Hoi,
Reasonator is at this stage at best and at most as good as bot generated
articles. Generally they suck but provide a service. Reasonator does not
provide adequate service. Try this [1] for instance. Reasonator will not
create proper texts for many if not most languages because Wikidata does
not have the information to do that properly. It can be done and it should
be done but that is a completely different story and will have a gestation
period of years not months.
The fact that Magnus pulled a rabbit out of a hat is just that. It is a
hack, a wonderful hack and it is possible to hack around this whole issue
but true text generation on the appropriate level is NOT what Wikidata
currently does. What Reasonator does in stead is provide adequate
information where Wikidata provides unstructured data.
Jimmy is right when he says that at this stage on the fly creation of
articles is impossible.
This whole story has the grant of the Knight Foundation as its flashpoint.
It is only that and sadly so. The point is that many people in the
community do not trust the Wikimedia Foundation to do good. This is not a
recent thing. We have always had people insist on some crackpot idea. An
old one is the insistence that old skins should still work. That all
information should be possible in a text only browser. Commons cannot be
trusted with public domain pictures. Many people and ideas like this are
alive and well and sour our relations.
People advocated for a different board. They got it and the result is
disappointing. What makes it bad is that the diplomatic skills of Jan-Bart
are sorely missed. What makes it bad that the flash point is mistaken for
the issue. What makes it bad is that bad faith is assumed.
My experience is that what the community spouts is worse than what the WMF
does. It actively undermines what we stand for and at the same time it is
not even open to consider issues around quality of Wikipedia or Wikidata
that are not the same old old.
Really do consider what you want and what the real issue is. Forget about
this grant because it is not about search, it is not about automatically
generated articles. What it is about is "share in the sum of all knowledge"
and how we are going to accomplish this together.
Thanks,
GerardM
[1] https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q1339&lang=de
On 16 February 2016 at 01:26, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here is another such example. Jimmy Wales has tonight told[1] a volunteer
>
> ---o0o---
>
> First the idea that Wikidata could be used to "construct articles" with "no
> need for editors to edit actual article content" is pretty absurd from a
> technological point of view. Major breakthroughs in AI would be
> necessary. That isn't what is intended at all, obviously.
>
> ---o0o---
>
> So "major breakthroughs in AI" are necessary? This is 2016, and the page
> "API:Presenting Wikidata knowledge"[2] on MediaWiki specifically points
> out:
>
> ---o0o---
>
> * Reasonator[3] and Autodesc[4] are tools that create machine-generated
> articles and short descriptions about Wikidata items.
>
> ---o0o---
>
> Both the Reasonator and Autodesc pages feature what seem to be examples of
> such articles:
>
>
> https://tools.wmflabs.org/autodesc?q=Q1339&links=wikipedia&lang=en&mode=long&format=html&redlinks=reasonator
>
> https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q1339
>
> The just concluded strategy consultation[5] specifically highlighted the
> idea to "Explore ways to scale machine-generated, machine-verified and
> machine-assisted content."
>
> Now, I've got nothing against these ideas in principle. However, like Pete,
> I am absolutely astonished at the sheer number of self-contradictory
> messages coming from the WMF with regard to all of this.
>
> Could this please stop?
>
> Andreas
>
> [1]
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=705170990
>
> [2]
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Presenting_Wikidata_knowledge#See_also
> [3] https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/
> [4] https://tools.wmflabs.org/autodesc
> [5] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2016_Strategy/Knowledge
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 4:57 PM, 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>
