בתאריך יום ה׳, 2 ביולי 2026 ב-11:24 מאת Christophe Henner < [email protected]>:
> There were different level of support: > * External consultants (williamswork I think but probably others) > I don't remember all the brand names. There were several companies along the way. What was common to all of them is that they had to learn everything about Wikimedia from scratch. I especially remember speaking to somebody from the first company. He came to a Wikimedia conference in Berlin, and towards its end, he looked quite confused and said "I didn't know that you work in so many languages". My impression that none of them actually learned anything real about what we do and only got in the way. > * Internal paid facilitators (mostly wikimedians paid to facilitate > discussions) > These were great people, but I heard from several of them that they were kind of unhappy that they worked only on the process: posting announcements, translating, and summarizing discussions, but couldn't contribute much of their own creativity. Did this process really help? It certainly looked very nice: a lot of pages, a lot of translations, well-designed tables and lists, etc. But six years later, we are discussing possibly disastrous scenarios, and more than halfway to 2030, we didn't achieve a lot of the goals. So I say that all these nicely designed pages were not very effective. > * Internal staff resources (mostly form WMDE and WMF) > Similar to the above: they followed the process that the consultants built and checked all the boxes, but did it change our movement for the better? Did we achieve the goals about knowledge as a service, equity, and all that?
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], 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/[email protected]/message/7OZKGKUDYCGFIH77IVWLM64UUNMVIKQO/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
