A wikipedian messaged me the following just now: " I see you're doing a
nice job of defending Miss Raval. You should be a lawyer."

My email is not meant to defend any person nor accuse any person.

On an unrelated note, there is a fall in the level of trust around here
that I have experienced. There is no good faith, any longer.

Regards,
Pradeep

On 25 March 2012 15:58, Pradeep Mohandas <pradeep.mohan...@gmail.com> wrote:

> hi Anirudh,
>
> My reply is in-line.
>
> On 25 March 2012 14:30, Anirudh Bhati <anirudh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 12:54 AM, Pradeep Mohandas
>> <pradeep.mohan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > A bunch of observations:
>> > 1. I've never seen such scrutiny of any Wikipedian's contributions. I'm
>> > disappointed also to see this scrutiny being done by only a section of
>> the
>> > community. I think the Indian community needs to speak up on this -
>> whether
>> > for or against such scrutiny even if being done under particular
>> > circumstances. This must be done, in my opinion, in a way that shows the
>> > scrutiny is only wrt the particular condition while still respecting the
>> > editor for tAking the time and editing Wikipedia.
>>
>> Please be clear when making statements such as these.  What scrutiny
>> are you talking about?  Stating that a recently hired communications
>> consultant has close to zero experience editing Wikpedia is quite
>> relevant to discussions that happen during IRC office hours, specially
>> in the light of the fact that Hisham has previously stated that no
>> established Wikipedians applied for work with India Programs.
>
>
> Please read my statement in its entirety. It is pretty clear. I did not
> think that your line of questioning was Wikipedian-like. My
> suggestion/observation here was to inform the Wikipedian in question or at
> least for the record, that the question was  only in relation to the WMF
> Office position and not as a Wikipedian. There is the question of how you
> define expertise. I have been on Wikipedia for 5 years but have still not
> read many of the rules there or participated in many discussions. I just
> use common sense and civility in my edits and discussions on Wikipedia and
> its talk pages. So, I clearly would not meet your definition of "expert".
> The number of edits or the years of experience that a person has on
> Wikipedia cannot and should not define expertise. Have you questioned the
> Wikipedian in question on the person's understanding of Wikipedia's rules
> to state that the person does not know the ways of Wikipedia, purely based
> on the fact that the person has been a Wikipedian only for 2 months. The
> person may have been a Wikipedian only for 2 months but might know more
> than a Wikipedian who has been editing for the last 5 years.
>
>
>>
>>
>> Foundation employees and consultants are likely to be scrutinized more
>> than regular WP'ians, because they are paid for the work they do.
>> These are community funds we are talking about raised because our
>> community works their ass off to produce the content that's present on
>> our projects. In the discussion linked above, it is quite apparent
>> that Hisham hired a newbie user even when there was a much more
>> qualified candidate available.
>>
> Are Wikipedians scrutinised at all was my general question, above. I
> support that WMF employees and consultants must be scrutinized by the
> community and must be scrutinised more. They must also be scrutinised when
> they are working on projects like GLAM. I thank you for taking a proactive
> role on this. My only point here was that more community members must join
> in to make sure that a single or a group of Wikipedians do not push POV.
>
>>
>> For now, nobody on the India Programs team has any decent experience
>> editing articles on the English Wikipedia, in short, they are all
>> newbies.
>
>
> I would humbly disagree with you here. I have no time nor inclination to
> raise evidence in support of my claim. You are entitled to your opinion on
> this point, of course. But, again it is a single person's POV that this is
> the case. Again, I would not take the community's silence as agreement with
> this statement. If the community does agree with this statement, I would
> still not, as I am entitled to.
>
>
>>  And this has continued despite the community asking for
>> old-hands and despite Hisham's assurances that he is looking for
>> someone intimately familiar with WP processes.
>>
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:India_Education_Program/Analysis/Independent_Report_from_Tory_Read
>>
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:India_Education_Program/Analysis/Independent_Report_from_Tory_Read&diff=prev&oldid=473097755
>>
>> Is this too much to ask for?
>>
>
> I don't know.
>
>
>> I must also point out that the stated selection criteria and
>> responsibilities in the case of the Communications Consultant and
>> Operations Consultant were altered after the candidates were
>> announced.  We want expert Wikipedians and not social media
>> consultants because we are looking at increasing participation on our
>> projects, and not enhancing the social media experience.
>>
>
> I can only request that the Office stand by the selection criteria and
> responsibilities that it lays down at the beginning of the process. Whether
> the Office must disclose all the reasons for selecting a candidate over
> other candidates is a sticky issue. It is not general practice to reveal
> these points in public. I am not sure whether it would be responsible
> practice on Wikipedia either. While I support disclosure of the reasons for
> a candidate's choice, I am not sure how responsible or practical it is.
>
> I hope this clarifies my statements adequately. If you still have doubts
> please raise it over email only. I will try and get back to you asap.
>
> warm regards,
> Pradeep
>
>
>>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
>> > Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
>> Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l
>>
>
>
>
> --
> How Pradeep uses email - http://goo.gl/6v1I9
>
>
>


-- 
How Pradeep uses email - http://goo.gl/6v1I9
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Reply via email to