Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] Solve legal uncertainty of Wikidata

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hi,

Le 19/05/2018 à 03:35, Denny Vrandečić a écrit :


Regarding attribution, commonly it is assumed that you have to respect 
it transitively. That is one of the reasons a license that requires BY 
sucks so hard for data: unlike with text, the attribution requirements 
grow very quickly. It is the same as with modified images and 
collages: it is not sufficient to attribute the last author, but all 
contributors have to be attributed.
If we want our data to be trustable, then we need traceability. That is 
reporting this chain of sources as extensively as possible, whatever the 
license require or not as attribution. CC-0 allow to break this 
traceability, which make an aweful license to whoever is concerned with 
obtaining reliable data.


This is why I think that whoever wants to be part of a large 
federation of data on the web, should publish under CC0.
As long as one aim at making a federation of untrustable data banks, 
that's perfect. ;)


___
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] Solve legal uncertainty of Wikidata

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hi,


Le 18/05/2018 à 19:45, Info WorldUniversity a écrit :

At a Wikimedia conference in early 2017, with Lydia and Dario present, I
think I learned that all books / WikiCitations in all 301 of Wikipedia
languages could be licensed, or heading to be licensed, with CC-0 licensing
- https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc0/ - and per
- https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728 - which would allow them to be
data sources for online bookstores even. Is this the case. Could some of
Wikidata's data be licensed with CC-SA-4 (
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) and other data be licensed
with CC-0?

I am not sure what you mean here. Regarding citations, our movement 
already faced copyright issues with Wikiquote, see 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications_committee/Subcommittees/Press/2006/03/28_fr.Wikiquote_brief


Cheers

___
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] Solve legal uncertainty of Wikidata

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hello everybody,

There is a phabricator ticket on Solve legal uncertainty of Wikidata 
 that you might be interested 
to look at and participate in.


As Denny suggested in the ticket to give it more visibility through the 
discussion on the Wikidata chat 
, 
I thought it was interesting to highlight it a bit more.


Cheers

___
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] Kio faras vin feliĉan tiu semajno? / What's making you happy this week?

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Ah, the rendering is not that great in full text, for those interesting, 
here is a HTML version: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Psychoslave/Wiki_loves_love/wikimedia-l_announce



Le 01/05/2018 à 22:29, mathieu stumpf guntz a écrit :
Viki amas amon, Wiki loves love, विकी प्यार को प्यार करता है, ويكي 
تهوى الحب, and you can find it already translated in more than 50 
languages on the corresponding Wikidata Q52286144 item 
<https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q52286144>, all that in less than four 
days. Seeing so much effort to foster love, that for sure is a good 
reason to be happy. Please be bold in adding more translations, and 
help to spread more love across the movement and beyond.


But wait, what is Wiki loves love (WLL)? It's an international photo 
contest which aims at documenting love testimonials through human 
cultural diversity. From monuments to ceremonies, from miscellaneous 
objects used as symbol of love to tender gesture, let's show to the 
world how mankind express love everywhere and in so many ways.



<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Capture_du_2018-05-01_22-06-22.png>
/Wiki loves love/ is a rather active entry this week on Wikidata.



WLL Subtitled Logo (transparent).svg 
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WLL_Subtitled_Logo_%28transparent%29.svg>



Interested to help? We are actively looking for people wanting to join 
our team and foster love in the Wikimedia world and beyond 
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Love_2018#WLL_team>. 
Help from experienced people in other Wikimedia photo contests or 
other Wikimedia international projects would be especially useful, but 
all good will will be welcomed with warm love!


You can also provide your feedback and proposal to help in one of the 
following place:


 * The project on Commons
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Love> and its
   talk page
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Talk:Wiki_Loves_Love>
 * The project description on meta
   <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wiki_Loves_Love> and its talk
   page <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wiki_Loves_Love>
 * Telegram:
 o Wiki Loves Love discussion group
   <https://t.me/joinchat/H1XPpRLLr-pvx-oo8ZkMwA>
 o @WLL18 announce channel <https://web.telegram.org/#/im?p=@WLL18>

Special thanks you to Romaine and Rupika for their great efficient 
outreach work! You can help too, spread love, share WLL: in social 
networks, in your chapter, in your user groups, in your family, in 
your neighbourhood, because you know they all deserve more love!


If you love this initiative, but don't have much time to help, *please 
show your support to this project*, just edit the Meta page 
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wiki_Loves_Love=edit=4> 
and at the end of the section copy/paste the following wikitext: *# 
*.


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

New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


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

[Wikimedia-l] Kio faras vin feliĉan tiu semajno? / What's making you happy this week?

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Viki amas amon, Wiki loves love, विकी प्यार को प्यार करता है, ويكي تهوى 
الحب, and you can find it already translated in more than 50 languages 
on the corresponding Wikidata Q52286144 item 
, all that in less than four 
days. Seeing so much effort to foster love, that for sure is a good 
reason to be happy. Please be bold in adding more translations, and help 
to spread more love across the movement and beyond.


But wait, what is Wiki loves love (WLL)? It's an international photo 
contest which aims at documenting love testimonials through human 
cultural diversity. From monuments to ceremonies, from miscellaneous 
objects used as symbol of love to tender gesture, let's show to the 
world how mankind express love everywhere and in so many ways.




/Wiki loves love/ is a rather active entry this week on Wikidata.



WLL Subtitled Logo (transparent).svg 




Interested to help? We are actively looking for people wanting to join 
our team and foster love in the Wikimedia world and beyond 
. 
Help from experienced people in other Wikimedia photo contests or other 
Wikimedia international projects would be especially useful, but all 
good will will be welcomed with warm love!


You can also provide your feedback and proposal to help in one of the 
following place:


 * The project on Commons
    and its
   talk page
   
 * The project description on meta
    and its talk
   page 
 * Telegram:
 o Wiki Loves Love discussion group
   
 o @WLL18 announce channel 

Special thanks you to Romaine and Rupika for their great efficient 
outreach work! You can help too, spread love, share WLL: in social 
networks, in your chapter, in your user groups, in your family, in your 
neighbourhood, because you know they all deserve more love!


If you love this initiative, but don't have much time to help, *please 
show your support to this project*, just edit the Meta page 
 
and at the end of the section copy/paste the following wikitext: *# *.


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Social: non-profit social networking service ?

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 10/04/2018 à 11:03, David Cuenca Tudela a écrit :

Regarding the question if the WMF should build a social network for the
masses, I don't think it should. A general purpose social network is mainly
used for sharing personal events, viral stories, cat pictures, and so on.
It does not offer long-term cultural value.
While I think I understand your concern, however it seems to me that it 
doesn't take into account the value of this kind of "silly data", in 
serious research in fields like anthropology, sociology or linguistic, 
just to name a few.


If Wikimedia want to become an essential infrastructure of the ecosystem 
of free knowledge, and let anyone who shares our vision able to join us, 
then we certainly must do something about the social networking topic. 
Integrating matching features in a dedicated platform would allow to 
promote path to other kind of contributions.


If the goal of this announced infrastructure is to enable to collect and 
use different forms of free, trusted knowledge, then starting with 
collecting data, and encouraging curation through gamification of 
services might be a path. All data which are not published under a free 
license right from the start will be harder to make relicensed under a 
free license latter, and all people which are feeding input into 
non-free platforms are basically sending them to oblivion as far as free 
knowledge is concerned, which won't help the "sum of all knowledge" 
goal. That is, rather than losing completely potential contributors 
because their habits do include silly inputs, especially when they are 
new comers, you can build them a landing space for silly stuffs and 
design paths toward more virtuous/prestigious contributions.


Cheers
___
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] Wikisource IRC 2018

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hello Ananth,

I'm sorry I missed this meeting. Is there a log of this conversation or 
some minutes somewhere? I found nothing related in 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CIS-A2K/IRC


Cheers



Le 15/02/2018 à 16:49, Ananth Subray a écrit :

Dear All,

Firstly I would like to thank you for the continuous support and
contribution to the Wikimedia movement.


Wikisource is originally called Project Sourceberg as a play on words
for Project Gutenberg . Wikisource began in
November 2003, as a collection of supporting texts for articles in
Wikipedia. Grew rapidly, reaching a total of 20,000 text units in various
languages by May 18, 2005. For updated page/ digitised content you go here


In August and September of 2005, Wikisource moved to separate subdomains
for different languages. From that time Indic community members are
actively taking part to increase the content in your language Wikisource.


But Indic community members have not got any chance to meet each other and
share best practices of their community. Keeping this in mind we are
planning to have an IRC[1] on 25th February 2018 (@8:00 PM) for the Indic
community. Please suggest Agenda for the IRC in Google Doc

[3]

[1]. https://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#cis-a2k
[2]. https://tools.wmflabs.org/phetools/statistics.php?diff=0
[3]. https://docs.google.com/document/d/11T9qUpNfx6wY06mVQ8X
qXox26PP34eEPyswz8qP_xwU/edit?usp=sharing

Thanks and Regards,


*ANANTH SUBRAY P V(ಅನಂತ್)*

Programme Associate

Access to Knowledge program

The Centre for Internet & Society

+91-9739811664
___
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] Women in the Wikimedia movement: Conversations with communities

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Great, thank you Maria.

Will there also be some room for feedback from women who don't want to 
express with their faces bare?


I would also appreciate to know if any similar initiative is already in 
the pipe for other people that might face discremination issues such as 
LGBT+[1],  Asperger Syndrome[2]. I don't pretend this is an extensive 
list, of course, be bold about raising awareness about other 
discreminatory problems you might know.


Cheers

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT%2B/Portal
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Aspergian_Wikimedians


Le 05/03/2018 à 23:06, Maria Cruz a écrit :

*Hi all, In honour of Women’s History Month, the Community Engagement
department is hosting a series of conversations with community members
about Women in the Wikimedia movement
,
and what their experience is like contributing to our projects. Our
conversations will focus on women within three strategic areas of our work:
Programs, Technical Spaces, and Leadership positions. Each conversation
will have two community members presenting on their work, and 15-20 minutes
at the end for conversation, follow up questions, and discussion. The goal
of these discussions is to foster understanding of challenges and
inequalities that women face throughout our movement, and to engage with
our communities to help better address them.These conversations will be
online events, streamed on YouTube, and hosted on BlueJeans. If you would
like to participate in these events, please add the event to your calendar,
or sign up on wiki: - Women in Wikimedia programs: Thursday, March 8, 2018,
17:00 UTC (add to calendar
)
(sign up on wiki
)
Presenters: Monika Sengul-Jones (OCLC Wikipedian in Residence) and Luisina
Ferrante (Wikimedia Argentina education coordinator). - Women in
leadership: Wednesday, March 14, 2018, 19:00 UTC (add to calendar
)
(sign up on wiki
)
Presenters: Mervat Salman (Wiki Arabia 2015 organizer) and Natalia
Szafran-Kozakowska (CEE Spring coordinator, and Polish Wikipedia sysop) -
Women in technical spaces: Wednesday, March 21st, 15:00 UTC (add to
calendar
)
(sign up on wiki
)
Presenters: Josephine Lim (Mediawiki contributor) and Ciell (organizer of
all-women hackathon in the Netherlands).If you find this conversation
series interesting, I would greatly appreciate your support spreading the
word. Please feel free to invite anyone you think might have something to
add to the conversations, as well. I look forward to seeing many of you
online!Best, María*



*María Cruz * \\  Communications and Outreach project manager, L
Team \\ Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc.
mc...@wikimedia.org  |  Twitter:  @marianarra_

___
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] #WeMissTurkey social media campaign

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hello Zachary,

First, thank you and all people involved for this great initiative.

There are two points for which I would be happy to have more information 
about.


The first one is about the state of censorship in Turkey, not only 
regarding each Wikimedia project, but also for the communication canal 
intended to diffuse this campaign, namely Facebook and Twitter. Are they 
free of any censorship from the Turkish government? Also, although I 
guess this was already taken into account, is there some some 
communication platform particularly praised among Turkish people outside 
this two platform?


The second is more broad, on the Wikimedia effort regarding censorship. 
There are some resources I easily found [1][2][3], but nothing as an 
official up-to-date comprehensive overview of the state of censorship 
affecting Wikimedia projects in the world. Something like a page 
including a world map showing various degree of censorship and a 
description of how and why it's in place, as well as Wikimedia 
initiatives aiming at making cease this kind of practices.


Thank you again for this initiative, and thank you in advance for any 
feedback on this points.


[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Censorship
[2] 
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Notices_received_from_search_engines

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Wikipedia


Le 05/03/2018 à 20:44, Zachary McCune a écrit :

Hi everyone,

For the last 10 months, several teams within the Wikimedia Foundation have
been working with the local Turkish community to lift the block of
Wikipedia in Turkey.

Today, we have launched a social media campaign designed to help raise
international awareness of the block and send a positive message to our
friends in Turkey. We are asking individual volunteers, affiliates, and
anyone else who would like to participate to join us in one of several
ways. More details are below and on Meta-Wiki:  https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Communications/WeMissTurkey

The campaign, based around the hashtag #WeMissTurkey, is an opportunity for
all of us to tell our friends in Turkey that we miss them and help inform
the world what impact their absence is having.


== An overview of the #WeMissTurkey campaign ==

 From March 5-12, we will be reminding the world about the Turkish block of
Wikipedia. We will communicate primarily on Twitter and Facebook- networks
where advocates for Wikipedia can increase the reach of messages about the
block.

On Twitter, we will share a series of tweets about Turkish culture,
history, sports, etc. from @Wikipedia . We’ll also be sharing messages that
express sadness for missing the perspectives of Turkish people on our
projects, and our hopes that access to Wikipedia will be restored in Turkey.

On Facebook, we have developed a "photo frame" users can add to their
profile picture to show support for Wikipedia in Turkey.

In addition to posting messages, we will also be sharing some posters from
Turkish artists which help visualize the culture and knowledge we are
missing. The posters will be released throughout the week and available for
you to utilize. We invite you to develop posters or graphics of your own.

We hope that affiliates and volunteers around the world will join us! You
can get involved in a number of ways, including by creating, sharing, and
retweeting messages, sharing our posters and creating your own, and more!
More details on how to get involved are on the Meta-Wiki campaign page:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/WeMissTurkey


== On tone ==

The messages for this campaign are being directed to the people of Turkey,
and have a positive message and tone. We do not want to use this campaign
to directly confront authorities in Turkey. We are asking that others
managing Wikimedia social media accounts join us, and be respectful of the
positive goal and message. This messaging approach for the campaign is part
of a broader, ongoing strategy from the Wikimedia Foundation to lift the
block of Wikipedia in Turkey.


If you have any questions, let us know!


Zack & the Comms team




___
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] Disseminated outreach material and archive considerations [Was: Re: About Facebook Linked in some of Wikimedia projects]

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Actually, I don't see this things as necessarily incompatible options. 
If Mastodon have bridges to other platform such as Facebook then it 
would in fact even a way to gather effort and reaching both networks. On 
the other hand if there is not such a bridge, then it will add resource 
requirements to manage both canal.


On a broader view, I would like to put back the topic of archiving our 
communications. Right now we already have many canal to communicate:


- in wiki project and talk pages
- a set of mailling lists hosted by WMF and probably many more by misc. 
chapters and user groups

- some discourse instances
- social media groups
- telegram groups
- IRC channels

And probably more I forgot or that I'm not even aware of.

Not all this communication canal are archived equally. I think it's 
important to archive as much as we can, making them conveniently 
searchable can always be done later, but making their data archived can 
only be done while they are available.


So before adding yet an other canal, I think it would be good to have a 
rational explicit goals regarding archive strategy of our communication. 
If there's a consensus to let things happen without caring about 
archiving, OK, but it should at least debated. If it already was, or is 
already in progress, please provide a reference.


Cheers


Le 02/03/2018 à 07:05, Erik Moeller a écrit :

On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Strainu  wrote:


Personally, I'd love to see WMF or a chapter set up a public Mastodon
instance; the project has matured significantly since its first
release and is at least a viable free/open alternative to the
Twitter-ish forms of social networking. FB still has event management
functions that are difficult to substitute, however.

Even if there would be an open-source alternative with all the
Facebook functionality, installing, maintaining and promoting it would
be a huge waste of money.

I would agree if we compared centralized service to centralized
service (e.g. Ello vs. Facebook), but the premise of services like
Mastodon is federation between servers (instances) using open
protocols like ActivityPub. This means that even small organizations
can credibly host "instances" of a social network like Mastodon while
participating in the larger federation of users (you can follow users
from other instances, reply to their statuses, etc.). Mastodon is the
first IMO fairly successful implementation of this approach; it has
more than 1M accounts of which about 10% show recent activity, and it
already is reaching subcultures beyond the usual suspects.

To give you an idea of the cost, you can run a mid-size instance with
a few thousand users, automated backups and monitoring for tens of
dollars a month (the main cost is in person-time, but most instances
like this are run by volunteers and supported by donations). So I do
think it would be very possible even for an interested volunteer to
set up an instance with reasonable uptime, backup and monitoring
characteristics for exploratory use. Certainly it would be possible at
reasonable cost for WMF or a chapter to do so, possibly with some
"active contributor on Wikimedia projects" requirement for creating an
account.

Once again, the crucial point here is that instances communicate with
each other, so even though your own instance may only have a few
thousand users, you are part of the larger "fediverse" which includes
software with completely different UIs implementing the same protocol.

A nice intro for the unfamiliar:
https://blog.rowan.website/2018/01/08/yet-another-explanation-of-mastodon/

Incidentally, the protocol used by Mastodon, ActivityPub, recently
became a W3C recommendation:
https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/

Of course, I'm not opposed to people using FB for organizing -- I
think it's a totally reasonable choice, for the reasons you say -- but
I do think it's worth keeping an eye on federated social networks in
general, and Mastodon in particular, as a potential alternative space
for Wikimedia to engage in, _including_ for outreach. The numbers are
obviously still a drop in the bucket compared with the mega-networks,
so pragmatic considerations may reasonably prevail in many
circumstances.

Erik

___
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] knowing English is a privilege (was Re: Paid translation)

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 02/03/2018 à 00:46, Jean-Philippe Béland a écrit :

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

JP
Actually one point that wasn't indicated so far, is the Wiktionnaries 
have indeed not a equal quality for every single article, but where 
quality is there it outstand easily any other single dictionary out 
there. Also there are a growing number of words for which no definition 
is given outside the Wiktionary. I think that conjugated, it might 
easily accustom people to directly go look up in Wikitonary when they 
need a definition, whatever its authoritative level might be.

___
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] About Facebook Linked in some of Wikimedia projects

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Ok, thank you. To my mind the main problem with that kind of practice 
pertain to the lake of Free-Libre-Archivable-Infrastructure-Rack (FLAIR) 
alternative along the proprietary platform. One problem with this 
platform, is that – as far as I know – we don't have comprehensive 
archives, let alone an archive policy. If tomorrow a proprietary 
platform decide to erase all data related to a group, as far as I know 
they can do so¹.


Also, as I usually don't employ this services, so I don't know to which 
extend this groups can enforce a free license policy for everything 
published there. This plus terms of service, I have no idea how legal a 
problem it would be to dump this group discussions into a public archive.


Anyway, would a FLAIR alternative be proposed, I would see no point in 
promoting the closed garden within Wikimedia projects, although bridges 
which automatically synchronize data flow on popular closed platforms 
would be still obviously important to maintain.


Actually, even here I think that we should make a policy that submitting 
to our mailling list is conditioned by agreement that the posted 
material will be published under a free license.


Cheers

¹ Let alone duty to keep a record of everything enforced by this or that 
law, the thing is that it can become offline instantly.



Le 28/02/2018 à 21:32, Yaroslav Blanter a écrit :

At your service

https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeniyetmə_(roman)

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:26 PM, mathieu stumpf guntz <
psychosl...@culture-libre.org> wrote:


Saluton,

Can we actually have a link to a page with a concrete example so we can
judge this factually?

Vikiame

Le 28/02/2018 à 20:43, Asaf Bartov a écrit :


Facebook is a de-facto major venue of communication for a great majority
of
Internet users.  Many communities, user groups, and chapters have some
kind
of formal presence on Facebook -- "groups" or "pages".  Directing visitors
to your wiki to *your own wiki's* presence on this other major platform,
i.e. a direct link to your group/page on Facebook, is absolutely fine.  It
is *quite* different from, say, just linking to www.facebook.com or
explicitly endorsing it as a platform ("Join Facebook! It's great!") in
general.

As you note, a number of communities have done or are doing this.
Especially for smaller communities, the impact of such link placement can
be a significant driver of traffic (i.e. readers!) to your community
group/page on Facebook, which itself is important for outreach, awareness,
and volunteer recruitment, and therefore is mission-aligned.

Cheers,

 Asaf

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:06 AM Jimmy Wales <jimmywa...@wikia-inc.com>
wrote:

Speaking only for myself, not as a member of the board, I don't know of

any legal or other reason why this should not be done.  I think we
should be very careful about links or appearance of endorsement
especially on article pages, but outreach to people in the world should
take place wherever we find a willing and useful audience.



On 2/28/18 6:29 AM, Minata Hatsune wrote:


I know it based on local consensus, but what I mean here is: those
consensus valid for WMF Term of Use and others policies or not? Because


it


same with Wikipedia have linked with 3rd party, which is a commerical
website.

Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy
Vietnamese Wikimedian

2018-02-28 18:52 GMT+09:00 James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com>:

IMO this is based on local community consensus. It is not a global
policy.
James

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Minata Hatsune <


minatahats...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Hello, I have a question: is it legal and valid for Wikipedia
communities

put promotion links to their Facebook pages on public space as Main

Page

or

Sitenotice?

I see many of Wikimedia projects doing this, as Indonesia Wikipedia,


Arabic


Wikipedia, etc... Their Facebooks page also have blue checkmark of


Facebook


as verified.

All what I concern is: Facebook is a commerical website, we put a link


as

"official" to them, will it same with Wikipedia biased for Facebook and

violated the NPOV policy? And in finally: is it OK if other projects


can

do

that? Vietnamese Wikipedia also have a discussion about sitenotice
promotion to Facebook at <
https://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Th%E1%BA%A3o_lu%E1%
BA%ADn/Qu%E1%BA%A3ng_b%C3%A1_trang_Facebook_%22Wikipedia_
ti%E1%BA%BFng_Vi%E1%BB%87t%22


. If this is OK, I think we have no reason to reject it.


Thank you!

Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy
Vietnamese Wikimedian
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>




--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikip

Re: [Wikimedia-l] About Facebook Linked in some of Wikimedia projects

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 28/02/2018 à 20:44, Dariusz Jemielniak a écrit :

My personal preference is to NOT link to Facebook. I think they use the
energy of people enough already.

However, I also think it is up to local communities to decide what works
for them best, there is no "one size fits all" here, IMHO
Sure, it's good to let them decide, and it's also good to give feed back 
of what see as possible issue or not especially when asked for such an 
opinion. :)




best,

DJ "pundit"

On Feb 28, 2018 20:06, "Jimmy Wales"  wrote:

Speaking only for myself, not as a member of the board, I don't know of
any legal or other reason why this should not be done.  I think we
should be very careful about links or appearance of endorsement
especially on article pages, but outreach to people in the world should
take place wherever we find a willing and useful audience.



On 2/28/18 6:29 AM, Minata Hatsune wrote:

I know it based on local consensus, but what I mean here is: those
consensus valid for WMF Term of Use and others policies or not? Because it
same with Wikipedia have linked with 3rd party, which is a commerical
website.

Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy
Vietnamese Wikimedian

2018-02-28 18:52 GMT+09:00 James Heilman :


IMO this is based on local community consensus. It is not a global

policy.

James

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Minata Hatsune 
wrote:


Hello, I have a question: is it legal and valid for Wikipedia

communities

put promotion links to their Facebook pages on public space as Main Page

or

Sitenotice?

I see many of Wikimedia projects doing this, as Indonesia Wikipedia,

Arabic

Wikipedia, etc... Their Facebooks page also have blue checkmark of

Facebook

as verified.

All what I concern is: Facebook is a commerical website, we put a link

as

"official" to them, will it same with Wikipedia biased for Facebook and
violated the NPOV policy? And in finally: is it OK if other projects can

do

that? Vietnamese Wikipedia also have a discussion about sitenotice
promotion to Facebook at <
https://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Th%E1%BA%A3o_lu%E1%
BA%ADn/Qu%E1%BA%A3ng_b%C3%A1_trang_Facebook_%22Wikipedia_
ti%E1%BA%BFng_Vi%E1%BB%87t%22

. If this is OK, I think we have no reason to reject it.

Thank you!

Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy
Vietnamese Wikimedian
___
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,





--
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,



___
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] About Facebook Linked in some of Wikimedia projects

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Saluton,

Can we actually have a link to a page with a concrete example so we can 
judge this factually?


Vikiame

Le 28/02/2018 à 20:43, Asaf Bartov a écrit :

Facebook is a de-facto major venue of communication for a great majority of
Internet users.  Many communities, user groups, and chapters have some kind
of formal presence on Facebook -- "groups" or "pages".  Directing visitors
to your wiki to *your own wiki's* presence on this other major platform,
i.e. a direct link to your group/page on Facebook, is absolutely fine.  It
is *quite* different from, say, just linking to www.facebook.com or
explicitly endorsing it as a platform ("Join Facebook! It's great!") in
general.

As you note, a number of communities have done or are doing this.
Especially for smaller communities, the impact of such link placement can
be a significant driver of traffic (i.e. readers!) to your community
group/page on Facebook, which itself is important for outreach, awareness,
and volunteer recruitment, and therefore is mission-aligned.

Cheers,

Asaf

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:06 AM Jimmy Wales 
wrote:


Speaking only for myself, not as a member of the board, I don't know of
any legal or other reason why this should not be done.  I think we
should be very careful about links or appearance of endorsement
especially on article pages, but outreach to people in the world should
take place wherever we find a willing and useful audience.



On 2/28/18 6:29 AM, Minata Hatsune wrote:

I know it based on local consensus, but what I mean here is: those
consensus valid for WMF Term of Use and others policies or not? Because

it

same with Wikipedia have linked with 3rd party, which is a commerical
website.

Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy
Vietnamese Wikimedian

2018-02-28 18:52 GMT+09:00 James Heilman :


IMO this is based on local community consensus. It is not a global

policy.

James

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Minata Hatsune <

minatahats...@gmail.com>

wrote:


Hello, I have a question: is it legal and valid for Wikipedia

communities

put promotion links to their Facebook pages on public space as Main

Page

or

Sitenotice?

I see many of Wikimedia projects doing this, as Indonesia Wikipedia,

Arabic

Wikipedia, etc... Their Facebooks page also have blue checkmark of

Facebook

as verified.

All what I concern is: Facebook is a commerical website, we put a link

as

"official" to them, will it same with Wikipedia biased for Facebook and
violated the NPOV policy? And in finally: is it OK if other projects

can

do

that? Vietnamese Wikipedia also have a discussion about sitenotice
promotion to Facebook at <
https://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Th%E1%BA%A3o_lu%E1%
BA%ADn/Qu%E1%BA%A3ng_b%C3%A1_trang_Facebook_%22Wikipedia_
ti%E1%BA%BFng_Vi%E1%BB%87t%22

. If this is OK, I think we have no reason to reject it.

Thank you!

Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy
Vietnamese Wikimedian
___
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,





--
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,



___
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 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 27/02/2018 à 18:51, Jean-Philippe Béland a écrit :

Amir,

I agree with everything you said, especially that languages are knowledge
in themselves, but I must say that Wikimedia is not doing much in an effort
to teach languages to people. Why isn't there more effort at the WMF or as
a movement to try to develop a platform to teach languages?
I totaly support this idea. Right now there are a lot of digital 
solutions to learn new languages, but I'm not aware of any which is 
doing it with free knowledge activism in mind.


I think we could even make some programs like "start to learn, try to 
translate some existing free material selected according to your current 
level, get feedback from someone who master the language" pipeline.




Jean-Philippe Béland
Vice President and Programs Coordinator, Wikimedia Canada
Coordinator, Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 27/02/2018 à 12:42, Vi to a écrit :

I see Amir's points, which are pretty reasonable, but I fear this would
suit languages with a significant presence on the web.

Among them I agree with points 1, 3 and 4 while I'm not sure about #2 "creating
basic encyclopedic terminology and style in that language", if we want to
preserve a language we shouldn't create a thing.
I think that here the term "preserving" is misinterpreted. It's not 
about stuff it to put it in a nothing-should-move-anymore museum. It's 
about preserving actual use of diverse language as diachronic phenomena, 
ie as evolving objects.


On this regard, even largest language communities are seeing their use 
changing at an increasing pace, as recognize institutions like Académie 
française (not quite your average neologismophilic neo-punk band).


I think it's also good to recall that there are places where there is 
not yet a a high bandwith reliable internet (or internet at all), but 
that computer are accessibles. For example Libraries Without Borders[2] 
are providing computer boxes, which do include some Wikimedia material 
if I'm not mistaken. Although I'm not enough informed on their actions, 
but it would interesting to be in contact with them if it's not already 
the case. Making encyclopedia shared through travelling USB key would be 
surely possible for example, but that just a sketched idea.


On the other hand, should we recall that we are losing language 
diversity at an increasing pace?[3] And of course when a language die, 
it's whole culture which go with it like a bush medicine engraved in 
aboriginal vocabulary.[4] So really it's not about bringing knowledge to 
communities with less geopolitcally influence, it's about giving mankind 
a chance to loose as few as possible of valuable knowledge by diffusing 
it omnidirectly.



[1] Parce qu’il doit être tout à la fois le greffier de l’usage, le 
témoin de l’histoire et celui du changement le Dictionnaire de 
l’Académie aura donc presque doublé de volume. En consacrant ainsi un 
très grand nombre de mots nouveaux, l’Académie répond aux exigences du 
temps mais elle se montre fidèle aussi à sa tradition. 
http://www.academie-francaise.fr/la-langue-francaise-langue-de-la-modernite-seance-publique-annuelle

[2] https://www.librarieswithoutborders.org/
[3] 
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/unesco-half-worlds-languages-will-disappear-by-2100-1498154

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_medicine



By the way I was wondering my concerns about cultural colonization may be
addressed -for wikis which has some contents (let's say at least 1000
articles)- by starting expanding existing articles instead of translating
new ones. This would solve the problem of choosing what to translate though
would leave problems about the perspective contents are created.

Vito

2018-02-27 12:31 GMT+01:00 Amir E. Aharoni <amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il>:


2018-02-27 13:00 GMT+02:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
psychosl...@culture-libre.org>:



Le 24/02/2018 à 18:08, Vi to a écrit :


*finally I think paid translators would hardly turn into stable
Wikipedians.

I think this misses an important point that is, we don't need the

initial

translator to turn into a sustaining editor, we need the article to

evolve

with call to action incentives. And articles which don't exist at all –
even as a stub – or don't meet an audience of potential contributors will
never catch such an evolving cycle.


This is one of the issues with what I alluded to in my earlier email in
this thread: the privilege that the "big" languages have. It's the
privilege of already having other encyclopedias, textbooks, public
education, etc., in this language. A lot of languages don't have these
things. When you speak a language that has had these things before
Wikipedia came along, it's hard to perceive the world like a person who
speaks a language that doesn't perceives it.

If you define the purpose of paying somebody to translate as "turning the
paid translator" into a sustaining editor, then this is indeed likely to
fail.

But if you define the purpose differently, it may succeed. For example, you
may define the purpose as one or more of the following:
* Demonstrating that it's possible to write an encyclopedia in that
language
* Creating basic encyclopedic terminology and style in that language
* Creating a bunch of basic articles that would appear in interlanguage
links in Wikipedias from bigger languages (English, French, etc.)
* Creating a bunch of basic articles that would appear in search results
from internet search engines

The existence of these things may bring in people who will become volunteer
sustaining editors.

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 24/02/2018 à 18:08, Vi to a écrit :

*finally I think paid translators would hardly turn into stable Wikipedians.

I think this misses an important point that is, we don't need the 
initial translator to turn into a sustaining editor, we need the article 
to evolve with call to action incentives. And articles which don't exist 
at all – even as a stub – or don't meet an audience of potential 
contributors will never catch such an evolving cycle.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

I'm not against the idea of paid translation /per se/, but it shouldn't 
be managed by the WMF, should it be only to ensure that it doesn't cross 
too far the line of non-intervention regarding editorial decisions.


Debate can go on to which level it stands with this line, but to my mind 
WMF always have been mainly about hosting works, not about what will be 
published by who under which (non-)remunerated conditions. I think that 
it is important that it stay so for example due to legal reasons 
regarding responsibility of what is stated in this works.


From this perspective, it would be probably better to have locale 
collective initiatives which decide what seems the more important to be 
translated and means to achieve them, should it be through paid editing 
with money coming from the said collective itself. Directly financing 
that kind of initiative would blur the line of the hosting position I 
think. But giving visibility to this kind of locale fund raising 
initiatives could be a donation in kind that would be maybe less 
problematic, wouldn't it?



Le 24/02/2018 à 13:51, John Erling Blad a écrit :

This discussion is going to be fun! =D

A little more than seventy Wikipedia-projects has more than 65k articles,
the remaining two hundred or so are pretty small.

What if a base set of articles were opened for paid translators? There are
several lists of such base sets. We have both the thousand articles from
"List of articles every Wikipedia should have"[1] and and the ten thousand
articles from the expanded list[2].

Lets say verified good translators was paid about $0.01 per word (about $1
for a 1k-article) for translating one of those articles into another
language, with perhaps a higher pay for contributors in high-cost
countries. The pay would also have to be higher for languages that lacks
good translation tools.

I believe this would be an _enabling_ activity for the communities, as
without a base set of articles it won't be possible to build a community at
all. By not paying for new articles, and only translating well-referenced
articles, some of the disputes in the communities could be avoided. Perhaps
we should also identify good source articles, that would be a help.
Translated articles should be above some minimum size, but they does not
have to be full translations of the source article.

A real problem is that our existing lists of good articles other projects
should have is pretty much biased towards Western World, so they need a lot
of adjustments. Perhaps such a project would identify our inherit bias?

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_articles_every_Wikipedia_should_have
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_articles_every_Wikipedia_should_have/Expanded
___
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] What's making you happy this week? (Week of 18 February 2018)

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Yes, that's a great milestone, congratulation and thank you to all 
people which made that possible!



Le 22/02/2018 à 20:09, Lionel Allorge a écrit :

Hi,

What is making me happy this week is the start of the 3D models uploads
in Commons:

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/02/20/three-dimensional-models/

Regards.



___
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] What's making you happy this week? (Week of 18 February 2018)

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

What's making me happy this week is joining the "Telegrafo" discussion 
for ELISo  and I also just 
found Six Degrees of Wikipedia 
.



Le 18/02/2018 à 23:12, Pine W a écrit :

What's making me happy this week is Isarra's persistence in working on the
Timeless skin. Timeless is based on Winter. [0] [1]

For anyone who would like to try Timeless, it's available in Preferences
under Appearance / Skin.

What's making you happy this week?

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )

[0] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Skin:Timeless
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Winter
___
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 Report Released: Wikimedia 2030: Wikimedia’s role in shaping the future of the information commons

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hi Caitlin,

Thank you for this email, and thank to everybody implicated for the 
creation of this report.


Could we put a version on meta and make it translatable? Or am I alone 
to think it would make sense?


Cheers

Le 13/02/2018 à 02:20, Caitlin Virtue a écrit :

(Apologies for the formatting issues in the previous email.)

Hi Everyone,

On Thursday, we released an extensive research report [1] about Wikimedia’s
role in shaping the future of the information commons. The report was
created as part of the Wikimedia 2030 strategy process, as the Foundation
engaged research teams to examine awareness and usage of Wikimedia projects
and evolving information consumption habits. The consulting teams conducted
desk research and spoke both with people familiar with and involved in the
Wikimedia movement and expert observers who could inform the strategy
process but who are not directly involved today. In one-on-one interviews,
experts in geographic areas where the projects are most heavily used were
asked to think about future trends in their fields and how the trends might
apply to the Wikimedia movement’s strategy. This particular research
focused on six broad topics that seemed most likely to further or frustrate
the vision for growth that the Foundation embraces.

In this report, the Foundation’s staff and its consulting teams present
top-level insights from this global process. Perspectives from interviewees
around the world are also provided with context about their region and area
of expertise. The report draws from six comprehensive research briefs,[2]
published on Wikimedia’s strategy website, which address these topics:

  - Demographics: Who is in the world in 2030? The report outlines global
population trends, which project the highest population growth in places
where Wikimedia has significant room to expand.

  - Emerging platforms: How will people around the world be using
communications technologies to find, create, and share information? The
report considers future technologies, from the imminent to the speculative,
and examines what range of new hardware, software, and content production
capabilities might mean for content creation and user access.

  - Misinformation: How will people find trustworthy sources of knowledge
and information? The report explores how content creators and technologists
can ensure that knowledge is trustworthy and also identifies threats to
these efforts.

  - Literacy: How will the world learn in the future? The report forecasts
that technology will transform learning and educational settings as well as
expand the requirements for literacy beyond text and images.

  - Open knowledge: How will we share culture, ideas, and information? The
report documents the global trend toward opening collections and archives
to the public and making them freely available online, and explores ways
the Wikimedia movement might partner with people and organizations to
accelerate this sharing.

  - Expect the unexpected: How can we know what the world will look like in
2030 — and what the Wikimedia movement’s role will be in it?

The report proposes that a study of trends can never be truly predictive
and introduces alternative visionary tools such as scenario planning and
speculative social science fiction.

The consulting team published an additional research brief on the future of
the digital commons,[3] examining the political and commercial forces that
could lead to the contraction or expansion of the open web. Looking at the
constellation of issues most important to the Wikimedia community, this
brief identifies access, censorship, privacy, copyright, and intermediary
liability as active battlefronts.

The fate of the digital commons is the single subject that rises above and
intersects with each of the other areas of research. The commons of the
future will shape the environment that ultimately fosters or blocks all of
the Wikimedia projects’ work. Thus, this report weaves research findings
about the future of the commons throughout.

Specifically, the report highlights growing concerns across civil society
about the quality of and access to open knowledge online, as well as
compounding threats to the Wikimedia movement and its open knowledge
allies. Between now and 2030, open knowledge advocates face headwinds that
include censorship by governments and corporations, internet shutdowns,
surveillance of users, information monopolies, and troubling developments
such as the arrests of scholars and journalists operating in closed
societies.

The Wikimedia movement is positioned to work toward potential solutions to
these threats. Despite the trend toward a “darkening globe,” some leaders
see the Wikimedia movement as among the brightest hopes and most inspiring
exemplars of the global digital commons.

The Wikimedia movement has immediate internal challenges to address,
including adapting to an increasingly mobile internet, recruiting a new
generation of volunteers, and 

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

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

This is a great news, thank you Kirill, and all member of this group for 
their work of unvaluable importance regarding language diversity.


Are they any plane to collect traditional tales and songs in addition to 
Lingua Libre sessions?


By the way, I see we have Atikamekw 
 courses on 
Wikiversity, altough it seems more like a stub. I think it would be 
interesting to have an evaluation matrix of languages courses we have in 
Wikimedia projects, and it might be a good idea to coordinate efforts 
around language courses. Actually I think it could be an interesting 
path to both attract new contributors and provide people opportunity to 
have meaningful practical use of what they learn, if each lesson could 
be matched with some text to translate extracted from some of our Wiki 
projects. What is your opinion about that?


Cheers

Le 13/02/2018 à 16:45, Kirill Lokshin a écrit :

Hi everyone!

I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
the Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group [1] as a
Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to support the creation and
development of Wikimedia projects and other language-related free knowledge
initiatives in the indigenous languages of North America.

Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!

Regards,
Kirill Lokshin
Chair, Affiliations Committee

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_North_American_Indigenous_Languages_User_Group
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 09/02/2018 à 22:57, Chris Koerner a écrit :

As for the usefulness of this mailing list I can only speak for
myself. I work remotely. I have conditioned into me from previous
experiences not to send frivolous single-sentence replies. However in
my experience within the movement, these sort of of “hey I acknowledge
you exist, saw your message, but have nothing to add” messages are
helpful for remaining connected to colleagues who are physically
distant, but frequently encountered (and sometimes sadly not) in
online spaces. It’s part of the reason I find the Thanks extension
helpful on-wiki. So that is to say, this is a hearty +1 to the current
state of things. In my opinion, I'm fine. We're fine.
Maybe a mailling list equivalent could be developed, for example 
indicating a link to thank the person at the end of the email, which 
both email this person and add some data for the mailling-list statitics.


Cheers
___
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] Update on Wikimedia vs. NSA

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Thank you Katherine for the update.

For Greg, I would like to know if there are some international courts in 
which this could also lead to a lawsuit. I'm thinking to the 
International Court of Justice, or the Inter-American Court of Human 
Rights, as I guess something like European Court of Human Rights would 
be out of scope, although the global spying practice might suggest 
otherwise.


If any lawsuit is possible in an international court, had this been 
attempted by anyone, or had this been avoided for some specific reasons?


Cheers


Le 30/01/2018 à 01:14, Katherine Maher a écrit :

Hi all,

I’d like to share an update and next steps in our lawsuit against the U.S.
National Security Agency (NSA), Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA.[1] As you’ll
recall, in March 2015, the Wikimedia Foundation joined eight other
plaintiffs in filing a suit in United States Federal District Court against
the NSA[2] and the Department of Justice,[3] among others. We have been
represented pro bono[4] by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)[5] and
the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.[6] The law
firm Cooley LLP[7] has also been serving as pro bono co-counsel for the
Foundation.

Since we’re coming on the three-year anniversary, I wanted to offer a
reminder of why we filed this suit. Our challenge supports the foundational
values of our movement: the right to freedom of expression and access to
information. Free knowledge requires freedom of inquiry, particularly in
the case of challenging and unpopular truths. Each day people around the
world engage with difficult and controversial subjects on Wikipedia and
other Wikimedia projects. Pervasive mass surveillance brings the threat of
reprisal, creates a chilling effect, and undermines the freedoms upon which
our projects and communities are founded. In bringing this suit, we joined
a tradition of knowledge stewards who have fought to preserve the integrity
of intellectual inquiry.

Our lawsuit challenges dragnet surveillance by the NSA, specifically the
large-scale seizing and searching of Internet communications frequently
referred to as “Upstream” surveillance.[8] The U.S. government is tapping
directly into the internet’s “backbone”[9]—the network of high-capacity
cables, switches, and routers that carry domestic and international
communications—and seizing and searching virtually all text-based internet
communications flowing into and out of the United States. It’s this
backbone that connects the global Wikimedia community to our projects.
These communications are being seized and searched without any requirement
that there be suspicion, for example, that the communications have a
connection to terrorism or national security threats.

Last May, we reached an important milestone: a Federal Court of Appeals[10]
in the United States ruled[11] that the Foundation alone had plausibly
alleged “standing”[12] to proceed with our claims that Upstream mass
surveillance seizes and searches of the online communications of Wikimedia
users, contributors and Foundation staff in violation of the U.S.
Constitution and other laws. The Court of Appeals’ ruling means that we are
the sole remaining plaintiff among the nine original co-plaintiffs. There
is still a long road ahead, but this intermediate victory makes this case
one of the most important vehicles for challenging the legality of this
particular NSA surveillance practice.

As a result of our win in the appellate court, we are now proceeding to the
next stage of the case: discovery.[13] In the U.S. court system, parties
use the discovery stage to exchange evidence and ask each other questions
about their claims. We have requested information and documents from the
government, and they have made similar requests from us. The entire phase,
which will also involve research and reports from experts, is expected to
last the next few months.

As part of our commitment to privacy, I want you to know about what this
stage of the case means for our data retention practices. Our goal in
bringing this lawsuit was to protect user information. In this case, like
other litigation in which we engage, we may sometimes be legally required
to preserve some information longer than the standard 90-day period in our
data retention guidelines. These special cases are acknowledged and
permitted by our privacy and data retention policies.[14]

As always, however, we remain committed to keeping user data no longer than
legally necessary. We never publish the exact details of litigation-related
data retention, as part of our legal strategy to keep personal data safe.
And we defend any personal data from disclosure to the maximum extent,
taking both legal and technical measures to do so. We are keeping sensitive
material encrypted and offline, and we have the support of the experienced
legal teams at the ACLU and Cooley in ensuring its safety and integrity.
Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA is currently one of the only freedom of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Duty of care

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hi Renée,


https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Handbook and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Support_and_Safety might be a start for 
your research.


Cheers


Le 27/01/2018 à 13:22, Renée Bagslint a écrit :

Looking at a couple of situations that have arisen recently on one of the
projects, where the health and well-being of volunteers might have been
affected by their participation, I wonder where we can find a clear
statement of the Foundation's Duty of Care towards the volunteers?  I
looked on Meta, but the search appeared to return only pages relevant to
the Trustees duty towards the Foundation.  I was looking for something
about the Foundation's duty towards the community?  Can anyone help?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 



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

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

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Great, congratulations to Community User Group Botswana, and all my wish 
of many successes for you coming projects.


Kind regards


Le 15/12/2017 à 15:52, Samuel Patton a écrit :

Awesome! Congratulations and welcome.

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 9:34 PM, Kirill Lokshin 
wrote:


Hi everyone!

I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
Wikimedia Community User Group Botswana [1] as a Wikimedia User Group. The
group aims to promote the use of Wikipedia and its sister projects by the
residents of Botswana, effectively engaging people to help contribute
online content and promoting the use of the free online resources of the
Wikimedia Foundation to enhance the life of every individual.

Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!

Regards,
Kirill Lokshin
Chair, Affiliations Committee

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_
Group_Botswana
___
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] Tool to help reaching community consensus

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Thank you James for the link. The section is now archived in 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#What_percentage_support_should_be_needed_for_a_policy_proposal_on_Wikipedia_to_pass?



Le 07/12/2017 à 19:38, James Heilman a écrit :

Am with Denny on this. We are currently discussing what "consensus" means
and how to achieve it on EN WP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#What_percentage_support_should_be_needed_for_a_policy_proposal_on_Wikipedia_to_pass
?

James

On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Denny Vrandečić <vrande...@gmail.com>
wrote:


Mathieu,

you wrote


Despite the fact that reaching community consensus is an easy task,

I just wanted to check whether that was a typo, irony, or actually meant
that way. In the latter case, I would like to ask for {{cn}}.

Reaching and establishing community consensus seems to me one of the
hardest tasks we are facing, which is why this sentence astonished me, and
made me think whether I missed something fundamental.

Cheers,
Denny

On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 8:56 AM Kunal Mehta <lego...@member.fsf.org> wrote:


-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Hi,

On 12/07/2017 04:51 AM, mathieu stumpf guntz wrote:

Loomio offers free use for community cases. But it's non-free
software, as far as I can see, but I didn't made deep inquiry. So I
wondered if anyone was aware of a free software equivalent.

Loomio is free software, it's licensed under the GNU Affero General
Public License[1][2].

[1] https://github.com/loomio/loomio/blob/master/LICENSE.txt
[2] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html

- -- Legoktm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=GzLD
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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

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






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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Tool to help reaching community consensus

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 07/12/2017 à 18:12, Denny Vrandečić a écrit :

Mathieu,

you wrote


Despite the fact that reaching community consensus is an easy task,

I just wanted to check whether that was a typo, irony, or actually meant
that way. In the latter case, I would like to ask for {{cn}}.
Sorry, some emoticon was missing here to make things more clear. It's 
plain irony here.

Reaching and establishing community consensus seems to me one of the
hardest tasks we are facing, which is why this sentence astonished me, and
made me think whether I missed something fundamental.
I completely agree with you that this is among the most hardest tasks. 
More broadly, to my mind, communication and empathy are among the less 
well developed topic in education relatively to their prominent 
importance in all domain where humans have to pay attention.


Kind regards
___
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] Tool to help reaching community consensus

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 07/12/2017 à 14:17, Philippe Beaudette a écrit :

Other than mediawiki, with some extensions?  I'm not trying to be snarky,
but there's not a ton on that page that can't be done with mediawiki.  :-)


:)

But, do you have specific extensions in mind? I didn't test loomio 
actually, but it is clear that we might have benefited from more 
apropriate tools for the wikimedia strategy consultation for example. 
Having a person which have to sum up everything in tables might not be 
the more effective way to make important information and decisional 
cornerstone emerge. Even launching a "word cloud" wasn't done, as far as 
I know.



___
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] Tool to help reaching community consensus

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Saluton ĉiuj,

Despite the fact that reaching community consensus is an easy task, I'm 
nonetheless wasting time at looking for tools which might help achieve 
that. I just red /4 simplaj ideoj por direkti vian komunumon al 
interkonsento/ 
 
(4 simple ideas to drive your community toward consensus, I'm not aware 
of an available translation) written by David de Ugarte 
 (in Spanish), 
which point to Loomio  as a possible tool for 
just that.


Loomio offers free use for community cases. But it's non-free software, 
as far as I can see, but I didn't made deep inquiry. So I wondered if 
anyone was aware of a free software equivalent.


Ĝis baldaŭ

___
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] Appointment of Esra’a Al Shafei to Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hi Chistian, and others

First congratulation to Esra’a Al Shafei.

Le 02/12/2017 à 05:31, Cristian Consonni a écrit :

I agree with the idea that occupying a high-profile position and trying
to limit one's own exposure are conflicting goals, but I am sure that
this was very carefully.

I feel like there is a verb missing at the end of this sentence, isn't it?

So, I understand that this may seem different from the usual, but,
actually, it is not.
Well, it is a bit different as this is not the same context. Although 
it's already sometime a difficult task, it's far easier to protect 
online contributors anonymity than it is for a person occupying such a 
visible position in the organization chart. We can apply usual 
precautions, but possibly it requires additional ones. Plus it's easier 
to do our best to protect anonymity of our fellow wikimedians in our own 
environment, but it's far harder outside this scope. Laws might help in 
some cases when people are clearly trying to harm someone with personal 
information disclosure, but when you are a public figure laws also 
grants some freedom to general press to which such a position might expose.


ĝis,


Ciao,



___
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] [Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Dear Leila


Le 02/12/2017 à 21:48, Leila Zia a écrit :
[I apologize for the longish response, and I will do what I can to 
take the rest of this offlist as needed. I just see a couple of places 
where I need to add more explanation.]
Then I feel somewhat bond to respond too. But too make it shorts, I 
don't think I add in this email says anything that wasn't already said 
before. So anyone already fed up with this thread can just skip this 
message with no fear to miss any revelation. And to make it clear, I 
don't expect any answer to this message on the list, but will diligently 
reply in private if you are looking for more information from my part.


​(​Side-note. We should take this part offline but for the record: I 
couldn't find a place where transparency was listed as an agreed upon 
and shared value of our movement as a whole. There are subgroups that 
consider it a core value or one of the guiding principles, and it's of 
course built in in many of the things we do in Wikimedia, but I'm 
hesitant to call it /a core value of our movement/ given that it's not 
listed somewhere as such. btw, for the record, it's high on my 
personal and professional list of values.)
Here is an official Wikimedia Foundation presentation support of 2017 
related to leadership where /being transparent/ is explicitely stated in 
a silde titled "Staying true to our values": 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AWhat_is_Leadership%3F.pdf=25


​While I agree that transparency is a value for many of us, it is not 
very clear, to at least me, how we as a whole define transparency to 
the level that can be used in practice. In the absence of a shared 
practical definition for transparency, each of us (or groups of us) 
define a process as transparent as a function of how big/impactful the 
result of a process is at each point in time, our 
backgrounds/cultures/countries-we're-from, how much personal trust we 
have in the process or the people involved in the process, etc. If 
this is correct, this means that in practice we as individuals or 
groups define what transparency means for us and we will demand 
specific things based on our own definition. So, while in theory you 
are requesting/demanding something that is likely a shared value for 
many of us, in practice, you are entering your own checklist (that may 
be shared with some other people's view on transparency in a specific 
case) that once met, you will call the process transparent. That's why 
I interpreted what I heard from you as "I" demand transparency, versus 
"we, as a movement" demand transparency in this case.
I completely agree with you with the lake of clear definition of some 
crucial core notions we use all the time. This is also a feedback I red 
in several comments in the 2017 strategy consultation. Staying vague 
brings both pros and cons of flexibility. An other example is "free 
license", which is for example used in the foundation bylaws 
, but not defined it it. 
One might argue that "free license" has a clear cultural meaning in the 
free/libre culture movement, with the four famous freedom inherited from 
free software. But this is a legal document, what is not clearly 
explicitly stated is subject to large interpretation variations. But at 
list the foundation has "free license" in its bylaws, I know that the 
equivalent is not even mentioned in the French chapter similar document 
.




To give you a more specific example: as an Iranian involved in 
Wikimedia movement who knows Markus through his contributions to 
Wikidata and at a professional/work level, I trusted Markus' words 
when he said that those in early stages of the project didn't think of 
Wikidata as a project that one day becomes as big as it is today. I 
believe it that this was a fun project that they wanted to see 
succeed, but they were not sure at all if it gets somewhere, so the 
natural thing to do for them was to spend time to see if they can help 
it take off at all as opposed to spending time on documenting 
decisions in case it takes off and they need to show to people how 
they have done things. If trust between Markus and I were broken, 
however, I would likely not be content with that level of response and 
I would ask/demand for more explanation. In case (ii), and in the 
absence of a shared practical definition of transparency, my personal 
priors and understandings of the case would define when I call the 
process transparent.
The issue has nothing to do with Markus or anyone else being an honest 
sympathetic person, and just by "assuming good faith" surely we can 
grant that, even without any testimony, to every contributors unless 
clear proof of the contrary should make think otherwise. Also the issue 
is not how Wikidata project debuted in some confidential ways with 
uncertain results.


One issue remounted here is that 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hi Leila,

First, thank you for your clear analyze and suggestions.

I won't respond extensively on list about this thread anymore for now.

So to your reply, I will just make a single point more clear, and take 
the rest in consideration off list.



Le 01/12/2017 à 22:49, Leila Zia a écrit :

(ii) I demand transparency: You need to answer my questions since
transparency is important for us and I have the right to ask about any
topic and demand more explanation until my satisfaction.
Once again, this is not about "I, me and my". Transparency is a core 
value of *our* Wikimedia movement. So the question is not to reach my 
satifaction, but the level of transparency which is expected in the 
Wikimedia movement.


As far as I'm aware, this level is nothing like "a right for any 
individual to ask full transparency on any topic at whichever level it 
wants". This is just broad unfair generalization of what I said. I never 
demanded such an extensive transparency level, and I actually would 
raise against such a demand more vigorously than what I'm doing here in 
favor of more transparency on a scoped issue.


My demand is on a scoped topic which, to my mind, is of deep importance 
for the general governance of the movement and its future as a whole. So 
if that is asking too much information, then yes it can be stated that I 
was wrong in my view regarding the expected level of transparency our 
community is demanding on its governance. Or maybe it's the importance 
of the topic and its impact that I'm miss-evaluating.


I recognize I'm all but perfect, I do mistakes, and the form of my 
message was a terrible one. Exaggeratedly generalized interpretation of 
a transparency demand is however not a proper way to discard the 
underlying issue.


But once again, this is the single point I wanted to makes things more 
clear, and the rest of Leila message seems full of good advises. So 
while I'm not going to make extensive laudatory comments on the reply, 
I'm not short of complimentary thoughts for the rest of it.


Kind regards,
mathieu
___
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] [Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

founders of Wikidata also just picked it for the usual 
reasons, without any secret conspiracy).
Occam's Razor states that you should always prefer the theory which 
requires the smallest set of entities/rules couple available to explain 
a phenomena in regard of empirical data. It's completely different from 
opting for the simplest explanation. The possibility of conflict of 
interest require no hidden conspiracy, no additional entity, and simply 
consider the possibility of occurrence of a phenomena which is widely 
documented in social science fields.


Maybe at this point it might also be interesting to explicitly state 
that knowing that there was no conflict of interest intervening in this 
decision is interesting for the sake of governance transparency. But 
going with this hypothesis don't really have much importance with the 
rather independent question of whether using CC0 as unique license for 
Wikidata is the best choice for reaching the goal of the Wikimedia 
movement in a sustainable manner.


And once you have an interesting theory formed, you need to gather 
evidence for or against it in a way that is not affected by the theory 
(i.e., in particular, don't start calls for information with an 
emotional discussion of whether or not you would personally like the 
theory to turn out true).
I totally recognize that on this point I've misbehaved in this post, I 
should have refrain of adding so much emotional emphaze in my message.
What you are doing here is completely unscientific and I hope that 
your supervisor (?) will also point this out to you at some point. 
Moreover, I am afraid that you cannot really get back to the position 
of an objective observer from where you are now. Better leave this 
research to others who are not in publicly documented disagreement 
with the main historic witnesses.
This research don't have a supervisor. This is a Wikiversity research 
project. Anyone can join and improve it.
So you should understand that I don't feel compelled to give you a 
detailed account of every Wikidata-related discussion I had as if I 
were on some trial here. As a "researcher", it is you who has to prove 
your theories, not the rest of the world who has to disprove them. I 
already told you that your main guesses as far as they concern things 
I have witnessed are not true, and that's all from me for now.
The question is not whether you want to give me that kind of details. Me 
and the feelings I might inspire doesn't matter here. The question is 
whether you are willing to comply with the exigence of transparency that 
the Wikimedia movement is attached to, on a topic which directly impact 
its governance and future on a large scale.


Kind regards,
mathieu


Kind regards,

Markus


On 01.12.2017 03:43, mathieu stumpf guntz wrote:

Hello Markus,

First rest assured that any feedback provided will be integrated in 
the research project on the topic with proper references, including 
this email. It might not come before beginning of next week however, 
as I'm already more than fully booked until then. But once again it's 
on a wiki, be bold.


Le 01/12/2017 à 01:18, Markus Krötzsch a écrit :

Dear Mathieu,

Your post demands my response since I was there when CC0 was first 
chosen (i.e., in the April meeting). I won't discuss your other 
claims here -- the discussions on the Wikidata list are already 
doing this, and I agree with Lydia that no shouting is necessary here.


Nevertheless, I must at least testify to what John wrote in his 
earlier message (quote included below this email for reference): it 
was not Denny's decision to go for CC0, but the outcome of a 
discussion among several people who had worked with open data for 
some time before Wikidata was born. I have personally supported this 
choice and still do. I have never received any money directly or 
indirectly from Google, though -- full disclosure -- I got several 
T-shirts for supervising in Summer of Code projects.


Maybe I wasn't clear enough on that too, but to my mind the problem 
is not money but governance. Anyone with too much cash can throw it 
wherever wanted, and if some fall into Wikimedia pocket, that's fine.


But the moment a decision that impact so deeply Wikimedia governance 
and future happen, then maximum transparency must be present, 
communication must be extensive, and taking into account community 
feedback is extremely preferable. No one is perfect, myself included, 
so its all the more important to listen to external feedback. I said 
earlier that I found the knowledge engine was a good idea, but for 
what I red it seems that transparency didn't reach expectation of the 
community.


So, I was wrong my inferences around Denny, good news. Of course I 
would prefer to have other archived sources to confirm that. No 
mistrust intended, I think most of us are accustomed to put claims in 
perspective with sources and think critically.


For completeness, was this discussion online or – to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 01/12/2017 à 05:51, John Erling Blad a écrit :
My reference was to in-place discussions at WMDE, not the open 
meetings with Markus. Each week we had an open demo where Markus 
usually attended. As I remember the May-discussion, it was just a 
discussion in the office, there was a reference to an earlier meeting. 
It is although easy to mix up old memories, so what happen first and 
what happen next should not be taken to be facts. If Markus also says 
the same it is although a reasonable chance we have got it right.
It's perfectly understandable that human memory limits arise here, I was 
expecting such a response. Are they some minutes of this meetings? No 
blame if that's not the case, Wikimedia DE for what I found already 
release a large set of archives, including the IRC logs of the open 
meeting organized each weeks. Simply if there is no trace of this, it's 
really unfortunate that considerations for such a crucial decision fell 
in oblivion while so many log are available for far less important 
points in term of governance.
As to the questions about archives on open discussions with the 
community. This was in April-May 2012. There was no community, there 
were only concerned individuals.
Just as a side note if it wasn't clear, by community, I was talking 
about the Wikimedia community at large. And if I don't make the 
precision, you can assume that it's how it is supposed to be denoted in 
my sentences.
The community started to emerge in August with the first attempts to 
go public. On Wikidata_talk:Introduction there are some posts from 15. 
August 2012,[1] while first post on the subject page is from 30. 
October. The stuff from before October comes from a copy-paste from 
Meta.[3] Note that Denny writes "The data in Wikidata is published 
under a free license, allowing the reuse of the data in many different 
scenarios." but Whittylama changes this to "The data in Wikidata is 
published under[http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/a 
free license], allowing the reuse of the data in many different 
scenarios.",[4] and at that point there were a community on an open 
site and had been for a week. When Whittylama did his post it was the 
4504th post on the site, so it was hardly the first! The license was 
initially a CC-SA.[8] I'm not quite sure when it was changed to CC0 in 
the footer,[9] but it seems to have happen before 31 October 2012, at 
19:09. First post on Q1 is from 29. October 2012,[5] this is one of 
several items updated this evening.


It is quite enlightening to start at oldid=1 [6] and stepping forward. 
You will find that our present incarnation went live 25. October 2012. 
So much for the "birthday". To ask for archived community discussions 
before 25th October does not make sense, there were no site, and the 
only people involved were mostly devs posting at Meta. Note for 
example that the page Wikidata:Introduction is from Meta.[7]

Thank you for all this sourced informations.


[1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Introduction
[2] 
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Introduction=2677
[3] 
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata_talk:Introduction=133569705=128154617
[4] 
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Introduction=next=4504

[5] https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q1=103
[6] https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?oldid=1
[7] 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata/Introduction=4030743
[8] 
https://web.archive.org/web/20121027015501/http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Main_Page
[9] 
https://web.archive.org/web/20121102074347/http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Main_Page



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Haha, thank you for the funny form of your message Luca.

Now on topic, I'm not convinced that the current situation resolve the 
problem, it just pretend that nothing exist out of the simple cases.


For example, currently we can not use data from OSM due to this license 
restriction. May the per item license attribute is not the best 
approach, other suggestions are welcome. But at least it's a proposal 
that would resolve this issue, rather was divest the Wikimedia community 
from valuable free resource like OSM data for the convenience of 
Wikidata reusers which are exogenes of the Wikimedia movement. Adding a 
license attribute is not technically complicated. The only complexity it 
would make visible is the legal complexity. And providing tool to filter 
by license or compatible license would be just as easy as adding any 
other criterion in a request.


Maybe an other approach might be to have a separated Wikibase instance 
for specific projects (like OSM) or licenses and make them accessible 
through an other magic word in Mediawiki instances of the foundation. 
But then it would add technical difficulties in possibility of remix 
even when distinct licenses are compatibles, although Scribunto modules 
might help for most trivial cases. However all in all that would be 
probably a far more complex solution than the previous one.


It's complicated,
mathieu

Le 30/11/2017 à 13:07, Luca Martinelli a écrit :
Il 30 nov 2017 13:02, "mathieu stumpf guntz" 
<psychosl...@culture-libre.org <mailto:psychosl...@culture-libre.org>> 
ha scritto:



Also it doesn't completely dismiss the idea of a per item license
tracking system, does it?


In Italy, a country notorious for its simple and easily understandable 
set of rules, we'd compare such proposal to the institution of the 
strangely infamous "Office for Complication of Simple Affairs".


That sums up perfectly what I think of this idea, and it's also as 
diplomatic as I can get on the issue.


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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hello Markus,

First rest assured that any feedback provided will be integrated in the 
research project on the topic with proper references, including this 
email. It might not come before beginning of next week however, as I'm 
already more than fully booked until then. But once again it's on a 
wiki, be bold.


Le 01/12/2017 à 01:18, Markus Krötzsch a écrit :

Dear Mathieu,

Your post demands my response since I was there when CC0 was first 
chosen (i.e., in the April meeting). I won't discuss your other claims 
here -- the discussions on the Wikidata list are already doing this, 
and I agree with Lydia that no shouting is necessary here.


Nevertheless, I must at least testify to what John wrote in his 
earlier message (quote included below this email for reference): it 
was not Denny's decision to go for CC0, but the outcome of a 
discussion among several people who had worked with open data for some 
time before Wikidata was born. I have personally supported this choice 
and still do. I have never received any money directly or indirectly 
from Google, though -- full disclosure -- I got several T-shirts for 
supervising in Summer of Code projects.


Maybe I wasn't clear enough on that too, but to my mind the problem is 
not money but governance. Anyone with too much cash can throw it 
wherever wanted, and if some fall into Wikimedia pocket, that's fine.


But the moment a decision that impact so deeply Wikimedia governance and 
future happen, then maximum transparency must be present, communication 
must be extensive, and taking into account community feedback is 
extremely preferable. No one is perfect, myself included, so its all the 
more important to listen to external feedback. I said earlier that I 
found the knowledge engine was a good idea, but for what I red it seems 
that transparency didn't reach expectation of the community.


So, I was wrong my inferences around Denny, good news. Of course I would 
prefer to have other archived sources to confirm that. No mistrust 
intended, I think most of us are accustomed to put claims in perspective 
with sources and think critically.


For completeness, was this discussion online or – to bring bag the 
earlier stated testimony – around a pizza? If possible, could you 
provide a list of involved people? Did a single person took the final 
decision, or was it a show of hands, or some consensus emerged from 
discussion? Or maybe the community was consulted with a vote, and if 
yes, where can I find the archive?


Also archives show that lawyers were consulted on the topic, could we 
have a copy of their report?


At no time did Google or any other company take part in our 
discussions in the zeroth hour of Wikidata. And why should they? From 
what I can see on their web page, Google has no problem with all kinds 
of different license terms in the data they display.
Because they are more and more moving to a business model of providing 
themselves what people are looking for to keep users in their sphere of 
tracking and influence, probably with the sole idea of generating more 
revenue I guess.
Also, I can tell you that we would have reacted in a very allergic way 
to such attempts, so if any company had approached us, this would 
quite likely have backfired. But, believe it or not, when we started 
it was all but clear that this would become a relevant project at all, 
and no major company even cared to lobby us. It was still mostly a few 
hackers getting together in varying locations in Berlin. There was a 
lot of fun, optimism, and excitement in this early phase of Wikidata 
(well, I guess we are still in this phase).
Please situate that in time so we can place that in a timeline. In March 
2012 Wikimedia DE announced the initial funding of 1.3 million Euros by 
Google, Paul Allen's Institute for Artificial Intelligence and Gordon 
and Betty Moore Foundation.


So please do not start emails with made-up stories around past events 
that you have not even been close to (calling something "research" is 
no substitute for methodology and rigour). 
But that's all the problem here, no one should have to carry the pain of 
trying to reconstruct what happened through such a research. Process of 
this kind of decision should have been documented and should be easily 
be found in archives. If you have suggestion in methods, please provide 
them. Just denigrating the work don't help in any way to improve it. If 
there are additional sources that I missed, please provide them. If 
there are methodologies that would help improve the work, references are 
welcome.


Putting unsourced personal attacks against community members before 
all other arguments is a reckless way of maximising effect, and such 
rhetoric can damage our movement beyond this thread or topic. 
All this is built on references. If the analyze is wrong, for example 
because it missed crucial undocumented information this must be 
corrected with additional sources. Wikidata team, as far as I 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 30/11/2017 à 12:14, Andrea Zanni a écrit :

Maybe, instead of thinking about CC0 vs CC-BY-SA,
we should try to think at the goal: how can we, as a movement,
"fight" the exploitation from over-the-top players of community-generated
content?
Thank you for enlightening this surely far better way to investigate the 
topic.
Stand back is often very helpful, but also often difficult when you have 
your nose in the data.

Of course, license is the primary tool every one of us thinks about.
But (and please correct me if I'm wrong) I don't think that things changed
much from when Wikidata was not here and Google just scraped/crawled
Wikipedia for their own knowledge base. Players like Google have resources
and skill to basically do what they want, and if I recall correctly they
didn't really stop with CC-BY-SA content. So license is not an obstacle for
them. As much as I don't personally like this, my question is: Is this a real
problem?
I miss clear data on that, but I came across some documents making a 
parallel between a shrink of audience in Wikipedia and the arrival of 
Google Knowledg Graph. So the basic argument was, less traffic, less 
people know our movement, less potential contributors and less donors. 
But I didn't deepen this topic yet. Any reference which confirm/infirm 
or simply speak about this corollary is welcome.

I don't like the idea of Wikimedia communities giving content for free to
players so big that can actually profit hugely from this,
(huge profits always translates to huge power), but I really don't know
what we could do about this.
Well, I'm far less concerned with other actors making little, medium or 
huge profit by using work of our community. Per se, I don't see it as a 
threat for our community, and even this actors might give back in some 
way if they wish. And in fact, some do. Google does provide to our 
community some useful resources, not only money but they also organize 
events like summer of code which benefits our community.


What raises my concern is that this actors can have a negative effect on 
our community liveliness, even if it's not their goal at all and that 
they are fine with the idea of helping us where it doesn't directly 
conflict with their business model.


I say Google, but other prominent actors which makes the sun shine or 
make it rain as regards of web audience are equally replaceable in 
previous sentences.


So to my point of view, despite all the controversies it raised 
"knowledge engine" as a general search open engine would be an 
interesting idea to explore. That could avoid being left without 
visibility due to main actors of the field moving to a new paradigm 
where our community is no longer useful for them, or even in direct 
competition with what they are targeting but under a closed garden paradigm.




Aubrey



On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Amir E. Aharoni <
amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:


2017-11-30 11:46 GMT+02:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
psychosl...@culture-libre.org>:

Nobody suggest in no way to do license laundering nor to violates

Wiktionaries licence,

It's not suggestion, it's what Wikidata is already doing with Wikipedia,

despite the initial statement of Wikidata team[1] that it wouldn't do that
because it's illegal :

/"Alexrk2, it is true that Wikidata under CC0 would not be allowed
to import content from a Share-Alike data source. Wikidata does not
plan to extract content out of Wikipedia at all. Wikidata will
provide data that can be reused in the Wikipedias./"
– Denny Vrandečić


https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikidata#Is_CC_the_
right_license_for_data.3F

I think that the extent to which massive import without respecting

license of the source  should be investigated properly by the Wikimedia
legal team, or some qualified consultants.

In the mid time, based on its previous practises, it's clear that

promises of Wikidata team regarding respect of licenses can not be trusted.
So even if they suggested that that kind of massive import won't be done,
it wouldn't be enough.

This is another personal attack, and it's unnecessary and incorrect.

The imports from Wikipedia were done by the Wikidata community, not by
Wikidata team.

It's too easy to speak in retrospect, but there were these plausible
scenarios:

1. Editors who strongly care about reliable sourcing, in the style of
English Wikipedia verifiability policies, are strongly opposed to importing
data from Wikipedia, because by itself it's a self-reference and not a
reliable source. If it would succeed, data would not be imported from
Wikipedia, not because of licensing, but because of content quality. I
remember attempts to do this, but evidently this is not what happened.

2. Editors who strongly care about the prevention of license whitewashing
object to importing data from Wikipedia and prevent it. This also could
happen, but it didn't.

3. Editors who are good at writing bot

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 30/11/2017 à 11:04, Amir E. Aharoni a écrit :

2017-11-30 11:46 GMT+02:00 mathieu stumpf guntz <
psychosl...@culture-libre.org>:
promises of Wikidata team regarding respect of licenses can not be trusted.
So even if they suggested that that kind of massive import won't be done,
it wouldn't be enough.

This is another personal attack, and it's unnecessary and incorrect.
Well, I don't know on this one, I'm talking about "Wikidata team". Maybe 
the statement might be considered incorrect, but is it personal attack 
to mention who said what with a precise source? Or is it the way I 
formulated that was needlessly aggressive? What would be a more proper 
way to formulate that there was a stated promise which wasn't hold?


Once again, my goal is not to offence anyone, be it an individual or a 
group of people. On the other hand, when there are decisions which are 
taken by some entity which clearly identify itself as responsible for 
the decision, then isn't it fair to consider this entity as also 
responsible for consequences of this decision. At least to some extent 
which don't include reasonably unpredictable consequences.

The imports from Wikipedia were done by the Wikidata community, not by
Wikidata team.
Sure, and I think that here the responsibility is shared between the 
Wikidata community and the team which promised it would not happen. 
Hopefully, Wikisource community would no allow anyone to publish a work 
like Harry Potter in it's repository. Or even less legally problematic 
some works available under a CC-by-sa-nc license or some equivalent. And 
would the Wikisource community be lenient enough for allowing that, I 
would expect the foundation to remove this works, especially if authors 
of this works would complain about this license laundering.


Also I wonder why Wikipedia community didn't react to this massive 
extraction, if indeed it didn't, so maybe there are also some convincing 
arguments that was presented to him that I'm not aware of. Once again, 
references are welcome.


So, maybe I'll proven completely wrong here too, with some point I'm not 
aware of, which would be fine. Otherwise Wikidata team did indeed let 
the community go in too lenient behaviours.


By the way, arguments proposed here will be used in further evolution of 
the project research on this topic. Plus it's on Wikiversity, so if you 
speak French, your contributions are welcome.



It's too easy to speak in retrospect, but there were these plausible scenarios:
Well, the easiest way to go is to blindly follow anywhere the majority 
goes. Anything else is more difficult. Building scenarios is good, and 
trying to falsify them with available data is even better.



1. Editors who strongly care about reliable sourcing, in the style of
English Wikipedia verifiability policies, are strongly opposed to importing
data from Wikipedia, because by itself it's a self-reference and not a
reliable source. If it would succeed, data would not be imported from
Wikipedia, not because of licensing, but because of content quality. I
remember attempts to do this, but evidently this is not what happened.
Yes, I came across some document on that matter, which fed my thoughts 
on traceability. Actually, from document I went through it's probably 
the most recurring concern that I found expressed by the community. And 
the most usual answer is (in spirit) that "it will improve in the 
future, this is a useful transition state, later more external sources 
will supersed Wikipedia for the same statements". Apart from the 
usefulness from a Wikipedia perspective, that are arguments that all 
sound rather consistent to my mind.


I'm not sure of the current state of use of Wikidata within the 
miscellaneous Wikipedia projects, and what community discussions 
occurred in each. References are welcome here too.

2. Editors who strongly care about the prevention of license whitewashing
object to importing data from Wikipedia and prevent it. This also could
happen, but it didn't.

3. Editors who are good at writing bots or making a lot of manual edits and
love seeing Wikidata getting filled with data, import a lot of data. Like
it or not, this happened.

Could anybody know in 2012 what would actually happen? I don't know. If you
would have asked me then, I'd possibly guess that scenarios 1 and 2 are
likelier, but now we know that that would be very naïve.
The problem is not so much predictions, which is always difficult, 
especially about future.


The problem is the will of Wikidata team to intervene when the community 
is crossing the line that they themselves previously identified as not 
legally negotiable.

Judging by what happened in the past, I can suspect that data from
Wiktionary will be imported anyway. Public domain or not, the bots people
will find a way around licenses. It's a certain eventuality. The bigger
questions are under what license will it be eventually stored, under what

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 30/11/2017 à 10:13, Egon Willighagen a écrit :

Dear Mathieu,

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 10:45 PM, Mathieu Stumpf Guntz 
<psychosl...@culture-libre.org <mailto:psychosl...@culture-libre.org>> 
wrote:


I forward here the message I initially posted on the Meta
Tremendous Wiktionary User Group talk page

<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wiktionary/Tremendous_Wiktionary_User_Group#An_answer_to_Lydia_general_thinking_about_Wikidata_and_CC-0>,
because I'm interested to have a wider feedback of the community
on this point. Whether you think that my view is completely
misguided or that I might have a few relevant points, I'm
extremely interested to know it, so please be bold.

As having contributed to many open database and as user of many open 
database, the CCZero is my default choice for making data open. 
Adoption of this license is, IMHO, the prime reason Wikidata is 
growing so fast, and integrated so fast in many use cases.
Well, that would indeed be a huge point in favor of CC0 then. 
Unfortunately, I'm not aware of any way to turn that into a measurable 
analyze, as too many factors might come coincidentally to this. However, 
since you are contributor of many open database, maybe you are aware of 
some studies on the subject which can back your opinion.


License incompatibilities have been a major concern in open source 
development and academic research. Yes, there too, there is a 
continuous almost-religious and unsolved discussion about copylefting, 
but the plain experience there is that the closer to the idea of 
public domain, the easier it is to use. The advantages of CCZero have 
been widely discussed in the life sciences, and while not everyone 
choice, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages for many.
Well, surely my message don't help to make it obvious, but I'm not 
radically against CC0, and don't deny it does have huge advantages in 
reuse. As an example I already gave the CC0/public domain for works 
publishd by State institutions. This is something that I am completely 
favorable to and will defend and promote anytime I can.


I also note that public domain (which CCZero formalizes across 
jurisdictions) is still the "ideal" license when uploading images to 
Wikimedia, suggesting more of Wikimedia actually finds the CCZero idea 
very welcome.
I'm not sure what you mean here. If you are talking about things like 
pictures that the NASA release, I think it falls in the case exposed 
above. If you are speaking of the most used license on Wikimedia by 
benevolent contributors, I'm not aware of the statistics on this topic, 
but would be interested to have some.


Also stress that in no way I recognize myself in your comments about 
Denny and Google.

I guess it's all  in your honour.
And your comment that "freedom of one is murder and slavery of others" 
needs some refinement, IMHO; my definition of "freedom" is quite 
different and I experience your definition as abusive and offensive.
If you mean "freedom of one begins where it confirms freedom of others", 
it's not "my" definition, however I could not give proper credit to it. 
Maybe Joseph Déjacque was among the first to publish this with some 
variation in the exact formulation. But really this not "mine 
definition". Also it is of course not the ultimate definition of freedom 
that everybody have to agree with.


If you are talking about the more dramatic example of "freedom abuse" I 
provided next to this definition, as far as I'm aware it's more or less 
my forgery. Although it probably was somewhat influenced by a comment of 
Teofilo[1].


Suggestion of less dramatic examples which enlighten the point just as 
well are welcome.


[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikidata#Teofilo



The CCZero license of Wikidata is essential to my contributions and 
use of Wikimedia products. The chemistry knowledge in Wikidata is 100x 
more useful (to me) than that in Wikipedia etc. That is in part 
because of the machine readability, but also to a large part by the 
choice of CCZero.


I hope this helps,

with kind regards,

Egon

--
E.L. Willighagen
Department of Bioinformatics - BiGCaT
Maastricht University (http://www.bigcat.unimaas.nl/)
Homepage: http://egonw.github.com/
LinkedIn: http://se.linkedin.com/in/egonw
Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/
PubList: http://www.citeulike.org/user/egonw/tag/papers
ORCID: -0001-7542-0286
ImpactStory: https://impactstory.org/u/egonwillighagen


___
Wikidata mailing list
wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata


___
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
Unsubscr

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 30/11/2017 à 08:57, Luca Martinelli a écrit :

I basically stopped reading this email after the first attack to Denny.
That's sad to read, but I guess I must mostly blame my unfortunate 
formulations.


I was there since the beginning, and I do recall the *extensive* 
discussion about what license to use. CC0 was chosen, among other 
things, because of the moronic EU rule about database rights, that CC 
3.0 licenses didn't allow us to counter - please remember that 4.0 
were still under discussion, and we couldn't afford the luxury of 
waiting for 4.0 to come out before publishing Wikidata.

I welcome any reference to this discussions.


And possibly next time provide a TL;DR version of your email at the top.

Ok, thank you for this suggestion, I'll do that.



Cheers,

L.


Il 29 nov 2017 22:46, "Mathieu Stumpf Guntz" 
<psychosl...@culture-libre.org <mailto:psychosl...@culture-libre.org>> 
ha scritto:


Saluton ĉiuj,

I forward here the message I initially posted on the Meta
Tremendous Wiktionary User Group talk page

<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wiktionary/Tremendous_Wiktionary_User_Group#An_answer_to_Lydia_general_thinking_about_Wikidata_and_CC-0>,
because I'm interested to have a wider feedback of the community
on this point. Whether you think that my view is completely
misguided or that I might have a few relevant points, I'm
extremely interested to know it, so please be bold.

Before you consider digging further in this reading, keep in mind
that I stay convinced that Wikidata is a wonderful project and I
wish it a bright future full of even more amazing things than what
it already brung so far. My sole concern is really a license issue.

Bellow is a copy/paste of the above linked message:

Thank you Lydia Pintscher
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Lydia_Pintscher_%28WMDE%29>
for taking the time to answer. Unfortunately this answer
<https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Lydia_Pintscher_%28WMDE%29/CC-0>
miss too many important points to solve all concerns which have
been raised.

Notably, there is still no beginning of hint in it about where the
decision of using CC0 exclusively for Wikidata came from. But as
this inquiry on the topic

<https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/fr:Recherche:La_licence_CC-0_de_Wikidata,_origine_du_choix,_enjeux,_et_prospections_sur_les_aspects_de_gouvernance_communautaire_et_d%E2%80%99%C3%A9quit%C3%A9_contributive>
advance, an answer is emerging from it. It seems that Wikidata
choice toward CC0 was heavily influenced by Denny Vrandečić, who –
to make it short – is now working in the Google Knowledge Graph
team. Also it worth noting that Google funded a quarter of the
initial development work. Another quarter came from the Gordon and
Betty Moore Foundation, established by Intel co-founder. And half
the money came from Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen's Institute
for Artificial Intelligence (AI2)[1]

<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wiktionary/Tremendous_Wiktionary_User_Group#cite_note-1>.
To state it shortly in a conspirational fashion, Wikidata is the
puppet trojan horse of big tech hegemonic companies into the realm
of Wikimedia. For a less tragic, more argumentative version,
please see the research project (work in progress, only chapter 1
is in good enough shape, and it's only available in French so
far). Some proofs that this claim is completely wrong are welcome,
as it would be great that in fact that was the community that was
the driving force behind this single license choice and that it is
the best choice for its future, not the future of giant tech
companies. This would be a great contribution to bring such a
happy light on this subject, so we can all let this issue alone
and go back contributing in more interesting topics.

Now let's examine the thoughts proposed by Lydia.

Wikidata is here to give more people more access to more knowledge.
So far, it makes it matches Wikimedia movement stated goal. 
This means we want our data to be used as widely as possible.

Sure, as long as it rhymes with equity. As in /Our strategic
direction: Service and //*Equity*/

<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Direction/Endorsement#Our_strategic_direction:_Service_and_Equity>.
Just like we want freedom for everybody as widely as possible.
That is, starting where it confirms each others freedom.
Because under this level, freedom of one is murder and slavery
of others. 
CC-0 is one step towards that.

That's a thesis, you can propose to defend it but no one have
to agree without some convincing proof. 
Data is different from many other things we produce in Wikimedia

in that it is aggregated, combined

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Saluton Nicolas,

Le 30/11/2017 à 00:23, Nicolas VIGNERON a écrit :

Mathieu,

I know you and like you personally, that why I can say that this mail 
is clearly not your best argument.


Despite saying multiple times this is not a manifesto nor against 
Wikidata, your mail seems clearly fuelled with biases and 
misjudgements (especially Wikidata can't be « discontinued quietly » 
not now that it's so widely used in Wikimedia projects, even the 
wiktionaries are *already* using Wikidata).
That's perfectly plausible that my view is fuelled with biases and 
misjudgements, and that's why I'm looking for feedback that might help 
in correcting them if needed. I prefer to expose my errors blatantly and 
seize opportunities to correct them rather than confine myself in my 
possibly misguided views.


Of course, the statement that Wikidata can't be « discontinued quietly » 
is shocking. Surely I'm a little provocative here. But one have to put 
that in perspective with the fact that my previous attempts to get 
feedback on this were far less provocative, or at least were aiming at 
being as unprovocative as I could do. So I recognize you are right to 
point this, all the more as I made my previous more cordial demands in 
less visible canals.


Dissecting each single phrase point by point is violent, borderline 
mean and definitely not constructive ; cross-posting this mail on 
multiple places doesn't help either. This is not the good way to 
debate peacefully.
First, if people felt personally assaulted by my message, I apologize. I 
wasn't aware that treating a topic point by point extensively could be 
perceived as such a violent behaviour. I don't want to harass anyone, I 
want to get constructive feedback on this topic from as many people of 
our community that I can get. If there are better way to achieve this 
through documented peaceful process, I would welcome references to this 
kind of documentation. And if we don't have that kind of documentation, 
I think it would be interesting that we build one.


For better or worse, Wikidata choose CC0 and it will be quite 
difficult to change the licence now (the example of licence change on 
OpenStreetMap illustrate it quite painfully).
Actually, with CC0 – if it appeared that all the data contained in 
Wikidata really can be published under CC0 – we could switch the whole 
database to whatever license we want. That was even explicitly stated as 
is at the start of the project that:


   So do I understand it correctly that during development and testing,
   we can can go with CC-0, and later relicense to whatever seems
   suitable, which is possible with CC-0?, Denny Vrandečić,
   https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikidata//2012-April/000185.html

But as far as I'm concerned, I wouldn't suggest for such a unilateral 
move. For me, just allowing a tracking of license for each item would be 
enough.


We have to get approval of the community, there was multiple lengthy 
and non-conclusive discussions, it's not something that will be done 
with a ranting mail.
I'm interested with links to this community discussions and clear 
approval of the community.


For me, the situation is quite simple, Wikidata needs lexiographical 
data and the Wikimedia projects needs Wikidata to have these data.
I agree with that, or at least that it would be very positive for our 
community to have this kind of tools.
Nobody suggest in no way to do license laundering nor to violates 
Wiktionaries licence,
It's not suggestion, it's what Wikidata is already doing with Wikipedia, 
despite the initial statement of Wikidata team[1] that it wouldn't do 
that because it's illegal :


   /"Alexrk2, it is true that Wikidata under CC0 would not be allowed
   to import content from a Share-Alike data source. Wikidata does not
   plan to extract content out of Wikipedia at all. Wikidata will
   provide data that can be reused in the Wikipedias./"
   – Denny Vrandečić
   
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikidata#Is_CC_the_right_license_for_data.3F

I think that the extent to which massive import without respecting 
license of the source  should be investigated properly by the Wikimedia 
legal team, or some qualified consultants.


In the mid time, based on its previous practises, it's clear that 
promises of Wikidata team regarding respect of licenses can not be 
trusted. So even if they suggested that that kind of massive import 
won't be done, it wouldn't be enough.


in fact we could simply import Public Domain sources (in the same way 
the wiktionaries did, in frwikt a big chunk of entries come from the 
/Littré/ and the /Dictionnaire de l’Académie française/, and there is 
enough dictionaries waiting in the Wikisources to keep us busy for 
years) but it would be a shame for Wikidata to not profits from 
wiktionarists expertise.
I agree with that. All the more, all this material we imported helped 
much in populating the project, but it often includes heavy biases, 
outdated 

[Wikimedia-l] An answer to Lydia Pintscher regarding its considerations on Wikidata and CC-0

[Mathieu Stumpf Guntz]

Saluton ĉiuj,

I forward here the message I initially posted on the Meta Tremendous
Wiktionary User Group talk page
,
because I'm interested to have a wider feedback of the community on this
point. Whether you think that my view is completely misguided or that I
might have a few relevant points, I'm extremely interested to know it,
so please be bold.

Before you consider digging further in this reading, keep in mind that I
stay convinced that Wikidata is a wonderful project and I wish it a
bright future full of even more amazing things than what it already
brung so far. My sole concern is really a license issue.

Bellow is a copy/paste of the above linked message:

Thank you Lydia Pintscher
 for
taking the time to answer. Unfortunately this answer

miss too many important points to solve all concerns which have been raised.

Notably, there is still no beginning of hint in it about where the
decision of using CC0 exclusively for Wikidata came from. But as this
inquiry on the topic

advance, an answer is emerging from it. It seems that Wikidata choice
toward CC0 was heavily influenced by Denny Vrandečić, who – to make it
short – is now working in the Google Knowledge Graph team. Also it worth
noting that Google funded a quarter of the initial development work.
Another quarter came from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation,
established by Intel co-founder. And half the money came from Microsoft
co-founder Paul Allen's Institute for Artificial Intelligence (AI2)[1]
.
To state it shortly in a conspirational fashion, Wikidata is the puppet
trojan horse of big tech hegemonic companies into the realm of
Wikimedia. For a less tragic, more argumentative version, please see the
research project (work in progress, only chapter 1 is in good enough
shape, and it's only available in French so far). Some proofs that this
claim is completely wrong are welcome, as it would be great that in fact
that was the community that was the driving force behind this single
license choice and that it is the best choice for its future, not the
future of giant tech companies. This would be a great contribution to
bring such a happy light on this subject, so we can all let this issue
alone and go back contributing in more interesting topics.

Now let's examine the thoughts proposed by Lydia.

Wikidata is here to give more people more access to more knowledge.
So far, it makes it matches Wikimedia movement stated goal. 
This means we want our data to be used as widely as possible.
Sure, as long as it rhymes with equity. As in /Our strategic
direction: Service and //*Equity*/

.
Just like we want freedom for everybody as widely as possible. That
is, starting where it confirms each others freedom. Because under
this level, freedom of one is murder and slavery of others. 
CC-0 is one step towards that.
That's a thesis, you can propose to defend it but no one have to
agree without some convincing proof. 
Data is different from many other things we produce in Wikimedia in that
it is aggregated, combined, mashed-up, filtered, and so on much more
extensively.
No it's not. From a data processing point of view, everything is
data. Whether it's stored in a wikisyntax, in a relational database
or engraved in stone only have a commodity side effect. Whether it's
a random stream of bit generated by a dumb chipset or some encoded
prose of Shakespeare make no difference. So from this point of view,
no, what Wikidata store is not different from what is produced
anywhere else in Wikimedia projects. 
Sure, the way it's structured does extremely ease many things. But
this is not because it's data, when elsewhere there would be no
data. It's because it enforce data to be stored in a way that ease
aggregation, combination, mashing-up, filtering and so on. 

Our data lives from being able to write queries over millions of
statements, putting it into a mobile app, visualizing parts of it on a
map and much more.
Sure. It also lives from being curated from millions[2]


of benevolent contributors, or it would be just a useless pile of
random bytes. 
This means, if we require 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Looking for advises regarding a public conference about the Wikimedia movement on the topic "Dissemination of Knowledge: What Limits" [Fwd: Re: Conférence Wikipédia]

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

So, I did it somewhat in a quick and dirty fashion, the first page that 
I simply copied from the template went badly resized, but apart from 
that, it should make the job.


https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diffusion_des_connaissances_-_quelles_limites_%3F.pdf

If you have any feedback, you have still a few hours.


Le 26/11/2017 à 23:40, Gergő Tisza a écrit :

On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 8:32 AM, mathieu stumpf guntz <
psychosl...@culture-libre.org> wrote:


Also I'm wondering where I could find the nice blue or green background
that I see used in many first page of Wikimedia presentations


https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Brand > Presentations
___
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] Looking for advises regarding a public conference about the Wikimedia movement on the topic "Dissemination of Knowledge: What Limits" [Fwd: Re: Conférence Wikipédia]

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Also I'm wondering where I could find the nice blue or green background 
that I see used in many first page of Wikimedia presentations


Examples:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Discovery_narrative_FY_2017-18.pdf
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2017_StrangeLoop-_Wait,_it_does_--tahW-_How_supporting_Right-to-Left_can_expose_your_bad_UX_decisions.pdf

Do we have libre office impress for Wikimedia presentation? It would be 
an interesting support. Although, sadly, this file format can not be 
uploaded to Commons, for some reason. That would make existing 
presentations far more reusable, while I don't see any cost at allowing 
the matching file extension.



Le 08/11/2017 à 09:00, mathieu stumpf guntz a écrit :



Le 08/11/2017 à 02:52, Devouard (gmail) a écrit :

Le 07/11/2017 à 16:22, mathieu stumpf guntz a écrit :

Saluton ĉiuj,

Your fellow wikimedian was invited to present the Wikimedia movement 
in a conference organized by "Association des Masters en Économie de 
Strasbourg", which will occur Tuesday, November 28th, in Strasbourg 
(who would have guest?).


More information are below in French, but the main point is that the 
conference is entitled "Dissemination of Knowledge: What Limits", 
and after a call to better understand what was expected, the main 
point which will be presented:


1. How is structured the movement (relation between
    WMF/Chapters/Communities/Projects…)
2. What are the requirements of Wikipedia regarding information 
reliability

3. The different knowledge dissemination supports: what limits?

The main point, in term of coverage, will be the second.

No concern worries me about being able to cover all this topics in a 
way far more extensive than required for this conference. However, 
it would be appreciable if feedback was provided regarding what the 
community as a whole think important to highlight. More broadly any 
other advise that the topic or the main points might inspire to you 
would be warmly welcome.


Ĝis baldaŭ,
mathieu



Good evening

I think you should exercise more caution in forwarding entire private 
discussions (which include phone number etc.) by email to a public list.
You are perfectly right, I wasn't cautious enough on this. Actually it 
was one of my first thought this morning that I hadn't checked the 
whole content of the forwarded email.


May a moderator please remove this details from archives? Especially 
phone numbers. I would expect emails to be automatically transformed 
to avoid easy spam target, but maybe I'm wrong.




Otherwise... by experience, students in France have been repeated 
over and over to be careful about their private information. Hence, 
you should anticipate and expect questions related to privacy on 
Wikimedia projects, and by extension, harassements issues (hot topic 
those days).
Well, of course I'm aware of the harassment issues, but I didn't know 
students were boldly informed on this topic, and I would not have 
expected many question on this given the topic, expect for the right 
to a person's image and right to oblivion. In fact I should probably 
improve my knowledge on this topics too, any reading suggestion is 
welcome.




I invite you to take a look at : 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiConvention_francophone/2017/Programme/Fossé_des_genres_et_harcèlement:_le_point_sur_les_projets_francophones

Thank you Florence, I will look at that with much attention.


Florence


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

New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


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

New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Looking for advises regarding a public conference about the Wikimedia movement on the topic "Dissemination of Knowledge: What Limits" [Fwd: Re: Conférence Wikipédia]

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hi again,

I'm looking for some heat map of Wikimedia projects audience and 
contributors distribution at world scale. So far I found


https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikidata_Map_October_2016_Normal.png

https://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/animations/wivivi/wivivi.html but 
would like something


So it's already rather good for illustrating geolocalized article 
coverage and number of /Pageviews per capita to any Wikipedia in 
September 2017/. But I'm not aware of a heat map for contributors, any 
link is welcome.


I'm also interesting in any graph covering evolution of misc. gaps 
(gender, racial…), both in term of article coverage and in rate of 
contributors.


Cheers


Le 08/11/2017 à 09:00, mathieu stumpf guntz a écrit :



Le 08/11/2017 à 02:52, Devouard (gmail) a écrit :

Le 07/11/2017 à 16:22, mathieu stumpf guntz a écrit :

Saluton ĉiuj,

Your fellow wikimedian was invited to present the Wikimedia movement 
in a conference organized by "Association des Masters en Économie de 
Strasbourg", which will occur Tuesday, November 28th, in Strasbourg 
(who would have guest?).


More information are below in French, but the main point is that the 
conference is entitled "Dissemination of Knowledge: What Limits", 
and after a call to better understand what was expected, the main 
point which will be presented:


1. How is structured the movement (relation between
    WMF/Chapters/Communities/Projects…)
2. What are the requirements of Wikipedia regarding information 
reliability

3. The different knowledge dissemination supports: what limits?

The main point, in term of coverage, will be the second.

No concern worries me about being able to cover all this topics in a 
way far more extensive than required for this conference. However, 
it would be appreciable if feedback was provided regarding what the 
community as a whole think important to highlight. More broadly any 
other advise that the topic or the main points might inspire to you 
would be warmly welcome.


Ĝis baldaŭ,
mathieu



Good evening

I think you should exercise more caution in forwarding entire private 
discussions (which include phone number etc.) by email to a public list.
You are perfectly right, I wasn't cautious enough on this. Actually it 
was one of my first thought this morning that I hadn't checked the 
whole content of the forwarded email.


May a moderator please remove this details from archives? Especially 
phone numbers. I would expect emails to be automatically transformed 
to avoid easy spam target, but maybe I'm wrong.




Otherwise... by experience, students in France have been repeated 
over and over to be careful about their private information. Hence, 
you should anticipate and expect questions related to privacy on 
Wikimedia projects, and by extension, harassements issues (hot topic 
those days).
Well, of course I'm aware of the harassment issues, but I didn't know 
students were boldly informed on this topic, and I would not have 
expected many question on this given the topic, expect for the right 
to a person's image and right to oblivion. In fact I should probably 
improve my knowledge on this topics too, any reading suggestion is 
welcome.




I invite you to take a look at : 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiConvention_francophone/2017/Programme/Fossé_des_genres_et_harcèlement:_le_point_sur_les_projets_francophones

Thank you Florence, I will look at that with much attention.


Florence


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

New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


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

New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Experimental onion service for all Wikimedia projects set up by Alec Muffett

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Then, if it's not a too big maintance burden, what about proposing both 
solution?


Our users already pay extremely huge loading time for some feature like 
visual editing, but the far faster wikitext editor is still there for 
those who are happier with that.



Le 24/11/2017 à 19:37, Tilman Bayer a écrit :

I think this is unlikely to happen, because of the performance degradation
(access via Tor will always be slower, which user studies
 have shown to be a significant
usability issue in the past). But as an option or fallback or separate app
it might be a great idea; there is a Phabricator task at
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T163747

On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 12:35 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
wrote:


Excellent! Still, as I argued before, I believe that a solution we could
use is defaulting to Tor channeling in our mobile app. Facebook offers it
as an option in partnership with Orbot - I believe we should do the same,
but default to it (so that people cannot be held responsible for making a
choice). For unlogged Wikipedia reading this solution is practically
transparent for users.

I've recently contacted the WMF with Orbot people and hope that at least we
can evaluate this approach as a possibility.

best,

Dariusz Jemielniak "pundit"



On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Cristian Consonni 
wrote:


Hi all,

Some months ago, the idea of setting up an onion service for Wikimedia
projects was discussed on this list[1] and as a proposal in IdeaLab on
Meta[2].

Today, Alec Muffett announced on Twitter[3] that he created «as an
experiment» a series of read-only mirrors of all the Wikimedia projects.
He will be running them for some time.

The service is reachable with a Tor-enabled browser at the following
address:
https://www.qgssno7jk2xcr2sj.onion/
































If you want to try out the service, first visit the addresses listed in
this page and add exceptions for the SSL certificates:
https://gist.github.com/alecmuffett/3da587fde6aef90ba3e49e8858fafdae

(this is one of the limits of having a non-official service)

Alec Muffett is the author of the Enterprise Onion Toolkit (EOTK)[4], a
FLOSS project which "does for Onions what LetsEncrypt does for SSL",
that is providing a simple way to transform websites in Onion services
(which are accessible only and contained within the Tor network). Alec
used EOTK for creating this demo. He was also behind the onion service
for Facebook[5].

IMO this service, even with its current limitations, is quite awesome
and I am very happy to see it. It is exactly the kind of proof of
concept that I wanted to create with my proposal. So now there's that.

Enjoy!

Cristian

[1]: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-
June/087708.html
[2]:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/A_Tor_
Onion_Service_for_Wikipedia
[3]:https://twitter.com/AlecMuffett/status/933739816038076419
[4]: https://github.com/alecmuffett/eotk
[5]:
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/
10/facebook-offers-hidden-service-to-tor-users/

___
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,





--

 prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
kierownik katedry MINDS (Management in Networked and Digital Societies)
Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
http://NeRDS.kozminski.edu.pl  

associate faculty w Berkman-Klein Center for Internet and Society,
Harvard University
*Ostatnie artykuły:*

- Dariusz Jemielniak, Maciej Wilamowski (2017)  Cultural Diversity of
Quality of Information on Wikipedias

*Journal
of the Association for Information Science and Technology* 68:  10.
 2460–2470.
- Dariusz Jemielniak (2016)  Wikimedia Movement Governance: The Limits
of A-Hierarchical Organization

*Journal
of Organizational Change Management *29:  3.  361-378.
- Dariusz Jemielniak, Eduard Aibar (2016)  Bridging the Gap Between
Wikipedia and Academia
 *Journal of the
Association for Information Science and Technology* 67:  7.  1773-1776.
- Dariusz Jemielniak (2016)  Breaking the Glass Ceiling on Wikipedia
 *Feminist
Review *113:  1.  103-108.
- Tadeusz Chełkowski, Peter Gloor, Dariusz Jemielniak (2016)
Inequalities
in Open Source Software Development: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Saluton Samuel kaj ĉiuj,

Le 23/11/2017 à 22:39, Samuel Klein a écrit :

On Nov 23, 2017 2:55 PM, "Emeric Vallespi" 
wrote:



the Wikimedia community protect itself and its members by harassing and
defaming people who question
Please don't turn it to a inaccurate "us versus them" representation. 
Sure there are people in our community that misbehaves in reaction to a 
feeling of aggression. But condemning the whole community for also 
including this kind of behaviour is not constructive. We also have 
people who try, not vehemently, to listen to each party, bring 
compassion, and try to help solving conflicts through dialogue as far as 
possible.


Of course our community is not perfect, we are human, and nothing 
characterize better human beings than erroneous behaviours. But as far 
as I know, we don't promote harassment, or any form of violence, as an 
acceptable solution to problems we face.

I cannot imagine why anyone would attempt to defame you, when they cannot
hope to surpass the eloquence and thoroughness of your own writing.
Well, they are situation where having more reasonable arguments are not 
enough to meet prevalence in decisions. Typically when different 
decision can be imposed by force. That may be physical violence, 
psychological abuse, hierarchical authoritarian misconduct, and so on.


People are not always reacting with violent means because they are 
inherently wired to such a behaviour as first reaction. Often they will 
act like that as a last resort because they themselves feel assaulted 
and see no other mean to react.


I think it would be healthy to redact pattern/anti-pattern for that kind 
of problematic and extensively promote them. Currently we don't have 
much material pertaining harassment in our pattern library 
.


Distingeble,
mathieu



—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, 



___
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] Legal status of Wikimeida lists [Was: Re: The other side of the crisis at WMFR]

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Saluton ĉiuj,

Le 23/11/2017 à 20:54, Emeric Vallespi a écrit :

I think it was important to re-explain all those points so that the community, 
which is - again - unnecessarily taken as witness, is not deceived by a 
scenario built from scratch.
Again, to discredit the movement by such erroneous but public accusations still 
shows that only personal interests and vainness matter in this conflict with 
some people.

I seize the opportunity to ask: what is the legal status of the list? Is 
it considered public?


I mean, it's easy to subscribe for anyone, but you still have to 
subscribe. And as far as I know, accessing archives require to login. 
Now there are other website which make crawled archives publicly 
accessible, but just because some do that doesn't mean it's legal.


Also I'm not aware of any license regarding posted emails, so plain 
copyright probably apply, minus any exception related to epistolary 
material that might exist.


It might be interesting to make any post to our mailing list a free 
licensed material. I've been thinking about that as I had the idea to 
extensively analyse the wikidata-l mailling list and publish a side by 
side statements and extracted keywords elements, but from a legal point 
of view it is probably not feasible. That might be circumvented with 
links, or providing a software which generate the expected table from 
provided references, but anyway it's less practical than a straight 
published table. Having this material published under a free license 
would make it far more useful in any kind of study with such an 
extensive goal in its publication.


Now, switching to a free license would not make the change retroactive, 
but it would already cover new material. Also it should be possible to 
contact most posters through their email and ask permission to release 
their previous publications under one or more free licenses and change 
archive metadata accordingly.


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Education] non-technical community wish: Invitational essay authorship contest

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Saluton,

To my mind, this whole discussion doesn't make any sense as it is all 
grounded on suspect hypotheses.


First, what do you call an essay? I think that for such a work the 
author must instill selfness in it. As say Montaigne 
 "c’eſt moy 
que ie peins ". If you 
take that into consideration, how might you even begin to consider that 
there are any consensual ordering possible? Actually, a "commissioned 
essay" sounds more like an oxymoron than anything else.


Concerning the proposed subject, I would advise any person considering 
answering such a tricksy question to first question its premises. You 
might even explore the strict opposite question: can any institution 
ever give enough to a person for all the time dedicated into integrating 
its expectations? All this time that nothing will ever give back, and 
not spent in other life experiences that the said institution might not 
care about but that would be far more enjoyable.


So, to answer the last question, that's not simply your dichotomy which 
is false, it's the whole underlying premise set your are pushing that is 
total nonsense. No, you can not provide a well-order 
 relation on any set for any 
property.


Moreover you seems to think that it suffices to drop money to achieve 
attracting "the best possible essay" in the scope of your nonsense 
contest. But what if "the best" essay writer in the pool you are 
targeting will be on the contrary repelled by such a contest?


Now, I'm not against fostering the idea of writing orignal essays around 
and within the Wikimedia movement. Currently, I don't think we have a 
clear dedicated project for that, although I come across some of them 
which are usually stored on Meta 
, in user namespaces 
, or on Wikibooks 
(for example A Lecture on the Limits of Human Knowledge 
). 
So maybe a dedicated project for essays might make some sense.


Eseete,
mathieu

Le 22/11/2017 à 19:05, James Salsman a écrit :

Thanks, Lucas. I am happy to discuss the idea.

I believe that there is strong evidence against the proposition that
the best editors are skilled in writing articles but not essays.

LiAnna and Tighe, do you have any reasons to believe that editors
skilled in composing both articles and essays are not superior to
editors skilled in articles only? Is there a false dichotomy in
believing that one or the other could be preferable to both?

Best regards,
Jim


On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Lucas Teles  wrote:

Maybe you should first discuss any contest like this with community and
then come with a suitable idea.

Your willingness to invest on this is something valuable and should be used
on a project that fits with WMF goals.

Teles

Em ter, 21 de nov de 2017 às 14:19, Tighe Flanagan 
escreveu:


To echo LiAnna and Wiki Education's take, the Wikimedia Foundation's
education team support activities that get students to contribute to
Wikimedia projects as part of their learning. While the contexts may vary
from country to country and classroom to classroom, the students contribute
according to Wikimedia project norms (neutrality, citations, etc). This
type of proposed assignment/competition seems out of scope and we could not
support it on our end either.

Best,
Tighe

--
Tighe Flanagan
Senior Manager, Wikipedia Education Program
Wikimedia Foundation
tflana...@wikimedia.org
education.wikimedia.org

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:52 AM, LiAnna Davis  wrote:


On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:27 AM, James Salsman 

wrote:

I offer $50 USD first prize and $25 for the runner-up for the best
twelve paragraph essay on the topic of whether college students are
likely to pay more in income taxes over their lifetime than the
present value of the entire amount of their college tuition, room, and
board expenses.

This contest is open only to the top 50% of participants in the
Wikimedia Education Program or WikiEd Foundation's student editors.

If there are any objections to this contest, please let me know. If
there are any reasons it shouldn't be communicated to the eligible,
please let me know. I ask both foundations to match my award, taking
the prizes to $150 and $75 if they agree. Thank you!



No. At the Wiki Education Foundation, we focus on teaching students to
write neutral, fact-based encyclopedia articles instead of essays; our
asking them to write essays would be counterproductive given the mission

of

our program, our organization, and the Wikimedia movement. We will not
support this effort, and ask that you do not reach out to them on your

own.

LiAnna


--
LiAnna Davis
Director of Programs; 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] non-technical community wish: Invitational essay authorship contest

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Where does this idea come from, especially the topic selected?

How "the best" will be determined, and by who?

What the goal of this proposal in the first place?


Le 21/11/2017 à 10:52, James Salsman a écrit :

The Wikipedia Education Program is shared by both the Wikimedia
Foundation and the WikiEd Foundation, and I am asking both to
participate.


On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Joseph Seddon  wrote:

How is this relevant to wikimedia-l?

Seddon

On 21 Nov 2017 09:28, "James Salsman"  wrote:


I offer $50 USD first prize and $25 for the runner-up for the best
twelve paragraph essay on the topic of whether college students are
likely to pay more in income taxes over their lifetime than the
present value of the entire amount of their college tuition, room, and
board expenses.

This contest is open only to the top 50% of participants in the
Wikimedia Education Program or WikiEd Foundation's student editors.

If there are any objections to this contest, please let me know. If
there are any reasons it shouldn't be communicated to the eligible,
please let me know. I ask both foundations to match my award, taking
the prizes to $150 and $75 if they agree. Thank you!

Sincerely,
James Salsman

___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A fundraising banner we'd like to try in a short test

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Well, I'm not skilled in marketing, but maybe being ugly and annoyingly 
large is part of the "pay attention" driving force.


Regarding the format, as said I'm not sikilled in the domain, so my 
opinion surely doesn't worth much. The good old vertical banner is 
definitely simpler, so it might be a better way to catch initial 
attention, then once you clicked you will also have to make all the rest 
of the input, but you are already a bit engaged. On the other hand the 
more complete form say "hey you just fill this few fields, and you are 
done, there are no additional form pages hidden behind the next button". 
But really that just the thought of an ignorant on the matter. :)


Will you publish results of your tests somewhere? Maybe it would be an 
occasion to feed a bit some of our wiki on the topic. Here are some 
related links:


 * https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Portal:Marketing
 * https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Marketing
 * https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/School:Business


Le 15/11/2017 à 09:34, Mardetanha a écrit :

both are equally ugly, they should much more smaller, current banner should
1/10 or 1/8th of a page not half of it.

Mardetanha

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:


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,



___
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: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Looking for advises regarding a public conference about the Wikimedia movement on the topic "Dissemination of Knowledge: What Limits" [Fwd: Re: Conférence Wikipédia]

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 08/11/2017 à 02:52, Devouard (gmail) a écrit :

Le 07/11/2017 à 16:22, mathieu stumpf guntz a écrit :

Saluton ĉiuj,

Your fellow wikimedian was invited to present the Wikimedia movement 
in a conference organized by "Association des Masters en Économie de 
Strasbourg", which will occur Tuesday, November 28th, in Strasbourg 
(who would have guest?).


More information are below in French, but the main point is that the 
conference is entitled "Dissemination of Knowledge: What Limits", and 
after a call to better understand what was expected, the main point 
which will be presented:


1. How is structured the movement (relation between
    WMF/Chapters/Communities/Projects…)
2. What are the requirements of Wikipedia regarding information 
reliability

3. The different knowledge dissemination supports: what limits?

The main point, in term of coverage, will be the second.

No concern worries me about being able to cover all this topics in a 
way far more extensive than required for this conference. However, it 
would be appreciable if feedback was provided regarding what the 
community as a whole think important to highlight. More broadly any 
other advise that the topic or the main points might inspire to you 
would be warmly welcome.


Ĝis baldaŭ,
mathieu



Good evening

I think you should exercise more caution in forwarding entire private 
discussions (which include phone number etc.) by email to a public list.
You are perfectly right, I wasn't cautious enough on this. Actually it 
was one of my first thought this morning that I hadn't checked the whole 
content of the forwarded email.


May a moderator please remove this details from archives? Especially 
phone numbers. I would expect emails to be automatically transformed to 
avoid easy spam target, but maybe I'm wrong.




Otherwise... by experience, students in France have been repeated over 
and over to be careful about their private information. Hence, you 
should anticipate and expect questions related to privacy on Wikimedia 
projects, and by extension, harassements issues (hot topic those days).
Well, of course I'm aware of the harassment issues, but I didn't know 
students were boldly informed on this topic, and I would not have 
expected many question on this given the topic, expect for the right to 
a person's image and right to oblivion. In fact I should probably 
improve my knowledge on this topics too, any reading suggestion is welcome.




I invite you to take a look at : 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiConvention_francophone/2017/Programme/Fossé_des_genres_et_harcèlement:_le_point_sur_les_projets_francophones

Thank you Florence, I will look at that with much attention.


Florence


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

New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


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

[Wikimedia-l] Looking for advises regarding a public conference about the Wikimedia movement on the topic "Dissemination of Knowledge: What Limits" [Fwd: Re: Conférence Wikipédia]

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Saluton ĉiuj,

Your fellow wikimedian was invited to present the Wikimedia movement in 
a conference organized by "Association des Masters en Économie de 
Strasbourg", which will occur Tuesday, November 28th, in Strasbourg (who 
would have guest?).


More information are below in French, but the main point is that the 
conference is entitled "Dissemination of Knowledge: What Limits", and 
after a call to better understand what was expected, the main point 
which will be presented:


1. How is structured the movement (relation between
   WMF/Chapters/Communities/Projects…)
2. What are the requirements of Wikipedia regarding information reliability
3. The different knowledge dissemination supports: what limits?

The main point, in term of coverage, will be the second.

No concern worries me about being able to cover all this topics in a way 
far more extensive than required for this conference. However, it would 
be appreciable if feedback was provided regarding what the community as 
a whole think important to highlight. More broadly any other advise that 
the topic or the main points might inspire to you would be warmly welcome.


Ĝis baldaŭ,
mathieu


 Message transféré 
Sujet : Re: Conférence Wikipédia
Date :  Wed, 1 Nov 2017 06:54:55 +0100
De :Amélie BARBIER-GAUCHARD <abarb...@unistra.fr>
Pour :  mathieu stumpf guntz <psychosl...@culture-libre.org>
Copie à :   AMES Strasbourg <ames.strasbo...@gmail.com>



Bonjour Mathieu,

Pour faire suite à notre entretien téléphonique de la semaine dernière, 
je reviens vers vous pour résumer notre échange sur le déroulement de 
cette conférence du mardi 28 novembre 2017 à 18h.


Cette conférence sera donc articulée autour de trois questions que vous 
poserons les étudiants organisateurs :

1 - La Fondation Wikimedia, de quoi s’agit-il ?
2 - Quelles sont les exigences de Wikipedia en termes de fiabilité des 
informations ?
3 - Les différents supports de diffusion des connaissances : quelles 
limites ?


Suite à cela, la parole sera donnée au public pour des questions et un 
échange avec vous.


Pour l’affiche de promotion de cet événement, nous allons corriger votre 
fonction en vous présentant comme « Contributeur aux projets Wikimédia » 
et en complétant votre nom en tant que « Mathieu STUMPF GUNTZ" .


Par ailleurs, si vous le souhaitez, vous serait-il possible de me faire 
parvenir une photo de vous que nous pourrons ajouter sur l’affiche ?


Tout cela est ok pour vous ?

Tenez moi au courant, par avance merci.

Au plaisir de vous rencontrer, à bientôt donc.

Amélie.


Le 26 oct. 2017 à 10:11, mathieu stumpf guntz 
<psychosl...@culture-libre.org <mailto:psychosl...@culture-libre.org>> 
a écrit :


Rebonjour


Le 26/10/2017 à 06:43, Amélie BARBIER-GAUCHARD a écrit :

Bonjour Mathieu,

Entendu comme cela, je vous téléphonerai vers 16h30.

Pourriez vous m’indiquer précisément la fonction que vous souhaitez 
voir apparaitre sur l’affiche de l’événement ?
Ah, au vu de l’affiche, j’ai bien fait de signaler l’erreur, je ne me 
doutait pas que ce serait mis tellement en avant dans la communication 
en amont. Est-ce que « Contributeur aux projets Wikimédia » pourrait 
convenir ? C’est un peu long, mais un laconique « wikimédien » serait 
sans doute peut parlant.


En effet, au vu de l’angle sous lequel l’affiche est présenté, je 
pense que toucher un mot sur les projets Wikimédia au-delà de 
Wikipédia pourrait s’avérer intéressant. Wikipédia est le plus connu 
des projets soutenu par la fondation Wikimédia, mais d’autres projets 
proposent des plateforme de partage pour des connaissances sortent du 
cadre encyclopédique.


Je vous la transmets en PJ en l’état pour info.
Merci. Du coup comme dit, si je suis cité je préfèrerais apparaître 
comme mathieu stumpf guntz. Aussi, sauf si j’ai mal compris la 
demande, je crois que je ne serais pas le seul intervenant et je 
trouverait plus juste de voir apparaître nos deux noms. Enfin nous 
pourrons discuter de ça plus plus en détail tout à l’heure.


Bonne journée à vous, à tout à l’heure.

Cordialement.

Amélie.


PS 1 : en effet, par habitude de l’usage de Mr dans les échanges en 
anglais, il m’arrive de commettre cette erreur


PS 2 : pour le tutoiement, de mon coté, il faudra attendre de se 
rencontrer

Pas de soucis. :)




Le 26 oct. 2017 à 04:36, mathieu stumpf guntz 
<psychosl...@culture-libre.org 
<mailto:psychosl...@culture-libre.org>> a écrit :


Pas de souci. Je suis joignable au 06.27.42.08.39

Petite correction sur l’annonce de Cyrille, je n’ai pas de statut 
d’administrateur sur Wikipédia. Ça n’a pas grande importance pour le 
sujet qui nous concerne, par contre ça me semblait d’autant plus 
pertinent de rectifier au vu du sujet. :)


Et tant qu’à faire dans le pointillisme, l’usage en français retient 
M. plutôt que Mr qui prévaut en anglais. Et j’en profite pour 
ajouter que je n’ai pour ma part pas de souci à 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia movement under DMCA attack!

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Thank Chico and Henrique for your reports and related links.

I encourage both of you to document further this topic. But as the 
mailing list format might quickly turn it into a flameware, to avoid 
list moderators some disagreeable work, you could preferably find more 
suited place to develop your points. Punctual feedback on the list to 
signal creation or update of additional external resources is welcome, 
as far as I'm concerned.


You might, inter alia, use wikimedia-timeline[1] to generate an overview 
of main statements you are claiming, each linked to related resources 
which let reader deepen their inquiry on the topic if they have interest 
and resources to do so.


If you are interested to turn that in a research project as objective as 
you might be able to create, I also encourage you to open a research 
project on a Wikiversity instance, after a check of how such a project 
might be conducted on the selected instance. You might also like to 
create and conduct some interviews and publish them on Wikinews.


I hope that the difficult situation you are passing through will end up 
in the most contributive, positive and placid possible resolution.


Kind regards,
mathieu

[1] https://github.com/molly/wikimedia-timeline


Le 06/11/2017 à 11:59, Chico Venancio a écrit :

Ended up with out the links, sorry:
[1]http://www.isitdownrightnow.com/wikibrasil.org.html
[2]https://www.whois.com/whois/107.180.2.118
[3]http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/L9610.htm#art24

Chico Venancio

2017-11-06 7:53 GMT-03:00 Chico Venancio :


To all on the list, *this is characterization is filled with obvious
lies.*

The DMCA was filed a month ago simply *DID NOT TAKE the site down*.[1]
Henrique quickly took down the article offending copyright and Godaddy
allowed it to continue to be hosted.[2]

Henrique is a paid contractor of the user group Wiki Education Brazil that
has repeatedly harassed several members of our user group (Joalpe and
myself included). And is probably here acting as a Meatpuppet of another
user who is under an Office action interaction ban to interact with either
myself or João.

That he goes on an international platform to call on the Dean of the
university were João works is egregious harassment and WMF should not only
impose severe sanctions, but review both the grant and affiliation
agreements with the "user group" were this comes from.

On the merits, after the event the organizer harassed several of our
members, and to me it is completely understandable that João does not want
his name attached to an event that harassed him and others. There was on
more than one occasion hints of physical violence from a member of Wiki
Education Brazil, and at one point those hints came to level of actually
using the words "beating" in reference to another member of our user group,
Teles, who was also called a famous Wikipedia despot, that he needed
psychiatric attention, and that he needed to find a boyfriend on a public
facebook thread.

The CC-BY 3.0 Henrique alleges to have on the article is clearly invalid
for several reasons, one being he did not have one from the co-authors of
the work. Even if he did, Brazilian law supersedes it and clearly states
that the author has the inalienable moral right to revoke any license and
remove from circulation in any form when the use represents an affront to
his image or reputation.[3] That Henrique confesses that he, and the user
banned from interacting with myself or Joalpe, knew that license was not
given by João and that an explicit revocation was placed onwiki, only makes
the copyright violation willful and demonstrates that no assumption of good
faith can be reasonably made. This was an explicit provocation from the
"User Group" Wiki Education Brazil to João.

Best to all on the Wikimedia Movement,

Hoping for a movement with less tolerance for harassment,

Chico Venancio (User:Chicocvenancio)

2017-11-06 1:08 GMT-03:00 Henrique de Andrade 

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

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hi James,

I fail to see the relation between Erik message and you answer.

I have huge doubt that Mandarin will eclipse English anytime soon. 
Despite the Confucius institutes growing everywhere in the world, as far 
as my narrow knowledge of the world goes, PRC doesn't seem to aim 
exporting Mandarin with heavy means of soft power competing with the 
Hollywood industry.


Anstataŭe mi bone fidas ke Esperanto frue estos ĉie parolita anstataŭ, 
kiel celas nian sekretan planon de monda superrego. Fakte ni jam 
kontrolas Ĉinian politikon pri tio, kaj uzas ĝiajn rimedojn por nia 
propra propagando[1], ehe!


[1] http://esperanto.cri.cn/

Mondsuperrege,
psikosklavoj


Le 28/10/2017 à 00:39, James Salsman a écrit :

Hi Erik,

I get the feeling you would question my identity if I didn't follow up
by asking you whether they asked you to endorse the possibility that
Mandarin could eclipse English?

Best regards,
James


On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:47 AM, Erik Moeller  wrote:

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:


I think it would be good to do some legal work to gain that clarity. The
Amazon Echo issue, with the Echo potentially using millions of words from
Wikipedia without any kind of attribution and indication of provenance at
all, was raised on this list in July for example.

There is some basic attribution in the Alexa app (which keeps a log of
all transactions). As I said, I don't see a reason not to include
basic attribution in the voice response as well, but it still seems
worth pointing out. Here's what it looks like in the app (yup, it
really does say "Image: Wikipedia", which is all too typical):

https://imgur.com/a/vchAl

I'm all in favor of a legal opinion on bulk use of introductory
snippets from Wikimedia articles without attribution/license
statement. While I'm obviously not a lawyer, I do, however, sincerely
doubt that it would give you the clarity you seek, given the extremely
unusual nature of authorship of Wikipedia, and the unusual nature of
the re-use. I suspect that such clarity would result only from legal
action, which I would consider to be extremely ill-advised, and which
WMF almost certainly lacks standing to pursue on its own.


If CC-BY-SA is not enforced, Wikipedia will stealthily
shift to CC-0 in practice. I don't think that's desirable.

Regardless of the legal issue, I agree that nudging re-users to
attribute content is useful to reinforce the concept that such
attribution goes with re-use. Even with CC-0, showing
providence/citations is a good idea.


An interesting question to me is whether, with the explosion of information
available, people will spend so much time with transactional queries across
a large number of diverse topics that there is little time left for
immersive, in-depth learning of any one of them, and how that might
gradually change the type of knowledge people possess (information
overload).

It's a fair question; the Internet has certainly pushed our ability to
externalize knowledge into overdrive. Perhaps we've already passed the
point where this is a difference in kind, rather than a difference in
degree, compared with how we've shared knowledge in the past; if
[[Neuralink]] doesn't turn out to be vaporware, it may push us over
that edge. :P

That said, people have to acquire specialized domain knowledge to make
a living, and the explosive growth of many immersive learning
platforms (course platforms like edX, Coursera, Udacity; language
learning tools like Duolingo; the vast educational YouTube community,
etc.) suggests that there is a very large demand. While I share some
of your concerns about the role of for-profit gatekeepers to
knowledge, I am not genuinely worried that the availability of
transactional "instant answers" will quench our innate thirst for
knowledge or our need to develop new skills.

I'm most concerned about information systems that deliver highly
effective emotional "hits" and are therefore more habit-forming and
appealing than Wikipedia, Google, or a good book. The negative effect
of high early childhood TV use on attention is well-documented, and
excessive use of social media (which are continuously optimized to be
habit-forming) may have similar effects. Alarmist "Facebook is more
addictive than crack" headlines aside, the reality is that social
media are great delivery vehicles for the kinds of little rewards that
keep you coming back.

In this competition for attention, Wikipedia articles, especially in
STEM topics, have a well-deserved reputation of often being nearly
impenetrable for people not already familiar with a given domain.
While we will never be able to reach everyone, we should be able to
reach people who _want_ to learn but have a hard time staying focused
enough to do so, due to a very low frustration tolerance.

I think one way to bottom line any Wikimedia strategy is to ask
whether it results in people getting better learning experiences,
through WMF's 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikidata and CC0 [was Re: what made me happy this week]

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Thank you Léa for the link,

I seize the opportunity to also ask anyone who have links related to 
Wikidata and the choice of CC0 as license for this project.


What Wikidata already achieved and its further possibilities is very 
attractive to me. But so far CC0 is a far more repulsive point. Now 
maybe with more documentation I might change my mind, I think at least I 
should make some research to have a more informed opinion on the topic. 
So any documentation is welcome on how it was decided, what have been 
the misc. pros/cons highlighted, how was the community involved (or not) 
in the decision.


Also, I heard last week during Wikiconvention Francophone that there are 
some actions on sister projects that generate content on Wikidata, 
without informing the user it does so. Afterward I was explained with 
more precise statements, saying that it was things like syslogs stored 
in Wikidata. I would like to be sure:


 * what actions on sister projects might generate publication of what
   kind of data on Wikidata
 * and that legal enquiries have been done about that. So we are
   certain that none of this publication might create legal threats. As
   I understand it, the user action end up with published (unlike raw
   syslog) data under a license which wasn't explicitly agreed. Or
   hopefully, I was misinformed, or misunderstood something.

Thanks again for the link, I think I will watch the conference about 
Wiktionary with much interest and profit other records to learn more 
about the project.


Cheers


Le 28/10/2017 à 09:31, Léa Lacroix a écrit :

What makes me happy today: the WikidataCon, the first international
conference dedicated to the WIkidata community, is about to start, and will
be live-streamed :)

The link to access the livestream is: http://streaming.media.ccc.de/
wikidatacon2017

The conference will be broadcasted from today at *11:00 (UTC+2)*, starting
with the talk "State of the project" by Lydia Pintscher. The content
of the *rooms
A, A1, A2 and A3* will be streamed, unless the speaker requests not to be
recorded.

You can find the program here https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
Wikidata:WikidataCon_2017/Program/Saturday

The videos will also be available later under CC-BY-SA: I'll share the
links with you as soon as possible.

Best,

On 28 October 2017 at 03:36, quiddity  wrote:


My mistake, there is a one line reference to Wikipedia in the lyrics.
(The time_continue parameter didn't work on my first play through, but
I checked again to be sure and then I heard the reference.) Sorry for
the mistake. My other points stand. 

On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 6:29 PM, quiddity  wrote:

James, that video does Not seem to have any connection to the
Wikimedia movement. (I checked the credits, but didn't watch the whole
song).
Please don't distract the hundreds of subscribers here with irrelevant

content.

Bare links without any explanation are also an anti-pattern to avoid.
Thanks.

On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 6:13 PM, James Salsman 

wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=150=Eijc2tGe-zM

___
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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Movement Strategy: Endorse the strategic direction today! #wikimedia2030

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Le 27/10/2017 à 16:57, Nicole Ebber a écrit :

Hello again,

I have taken the unclear wording from the meta page. As I said, no one
will be excluded from phase 2 conversations.

I would also like to point out that this endorsement page is intended
to work like a show of approval and support instead of an RfC. We are
asking people to support it, to show that they agree upon the outcomes
and intent to contribute to the following process in good faith. It's
a group exercise that is also meant to show what unites us as a
movement.

It is no surprise that not everyone will like everything in the
direction, that's probably in the nature of such a document, and in
the nature of a strategy process. For those of you who have expressed
concerns and wonder about the clarity of the direction, phase 2 will
be the the space for all these conversations.
Well, harmony is not unison, and we promote diversity so it would be 
actually strange to *not* hear some dissonance here and there.


I found the previous process interesting to look and participate at, but 
either individual should not be asked to endorse it, or it should be 
permitted to also be clearly neutral and opposed to it.


That is, either the foundation

 * is trying to identify a direction built and assented by the
   community¹, which is fine;
 * or is trying to push some direction, while taking more or less into
   consideration feedback from the community, which – as far as I'm
   concerned – is fine too.

But you can't play both sides while throwing a unified façade at the 
face of the world. When you have (as I'm writing) 1 explicit 
{{neutral}}, 9 explicit {{opposed}}, 8 explicit and 68 implicit 
{{support}}, I don't see the point of hiding disagreements. All the 
more, if endorsement don't play any role in participation in future 
phases, and that there is in fact no actual way to oppose to its 
adoption as is as a base for the next phase. What the point of this 
endorsement at all? Why don't run phase 2 after phase 1 just like have 
been done for cycles?


Finally, where is "knowledge equity" when endorsement requires that 
people "are endorsing the original English version"?


Also, endorsement by groups is a different point, as groups can (and do) 
discuss pros, cons and uselessness of such an endorsement. It would be 
interesting to know at the end of the endorsement how much groups 
expressed endorsement compared to the number of group that the 
foundation or some chapter officially recognize.


And to end on a more positive not, I want to recall that I did deeply 
appreciate participating in this strategy process so far, which produced 
interesting debates both off line and on line, and I already met two 
people making social science works who manifested interest for the 
archived discussion it generated.


Ĝis baldaŭ

¹ That is, from the extreme minority within the community which do care 
to give an answer and pass all the technical/language barrier to do so.





I will now restore the original status of the sections for organized
groups and individual contributors, without any sorting order but the
time the endorsement has been made.

Best,
Nicole

On 27 October 2017 at 15:59, Peter Southwood
 wrote:

Hi Nicole.
That is not the message we are getting from the endorsement page.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Nicole Ebber
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 10:50 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Movement Strategy: Endorse 
the strategic direction today! #wikimedia2030

Hi all,

By endorsing, people and organizations state that they agree that the direction is the right way 
for us as a movement to move forward, and that they commit to participate in phase 2 conversations 
in good faith. And in phase 2, we will discuss how to fill this direction with life. The next steps 
will will be designed as an inclusive process, but we won't "oblige" anyone to contribute 
to phase 2, nor will we "ban" people from it. A look into our FAQ can further clarify:

"How you use the outcomes of this discussion is up to you. Some individuals or 
organizations may use it to inform programmatic or organizational strategy. Others 
may see it as a way to connect with the broader movement and invite others to 
contribute to Wikimedia.
Some may not use it at all – and that’s okay!

Practically, this does not mean that volunteers will be more restricted in what 
activities they develop or engage in. Volunteers will remain free to engage in 
activities that interest them and they believe will most benefit Wikimedia and the 
world."
(https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Frequently_asked_questions#How_will_this_impact_me_or_my_organization.3F)

Hope that helps,
Nicole

On 27 October 2017 at 10:21, Lodewijk  wrote:

I'm not sure how I missed that 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Berkman Klein Center: Will Wikipedia exist in, 20 years?

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Anyone know if it's possible to add comment in subtitles, I tried with a 
"#" at the beginning of line, but it looks like it will just crash the 
parser. I didn't found anything in the documentation 
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Universal_Subtitles>.


Moreover, editing raw text in mediawiki in one tab and hearing at the 
video in an other is probably not the most convenient graphical user 
interface to make subtitle review, and trying to translate it on the fly 
is surely even worse. :) Now the above documentation speak about Amara, 
but I'm not sure how it's interfaced or not with Commons.


Please feel free to forward this email to wherever you feel more 
appropriate.


Cheers


Le 26/10/2017 à 21:01, Lane Rasberry a écrit :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_of_Wikipedia%27s_end

Thanks Andreas, Mathieu, Christian, Asaf, Cornelius, and SJ for advancing
the conversation and promoting the video. I felt inspired also so I started
an article on English Wikipedia.

On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Cornelius Kibelka <
cornelius.kibe...@wikimedia.de> wrote:


I've added them.

Cheers
Cornelius

On 26 October 2017 at 11:13, mathieu stumpf guntz <
psychosl...@culture-libre.org> wrote:


Yes, please, it would be warly welcome. Sure they are not good, but still
it might greatly help, especially if they come with relevant timecodes.

Kind regards

Le 26/10/2017 à 01:07, Cornelius Kibelka a écrit :

You can download the Youtube machine-generated subtitles, but they are

not

really good (in terms of spelling, etc.). If someone is eager to review
them, I'm happy to upload them.

Cheers
Cornelius

On 25 October 2017 at 16:39, Asaf Bartov <asaf.bar...@gmail.com> wrote:


On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:32 PM mathieu stumpf guntz <
psychosl...@culture-libre.org> wrote:


Great, thank you Asaf.

Would it possible (both technically and legally) to also transfer
subtitles? They would surely need some fixes, as it's automated (I

guess)

transcription , but it would probably be less workload than a

transcription

from scratch. If so, I would be happy to translate it to Esperanto —

and

the more obscure French language. ;)


It would have been possible, had there been any subtitles. It seems the
YouTube version at the moment contains only machine-generated subtitles,
and those are not available in the same mechanism as human-generated
subtitles, so the (wonderful) video2commons tool could not import them.

Cheers,

A.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
i/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>




--
Cornelius Kibelka
Program and Engagement Coordinator (PEC)
for the Wikimedia Conference

Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 <030%20219158> 26-0
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





--
Cornelius Kibelka
Program and Engagement Coordinator (PEC)
for the Wikimedia Conference

Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
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
___
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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Movement Strategy: Endorse the strategic direction today! #wikimedia2030

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Well, it might be clear in your mind Yaroslav, but Fæ point is that is 
not clear at all in the answer of Nicole. So she might seize the 
question to make it perfectly clear or just let it in a fuzzy state 
which would give more credit to your point of view.


Thus said, while I do share concerns about this "endorse or hush"  
enforcement, I wouldn't qualify my point of view as being that of a 
dissenter.



Le 27/10/2017 à 12:12, Yaroslav Blanter a écrit :

I think the situation is pretty clear, and we have already many statements
exactly about this point. The dissenters are being, and will continue being
simply ignored.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Fæ  wrote:


Sorry Nicole, what you have written is ambiguous. Will all affiliates and
individual volunteers be able to be full participants in later discussion
on the strategy, to exactly the same level as those that endorsed phase
one?

Saying that nobody gets "banned" does not ensure an open process. I.e. that
those not in the "club" will have the same access privileges or will not be
simply ignored as "non-U".

Thanks
Fae
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LGBT+
http://telegram.me/wmlgbt

On 27 Oct 2017 09:50, "Nicole Ebber"  wrote:

Hi all,

By endorsing, people and organizations state that they agree that the
direction is the right way for us as a movement to move forward, and
that they commit to participate in phase 2 conversations in good
faith. And in phase 2, we will discuss how to fill this direction with
life. The next steps will will be designed as an inclusive process,
but we won't "oblige" anyone to contribute to phase 2, nor will we
"ban" people from it. A look into our FAQ can further clarify:

"How you use the outcomes of this discussion is up to you. Some
individuals or organizations may use it to inform programmatic or
organizational strategy. Others may see it as a way to connect with
the broader movement and invite others to contribute to Wikimedia.
Some may not use it at all – and that’s okay!

Practically, this does not mean that volunteers will be more
restricted in what activities they develop or engage in. Volunteers
will remain free to engage in activities that interest them and they
believe will most benefit Wikimedia and the world."
(https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
movement/2017/Frequently_asked_questions#How_will_this_
impact_me_or_my_organization.3F)

Hope that helps,
Nicole

On 27 October 2017 at 10:21, Lodewijk  wrote:

I'm not sure how I missed that strongarm-statement ("the endorsement is
also a necessary step in order to participate in phase 2 discussions").

I'm

confident that this is a typo of a kind. It does not match with how I

know

the people in charge of this process.

Lodewijk

On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 12:51 AM, Fæ  wrote:


On 26 Oct 2017 09:00, "Nicole Ebber"  wrote:

Dear Wikimedians,

Today marks the final milestone of phase 1 of our movement strategy
process. Over the past eight months, many of you, of your peers,
colleagues, partners and friends have contributed to an endeavor that
resulted in the new Strategic Direction of the Wikimedia movement.

This direction provides us with an answer to the question: What do we
want to build and achieve as a movement over the next 10–15 years: By
2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the
ecosystem of free knowledge, and anyone who shares our vision will be
able to join us.[1]

On behalf of the strategy team, it’s with great pleasure that I invite
you today to declare your intent to work together towards this future.
Organized groups as well as individual contributors of our movement
are invited to endorse the Strategic Direction by adding their
signature to the endorsement page on Meta-Wiki. You will find all
necessary instructions there.[2]

By endorsing the Strategic Direction, you are not necessarily agreeing
with every single outcome of the first phase. Endorsing means that you
commit to participating in the next phase of this discussion in good
faith and to help define, by Wikimania 2018, how to come to an
agreement on roles, responsibilities, and organizational strategies
that enable us to implement that future.

In addition to signing the meta page, you are all welcome to use the
#wikimedia2030 hashtag on social media to celebrate and share your
excitement with the world and encourage other Wikimedians to show
their support, too.

Ideally, please leave questions or remarks on the talk page, to make
it easier to follow-up in a structured way.

Thank you!
Nicole


[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
movement/2017/Direction#Our_strategic_direction:_Service_and_Equity
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
movement/2017/Direction/Endorsement

--
Nicole Ebber
Adviser International Relations
Movement Strategy Track Lead: Organized Groups

Wikimedia 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Movement Strategy: Endorse the strategic direction today! #wikimedia2030

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Thank you Yaroslav.

I copied the matching section to 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Direction/Endorsement/Concerns


I also added a link to that page in the endorsement page, and began some 
sorting, including support/neutral/oppose for individuals (groups only 
replied in support so far).


In groups I added first level bullet for misc. kind of groups and let 
the whole existing endorsement in a second level list of unsorted items. 
Help on triage is welcome.


Cheers


Le 26/10/2017 à 19:55, Yaroslav Blanter a écrit :

For the record, at the talk page of the endorsement page,

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Direction/Endorsement

we have a small number of contributors, including myself, who explain why
they refuse to endorse the document. I do not expect us to be heard though.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Kaarel Vaidla 
wrote:


Dear fellow Wikimedians,

As a volunteer member of some of the support groups for phase 1 of movement
strategy process [1], I am excited about the Endorsement Day and am one of
the people who has *individually endorsed
*
strategic
direction

.
With my letter to Wikimedia-l I would like to remind everyone that there is
this possibilty of individual endorsement that may not have really been
highlighted. So, if you personally feel like endorsing the direction, you
are more than welcome to do that!
I am happy to see already quite many endorsements on respective meta page.
I am also happy that there are people presenting their discord with
strategic direction in a constructive way on the endorsement discussion
page
.
I think that it is important not only to endorse or not endorse the
document, but also to give rationale why it is done. I believe that this
will help us in moving forward together with Phase 2 and learn as we go.
As a result I have written a small essay in my user namespace

presenting some of the reasons why I am happy with what we have achieved in
phase 1 and with having a strategic direction for our movement. You may
agree or disagree, but I feel it is important to express one's opinion.
Also I encourage everyone else to share their reasons for liking or
disliking the direction with wider Wikimedia public, so we can learn more
and have even more meaningful phase 2.
I thank you for your time and kind attention!

Best regards,
Kaarel Vaidla

[1] Namely, Community Process Steering Committee
,
Track A Advisory Group

and Drafting Group

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


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



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Berkman Klein Center: Will Wikipedia exist in, 20 years?

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Yes, please, it would be warly welcome. Sure they are not good, but 
still it might greatly help, especially if they come with relevant 
timecodes.


Kind regards


Le 26/10/2017 à 01:07, Cornelius Kibelka a écrit :
You can download the Youtube machine-generated subtitles, but they are 
not really good (in terms of spelling, etc.). If someone is eager to 
review them, I'm happy to upload them.


Cheers
Cornelius

On 25 October 2017 at 16:39, Asaf Bartov <asaf.bar...@gmail.com 
<mailto:asaf.bar...@gmail.com>> wrote:


On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:32 PM mathieu stumpf guntz <
psychosl...@culture-libre.org
<mailto:psychosl...@culture-libre.org>> wrote:

> Great, thank you Asaf.
>
> Would it possible (both technically and legally) to also transfer
> subtitles? They would surely need some fixes, as it's automated
(I guess)
> transcription , but it would probably be less workload than a
transcription
> from scratch. If so, I would be happy to translate it to
Esperanto — and
> the more obscure French language. ;)
>
It would have been possible, had there been any subtitles. It
seems the
YouTube version at the moment contains only machine-generated
subtitles,
and those are not available in the same mechanism as human-generated
subtitles, so the (wonderful) video2commons tool could not import
them.

Cheers,

   A.

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




--
Cornelius Kibelka
Program and Engagement Coordinator (PEC)
for the Wikimedia Conference

Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
http://wikimedia.de <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


___
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] Berkman Klein Center: Will Wikipedia exist in, 20 years?

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Great, thank you Asaf.

Would it possible (both technically and legally) to also transfer 
subtitles? They would surely need some fixes, as it's automated (I 
guess) transcription , but it would probably be less workload than a 
transcription from scratch. If so, I would be happy to translate it to 
Esperanto — and the more obscure French language. ;)


Ĝis baldaŭ

Le 24/10/2017 à 22:08, Asaf Bartov a écrit :

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 7:20 PM Cristian Consonni <crist...@balist.es>
wrote:


On 24/10/2017 17:39, mathieu stumpf guntz wrote:

I would find interesting to have a copy of that video on Commons. It
might for example let the community use curration/translation facilities
of subtitles of our platform. According to the bottomline "Unless
otherwise noted this site and its contents are licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license.", but the video is stored on
youtube, so I'm not sure the statement applies.

Actually, I don't know if that's already something on rails somewhere,
but encouraging educational establishment to publish their multimedia
works on commons should be targeted. All the more when they are already
publishing works under a free license. :)

If you look at the video on Youtube[1], it says that its license is
indeed CC-BY (and indeed CC-BY 3.0 Unported, more info on this page[2])

So, I think that this can be uploaded also on Commons without issue.


This is now done:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Will_Wikipedia_exist_in_20_years-.webm


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


___
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] Berkman Klein Center: Will Wikipedia exist in, 20 years?

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hi Andreas,

I would find interesting to have a copy of that video on Commons. It 
might for example let the community use curration/translation facilities 
of subtitles of our platform. According to the bottomline "Unless 
otherwise noted this site and its contents are licensed under a Creative 
Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license.", but the video is stored on 
youtube, so I'm not sure the statement applies.


Actually, I don't know if that's already something on rails somewhere, 
but encouraging educational establishment to publish their multimedia 
works on commons should be targeted. All the more when they are already 
publishing works under a free license. :)


Kind regards


Le 22/10/2017 à 14:00, wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org a écrit :

Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 03:20:57 +0100
From: Andreas Kolbe 
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Berkman Klein Center: Will Wikipedia exist in
20  years?
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Video featuring Katherine Maher, Executive Director of the Wikimedia
Foundation, in conversation with Harvard Law School Professor Yochai
Benkler:

https://cyber.harvard.edu/events/2017/luncheon/10/Maher

The material in this video touches on many points related to the Wikimedia
movement's strategic direction, as discussed in other current threads on
this list.


--

Subject: Digest Footer

___
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, 


--

End of Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 163, Issue 71



___
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] [Wikitech-l] Content Translation office hour and online meeting on September 20, 2017 (Wednesday) at 1300 UTC

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hello Runa,

Thank you for the information.


Le 18/09/2017 à 11:06, Runa Bhattacharjee a écrit :


This session is going to be an online discussion over Google
Hangouts/Youtube with a simultaneous IRC conversation. Due to the
limitation of Google Hangouts, only a limited number of participation slots
are available. Hence, do please let us know in advance if you would like to
join in the Hangout. The IRC channel will be open for interactions during
the session.
Did you consider using an other solution, such as the jisti 
 FLOSS?

___
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] Should we plan anything regarding Mozilla’s "Talk" open-source commenting platform

[mathieu stumpf guntz]

Hi,

I'm just discovering this blog post Mozilla and the Washington Post Are 
Reinventing Online Comments 
 
and thought it might worth talking about its relevancy for the Wikimedia 
movement. For those who didn't followed the 2017 Movement strategy 
, 
we now also have wikicomment  as a 
solution related to this topic.


Kind regards,
mathieu

___
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,