+1 The report as written is fine with me. Jim hayes On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 5:57 AM Ankry <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think that information like "WCUG member X presented a session on Y at > event Z" would be hard to manage in this form as (1) we have no formally > managed membership at the moment (maybe we should change this and ask > interested people for formal declarations at regular intervals? - the list > on meta is unmaintained and contains initial declarations only) and (2) > most of us are also members of other formal affiliates and while our > activity in specific fields can be separated internally, this separation > would be not verifiable without clear declarations of these members (should > we ask them for such declarations concerning any Wikisource related > activity?) > > For example, while I am a member of WMPL and participated in the > organization committee of Źródłosłów 2021, I clearly declared to WMPL that > I represent the community, not WMPL during the organizational process. But > neither information about roles of the conference organizing committee > members, nor this declaration is anywhere in public. Only the results of > this activity are public. > > And I am active in WMPL in non-Wikisource related fields and also in some > Wikisource-related fields. > > Ankry > W dniu 13.11.2021 o 20:12, Asaf Bartov pisze: > > Thank you for starting the report, Ankry! > > I think it should be clear what the user group is claiming as an > activity. For instance, was the usergroup involved in the creation of the > Balinese and Javanese Wikisource projects, mentioned under "Milestones"? > If so, the report should explain how the group was involved; if it is just > a mention of a milestone for Wikisource (as distinct from a milestone for > the Wikisource Community User Group), it should be clearly separated from > the main section of the report, which should be devoted to activities and > communications of the WCUG. > > Likewise, was the user group involved in planning or organizing the events > mentioned? If so, it should be stated explicitly. (And if the involvement > was only that a member of the user group presented at the event, then > *that* should be stated explicitly (e.g. "WCUG member X presented a session > on Y at event Z"), avoiding the impression the event itself is > [co-]organized by the user group.) > > Cheers, > > A. > > Asaf Bartov (he/him/his) > > Senior Program Officer, Emerging Wikimedia Communities > > Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/> > > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the > sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! > https://donate.wikimedia.org > > > On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 7:11 PM Satdeep Gill <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Here is the link to the report: >> >> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikisource_Community_User_Group/2021_Report >> >> >> Best >> Satdeep >> >> On Sat, Nov 13, 2021, 7:57 PM Ankry <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> As we are close to the end of this year, I started preparing the 2021 >>> WCUG annual report. Formally, it is due end of November. >>> >>> If anyone participated or organized some Wikisource events, please add >>> appropriate sections. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Ankry >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikisource-l mailing list -- [email protected] >>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikisource-l mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikisource-l mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Wikisource-l mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
