Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage logo

[Richard Farmbrough]

Trademark protection has benefits for both parties, but primarily the 
consumer.


There is little point protecting our neutrality, for example, if our 
identity can be hijacked to make vested recommendations.



On 05/06/2013 15:58, Mathieu Stumpf wrote:

Le 2013-06-04 19:25, George Herbert a écrit :

On Jun 4, 2013, at 2:24 AM, Mathieu Stumpf

etc...

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why the WP will never be a real encyclopaedia

[Richard Farmbrough]

Rui (and list) there is a myth about "articles that are sacrosanct" - 
which is not to say that there aren't such articles, though the examples 
you gave don't stand up to much scrutiny.  It would be useful to conduct 
some research on the whole corpus to evaluate this hypothesis and give 
some upper and lower bounds for  the populaiton, and to establish some 
sample lists for qualitative examination.


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Visual Editor "temporary" opt-out

[Richard Farmbrough]

Apparently important.  I am aware, as probably everyone is, that this is 
the first most obvious step to make article editing more accessible, and 
address certain inclusiveness goals.  I am also aware that there is no 
data to support the theory that a visual editor means more inclusive 
editing, let alone that it will result in better content.


I will simply add a couple of observations.

The learning curve for wikitext is one of the shallowest of any 
application.  Press edit, type in the box and press save.  If you can 
type and press edit and save (the latter two of which /are/ HMI issues 
IMHO) you can edit Wikimedia projects.


Secondly, and anecdotally, most full functioned word-processors have a 
plethora of functions that are usually only known about by the same 
"tech-savvy"  group that we currently believe are at home with wiki-text.


Thirdly I vividly remember my first editing experiences - I did not 
think I would /ever /be touching stuff like infoboxes and categories, 
but they made no real obstacle to editing.  (The keyboard only method of 
formatting text took seconds to understand, and saves a huge amount of 
time.)


I would not be surprised if the /choice/ of editor turns out to be the 
reason that editing has fallen off more rather than the VE itself.


On 06/08/2013 08:04, MZMcBride wrote:
I cannot and will not blame the Wikimedia Foundation for working on 
this project. It's an important project

...
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An idea that may improve Wikipedia's fundraising

[Richard Farmbrough]

enwiki-20130708-pages-articles.xml.bz2 
 
9.3 GB - a double sided single layer  DVD (9.4gb).  The images would be 
more challenging.


On 06/08/2013 17:52, Kevin Wayne Williams wrote:
More like a complete set of Wikipedia Blu-Rays. I forget the actual 
byte count of Wikipedia these days, but it's well over anything you 
would want to try to store on DVDs.


KWW


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikimania-l] git.wikimedia.org dead due to wikimania ; )

[Richard Farmbrough]

I maintained 24/7 support with a team of 6. WMF has 150 staff and does 
not have weekend support.  The tail is wagging the dog.



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Attribution of external content

[Richard Farmbrough]

We have a number of source specific templates, such  as {{EB1911}} for
acknowledging re-used source material.  There is as yet no automatic
 mechanism for changing these as and when the actual copying is replaced
entirely.

On 28 Aug 2017 01:18, "Gnangarra"  wrote:

> but the information is exactly the same, url, date, author, title - the
> refn template can include anything you need to add including license detail
> ie cc-by all of which can be internal or external links
>
> On 28 August 2017 at 00:26, John Erling Blad  wrote:
>
> > Citation and reuse is two different things.
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> >
> > > that notice states that text has been used, a specific citation where
> the
> > > text would add context by using https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> > > Template:Refn
> > >
> > > On 27 August 2017 at 22:22, John Erling Blad  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Use of a template does not accurately identify the copied text, and
> in
> > > this
> > > > case nor the author.
> > > >
> > > > The license is the contract with the author and the reason why the
> text
> > > can
> > > > be copied. If the license says the author shall be identified, the by
> > > > attribution clause, then a link to the site is not good enough. If
> the
> > > > share alike clause is given, then it is even harder to give correct
> > > credit,
> > > > as the request for credit can be pretty weird.
> > > >
> > > > Anyhow, a page that is later edited is not necessarily something the
> > > > external editor has created, he or she has created a part that at
> some
> > > > point in time was incorporated in the page, and the present page may
> > not
> > > > even contain this content anymore.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Gnangarra 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > There is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:CC-notice on en at
> > > least
> > > > > specifically for the purpose of incorporating text licensed cc-by
> > > content
> > > > > within articles
> > > > >
> > > > > On 27 August 2017 at 21:28, John Erling Blad 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In some cases we need to attribute content created on external
> > sites,
> > > > and
> > > > > > reused on Wikimedia-sites. In Norway Åndsverksloven says "The
> > creator
> > > > has
> > > > > > the right to be named according to good practice" ("Opphavsmannen
> > har
> > > > > krav
> > > > > > på å bli navngitt slik som god skikk tilsier") and for our
> content
> > > that
> > > > > is
> > > > > > given by our license and our terms of use. That means by a link
> to
> > > the
> > > > > page
> > > > > > if possible, or if possible an entry in the history.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now we use a template on the page itself, or similar, but it is
> not
> > > the
> > > > > > page on our site that the external entity has provided, they have
> > > > > provided
> > > > > > the content at their site. So we must say that in some consistent
> > > way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that the best option would be to have a log entry
> > injected
> > > > into
> > > > > > the history for our page that says "this revision comes in full
> or
> > > part
> > > > > > from that external source". Such an entry could be made by the
> > editor
> > > > or
> > > > > by
> > > > > > an administrator, but must be made as an extension of the
> revision.
> > > It
> > > > > > should also be possible to delete such an entry.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > An alternative could be to make the summary editable, but the
> > summary
> > > > is
> > > > > > the description of the revision, not the source of the revision.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does this make sense? Will it solve the problem, or is it just
> > > another
> > > > > > level that makes things more confusing?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > John Erling Blad
> > > > > > ___
> > > > > > 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > >  > unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > GN.
> > > > > President Wikimedia Australia
> > > > > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> > > > > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> > > > > ___
> > > > > 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > >  unsubscribe>
> > > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

[Richard Farmbrough]

I think it very clear that these allegations were the last gasp of an
ancient regime, mired as it was in nepotism and other unsavoury practices.

The criminal allegations can be left to the police.  The description of the
steps taken by the WMF in this case seems to be of a very sensible
handlingerie of a difficult situation.

On 20 Oct 2017 12:22 am, "Emeric VALLESPI" 
wrote:

Katherine,

Your answer is particularly shocking. Which right has the Foundation to
feel legitimate in order to describe the situation experienced by Nathalie
Martin or by other people? Only a judge can.
The movement organization does not take precedence over the laws of the
countries.

You rely on a single document (a letter) to judge that there is no moral or
sexual harassment?
What about the criminal complaint? And the medical leaves? And the
testimonies attached to the complaint? These other elements were not taken
into account, why?

The Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation ridiculed himself in the press [0]
when he said that he had discovered yesterday the reproaches that were
addressed to him as well as the complaint. His lawyer even tried to make it
appear that the complaint had never been filed.
Even though this whole situation has been known by the Wikimedia Foundation
for months!

Mockery reaches its top with your so-called measures. In case you do not
know Katherine, in France independent lawyers do not exist. Judges are
independent, not lawyers.
The lawyers you have appointed have been paid by the Foundation. They
*only* interviewed the defendant. In these conditions, how could the
outcome not be favorable to his version?

You did not answer any of my previous questions:

Why did not the Wikimedia Foundation hear Nathalie Martin at her request?
Just to have her version of the facts, it would have been - maybe ... - a
good idea.
Why did the experts who were supposed to conduct an adversarial
investigation not discussed with Nathalie or Marie-Alice? Would not that
have been the least of the things? Why did not they hear the board of
trustees’ member? Why did you refuse to organize, as you (or your
representatives) were offered, a confrontation between
complainant/defendant?
Why fear so much to hear the version of Nathalie?

You have witnessed what Marie-Alice and Nathalie have experienced with
social media as well as on the mailing-list you're hosting. You've done
absolutely nothing to protect them.
You're mentioning complaints that have been filed to the Support and Safety
committee, which has no legal existence in the real world (outside of the
movement). I am talking about real criminal complaints in a police station.
Whether you can compare the two shows your total unconsciousness.

Again, the role of the Wikimedia Foundation is not to determine whether the
current Chair is guilty or innocent. Nor whether the acts are sexual or
moral harassment.
Your role, as an organization, is, to a minimum, to hear the victims and to
ensure their protection. You have undertaken everything to mask this
situation in order to guarantee your tranquility. It is a shame for a
movement that wants to be humanistic.

Regards,
--
Emeric Vallespi

2017-10-19 23:19 GMT+02:00 Katherine Maher :

> Everyone,
>
> The past six months have been a complex and troubling time for our
> community in France. Let me be absolutely clear, with no confusion or
> ambiguity, that the Wikimedia Foundation condemns harassment. We take all
> harassment claims seriously, investigate them promptly, and take the
> appropriate action to enforce our policies whenever necessary. My goal
here
> today is to provide more information about the actions of the Wikimedia
> Foundation, the principles to which we adhere, and the situation in which
> our movement finds itself.
>
> As many of you know, there have been months of discussion within the
French
> Wikimedia community, independent committees and governance bodies, and the
> Wikimedia Foundation about the governance and operations of Wikimédia
> France. During this time, we have seen growing tensions between a number
of
> the former leaders of Wikimédia France and some members of the French
> Wikimedia community. This situation created great strain on the French
> community, former and current staff of Wikimédia France, and concerned
> Wikimedia volunteers around the world. Much of this was documented by
> community members[1] and in the press.[2] Over the past months the
> Foundation has received formal and informal complaints alleging harassment
> and other harmful behaviour, and we have enforced existing policies
> whenever applicable.
>
> Recently, an individual associated with our movement published an essay
> about the events in France on the blogging site Medium and shared that
> essay with this list. It contained a number of deeply concerning
> allegations of harassment. Let me first address the most troubling claims
> of the recent essay—those regarding the Foundation’s handling of
> allegations against the Wikimed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Welcome messages at arwiki

[Richard Farmbrough]

There are many million users registered in central auth.  Most have not
edited anywhere, and never even visited ar.wikipedia.org. welcoming these
is actually harmful in a demonstrable way: readers will be notified of this
useless welcome by email,  or the notification tool. If this were
multiplied across our

On 29 Dec 2017 10:20, "Vi to"  wrote:

> I can estimate the number of welcomes I received to roughly 300, most of
> these languages I cannot even copypaste from.
> While these messages are useless for sure I don't see any reason to be
> bothered of them.
>
> Vito
>
> 2017-12-29 10:25 GMT+01:00 K. Peachey :
>
> > Have you asked the user how the finding the users?
> > Have you considered other steps than just jumping to mailing list?
> > Where are the complaints from the other users to show this is a long
> > running issue?
> >
> > On 29 December 2017 at 19:20, John Erling Blad  wrote:
> > > Users on other projects are complaining about the welcome messages at
> > > arwiki. A bot at that project are welcoming people that has no activity
> > at
> > > that project at all. The bot operator claims the activity is valid,
> but I
> > > can't see that this is a well-behaving bot at all.[1]
> > >
> > > I suspect the bot is welcoming every user it can find, but using user
> > > accounts from central login and not users that has local contributions
> at
> > > arwiki.
> > >
> > > Can someone shut down the bot until the user fix the spam problem.
> > >
> > > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Meno25#Welcome_messages
> > > ___
> > > 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> > ___
> > 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reducing the net cost of Wikimania

[Richard Farmbrough]

It's all very well to assume that certain demographics are wealthy. But 
it is simply a stereotype. Wikipedians I know personally from the 
"privileged" demographics vary from those who are well off through to 
those who are saddled with substantial debt and zero income.


But really the question is, given the funds available, and the benefits 
that accrue, why there should be such a limited WMF spend on Wikimania 
(and/or other gatherings).   It is one of the few discretionary spends 
that we know from stories like Doc James' has a huge impact.


On 10/02/2016 16:27, Béria Lima wrote:
And I for one agree with the new policy. The effort made by a European 
(or American, or Canadian) to travel to a Wikimania, is something like 
one month of salary. For a woman from the same place will probably be 
2 months (pay gap at its finest!) and for a Latino, African, or 
Asiatic the effort starts at 6 months and go on to even a decade*[4]* 
(A full decade of your salary to go to Wikimania).



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Scholarship Decline

[Richard Farmbrough]

I believe that Wikimania scholarships are one of the best uses of WMF 
funds.  I would like to see more scholarships.  If funds are a problem, 
then by all means have more scholarships for relatively local people - 
but frankly I don't think funds _are_ a problem.


On 21/03/2016 14:00, Rodrigo Padula wrote:

I had a conversation with Vitor Mazuco about this email and agreed with his 
point of view.

Analyzing the list of users from Brazil that received schollarships from WMF 
during the last years, I noted that WMF/Scholarship Committees are always 
supporting the same group of people not generating opportunities for new 
people(and very important contributors) to join and enjoy Wikimania.

Including, some of the users that received support to go to Wikimania never 
provided any feedback to our community regarding Wikimania experience, 
learnings, knowledge acquired or any kind of reports.

I think the scholarship committee should take in consideration those who have 
been to the event several times, so that we can also include more people, 
increasing the Wikimania's diversity in all possible ways, avoid so many 
repetitions engaging more people into this international movement.

I'm not saying that the users that received support in recent years do not 
deserve this support, my point is that we have more people who also deserve to 
go to Wikimania and never get this opportunity, sometimes it disengage our 
volunteers.

Rodrigo Padula
Coordenador de Projetos
Grupo Wikimedia Brasileiro de Educação e Pesquisa
http://www.wikimedia.org.br
21 99326-0558


--- Em Qui, 17 Mar 2016 20:32:36 -0300 Ellie Young  
escreveu 
Vitor,

I have asked the Scholarship Committee for Wikimania '16 to reply to your
email.
wikimania-scholarsh...@wikimedia.org

Ellie Young
WMF Events Manager


On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Vitor Mazuco 
wrote:

> Hi everybody!
>
> my apply was decline.
>
> This is my second time that is decline, and my friend of Brazil goes
> every year, same users in every year and I never.
>
> If do you compare my contribution as long with their, I have much more
> and my apply is every year decline by WMF.
>
> Please, who can help with this?
>
> Thanks in advanced,
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> ;




-
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
;



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FLOSS for operations equipment

[Richard Farmbrough]

I think there are two clear policies here:

1. The forkability of the projects
2. The "niceness" of suppliers.

The first is a movement and project principle.  The second is - loosely 
- connected to a broader movement.  It is philosophically and morally 
dubious to coerce people to conform to our preferred ethics model.  
Perhaps this would be highlighted best if we were to consider only 
serving web pages to readers using FLOSS operating systems.






___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [PRESS] Turkish authorities block Wikipedia

[Richard Farmbrough]

It is absolutely important to be clear that Wikipedia is impartial, or at
least  substantially so.  This impartiality may be a threat to some, but it
could be counter-productive to make statements which are not carefully
thought through.  Those who support repressive regimes can easily be pushed
into an absolutist mindset.


On 29 Apr 2017 18:42, "Ivan Martínez"  wrote:

> +1 to Ting's idea about a statement
>
> Also we can support from our corner sending tweets and e-mails to our local
> embassies. Our friends from Turkey or someone who speaks turkish can
> support us with a hasthag? I posted #WikipediaSansürlendi but maybe is
> incorrect.
>
> Best,
>
> 2017-04-29 12:16 GMT-05:00 Ting Chen :
>
> > I think the Foundation and the chapters *must* make a statement that
> > decisively contradicts the reason of the block: That Wikipedia supports
> > terrorism. There could be further texts in the statement which stresses
> our
> > principle of neutrality and our goal to spread knowledge, but the first
> and
> > most important statement is to contradict the accusation.
> >
> > Ah some times I miss Jay, he would immediately recognize how important it
> > is to make such a statement. When national newspapers and broadcasts are
> > referring (I just heard the one in Deutschland Funk
> > http://www.deutschlandfunk.de/dlf24-startseite.1441.de.html ) this
> event,
> > there should be not only the accusation but always also a reaction.
> >
> > Greetings
> >
> > Ting
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 29.04.2017 um 10:43 schrieb Itzik - Wikimedia Israel:
> >
> >> Hey,
> >>
> >> FYI -  sad news from Turkish.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *Regards,Itzik Edri*
> >> Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
> >> +972-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
> >> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the
> >> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
> >>
> >>
> >> -- Forwarded message --
> >> From: Itzik - Wikimedia Israel 
> >> Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 11:42 AM
> >> Subject: [PRESS] Turkish authorities block Wikipedia
> >> To: Communications Committee 
> >>
> >>
> >> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39754909
> >>
> >> Reuters just published that a 15 minutes ago, so it will be soon all
> over
> >> the news.
> >>
> >>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> *Turkey has blocked all access inside the country to the online
> >> encyclopaedia Wikipedia, one of the world's most popular websites.*
> >>
> >> It was not initially clear why the ban had been imposed.
> >> The Turkey Blocks group said the site was inaccessible from 08:00 (05:00
> >> GMT) by order of the Turkish authorities.
> >> People in the capital Istanbul were unable to access any Wikipedia pages
> >> without using a Virtual Private Network (VPN).
> >> "After technical analysis and legal consideration based on the Law Nr.
> >> 5651, an administrative measure has been taken for this website,"
> Turkey's
> >> Information and Communication Technologies Authority was quoted as
> saying.
> >> No reason was given.
> >> Turkey Blocks and Turkish media, including the Hurriyet Daily News, said
> >> the provisional order would need to be backed by a full court ruling in
> >> the
> >> next few days.
> >>
> >> Social media was in uproar as news of the ban emerged, with some users
> >> speculating that it might be a bid to suppress criticism on President
> >> Recep
> >> Tayyip Erdogan's Wikipedia page.
> >> Mr Erdogan narrowly won a controversial 16 April referendum on
> increasing
> >> his powers, but the issue has deeply divided the country.
> >> Turkey has temporarily blocked popular social media sites including
> >> Facebook and Twitter in the past, especially in the wake of mass
> protests
> >> or terror attacks.
> >> The government has previously denied censoring the internet, blaming
> >> outages on spikes in usage after major events.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *Regards,Itzik Edri*
> >> Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
> >> +972-54-5878078 <+972%2054-587-8078> | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
> >> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the
> >> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> >> i/Wikimedia-l
> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> 
> >>
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Iván Martínez*
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [PRESS] Turkish authorities block Wikipedia

[Richard Farmbrough]

"As a movement" is a phrase which I have trouble with.  WhiIe left it is
very easy to make apple pie statements with little fear of contradiction, I
think it misees the point.  We provide information, neutral information.
Perhaps we hope as individuals this discourages rather than encourages
certain forms of behaviour. But if we provided the information with the
goal of, for example, opposing terrorism we would cease to be a neutral,
reliable sourgent,  thus defeating any such goal.

Conversely it is far more convincing to say that we don't support
terrorism, that the statements are on their face absurd, that we clearly
document the rise and fall of Isis, together with their actions both in the
Middle East and the wider world, and tother encourage anyone who doubts
this to read our articles on the subject.

On 29 Apr 2017 19:52, "James Heilman"  wrote:

> Richard I am not sure I am clear on what you mean. We are not impartial to
> everything. We oppose censorship and we oppose suppression of freedom of
> information. I think it is also perfectly fine to state that we as a
> movement oppose terrorism.
>
> Made a few more adjustments to this statement on meta
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Response_to_2017_ban_in_Turkey
>
> James
>
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Richard Farmbrough <
> rich...@farmbrough.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > It is absolutely important to be clear that Wikipedia is impartial, or at
> > least  substantially so.  This impartiality may be a threat to some, but
> it
> > could be counter-productive to make statements which are not carefully
> > thought through.  Those who support repressive regimes can easily be
> pushed
> > into an absolutist mindset.
> >
> >
> > On 29 Apr 2017 18:42, "Ivan Martínez"  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 to Ting's idea about a statement
> > >
> > > Also we can support from our corner sending tweets and e-mails to our
> > local
> > > embassies. Our friends from Turkey or someone who speaks turkish can
> > > support us with a hasthag? I posted #WikipediaSansürlendi but maybe is
> > > incorrect.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > 2017-04-29 12:16 GMT-05:00 Ting Chen :
> > >
> > > > I think the Foundation and the chapters *must* make a statement that
> > > > decisively contradicts the reason of the block: That Wikipedia
> supports
> > > > terrorism. There could be further texts in the statement which
> stresses
> > > our
> > > > principle of neutrality and our goal to spread knowledge, but the
> first
> > > and
> > > > most important statement is to contradict the accusation.
> > > >
> > > > Ah some times I miss Jay, he would immediately recognize how
> important
> > it
> > > > is to make such a statement. When national newspapers and broadcasts
> > are
> > > > referring (I just heard the one in Deutschland Funk
> > > > http://www.deutschlandfunk.de/dlf24-startseite.1441.de.html ) this
> > > event,
> > > > there should be not only the accusation but always also a reaction.
> > > >
> > > > Greetings
> > > >
> > > > Ting
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am 29.04.2017 um 10:43 schrieb Itzik - Wikimedia Israel:
> > > >
> > > >> Hey,
> > > >>
> > > >> FYI -  sad news from Turkish.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> *Regards,Itzik Edri*
> > > >> Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
> > > >> +972-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
> > > >> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share
> in
> > > the
> > > >> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> -- Forwarded message --
> > > >> From: Itzik - Wikimedia Israel 
> > > >> Date: Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 11:42 AM
> > > >> Subject: [PRESS] Turkish authorities block Wikipedia
> > > >> To: Communications Committee 
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39754909
> > > >>
> > > >> Reuters just published that a 15 minutes ago, so it will be soon all
> > > over
> > > >> the news.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> ---
> > > >>
> > > >> *Turkey has blocked all access inside the cou

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [PRESS] Turkish authorities block Wikipedia

[Richard Farmbrough]

Primarily this is those who sign the statement  on meta.

On 29 Apr 2017 20:41, "Rogol Domedonfors"  wrote:

> James
>
> If you cannot say who "We" are who do not support terrorism, then your
> statement is both meaningless and ineffectual.  If you are specific, then
> "we" need to know why you feel able to speak for "us".
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 8:33 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
>
> > @ Richard Thank you. I have adjusted that sentence to "We do not support
> > terrorism."
> >
> > J
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Richard Farmbrough <
> > rich...@farmbrough.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > "As a movement" is a phrase which I have trouble with.  WhiIe left it
> is
> > > very easy to make apple pie statements with little fear of
> > contradiction, I
> > > think it misees the point.  We provide information, neutral
> information.
> > > Perhaps we hope as individuals this discourages rather than encourages
> > > certain forms of behaviour. But if we provided the information with the
> > > goal of, for example, opposing terrorism we would cease to be a
> neutral,
> > > reliable sourgent,  thus defeating any such goal.
> > >
> > > Conversely it is far more convincing to say that we don't support
> > > terrorism, that the statements are on their face absurd, that we
> clearly
> > > document the rise and fall of Isis, together with their actions both in
> > the
> > > Middle East and the wider world, and tother encourage anyone who doubts
> > > this to read our articles on the subject.
> > >
> > > On 29 Apr 2017 19:52, "James Heilman"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Richard I am not sure I am clear on what you mean. We are not
> impartial
> > > to
> > > > everything. We oppose censorship and we oppose suppression of freedom
> > of
> > > > information. I think it is also perfectly fine to state that we as a
> > > > movement oppose terrorism.
> > > >
> > > > Made a few more adjustments to this statement on meta
> > > >
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Response_to_2017_ban_in_Turkey
> > > >
> > > > James
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Richard Farmbrough <
> > > > rich...@farmbrough.co.uk> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > It is absolutely important to be clear that Wikipedia is impartial,
> > or
> > > at
> > > > > least  substantially so.  This impartiality may be a threat to
> some,
> > > but
> > > > it
> > > > > could be counter-productive to make statements which are not
> > carefully
> > > > > thought through.  Those who support repressive regimes can easily
> be
> > > > pushed
> > > > > into an absolutist mindset.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 29 Apr 2017 18:42, "Ivan Martínez"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 to Ting's idea about a statement
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also we can support from our corner sending tweets and e-mails to
> > our
> > > > > local
> > > > > > embassies. Our friends from Turkey or someone who speaks turkish
> > can
> > > > > > support us with a hasthag? I posted #WikipediaSansürlendi but
> maybe
> > > is
> > > > > > incorrect.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2017-04-29 12:16 GMT-05:00 Ting Chen :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think the Foundation and the chapters *must* make a statement
> > > that
> > > > > > > decisively contradicts the reason of the block: That Wikipedia
> > > > supports
> > > > > > > terrorism. There could be further texts in the statement which
> > > > stresses
> > > > > > our
> > > > > > > principle of neutrality and our goal to spread knowledge, but
> the
> > > > first
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > most important statement is to contradict the accusation.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ah some times I miss Jay, he would immediately recognize how
> > > > important
> > > > > it
> > > > > > &

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WFM 91.7 FM becomes our broadcasting partner in Nigeria

[Richard Farmbrough]

Article needate a little work.

On 12 Jun 2017 12:23, "Quim Gil"  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:26 PM, shola ishola 
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Dear wikipedians,
> >
> > We are delighted to announce that we have reached agreement with the
> above
> > named prestigious broadcasting station to partner with us in reaching
> > further audience in Nigeria.
> >
> > The agreement will assist us in reaching wider audience and also
> > actualizing some of our core projects in alignment with the pinnacle of
> > their establishment, which is to promote women in Nigeria.
> >
> > I will keep you inform as things unfold.
> > Best RegardsOlushola
> > Welcome to WFM 91.7 - NIGERIA'S FIRST RADIO STATION FOR WOMEN AND THEIR
> > FAMILIES
> >
> > |
> > |   |
> > Welcome to WFM 91.7 - NIGERIA'S FIRST RADIO STATION FOR WOMEN AND THEIR
> > FAMILIES
> >  Keeping listeners company throughout the day with quality, relevant,
> > informative and entertaining programmes tha...  |  |
> >
>
> This very interesting announcement was kind of cut. Turns out WFM 91.7 has
> an informative article in English Wikipedia:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WFM_91.7
>
> Thank you Shola and other contributors of Nigeria for this fresh
> initiative! Please report about your progress.
>
> --
> Quim Gil
> Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil
> ___
> 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Which templates should be global?

[Richard Farmbrough]

Amir, I will certainly  try to respond!  I had a rather nice universal
deployment model pre-lua.

On 28 Jun 2017 07:33, "Amir E. Aharoni" 
wrote:

> Hallo,
>
> TLDR: If you are an experienced editor on any Wikimedia project in any
> language, please add your ideas here:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Which_templates_should_be_global
>
> In more detail:
>
> Continuing some recent discussions from Phabricator[1], Wikimedia
> Hackathon, and Wikimedia Developers Summit, I'd like to ask the wider
> community of editors in all projects:
>
> Which templates could be useful for all Wikimedia projects, or at least for
> _many_ projects?
>
> A lot of templates are replicated manually, and it's a problem that is
> well-known to all experienced editors. If there was a technology that
> allows templates to be more conveniently globally managed, which templates
> would you adapt to this technology first?
>
> I started a list at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Which_templates_should_be_global . Please
> continue it! I'm very interested to hear from all projects and languages,
> not only the big Wikipedias, so spread the word.
>
> Thanks!
>
> [1] For example https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T159334
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> ‪“We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> ___
> 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sharing sad news about Bassel

[Richard Farmbrough]

Very sad news  indeed.  Frustrating that we could not gain more social
media traction, when there is such nonsense that does.

On 2 Aug 2017 08:37, "kayode yussuf"  wrote:

> This is a very sad news.
>
> Bassel will continue to be an hero in our hearts and we will take solace
> in his activities in the Open movement.
>
> Kayode Yussuf
>
> > On Aug 2, 2017, at 00:19, David Gerard  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2 August 2017 at 00:00, Katherine Maher 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> at his article [2], and at https://freebassel.org.
> >
> >
> > This is giving an SSL error ...
> >
> >
> > - d.
> >
> > ___
> > 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
>
> ___
> 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

[Richard Farmbrough]

The problem of knowledge is much older than Wikipedia.  It is part of the
reason that so many intelligent people belive things that are "simply not
so".


On 11 Aug 2017 11:52, "Rogol Domedonfors"  wrote:

> Is it not rather late to be discussing what "knowledge" might be, towards
> the end of the second decade of a mission to bring the sum of human
> knowledge to the world, and in the middle of a major effort to determine
> the strategy of the movement into its third and fourth decades?  Surely by
> now there is a clear, concise and actionable agreed definition of knowledge
> that we can point to when people ask what all that money has been and
> continues to be raised for?  Why not just point to that common position
> that everyone has signed up to?
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 1:00 PM, John Erling Blad 
> wrote:
>
> > Information is "facts told, heard, or discovered" (Oxford) or "knowledge
> > communicated or received concerning a particular fact or circumstance".
> (I
> > would say data and not knowledge, but knowledge is good enough for this.)
> > If you can't observe the fact or circumstance, and can't communicate the
> > fact, how can there be the information?
> >
> > Sorry, this does not make sense.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:08 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > ​
> > > > Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources
> > >
> > >
> > > ​very agree, the intangible sources are a really challenge to way you
> > look
> > > at verifiability. Not only are wanting to gather the information and
> make
> > > it possible for others to also access it the very nature of the sources
> > is
> > > dynamic and fragile bringing them into a tangible format risks the
> > > continuation of knowledge gained, a kin to exposing an ancient paper
> > source
> > > to intense UV light.
> > >
> > > There is a lot of fantastic work going on around the world on how to
> > > "Europeanise" knowledge without destroying it  .  All of this gets more
> > > complex when you learn that knowledge isnt just a few words its part
> of a
> > > multidimensional connection to and in time, place, and circumstances
> by
> > > bringing it into a one dimensional world like Wikipedia is in it self
> > > changing the very nature of the knowledge.   If our goal is to collect
> > the
> > > sum of all knowledge then we need to be free as communities to address
> > the
> > > uniqueness of the knowledge we seek within the bounds of
> > culture(language)
> > > from which it originates
> > >
> > > > ​
> > >
> > >
> > > On 9 August 2017 at 04:12, Jean-Philippe Béland  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources.
> > > >
> > > > JP
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017, 05:20 John Erling Blad, 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Policy should not have local variations, unless you want to create
> > > > > something different from Wikipedia. This is about core content
> > > policies.
> > > > > Those are no original research, verifiability, and neutral point of
> > > view.
> > > > > The one most don't follow is neutral point of view, where projects
> > > > rewrite
> > > > > world history to focus on their own local view.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 2:20 AM, Gnangarra 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > its the cultural differences that influence the policy, so who's
> > > > culture
> > > > > is
> > > > > > more significant than everyone elses that will dictate the
> > policies.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 8 August 2017 at 08:14, John Erling Blad 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes there are cultural differences between wikipedias on
> > _content_,
> > > > but
> > > > > > > there should be no differences on _policy_ about that content.
> > > > > > > Note also that there are some differences on use of _facts_
> that
> > > are
> > > > > > highly
> > > > > > > troublesome, and that comes from relaxed core policies.
> > > > > > > Armenian genocide for example.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Gnangarra  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > to quote, worth a read before even considering policies being
> > > > global
> > > > > > > > http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23901/
> abstract
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This article explores the relationship between linguistic
> > culture
> > > > and
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > preferred standards of presenting information based on
> > article
> > > > > > > > > representation in major Wikipedias. Using primary research
> > > > analysis
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > number of images, references, internal links, external
> links,
> > > > > words,
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > characters, as well as their proportions in Good and
> Featured
> > > > > > articles
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > the eight largest Wikipedias, we discover a high diversity
> of
> > > > > > > approaches
> > > > > > > > > and format preferences, correlating with cultur

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

[Richard Farmbrough]

Probably that is verifiability.

On 11 Aug 2017 12:31, "Rogol Domedonfors"  wrote:

> I'm aware that "knowledge" as a concept has a long history.  I would not
> have expected the movement to have finally resolved the "problem of
> knowledge", whatever that might be, nor did I say that I had.  I am
> expressing surprise that there is not yet a common understanding that the
> movement can rally round.
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Richard Farmbrough <
> rich...@farmbrough.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > The problem of knowledge is much older than Wikipedia.  It is part of the
> > reason that so many intelligent people belive things that are "simply not
> > so".
> >
> >
> > On 11 Aug 2017 11:52, "Rogol Domedonfors"  wrote:
> >
> > > Is it not rather late to be discussing what "knowledge" might be,
> towards
> > > the end of the second decade of a mission to bring the sum of human
> > > knowledge to the world, and in the middle of a major effort to
> determine
> > > the strategy of the movement into its third and fourth decades?  Surely
> > by
> > > now there is a clear, concise and actionable agreed definition of
> > knowledge
> > > that we can point to when people ask what all that money has been and
> > > continues to be raised for?  Why not just point to that common position
> > > that everyone has signed up to?
> > >
> > > "Rogol"
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 1:00 PM, John Erling Blad 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Information is "facts told, heard, or discovered" (Oxford) or
> > "knowledge
> > > > communicated or received concerning a particular fact or
> circumstance".
> > > (I
> > > > would say data and not knowledge, but knowledge is good enough for
> > this.)
> > > > If you can't observe the fact or circumstance, and can't communicate
> > the
> > > > fact, how can there be the information?
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, this does not make sense.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:08 AM, Gnangarra 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ​
> > > > > > Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ​very agree, the intangible sources are a really challenge to way
> you
> > > > look
> > > > > at verifiability. Not only are wanting to gather the information
> and
> > > make
> > > > > it possible for others to also access it the very nature of the
> > sources
> > > > is
> > > > > dynamic and fragile bringing them into a tangible format risks the
> > > > > continuation of knowledge gained, a kin to exposing an ancient
> paper
> > > > source
> > > > > to intense UV light.
> > > > >
> > > > > There is a lot of fantastic work going on around the world on how
> to
> > > > > "Europeanise" knowledge without destroying it  .  All of this gets
> > more
> > > > > complex when you learn that knowledge isnt just a few words its
> part
> > > of a
> > > > > multidimensional connection to and in time, place, and
> circumstances
> > > by
> > > > > bringing it into a one dimensional world like Wikipedia is in it
> self
> > > > > changing the very nature of the knowledge.   If our goal is to
> > collect
> > > > the
> > > > > sum of all knowledge then we need to be free as communities to
> > address
> > > > the
> > > > > uniqueness of the knowledge we seek within the bounds of
> > > > culture(language)
> > > > > from which it originates
> > > > >
> > > > > > ​
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 9 August 2017 at 04:12, Jean-Philippe Béland <
> > jpbel...@wikimedia.ca
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > JP
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017, 05:20 John Erling Blad, 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Policy should not have local variations, u

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Windows 10 lockscreen images

[Richard Farmbrough]

I have looked at the Wikipedia traffic for the places associated with some
of these images, and it is clear that they drive in the order of thousands
of hits per day.

I haven't been able to find a definitive list, from which more
comprehensive stats could be generated.

I think that using Commons images might provide an attribution problem.  It
might also take bread from the mouth of babes  (or at least photographers).
I think Microsoft can afford to pay for these images and fund creation of
more, even if that is mainly going to be commercial, it is not inimical to
free images.


On 21 Aug 2017 18:20, "Michael Maggs"  wrote:

> Rogol
>
> Why the randomly-chosen names beginning with R?
>
> Michael
>
>
> Rogol Domedonfors wrote:
>
>> Perhaps a randomly chosen image every time the user logs in?
>>
>> Rudigerd
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak
>> wrote:
>>
>> it does not hurt to ask - Microsoft does some CSR, after all, and using
>>> beautiful images under an open license is in their interest, too anyway.
>>> I
>>> would not be overly optimistic though.
>>>
>>> dj
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Tomasz Ganicz
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> In some geographies this feature is used as an advertising tool - I guess
 promoting of Commons via this feature could be quite costly.

 2017-08-20 1:08 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett:

 Those of you running Windows 10 will be familiar with the
> regularly-changing "lockscreen" images showing things like beautiful
> scenery and scenes from nature:
>
>  https://www.tekrevue.com/tip/find-windows-spotlight-lock-
> screen-images-windows-10/
>
> The last one I just saw was labelled "copyright [photographer name]
> and Shutterstock"
>
> Is there someone at WMF, with contacts at Microsoft, who could
> persuade them to use some featured images from Commons, with a small
> piece of text explaining that people may upload their own images?
>
> That would seem to be a simple way to do a massive piece of outreach,
> to a new audience.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>


 --
 Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
 http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
 http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
 ___
 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 

>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> __
>>>
>>>   prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak
>>> kierownik katedry MINDS (Management in Networked and Digital Societies)
>>> Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
>>> http://NeRDS.kozminski.edu.pl
>>>
>>> associate faculty w Berkman-Klein Center for Internet and Society,
>>> Harvard University
>>>
>>> Wyszła pierwsza na świecie etnografia Wikipedii "Common Knowledge? An
>>> Ethnography of Wikipedia" (2014, Stanford University
>>> Press) mojego autorstwa (Dorothy Lee Award 2015, Nagroda
>>> Naukowa Prezesa PAN 2016)  http://www.sup.org/book.cgi?id=24010
>>> ___
>>> 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> 
>>>
>>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,> ilto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Richard Farmbrough]

While I would  (and have) strongly opposed both threats and actual
contacting of employerst of volunteers, I think the situation here is
somewhat different.

Firstly WMF employees are not subject to community sanction insofar as
their paid roles go.  Secondly it is perfectlying normal to have an
escalation path in case of difficulty in anthe public faxing role.

I am aware that the US has a culture far more prone to fire people first
and ask questions later, than the UK, but I would hope that the WMF does
not work like that.

On 25 Aug 2017 19:23, "Andrew Lih"  wrote:

> I'd like to second what Rob has expressed here. This list already suffers a
> very poor reputation within our community, even as it is positioned as an
> important part of our communications ecosystem.
>
> Allowing participants to intimidate others and exact "in real life"
> consequences should be dealt with in the most severe manner. If we do
> not meatball:DefendEachOther, and deliver the basic safety needs of the
> list membership, how can we in good conscience keep this list running and
> encourage participation?
>
> -Andrew
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Robert Fernandez  >
> wrote:
>
> > I am grateful that the moderators have taken some action, but I am
> > disappointed that contacting a person's employer is not yet seen as an
> > uncrossable line here.
> >
> > Out of respect to your call for civility I will refrain from directly
> > responding to the person in question despite his allegations against me.
> > It is a mistake to frame this as a free speech issue.  It is of course in
> > the interests of a person engaging in bullying and harassing behavior to
> > claim people are trying to suppress their powerful truths, but there is
> no
> > reason we have to accept this duplicitous framing.  The content of the
> > message is immaterial, the behavior is the issue.  Some people may see
> this
> > as a grey area given that it was a Foundation employee, but I see it as a
> > slippery slope.  Seddon's job is almost certainly safe, but this might
> not
> > be the case for the next victim.  Will the poster in question decide
> that I
> > am "bullying and harassing" him and attempt to contact my employer next?
> >
> > Most of my fellow board members of my chapter are the employees of US
> > government agencies or connected to the Foundation as an employee or a
> > grant recipient.   Given the unusual political climate in the US I worry
> > that the former group are particularly vulnerable to harassment targeting
> > their employment.   (Media outlets favored by the current US presidential
> > administration have targeted individual Wikimedia editors, including
> > myself, in the past.)  If participants on this list are allowed to engage
> > in this sort of harassment without real consequence, I will advise that
> my
> > chapter and its board members and volunteers no longer participate on
> this
> > list due to the risk to their livelihoods.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 5:45 AM, Shani Evenstein 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Wikimedia-l,
> > >
> > > Rogol has been placed under moderation, but at this point no decision
> has
> > > been made to ban him from the list. As long as his messages are
> > reasonable,
> > > respectful and on point, his messages will go through. We agreed that
> it
> > is
> > > important to allow a diversity of voices to be heard, including those
> of
> > > "frequent flyers" in the list, especially as we work collaboratively on
> > > next steps towards a healthier community atmosphere.
> > >
> > > In addition, we are asking everyone to refrain from focusing on
> specific
> > > individuals posting to the list, put any personal issues aside and stay
> > on
> > > problem. We want as many people as possible to productively and
> > objectively
> > > participate in the discussion, till we draft clearer guidelines for
> > posting
> > > to the list. We are aware that these guidelines will not automagically
> > fix
> > > all of our issues as a global community, but we believe they will help
> > > reduce the noise substantially. Do keep on debating. We are trying to
> > > intervene as little as possible at this point and let the debate run
> its
> > > course.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Shani Evenstein, on behalf of the Wikimedia-l Admins.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 8:52 PM, James Salsman 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Why are we having this RFC prior to the survey which was discussed at
> > >> length less than a year ago?
> > >>
> > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:James_Salsman#Peri
> > >> odic_survey_prototype
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:05 AM, Robert Fernandez
> > >>  wrote:
> > >> > Since Rogol has followed through on his threat he should be banned
> > from
> > >> the
> > >> > list, or we should have a public statement from the moderators
> > regarding
> > >> > why they will not do so.
> > >> >
> > >> > I can't imagine many actions that would have a more chilling effect
> on
> > >> > parti

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open Letter to Lila (Harassment Policy)

[Richard Farmbrough]

It is true that our Arbitrators have not always behaved as we would wish,
and the cases that Trillium brings are are especially egregious, those
familiar with the the Arbcom leaks or indeed who have followed the actions
of the Committee, or dealt with individual Arbitrators on the English
Wikipedia, will be aware of many errors and abuses.  (They will also be
aware that the majority of Arbitrators have been assets to the community
the majority of the time.)

However the fact that a proportion, even if it were a significant
proportion, of the committee have feet of clay, does not mean that they are
not a useful collective resource to consult over harassment issues.

What we should take form the issues over the years is that it is worth
looking at ways to improve the governance structure.  Splitting check-user
form arbitration is one possible means.  Making checkuser more transparent
is another.  And "real name" accountability is a third.  Note that one
Arbitrator resigned (and pretty much left the project too) rather than
provide the WMF with his real name.

On 2 February 2015 at 15:12, Trillium Corsage 
wrote:

> Nathan, there is no context that could possibly justify those evidenced
> incidents of harassment and stalking. There is no excuse. The information
> is out there for anyone who wants to read about them, but it's wrong to
> attempt to rationalize them in a sea of details and that's why I didn't do
> it.
>
> Trillium Corsage
>
> PS: yes, I identify as male ("he, his" etc.).
>
> 02.02.2015, 15:03, "Nathan" :
> > I wasted the few minutes necessary to read "Trillium"'s blog post, and I
> > don't recommend anyone else make that same mistake. He's taken a few
> > incidents in a 7 year period, presented them utterly without the totally
> > necessary context, and ignored any evidence that might make it clear how
> > silly and ignorant his (or her) position is.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open Letter to Lila (Harassment Policy)

[Richard Farmbrough]

Because the Arbitration Committee does have experience dealing with
harassment.  Not many projects have such a body dedicated to dealing with
conflict.  You are of course right that a general consultation should be
made, and I'm sure if there are other bodies you can point to the WMF would
love to consult with them too.

On 2 February 2015 at 18:04, Federico Leva (Nemo) 
wrote:

> If the WMF is consulting any specific entity of an individual Wikimedia
> project out of 800 for a crosswiki matter, that's ridiculous, period. I
> don't see why bother looking into the specific merits of the entity in
> question, or the allegations about them.
>
> Nemo
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who are the nicest people on our projects ?

[Richard Farmbrough]

Who was most thanked?

On 5 February 2015 at 15:47, Fæ  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> After reading an interesting related discussion on GenderGap, I have
> queried the top 10 users of the thanks feature last month, on both the
> English Wikipedia and Commons. Snapshot image attached and report link
> below.
>
> Perhaps someone might think of a suitable barnstar and award these
> folks for "being nice"? :-)
>
> Link:
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:F%C3%A6/sandbox&oldid=149050523
>
> P.S. This is a long query to run, taking 20 to 30 minutes due to the
> nature of the logging tables. However if someone wanted to make a
> monthly summary on-wiki somewhere, part of an active "be nice"
> campaign, I would be happy to set up an automated monthly report (if
> someone discovers this is already reported somewhere, that's cool we
> can use that).
>
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcing: The Wikipedia Prize!

[Richard Farmbrough]

Moreover this may well be a breach of policy, TOS and even law.

On 31 March 2015 at 01:15, Oliver Keyes  wrote:

> So, let me get this right:
>
> 1. You announced that, as David puts it, noting anonymous IPs is the
> same as all-the-NSA-stuff-ever;
> 2. People disputed it, but suggested you go form local consensus that
> this was problematic or participate in efforts to improve how we mask
> and handle data if that doesn't work for you;
> 3. You decided that this was hard and a satirical breaching experiment
> would be more enjoyable?
>
> I'm...really not sure how this could possibly seem like a constructive
> way to go about solving for this problem, to you. Andrew Gray's advice
> is good advice, and still stands.
>
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 6:43 PM, Robert Rohde  wrote:
> > So, you are offering a prize equivalent to US $2.50?  Not exactly an
> > inspirational amount of money (though perhaps that is the point).
> >
> > -Robert Rohde
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Brian  wrote:
> >
> >> I'm sure many of you recall the Netflix Prize
> >> . This is that, for
> Wikipedia!
> >>
> >> Although the initial goal of the Netflix Prize was to design a
> >> collaborative filtering algorithm, it became notorious when the data was
> >> used to de-anonymize Netflix users. Researchers proved that given just a
> >> user's movie ratings on one site, you can plug those ratings into
> another
> >> site, such as the IMDB. You can then take that information, and with
> some
> >> Google searches and optionally a bit of cash (for websites that sell
> user
> >> information, including, in some cases, their SSN) figure out who they
> are.
> >> You could even drive up to their house and take a selfie with them, or
> >> follow them to work and meet their boss and tell them about their views
> on
> >> the topics they were editing.
> >>
> >> Here, we'll cut straight to the privacy chase. Using just the full
> history
> >> dump of the English Wikipedia, excluding edits from any logged-in users,
> >> identify five people. You must confirm their identities with them, and
> >> privately prove to me that you've done this. I will then nominate you as
> >> the winner and send you one million Satoshis (the smallest unit of
> Bitcoin,
> >> times 1 million), in addition to updating this thread.
> >>
> >> I suspect this challenge will be very easy for anyone who is determined.
> >> Indeed, even if MediaWiki no longer displayed IP addresses, there would
> >> still be enough information to identify people. Completely getting rid
> of
> >> the edit history would largely solve the problem. In the mean time, this
> >> Prize will serve as a reminder that when Wikipedia says "Your IP address
> >> will be publicly visible if you make any edits." what they mean is,
> "People
> >> will probably be able to figure out where you live and embarrass you."
> >>
> >> An extra million Satoshis for each NSA employee that you identify. A
> full
> >> bitcoin if you take a selfie with them.
> >>
> >> Let the games begin!
> >>
> >> Brian Mingus
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editing Wikipedia for school community service hours

[Richard Farmbrough]

Content about businesses is potentially useful to people who need jobs.
Television shows *are* cultural topics.

I am uneasy about well intentioned attempts to define "worthy" and
"unworthy" content.

On 14 April 2015 at 02:28, Leigh Thelmadatter  wrote:

> I agree that any community service type editing would have to be planned
> and done carefully as the type of work being done is everything. Obviously
> adding content about businesses and television shows would have no
> community impact, but documenting cultural topics, marginalized peoples,
> and the like very well could. Not to mention academic topics to the same
> communities as Wikipedia Zero serves. No sense students having free access
> if they information they need does not exist.
> Servicio social for Mexican universities also has an academic component,
> relating the service to their majors. María José has written a blog post,
> which is in the draft queue, about her experience which I hope gets
> published eventually.
> Leigh
>
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 21:03:50 -0400
> > From: aleksey.bilo...@gmail.com
> > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > CC: wikimedia-casca...@lists.wikimedia.org;
> wikimediau...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editing Wikipedia for school community
> service hours
> >
> > If editing Wikipedia counted as community service my school ought to
> start
> > handing me plaques.
> >
> > Alas, it does not, for a host of legitimate reasons as I see it, ranging
> > from academic uncertainty about the usefulness of doing so when it comes
> to
> > community impact, to the sheer difficulty of actually measuring. More
> > meaningful (and, in the spirit of things, selfless) to volunteer at a
> local
> > Wikipedia editing event then to sit back in an armchair and do the whole
> > first-world-netizen-at-a-computer thing.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Pine W  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Many schools in the United States encourage or require students to
> perform
> > > community service hours, such as by cleaning up parks, caring for the
> > > disabled, or tutoring younger students. Sometimes more specialized
> > > requirements apply, such as university schools of education or health
> which
> > > may require experience that is applicable to a student's desired
> > > coursework. Contributing to Wikimedia is one form of accepted community
> > > service in a multi-campus Mexican university, and the practice seems
> to be
> > > gaining momentum (see
> > >
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/04/13/wiki-learning-edit-a-thon-mexico/).
> > >
> > > These community service programs are different from in-class
> assignments
> > > that require Wikipedia editing. Wikipedia can  benefit from both kinds
> of
> > > activities.
> > >
> > > I am wondering, have other Wikimedia affiliates had success with
> > > encouraging students to complete community service requirements by
> > > contributing to Wikimedia? I am thinking that here in Cascadia, we
> might
> > > encourage schools to allow this option, and other affiliates also might
> > > want to explore this possibility.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Pine
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Farewell

[Richard Farmbrough]

We shall miss you.

On 19 June 2015 at 09:30, Andrea Zanni  wrote:

> Goodbye Fabrice, and thank you for all your enthusiasm.
> It was very appreciated :-)
> Good luck!
>
> Aubrey
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Michael Jahn 
> wrote:
>
> > May your next steps be joyful, thrilling and challenging. All the best to
> > you, Fabrice!
> > Michael
> >
> > 2015-06-18 18:25 GMT+02:00 Fabrice Florin :
> >
> > > Hello everyone,
> > >
> > > After three great years working at the foundation, the time has come to
> > > say goodbye.
> > >
> > > I will be leaving WMF at the end of June, to spend more time with my
> > > family, focus on personal art projects and consult part-time on worthy
> > > causes.
> > >
> > > I would like to thank all the community and team members I have had the
> > > pleasure to work with over the years. It has been an honor to serve our
> > > movement together — and to help our contributors share free knowledge
> > with
> > > each other and the world.
> > >
> > > I’m particularly grateful to Katherine Maher and our WMF communications
> > > team for being such wonderful collaborators. I really enjoyed working
> > with
> > > them to manage and edit the Wikimedia blog, help grow our team and
> > publish
> > > some great stories together, to celebrate the heroes of our movement.
> > >
> > > Going forward, WMF's Juliet Barbara will manage the Wikimedia blog, in
> > > close collaboration with Ed Erhart. As many of you know, Ed is the
> former
> > > editor-in-chief of the Wikipedia Signpost and has now joined our team
> for
> > > the summer. I've worked with him for nearly a month now and find him
> > > uniquely qualified for this project. Starting today, please contact
> them
> > > directly with any questions about the blog (they are Cc:d on this
> > message).
> > >
> > > After June 30, you can reach me at  — or
> follow
> > > me on Twitter ( @fabriceflorin ) or on my blog (
> > http://fabriceflorin.com
> > > ).
> > >
> > > The last three years have been an incredible experience for me, and I
> am
> > > grateful for all that I have learned from so many of you. You’ve been
> an
> > > inspiration to me and I have many fond memories of our time together. I
> > > wish you all the best with the next chapter of the Wikimedia movement
> and
> > > can’t wait to see what you’ll come up with next.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > >
> > > Fabrice
> > >
> > > ___
> > >
> > > Fabrice Florin
> > > Movement Communications Manager
> > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > >
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF)
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Leiter Kommunikation
> > Head of Communications
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > Tel. (030) 219 158 260
> >
> > http://wikimedia.de 
> >
> > Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu der
> > Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
> > Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
> unter
> > der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> > Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What is the wikipedia http API address now?

[Richard Farmbrough]

All on-wiki discussion agrees that the http service has been
unceremoniously dumped.  Various reasons are given: HSTS won't allow you to
access it (not quite true) and that it would allow SSL Stripping attacks
(almost totally false).



On 20 June 2015 at 13:43, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) 
wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Yuri  wrote:
>
> > Now all previously http URLs redirect to https.
> > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Main_page also still mentions the old
> > http address that now redirects.
> >
> > What is the new purely http API address?
> >
>
> I don't think there is one.
>
> --
> Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
> Software Engineer
> Wikimedia Foundation
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Printed Wikipedia is go!

[Richard Farmbrough]

I toyed with this idea some years ago when I was working for a short-run
large-document printing company.  We regularly produced 160,000 page
documents (20 copies).  With a suitable font Wikipedia's then 1 million
articles would have been a cinch.

On 17 June 2015 at 20:42, David Gerard  wrote:

> On 17 June 2015 at 20:39, Risker  wrote:
>
> > I am surprised at how many people outside of my "Wikipedia" life have
> > brought this to my attention today.
> > I agree the "Buy Now" option is probably not the best bet here, but there
> > is a tiny part of me that wouldn't mind getting a volume that includes an
> > article I've done a lot of work on or one that includes some form of my
> > username.  I can imagine the subjects of some of our biographical
> > articles thinking the same way.  Who knows, this might actually sell...
>
>
>
> I find myself feeling much more positive towards this project than the
> likes of Books LLC.
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect's first birthday

[Richard Farmbrough]

Using it for legal disputes is poor form.  We had legal disputes before, 
and managed them with "office actions".  If you don't trust the admins 
not to  purposefully post libel or copyvios, then super-protecting a 
page or two won't help.


Moreover it implies that the Foundation can or will take action in these 
matters to override the community, which opens them up to charges of 
discrimination, favouritism, nepotism, cowardice, corruption or at least 
stupidity.



On 11/08/2015 19:36, John Lewis wrote:
Yes. It was used a few months ago to prevent editing the Germany item 
on Wikidata due to a very serious breaking issue. Also on several 
pages following legal disputes. Superprotect in my opinion if used 
correctly is an essential tool which can prevent legal and technical 
issues that can in theory cause wide disruption. John 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect's first birthday

[Richard Farmbrough]

Not a good example.   This could be a special page.

On 11/08/2015 21:56, Risker wrote:

There are situations where not even the administrators of a particular
community should be allowed to edit a page. A good example would be the
pages that describe the copyright and licensing of Wikimedia products.
Individual communities cannot change that (it applies globally), and
individual administrators should not modify it. If there is a problem with
translation, that needs to be brought to the attention of the WMF, because
there may be a similar problem with translation elsewhere.

There are also some examples currently being discussed on the Wikitech-L
list that may require significantly elevated levels of protection above
'all administrators on Project ABC', although they may call for another
level of protection that can be customizable to allowing a much smaller
group or specific individuals to be the only editors.

Risker/Anne




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect's first birthday

[Richard Farmbrough]

No community would want to change documents issued by the WMF, if it 
did, the stewards would be crazy to do so.


This is reaching.

Why?

On 11/08/2015 22:34, Risker wrote:

However, stewards under their current
process could very well find themselves in a situation where a "community"
wants to do something, like change the (global) terms of use or the
(global) interpretation of copyright policyat which point their current
rules put them smack in the middle of the global community and WMF board
that approved a global policy, and a local community that wants to have its
own.



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect's first birthday

[Richard Farmbrough]

Thanks for the (single) use case: Trouble is it just  pushes the 
question further down the road.


"inadequate for some compelling reason "

On 13/08/2015 09:25, Pine W wrote:

A*few*  legitimate use cases could be:

*Superprotection by stewards of legally or technically sensitive pages, to
prevent damage caused by a hijacked admin account. The theory here is that
admin accounts are more numerous than steward accounts, so the liklihood of
a successful admin account hijack may be higher. Superprotection would
proactively limit possible damage. Admins doing routine maintenance work,
or taking actions with community consent, could simply make a request for a
temporary lift of superprotect by a steward or ask a steward to make an
edit themselves.

*Upon community request, superprotection of pages by a steward where those
pages are the subject of wheel-warring among local admins.

*Superprotection of a page by a steward for legal reasons at the request of
WMF Legal, for example if a page is the subject of a legal dispute and
normal full protection is inadequate for some  compelling reason.

None of this is an endorsement of WMF's first use of superprotect. I would
prefer that if superprotect continues to exist as a tool, that it be in the
hands of the stewards and not WMF directly.

Pine



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Updating the typography on all Wikimedia sites

[Richard Farmbrough]

Possibly we could re-address the accessibility issues around using 
smaller than (the wiki's) normal font for references and other matter.
I have had difficulty in getting Wikipedians to stop offering me 
personal solutions to this issue, and simply use the standard font 
size.  On the other hand I am a little out of touch, so perhaps this has 
been addressed.  If, the proportion of the population who have 
difficulty with small print is probably one of the largest facing any 
accessibility issue, so we should take it seriously.


On 27/03/2014 03:15, Fæ wrote:

As someone with "aging" eyesight, I am pleased to find readability
changes that make it easier to follow a large screen full of text
without having to override font styles in my browser or tablet.




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] simple and effective creation process for chapters

[Richard Farmbrough]

I am involved with a charity that sets up regional charities.  We have a 
nominally clean procedure which can set up a charity in a few days.  
However a constantly changing legislative and regulatory environment can 
send the whole system back to square one.


When we are dealing with a new legislative and regulatory environment 
for each chapter, the plan for a cookie-cutter approach is likely to 
founder at the first hurdle.   Moreover cultural and demographic 
differences are even more diversifying.


Regulatory constraints limit the sense in which a chapter, if it is to 
benefit from charitable, non-profit or tax exempt status, can be a 
membership organisation.


On the other hand a simple "association" may meet most of the needs of a 
chapter, and they should not be weighed down with excess regulatory 
burden if that is all they need.


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Unacceptable -- CheckUser abuse gone uninvestigated

[Richard Farmbrough]

I have to say that there is an unnecessary lack of transparency which seems
to get worse.  In or around May 2012 I emailed the audit committee on EN:WP
to ask about checkuser run on my account and got a polite and informative
reply.   In or around May 2014 an identically worded query got a polite
refusal.

Note, incidentally that those who run checkuser are often working from the
UK, and are quite likely under a legal obligation make this information
available.


On 3 August 2014 03:15, John Mark Vandenberg  wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Nathan  wrote:
> >>..
> > I could be wrong, but it was my understanding that the logs are
> maintained
> > indefinitely but the data is retained for only 3 months (i.e. the results
> > of the check that is recorded in the log).
>
> The checkuser log are kept indefinitely, but it only records what
> usernames/IPs that were checked (i.e. the query), and the reason given
> by the checkuser for the check.
>
> It does not record the results of the query.
>
> That said, the sequence of checks run by a CU often creates a
> permanent record in the private CU log of an persons likely IP
> addresses.  e.g. the log may contain a check on an account, with a
> reason given, followed by checks on IPs, with the same reason logged.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Richard Farmbrough]

It is very disheartening to see that active members of the community have
been Borged by the Foundation, and all tell the same story, albeit with
different levels of enthusiasm.

Quite possibly there are issues over configuration pages, but to implement
a super-protection feature *in the middle of a dispute* is ham-fisted at
best, and a blatant power grab at worst.

Many less extreme alternatives exist, and good reasons for maintaining
the *status
quo* are also not hard to find.

Since this is undoubtedly a fire, the fire-fighting steps that should be
taken immediately are:

1 Un-super-protect the page.

2 Apologise to the community

3 Give an undertaking not to use superprotect except in a clear emergency
(though I can't think of one that would justify its use) - or disable the
feature

4 Engage with the community to discuss superprotect.

Once this discussion is concluded, then and only then should a discussion
about media-viewer be entered into, meanwhile the community consensus
should be respected.

And Magnus - saying X number of people does not represent the community is
all very well,  provided that there is a mechanism for gaining a  more
representative sample - and it has been used.

All the best,  Rich Farmbrough


On 12 August 2014 19:12, Magnus Manske  wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Erik Moeller  wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > These changes will need to be carefully tested/validated. If you want
> > to take a look at an early early (!) prototype (!!), see
> > http://multimedia-alpha.wmflabs.org/wiki/Lightbox_demo , but please
> > note that anything but the basic view experience is placeholder right
> > now (as is the "Details" icon etc.), and the caption-above-the-fold is
> > not implemented yet. We've looked at some of this with folks at
> > Wikimania, and the community feedback there was very positive. But
> > like I said, give us a bit more time on this.
> >
>
> This looks much better! (though it appears to have problems with PNGs...)
>
>
> >
> > In answer to your query regarding how we communicated about this,
> > please note that we posted the following at the beginning of the poll:
> >
> >
> https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_Diskussion:Meinungsbilder/Medienbetrachter&diff=prev&oldid=132469014
> >
> >
> Thanks Erik, I somehow missed this. It is indeed ample notification.
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Clarification by Lila Tretikov about MediaViewer

[Richard Farmbrough]

The community too is asking for kindness and consideration.  Riding
roughshod over community consensus does not equate to kindness, or even
wisdom, unless it it that of Niccolò Machiavelli!

The Mission Statement of the Foundation says


*The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage people
around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free
license  or in the public
domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.*
If the WMF would remember the word "empower" we would not get these
issues.   The Foundation needs to empower the community to disseminate
content not dictate to the community how content will be disseminated.

All the best,  Rich Farmbrough.


On 13 August 2014 13:01, Thehelpfulone  wrote:

> Forwarding on request.
>
> --
> Thehelpfulone
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thehelpfulone
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> > From: Ad Huikeshoven 
> > Date: 13 August 2014 12:40:14 BST
> > To: wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Clarification by Lila Tretikov about MediaViewer
> >
> > Dear fellow Wikipedians and Wikimedians,
> >
> > Your work in creating the awesome thing Wikipedia is very much
> appreciated and you're all recognized for contributing towards it's
> success. Last weekend I have been to Wikimania. I really enjoyed the
> presentation by Fabrice Florin about A Culture of Kindness [1]. One of the
> slide contains a picture of Jimmy Wales holding a sheet of paper on which
> he has written 'be kind to everyone, including the annoying ones'.
> >
> > There have been multiple threads on this list with many postings about
> actions on the German Wikipedia with respect to MediaViewer. On meta Lila
> Tretikov has posted several remarks including an additional clarification
> [2], which I copy below:
> >
> > 
> > * Our overall communication, design, prioritization, testing, roll-out
> mechanisms and general product development practices are insufficient and
> must be brought on-par with our user’s expectations. We are not planning
> any new major deployments until some of those basic improvements are put
> into place. This will be done in the open; it is fundamental and urgent.
> I've touched on it at Wikimania.
> > * We are not removing MV.  It has been in production for months. Its
> removal will cause more problems and confusion for our users.  We will hold
> ourselves accountable to getting it to the level of quality that is
> expected of the top site.
> > * We are working to post next steps to clarify development and
> deployment process including rights and responsibilities; you can expect
> more information in coming days.
> > * I encourage you to help us improve our process as a whole as well as
> this specific feature by offering your time, advice, and collaboration. We
> will be engaging you on it. Please refrain from making unassisted changes
> to  the feature’s configuration.
> > 
> >
> > What Fabrice and Jimmy ask for is to be kind. What I would like to
> express is that many of the postings about MediaViewer do annoy me, and
> some are very annoying. What I do ask of my fellow Wikipedians is to
> continue to contribute to Wikipedia in a kind way, to pay attention to what
> Lila has posted on meta and which I copied above.
> >
> > Some of you might be curious to learn to know the ideas of Lila. She
> made a presentation at Wikimania, which can be viewed on line [3]. Please
> collaborate in the development of processes in a kind way. Thank you.
> > ---
> > [1]
> https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/A_Culture_of_Kindness
> > [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ALilaTretikov&diff=9501584&oldid=9501543
> > [3] http://new.livestream.com/wikimania/saturday2014
> > --
> > Ad Huikeshoven
> >
> > Bestuurslid / Board member Wikimedia Nederland
> > Internationaal / International Affairs
> > Educatieprogramma / Education Program
> >
> > tel.(+31) (0)70 3608510
> > mob. (+31) (0)6 40293574
> >
> > Steun vrije kennis! Kijk op wikimedia.nl
> > Postadres:  Bezoekadres:
> > Postbus 167Mariaplaats 3
> > 3500 AD  Utrecht Utrecht
> >
> > ABNAMRO NL33 ABNA 0497164833 - Kamer van Koophandel 17189036
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Richard Farmbrough]

Erik said:

>We are very open to continuing the discussion about how the feature
>should be configured, how it should be improved, and how it should be
>integrated in the site experience

The message that is being given, though is, to quote Mathilda "I'm smart;
you're dumb; I'm big, you're little; *I'm right, you're wrong*, and there's
nothing you can do about it."

And this continues in this post.  Assuming for example that those who do
not opt-out "support" the media viewer.

Let me just make my position on the media viewer clear, since I am being
uncharacteristically vocal on this subject.  I am undecided, but I think it
is probably a good thing.  However when I hear respected communities saying
there are functional and legal problems, I am inclined to believe them.  I
support therefore the "not-yet" faction.  Personally I find it irritating
(and at the same time potentially very cool), but I keep it on because I
want to see what the bulk of our readers see.

So there are interconnecting layers of issues here - and I think they are
clear, but I will lay them out in case we are talking at cross purposes.

1. Erik's actions.  This sort of thing happens a lot on on-line communities
(and elsewhere - see the Crimea!)  and I did not get too excited about the
socially inept blundering on en:WP.  But to repeat the same script on
German Wikipedia within a few days shows a lack of wisdom unbecoming to
"Deputy Director".

2. The specific question of Media Viewer.  That I believe can be resolved,
and is all about "not yet", it should never have been allowed to cause
drama. I would like to see some metrics for the value delivered by the
Media Viewer, though, rather than "Flikr does it, it must be good".  I am
disappointed after a mostly unusable Visual Editor was released with
content breaking bugs that another project is being forced down the same
path - Erik's comment "That's no way to develop software" rings rather
hollow in this context.

3.  The ongoing question of software development.  The WMF is supposed to "to
empower and engage" the communities to  disseminate content "effectively
and globally."  It is not supposed to run with its own agenda.  Bugs and
feature requests by the community are allowed to stand unattended for years
- one was closed (WONTFIX) because of an off-hand comment made by a dev on
a mailing list!  Meanwhile "nice to have" features absorb apparently huge
amounts of financial and staff resoruces. In the style re-work, extensive
feedback was solicited and provided - and ignored when it didin't suit.
(Notably a/b testing, mixing serif and sans, and using typefaces where the
glyphs are more distinct)

4. The culture at the Foundation needs to be more focussed on collaborative
and collegial work with the communities. The Foundation  is an essential
part of the Movement, if it did not exist it would be necessary to invent
it.  However it is not the senior partner, certainly not in terms of age or
resource, and, due to the open licensing, not in content.  To work
effectively with the community the Foundation needs to consider the
community as its customer, be responsive to its needs and wants, in this
way it can deliver on its charitable objectives.

Note: This does not mean a namby-pamby relationship, but rather a robust
one, where evidence based decisions can be made jointly and collegialy.
Indeed one value add from having an organisation like the WMF is the
resource to gather significant evidence on usability, readability,
accessibility, clarity, interrogability and so forth.


On 14 August 2014 14:35, David Gerard  wrote:

> On 14 August 2014 13:56, David Cuenca  wrote:
>
> > It would be more sensible to let contributors participate in the tech
> > roadmap in more formal and empowered way than now, because without that
> > early participation there is no possibility for later consensus.
>
>
> A pattern we see over and over is that the developers talk at length
> about what they're working on in several venues, then it's released
> and people claiming to speak for the community claim they were not
> adequately consulted. Pretty much no matter what steps were taken to
> do so, and what new steps are taken to do so. Because there's always
> someone who claims their own lack of interest is someone else's fault.
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board statement on the Media Viewer roll out

[Richard Farmbrough]

This is all very nice "going forward", but it completely misses the salient
points.

1. It is an egregious social blunder to act as Erik has done - he
apologised (sort of) on  the English Wiki, he should at the very least have
the grace to do so on the German,

2. There are concerns about the MV software breaking attribution (among
other things).  These need to be taken seriously.  I am not familiar with
the detail, but if they are supported by fact the Media VIewer should be
withdrawn until it is fixed. Breaking the law is not what the free content
movement is about.

3. The Mediawiki community are knowledgeable, intelligent and experienced
as a group.  They are not objecting because they are reactionary old farts,
but because there are significant issues.  It is standard software
development practice to have a roll-back plan in place in case of just such
an event.  It is not and should not be seen as a "defeat" or "climbdown" to
disable a new component while  improvements are made.  It is a learning
opportunity.

4. Superprotect. The suggestion that all software on the projects needs to
go through code review is absurd posturing that points up the cultural
difficulties.  If there are features that should not be accesible to
Admins, then the software should not expose them.  Traditionally, though,
such features have resulted in a divisive environment with chages to
configuration requested and denied by devs on the grounds that "we know
best".

5. Development.  Note that the community does not have head-to-head clashes
with legal, financial and other parts of the Foundation. The development
team includes some of the best and the brightest of Wikipedians recruited
over the years.  I have had the pleasure of talking to several of them at
Wikimanias, and despite the fact that they are lovely people, there is a
sense that they have become increasingly out of touch with the  community,
and convinced that they are the guardians of the one-true-flame.  I might
cite the developer  who changed his mind three times during the Hifa
Wikimania over the solution to the "parser function" problem.  His sole
decision  resulted in considerable effort being directed in a way that took
years to deliver a result, when what we were asking for could have been
delivered in ten minutes.

6.Mission statement. The mission is to "encourage and empower" the
community.  Not to bully and coerce it. I believe that during the time the
WMF has turned its gaze outwards, to attempt (mostly unsuccessfully) to
grow and diversify the editor base it lost focus on its mission.  We need
to refocus so that the WMF can encourage and empower the community
efficiently.  We need to ask the difficult questions on Gender Gap, on
content, on translation, on advocacy, on wiki-culture - and yes on HCI
too.  We need to work with academic partners, talented volunteers,
contractors and staff  to build evidence on which to base our decisions.
We need to build the software development structure Lila talks of.  We need
to engage in content building strategies.  All this will be a thousand
times as fruitful with an "encourage and empower" dynamic than  the present
confrontational one.

All the best, Rich Farmbrough.



On 14 August 2014 15:00, Manuel Schneider 
wrote:

> Hi Jan-Bart,
>
> thanks for this statement.
> Thanks to all on the board and Lila working on this, the improvement of
> our website and trying to recover the trust of our community.
>
> /Manuel
>
> Am 14.08.2014 15:42, schrieb Jan-Bart de Vreede:
> > Some of you have asked the Board and its individual members for
> feedback. Some of us are already in conversation with you or are planning
> to answer on different pages. This is our general common statement:
>
> [...]
>
> --
> Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
> Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Coming to a wiki near you

[Richard Farmbrough]

There are 105 bugs open for Media Viewer.  To my mind that is not a product
that is ready to be delivered to 500,000,000 users, delivering  52.5
billion bugs!  (And that's just the ones we know about!)

But even if it was, the fact  that a project community has asked for it to
be opt-in should be respected by the developers.  The idea that  software
developers control the roll-out of their own software is "no way to develop
software"  User acceptance testing was invented, what, 50 or 60 years ago?


On 15 August 2014 14:45, Dan Garry  wrote:

> On 15 August 2014 06:08, Todd Allen  wrote:
> >
> > Developing for mobile is nice and should continue, but desktop is far
> from
> > dead. I don't even try to edit from mobile; I want my real keyboard and
> > monitor, not the crappy on screen one and 3" display.
> >
>
> This is a false dilemma. The WMF does not have any plans to stop developing
> desktop features. On the contrary, the VisualEditor team recently changed
> scope to be the Editing team in part so that the scope of their team also
> included maintaining the wikitext editor on desktop.
>
> Dan
>
> --
> Dan Garry
> Associate Product Manager, Mobile Apps
> Wikimedia Foundation
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Coming to a wiki near you

[Richard Farmbrough]

And that is a common community complaint, games communities, social
communities, and content communities.

They all say "fix the bugs before working on new stuff."  Developers prefer
working on new stuff, managers prefer working on new stuff. Where's the
kudos from making things bug-free?  But that is what is needed.


On 17 August 2014 13:48, Comet styles  wrote:

> yes but mediawiki is a software, not an "add-on" or as the kids say
> these days, an "App" which is what Media Viewer is. Enforcing
> something with more than a 100 bugs (and counting) is indeed not a
> very super idea..Fix the bugs or atleast half of them and maybe then
> try "enforcing them" (as WMF ignores community decisions)..
>
> On 8/17/14, Chad Horohoe  wrote:
> > On Aug 17, 2014 6:49 AM, "Richard Farmbrough" 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> There are 105 bugs open for Media Viewer.  To my mind that is not a
> > product
> >> that is ready to be delivered to 500,000,000 users, delivering  52.5
> >> billion bugs!  (And that's just the ones we know about!)
> >>
> >
> > MediaWiki itself has 4893 open bugs. Guess we need to start over so we
> can
> > write bug-free software.
> >
> > Except that's not how it works, absolute bug counts are a pretty useless
> > metric.
> >
> > -Chad
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> --
> Cometstyles
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Coming to a wiki near you

[Richard Farmbrough]

Lets straighten a few things out

1. Of course I don't think that bug counting is an accurate metric - and we
are all aware that Bugzilla contains other "items".  Nonetheless to pretend
that everything is rosy with MV is facile.

2. Specifically it appears that MV breaks CC-BY-SA-3.0.  Details on
Bugzilla.

3. But this is not really about MV.  It is about working with the
community.  The mission statement for the Foundation says "encourage and
empower" not "command and control".  There are good reasons for this, which
have been touched on in various places.

4. A culture change is needed, and there is little point in debating
specifics (except to add them to a list of what not to do) unless the
Foundation accepts that this needs to happen.

5. Moreover engaging in personalities within the community do not move
things forward, indeed they devalue the overall debate.


On 18 August 2014 13:55, Risker  wrote:

> On 18 August 2014 03:53, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
>
> > Risker, some replies below:
> >
> > 
>
>
>  As I stated in my response, although the WMF failed to predict that this
> would be a hot issue, I predicted it clearly in February, and so did
> another longtime community member. (If anybody wants to see that other
> piece, let me know -- I now have permission to share it, actually an IRC
> log, not an email.)
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:
> LilaTretikov&diff=9512960&oldid=9512915
>
> (and the reference link:
> https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?diff=907392
> )
>
> Wow, Pete.  You predict something will be rejected by the community, and
> identify a list of concerns.  Several months later, you apply the code that
> applies a community "rejection".  This brings the term "self-fulfilling
> prophecy" to a whole new level.  Just wow.
>
> Risker/Anne
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New movement org?

[Richard Farmbrough]

Note that while it *is* a trademark issue, it isn't *just* a trademark
issue.


On 21 August 2014 18:44, Gregory Varnum  wrote:

> Thank you Richard for bringing this to everyone's attention.
>
> So folks know, WMF Legal and the Affiliations Committee are investigating
> and will be reaching out to the group soon.
>
> Thanks!
> -greg aka varnent
> Wikimedia Affiliations Committee Vice Chair
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Richard Symonds <
> richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > Thanks all!
> >
> > I have passed this over to WMF legal to deal with as it's a trademark
> > issue.
> >
> > Richard Symonds
> > Wikimedia UK
> > 0207 065 0992
> >
> > Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
> > Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
> > Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A
> 4LT.
> > United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
> > movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
> > operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
> >
> > *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
> > over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
> >
> >
> > On 21 August 2014 17:31, Risker  wrote:
> >
> > > On 21 August 2014 12:21, James Forrester 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 21 August 2014 09:13, Nathan  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Richard, any links to where you found this information?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ​The ever-excellent OpenCorporates has its entry:
> > > >
> > > > https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_mi/71656Y
> > > >
> > > > … leading to the official US state of Michigan's entry:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.dleg.state.mi.us/bcs_corp/dt_corp.asp?id_nbr=71656Y
> > > >
> > > > No information about the officers, sadly, just a filing office.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Incorporation documents here:
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.dleg.state.mi.us/bcs_corp/image.asp?FILE_TYPE=ELF&FILE_NAME=D201408\2014224\E0091608.TIF
> > >
> > > President:  Scott Perry
> > > Vice President:  Ann Perry
> > > Secretary:  Danielle Lewis
> > >
> > > Someone else can figure out how to copy/paste.
> > >
> > > Risker/Anne
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Access by Wikimedia volunteers to WMF records about them

[Richard Farmbrough]

But if the entity refuses to answer, one has limited recourse, especially
if that entity is American, or trans-Atlantic.


On 24 August 2014 16:50, Federico Leva (Nemo)  wrote:

> If you don't know of a policy which gives you the right to ask
> something, why ask that something?
> Instead, ask something you know you have the right to ask; for instance,
> EU citizens have the right, by privacy law, to ask what PII an entity
> has about them.
>
> Nemo
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] editor retention initiatives

[Richard Farmbrough]

I have coincidentally raised the question of fair-use images for living
people at the Gender Gap Taskforce talk page. Perhaps this is something we
shoudl take to the policy talk page?


On 26 August 2014 14:24, Tim Davenport  wrote:

> David Goodman has this exactly right — new volunteers (as opposed to casual
> contributors) aren't made with templates of cookies or beer, they are
> generally made one at a time, with personal attention and personal
> assistance. Teahouse is one of the best ideas of the last five years, being
> a place where newcomers can go to ask specific questions. Mentoring
> programs is another very correct step.
>
> I'm currently working with a buddy who is getting into it. Wiki markup gunk
> isn't a big problem for him; he's about 40 years old and has been around
> html enough that it doesn't put him off. Footnoting he initially found
> difficult, but I taught him how to do it long form rather than using layout
> clogging templates, so that might have added an hour or two to the learning
> curve. Still: not that difficult and he already has the knack of it — and
> once you learn that, it's all very simple.
>
> I'm going to write him a couple thousand word email on linking today.
> That's all pretty self-evident.
>
> We had lunch yesterday and I explained to him the way that some topics
> which interest him (alternative medicine) are going to be battleground
> areas in which he really must be a master of NPOV; while other interests,
> relating to popular culture and sports, are less intense, with rawer and
> worse articles standing that need Tender Loving Care.
>
> He's enthusiastic about WP, and there is absolutely no substitute for that.
> That is the thing that is missing in college students doing class projects.
> My experience thus far with them is that they dive in at the 11th hour, do
> minimally decent work necessary to complete the assignment, ask zero
> questions, and then vanish.
>
> Serious, longterm editors are made one at a time, I think. It starts with
> personal attention. It requires someone to explain editing techniques and
> (just as importantly) WP culture and policies and tour-guiding them through
> all the policy pages and various backstage aspects of WP.
>
> It also involves something we have totally ignored so far: making sure they
> have something to do: assigning projects."You like this band? Dig up more
> sources, flesh it out. Oh, your grandpa was a pro athlete and already has a
> page? Dig up some news stories on his career... Write about his
> teammates... Hey, this article on the NFL championship game he played in is
> pretty terrible, why not see if you can make it better?
>
> Another unspoken problem is photo rights, which is (1) confusing to start
> with; (2) subject to one of the worst decisions ever, the choice to use
> free files rather than to make use of American fair use legal doctrine; (3)
> populated by anal retentive volunteers who delete first and ask questions
> never, engage only with templates, work too fast, and who in many cases I
> suspect take malicious joy in their work. I know that that was the aspect
> of WP that alienated me the worst as a newcomer. It still does.
>
> So, WMF sorts: remember that this is a slow process and that there are no
> magical software solutions. Creating new Very Active Editors takes
> motivated candidates and volunteers willing to take newcomers under their
> wings.
>
> Tim Davenport
> Corvallis, OR
> "Carrite" on WP /// "Randy from Boise" on WPO
>
>
> DAVID GOOMAN WROTE:
> >>Perhaps the best way of doing this is the admittedly laborious method
> of personally communicating with new editors who seem promising
> and encouraging them and offering to help them continue. The key word in
> this is "personally". It cannot be effectively done with  wikilove
> messages, and certainly not with anything that looks like a template.
> Template welcomes are essentially in the same class as mail or
> web "personalized"advertisements.  What works is to show that you actually
> read and appreciated what they are doing, to the extent you wanted to
> write something specific.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps regarding WMF<->community disputes about deployments

[Richard Farmbrough]

Legal position:

I have seen it claimed by legal and repeated here by Erik that the
"reasonableness" criteria means that we do not have to worry about the
CCBYSA-3.0 clause that says all copyright holders need equal attribution.
This is simply not so:

"The credit required by this Section 4(c) may be implemented *in any
reasonable manner; provided, however, that *in the case of a Adaptation or
Collection,* at a minimum such credit will appear*, if a credit for all
contributing authors of the Adaptation or Collection appears, then as part
of these credits and* in a manner at least as prominent as the credits for
the other contributing authors*."

There is no wriggle room here. * provided however that* means the following
is compulsory, and not subject to the lenience of the previous phraseology.




On 31 August 2014 16:59, Yann Forget  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thank you Erik for your mail. It shows that the WMF is willing to
> discuss rather than to impose its solution.
>
> I am really shocked that the dispute reaches that level of
> confrontation, and although some community members have a hard stance,
> this is largely due to WMF actions, specially the creation of the
> "superprotect" right. This is the worst possible step the WMF could
> make to find a solution for this issue.
>
> Initially I was quite neutral about the MediaWiever, but I became
> increasingly skeptical. IMO it is hardly a priority, even for readers.
> Even if I am a long term contributor of Wikimedia projects, I am also
> a heavy reader of Wikipedia. I think that if a feature is refused in
> masse for the most active contributors, there is something wrong
> either in the feature itself, or in the way it is proposed to the
> projects. The WMF can certainly bring useful new additions in term of
> software development, but the implementation has to be done in a
> partnership with volunteer contributors. I cannot understand that the
> WMF in spite of its multi-million dollars budget is not able to
> convince volunteer contributors that the new feature is beneficial to
> the projects, either because it is technically very good, or that even
> with some shortcomings, it would improve the reading experience.
>
> I am quite willing to test beta software, and I think there is no
> urgency to impose the MediaWiever now to everybody. I could be done
> after some time, when all issues have been sorted out. In term of
> media management, the most urgent and important thing is to fix the
> UploadWizard. Viewing images with Mediawiki may not be optimal, but it
> is not broken. The UploadWizard is broken.
>
> Regards,
>
> Yann
>
> 2014-08-20 0:42 GMT+05:30 Erik Moeller :
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > This is a response to Martin's note here:
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-August/073936.html
> >
> > .. and also a more general update on the next steps regarding disputes
> > about deployments. As you may have seen, Lila has also posted an
> > update to her talk page, here:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LilaTretikov#Working_Together
> >
> > I want to use this opportunity to respond to Martin's and other
> > people's criticisms, and to talk about next steps from WMF’s
> > perspective following discussions with Lila and the team. I’m also
> > sending a copy of this note to all the stewards, to better involve
> > them in the process going forward.
> >
> > I am -- genuinely -- sorry that this escalation occurred. We would
> > have preferred to avoid it.
> >
> > I would like to recap how we find ourselves in this situation: As
> > early as July, we stated that the Wikimedia Foundation reserves the
> > right to determine the final configuration of the MediaViewer feature,
> > and we explicitly included MediaWiki: namespace hacks in that
> > statement. [1] When an admin implemented a hack to disable
> > MediaViewer, another local admin reverted the edit. The original admin
> > reinstated it. We then reverted it with a clear warning that we may
> > limit editability of the page. [2] The original admin reinstated the
> > hack. This is when we protected the page.
> >
> > Because all admins have equal access to the MediaWiki: namespace,
> > short of desysopping, there are few mechanisms to actually prevent
> > edit wars about the user experience for millions of readers.
> > Desysopping actions could have gotten just as messy -- and we felt
> > that waiting for a "better hack" to come along (the likeliest eventual
> > outcome of doing nothing) or disabling the feature ourselves would not
> > be any better, either from a process or outcome standpoint.
> >
> > Our processes clearly need to be improved to avoid these situations in
> > the future. We recognize that simply rejecting a community request
> > rather than resolving a conflict together is not the right answer.
> > We’ve been listening to feedback, and we’ve come to the following
> > conclusions:
> >
> > - We intend to undertake a review of our present processes immediately
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps regarding WMF<->community disputes about deployments

[Richard Farmbrough]

What is irritating about the ACTRIAL scenario, was that it was a well
defined (6 month) test.

It might have worked, it might not have worked.  But we would have known.
We would have had solid comparators.

Most of what we do (WMF and community) has no control to establish whether
it works.

To be clear, I am against preventing article creation by IPs let alone
non-autoconfirmed users. But this trial might well have provided compelling
evidence one way or the other.

The dismissal as a "we know better" was a bad thing, but not uncommon on
Bugzilla.




On 2 September 2014 01:06, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> I hope that's not the feature Philippe meant, but maybe. For my clients and
> students I think it's generally caused more confusion than it's solved,
> since now they have an additional layer of bureaucracy to navigate (AFC).
> Is there any data suggesting that's been a net improvement for new users?
>
> Pete
> On Sep 1, 2014 4:38 PM, "Risker"  wrote:
>
> > Wasn't the creation of the DRAFT namespace at least in part a response to
> > concerns raised at ACTRIAL, in particular new, poorly developed articles
> > showing up in mainspace?
> >
> > Risker/Anne
> >
> >
> > On 1 September 2014 19:08, Joe Decker  wrote:
> >
> > > This, to the best of my knowledge, represents the entirety of the WMF's
> > > response to ACTRIAL.  To the extent that there was additional feedback
> > > given, it was not given at WP:ACTRIAL, nor any other venue I am aware
> of.
> > >
> > > https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30208
> > >
> > > --Joe
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Todd Allen 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > That's the issue I cited above. You haven't heard more complaints,
> > > because
> > > > the complaint was pointless the first time and took a massive effort
> to
> > > > produce.
> > > >
> > > > The underlying issue isn't fixed. We're still drowning in crap and
> spam
> > > > from people who never have the slightest intent of editing helpfully,
> > and
> > > > those who are newbies who genuinely want to help but need guidance
> get
> > > > caught in the crossfire aimed at the vandals and spammers. It is
> > > relatively
> > > > rare that when a genuinely new editor's first edit is a creation, it
> is
> > > the
> > > > creation of an appropriate article on a workable subject, and that's
> > > > normally more by dumb luck than them having actual knowledge that
> they
> > > > should do it.
> > > >
> > > > So, consider that a complaint. The proposed fix didn't work, and most
> > > > people at the time didn't figure it would work, but it was clearly
> the
> > > best
> > > > we were going to get.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Philippe Beaudette <
> > > > pbeaude...@wikimedia.org
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sep 1, 2014, at 8:45 AM, Todd Allen 
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's contradicted by, among other things, ACTRIAL as mentioned
> > > above.
> > > > > The
> > > > > > en.wp community came to a clear consensus for a major change, and
> > the
> > > > WMF
> > > > > > shrugged and said "Nah, rather not."
> > > > >
> > > > > That's... Not exactly what I remember happening there. What I
> > remember
> > > > was
> > > > > that a pretty good number (~500) of enwiki community members came
> > > > together
> > > > > and agreed on a problem, and one plan for how to  fix it and asked
> > the
> > > > WMF
> > > > > to implement it. The WMF evaluated it, and saw a threat to a basic
> > > > project
> > > > > value. WMF then asked "what's the problem you're actually trying to
> > > > > solve?", and proposed and built a set of tools to directly address
> > that
> > > > > problem without compromising the core value of openness. And it
> seems
> > > to
> > > > > have worked out pretty well because I haven't heard a ton of
> > complaints
> > > > > about that problem since.
> > > > >
> > > > > __
> > > > > Philippe Beaudette
> > > > > Director, Community Advocacy
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > >  ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > 
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Joe Decker
> > > www.joedecker.net
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's fix templates

[Richard Farmbrough]

I have a tool to migrate templates. If anyone has a particular wiki that
needs templates migrating on an as needed basis, please let me know and I
will be happy to help.

On 10 October 2014 02:57, Romaine Wiki  wrote:

> Lua makes editing templates for most users impossible. Perhaps the English
> community has enough users to handle all edit requests for Lua templates,
> most smaller wikis have too less users to do that. It is not just creating
> a Lua template, but also that the local communities on various wikis need
> to be able to maintain those templates when an update is needed or a
> changed is wished for. Depending on other projects is a bad scenario which
> is not an acceptable solution.
>
> I also do not see why it is considered easier... it is actually not easier.
> The general rule which is applied for the wikis I am active is that almost
> all templates should be editable by the majority of the community and we
> should not rely on a small number of users with programming skills. And
> learning an extra method for editing templates is the other way round,
> which absolutely does not make editing templates easier but creates an
> extra doorstep for users to do simple updates.
>
> Another general rule applied is KISS: if we can make it simple such is
> recommended over a complex template with little or no extra functionality.
> With a complex template, the first question to be asked is if a complex
> template is really needed. In most cases it is not. Problem solved.
>
> Romaine
>
>
> 2014-10-10 1:40 GMT+02:00 Matthew Flaschen :
>
> > On 09/02/2014 03:27 PM, pi zero wrote:
> >
> >> The templates are extremely complicated in implementation, which is
> >> irrelevant.  If templates were rejected based on extremely complicated
> >> implementation, that would rule out essentially everything that uses
> >> Scribuntu under the hood.
> >>
> >
> > I don't agree with this.  Scribunto is a new language to learn (Lua), but
> > that language is far easier for complicated work than parser functions
> are
> > for complicated work.
> >
> > Matt Flaschen
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] BBC Open Content

[Richard Farmbrough]

Well, actually we don't know it works for us. Our stuff is in early 
draft, and re-use of text is already making life pretty difficult 
already (checking for copyvios, notability, and clones in repressive 
regimes (Baidu Baike) ).  We  are also causing breaks in attribution 
chains every time we delete something that is mirrored, and the case law 
is still patchy to say the least.


On 10/04/2012 17:33, David Gerard wrote:


"But we can't just lose control of our stuff!"
"It works for us. You called me, after all."






___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such

[Richard Farmbrough]

Apart from using a vandalized version of [[Pyramid]] and a graphically 
horrendous capital I, there are some nice elements in a generally good 
layout.


The key improvement needed (and WAP has made this evident to more 
people) is to stop wasting real estate on more and more nested top bars 
and side bars.  Even with a modern 15.2 inch laptop many pages have 
threir contents squeezed enough by the OS, browser and MW bars that 
there is little room left for infoboxes, TOCs, pictures, tables  and 
navboxes.


There is also a desire to "visualise" that may be applied where it is 
not needed.   We do not need the interface to show us the relation 
between the number of articles on arts and the number of articles on 
humanities - this is not necessarily a useful statistic for researchers, 
and even less so for readers.




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Slate article on Gibraltar

[Richard Farmbrough]

To give some idea of how poor the research for the writing is:

"/This article originally and incorrectly referred to Gibraltar as an 
island. It is a peninsula."/


Were they to correct the rest of the errors in the article there would 
be very little of the original left.


Just as an example:

" Wikimedia U.K. (which controls all Wikipedia platforms in Britain)"

Arguably since there are no Wikipedia platforms in Britain this could be 
said to be true. But it is misleading or nonsensical at best.


On 20/09/2012 19:25, Richard Symonds wrote:

User:Panyd, who spotted the start of this whole incident on DYK, gave an
interview with Slate magazine, which she's been very misquoted in and is a
little upset about. She just emailed the UK list explaining her thoughts on
all this, so I'm sharing them here:
*


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] (semi-OT) Open access "catastrophic" for Elsevier

[Richard Farmbrough]

On 24/09/2012 03:49, Risker wrote:

the costs of peer review
I have academics complaining to me that they don't get paid for peer 
review, so I'm not sure what these costs are.


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

[Richard Farmbrough]

Free speech in the US is, I believe, generally considered to exclude 
both "fighting words" and "shouting fire in a crowded theatre".


On 20/09/2012 04:56, Fred Bauder wrote:
I think any laws should be couched in terms of damaging foreign 
relations or inciting to riot. I'm not sure they would be 
unconstitutional even in the United States. When the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff is reduced to begging a fundamentalist preacher 
in Florida to cool it, something is out of whack. Fred 
___ Wikimedia-l mailing 
list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikitech-l] #switch limits

[Richard Farmbrough]

Attempts to de-switch templates are resisted at every turn by folk who 
have CS 101. :-P


On 21/09/2012 05:14, Steven Walling wrote:

Template authors on any and every wiki, this one's for you. ;)

-- Forwarded message --
From: Tim Starling 
Date: Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:07 PM
Subject: [Wikitech-l] #switch limits
To: wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org


Over the last week, we have noticed very heavy apache memory usage on
the main Wikimedia cluster. In some cases, high memory usage resulted
in heavy swapping and site-wide performance issues.

After some analysis, we've identified the main cause of this high
memory usage to be geographical data ("données") templates on the
French Wikipedia, and to a lesser extent, the same data templates
copied to other wikis for use on articles about places in Europe.

Here is an example of a problematic template:

<
https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mod%C3%A8le:Donn%C3%A9es_PyrF1-2009&action=edit
That template alone uses 47MB for 37000 #switch cases, and one article
used about 15 similarly sized templates.

The simplest solution to this problem is for the few Wikipedians
involved to stop doing what they are doing, and to remove the template
invocations which have already been introduced. Antoine Musso has
raised the issue on the French Wikipedia's "Bistro" and some of the
worst cases have already been fixed.

To protect site stability, I've introduced a new preprocessor
complexity limit called the "preprocessor generated node count", which
is incremented by about 6 for each #switch case. When the limit is
exceeded, an exception is thrown, preventing the page from being saved
or viewed.

The limit is currently 4 million (~667,000 #switch cases), and it will
soon be reduced to 1.5 million (~250,000 #switch cases). That's a
compromise which allows most of the existing geographical pages to
keep working, but still allows a memory usage of about 230MB.

At some point, we would like to patch PHP upstream to cause memory for
DOM XML trees to be allocated from the PHP request pool, instead of
with malloc(). But to deploy that, we would need to reduce the limit
to the point where the template DOM cache can easily fit in the PHP
memory limit of 128MB.

In the short term, we will be working with the template editors to
ensure that all articles can be viewed with a limit of 1.5 million.
That's not a very viable solution in the long term, so I'd also like
to introduce save-time warnings and tracking categories for pages
which use more than, say, 50% of the limit, to encourage authors to
fix articles without being directly prompted by WMF staff members.

At some point in the future, you may be able to put this kind of
geographical data in Wikidata. Please, template authors, wait
patiently, don't implement your own version of Wikidata using wikitext
templates.

-- Tim Starling



___
Wikitech-l mailing list
wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Big data" benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices)

[Richard Farmbrough]

Yes there is some data on templating in a research paper somewhere, and 
some more on a/b template runs. But the solution is not trivial.  I have 
stuck up for a few editors who appear to be children, suggesting that we 
treat them a little more gently, only to be told that they are in fact 
trolls, pretending to be children, pretending to create obvious socks...


When I joined Wikipedia I was constantly being surprised (and delighted) 
by the unwillingness to block, the willingness to unblock, the IAR ethos 
when something did something obviously good that broke a rule.  I get 
the feeling that many admins still have the same /attitude/ they are 
just to weary to AGF.  UNblock is pretty much always "standard offer or 
nothing" - even people who say  "I see what I did was wrong but.." end 
up with their talk page access removed, or giving up.  This is not about 
the vandalism only accounts, this is people who do something stupid, and 
something in good faith, or make a mistake.  They may well not be ready 
to edit for a few years, but we are building up a resentment about 
Wikipedia that is visible in every comments section of every article 
about Wikipedia "I tired to edit once and it got reverted".   Of course 
there will always be some who won't engage with discussion, but 
fundamentally we should be able to engage these people, rather than 
alienate them.


On 03/01/2013 10:01, Thomas Morton wrote:
It might help; often it is surprising how statistical analysis can 
help narrow the focus of such efforts. For example; it is taken as a 
given that incivility drives away new users, but do we have hard 
statistical evidence to back that up? And if that is a true situation, 
can we identify specifically what uncivil things are driving the most 
editors away (rudeness, templating, etc.). Although please lets do it 
without words like "big data", which makes me squirm :P Tom 


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: "Big data" benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

[Richard Farmbrough]

Yes, of course - why didn't we think of that?  Actually the lack of 
rules and lack of punishments means (meant) it was bloody hard to game 
the  system.  Now we have a calcified set of rules and an oligarchy, 
passive-aggressives have a field day.  Rules-lawyers abound, polite 
requests to the oligarchy are met with insults about "mind-set" and 
other newspeak comments. Meanwhile the 99% of editors that just want to 
edit and the 95% of admins that just want to help the project are 
stymied at every turn, scared to get involved in the processes.  A 
number of years ago the oligarchy destroyed hope (Esperanza) - now the 
Wikiquette noticeboard has gone.  Power is increasingly in fewer and 
fewer hands, a significant number of whom have, over the years, and 
indeed recently, abused that power.


The solution for social problems is socialisation.  We have some great 
exponents of that art in Dennis Brown, Worm That Turned and several 
others.  For those that won't be socialised, the solution is ostracism - 
or blocking as it is known.  Provided this is used with caution on 
community members, and with no longer duration than necessary it is a 
good solution.


On 04/01/2013 06:27, Tim Starling wrote:
The solution for social problems is to have rules and a means to 
punish people who break them.



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: "Big data" benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

[Richard Farmbrough]

Of course any effort to make article source more readable meets with 
opposition - in the case of references in particular.  And not only from 
those who cite CITEVAR legitimately, but from at least one admin who 
will block for putting references in numerical order.  These are the 
sorts of things which would not have lasted long in (admittedly slightly 
mythical) Good Old Days


On 04/01/2013 15:48, David Gerard wrote:
I spent idle time in the holiday week working on [[:en:OpenOffice]]. 
Wikitext is just awful these days, particularly in an article like 
that where every assertion needs and has a cite. Anyone who thinks 
wikitext is just fine for the job, I urge you to click "edit" and 
contemplate fixing the guacamole you see before you. Sure hope the 
visual editor makes managing references on an article like that 
easier. - d. ___ 
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l