@Smirkybec: Studying a certain country's history may, incidentally, make readers think more highly of the country in question. That does not mean that the goal of hosting the article is to make the country look good. It also does not mean that "making the country look good" has become one of the Wikimedia movement's objectives.
Regarding the examples: Neither the projects nor the WMF have made any effort to promote any ideology in those articles. The Wikimedia projects endeavor to neutrally document topics. Surely nobody thinks that WikiProject Buddhism, WikiProject Conservatism, or WikiProject Feminism are about promoting these things rather than neutrally documenting them? I have a hard time imagining a viewpoint which leads one to think that edits and grants must be about winning a political argument, or that the WMF should intentionally promote particular ideologies through Wikipedia's content. Neutral Point of View is a fundamental founding principle. Per the policy, NPOV "is non-negotiable, and the principles upon which it is based cannot be superseded by other policies or guidelines, nor by editor consensus." It may not be violated, period. If there are some contributors that think it's okay to violate NPOV so long as it's for a cause that some in the WMF like, we have a serious problem. @Pbsouthwood: Re "bias" towards verifiability, etc: We must distinguish between bias in content, "bias" in content creation/curation processes, and bias in institutional behaviour/advocacy/activism. No Wikipedia article non-neutrally trumpets the praises of verifiability. The WMF doesn't go around trying to convince random individuals that verifiability is a great thing in general, or that civil discourse should be promoted in every facet of life. It is important not to mix these things up. Suggesting that we're biased because we ask people to use the proper templates is silly. @Smirkybec (earlier post) Re the idea that political inaction is the same as supporting the status quo, and is therefore "being political" on its own: No. Taking action to support the status quo is supporting the status quo. Inaction is neither the same as taking actions opposing the status quo, nor the same as taking actions supporting the status quo. @Gnangarra Re the idea that one's political faction has a monopoly on neutrality, and therefore neutrality itself implies taking a political side: ...You know what, I'm not going to engage with that. (If I've inadvertently misrepresented the argument, clarification would be appreciated.) -- On the issue of prohibitions on WMF engagement in advocacy unrelated to our goals again: (I know that's from the other thread, but things seem to have veered in that direction so...) The Wikimedia Foundation's mission still stands. It does not include promoting a higher minimum wage, nor public advocacy for environmentalism. Even if the recent incident hadn't included every left-wing cause from here to Sunday, and had only been about environmentalism, it would still have been a violation of important standards which were endorsed by every community-elected member of the board shortly before their most recent election, and of principles regularly reinforced by community discussion every time this comes up on-wiki. Our neutrality means we don't need a separate Wikimedia for every political faction of every country, it means our institutions' roles aren't stocked with people who got there to influence politics, it means our success can be everyone's successes. It is absolutely necessary for the Wikimedia movement to function. (@Nathan re stats: wikimediafoundation.org gets roughly 10,000 views per day, and the banner was up for the full 24-hour period, IIUC.) -- Yair Rand בתאריך יום א׳, 26 באפר׳ 2020 ב-18:03 מאת Rebecca O'Neill < rebeccanin...@gmail.com>: > Seeing as you decided to call me out specifically, that line of reasoning > falls apart when you note that WMF foundations funds and supports > initiatives that would been seen as supporting all of those examples you > gave: > > - Wiki Loves Earth for animal sanctuaries, highlighting areas of natural > beauty and those that require protection > - WikiProject Medicine covers articles relating to opioid (and all > manner of other addictions) > - Art+Feminism and Wikimedia LGBT+ work to promote issues relating to > LGBT+ and feminist content worldwide > > > On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 at 22:35, Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > There's a tendency of people with an association with the Wikimedia > > movement to see it as a hammer that can be swung at every nail. This is > > embodied most perfectly in the e-mail by Rebecca O'Neil, who claims that > if > > WMF doesn't take a position on any issue (or every issue?), it is taking > a > > position in support of the status quo. > > > > That is absurd. The movement and the WMF have a purpose. That purpose is > > not koala habitats, nor Superfund sites, nor opioid addiction nor LGTB > > rights in Uganda. All those issues are valuable purposes for an > > organization to have, but the WMF has a different purpose. Its activities > > should be in pursuit of its mission. Not any and every mission that at > > least some Wikimedians think is valuable. > > > > All that said, how many views did the wikimediafoundation.org site get > > during the time the banner was up? A few hundred? A few thousand? Varnum > > apologized, the banner was a bit of a rush job. Rather than arguing why > WMF > > should support all your pet causes or, alternatively, hand over the keys > to > > "the community" - maybe just move on. > > _______________________________________________ > > 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: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > -- > PhD in Digital Media > Project Coordinator Wikimedia Community Ireland <http://wikimedia.ie> > She/Her > _______________________________________________ > 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: Wikimediaemail@example.com > 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>