactively engaged in eliminating
harassment"

What is the WMF actually going to do?

Kind regards
Ziko



2016-12-08 21:26 GMT+01:00 Sydney Poore :

> Thank you Christophe and the rest of the Wikimedia Foundation trustees
> for dedicating time and thought to this important topic.
>
> I'm optimistic that if we collaborate together as a community we can
> make a difference in the level of harassment on Wikimedia projects and
> maybe even other parts of the internet.
>
> Sydney
> Sydney Poore
> User:FloNight
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Christophe Henner 
> wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > As many of you know, over the past couple of years the Wikimedia
> Foundation
> > has taken a focused look at community health—particularly in regards to
> > harassment. The Foundation's Board has been monitoring and discussing
> this
> > issue over the past year with great interest. We have prepared a
> statement
> > offering our thoughts on this topic, and providing a clear mandate for
> the
> > Foundation’s leadership to fully engage on this issue.
> >
> > Our statement is below and has been posted on Meta-Wiki, where it is set
> up
> > for translation:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> Board_noticeboard/November_2016_-_Statement_on_Healthy_Community_Culture,_
> Inclusivity,_and_Safe_Spaces
> >
> > Since the Foundation was established, we have been invested in building a
> > positive community culture. As part of these efforts, we have monitored
> the
> > projects for instances of harassment, escalating our capacity to respond
> in
> > recent years. Thanks to the work of the Foundation's Support and Safety
> > Team, we now have data in the form of the 2015 Harassment Survey[1] about
> > the nature of the issue. This has enabled us to identify key areas of
> > concern, and step up our response appropriately. This research shows that
> > harassment has a negative impact on participation in our projects. This
> has
> > implications for our ability to collect, share, and disseminate free
> > knowledge in support of the Wikimedia vision. Our statement speaks to the
> > Board's duty to help the Foundation fulfill its mission.
> >
> > The Board is committed to making our communities safer and will not
> accept
> > harassment and toxic behavior on Wikimedia projects. We believe this
> matter
> > deserves the Foundation's attention and resources, and have confirmed
> this
> > responsibility at our latest Board meeting on November 13th. The
> questions
> > that lay before us all now are how to best address this threat, rather
> than
> > if we should attempt to do so.
> >
> > The Board especially appreciates and applauds the work being done to
> > address this important issue by many community leaders across the
> movement
> > and teams within the Foundation. We look forward to seeing this
> cooperative
> > work not only continue, but expand. Finally, we encourage everyone who is
> > interested in helping the Foundation address this threat to our vision
> and
> > mission to engage in the upcoming discussions around this issue.
> >
> > On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees,
> >
> > Christophe Henner, Board Chair
> >
> > María Sefidari, Board Vice Chair
> >
> > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Harassment_survey_2015
> >
> >
> > Statement by the Wikimedia Board on Healthy Community Culture,
> Inclusivity,
> > and Safe Spaces
> >
> >
> > At our Board meeting on November 13, and in Board meetings in September
> and
> > June, we spent considerable time discussing the issues of harassment and
> > hostility on the internet generally, and more specifically on the
> Wikimedia
> > projects.
> >
> > This is an important issue. Approximately 40% of internet users, and 70%
> of
> > women internet users, have personally experienced harassment.[1] Of
> people
> > who have reported experiencing harassment on Wikimedia projects, more
> than
> > 50% reported decreasing their participation in our community.[2] Based on
> > this and other research, we conclude that harassment and toxic behavior
> on
> > the Wikimedia projects negatively impacts the ability of the Wikimedia
> > projects to collect, share, and disseminate free knowledge. This behavior
> > is contrary to our vision and mission.
> >
> > Our communities deserve safe spaces in which they can contribute
> > productively and debate constructively. It is our belief that the
> Wikimedia
> > Foundation should be proactively engaged in eliminating harassment,
> > promoting inclusivity, ensuring a healthier culture of discourse, and
> > improving the safety of Wikimedia spaces. We request management to
> dedicate
> > appropriate resources to this end.
> >
> > We urge every member of the Wikimedia communities to collaborate in a way
> > that models the Wikimedia values of openness 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Upcoming Research Showcase, November 16, 2016

2016-11-09 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,
The topic sounds great. I'm afraid I can't watch it live, as I have other
duties in the evening.
Kind regards
Ziko

2016-11-09 23:29 GMT+01:00 Leila Zia :

> [Apologies for cross-posting]
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Almost a year ago, we [1] embarked on a research project to understand who
> Wikipedia readers are. More specifically, we set a goal for finding a
> taxonomy of Wikipedia readers. In the upcoming Research Showcase, I will
> present the findings of this research.
>
> *Logistics*​
> The Research Showcase will be live-streamed on Wednesday, November 16, 2016
> at 11:35 (PST) 19:35 (UTC).
>
> YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O24F1xkbNwI
>
> As usual, you can join the conversation on IRC freedone at
> #wikimedia-research. And, you can watch our past research showcases at
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Showcase.
>
> *Title*
> Why We Read Wikipedia
>
> *Abstract*
> Every day, millions of readers come to Wikipedia to satisfy a broad range
> of information needs, however, little is known about what these needs are.
> In this presentation, I share the result of a research that sets to help us
> understand Wikipedia readers better. Based on an initial user study on
> English, Persian, and Spanish Wikipedia, we build a taxonomy of Wikipedia
> use-cases along several dimensions, capturing users’ motivations to visit
> Wikipedia, the depth of knowledge they are seeking, and their knowledge of
> the topic of interest prior to visiting Wikipedia. Then, we quantify the
> prevalence of these use-cases via a large-scale user survey conducted on
> English Wikipedia. Our analyses highlight the variety of factors driving
> users to Wikipedia, such as current events, media coverage of a topic,
> personal curiosity, work or school assignments, or boredom. Finally, we
> match survey responses to the respondents’ digital traces in Wikipedia’s
> server logs, enabling the discovery of behavioral patterns associated with
> specific use-cases. Our findings advance our understanding of reader
> motivations and behavior on Wikipedia and have potential implications for
> developers aiming to improve Wikipedia’s user experience, editors striving
> to cater to (a subset of) their readers’ needs, third-party services (such
> as search engines) providing access to Wikipedia content, and researchers
> aiming to build tools such as article recommendation engines.
>
>
> *How to prepare? What to expect?*
> If you decide to attend, here are a few things I would like to ask you to
> keep in mind, especially if this will be your first time to one of our
> research showcases:
>
> * Like many other research projects in fields that are not heavily
> explored, the findings of this research will create more questions than
> they answer. I encourage you to keep these questions in mind throughout the
> presentation and discussion: "What can we do with this finding? What other
> questions can we ask? What other ideas can we try?"
>
> * Be open to ask these questions to yourself, especially if you are a
> Wikipedia editor, even before coming to the showcase: "Why do I edit
> Wikipedia? Who am I writing the content for, if anyone? Will I change the
> way I write content if I know more about who reads it (to encourage or
> discourage certain types of reading or readers)? What needs an encyclopedia
> should serve? What is Wikipedia: A place one can quickly find the answer to
> his/her questions, or a place that one can go to when he/she wants to spend
> a quiet time reading and learning, or a place for both and even more? etc."
>
> * And, see if you would be interested to see the result of this study in
> your language. What will be presented is based on research on English,
> Persian, and Spanish Wikipedia (the data from the latter two projects have
> been used only for one part of the research). We are interested in running
> the study on at least 2-3 more languages to understand the robustness of
> some of the results across different languages, and to also help
> communities with having access to the results for their specific language
> project.
>
> ​Looking forward to seeing you there, and if you can't make it, please feel
> free to watch the video later and get in touch with us with
> questions/comments. :)
>
> Best,
> Leila
> --
> Leila Zia
> Senior Research Scientist
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> ​[1] WMF Research and researchers from three academic institutions: EPFL,
> GESIS, and Stanford University, in collaboration with WMF Reading.
> ​
> ___
> 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,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changes to current chapter and thematic organisation criteria

2016-08-25 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear all,

Allow me, from my personal experiences, to bring into conscience what it
means to "be" or to represent a Wikimedia affiliate, whether it is a
chapter, a thematic organization or a WM user group.

It is a great honour to be active in a Wikimedia affiliate.

Affiliates, a chapter for example, are trusted with the use of important
trademarks and logos. For many people who are unfamiliar with the movement,
a chapter is the first contact point with everything regarding "Wikipedia".
Government and other institutions cooperate with chapters. The people
responsible in a chapter have to decide on budgets and reglements and many
other things, with effect to people inside and outside the chapter.

But what if a chapter fails?

Think of a museum that wants to cooperate with "Wikipedia" in a specific
language, and approaches the chapter related. If the chapter fails to
reply, if the museum never gets an answer of any kind even after several
attempts via different communication channels - that is a catastrophe for
the reputation of the chapter, but also for the Wikipedia language version
in question.

Or think of a volunteer who wants to organize something on an international
scale, and invites other chapters (and affiliates) to join. What if her
inclusionist approach is rewarded with deafening silence because chapter
representants are inactive but too proud to admit that?

I am a member of WMNL and WMDE. But even if I were not, these organizations
and the WMF represent me and my work on Wikipedia to the outside world. I
want them to be accountable to minimum standards - I think that I deserve
that as a Wikipedia volunteer. And I want to travel to other countries and
meet museum people and hear from them: "Wikimedia? Yes, we work together
with a Wikimedia user group here, those folks do great a great job."

It cannot be surprising that I was very happy to read Carlos' mail. I'm not
sure whether we are quite there yet, and one issue remains how to
effectively support affiliates even more, and how to provide appropriate
resources. But - whether such investions make sense depends also from the
affiliate.

Kind regards
Ziko




Am Donnerstag, 25. August 2016 schrieb Delphine Ménard :

> On 24 August 2016 at 22:50, Michael Peel  > wrote:
> >
>
> > This process seems to be very harsh as written. For example, it says:
> > "an organization’s recognition may be terminated immediately
> according to the group's agreement (without Board review or appeal)"
> > There's no mention of any sort of ombudsperson, or appeal process in
> this document. Presumably this is delegated to the individual group
> agreements, but it would be good to see that explicitly mentioned in this
> process document. There are other examples elsewhere in the process that I
> won't go into here. But I think this process needs rewriting to make it
> fairer to all parties.
> >
>
> I don't think it's harsh. Experience proves that "trying to get in
> touch" and "trying to put together a plan" is a very lengthy process,
> and takes months, if not years. In short, every attempt I have seen at
> actually making sure a chapter / group was really inexistent before
> entering the last phase of derecognition has been more than thorough
> (from many emails to activating personal contacts to everything you
> can think of to get in touch with people). You do have to draw the
> line somewhere though, and at some point get "harsh" and have hard
> deadlines. An appeal process would mean having someone at the other
> end of the line. More often than not, this is not the case. I think
> it's important that we know to "terminate", because dormant entities
> often prevent new people from rekindling motivation and starting anew.
>
> Best,
>
> Delphine
>
> --
> @notafish
>
> NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get
> lost.
> Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive -
> http://blog.notanendive.org
> Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org
>
> ___
> 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,
> 
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] First French WikiConvention

2016-08-18 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Cher amis,

I feel very lucky that I have the occasion to take part into something new
in our movement. It has been some time that French speaking Wikipmedians
are planning this. As a foreign observer I am looking forward to learn a
lot of thing for our convention in the Netherlands, in November.

See you tomorrow at Halle Pajol!

Kind regards
Ziko



Am Donnerstag, 18. August 2016 schrieb Andy Cruz y Corro :

> Yay for inter-regional conferences! I wish you nothing but success!
>
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Kevin Payravi  >
> wrote:
>
> > This is awesome to hear, Pierre. Best of luck to the event!
> >
> > Kevin
> > SuperHamster on en.wiki
> > Sent via mobile
> >
> > On Aug 17, 2016 11:11 AM, "Pierre-Yves Beaudouin" <
> > pierre.beaudo...@wikimedia.fr > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > We are proud to announce that the first ever French-speaking Wikimedia
> > > projects editors gathering will take place on August 19-20-21 in Paris,
> > > France. Supported by WikiFranca and organized locally by Wikimedia
> > France,
> > > it's a "dream come true" as the first idea of this event goes back to
> > 2012.
> > >
> > > The 1st Francophone WikiConvention will take place in an eco-friendly
> > > rehabilitated place called the Halle Pajol in the 18th arrondissement
> of
> > > Paris.
> > > Nearly 140 participants from 15 countries will be present. More than 40
> > > proposals were made by the participants to create the program of this
> 2,5
> > > day convention: gender-inclusive language on Wikipedia, paid
> > contributions,
> > > enriching articles about francophone Paralympic athletes, accessibility
> > and
> > > contribution in Africa ... A variety of themes that reflect the issues
> of
> > > the francophone part of the Wikimedia movement.
> > >
> > > This event was made possible by the support of the International
> > > Organization of the Francophonie, the General Delegation for the French
> > > language and the languages ​​of France, L'Oréal Foundation for Women in
> > > Science, Google France and of course the support of Wikimedia Wikimedia
> > > France and Wikimedia Switzerland, as well as the Wikimedia Foundation.
> > The
> > > event is coordinated by WikiFranca, the organization of chapters,
> > > francophone user groups and contributors of the Wikimedia movement.
> > >
> > > It is meant to be then organized annually, if it proves to be
> successful
> > !
> > > Thank you to all Wikimedians who supported this event. And now, let's
> do
> > it
> > > !
> > >
> > >
> > > Pyb
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > > 
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> "Imagina un mundo en donde cada persona del planeta pueda tener acceso
> libre a la suma total de todo el conocimiento humano. Eso es lo que estamos
> haciendo."—Jimmy Wales .
>
> Socio de Wikimedia México
> .
>
>
>
> [image: Andrés C y C on about.me]
>
> Andrés Cruz y Corro
> about.me/andycyca
>   
> ___
> 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,
> 
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Our Visiting Wikimedian initiative #wmcon

2016-07-29 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Thanks for the mail, Nicole, and Teele for the post. Two points:

a) It is great to see this kind of chapter interchanges, and I hope to
see more of it. It would be great if more chapters can offer such
opportunities.

b) It is great to see how a generation of young people grows in/into
the Wikimedia movement, who do internships, write their BA thesis on a
Wikimedia topic or travel to conventions. When I started with
Wikipedia, I was already 30, way over the age of secondary
socialisation.

Kind regards
Ziko








2016-07-29 12:30 GMT+02:00 Nicole Ebber :
> Hi all,
>
> Following up on our Wikimedia Conference report 2016[1], we have now
> published more information about our “Visiting Wikimedian” initiative
> that we kicked-off with Teele Vaalma from Wikimedia Eesti this year.
> This initiative aims to transfer practical knowledge from the German
> chapter to other Wikimedia movement affiliates and provides us with an
> outside view.
>
> Teele wrote a blog post on the movement blog, describing her time in
> Berlin and her work to support us in organising the conference. It’s
> really worth a read, as she provides insights into cross chapter
> exchange and knowledge transfer.[2]
>
> We have also set up a page (on Meta!) that describes the pilot that we
> started this year. We would like to continue this for the Wikimedia
> Conference 2017 and now start looking for the next Visiting
> Wikimedian.[3] We are especially looking for a person who can apply
> the knowledge to an upcoming event, for example if the affiliate is
> hosting a regional or international conference. If you are interested
> in becoming a Visiting Wikimedian, please reach out to me directly
> until mid September.
>
> A special thanks goes out to Wikimedia Eesti for being so supportive
> of the idea and to Teele for doing such an awesome job!
>
> Cheers,
> Nicole
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2016/Report
> [2] 
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/07/28/digest-estonia-germany-wikimedia-conference/
> [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Visiting_Wikimedian
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Referentin Internationale Beziehungen
> Adviser to the ED, International Relations
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. +49 30 21915826-0
> http://wikimedia.de
>
> 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.
>
> ___
> Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately 
> directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. 
> For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ___
> WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
> wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l

___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Farsi Wikipedia

2016-07-27 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Congratulations to the mile stone.

I do allow myself to ask how the 500.000 have been achieved. When I
click on Random Article, I get a certain percentage of articles of
this kind:
https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%AF%D9%87%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%A7%D9%86_%D9%85%DB%8C%D8%B3%D9%88

Kind regards
Ziko




2016-07-27 20:27 GMT+02:00 Ivan Martínez :
> Congratulations!
>
> 2016-07-27 13:15 GMT-05:00 Kevin Payravi :
>
>> Awesome to hear, Mardentanha! Congratulations to you and the rest of the
>> Farsi Wikipedia editors.
>>
>> Kevin Payravi
>> W: www.kevinpayravi.com
>> E: kevinpayr...@gmail.com
>> P: (330) 554 - 3397
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Asaf Bartov 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Fantastic news!  Congratulations to all Farsi contributors! \o/
>> >
>> >A.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:10 AM, Mardetanha 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > I would to let everyone know, after 13 years and millions of edits,
>> > Finally
>> > > Farsi Wikipedia has reached 500,000 article. This is a very historic
>> > moment
>> > > for all us in Farsi Wikipedia.
>> > >
>> > > Mardetanha
>> > > ___
>> > > 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,
>> > > 
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Asaf Bartov
>> > Wikimedia Foundation 
>> >
>> > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
>> > sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
>> > https://donate.wikimedia.org
>> > ___
>> > 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,
>> > 
>> >
>> ___
>> 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,
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Iván Martínez*
>
> *Presidente - Wikimedia México A.C.User:ProtoplasmaKid *
>
> // Mis comunicaciones respecto a Wikipedia/Wikimedia pueden tener una
> moratoria en su atención debido a que es un voluntariado.
> // Ayuda a proteger a Wikipedia, dona ahora: https://donate.wikimedia.org
> ___
> 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, 
> 

___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] With my thanks to everyone ...

2016-07-14 Thread Ziko van Dijk
It was always great to talk to you, Geofff, I wish you all the best
and hope that from time to time the Wikimedia movement still will
enjoy your advice.
Ziko

2016-07-14 13:01 GMT+02:00 Michael Jahn :
> Working with you has been a brief but nonetheless great pleasure, Geoff!
> Wishing you all the best for this exciting change!
> Michael
>
> --
>
> Michael Jahn
> Leiter Kommunikation & Partnerschaften
> Head of Communications & Partnerships
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 260
>
> http://wikimedia.de 
>
> Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu der
> Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> 2016-07-13 23:25 GMT+02:00 Geoff Brigham :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Over the past five years, I’ve been honored to serve as the General Counsel
>> and Secretary of the Wikimedia Foundation. This job has been amazing, and
>> I’m grateful to everyone who has made it so rewarding. It's now time for my
>> next step, so, in the coming days, I will be leaving the Foundation to
>> pursue a new career opportunity.
>>
>> I depart with such love for the mission, the Foundation, the Wikimedia
>> communities, and my colleagues at work. I thank my past and present bosses
>> as well as the Board for their support and guidance. I stand in awe of the
>> volunteer writers, editors, and photographers who contribute every day to
>> the Wikimedia projects. And I will hold special to my heart my past and
>> current teams, including legal and community advocacy. :) You have taught,
>> given, and enriched me so much.
>>
>> After my departure, Michelle Paulson will serve as interim head of Legal,
>> and, subject to Board approval, Stephen LaPorte will serve as interim
>> Secretary to the Board. I can happily report that they have the experience
>> and expertise to ensure a smooth and professional transition.
>>
>> The future of the Foundation under Katherine's leadership is exciting.
>> Having had the pleasure of working for her, I know Katherine will take the
>> Foundation to its next level in promoting and defending the outstanding
>> mission and values of the Wikimedia movement. Although I'm delighted about
>> my next opportunity, I will miss this new chapter in the Foundation's
>> story.
>>
>> My last day at the Foundation will be July 18th. After that, I will take a
>> month off to recharge my batteries, and then I start my new gig at YouTube
>> in the Bay Area. There, I will serve as Director of YouTube Trust & Safety,
>> managing global teams for policy, legal, and anti-abuse operations. As with
>> Wikimedia, I look forward to learning from those teams and tackling
>> together a new set of exciting, novel challenges.
>>
>> For those who want to stay in touch, please do! My personal email is:
>> geoffrey.r.brig...@gmail.com.
>>
>> With respect, admiration, and gratitude,
>>
>> Geoff
>> ___
>> 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,
>> 
> ___
> 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, 
> 

___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight

2016-06-30 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Honestly, I am rather unhappy with the wording: "The article for one
of them and the data at Wikidata are pathetic"

Obviously, someone took the time to make a start. Saying "it is
pathetic" sounds like "you are / your work is pathetic". This is a
good example how the wording of a comment affects the general
atmosphere on wikis and on lists. Wouldn't it be better to say "can be
improved" or "I'd wished to see more content"?

As long as short articles or minimum data sets are allowed..
personally I'd prefer a different approach on article creation and
minimum standards, but that's a different discussion.

Kind regards
Ziko



>
> The article is a one liner stub. The Wikidata item had no statements and I
> added the few that were minimally needed.
>
> I find it incredible that we take no care of our own even when they are
> obviously notable.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> PS I have not looked at any of the others and I would welcome it when they
> get some proper attention.
>
> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2016/06/wikipedia-wikipedian-of-year-rosie.html
> ___
> 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, 
> 

___
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, 


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

2016-06-23 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear Patricio,

You have been chair, and board member, in times difficult for our
movement. You have invested a lot of time, and even if I did not agree
always with you for 100%, I knew that a good conversation was
possible. Please accept my unconditional respect for your commitment.

Kind regards
Ziko





2016-06-23 21:07 GMT+02:00 Salvador A :
> Congratulations Christophe and Maria! We hope to see great and new things
> from you in the BoT
>
> Thanks for your years of service Patricio.
>
> El jueves, 23 de junio de 2016, Samuel Klein  escribió:
>
>> Thank you Patricio!  It is great to see these updates.  ×SJ
>> On Jun 23, 2016 19:34, "Tanweer Morshed" > > wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks to Patricio for your service in the movement. Congratulations to
>> > Christophe, Maria on being elected to the positions, as well as to
>> > Nataliia. :)
>> >
>> > On Thursday, June 23, 2016, Galileo Vidoni > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Congrats to Christophe and María. We're sure the Foundation will be in
>> > good
>> > > hands ;).
>> > >
>> > > Gracias Patro!
>> > >
>> > > Galileo Vidoni
>> > > Presidente
>> > > A. C. Wikimedia Argentina
>> > > Thank you for all of your work,
>> > > nice persons are leaving, nice persons are joining.
>> > >
>> > > You know that for me you be always Patricio, Natalia, Cristophe, Maria,
>> > > Frieda, Alice. All Wikipedians.
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Patricio Lorente <
>> > > patricio.lore...@gmail.com  > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hello everyone,
>> > > >
>> > > > I am happy to share that as of today, Christophe Henner and Nataliia
>> > > > Tymkiv have formally joined the Board of Trustees as affiliate
>> > > > Board-selected members. They both bring deep expertise in the
>> Wikimedia
>> > > > community, and in their respective fields. I’m confident they will
>> > serve
>> > > as
>> > > > excellent contributors, rooted in the values of our movement. You can
>> > > learn
>> > > > more about them in an announcement we made in May:
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/05/24/affiliate-selected-board-trustees-election/
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Today the Board also voted to appoint Christophe Henner as Chair, and
>> > > > María Sefidari as Vice Chair. Both Christophe and María have a long
>> > > history
>> > > > of involvement in the Wikimedia community, and have held leadership
>> > roles
>> > > > at Wikimedia France and Wikimedia Spain, respectively.
>> > > >
>> > > > More about Christophe, María, and Natallia is below. I hope you will
>> > join
>> > > > me in congratulating them on their new positions and wish them
>> success
>> > in
>> > > > their terms ahead.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > I would like to thank my friend Alice for working with me in her role
>> > as
>> > > > Vice Chair, and many thanks to you all for your support during my
>> time
>> > as
>> > > > Chair.
>> > > >
>> > > > Patricio Lorente
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > About Christophe Henner
>> > > >
>> > > > Christophe Henner is the former Chair of Wikimedia France and current
>> > > > deputy CEO of Webedia 's gaming division,
>> the
>> > > > international digital media group headquartered in France.
>> > > >
>> > > > He has deep and varied experience across the marketing sector,
>> > including
>> > > > leadership roles at at Webedia and L'Odyssée Interactive.
>> > > >
>> > > > Christophe has been an active member of the Wikimedia community for
>> > more
>> > > > than 12 years. In 2007, he joined the Board of Wikimedia France
>> > > >  and has remained an active Board member
>> in
>> > > > various positions for the past ten years. He has served as both Chair
>> > and
>> > > > Vice Chair of the Board of Wikimedia France. During his time on the
>> > > > Board, Christophe helped lead Wikimedia France through a significant
>> > > period
>> > > > of growth. This included leading the development of the chapter’s
>> > brand,
>> > > > and supporting the development of a clear organizational strategy and
>> > > > vision for the chapter.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > About Maria Sefidari
>> > > >
>> > > > Maria is a professor in the Digital Communications, Culture and
>> > > > Citizenship Master's degree program  of Rey Juan
>> > > > Carlos University
>> > > >  at the
>> > > > MediaLab-Prado .
>> > María
>> > > > graduated with a Psychology degree from Universidad Complutense de
>> > Madrid
>> > > > ,
>> and
>> > > > later a Master's degree in Management and Tourism at the Business
>> > faculty
>> > > > of the same university.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > María started contributing to the Wikimedia projects in 2006, and has

Re: [Wikimedia-l] election for 2 seats on WMF board of trustees ends May 7...

2016-05-03 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Actually I favor very much the idea that, after the election, there is
a public list of the chapters that did cast the vote. (Not
necessarily, which chapter supported which candidate, but that is
another discussion. In 2012, the list of candidates was not published
at all, by the way.)

I remember from 2012 that, shortly before the elections, I heard a
chairman from a specific chapter talking with very, very strong
opinions about the movement. It struck me to find out later that that
chapter didn't cast its vote. Isn't it important for a chapter to
influence the movement as a whole?

Also from the year 2012 (and 2013) I remember that many chapters that
we from the WCA contacted did not respond at all. So I am not
surprised to read now that only one third did vote until now.

Lane wrote:
"Feel free also to pressure more active chapters to do their duty to support
less organized chapters in voting."

I usually agree with Lane, but in this case I don't see that "duty".
It is the responsibility of each and every chapter to become active,
not anybody else's responsibility.

Possibly, if a chapter board did not cast a vote, it is interesting
for the members of the chapter to know that. Maybe the board can come
up with a good reason.

Kind regards
Ziko


2016-05-03 17:40 GMT+02:00 Laurentius :
> Il giorno mar, 03/05/2016 alle 08.05 -0400, Lane Rasberry ha scritto:
>> Or - I could be wrong. Should the list of voting chapters be reported?
>> What is the correct interpretation of closed voting in this case?
>
> At the end of 2015, before starting the election process, there has been
> some discussion about this on Meta.
> The result was in favour of publishing, after the end of the election,
> the list of affiliates who voted.
> The idea of publishing a partial list during the voting process was not
> proposed; personally I think it's fine and it makes sense, but I'd like
> to hear a few opinions about this from the involved affiliates.
>
> Lorenzo
>
>
>
> ___
> 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, 
> 

___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Massive Online Open Course about Wikipedia

2016-04-06 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Congratulations for this project! I have looked at some figures, and
some videos, and it looks very impressive. I'm gonna have a closer
look in the nearby future.
It would be great to have something like that in other languages.
Kind regards
Ziko




2016-04-05 19:25 GMT+02:00 Brill Lyle :
> Ah. Interesting. Apologies, I didn't know the two Education programs were
> different. Thanks for explaining this.
>
> It's all very interesting. Thank you so much for sharing!
>
> - Erika
>
>
> *Erika Herzog*
> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Shani  wrote:
>
>> Hi, Erika.
>>
>> I was referring to the Wikipedia Education Program (the global one), and
>> specifically the Collab, a group of WikiEDU leaders from around the world,
>> *not* the Wiki Education Foundation (which is basically the US education
>> program). It's very confusing, I know! :)
>>
>> In any case, our efforts focus exactly on what you've described -- we've
>> noticed that different parties seem to work on the same thing and are doing
>> what we can to create global awareness and open up a dialogue about it, so
>> we can learn from each other's efforts, as well as come up with a
>>  successful "recipe" for those who want to start one.
>>
>> Best,
>> Shani.
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
>>
>> > I am curious about the overlap -- if any -- between the WikiMOOC
>> > initiatives and WikiEdu. It seems like these are inter-related
>> initiatives
>> > that duplicate efforts to some degree? I understand WikiEdu is focused on
>> > North America, so maybe that answers the question, but it sounds very
>> > frustrating that these efforts are not more connected somehow. The
>> WikiEdu
>> > Dashboard is very cool!
>> >
>> > I am also wondering about user metrics, and how they were measured.
>> > Apologies, I clicked through many of the original links but didn't see
>> that
>> > information quickly / easily.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> >
>> > Erika
>> >
>> > *Erika Herzog*
>> > Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* > >
>> > Secretary, Wikimedia NYC
>> > 
>> >
>>
> ___
> 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, 
> 

___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia Zero mass effect on Wikimedia projects

2016-03-23 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Actually, I am quite appalled by the article. Whether one wants to see
something positive in pirating or not, the Wikimedia servers are not meant
for this purpose (for good reasons). Breaking rules and taking abuse of an
opportunity is not a goal by itself.
Kind regards
Ziko




Am Mittwoch, 23. März 2016 schrieb Jason Koebler :

> This is an important issue and how Wikimedia and the community handles it
> is very important. I would caution that even those who are pirating and
> sharing copyrighted materials are not "bad actors," they are people who
> have no other file sharing options who have found a creative solution in
> the face of being given partial access to the internet.
>
> Here is an article I just published on the subject:
>
>
> http://motherboard.vice.com/read/wikipedia-zero-facebook-free-basics-angola-pirates-zero-rating
>
> On 22 March 2016 at 07:37, Mwaoshe Njemah  > wrote:
>
> > Reminder: Wikipedia Zero is actually a very good thing. We are hoping to
> > improve the quality and quantity of articles
> >
> > Mwaoshe Njemah,
> > Siku Ya Wiki Project
> > On 21 Mar 2016 09:58, "WereSpielChequers"  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Is much of the problem about differing varieties of Portuguese? Last I
> > > heard the Portuguese language Wikipedia allowed multiple versions of
> > > Portuguese in a similar way to English - i.e. standardised at the
> article
> > > level not the project level; Though the editing base is much more
> skewed
> > to
> > > Brazil than EN is to the US. Assuming Angolan Portuguese is closer to
> the
> > > Portuguese spoken in Portugal, then just as in EN you are likely to get
> > > some goodfaith newbies "correcting" spelling to the version they know.
> If
> > > so perhaps edit filters might work. Alternatively, would it be possible
> > to
> > > do something similar to the Chinese Wikipedia and display different
> > > versions of Portuguese according to user preference/IP geography?
> > >
> > > WereSpielChequers
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > > 
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jason Koebler
> Staff Writer, Motherboard  / VICE
> Host & Producer, Radio Motherboard
> 
> podcast
> 49 South 2nd Street, Brooklyn, NY 11249
> 301-412-7324
> @jason_koebler 
> ___
> 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,
> 
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Armenia candidate for the board

2016-03-02 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

I cannot say much about the specific case, but in general: in small
countries it is not unusual that there is only one national
encyclopedia, and that it is directly or indirectly published or
supported by the government or an institution close to the government.

A good example is the Store Norske from Norway.
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/buecher/2.1719/kein-geld-fuer-lexika-wer-rettet-das-grosse-norwegische-1639090.html

So it is not necessary to think immediately and exclusively about the
Soviet Union.

Kind regards
Ziko


2016-03-02 21:11 GMT+01:00 Yaroslav M. Blanter :
> On 2016-03-02 20:58, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Now, why are we bestowing Wikipedian of the Year honours on government
>> employees of repressive regimes? If we had the US Secretary of Defense
>> writing Wikipedia articles about the US Army, or had employees of the
>> German government running Wikimedia Deutschland, I'm sure there'd be an
>> outcry, even though those are countries with quite favourable records on
>> human rights, press freedom and so on. The idea of an award would not even
>> arise.
>>
>>
>
> Susanna is (or was) a researcher, and every researcher in Armenia is a state
> employee. There are just no non-governmental organizations who employ
> researchers.
>
> I do think there is a problem with a potential Armenian board member (that
> is, Turkish and Azeri Wikimedians would basically consider board as not
> legitimate), but I do not think the fact that she is or was employed by the
> Academy of Sciences is in any way problematic.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
>
> ___
> 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,
> 

___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] A quick note about the future

2016-03-01 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear Jimmy,

Thank you for the clarification. I very much appreciate signals that
lead to a better understanding and coming to terms with each other. I
am happy to read that you wouldn't, as a person, object to a return of
James to the board.

However, the FAQ says in the introduction: "The Board has compiled
this list of answers to many of the most common questions." So this
FAQ is a statement of the board, also in your name.

Which relates to your very decision to vote for the removal of another
board member. Why did you support the removal? For a gut feeling
anticipation that James might misbehave in future? Or for specific
actions of James in the past, actions that could be defined legally,
or at least within the frame of the WMF regulations? You know: nulla
poena sine lege.

I don't want to judge about matters I don't know sufficiently about. I
don't want to speculate and spread rumors. I don't want to rely on
leaked documents. I don't want to show disrespect to people who invest
a lot of time in order to keep the board and the Foundation running.

I just want to know, as a voter, why a board member coming from the
elections has been removed, and what are the consequences. Because I
want to know what is the value of my vote.

Kind regards
Ziko


PS: Thanks for the quote, Chris; I wonder what "next annual meeting"
means in our context.








2016-02-29 16:51 GMT+01:00 Denny Vrandecic :
> I agree as well.
> On Feb 29, 2016 06:00, "Jimmy Wales"  wrote:
>
>> On 2/29/16 5:52 AM, Nathan wrote:
>> > There is a simple and easy way to rectify this: you and the other members
>> > of the board can honestly and fully describe the circumstances that led
>> you
>> > to eject Heilman from the board.  I've seen lots of indirect and
>> > non-specific claims from both sides; I wish you would all stop making
>> vague
>> > assertions and just tell us what happened. I'm sure you can come up with
>> > lots of reasons why you Simply Cannot Do That, but if that's the case
>> then
>> > maybe stop talking about it altogether.
>>
>> I agree with you completely.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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,
>> 
> ___
> 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, 
> 

___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] A quick note about the future

2016-02-29 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello Jimmy,

Thank you for the note. I was wondering about the eligibility of
James, because the page
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/James_Heilman_removal_FAQ#Can_James_be_a_candidate_for_a_community-selected_seat_again.3F
says:
"Due to the removal from the Board, James is not eligible to be a
candidate for the Board until the 2017 community selection process.
Under the Bylaws, the Board oversees the rules and procedures for the
community-selection process. If the Board determines that a candidate
does not meet eligibility criteria, it may decline to appoint the
candidate to the Board."

Before 2017, James could be appointed to the board by the sitting
board members. Is he eligible for such an appointment?

According to the 2015 board selection page, a candidate for the
community seats - and I assume that the rules for other seats are
comparable - has to meet some criteria,
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/Board_elections/2015
"Prerequisites to candidacy".

If James was eligible in spring 2015, I guess that he is also eligible
at the moment. But why does the FAQ say that James is not eligible
"now" because of the removal?

The "prerequisites" say:
"You must not have been removed from a position at a non-profit
organization or other company because of mismanagement or misconduct"

So would this be a reason for not appointing James to the board, or
call him not eligible for the 2017 elections? Was James removed from
the WMF Board for "mismanagement or misconduct"?

Kind regards
Ziko









2016-02-29 15:03 GMT+01:00 Amir E. Aharoni :
> Nathan, as pretty much always, is correct.
>
> Everybody is tired of this mystery.
>
> I'm not blaming anybody - it's part of the unfortunate atmosphere of
> unnecessary secrecy, which plagued us for way too long. That's what creates
> the accusations and the wild rumors in all sides. We all have to fix it in
> ourselves.
>
> Simply telling everybody's stories fully and openly is the only right thing
> now.
> בתאריך 29 בפבר׳ 2016 15:53,‏ "Nathan"  כתב:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Jimmy Wales 
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > One of the things that someone asked me privately to discuss is what I
>> > think of the possibility of James running for the board again.
>> >
>> > First, I have no opinion about whether or not he will be eligible at the
>> > next election.  That's a matter for people other than me to decide.  I
>> > don't know.
>> >
>> > Second, if he is eligible, and if he runs, and if he wins, then I will
>> > support his joining the board.  Because I've been willing to be vocal
>> > about what I view as his failures, people have sometimes gotten the
>> > mistaken impression that this is primarily a personal conflict between
>> > him and me.  That's not true.  Before the board vote to remove him, I
>> > told him that I would vote with the majority - because it is my feeling
>> > that on matters of trust, if he was unable to command the trust of at
>> > least the majority of other trustees, his position would be untenable.
>> >
>> > Third, it may interest you all to know that I did not and would not have
>> > instigated the meeting in which he was removed from the board.  Indeed,
>> > I missed an online board meeting where things happened apparently that
>> > brought this to a head, and in the final meeting with James, I mainly
>> > inquired "What brought this up now?" as I thought things were settling
>> > down.
>> >
>> > Fourth, having said all of that, I remain very disappointed in James and
>> > the way he has spun this without coming forward with the community about
>> > what happened.  He claimed reasons for his dismissal that everyone else
>> > on the board agrees unanimously are not the reasons.  I haven't seen him
>> > acknowledge that he was wrong about that, and I haven't seen him own up
>> > to the things that actually upset people.
>> >
>> > There are many narratives being spun by people who weren't there, who
>> > have made all kinds of assumption that aren't true.
>> >
>>
>> There is a simple and easy way to rectify this: you and the other members
>> of the board can honestly and fully describe the circumstances that led you
>> to eject Heilman from the board.  I've seen lots of indirect and
>> non-specific claims from both sides; I wish you would all stop making vague
>> assertions and just tell us what happened. I'm sure you can come up with
>> lots of reasons why you Simply Cannot Do That, but if that's the case then
>> maybe stop talking about it altogether.
>> ___
>> 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,
>> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement representation vs WMF board reform

2016-02-29 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear Brion, thank you for starting this thread and for your caveats.

Among the challenges when creating new movement entities, or organs, I
think there are at least two which we have experienced in the past:

a) A certain part of the Wikipedians has a very individualistic mind
and may not want to be represented at all. Representation means to
support someone who is speaking, partially/temporarily, on your
behalf. It is easy to imagine that, in an emotional moment confronted
with a "common enemy", e.g. a specific Wikipedia language version
community elects representants. But that is not enough: on the long
run those representants need the constant support of those they are
supposed to represent, otherwise their position will be very weak.

b) Building up an organ or structures in general needs skills and hard
work. It is often difficult to find people who don't only want to cast
a voice of protest but to attend meetings, write minutes, communicate
with many different people, read a lot of documents, support a
decision even if you don't agree for 100% etc.

Kind regards
Ziko







2016-02-28 15:53 GMT+01:00 Brion Vibber :
> I just want to split out a concept that came up in the big threads of the
> last few days:
>
> Some members of the WMF Board of Trustees are giving strong signals (like,
> saying it outright) that the BoT can't fully take on the role of movement
> leadership or community representation. Not because they think it shouldn't
> happen, but because structurally and legally and practically the board of
> Wikimedia Foundation Inc has different roles to fill.
>
> I think we should consider what roles and structures we *do* want as
> members of the Wikimedia movement community. And I think we should think
> about that and talk about that carefully before rushing into details like
> board reform.
>
> Perhaps we should explicitly accept WMF as a "first among equals" org
> within the movement, with specific roles like tech development and
> fundraising (or other emphases as well) while other orgs concentrate on
> different specific issues. Or even just "one among equals" that happens to
> have specialized in those roles.
>
> This probably means we should think about "umbrella" structures to
> coordinate and represent and look forward.
>
> And that's something we should *definitely* not rush into. If a mismatch in
> hopes for what the WMF BoT can and should do has been a factor in
> communication and leadership issues in the past, then it's very important
> we not make the same kinds of mistakes in any new structures that might be
> needed.
>
> Dream big.
> Act with passion.
> Talk with thought.
> Don't run with scissors.
>
> -- brion
> ___
> 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, 
> 

___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] The reinstatement of James Heilman

2016-02-27 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Thanks for the contributions.

I can imagine that it is reasonable
* that the WMF Board deems it impossible to work together with a
specific board member;
* that the WMF Board deems it impossible to publish the reasons for the removal;
* that the WMF Board calls the removed board member to be ineligible
for future elections.

What my problem is, is that the WMF Board takes all these decisions by
itself. The WMF Board acted as prosecutor, judge and executioner in
one organ. The Dutch would say: The butcher is reviewing his own meat.
It becomes easy to criticise such a board.

The present situation is unfair to the removed member who is blamed in
public without a public information about the reason. The removed
board member also can only appeal to the very organ that removed him.

The present situation is furthermore a devastating signal to the
voters. The removal decreases the value of the community elections and
makes all board seats questionable. The ultimate election is made by
the WMF Board, not the community, it seems.

As solutions I can imagine
* to create an arbitration organ for these decisions; or
* to let the voters decide whether they want to send the removed board
member back to the board.

Kind regards
Ziko




2016-02-27 20:02 GMT+01:00 Kevin Gorman :
> Hi all -
>
> Maria's appointment should be viewed as a replacement to that of Arnnon
> Geshuri.  I like her, and I think she'd stand a fair chance in a community
> election, but she is not and cannot be described as a community selected
> trustee at present.  It's perfectly possible for boards to have members on
> it that don't get along, even of large organizations.  I've been a trustee
> of a sizable organization and had significant disagreements with at least
> one other trustee - more significant than those between Jimmy and James.
> The fact that there is animosity between board members isn't a barrier to
> having a productive board.  It's disingenious, at best, to say that James
> was dismissed because he spoke out about the knowledge engine, etc.  James
> had conversations with employees not related to the knowledge engine, but
> related to other significant issues at the WMF.  It's best practice to
> inform the ED when board talks to staff, but only if informing the ED would
> not harm the purpose of those conversations - and in this case it would.
> I'm also going to state here that I've had a number of conversations with
> employees in the same time frame James was having them, and that combined
> with other details is why I am absolutely convinced they were necessary.
>
> One of the first leveled and oftened returned to statements as to why James
> was removed was that he had conversations with employees that were
> inappropriate.  Every employee who has come forward stating they had
> conversations with James has stated that those conversations were
> necessary, and exactly the type of conversation that a trustee should be
> having when the situation has gotten to a point where they are,
> unfortunately, necessary.  James had the trust of both the community and
> many WMF employees, which is why so many people who felt they needed to
> talk went to him.  I have no doubt that many other trustees were doing
> important less visible work, many probably even about the same problem, but
> James was handling an element of it - direct communication with employees -
> that was absolutely necessary for the continued success of the Foundation,
> even if all other aspects had been handled.
>
> It's unfortunate that James and Jimmy have gotten in to it in public, but -
> I hate to say this, but there's no other way around it - Jimmy should be
> embarassed.  He's been exceptionally disrespectful of a respected community
> member, but worse than that, he's flat out lied on multiple occasions about
> the situation involving James.  If someone challenges me on that statement,
> as I have time, I will compile a list of diffs and archived emails in which
> he's done so. If the situation between James and Jimmy is such that a
> healthy board dynamic with both as trustees is not possible, then frankly
> Jimmy should step down, or at a minimum give up the concept of a Founder's
> seat, convert it to a community elected seat, stay on as a board member
> until the next elections, and then run as an ordinary community member in
> the next set of elections.
>
> I think it should also be stated for the public record that Jimmy was the
> individual who pushed for Lila's stay to be extended (and I like Lila, I
> really do,) and for trustees to not speak with the day to day WMF employees
> that have formed the backbone of the WMF side of the movement.  I also
> don't know who put the FAQ together, but want to point out that it's not
> factually accurate to say that James cannot run in the next elections, as
> at least one official FAQ stated at one point.  That would be true if he
> was a community ELECTED board member removed for 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Wikimedia Foundation BoT

2016-02-19 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear Ido,

Thank you for your e-mail. I am also grateful to many other people who have
contributed to give us a better understanding of the past and the present
(it is a lot of work).

I would like to read your opinion about two things that I find astonishing
and urging for a remedy:

* How it could come so far that staff members so openly applaud critical
voices about their boss, Lila Tretikov. This is a really terrible signal
about the state of the Foundation. Ido, do you agree with William Beutler
in the Signpost that it is not possible to imagine how the staff and Lila
Tretikov can go on together?

* We have heard from some of the board members. I actually miss the voice
of the chair. It is the task of a chair, certainly in a crisis like this,
to contribute to more clearness, what the Board is thinking, what it
intends to do next. Ido, imagine that the board makes a new start possible,
which would include a new community election. Would you regard that to be
helpful?

Kind regards
Ziko






>
>
>
>
>
>
___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reducing the net cost of Wikimania

2016-02-14 Thread Ziko van Dijk
There pure costs shouldn't be the main or only argument. What does the
movement pay, for what? How are the goals of the movement served by
Wikimania or other conventions? The better we understand that the
better our conventions are.
For example, for the programme of the Wikimedia Conference Netherlands
I looked at the strategy and annual plan of the association. It gives
you a good feeling to see that our conference was already in line with
that. :-)
Kind regards
Ziko


2016-02-13 7:52 GMT+01:00 David Goodman :
> Rather, we should spend more, possibly several times as much. We need much
> wider participation, both for Wikimania and for regional conferences, and
> the only practical way to achieve that is to pay full expenses for all
> regular participants who want to attend.  It should not be an elite event.
> The WMF is running a considerable surplus, and we should spend 5 or 10 %
>  of it on interpersonal live access to  each other.
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 6:02 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 2:28 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel
>>  wrote:
>> > If we want to talk about the cost of Wikimania it will be great if the
>> WMF
>> > and the local team will share the costs.
>> >
>> > Until now Wikimania London didn't published anything:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2014/Budget
>> >
>> > And also Mexico:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2015/Budget
>> >
>> > Maybe I missed something, but it's strange that such discussion takes
>> place
>> > without a real budget breakdown. To summarize 2 huge event to "1$ million
>> > USD" does not make sense.
>>
>> I agree.  Without public data, how can there be an informed public
>> consultation.
>>
>> I've asked for similar data at:
>>
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:IdeaLab/Towards_a_New_Wikimania#Analysis_on_repeat_funded_attendees
>>
>> --
>> John Vandenberg
>>
>> ___
>> 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,
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
> David Goodman
>
> DGG at the enWP
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
> ___
> 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, 
> 

___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Farewell <3

2016-02-09 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear Anna,
Thank you for your work, I enjoyed seeing some of it in Mexico. All
the best for the future!
Kind regards
Ziko


2016-02-09 21:21 GMT+01:00 Vira Motorko :
> Thank you, Anna, for whom you become for me and for us!
>
> Where are you going next? :)
>
> *--*
> *Vira Motorko*
> project manager, Wikimedia Ukraine 
> +380667740499
>
> Are you saving your documents in free formats? ;)
> Help save natural resources – please think twice before printing this
> e-mail or any attachments.
>
> 2016-02-09 19:49 GMT+02:00 Anna Koval :
>
>> Dear friends,
>>
>> During the past three years, I have been privileged to be a part of this
>> movement and this organization.
>>
>> I have been honored to be your colleague and to work with you in service of
>> the sum of all knowledge.
>>
>> In particular, I wish to note particular projects that have inspired me
>> very much.
>>
>>- Working with Philippe Beautdette, Maggie Dennis, James Alexander, and
>>Jan Eisfeldt to keep our community safe from threats of harm. [1]
>>- Working with Patrick Earley, Nick Wilson, Erica Litrenta, Sherry
>>Snyder, Oliver Keyes, and James Forester on the rollout of
>> VisualEditor. [2]
>>- Working with Yana Welinder and Heather Walls to design a user-friendly
>>trademark policy. [3] [4]
>>- Working with Siko Bouterse to support Individual Engagement Grants and
>>movement diversity. [5] [6]
>>- Working with Jake Orlowitz to promote the Wikipedia Library and the
>>Wikipedia Adventure. [7] [8]
>>- Working with Jaime Anstee, Edward Galvez, Amanda Bittaker to encourage
>>evaluation and learning. [9]
>>- Working with Asaf Bartov to encourage regional cooperation in Central
>>and Eastern Europe. [10]
>>- Working with Floor Koudijs. Tighe Flanagan, Kacie Harold, Samir
>>Elsharbaty, Rodney Dunican, Sage Ross, Jami Mathewson, and LiAnna Davis
>> on
>>the Wikipedia Education Program. [11]
>>
>> The Wikipedia Education Program is especially near and dear to my heart. It
>> is a means of educating readers, recruiting contributors, and creating
>> quality content. Since 2014, the number of education initiatives around the
>> world has increased by 36%. [12] [13] And 25% of all education programs are
>> in one of the regions that I directly supported. [14] I am so proud of what
>> they have accomplished. And I am enthusiastic about what great things they
>> have yet to achieve.
>>
>> I want to thank and compliment my current manager, Floor Koudijs. She is a
>> competent, considerate, conscientious leader, and her diplomacy skills are
>> unsurpassed. I am confident that the education team and the education
>> program will continue to excel under her leadership. They are in the best
>> hands.
>>
>> I want to thank and compliment my hiring manager, Maggie Dennis. She had
>> faith that, although I wasn’t an active community member, I could be taught
>> to be a good community advocate. I am so proud that I proved her right. She
>> taught me how to work in accordance with and to have the utmost respect for
>> the wiki way. [15]
>>
>> Wikipedia is a miracle, a monument to altruism. It is vital to the internet
>> ecosystem, and it is vital to the education system. I hope that more young
>> people especially will find their way to it and help out. And when they do,
>> I hope that they are met with wise mentorship from veteran community
>> members, just as I was.
>>
>> I intend to remain a Wikipedian even after I am no longer a WMF staff
>> member. And, with that promise, I’ll see you on the wikis. [16]
>>
>> All the best,
>> Anna Koval, M.Ed.
>>
>> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Threats_of_harm
>> [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor
>> [3] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Trademark_policy
>> [4]
>>
>> http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/10/29/designing-a-user-friendly-trademark-policy/
>> [5] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG
>> [6] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Diversity_Conference
>> [7] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Library
>> [8] https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Adventure
>> [9] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Evaluation
>> [10] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Central_and_Eastern_Europe
>> [11] https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education
>> [12]
>>
>> https://outreach.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Education/Countries=70367
>> [13] https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/Countries
>> [14]
>>
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3ACEE_2015_State_of_the_CEE_Movement_Presentation.pdf=28
>> [15] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_wiki_way
>> [16] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Msannakoval
>>
>> --
>>
>> Anna Koval, M.Ed.
>> Manager, Wikipedia Education Program
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>> +1.415.839.6885 x 6729
>> Skype: annakoval.wiki
>> ako...@wikimedia.org
>> education.wikimedia.org
>> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of María Sefidari to Wikimedia Foundation Board

2016-01-29 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear Patricio,

Thank you for the information. I would be interested in an elaboration
of the advantages and disadvantages of a community election, though.

Kind regards
Ziko

2016-01-29 16:27 GMT+01:00 Patricio Lorente :
> Dear all,
>
>
> I am happy to announce the Board intends to fill the open community Trustee
> seat at our meeting this weekend. On Saturday, María Sefidari will accept
> an appointment to the Board of Trustees, stepping into the third
> community-nominated seat. The appointment will last the remainder of the
> two year term, until Wikimania 2017.
>
>
> Many of you know María. She previously served as a community-selected
> Trustee from August 2013 to July 2015. In the most recent 2015 community
> elections, she received the next highest support percentage, and highest
> number of support votes. She was born and lives in Madrid, Spain, and has
> been a contributor to the Wikimedia projects since 2006. She was a founding
> member of Spanish Wikipedia's LGBT Wikiproject, Wikimedia España, and
> Wikimujeres Grupo de Usuarias. She has also served on the Affiliations and
> Individual Engagement Grants committees. María is passionate about the role
> of diversity in our strategic efforts to retain and increase editorship,
> and improving channels for community participation in Foundation governance
> and policymaking.
>
>
> We consulted with the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee before
> deciding how to proceed in identifying a new Trustee. They offered
> thoughtful feedback on the possible available options, and we’re grateful
> for their considerations. (
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2015
> 
> )
>
>
> We are certain many of you are wondering why we decided against holding
> another election. We did consider the option, but the disadvantages
> outweighed the benefits. The last election was well-attended, and still
> quite recent. Holding a new election would take considerable time, and we
> have important issues to address in the near future. It was important to us
> that the community perspective is fully represented in these conversations,
> without delay. We also didn’t want to distract from the affiliate Trustee
> selection process, which is coming up soon.
>
>
> I am excited by the dedication, compassion, and experience María brings to
> the Board at a crucial time. We are confident she will serve our mission
> with wisdom and grace.
>
>
> Please join me in congratulating our friend María, and thanking her service
> to our movement.
>
>
> Patricio
>
> --
> ___
> 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, 
> 

___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Message from Arnnon Geshuri to the Wikimedia Community

2016-01-27 Thread Ziko van Dijk
I cannot word it better than Michael Snow, so I won't try.
Kind regards
Ziko

2016-01-27 8:39 GMT+01:00 Michael Snow :
> Hello Arnnon,
>
> It is good to hear something directly from you. I am sure your intentions in
> the position you were appointed to are positive and supportive. Yet while
> you may be entirely sincere in your desire to help, I find it extremely
> difficult to see a path forward in which your contribution will bring the
> benefits that may have been contemplated.
>
> Your statement here carries very much the right tone, but is unfortunately
> rather lacking in substance. About the events in your career that have been
> the focus of so much concern, you suggest that there have been
> misconceptions and mitigating considerations, but say nothing about what
> those misconceptions or mitigating considerations might be. I fully
> understand that for both legal and ethical reasons, you may not feel free to
> elaborate, and I do not ask that you violate any such obligations. However,
> the inability to provide more information is itself a major handicap for the
> role you are in. In fact, a requirement of silence becomes doubly
> destructive because it both provides more fuel for conspiracy theories and
> denies the Wikimedia Foundation the tools to respond effectively.
>
> I suspect that many of the possible mitigating factors have already been
> touched on by others - from the limited picture we have of the recruiting
> practices in question, it is not completely clear what level of
> responsibility should be assigned to you, whether you could reasonably have
> done otherwise in your position, or to what extent you should have
> understood their legal implications. Nor do I believe that one mistake (you
> do not say it was a mistake, and presumably again you are not in a position
> to admit that, whether or not you might wish to) should necessarily
> disqualify anybody from the Board. However, as Asaf so eloquently explained
> on this list a couple weeks ago - which I hope you saw, if you've been
> following the conversation as you say - it's nearly impossible to get people
> to leave things fully in the past without an acknowledgment of the mistake.
> I understand you want to earn the trust of the community. But if you cannot
> do what is needed for this trust to develop, then you simply will never be
> able to earn it from many people. This is another way in which silence
> becomes disabling. You might manage for people to move on enough that you
> can function in your role, but the issue will continue to hang over
> everything you do.
>
> The Board has indicated that you were appointed for your expertise in human
> resources. I agree that your career includes some impressive experience and
> you would be a highly qualified candidate in that sense. I can also
> appreciate why the Board might have felt a need for your kind of expertise.
> While the Foundation was at a somewhat different point during my tenure, it
> has faced a variety of challenges in this area, and these types of issues
> were prominent in my thinking about the organization, both as Chair and
> afterward. But under the circumstances, I struggle to see how your
> appointment would lead to a net benefit for the Foundation. Your skills and
> contacts might bring something that is lacking, but the problematic pieces
> of your background also reflect directly on the same area. Considerations
> such as staff morale have fluctuated over time, but I cannot imagine how
> having someone associated with these practices on the Board would be
> anything but a negative influence on it. Whether they would acknowledge it
> to you, the rest of the Board, their managers, or anyone at all really, I
> think this is an extremely serious problem. It seems like it would take an
> incredible amount of good work from you to overcome the damage your mere
> presence on the Board is likely to cause.
>
> I do hope you can translate your passion for this movement into some sort of
> positive contribution. Assuming you cannot speak directly to your personal
> history in a way that will satisfy people, I hope you will at least try to
> explain more clearly what you anticipate bringing to the table. In the
> context of this particular appointment, however, it is a heavy weight you
> would need to counterbalance, and there may be other and better ways of
> approaching this.
>
> --Michael Snow
>
>
> On 1/26/2016 11:07 AM, Arnnon Geshuri wrote:
>>
>> It has been almost three weeks since my appointment to the Wikimedia
>> Foundation Board and I have read the feedback and comments from
>> representative members of the community.  My first reaction was how
>> amazing
>> the community is in its vibrant culture – there is direct and honest
>> dialog, celebration of diverse ideas, debate and counterpoints, and an
>> overall genuine passion to ensure that the WMF sustains itself for another
>> fifteen years and beyond.   Witnessing firsthand 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please stick to the 30-post limit

2015-12-31 Thread Ziko van Dijk
I very much agree with Fae on this.
Certainly, some people will always post more than others, e.g. because they
have a specific task in the movement. But often I wonder whether a post on
this list was really necessary. For example, sometimes it makes sense not
to react immediately to another post but wait some time for other reactions
and then answer to all of them in one post. That also keeps the thread
tidier for other people to follow the conversations.
Kind regards
Ziko




Am Donnerstag, 31. Dezember 2015 schrieb Nathan :

> The 30 post limit came about in a different era, when the list had problems
> at a greater scale. I don't see any issues with post frequency recently
> that should have received moderator response. You are referring to GerardM,
> but the majority of his posts have been to a single thread. I can't speak
> to whether that has interfered with that particular thread, but it
> certainly hasn't presented any problems to the list as a whole.
>
> By the way, Erik Zachte keeps statistics:
> https://stats.wikimedia.org/mail-lists/wikimedia-l.html
>
> Much easier than skimming through a list of posts and trying to count them
> up.
> ___
> 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,
> 
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

2015-11-26 Thread Ziko van Dijk
I can't find something wrong with Pundit's argument based opinions and
explanations.
Kind regards
Ziko

2015-11-26 12:33 GMT+01:00 Gerard Meijssen :
> Hoi,
> Some explanations simply read as weasel words. Nothing was lost in
> translation. You either have an opinion and you accept that people consider
> responsibility part of the parcel or you do not and that is in my opinion
> worse. It is not so bad to be wrong, it happens. It is worse to refuse to
> accept responsibility.
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On 26 November 2015 at 12:23, Fæ  wrote:
>
>> No, this was a simple explanation of the facts of the limited authority of
>> the FDC, not an attempt to weasel.
>>
>> Perhaps something was lost in translation?
>>
>> Fae
>> On 26 Nov 2015 10:58, "Gerard Meijssen"  wrote:
>>
>> > Hoi,
>> > Sorry but "The FDC provides recommendations to the WMF Board, who then
>> > decide on them. The FDC doesn't handle funds directly, so in no case does
>> > it withhold, or spend, funds, instead it recommends doing so to the WMF
>> > Board." qualify as weasel words. You make proposals and hope, expect that
>> > they will be accepted. Not taking responsibility for your actions and
>> > blaming them is the same as saying "we are only saying and they were not
>> > thinking themselves."
>> >
>> > Not good, not appreciated.
>> > Thanks,
>> >   GerardM
>> >
>> > On 25 November 2015 at 15:56, Michael Peel  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi MZMcBride,
>> > >
>> > > > The Wikimedia Foundation has a section under "Organisation-specific
>> > > > remarks", but isn't included in the "Funding recommendations" chart
>> and
>> > > > there's no amount requested, amount allocated, or proposal listed for
>> > the
>> > > > Wikimedia Foundation. Why is that?
>> > >
>> > > They are organisation-specific remarks. :-) The WMF did not apply to
>> the
>> > > FDC this round, hence why there are no amounts requested/allocated, or
>> a
>> > > proposal to link to. The FDC felt it necessary to include
>> recommendations
>> > > about the WMF anyway.
>> > >
>> > > > If Wikimedia Deutschland is required to separate out costs for
>> > Wikidata,
>> > > > does that mean that the Wikimedia Foundation is required to split out
>> > > > costs for Wikipedia and its other projects? I'd be quite curious to
>> > know
>> > > > how much money is being spent by the Wikimedia Foundation on
>> Wiktionary
>> > > or
>> > > > Wikinews or Wikiversity.
>> > >
>> > > It's worth noting that there are two meanings to the word 'project'
>> here
>> > -
>> > > there are the Wikimedia projects, and then there are projects run by
>> the
>> > > Wikimedia organisations (think of, e.g., GLAM or education projects).
>> > It's
>> > > particularly the latter case that is most relevant to the FDC's work,
>> and
>> > > in this case Wikidata falls under both meanings.
>> > >
>> > > > The report includes this note:
>> > > >> The FDC is appalled by the closed way that the WMF has undertaken
>> both
>> > > >> strategic and annual planning, and the WMF’s approach to budget
>> > > >> transparency (or lack thereof).
>> > > >
>> > > > Sort of inline with the first question, but perhaps more direct: what
>> > > > power does the Funds Dissemination Committee have over the amount of
>> > > donor
>> > > > money allocated toward the Wikimedia Foundation? Can the FDC only
>> > > admonish
>> > > > the organization, but not actually withhold funds?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > The FDC provides recommendations to the WMF Board, who then decide on
>> > > them. The FDC doesn't handle funds directly, so in no case does it
>> > > withhold, or spend, funds, instead it recommends doing so to the WMF
>> > Board.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Mike
>> > > ___
>> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > > 
>> > >
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > 
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect is gone

2015-11-08 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Thanks for the explanations. I always thought of the Superprotect
function as a technical way to react in a social-legal space of
tension. A discussion about the technical function is much less
interesting than about the real issue, of how to improve the MediaWiki
software with regard to the different needs of different actors
(readers, contributors, maybe others).

Andy, would you mind to explain what to mean exactly with "offensive"?

Kind regards
Ziko




2015-11-09 0:04 GMT+01:00 Andy Mabbett :
> On Nov 8, 2015 9:34 PM, "Quim Gil"  wrote:
>
>> the Q included more details:
>>
>>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#When_has_been_Superprotect_used.3F
>>
>> The main reason to act upon Superprotect now is the updated product
>> development process
>>  in the
>> drafts, which we want to discuss and agree with the communities. This new
>> process should make Superprotect unnecessary; removing it upfront was a
>> logical step.
>>
>> I have added these points in the Q:
>>
>> Why is Superprotect being removed?
>>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Why_is_Superprotect_being_removed.3F
>>
>> Why is the WMF doing this now?
>>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Why_is_the_WMF_doing_this_now.3F
>>
>> I hope this clarifies that sentence.
>
> Referring to "misbehaviour" in this context is extremely offensive; the
> initial use of superprotect was not a response to "misbehaviour".
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Advertising in Central notice?

2015-11-07 Thread Ziko van Dijk
It's normal, when you hire a company for a survey, you mention the
company, for various reasons.
Kind regards
Ziko

2015-11-07 22:36 GMT+01:00 Itzik - Wikimedia Israel :
> Thank you, I responded also there. I found the link to their full website
> (where the privacy doc is hosted) still problematic, as the page also
> include bold and many links to uses their (commercial) services. This is
> totally not ok from my POV. Better to host the privacy doc on Wiki (or a
> different version), and to mention there that we are using 3rd party system.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Regards,Itzik Edri*
> Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
> +972-(0)-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
>
>> This is under discussion on Meta Wiki, and I made some changes this
>> morning. Please be sure any significant comments are put on-wiki, where
>> Meta admins and community are more likely to see them.
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Requests_for_help_from_a_sysop_or_bureaucrat#Re:_Survey_powered_by_Qualtrics
>>
>> -Pete
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Patrick Earley 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Itzik,
>> >
>> > We placed that note as it is standard practice to let users know when a
>> > link will be taking them outside the Wikimedia projects.  We linked to
>> the
>> > Qualtrics privacy statement, as we felt that users should have access to
>> > that if they wanted to read it.
>> >
>> > Petefosyth has made some changes to it, based on this discussion [1].  It
>> > now reads "Survey data handled by a third party".
>> >
>> > Best,
>> >
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> >
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Requests_for_help_from_a_sysop_or_bureaucrat#Re:_Survey_powered_by_Qualtrics
>> >
>> > On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 5:28 AM, Mardetanha 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > it was strange for me too, we never did such thing before
>> > >
>> > > Mardetanha
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Bence Damokos 
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > My first guess would be that the company is mentioned as a way to
>> > notify
>> > > > users that they will be sending data to an outside company if they
>> > click
>> > > on
>> > > > the link (but the text you quote is not that clear on the privacy
>> > aspect
>> > > > here).
>> > > >
>> > > > Best regards,
>> > > > Bence
>> > > >
>> > > > 2015-11-06 12:33 GMT+01:00 Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <
>> > > > it...@wikimedia.org.il>
>> > > > :
>> > > >
>> > > > > "We invite you to participate in a survey about online harassment
>> on
>> > > > > Wikimedia projects.
>> > > > > *Survey powered by Qualtrics"*
>> > > > >
>> > > > > It's not the the first survey runs through the Qualtrics, but
>> that's
>> > > the
>> > > > > first time I see credit to them. We most of the time, even in GLAM
>> > and
>> > > > > others partnerships trying to avoid as much as we can mentions
>> > > > > organizations names, as it can be consider to be advertising.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > But mention a company (that we even paid them), and linking to
>> their
>> > > > > website? that's new and concern a bit. I'll be happy if someone
>> > related
>> > > > to
>> > > > > this decision can give more information about the idea behind it.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thank you.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > *Regards,Itzik Edri*
>> > > > > Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
>> > > > > +972-(0)-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
>> > > > > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share
>> in
>> > > the
>> > > > > sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
>> > > > > ___
>> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > > > Unsubscribe:
>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
>> > > > ___
>> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > > Unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > > > 
>> > > >
>> > > ___
>> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > > 
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Patrick Earley
>> > Community Advocate
>> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost

2015-10-05 Thread Ziko van Dijk
2015-10-05 18:16 GMT+02:00 Nathan :

> The WCA council was a bureaucratic mess that seemed almost doomed from its
> inception. I think the comparison is inapt.
>

No, there was hardly any "bureaucracy", the problem was that Council
members did not met their tasks, did not show up at votings etc.

I trust in a small number of capable and active people trusted with a
concrete task. That is realistic, that works. People get along the
best and come to the best results when everybody knows about what is
expected from them.

Kind regards
Ziko

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost

2015-10-05 Thread Ziko van Dijk
> On 15-10-05 05:26 AM, Gnangarra wrote:
>> I think we are stuck with Montreal and to change now isnt going address the
>> problems this decision has created
>

I think that this is a very unhappy wording; there is nothing wrong
with the bid or the city by itself. As much as I find the wasted
effort scandalous, it is not the fault of our friends from Montreal.

About the process of the past weeks since Wikimania in Mexico I cannot
say much, I have not been involved, and I don't want to judge about
something I don't know much about.

What I know about is that "the community" does not exist as an organ.
How to make decisions "by the community"? Hold a referendum for every
little question that arises in an organizing committee? Even in the
WCA Council we saw how months were wasted for clear decisions that in
other contexts had been made in a couple of days.

Kind regards
Ziko

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost

2015-10-04 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Of course it is the committee to have its say about Wikimania.

If I understand it well, the main problem was that the bid period was
from August to November 2015, and some groups were working on their
bids. They feel that they could have saved a lot of work if they had
known before.

Kind regards
Ziko



2015-10-04 22:38 GMT+02:00 Fæ :
> The ends should be used as the justification of the means.
>
> Never.
>
> Fae
> On 4 Oct 2015 21:31, "Pavel Richter"  wrote:
>
>> 2015-10-04 21:55 GMT+02:00 Theo10011 :
>>
>> >
>> > Those are some pretty broad leaps Pavel. They were never tasked to take
>> > that decision. They came to a conclusion that the process is broken, they
>> > thought to do away with the process, they picked a winner, and set about
>> > corresponding with them, without telling anyone. Then, developed an
>> entire
>> > roadmap of where they want to see Wikimania next for the near foreseeable
>> > future. All of this was never tasked to them in the first place.
>> >
>> > This committee isn't "community approved", their mandate isn't community
>> > approved. Its members weren't elected, in fact, I don't know why and how
>> > these people got on this committee, or how long they will be in-charge -
>> > because someone certainly seems to think they are in-charge. Maybe I
>> missed
>> > a call or notification asking to join or approve or comment as to who
>> > should be on this committee.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Theo
>> >
>>
>> Theo, you argue process, I argue outcome.
>> They faced a problem, they tackled it, they made a decission. And their
>> mandate? They *showed up and volunteered*. That is enough mandate in my
>> book.
>>
>> The revolution will not be community-approved.
>>
>> Pavel
>>
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > 
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards,
>>
>> Pavel Richter
>> Mobile: +49-151-19645755
>> Mail: m...@pavelrichter.de
>> Twitter: @pavel 
>> Blog: blog.pavelrichter.de
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Departure

2015-09-12 Thread Ziko van Dijk
My best wishes and a huge THANK YOU, Garfield! Many people in the
movement learned a lot from you, including me.
Kind regards
Ziko

2015-09-12 20:20 GMT+02:00 Itzik - Wikimedia Israel :
> Garfield,
>
> It was a pleasure to work with you. Your announcement sadness us all, as
> your contribution has been enormous. I can say that we, Wikimedia Israel
> learned a lot from you, and there is no doubt about the great changes you
> brought to the WMF and the chapters. We all grateful for that.
>
> On a personal level, it was always nice to meet you, knowing that every
> meeting I will learn something new. From a chapter meeting to FDC meeting.
> And of course, we can't (never) forget the ultimate Wikimania dancer. You
> will be missed.
>
> On behalf of Wikimedia Israel, the staff and the board, I wish to thank
> you, and wish you good luck.
>
>
>
> *Regards,Itzik Edri*
> Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
> +972-(0)-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Garfield Byrd  wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> For the last four years, I’ve led the Wikimedia Foundation’s finance,
>> administration, and office IT teams. I've had the opportunity to work
>> closely with many of you through collaboration with the Wikimedia
>> affiliates. They have been remarkable experiences, and I am grateful for
>> all I’ve learned from you during my time here. Therefore it is with some
>> sadness that today I am letting you know that I’ve decided to take a new
>> opportunity outside the WMF, at a California-based foundation focused on
>> public education.
>>
>> It has been a privilege to work with so many exceptional people over the
>> years. I’ve watched the WMF mature and take on many new challenges, and our
>> community grow and diversify. Our commitment to our free knowledge mission
>> is as strong as ever, and now shared by even more people. While I’ll no
>> longer be on staff, I plan to find ways to stay involved in the Wikimedia
>> community. I look forward to seeing the movement continue to do its
>> important work.
>>
>> My last day will be September 30. I look forward to staying in touch and
>> continuing to support our mission.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Garfield
>>
>> --
>> Garfield Byrd
>> Chief of Finance and Administration
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>> 415.839.6885 ext 6787
>> 415.882.0495 (fax)
>> www.wikimediafoundation.org
>>
>> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
>> the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
>>
>> *https://donate.wikimedia.org *
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

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


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy largely blocked by WMF fundraising

2015-08-19 Thread Ziko van Dijk
An excellent idea, Chris.

I am curious what are the exact reasons for having the fundraising banner
in September. We were always told that December is the best month. It is no
secret that many (and which) chapters run the WLM event in September. Maybe
the FR team can explain about that, so that we have the bigger picture.

Kind regards
Ziko


Am Mittwoch, 19. August 2015 schrieb Chris Keating :

 I can definitely understand your frustration, Romaine.

 However, if there is a strong operational reason why the Fundraising team
 can't move the activity they have planned for Italy in September, then I
 can't really see what resolution there can be except for sharing the banner
 space.

 Normally though one would expect repeated banner impressions to have
 diminishing returns, rather than increasing returns - so I would expect the
 impact on Wiki Loves Monuments to be a fair bit less than what you make
 out.

 One thing I don't understand though - I thought fundraising banners were
 set to display ~once per person these days, rather than actually site-wide
 as they used to - is it not possible to have the (less intrusive) WLM
 banner displaying for the people who aren't getting the fundraising
 messages?

 Thanks,

 Chris








 On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com
 javascript:;
 wrote:

  Hi all,
 
  Sad news.
  The title of this thread seems a bit hard, but that is practically the
  situation as it looks now.
 
  *Background*
  Wiki Loves Monuments is the yearly photo contest since 2010, organised by
  many local Wikipedia communities and local chapters. For this contest a
  banner is shown on top of Wikipedia pages in the specific countries to
  attract attention from the public to participate in enriching Wikipedia
  with photos of the local cultural heritage.
 
  Wiki Loves Monuments depends for at least 99% on the banner. When there
 is
  no banner, the uploads and results drop dramatically, as possible
  participants are not informed and can't easily find the contest site.
 Also
  participants need time to go on location to take photos and see the
 banner
  above Wikipedia afterwards to find their way back.
 
 
 
  *What is the situation?*
  * The fundraising team plans to have a fundraising banner in Italy during
  the month September.
  * The local team of Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy is organising the
 contest
  in Italy and needs a banner as well.
 
  As there can be shown only one banner at the time, there have been talks
  about these conflicting banners. Result: Wiki Loves Monuments get only
  37,5% of the time, the fundraising banner 62,5% of the time.
 
  Now you maybe think that 37,5% of the time is still large, but the
  appearances are deceptive because of the different ways the banner is
 used,
  and because the differences in numbers of upload throughout the month
  September. Also the banner is not shown at all during two full weeks,
  important weeks to attract participants. In the end I estimate, based on
  the usage and issues of previous years, etc, that only 10-15% of the
  uploads are made in comparison what normally would have been expected.
 
  This is what I would call a devastating effect.
 
  And this is purely because of bad planning at WMF:
  * They haven't checked which countries participated continuously the past
  years.
  * They haven't informed which countries are likely to participate.
  * And they say they can't move the fundraising banner to another month,
 but
  it is still a mystery why that isn't possible.
 
  This same issue was originally the case in two countries, but somehow it
  was possible to move it for the second country.
 
  This is really sad for Italy. Extra sad because of the difficult
 copyright
  situation in Italy, what requires the local team already to do much much
  much more work than in most other countries, just to have a normal
 contest.
  The Italian team does a great job this year.
 
 
  *My conclusion*
  The community is working very hard on improving and expanding the content
  of Wikipedia by organising Wiki Loves Monuments. I always thought that
 this
  was the number one priority of the whole Wikimedia movement. Did I made a
  wrong assumption somehow?
 
  But when it actually matters, the community project bears the bunt. This
 is
  sad, very sad.
 
 
  Please all, support the Italian team, they do a great job and deserve a
  successful contest.
 
  Greetings,
 
  Romaine
 
 
 
  PS: I am one of the international organisers of Wiki Loves Monuments this
  year, but this e-mail is written on my personal account only.
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 ?subject=unsubscribe
 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] possible power point or pdf file

2015-08-06 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Maybe related:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvgchlOrhI4 (Wikimania 2013)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR1hvyeJkE4 (Wikimania 2014)

Kind regards
Ziko


2015-08-06 17:47 GMT+02:00 Guillaume Paumier gpaum...@wikimedia.org:
 Hello Mardetanha,

 Le jeudi 6 août 2015, 19:52:17 Mardetanha a écrit :

 within next month I am going to give lecture about wikipedia and sister
 projects, I would like to know if have already prepared file to describe
 about wikipedia  (and all sister projects), that I can use for this event.
 even if it is old it would be useful and I will update with current
 information.

 There is a repository of presentations about Wikimedia projects at
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Presentations , and another one at
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_presentations . I'm not
 sure many are up-to-date, but they can be used as inspiration to get you
 started :)

 There's also a smaller list at
 https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_room/WMF_Presentations but they
 seem more outdated.

 Hope that helps,

 --
 Guillaume Paumier

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Does Foundation have 3rd party standing against Harald Bischoff?

2015-07-27 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Some people on the one hand like to complain on the interferences and
interventions of the Foundation, and on the other hand want its involvement
when it suits them.
Pointing to the wealth of the Foundation and by that legitimizing any
spending, is not really convincing.
Ziko



Am Montag, 27. Juli 2015 schrieb Pine W :

 I had a roundtable discussion last night with some Wikimedians and other
 sympathizers, and was persuaded that the best way to handle this matter
 might indeed be for the community to delete the files in question and/or to
 block the uploader for alleged bad-faith behavior. This still leaves me
 wondering if WMF Legal could be involved in the legal defense of the
 reusers if they acted in good faith in attempting to comply with the
 license terms as they understood them on Commons.

 Regarding Jan-Bart's point, I was thinking in the context of WMF's $68
 million budget and specifically of the reactive capacity that is built in;
 it seems to me that attention to this situation is a good use of that
 reactive capacity with a de minimis effect on the big picture in terms of
 cost. But I should have chosen my words more carefully, and I agree with
 Jan-Bart that some community (and WMF) requests and demands for other
 people's time can be excessively resource-intensive, particularly regarding
 use of volunteer time.

 Thanks,

 Pine
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 ?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conferentie Nederland, November 28th, 2015; Call for speakers

2015-07-27 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Wikimedia Nederland has an annual conference, the WCN. As usual, it is
scheduled for November, this time Saturday the 28th.

We will not dramatically change the concept but are a little bit more
conscious about these points:
* The primary goal of the conference is for people to meet and connect, not
the pure transmission of information. So the sessions tend to be shorter
and have a dedicated part for discussions.
* We try to make use of the conference for the goals of the association,
e.g. by showing more what WMNL does (and whom you can contact for what). At
the same time it remains a platform for community members to show what they
are doing at the moment (e.g. in Wikipedia or Wikidata).
* Everytime there should be, if possible, one session in English, although
the general language of the conference still is Dutch.

Therefore we have a Call for Speakers also in English:
http://www.wikimedia.nl/projectpagina/programma

So, if you have something to communicate and want to meet people in the Low
Countries, with regard to Wikipedia, free knowledge and our other topics:
the WCN might be a very suitable conference for you. :-)

Kind regards
Ziko van Dijk
programme coordinator
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Farewell

2015-06-22 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Dear Fabrice,

Thank you for your work, you leave the Foundation and all of us richer. I
hope that your ideas will still make an impact on the movement.

All the best for your next plans,
Ziko



Am Dienstag, 23. Juni 2015 schrieb Oona Castro :

 Dear Fabrice,
 it was a pleasure to collaborate with your work. You did a very good job
 and I enjoyed the atmosphere you created with your colleagues.
 wish you all the best
 Oona


 2015-06-20 18:48 GMT-03:00 attolippip attolip...@gmail.com javascript:;
 :

  May you fare well!
 
  We have published a few blog posts and you have been a great help to us.
  Wish you all the best!
 
  Best regards,
  antanana
  ED of Wikimedia Ukraine
 
  2015-06-18 19:25 GMT+03:00 Fabrice Florin fflo...@wikimedia.org
 javascript:;:
 
   Hello everyone,
  
   After three great years working at the foundation, the time has come to
   say goodbye.
  
   I will be leaving WMF at the end of June, to spend more time with my
   family, focus on personal art projects and consult part-time on worthy
   causes.
  
   I would like to thank all the community and team members I have had the
   pleasure to work with over the years. It has been an honor to serve our
   movement together — and to help our contributors share free knowledge
  with
   each other and the world.
  
   I’m particularly grateful to Katherine Maher and our WMF communications
   team for being such wonderful collaborators. I really enjoyed working
  with
   them to manage and edit the Wikimedia blog, help grow our team and
  publish
   some great stories together, to celebrate the heroes of our movement.
  
   Going forward, WMF's Juliet Barbara will manage the Wikimedia blog, in
   close collaboration with Ed Erhart. As many of you know, Ed is the
 former
   editor-in-chief of the Wikipedia Signpost and has now joined our team
 for
   the summer. I've worked with him for nearly a month now and find him
   uniquely qualified for this project. Starting today, please contact
 them
   directly with any questions about the blog (they are Cc:d on this
  message).
  
   After June 30, you can reach me at fabriceflo...@gmail.com
 javascript:; — or follow
   me on Twitter ( @fabriceflorin ) or on my blog (
  http://fabriceflorin.com
   ).
  
   The last three years have been an incredible experience for me, and I
 am
   grateful for all that I have learned from so many of you. You’ve been
 an
   inspiration to me and I have many fond memories of our time together. I
   wish you all the best with the next chapter of the Wikimedia movement
 and
   can’t wait to see what you’ll come up with next.
  
   Best regards,
  
  
   Fabrice
  
   ___
  
   Fabrice Florin
   Movement Communications Manager
   Wikimedia Foundation
  
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF)
  
  
   ___
   Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
   https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
   Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
   
 
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/guidelineswikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org
  
   Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
   mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 ?subject=unsubscribe
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 ?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 ?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call to Action

2014-10-08 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Well said, Craig. Because Che Guevara means for me: I'm out.
Ziko

Am Mittwoch, 8. Oktober 2014 schrieb Craig Franklin :

 I think the first lesson here is: if you're going to talk about a
 harmonious community, don't quote divisive political figures in support of
 your argument :-)

 That said, welcome Damon!  Certainly, it's a pretty tough job that you've
 stepped into, but I'm optimistic that a fresh approach and fresh eyes will
 assist the engineering team in pushing through the present difficulties
 with software deployments.

 Regards,
 Craig Franklin

 On 7 October 2014 11:02, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote:

  Hello and welcome, Damon.
 
  One thing I've long appreciated about the Wikimedia movement is that it
 is
  not political, and indeed the flagship project is explicitly neutral.
 This
  distinction has become a little more nuanced as the movement has taken
  political positions that are congruent with the overall mission, but I
  think it remains the case that Wikimedians have been able to avoid
  entanglements with general political issues. This has been especially the
  case with most deeply controversial and current political debates.
 
  So while I agree with your sentiment, that leaders must model values such
  as courage and integrity, I think it would have been better expressed
  without the ringing endorsement of Che Guevara. As you say, we should
  choose our words carefully and ensure that our language is positive and
  inclusive. This is obviously an area where we can all make progress.
 
  ~Nathan
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 ?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 ?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2015

2014-09-11 Thread Ziko van Dijk
There is  no reason to change the name, and no reason to invent a second
Wikimania. Also because of finances, the Spring meeting should be really
limited to people who make the movement work better.
I repeat that, in my opinion, some newer or smaller organisations don't fit
really in, or should not be represented with as many people as an older or
larger organisation. For newcomers I could imagine regional meetings with a
special focus to their needs.
It is certainly possible to improve the meeting by some better planning.
For a jolly Let's come all together and have a nice chat about anything
it is just too expensive...
Kind regards
Ziko



Am Donnerstag, 11. September 2014 schrieb Alice Wiegand :

 Is this really a discussion about the name of a conference or is it more a
 discussion about inclusion and exclusion with the underlying question if
 this conference, which once was set up as a meeting for the organizations
 within the Wikimedia movement, should be open for non-organized Wikimedians
 as well. Which would probably be a different conference.

 Alice.

 On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com javascript:;
 wrote:

  On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com
 javascript:; wrote:
 
   The name could be changed if the participants/organisers want to change
  it.
   As I tried to point out, I don't see the name as the underlying problem
   people really have, and changing it will not solve the problem of
  exclusion
   people see.
  
   We can make a conference that has a participants list that involves
  people
   that *should *or at least the people that really *want* to be there, we
  can
   also rename the conference for the people that *are *currently there
 and
   forget about those that want and should be there. I'd rather focus on
 the
   former.
  
   Regardless, I do feel an emotional connection to the name and I expect
  many
   people that have participated or organised it might feel this and I
   appreciate that those who have not been there can see it as a minor
 thing
   that can be changed without any cost. It might not be perfect, but it
  does
   have history and I do contend that the people that first started using
 it
   are Wikimedia, and they should not feel guilty about having come up
 with
   the idea first. Indeed, at this time, resources have been invested into
  the
   name and confusion is ebbing around the Wikimedia Conference name due
  to
   the years of history behind it.
  
   But in closing, I will once again point to my statements that names are
   symbolic and they can be changed. If the participants change the name
  that
   sends a totally different vibe than if the change is imposed on the
   participants, even if the end result is the same new name.
  
   Best regards,
   Bence
 
 
  If the as-yet undetermined organizers choose to name it Wikimedia
  Conference, then I suppose no one will act to force them to stop. But we
  are Wikimedia as much as the organizers and participants are, as much as
  hundreds of thousands of volunteers are. In a Wikimedia Conference you
  might expect it to be open to those Wikimedians. With a  narrower theme
 of
  governance, I doubt the prediction of it morphing into a second Wikimania
  would come true.
 
  And while I accept your assertion that the name has history and meaning
 to
  those who have participated there, I remain skeptical at the power the
 name
  holds for you and others. It is, as you'll agree, a fairly generic name.
  And less than a handful of events over as many years does not a venerable
  tradition make. So I would hope that the organizers, whoever they turn
 out
  to be, will make the simple gesture of adding a single word to the name
 of
  the event. It is still Wikimedia; it's just aimed at affiliates, those
 who
  organize and have attended the event up through now.
 
  Indeed, the conference of affiliates that you've attended in the past is
  valuable and worthy. I'd suggest you allow others interested to attend if
  resources permit, but I wouldn't ask you to fundamentally alter the
 nature
  of the event. Merely make it clear whom you represent, so that others
 don't
  feel you claim to represent them when you do not -- as Ilario seemed to
  with his principle of delegation comment.
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 ?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

a) This discussion actually belongs to a talk page on Meta or
Mediawiki.org, for example :-)

b) All my experience in teaching Wikipedia tells me that the talk page
system is absolutely outdated and inappropriate. It is, sorry to use this
word, *ridiculous* that you have to teach people how to communicate
technically in Wikipedia. I never had to explain to someone how to do that
on Facebook...

As other people have pointed it out already, if you are already accustomed
to the Wikipedia user interface for a longer time, you might find it
difficult to fully understand what is the problem for newbies. And how big
this is a problem, and how important it is to solve this problem.

Kind regards
Ziko



Am Montag, 8. September 2014 schrieb Risker :

 Well, I think that the article editing project (i.e., VE)  has a huge
 potential for also resolving a lot of discussion space issues.  I don't see
 tacking on yet another UI as being a positive for new editor introduction
 or retention, and cannot think of another significant site that has two
 such wildly divergent interfaces (one very flexible and the other very
 rigid in structure), except perhaps in the mobile vs. desktop situation.

 I dunno, Marc.  There are different expectations about signature, depending
 on the target group.  We still have people being freaked out that article
 histories contain their username or IP (a form of automatic signature), so
 I'm not convinced that there's an expectation on the part of new users that
 anything they write anywhere will automatically be signed.

 Risker/Anne


 On 8 September 2014 10:24, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org
 javascript:; wrote:

  On 09/08/2014 10:18 AM, Risker wrote:
   The most obvious one is automatic signing of comments, and it is
   something that we have technically been able to impose for years;
 sinebot
   didn't come into existence in a vacuum.
 
  I suppose that's a philosophical divergence between us then - that
  sinebot even needs to exist to me is demonstration that the system is
  broken.
 
  You say that discussion isn't all that much harder than editing content.
   Even if I agreed with that (and I do not, edit conflicts in articles
  are much rarer than on talk pages - and usually easier to sort out),
  that's not a *good* thing!
 
  Participating in discussion should be much, *much* easier than editing
  articles: encouraging newbies to seek help and participate in the
  community *before* diving in anything but trivial article edits would be
  an immensely powerful retention tool!
 
  (Which isn't to say that editing articles doesn't *also* need a lot of
  help - but that's a different project).
 
  -- Marc
 
 
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
  
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/guidelineswikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org
 
  Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 ?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 ?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

  1   2   >