This is great! Forwarding to wikimedia-l.
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 6:17 AM, Ariel T. Glenn ar...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Folks who are interested in downloading tarballs of media for their
particular project can now do so from:
I suppose this is old news by now, but I haven't seen it mentioned here
yet. Are any projects taking action?
Wikimedia-l mailing list
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 5:29 AM, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.comwrote:
Please note the substantive change in Article V: Officers and Duties. As
per the amendments, the Secretary and Treasurer are now non-trustee officer
This doesn't seem too unreasonable in itself, but it is
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 12:42 PM, cyrano cyrano.faw...@gmail.com wrote:
Why not distinguish the community seats from the Chapters seats with the
terms community seats and Chapters seats?
Using the word community in both cases may induce to believe that's it's
the same community with two
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 1:15 AM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.comwrote:
and at least my wish would be that people who
donate their time by sending code patches to software considered
essential to run the site are included.
In the 2011 election, anyone active with commit access (that
The way this whole affair was undertaken was unfortunate, but that can be
smoothed over with apologies. The remaining issue is that the wrong
decision was made, and there's no way to fix that except to reverse the
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 5:35 PM, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 11:05 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
By access logs I meant HTTP access logs. It's pretty clear that without
taking extraordinary measures, what you're editing is not anonymous. But
some people are probably under the impression that what they're reading and
On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 3:29 AM, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote:
Chad, I wonder if Rory has been considered. (:
Given his history of biting newbies, I'm not sure he'd be in a good
position to help solve the editor retention problem.
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 6:19 PM, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.comwrote:
In the past you have supported a hardline position regarding
publishing of private correspondence, and in circumstances when the
reasons for publishing the private correspondence were of greater
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Kevin Gorman kgor...@gmail.com wrote:
Can anyone articulate a valid reason why the freezeframe from the video
posted on the frontpage was just about the most graphic still possible from
Presumably the person who set up the templates thought that
There's no master list that I know of, but there are lists of each of those
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Alice Wiegand me.ly...@gmail.com wrote:
How's your definition of volunteers?
In this case, I just mean that some of the people on those lists are paid
employees of the WMF or a chapter, so I can't guarantee that everyone on a
list of volunteers is acting in a
On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
On the other side, I would note
that being a member of en.wp's ArbCom is highly stressful position and
I don't think that there are many of long-term ArbCom members (in
comparison to, let's say, WMF Board). I am sure that
Events sometimes get whitelisted for account creation purposes:
The exceptions there there could be made to set $wgCaptchaWhitelistIP too.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 8:54 AM, WereSpielChequers
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Michał Buczyński sand...@o2.pl wrote:
It would be _bad_ if this tag was used as a support more / less
flag and financial decisions on particular projects and people were heavily
based upon this underexplained and arbitrary list.
Based on the
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
* MediaWiki is developing and messages are changing. While it doesn't
matter a lot for the main language to have 99% and not 100% of
translated most used messages, the new one won't get a project if it's
not 100%. (The
On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 4:55 AM, Gerard Meijssen
clearly how much Cebuano has grown considerably in page views.
It's a shame we don't have filtered page view data: it'd be good to
This article highlights the happier side of things, but it appears
that Lin's approach also involved completely removing bad actors:
"Some players have also asked why we've taken such an aggressive
stance when we've been focused on reform; well, the key here is that
for most players, reform
Which of these heinous sins do we commit?
On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Pine W wrote:
> I think that a number of us may appreciate this article, specifically
> people who are involved with Wikimedia affiliates, grant committees, and
> WMF Community Engagement including CR
On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 3:19 PM, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> Sue explained to me that the goal was to have WMF's budget be roughly 50%
> grants and 50% user contributions to guard against unexpected fragility
> with either of these funding sources.
If that was the goal, it
Someone complained to you off-list about the amount you're posting to
the list. You immediately forwarded his email to the list. Is this
the best approach?
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 12:13 AM, Anthony Cole wrote:
> I thought I was bringing a sorely under-represented
I was glad when I saw Jimbo indicate he was reaching out to James. At
the risk of sounding hopelessly naive, maybe Jimbo should send James
another email, this time extending a clearer olive branch. If we're
past the point of no return on that, then so be it, but I would be
happy to know that
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Gnangarra wrote:
> of course I dont expect
> people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them but they
> do know the principles of it and what they can do
Are you sure? In the US, at least, industry groups go to a lot of
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Stephen Philbrick
> and it is astonishing how bad it is.
If you're astonished, then I'm afraid you haven't read enough news
articles about Wikipedia yet. :-(
P.S. MAYBE IT'S TIME WE REEVALUATED OUR STANCE ON ALLCAPS.
This is still going on, right? The latest question on the questions
page has only gotten one answer in a month. :-(
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Laurentius
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 5:00 AM, Rogol Domedonfors
> I think this is a very interesting point. Why is the WMF so dependent on
> being able to hire staff in one location?
A quick scan of the staff page shows more than 60 "international"
employees. (A fair number of
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Christophe Henner
> First, the resolution and its context. "Supervising" the ED is indeed a
> board duty, but this supervision must not become micro-management. That
> resolution provides staff the liberty to do their work more
On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 10:41 AM, sashi wrote:
> The fact that -- today on en.wp -- these religious categories are being
> overwhelmingly applied to Jews (and to a lesser degree to Freemasons) is
> certainly striking. (cf. the 862 members of Category:French Jews & the 21
On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 9:33 AM, sashi wrote:
> Given that the category French Jews contains more members than the category
> French Roman Catholics, and that there are living people included in both
I would again recommend caution in looking at numbers, because
On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 3:33 PM, James Salsman wrote:
> Are there any specific reasons that the Foundation should remain
> neutral on any topic, economic, political, or otherwise, which clearly
> impacts the readership or community?
Well, off the top of my head: to avoid compromising the
On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 1:48 PM Gerard Meijssen
> I am troubled with the ease doubt is raised about people contributing to
> this mailing list/ our community/ our projects. This is a mailing list that
> has the option of moderation. That is already in itself a sure way of
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 8:06 AM Dennis During wrote:
> Who is the judge? Are we going to join Facebook, Google, Twitter, et al as
> the new press barons?
All of our work on the projects necessarily involves making judgments.
As a movement we have largely decided that editors on individual
You paint the problem as being about us adapting to changing
demographics. I'm not so sure--if only because the notion of
attention-impaired millennials appears to be one of those
self-propagating ideas whose supposed statistical support turns out to
be fabricated. If the concern is about
It's interesting that you chose spellchecking as your example. On the
English Wikipedia, I tend to see that as an activity that some people
actually do find fun (or relaxing). Plus, spelling errors (or perceived
spelling errors) are something that unregistered users really like
On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 8:18 AM Mister Thrapostibongles <
> Let's look at the content first. Even on Wikipedia's own terms, it has
> failed. It is a principle that Wikipedia is founded on reliable sources,
> and by its own admission, Wikipedia itself is not
Like Peter, I do not see a clear connection to the proposed rebranding.
Threads of this sort would be more constructive if they were framed in a
way that does not unnecessarily tie in every other issue one might have
with the movement, and that does not imply that anybody with a different
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 1:18 AM Gregory Varnum
> Having said that, we agree with some of the criticisms you have raised. We
> had understood the Earth Day Live campaign to be both global and
> apolitical. However, we agree that the final campaign was both more
> US-centric and more
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 11:50 AM John Erling Blad wrote:
> It is said quite often that the Wikimedia-movement is apolitical.
I'm not sure I've seen anybody say that. I have seen people say that we
should avoid political activism or lobbying when it is not part of our core
mission, and that we
The original email here said "We welcome your input through 26 October." I
don't think a three-week comment period was appropriate to begin with for a
dramatic overhaul of our most formally powerful institution--particularly
at a time when the board has determined elections need to be put on
On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 9:20 PM Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
> Are we really sure he would have done something in any case if we did not
> provide such options?
It's pretty hard to be sure about the hypothetical behavior of
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:56 AM Gerard Meijssen
> Dear WereSpielChequers, the thing with bias is that it shows in the choices
> made. You are a Wikipedian, do not really care for the other projects and
> you make that plain in what you say.
This sort of assumption-making about other
On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 3:05 AM টিটো দত্ত Tito Dutta
> In such a situation there is a possibility that if a candidate has many
> social media or contacts and friends (Wimimedian), they will end up getting
> more votes than someone who entirely relied on their nomination and
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 11:18 AM Gerard Meijssen
> You have to appreciate that fulfilling the role of a board member of the
> Wikimedia Foundations is very time consuming. The candidates that may be
> chosen from are all volunteers, they have a day job. The argument for
> having only
Željko, I am really having trouble understanding what point you are making
or why this is appropriate for this list. Would you be able to clarify?
On Tue, Feb 23, 2021, 6:13 PM Željko Blaće wrote:
> Dear ALL -
> Especially #forQuestioningUCoC this is what working on Wikipedia is in
> 2021 even
Mail list logo