Hoi,
When you harp on things that do not truly matter, you get the wrong
results. It is not search that you are after, it is about aligning the
needs you feel about communication and openness and the lack of trust you
feel towards the WMF. I care about both. However, when Lila was hired it
was communicated loud and clear that the WMF would become more of an
organisation that would technically enable our projects. That in essence
means a change of culture. My appreciation is that this has not been really
taken on board by many and given the unfortunate changes at the board there
is a lack of trust in what is happening at the moment. It has been getting
towards a flash point for some time.

The whole thing with the Knight Foundation is what this flashpoint is
focused on and, it is a fight that will only have losers. When we have a
conversation of what kind of organisation we are, then fine. If we are to
be more activist, I want our endowment fund only to invest in green energy
to offset the harm that is done by using the electricity that is generated
by dirty sources. We hide behind our hosting company because it uses dirty
energy (and forget that we can offset that anyway somewhere else).

So what will it be, continue talk about things that are not the real issue
and fail or talk about what it is, where we really hurt. Trust in the
acceptance that the WMF and its board may be brave and do their job and
when this trust has broken down, what we can do to come to a workable and
acceptable continuation of what we do.
Thanks,
      GerardM



On 15 February 2016 at 19:19, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Gerard, you and I agree on most of these points. Certainly, there is room
> for improvement on intra-Wikimedia search, and such work is important, and
> I would assume more pressing for non-English projects. And I agree, it is
> quite possible Siko's concerns about integrity are not directly related to
> the Knowledge Engine. (If they are unrelated, that would only more strongly
> suggest there are fundamental issues to be addressed around integrity;
> multiple issues would be worse than isolated incidents.)
>
> But none of your points relate to whether Wikimedia leadership has been
> honest and forthright in its public communications about the Knowledge
> Engine. That is my concern here.
>
> Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> On Feb 15, 2016 9:11 AM, "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > The notion that WMF should out google Google is stupid, certainly at that
> > kind of money. Search in the Wikimedia Foundation is much better but it
> is
> > still easy for Magnus (for some time now) to improve the search results
> > considerably.
> >
> > The notion that search should not be strategic is laughable. Jane said
> that
> > she uses Google to search results in our project because it does a better
> > job. She searches in English !! Now consider searching in Tamil it finds
> a
> > lot more than only results in Tamil. Then apply this to our aim; provide
> > the sum of all knowledge.
> >
> > Yes Siko left. It does however not follow that this has to do with grant
> of
> > the Knight foundation. Yes she is outspoken in what she says but it does
> > not follow that everything good is suspect. When James Heilman says that
> he
> > has an issue with the focus on search, that is different. It does still
> not
> > follow that we do a good job on search or that the additional effort as
> > described in the Knight grant is not an important persuit.
> > Thanks,
> >       GerardM
> > Thanks,
> >       GerardM
> >
> > On 15 February 2016 at 17:57, Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Lila,
> > >
> > > The confusion, as you will surely agree, is understandable given the
> > > scattershot and often contradictory information provided by WMF to
> > > differing audiences. Above all, I hope the next volley of communication
> > > will address the central contradictions between what you and Jimmy
> Wales
> > > publicly stated prior to the publication of the grant application, and
> > the
> > > words in the application itself.
> > >
> > > I will quote these below, but first to underscore the importance: when
> > Siko
> > > questioned the integrity of the organization, these are the apparent
> > > willful lies that came to mind for me.
> > >
> > > -Pete
> > > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> > >
> > > Quotes:
> > >
> > > "To make this very clear: no one in top positions has proposed or is
> > > proposing that WMF should get into the general "searching" or to try to
> > "be
> > > google". It's an interesting hypothetical which has not been part of
> any
> > > serious strategy proposal, nor even discussed at the board level, nor
> > > proposed to the board by staff, nor a part of any grant, etc. It's a
> > total
> > > lie." -J. Wales, Feb. 1
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=704421946
> > >
> > > "Let’s all treat each other withcivility
> > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Civility> and etiquette
> > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Etiquette>, and see if we can
> > > collaborate
> > > to build a consensus <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Consensus> on
> the
> > > WMF’s project direction to help readers discover the high quality
> content
> > > and knowledge our editors are creating." - L. Tretikov, Feb. 1
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)&oldid=15302201
> > >
> > > "Knowledge Engine By Wikipedia is a federated knowledge engine that
> will
> > > give users the most reliable and most trustworthy public information
> > > channel on the web, applying fundamentals of transparent Wiki-based
> > systems
> > > to surfacing the most relevant and important information." Grant
> > > application, August 2015
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-02-10/In_focus
> > > On Feb 15, 2016 2:35 AM, "Lila Tretikov" <l...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Gnangarra,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for forwarding, the authors of the article seem to be
> > confused
> > > > about the nature of the project. Our Comms team is working to clarify
> > > this.
> > > > Please expect to see something from us in next few days.
> > > >
> > > > Lila
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > FYI making main stream media
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-15/wikimedia-foundation-aims-to-take-on-google-in-search/7168840
> > > > >
> > > > > On 14 February 2016 at 00:49, Anthony Cole <ahcole...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Anne, we're talking about almost the same thing, but not
> exactly. I
> > > say
> > > > > > "advised" you say "consulted". "Consulted" implies soliciting or
> > > > > expecting
> > > > > > some kind of response or engagement - probably
> > > > > > approval/disapproval/critique/input. "Advised" means they got the
> > > > memo. I
> > > > > > think "advised" is enough, and if the board wants more
> engagement,
> > > they
> > > > > can
> > > > > > initiate it - presuming the notification is clear and
> > comprehensive,
> > > of
> > > > > > course.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anthony Cole
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Well, I'm not sure about that, Anthony.  By "consulted", I
> would
> > > mean
> > > > > > > something to the effect of "We're looking at applying to XX
> for a
> > > > grant
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > $YYY to do ZZZ" and asking the Board if they would be likely to
> > > agree
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > accept such a grant if the application is successful.  The
> grant
> > > > > > > application, evaluation and approval process is costly in both
> > time
> > > > and
> > > > > > > resources, and for both the applicant and the grantmaker.
> Being
> > > > > informed
> > > > > > > that a grant has been approved sounds more like a fait accompli
> > > > > situation
> > > > > > > for the Board - they look petty and ungrateful if they say no,
> > even
> > > > if
> > > > > > they
> > > > > > > don't think it was a reasonable grant application.  In this
> case,
> > > > we're
> > > > > > > only dealing with $250,000.  What if this was $1 million?  $10
> > > > million?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think it is healthier for everyone if the Board is properly
> > > > consulted
> > > > > > > before the application is submitted.  (And again, I note that
> we
> > > > don't
> > > > > > know
> > > > > > > how much was actually requested in this case, only what was
> > > granted.)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Risker/Anne
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 21:23, Anthony Cole <
> ahcole...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Anne, regarding:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Since the Board must approve acceptance of any donations
> over
> > > > > $100,000
> > > > > > > > USD, it seems to be obvious that they should be consulted and
> > > > > possibly
> > > > > > > > should actively approve any grant applications where the
> dollar
> > > > value
> > > > > > > > sought is higher than that amount."
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm not sure that the board should be *consulted* ahead of
> such
> > > > > > > > applications' or should prior-approve all such applications.
> > That
> > > > > > seems a
> > > > > > > > bit like micromanagement. But it makes sense to me for the
> > board
> > > to
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > > *advised
> > > > > > > > *of such applications and when they're being actively
> > > contemplated
> > > > or
> > > > > > > > prepared.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Anthony Cole
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'm sorry to hear that you feel this way, Gerard. I
> > personally
> > > > > would
> > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > to feel more assured that the WMF is looking into the
> longer
> > > > future
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > actively plannning for the day that donations no longer
> > > support a
> > > > > > large
> > > > > > > > > staff doing lots of things.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I am concerned today that the team specifically tasked to
> > work
> > > > > > closely
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > so many elements of the community has lost 7% of its staff,
> > and
> > > > 30%
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > its
> > > > > > > > > leaders, in a single week. This should be a concern in any
> > > > > > > organization.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > With respect to the Knight grant - I know that many times
> > grant
> > > > > > > > > applications are made for considerably more than is given,
> > and
> > > I
> > > > am
> > > > > > > > > interested to know how much the WMF requested in the first
> > > place.
> > > > > I
> > > > > > > > would
> > > > > > > > > also like to know whether or not the Board was formally
> > advised
> > > > of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > request before it was submitted.  Since the Board must
> > approve
> > > > > > > acceptance
> > > > > > > > > of any donations over $100,000 USD, it seems to be obvious
> > that
> > > > > they
> > > > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > be consulted and possibly should actively approve any grant
> > > > > > > applications
> > > > > > > > > where the dollar value sought is higher than that amount.
> I
> > > > don't
> > > > > > > > believe
> > > > > > > > > the current policies require advance approval or even
> advance
> > > > > > > > notification,
> > > > > > > > > though.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Risker/Anne
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 03:54, Gerard Meijssen <
> > > > > > > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > > > > > > I am not complaining. I point out that all this huha does
> > not
> > > > get
> > > > > > us
> > > > > > > > > > anywhere. I am not afraid to give an opinion and I am not
> > > > afraid
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > contrarian when I think it makes sense. Yes, things
> > happened
> > > > that
> > > > > > > were
> > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > beautiful. They are not what upset me. What upsets me is
> > that
> > > > > > people
> > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > Siko and Anna are leaving. Because they are part of "my"
> > > > > Wikimedia
> > > > > > > > > > Foundation. What upsets me is that I routinely use
> Magnus's
> > > > tool
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > process hundreds of thousands of records and am to
> > understand
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > official
> > > > > > > > > > query is stunted and does not allow for this "because it
> > was
> > > > not
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > design" and it is then pointed out that it takes money to
> > > solve
> > > > > > > this...
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > My point is that baying for blood is not what helps us
> > > forward.
> > > > > > What
> > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > > > know is that when sheer negativity is not coupled with an
> > > > ability
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > stop
> > > > > > > > > > and move forward, we will get in a downward spiral. I
> fault
> > > > Pine
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > being able to stop. What I wish for is for people like
> Anna
> > > and
> > > > > > Siko
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > money for our environment and not for an endowment.
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > >       GerardM
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 09:35, Michel Vuijlsteke <
> > > > > wikipe...@zog.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Gerard,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I was waiting for this mail. For me personally, your
> > > > > complaining
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > achieving exactly the opposite of what you think.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It sounds as if you'd much rather prefer to stick your
> > head
> > > > in
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > sand
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > hope things will blow over. "Move along, nothing to see
> > > here
> > > > --
> > > > > > oh
> > > > > > > > > look!
> > > > > > > > > > > something positive over there!" is not going to solve
> > > > anything.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Michel
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 09:24, Gerard Meijssen <
> > > > > > > > > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > > > > > > > > Pine as you are talking about "self inflicting
> wounds"
> > I
> > > > take
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > > > not talking in your personal capacity. When is it
> > enough
> > > > for
> > > > > > you?
> > > > > > > > > When
> > > > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > > > you going to talk about positive things, things that
> > will
> > > > > move
> > > > > > us
> > > > > > > > > > > forward.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Why ask for blood and more blood? What is it that you
> > > hope
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > > achieve?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Who do you represent in this unending litany of
> > > negativity
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > > > you achieved in this way? When Lila was engaged in
> her
> > > > role,
> > > > > > she
> > > > > > > > was
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > direct in a different direction and she is doing
> that.
> > > You
> > > > > may
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > > and that is ok.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > >        GerardM
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 08:43, Pine W <
> > > wiki.p...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Dariusz, thanks for continuing to engage here.
> > Besides
> > > > the
> > > > > > good
> > > > > > > > > > > questions
> > > > > > > > > > > > > that others have asked, I'll add a few:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. If the Knowledge Engine is such an important
> > > project,
> > > > > why
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned in
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2015-16
> > > > > > > > > > > > ?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. I realize that as a percentage of the WMF
> budget,
> > > > $250k
> > > > > > is a
> > > > > > > > > > > > relatively
> > > > > > > > > > > > > small number. As others have said, this is not a
> > reason
> > > > for
> > > > > > > > opacity
> > > > > > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > > > > > > it, nor a reason for not having a conversation with
> > the
> > > > > > > community
> > > > > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > > > > > > something so strategically important as a decision
> to
> > > > > explore
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > question
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of "Would users go to Wikipedia if it were an open
> > > > channel
> > > > > > > beyond
> > > > > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > > > > encyclopedia?" It's one thing to have a blue-sky
> > > exercise
> > > > > > > > thinking
> > > > > > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > > > > > > possibilities, and another thing to take a $250k
> step
> > > in
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > direction,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > especially without consulting the community.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. I am getting tired about seeing bad news in
> > general
> > > > > about
> > > > > > > WMF
> > > > > > > > > > > > > governance, planning, and turnover. I am curious
> how
> > > you
> > > > > plan
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > address
> > > > > > > > > > > > > those issues. Like you, I would rather that we be
> > > talking
> > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > our
> > > > > > > > > > > > > movement plans for the next 10 years. However, it's
> > > > > difficult
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > > > those
> > > > > > > > > > > > > conversations when WMF is making so many
> > self-inflicted
> > > > > > wounds.
> > > > > > > > The
> > > > > > > > > > > > recent
> > > > > > > > > > > > > round of resignations is of respectable people from
> > the
> > > > WMF
> > > > > > > staff
> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > making
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the situation that much more concerning and that
> much
> > > > more
> > > > > > > > > difficult
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > recover from. It seems to me that WMF leadership
> has
> > > lost
> > > > > > > control
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > > > > situation, and I'd like to hear what the recovery
> > plan
> > > > is.
> > > > > > > > > > Personally,
> > > > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > > > > feel that we need leadership that can build good
> > > > > > relationships
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > staff and community, is transparent by default, and
> > is
> > > > > > capable
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > restoring
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the credibility of the organization's planning,
> > > > execution,
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > goodwill.
> > > > > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > > > > think that we may need new leadership to make that
> > > > happen.
> > > > > I
> > > > > > am
> > > > > > > > > > > > interested
> > > > > > > > > > > > > to hear your thoughts.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Pine
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Dariusz
> Jemielniak <
> > > > > > > > > > dar...@alk.edu.pl
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 11.02.2016 10:23 PM "SarahSV" <
> > > sarahsv.w...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > napisał(a):
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ​Hi ​
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dariusz,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ​T​
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > he grant application doesn't restrict the
> search
> > > > engine
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > projects. It says that the "Knowledge Engine by
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > [is
> > > > > > > > a]
> > > > > > > > > > > system
> > > > > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > discovering reliable and trustworthy public
> > > information
> > > > > on
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > Internet.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > My understanding is that the top range could
> > > > potentially
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > > > > > > open/public
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > resources, but this is the far stretched total
> > goal,
> > > > and
> > > > > > > still
> > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > general search engine of all content including
> > > > commercial
> > > > > > > one.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > And a rrasonable realistic outcome can be just
> > > > improving
> > > > > > our
> > > > > > > > > > searches
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > across projects.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can't comment on the initial ideas or goals,
> as I
> > > was
> > > > > not
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > Board
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > before August 2015, but this is what I understand
> > we
> > > > > build
> > > > > > > now.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The document says the "Search Engine by
> > Wikipedia"
> > > > > budget
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > > 2015–2016
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ($2.4 million) was approved by the ​board. Can
> you
> > > > point
> > > > > us
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > which
> > > > > > > > > > > > > board
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > meeting approved it and what was discussed there?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I dont recall this specifically, and I'm going to
> > > elude
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > question
> > > > > > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > going to sleep (and hoping someone better
> informed
> > > may
> > > > > > pick).
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good night!
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dj
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > ,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > GN.
> > > > > President Wikimedia Australia
> > > > > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> > > > > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > 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>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Lila Tretikov
> > > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > > >
> > > > *“Be bold and mighty forces will come to your aid.”*
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to