In this case, it does. On Fri, Jan 27, 2023, 3:34 AM Peter Southwood <peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> Yes, but sometimes a yes/no answer does not reasonably represent reality. > > Cheers, Peter > > > > *From:* The Cunctator [mailto:cuncta...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* 25 January 2023 17:26 > *To:* Wikimedia Mailing List > *Subject:* [Wikimedia-l] Re: The Endowment, again > > > > It looks like what Wikimedia is saying is they gave a (typically) > confusing response to the Italian journalists which they (in good faith) > misreported. > > > > Wikimedia communications would benefit from a willingness to answer yes/no > questions with a yes or no, imho. > > > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2023, 7:24 AM Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Lodewijk, > > > > The question at the top of that talk page section on Meta[1] is: > > > > "Is the money still with Tides?" > > > > The answer seems to be "Yes". > > > > If so, then the next question is: > > > > If the money is still with Tides, then why did the WMF tell the Italian > journalists that their information was incorrect and the Endowment had > already been moved to the 501(c)(3)? > > > > It seems like another case of paltering.[2] The bigger issue is that this > sort of thing *undermines community trust in everything the WMF says*, > especially about money.[3] Why didn't the WMF simply tell the journalists, > as you just put it, Lodewijk, "No, not yet. But we are going towards that > new situation"? > > > > We had two high-profile community RfCs on the English Wikipedia's Vilage > Pump last year that came to the conclusion that the WMF puts out misleading > or deceptive communications.[4] Half the shortlisted board candidates in > last year's board election endorsed that view during their campaigns.[5] > > > > We have a longstanding and, I believe, popular (his talk page has 670 > watchers) English Wikipedia administrator, a former member of the > Arbitration Committee, saying things like the following on his talk page[6] > (last year, in a different context): > > > > *"I don't doubt that the WMF is lying here—when it comes to where the > money comes from, where it goes, and who is taking a cut along the way, it > would be more unusual to find them being honest". * > > > > *"What's particularly irritating is that there's no need for the WMF to > equivocate here and they're just doing it out of habit."* > > > > I believe those are fairly mainstream views in the community, based on > close observation of the WMF's conduct. It's not healthy, and I believe the > WMF should look at its paltering habit. > > > > Andreas > > > > [1] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Endowment#Is_the_money_still_with_Tides > ? > > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paltering > > [3] See also ongoing discussions here: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Enterprise#Additional_members_of_the_LLC_besides_the_Wikimedia_Foundation > > [4] > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_193#Review_of_English_Wikimedia_fundraising_emails > and > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_197#RfC_on_the_banners_for_the_December_2022_fundraising_campaign > > [5] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2022/Community_Voting/Election_Compass/Answers > > [6] > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Iridescent&oldid=1124517409 > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 9:18 PM effe iets anders <effeietsand...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi Lane, > > > > maybe I'm just reading this differently, but doesn't "we are in the > process" typically mean "no, not yet. But we are going towards that new > situation"? If you don't feel this answers your question, it might be > beneficial to spell out the question a bit more explicitly. Re-reading the > statement of Andreas, I mostly see a statement that he is confused and his > question is "could someone please clarify this please". In Julia's > response, I read a good faith effort (but apparently insufficient for you) > to achieve just that: clarification. > > > > Best, > > Lodewijk > > > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 2:40 AM Lane Chance <zinkl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Fascinating, the WMF are saying they have answered the question on > Meta, yet a simple fact check, by reading the page, shows they have > not answered the obvious simple yes/no needed. > > A vague reply of "We are in the process" must set off red flags for > any logical reader. The huge amount of money under scrutiny is either > controlled by Tides or it isn't. The fact that the WMF has evaded the > yes/no question several times indicates there is a problem here that > they are not prepared to confirm in public, such as using interim > "holders" or incurring significant fees. Though the fast reader might > think the answer was "yes", it does not actually say "yes", nor does > it give any fixed dates that anyone could be held accountable to, like > for example "the funds are controlled by Tides until the end of > February 2023" which would be specific, accountable and verifiable. > > Happy to be confirmed wrong, with *facts* rather than more opinions > and defensive non-answers. > > For some unknown reason, the WMF official reply was not included in > the email, here it is for anyone to fact check where it can't be > edited later on a wiki: > "This question was also raised in a thread on Wikimedia-l. SJ’s > message there summarized the situation very well. The Wikimedia > Endowment has received its 501(c)(3) status from the US Internal > Revenue Service. We are in the process of setting up its financial > systems and transitioning out of Tides. This is in line with the > direction from the 2021 resolution from Wikimedia Foundation Board of > Trustees. We plan further updates in the next few months.The statement > made by the recent broadcast in Italy was unfortunately an incorrect > representation of the answers we sent them; a further clarification > was made on establishment of the Endowment in January also linked from > the show’s page. Considered as a whole, there are lots of inaccuracies > in the broadcast despite engagement with the show by the Foundation > and Wikimedia Italia over a period of six months to ensure the > movement and Wikipedia’s editing model were represented correctly.Best > regards JBrungs (WMF) (talk) 07:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)" > > Thanks, > Lane (for the avoidance of doubt, I have no connection to Wikipedia > Signpost) > > On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 at 07:13, Julia Brungs <jbru...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > We’ve answered this question on the Endowment’s meta talk page. [1] > > Regards, > > Julia > > > > [1] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Endowment#Is_the_money_still_with_Tides > ? > > > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 3:32 AM Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Dear Sam, > >> > >> Money cannot be in two places at the same time. Either it has been > moved, or it has not been moved. > >> > >> The Rai journalists specifically asked "Why the Wikimedia Foundation > didn't move it to a separate 501e3 entity?" > >> > >> Here is the complete question again: > >> > >> Q: The Wikimedia Endowment is today still entrusted to the Tides > Foundation. According to SignPost ( > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2022-05-29/Opinion) > on March 2017 Lisa Seitz-Gruwell said: “The WMF board has already given us > the direction to move it into a separate 501c3 once the endowment reaches > $33 million. [...] WMF's Executive Director is supportive of moving it to a > new 501c3 once it reaches $33 million." The Endowment has reached $33 > million and passed them reaching $100 million today. Why the Wikimedia > Foundation didn’t move it to a separate 501e3 entity? Being entrusted into > the Tides Foundation is not available to the public any financial report > about Wikipedia Endowment. Don't you think there is a lack of information > and transparency about a fund that is created through worldwide donations? > >> > >> If the picture you paint in your post describes the actual state of > affairs – i.e., the 501c3 has been set up, but it takes time to get the org > ready, so for now the money is still with Tides – then the answer should, I > feel, have looked something like this: > >> > >> A: We were planning to move the Endowment to a separate 501c3 entity > when it reached $33 million, but then our board decided to postpone that > move. We have now revived the plan to move the funds. We have established a > new organisation for that purpose, which received its 501c3 status in 2022. > We are currently getting that organisation ready to manage the Endowment > and expect to move the funds from Tides to the new org in (month/year). > >> > >> Instead, Nadee said Rai had it wrong, and made it sound like the money > had already been moved. And that is what the programme communicated to the > Italian audience – that the WMF said the Endowment had been transferred to > a dedicated new entity a few months ago in 2022. > >> > >> This is contradicted today both by the Endowment website and the > Endowment page on Meta-Wiki, which says that the Endowment is "currently > managed by the Tides Foundation as a Collective Action Fund". > >> > >> There are really two issues here: > >> > >> 1. Where is the money? There are now contradictory messages about this > in the public domain. > >> 2. How comfortable are we with how the WMF is communicating? > >> > >> As regards the second point, Nadee also told Rai: > >> > >> A: The Wikimedia Endowment was founded on and upholds principles of > transparency common to our movement. Our financials are available for > public review and we ensure our community and benefactors stay informed on > developments related to the endowment by publishing regular information > such as the list of donors, announcements about Endowment Board members on > the Endowment Website. We also publish current updates and new policy > updates on Wikimedia Meta and regular updates on our Diff blog, as well as > on the Wikimedia Foundation website. > >> > >> I disagree with that statement. The most recent info we have had on the > Endowment reflects January 2022 status – figures describing where things > stood a full year ago. And even then, nobody added the updated info to the > Endowment page on Meta. I added it, sourced to board meeting minutes.[1] > >> > >> And as I have mentioned before, we have not seen a single audited > financial statement for the Endowment showing revenue and expenses etc. in > all the seven years it has existed. To me this falls short of the > "principles of transparency common to our movement" (a point that, > incidentally, was also made in the Italian programme). > >> > >> I (and others) also asked questions about Tides Advocacy several weeks > ago on Meta.[2] There has been no reply from the WMF to date. > >> > >> As you may recall, in 2019/2020, Tides Advocacy were given $4.223 > million that were to be used for Annual Plan Grants to Wikimedia affiliates > in the July 2020 – June 2021 financial year.[3] I have looked through the > Form 990 disclosures Tides Advocacy has filed for the 2020 and 2021 > calendar years (their 2021 Form 990 only became available a few weeks ago), > hoping to find US and non-US expenditure items corresponding to that > 2020/2021 APG amount over Tides Advocacy's 2020 and 2021 calendar years. I > have not been successful. My sums fall about $400,000 short of the $4.223 > million total. > >> > >> Absent a clarification from the WMF, would you (and anyone else reading > in who feels so inclined) be able to have a look through the forms as well, > to see whether you come to a different result? The forms are linked in the > discussion.[2] It is always possible that you with your WMF board > experience might see an error I made or an item I have missed that happily > resolves the apparent discrepancy. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Andreas > >> > >> [1] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Endowment&diff=prev&oldid=23639117 > >> [2] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Knowledge_Equity_Fund#Tides_Agreement > >> [3] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/XI5A4FKDJUK3VWOQWZIPIZXMWAMIX5IW/ > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 10:36 PM Samuel Klein <meta...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> The statements are not mutually exclusive. They are likely both true, > and what one might expect from governance decisions to date. > >>> > >>> WME got its 501c3 status last year, expanded its Board, and is working > on its structure. It will start emitting 501c3 reports this year. It will > need staff to take over any of the investment management Tides currently > provides; I would expect the current endowment fund (the collective action > fund) to remain there until an alternative is in place. > >>> > >>> The sorts of regular reports we care about (reflections on > organizatFascinating, the WMF are saying they have answered the question on > Meta, yet a simple fact check, by reading the page, shows they have not > answered the obvious simple yes/no needed. > > A vague reply of "We are in the process" must set off red flags for > any logical reader. The huge amount of money under scrutiny is either > controlled by Tides or it isn't. The fact that the WMF has evaded the > yes/no question several times indicates there is a problem here that > they are not prepared to confirm in public, such as using interim > "holders" or incurring significant fees. Though the fast reader might > think the answer was "yes", it does not actually say "yes", nor does > it give any fixed dates that anyone could be held accountable to, like > for example "the funds are controlled by Tides until the end of > February 2023" which would be specific, accountable and verifiable. > > Happy to be confirmed wrong, with *facts* rather than more opinions > and defensive non-answers. > > For some unknown reason, the WMF official reply was not included in > the email, here it is for anyone to fact check where it can't be > edited later on a wiki: > "This question was also raised in a thread on Wikimedia-l. SJ’s > message there summarized the situation very well. The Wikimedia > Endowment has received its 501(c)(3) status from the US Internal > Revenue Service. We are in the process of setting up its financial > systems and transitioning out of Tides. This is in line with the > direction from the 2021 resolution from Wikimedia Foundation Board of > Trustees. We plan further updates in the next few months.The statement > made by the recent broadcast in Italy was unfortunately an incorrect > representation of the answers we sent them; a further clarification > was made on establishment of the Endowment in January also linked from > the show’s page. Considered as a whole, there are lots of inaccuracies > in the broadcast despite engagement with the show by the Foundation > and Wikimedia Italia over a period of six months to ensure the > movement and Wikipedia’s editing model were represented correctly.Best > regards JBrungs (WMF) (talk) 07:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)" > > Thanks, > Lane > > On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 at 07:13, Julia Brungs <jbru...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > We’ve answered this question on the Endowment’s meta talk page. [1] > > Regards, > > Julia > > > > [1] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Endowment#Is_the_money_still_with_Tides > ? > > > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2023 at 3:32 AM Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Dear Sam, > >> > >> Money cannot be in two places at the same time. Either it has been > moved, or it has not been moved. > >> > >> The Rai journalists specifically asked "Why the Wikimedia Foundation > didn't move it to a separate 501e3 entity?" > >> > >> Here is the complete question again: > >> > >> Q: The Wikimedia Endowment is today still entrusted to the Tides > Foundation. According to SignPost ( > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2022-05-29/Opinion) > on March 2017 Lisa Seitz-Gruwell said: “The WMF board has already given us > the direction to move it into a separate 501c3 once the endowment reaches > $33 million. [...] WMF's Executive Director is supportive of moving it to a > new 501c3 once it reaches $33 million." The Endowment has reached $33 > million and passed them reaching $100 million today. Why the Wikimedia > Foundation didn’t move it to a separate 501e3 entity? Being entrusted into > the Tides Foundation is not available to the public any financial report > about Wikipedia Endowment. Don't you think there is a lack of information > and transparency about a fund that is created through worldwide donations? > >> > >> If the picture you paint in your post describes the actual state of > affairs – i.e., the 501c3 has been set up, but it takes time to get the org > ready, so for now the money is still with Tides – then the answer should, I > feel, have looked something like this: > >> > >> A: We were planning to move the Endowment to a separate 501c3 entity > when it reached $33 million, but then our board decided to postpone that > move. We have now revived the plan to move the funds. We have established a > new organisation for that purpose, which received its 501c3 status in 2022. > We are currently getting that organisation ready to manage the Endowment > and expect to move the funds from Tides to the new org in (month/year). > >> > >> Instead, Nadee said Rai had it wrong, and made it sound like the money > had already been moved. And that is what the programme communicated to the > Italian audience – that the WMF said the Endowment had been transferred to > a dedicated new entity a few months ago in 2022. > >> > >> This is contradicted today both by the Endowment website and the > Endowment page on Meta-Wiki, which says that the Endowment is "currently > managed by the Tides Foundation as a Collective Action Fund". > >> > >> There are really two issues here: > >> > >> 1. Where is the money? There are now contradictory messages about this > in the public domain. > >> 2. How comfortable are we with how the WMF is communicating? > >> > >> As regards the second point, Nadee also told Rai: > >> > >> A: The Wikimedia Endowment was founded on and upholds principles of > transparency common to our movement. Our financials are available for > public review and we ensure our community and benefactors stay informed on > developments related to the endowment by publishing regular information > such as the list of donors, announcements about Endowment Board members on > the Endowment Website. We also publish current updates and new policy > updates on Wikimedia Meta and regular updates on our Diff blog, as well as > on the Wikimedia Foundation website. > >> > >> I disagree with that statement. The most recent info we have had on the > Endowment reflects January 2022 status – figures describing where things > stood a full year ago. And even then, nobody added the updated info to the > Endowment page on Meta. I added it, sourced to board meeting minutes.[1] > >> > >> And as I have mentioned before, we have not seen a single audited > financial statement for the Endowment showing revenue and expenses etc. in > all the seven years it has existed. To me this falls short of the > "principles of transparency common to our movement" (a point that, > incidentally, was also made in the Italian programme). > >> > >> I (and others) also asked questions about Tides Advocacy several weeks > ago on Meta.[2] There has been no reply from the WMF to date. > >> > >> As you may recall, in 2019/2020, Tides Advocacy were given $4.223 > million that were to be used for Annual Plan Grants to Wikimedia affiliates > in the July 2020 – June 2021 financial year.[3] I have looked through the > Form 990 disclosures Tides Advocacy has filed for the 2020 and 2021 > calendar years (their 2021 Form 990 only became available a few weeks ago), > hoping to find US and non-US expenditure items corresponding to that > 2020/2021 APG amount over Tides Advocacy's 2020 and 2021 calendar years. I > have not been successful. My sums fall about $400,000 short of the $4.223 > million total. > >> > >> Absent a clarification from the WMF, would you (and anyone else reading > in who feels so inclined) be able to have a look through the forms as well, > to see whether you come to a different result? The forms are linked in the > discussion.[2] It is always possible that you with your WMF board > experience might see an error I made or an item I have missed that happily > resolves the apparent discrepancy. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Andreas > >> > >> [1] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Endowment&diff=prev&oldid=23639117 > >> [2] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Knowledge_Equity_Fund#Tides_Agreement > >> [3] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/XI5A4FKDJUK3VWOQWZIPIZXMWAMIX5IW/ > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 10:36 PM Samuel Klein <meta...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> The statements are not mutually exclusive. They are likely both true, > and what one might expect from governance decisions to date. > >>> > >>> WME got its 501c3 status last year, expanded its Board, and is working > on its structure. It will start emitting 501c3 reports this year. It will > need staff to take over any of the investment management Tides currently > provides; I would expect the current endowment fund (the collective action > fund) to remain there until an alternative is in place. > >>> > >>> The sorts of regular reports we care about (reflections on > organizational structure, timelines, goals and budgeting, coordination with > WMF, practicalities of how an endowment functions) are only partly related > to the mandatory reports of a charity. Lodewijk, agreed that those sorts > of clarifications are great, and relevant to how we all plan for the > future; perhaps we can catalyze a public conversation about such things. > >>> > >>> Warmly, SJ > >>> (still hoping for part of our movement to put out a series of plans > for maximizing project functionality on a minimal budget) > >>> > >>> Dan S writes: > >>> > Since the answers express mutually exclusive propositions... > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, > guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > >>> Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/2JBV2WWRWVS5FOXRG4NZYKAOJK6X3XCX/ > >>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, > guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > >> Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/IZOLY5P445B5VZ5L2CCBTAXMKXZ36SBE/ > >> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/4HF6OXDDOTIYB4KV2YU3BVOI7OI42OKQ/ > > To unsubscribe send an email to > wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.orgional structure, timelines, goals > and budgeting, coordination with WMF, practicalities of how an endowment > functions) are only partly related to the mandatory reports of a charity. > Lodewijk, agreed that those sorts of clarifications are great, and relevant > to how we all plan for the future; perhaps we can catalyze a public > conversation about such things. > >>> > >>> Warmly, SJ > >>> (still hoping for part of our movement to put out a series of plans > for maximizing project functionality on a minimal budget) > >>> > >>> Dan S writes: > >>> > Since the answers express mutually exclusive propositions... > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, > guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > >>> Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/2JBV2WWRWVS5FOXRG4NZYKAOJK6X3XCX/ > >>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, > guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > >> Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/IZOLY5P445B5VZ5L2CCBTAXMKXZ36SBE/ > >> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/4HF6OXDDOTIYB4KV2YU3BVOI7OI42OKQ/ > > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/KHAKHKHD6EZVE4QL5SHOO76E3F3WYJVC/ > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/PZMXDDOMM5ZBF4KNWEZCN4B4HRD2B4GG/ > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/466OAUOXFBHSNNWT7VKQCAO2KAE3PHNS/ > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> > > Virus-free.www.avg.com > <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines > at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > Public archives at > https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/F6QE7MUOQDWJM4RCWIU5N5LJNGDDX4PR/ > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/XSNZDOHPNJZ5KMFL5OF5Z3UJTEC6K5GT/ To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
