Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-13 Thread ferdinando traversa
I’m sorry but things can’t go like you would like to intend giving this ironic inversion because we don’t have possibility to decide anything. We’re only asking to listen all the community to do a very very important decision like this. Un abbraccio, Ferdinando On Thu, Sep 12, 2019

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-13 Thread ferdinando traversa
I left a message, please write you too so we can stop this (I listen only to channels that will say that I’m right lalalalaalalla… this seems the behavior of WMF): https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_research_and_planning/community_review/results#RFC

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-13 Thread Dan Szymborski
This is largely my feeling as well. If you look at one of Andrew's links: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_research_and_planning/community_review/brainstorm You'll see some quite vigorous opposition to the name change and robust support for explicitly

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-13 Thread Mike Peel
> On 13 Sep 2019, at 06:03, MZMcBride wrote: > > Mike Peel wrote: >> I haven't been following this discussion too closely, but my sense is that >> a few people on this mailing list have already decided on an >> outcome and are seeking “oppose" and "feedback" to legitimize and >> validate that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-12 Thread MZMcBride
Mike Peel wrote: >I haven't been following this discussion too closely, but my sense is that >a few people on this mailing list have already decided on an >outcome and are seeking “oppose" and "feedback" to legitimize and >validate that predetermined decision. > >Mike >(Seriously - please give

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-12 Thread Andrew Lih
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 2:42 PM Ad Huikeshoven wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > There has already been an extensive consultation in the first half year of > 2019. Zack presented the outcome to the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia > Foundation August 14th in Stockholm. Het got a go for a next phase. The

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-12 Thread Aron Manning
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 20:27, Mike Peel wrote: > > Hi. > > > > I haven't been following this discussion too closely, but my sense is > that > > a few people within Wikimedia Foundation Inc. have already decided on an > > outcome and are seeking "support" and "feedback" to legitimize and > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-12 Thread Ad Huikeshoven
Hi Andrew, There has already been an extensive consultation in the first half year of 2019. Zack presented the outcome to the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation August 14th in Stockholm. Het got a go for a next phase. The current dialogue is about implementation details, as far as I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-12 Thread Mike Peel
> On 12 Sep 2019, at 17:47, MZMcBride wrote: > > Andrew Lih wrote: >> Folks, it's not clear this email thread is going to register at all as >> feedback for this process. > > Hi. > > I haven't been following this discussion too closely, but my sense is that > a few people within Wikimedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-12 Thread MZMcBride
Andrew Lih wrote: >Folks, it's not clear this email thread is going to register at all as >feedback for this process. Hi. I haven't been following this discussion too closely, but my sense is that a few people within Wikimedia Foundation Inc. have already decided on an outcome and are seeking

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-12 Thread Andrew Lih
Folks, it's not clear this email thread is going to register at all as feedback for this process. The only recognized feedback mechanisms according to the original mail are the following: 1. Wikimedia Space group - https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/g/brand-network Currently 13 members 2.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-09 Thread Ferdinando Traversa
It’ll be a very very important RFC. More than elections, it’s about all global identity. CentralNotice is appropriate. Ferdinando > Il giorno 7 set 2019, alle ore 22:06, David Gerard ha > scritto: > > I concur, it sounds sensible. > > (I'll note, I'm not actually against the name change

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-09 Thread Adrian Raddatz
Their approach hasn't changed. There are maybe just more ongoing projects than there were in the past. But yes, it can't be fun for anyone involved. I briefly discussed some of this above, but I'll list a few options that the WMF could take to make this process less consistently bad: 1. Determine

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-09 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
I only started following WMF stuff more closely around 2 years ago, but I don't remember it being this permanent state of crisis as it is now, with an ever increasing - now, apparently at an accelerating pace too - detachment from the onwiki communities. This is tiresome and distracting for those

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-09 Thread Pine W
It crosses my mind that I would think that some of the WMF office staff would also be getting tired of crisis, conflict, and unwelcome surprises. These types of problems are unlikely to ever be fully prevented, but I would think that the parade of difficulties in the past few months would also be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-08 Thread Yair Rand
The broad proposal was clearly rejected. The community has not authorized the Wikimedia Foundation to let any organization speak under Wikipedia's name. If a formal RfC is to be held to make a final decision (perhaps with the question subdivided, per Pine), I recommend delaying it for a while so

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Pine W
I too think that an RfC is a good option here. I suggest having multiple questions in the RfC. Questions could include, "What should the organization that is currently known as the Wikimedia Foundation be named?", "Should there be a unifying brand for the online projects such as Wikipedia,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread effe iets anders
Now imagine trying to explain the difference between a chapter, the Foundation and the community when they have the same name... Lodewijk On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 1:41 PM Isaac Olatunde wrote: > We sometimes spend several minutes trying to explain to potentials partners > the difference between

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Todd Allen
Yes, let's see an actually public RfC on this. We shouldn't have to argue about what the support/oppose proportions are, we should see it right there on an on-wiki page where anyone is free to review them. Todd On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 2:06 PM David Gerard wrote: > I concur, it sounds sensible.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread David Gerard
I concur, it sounds sensible. (I'll note, I'm not actually against the name change proposal - but it's got to be presented to the community properly.) On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 at 20:50, Kiril Simeonovski wrote: > > HI David, > > Yes, it stands to reason to announce on all wikis in a similar way as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Kiril Simeonovski
HI David, Yes, it stands to reason to announce on all wikis in a similar way as the announcements about board or steward elections. Best, Kiril On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 9:46 PM David Gerard wrote: > On all wikis? > > On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 at 19:19, Yaroslav Blanter wrote: > > > > Right. > > > > I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread David Gerard
On all wikis? On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 at 19:19, Yaroslav Blanter wrote: > > Right. > > I guess a central notice about an RfC would be appropriate. > > Cheers > Yaroslav > > On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 8:16 PM Kiril Simeonovski < > kiril.simeonov...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > It seems like

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Yaroslav Blanter
Right. I guess a central notice about an RfC would be appropriate. Cheers Yaroslav On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 8:16 PM Kiril Simeonovski < kiril.simeonov...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > It seems like there is a clear consensus to open an RfC on Meta about this, > so we can safely move forward

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Kiril Simeonovski
Hi all, It seems like there is a clear consensus to open an RfC on Meta about this, so we can safely move forward with it and close this thread. Otherwise, we will most likely keep up boggling our minds with the 20-per-cent metric and endlessly discuss how unfortunate is this for the global

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Dan Szymborski
Given the typical response rate for polling is extremely low, even among groups of people who agreed to be polled, the 20% metric is absurd. If you put out some random notice among a million other emails to 9,000 people on various lists submitting a proposition to change the name to Fart Factory

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Ferdinando Traversa
I’m against and sincerly I don’t trust this datas (80% agrees? Are you kidding me? I’ve seen the meta discussion). I think a Meta CLEAR VOTE as suggested here is the best way. Imposing a change like this is a wrong decision. Regards. > Il giorno 6 set 2019, alle ore 05:49, Zack McCune ha >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Mario Gómez
On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 11:58 AM Mario Gómez wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:49 AM Zack McCune wrote: > >> >> From more than 319 comments, representing 150 individual contributors and >> 63 affiliates, we assessed 6 major themes in feedback: >> >> > * Opposition percentage is set at 0.6% for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Strainu
Pe sâmbătă, 7 septembrie 2019, Adrian Raddatz a scris: > I think it's a fine idea. I know that nobody knows what "Wikimedia means", > and see value to moving at least the Foundation's name towards a more > recognizable brand. > > I also see valid points being raised from the community, such as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, The right question here: how have you supported the sister projects in the past. The follow question: Branding is about getting attention for products. How will the sister projects benefit from more attention to Wikipedia? The point is we have not marketed the products from sister projects.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
By the way, the solution is really easy: The Wiki Foundation. 2019 ira. 7 1:39 PM erabiltzaileak hau idatzi du (Lucas Werkmeister ): On 06.09.19 05:49, Zack McCune wrote: >3. > >Supporting sister projects I am extremely wary of this phrasing. Instead of a family of projects working

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Lucas Werkmeister
On 06.09.19 05:49, Zack McCune wrote: >3. > >Supporting sister projects I am extremely wary of this phrasing. Instead of a family of projects working together towards a shared goal, to me this invokes the image of a big, central Wikipedia who graciously supports the other, insignificant

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-07 Thread Mario Gómez
Hello, On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:49 AM Zack McCune wrote: > > From more than 319 comments, representing 150 individual contributors and > 63 affiliates, we assessed 6 major themes in feedback: > > The benchmark is completely twisted to make opposition impossible: * Support and Opposition are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Benjamin Ikuta
I agree that an RFC would be a reasonable way forward. > On Sep 6, 2019, at 10:02 AM, Fæ wrote: > > If the WMF is going to make statements that are not derived from all > the demonstrable facts, perhaps the community should now respond with > a completely unambiguous RFC on meta so there

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Kiril Simeonovski
Hi all, I think the problem arises from the lack of transparency about Wikimedia Foundation's intent to hire a consulting firm for a rebranding advice. This is a major thing that affects our entire movement and thousands of contributors who self-identify with the brand names that we currently

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Adrian Raddatz
I think it's a fine idea. I know that nobody knows what "Wikimedia means", and see value to moving at least the Foundation's name towards a more recognizable brand. I also see valid points being raised from the community, such as the distinction between Wikipedia and WikiBooks, -Versity, -Source,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
I think a rebranding to Wikipedia is the best branding option but, at the same time, I aknowledge that this can cause a wide variety of problems to so many people inside our community that doing it without a plan to give safety (not only legal, as their lives could be compromised) is a bigger

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Isaac Olatunde
We sometimes spend several minutes trying to explain to potentials partners the difference between Wikipedia and Wikimedia and the relationship between them. In most cases we just use "Wikipedia" so as to not confuse them. Of course some people would share an opposing view for many reasons but I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Strainu
Pe vineri, 6 septembrie 2019, Adrian Raddatz a scris: > Yet another potentially good idea from the Foundation killed by the usual > atrocious style of stakeholder management. No benefits framed for the > community, > > no indication that this change is coming from the bottom up, Huh? Have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Adrian Raddatz
Yet another potentially good idea from the Foundation killed by the usual atrocious style of stakeholder management. No benefits framed for the community, no indication that this change is coming from the bottom up, no assurance that this change happens or not based on the results of the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Paulo Santos Perneta
After the last disastrous WMF intervention in Wikipedia - Framgate - I believe the timing is just perfect for the WMF to go forward with this fit of creativity of branding themselves as the "Wikipedia Foundation". It's one after another, and never stops. Best, Paulo Yaroslav Blanter escreveu

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Yaroslav Blanter
I agree with Fae. I strongly oppose the proposal, and I somehow used to assume that our opinion would be asked in a structured way. Cheers Yaroslav On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:03 PM Fæ wrote: > If the WMF is going to make statements that are not derived from all > the demonstrable facts, perhaps

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread
If the WMF is going to make statements that are not derived from all the demonstrable facts, perhaps the community should now respond with a completely unambiguous RFC on meta so there can be no doubt? Something along the lines of: "The WMF have employed Wolff Olins for rebranding advice, and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Zack McCune
Hi Pine - Thanks for your questions. We set out to measure community appetite for this change, knowing that it is something we share as our Movement's identity and therefore something that needs broad support. On Meta-Wiki, we shared our consultation metrics for assessing that support and/or

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-06 Thread Diane Ranville
Hi, I agree with Pine. There is a majority of people who actually oppose the rebranding proposition. I don't quite understand why this is still going forward (except that it is difficult to acknowledge a mistake and take steps backwards - but it is sometimes necessary). Have other options even

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

2019-09-05 Thread Pine W
Hello Zack, Thank you for the report on Meta. I am troubled by your statement in this email that "There is considerable support for the brand proposal and general appetite to improve our movement’s branding system." What that statement appears to omit is that, according to the report on Meta,