Hi Chris,

This is actually a very good point!

I will try to find out with the other members of ec where we stand on this. 
Stay tuned for updates.

Thanks and sorry for the delay

On 16 באוקטובר 2017 21:14:33 GMT+03:00, wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org 
wrote:
>Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
>       wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>       https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>       wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>       wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Women in red (Peter Southwood)
>   2. Re: Women in red (Robert Fernandez)
>   3. Re: Women in red (Lodewijk)
>   4. Re: [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the 2017 Wikimedia
>      Foundation Board of Trustees election (Chris Keating)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 19:53:01 +0200
>From: "Peter Southwood" <peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
>To: "'Wikimedia Mailing List'" <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
>Message-ID: <000901d346a7$9e49dd40$dadd97c0$@telkomsa.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain;      charset="utf-8"
>
>Why?
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
>Behalf Of Pax Ahimsa Gethen
>Sent: Monday, 16 October 2017 7:21 PM
>To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
>
>The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether a
>comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary transmasculine
>people like myself.
>
>I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this thread:
>
>> Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of Emily's/Keilana's 
>> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
>>
>> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns that
>
>> this will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for
>
>> in the document outlining the competition, and editors involved in 
>> this project will be subject to all expectations of normal editors 
>> (including not mass-producing poor-quality content).
>>
>> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between 
>> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a sexist.
>
>> I believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's
>said 
>> can be described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid 
>> criticism of poor wording.
>>
>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare 
>> <gorillawarfarewikipedia@ gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through to 
>> this list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
>
>> with her email address.
>>
>> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle some 
>> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to AFD 
>> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
>>
>> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about women
>
>> to a higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia 
>> isn't going to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies 
>> write a bunch of stubs.
>>
>> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women? It's 
>> better than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as
>I 
>> shouldn't have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently
>stands."
>>
>> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>
>- Pax aka Funcrunch
>
>
>On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
>> Is that still going on?
>>
>> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
>Wikipedia.
>> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've turned 
>> out pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example, 
>> on women involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities
>because of them.
>>
>> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money in 
>> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without consideration
>
>> of quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is 
>> sexist. The same question would apply if the proposed articles were 
>> about Russian literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the 
>> question just because of what the subject happens to be.
>>
>> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling people
>
>> sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be all 
>> for shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in 
>> this thread.
>>
>> Todd
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez" <wikigamal...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>
>>> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
>>>
>>> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about these
>
>>> issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported,
>sweeping 
>>> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and that's 
>>> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the gentlest 
>>> tones it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
>
>>> apologies are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so
>much 
>>> that even the way we talk about sexism is sexist.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>>>
>>>> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're trying
>
>>>> to contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
>>>> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know *nothing*
>
>>>> about their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is, 
>>>> incidentally, one the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
>
>--
>Pax Ahimsa Gethen | p...@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org |
>Pronouns: they/them/their
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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>
>
>---
>This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>http://www.avg.com
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 13:57:26 -0400
>From: Robert Fernandez <wikigamal...@gmail.com>
>To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
>Message-ID:
>       <camy8yaxzyhsdvnuc1+goc42ccpdfoopjfpcv-w0qvvrez4n...@mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>Is the English Wikipedia the only Wikipedia which has problems with
>misogyny and under-representation of female editors and articles? I am
>relieved to hear that!
>
>
>On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland
><jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
>> wrote:
>
>> There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
>Wikipedia
>> like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able
>to
>> keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
>>
>> Jean-Philippe Béland
>> Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
>> list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
>>
>> > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether
>a
>> > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary
>transmasculine
>> > people like myself.
>> >
>> > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this
>thread:
>> >
>> >
>> > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of
>Emily's/Keilana's
>> >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
>> >>
>> >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns
>that
>> this
>> >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for
>in the
>> >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
>project
>> >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including
>not
>> >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
>> >>
>> >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
>> >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
>sexist. I
>> >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's
>said can
>> >> be
>> >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism
>of
>> poor
>> >> wording.
>> >>
>> >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
>> <gorillawarfarewikipedia@
>> >> gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through
>to
>> this
>> >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
>with
>> her
>> >> email address.
>> >>
>> >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle
>some
>> >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to
>AFD
>> >> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
>> >>
>> >> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about
>women
>> to a
>> >> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia
>isn't
>> going
>> >> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a
>bunch
>> of
>> >> stubs.
>> >>
>> >> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women?
>It's
>> better
>> >> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
>> shouldn't
>> >> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
>> >>
>> >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>> >>
>> >
>> > - Pax aka Funcrunch
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
>> >
>> >> Is that still going on?
>> >>
>> >> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
>Wikipedia.
>> >> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've
>turned out
>> >> pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example,
>on
>> women
>> >> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of
>them.
>> >>
>> >> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money
>in
>> >> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without
>consideration of
>> >> quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is
>sexist. The
>> >> same question would apply if the proposed articles were about
>Russian
>> >> literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
>> because
>> >> of what the subject happens to be.
>> >>
>> >> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling
>people
>> >> sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be
>all for
>> >> shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in
>this
>> >> thread.
>> >>
>> >> Todd
>> >>
>> >> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez"
><wikigamal...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
>> >>>
>> >>> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about
>these
>> >>> issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported,
>sweeping
>> >>> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and
>that's
>> >>> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the
>gentlest
>> tones
>> >>> it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
>> apologies
>> >>> are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so much that
>even
>> the
>> >>> way we talk about sexism is sexist.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're
>trying to
>> >>>> contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
>> >>>> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know
>*nothing*
>> >>>> about
>> >>>> their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is,
>incidentally,
>> >>>> one
>> >>>> the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> > --
>> > Pax Ahimsa Gethen | p...@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org |
>Pronouns:
>> > they/them/their
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> > i/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>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Jean-Philippe Béland
>>
>> [image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
>> <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre
>national
>> soutenant Wikipédia
>> Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
>> <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national
>chapter
>> supporting Wikipedia
>> 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L
>2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 11:03:32 -0700
>From: Lodewijk <lodew...@effeietsanders.org>
>To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Women in red
>Message-ID:
>       <cacf6beszfvkfnm38v1ugb7zwpomck+ow61n9uwafgm9b5h8...@mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>I understand from the original email that the venue was chosen based on
>the
>fact that it was WMF-funded as a project. I am guessing he's trying to
>pull
>that leverage.
>
>The topic is more generic though: should we support projects that are
>considered by some to be a little rough on the edges, or should we only
>pick 'safe' projects that will land well with the community. And how
>much
>of 'be bold' can be applied to projects that operate at a somewhat
>larger
>scale.
>
>While this particular topic seems enwp specific, its theme isn't.
>
>Lodewijk
>
>On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland <
>jpbel...@wikimedia.ca> wrote:
>
>> There is so many threads on this list that are only about English
>Wikipedia
>> like it is the centre of the world... Why other communities are able
>to
>> keep their internal discussions internal and not this community?
>>
>> Jean-Philippe Béland
>> Vice President, Wikimedia Canada
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Pax Ahimsa Gethen <
>> list-wikime...@funcrunch.org> wrote:
>>
>> > The people whose opinion should most matter in determining whether
>a
>> > comment is sexist are women. Not men, and not non-binary
>transmasculine
>> > people like myself.
>> >
>> > I support and echo Emily and Molly's earlier comments on this
>thread:
>> >
>> >
>> > Also, in case it's not clear from my forwarding of
>Emily's/Keilana's
>> >> message, I endorse it completely and am glad she made her points.
>> >>
>> >> I agree fully with Keegan and Sydney. I don't think the concerns
>that
>> this
>> >> will be overtaken by bots are well-founded; that was planned for
>in the
>> >> document outlining the competition, and editors involved in this
>project
>> >> will be subject to all expectations of normal editors (including
>not
>> >> mass-producing poor-quality content).
>> >>
>> >> As for Keegan's original post, there is a major difference between
>> >> describing an email as sexist versus labeling the sender as a
>sexist. I
>> >> believe Keegan meant the former, and I'm not sure anything he's
>said can
>> >> be
>> >> described as an attack on the sender so much as a valid criticism
>of
>> poor
>> >> wording.
>> >>
>> >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:44 PM, GorillaWarfare
>> <gorillawarfarewikipedia@
>> >> gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Emily (User:Keilana) is having some trouble getting mails through
>to
>> this
>> >> list, so I'm forwarding this on her behalf in case it's an issue
>with
>> her
>> >> email address.
>> >>
>> >> "This is some sexist bullshit. You really think we can't handle
>some
>> >> stubs? And do you really, really think that people won't try to
>AFD
>> >> everything that comes out of this contest as it is?
>> >>
>> >> I'm sick and tired of this idea that we have to hold shit about
>women
>> to a
>> >> higher standard than literally anything else. The encyclopedia
>isn't
>> going
>> >> to break because, god forbid, some inexperienced newbies write a
>bunch
>> of
>> >> stubs.
>> >>
>> >> And so what if people think we're paying lip service to women?
>It's
>> better
>> >> than being seen as being actively hostile to women, which, as I
>> shouldn't
>> >> have to remind you, is our reputation as it currently stands."
>> >>
>> >> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
>> >>
>> >
>> > - Pax aka Funcrunch
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 10/16/17 10:11 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
>> >
>> >> Is that still going on?
>> >>
>> >> I'm against sexism and all for improving coverage of women on
>Wikipedia.
>> >> I've helped to encourage events toward that end, and they've
>turned out
>> >> pretty well. We now have quite a few more articles, for example,
>on
>> women
>> >> involved as pioneers in outdoor sports and activities because of
>them.
>> >>
>> >> But I'm unsure how asking the question "Is it wise to offer money
>in
>> >> exchange for creating large numbers of articles without
>consideration of
>> >> quality?" or "Will this effort have the intended result?" is
>sexist. The
>> >> same question would apply if the proposed articles were about
>Russian
>> >> literature or asteroids. It is not sexist to ask the question just
>> because
>> >> of what the subject happens to be.
>> >>
>> >> I think that needs to be discussed, not sidetracked by calling
>people
>> >> sexists. If people really were making sexist statements, I'd be
>all for
>> >> shutting that crap down. But I've seen not one such statement in
>this
>> >> thread.
>> >>
>> >> Todd
>> >>
>> >> On Oct 16, 2017 10:28 AM, "Robert Fernandez"
><wikigamal...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So those who call out sexism are the real sexists, amirite?
>> >>>
>> >>> I am fed up with this double standard in the way we talk about
>these
>> >>> issues.  Some people are allowed to make broad, unsupported,
>sweeping
>> >>> generalizations about the motives and actions of others and
>that's
>> >>> considered just fine, but if you call them out in even the
>gentlest
>> tones
>> >>> it's treated as some horrific personal attack, and censure and
>> apologies
>> >>> are demanded.  We've culturally internalized sexism so much that
>even
>> the
>> >>> way we talk about sexism is sexist.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> But just a note: using the same behavior of phenomena you're
>trying to
>> >>>> contast is, per se, a clear defeat.
>> >>>> To be more clear, blind -because you obviously don't know
>*nothing*
>> >>>> about
>> >>>> their backgrounds- vilification of other's opinions is,
>incidentally,
>> >>>> one
>> >>>> the of the main instruments of "cultural" sexism.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> > --
>> > Pax Ahimsa Gethen | p...@funcrunch.org | http://funcrunch.org |
>Pronouns:
>> > they/them/their
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> > i/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>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Jean-Philippe Béland
>>
>> [image: Wikimedia Canada] Vice-président — Wikimédia Canada
>> <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr>, chapitre
>national
>> soutenant Wikipédia
>> Vice president — Wikimedia Canada
>> <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=en>, national
>chapter
>> supporting Wikipedia
>> 535 avenue Viger Est, Montréal (Québec)  H2L
>2P3,jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 19:14:29 +0100
>From: Chris Keating <chriskeatingw...@gmail.com>
>To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Results of the
>       2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election
>Message-ID:
>       <CAFche1quo=dj08jybm4owdyzpd9zf8jk1r9hcxn1uaz9_iy...@mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>Hello all and particularly the Elections Committee!
>
>I just wondered what is happening in terms of post-mortem on the
>elections.
>There was a call for comments on Meta - is there any kind of active
>review
>by the Election Committee happening? I know in previous years the EC
>has
>often made extensive comments to shape future years!
>
>Regards,
>
>Chris
>
>On 21 May 2017 01:33, "matanya moses" <mata...@foss.co.il> wrote:
>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> The certified results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of
>Trustees
>> election are now available on Meta-Wiki: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Results
>>
>> Congratulations to María Sefidari (User:Raystorm), Dariusz Jemielniak
>> (User:pundit), and James Heilman (User:Doc James) for receiving the
>most
>> community support. Subject to a standard background check, they will
>be
>> appointed by the Board at their August meeting at Wikimania.
>>
>> These results have been certified by the elections committee, the
>> Wikimedia Foundation staff advisors to the committee, and the Board
>of
>> Trustees.
>>
>> There were 5,581 votes cast, with 5,120 of those being valid. The
>461-vote
>> difference comes from recast ballots, where eligible voters recast
>ballots
>> to change their votes, and struck votes, of which there were 34.
>(Some of
>> the recast votes were also struck.)
>>
>> Additional information is available on the Wikimedia Blog:
>>
>https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/05/20/board-of-trustees-elections-2017/
>>
>> More statistics on the elections and a post-mortem from the committee
>will
>> be published in the coming days. In the meantime, we would appreciate
>your
>> input—what went well for you in this election?  What could we do
>better
>> next time?  These reports are crucial to helping future elections be
>even
>> more successful, and we hope that you will offer your feedback and
>ideas:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
>> elections/2017/Post_mortem
>>
>> The committee would like to thank everyone that participated in this
>> year’s election for helping make it, again, one of the most diverse
>and
>> representative in the movement’s history.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> – Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be
>immediately
>> directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
>> community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
>> wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
>>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>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,
><mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 163, Issue 44
>********************************************
_______________________________________________
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>

Reply via email to