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

[David Gerard]

On 17 August 2014 05:49, 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!)



Mere open bug count is not in any way a useful measure of software
quality. It really, really doesn't work like that.


- 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, 

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

[Pete Forsyth]

Risker, some replies below:

On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Risker  wrote:

> 
> Perhaps you should get to know a bit more about bugzilla and its current
> usage;
>


This topic is getting far afield. I have a reasonably good understanding of
how bugzilla works, and have reported and commented on a pretty wide
variety of bugs. I generally agree with everything you have to say about
it. My point really had nothing to do with platforms, though -- it was
about the way the organization and the movement approaches design. There
might be a worthwhile discussion to be had about platform use, but I don't
think it belongs in this thread, and I'm not sure I'd bother to participate
-- there are many people better qualified and more motivated than me to dig
into this stuff.

I'm sorry.  How, exactly, do you envision a new editor or reader improving
> file pages? There's not very much that can be edited there that isn't going
> to cause more problems than it solves.
> 


I am frankly astonished to see you say this. I don't have to envision
anything -- I watch people improve file pages on a daily basis, in much
more straightforward ways than the examples you chose. The single most
obvious thing is to expand the "Description" field, which often only has a
few words -- but there are all kinds of things people can and do improve.
And "new editor or reader" -- that may be your requirement, but it's not
mine. Paths from "newbie" to "experienced" involve many steps, and I don't
see any reason why the *first* step should be so heavily emphasized. I
don't think "newness" is the end-all-be-all. If somebody has been dabbling
on English Wikipedia for a few years, and comes across an image that they
know something about, or have the skills to improve and re-upload, etc.,
that may be an important moment where they start to realize that English
Wikipedia is part of a broader multilingual community. But will that moment
occur if they only ever experience media through the Media Viewer? I do not
know the answer to that question for certain, but I have a pretty strong
hunch.

I am at a loss as to why a template on Commons has anything to do with the
> privacy of subjects of photos.


I'm with you. And if the MV team had taken this view, they might have
skipped basing the way that personality rights are communicated to readers
on one template that is, so far, inadequate to the task of helping
uploaders comply with [[COM:IDENT]]. But they didn't skip it -- they
checked "personality rights" off the list by making the MV include this
template.

Understandable, if you're trying to hit a looming deadline and scrambling
to get a lot of stuff done. But in the end, totally inadequate. The way we
handle personality rights is a matter of vital concern to the future of
Wikipedia -- this has, as you know, been the topic of many discussions on
the Gender Gap email list and elsewhere.

Well, if you don't have a problem with it, why are you including it in your
> list of problems?


The list of problems is so huge, Risker, that I hardly think it matters
what specifics I do or don't include. This is software that is out of step
with what the Wikimedia movement is trying to accomplish, pure and simple.
If you disagree, fine. We'll see how it plays out.


> 
> In other words, you thought a discussion on a single site went well, but
> one that took place across hundreds of sites didn't do enough to inform
> people and seek feedback.


Actually, no -- I think the efforts at notification were reasonably good.
The bigger problem I see is not so much with the notification, but the way
the design process was conducted. To put it simply, the biggest issue is
that the team working on this software has a listening problem. It's one
I'm familiar with because I've experienced it in various interactions with
the broader WMF over a period of years. There is bias in the assumptions
the team brings to the project, and they "hear" the input that comes from
volunteers through the filter of that bias. One of the results is that in
many cases, they attempt to reflect back what was said to them, but end up
saying something completely different.

And when you're not doing a good job of listening, one of the overall
results is that you have a poor ability to predict how things will go. Lila
Tretikov asked on her user talk page last week:

"It is a bit strange to see this being such a big deal given that the
feature has been in Beta for nearly a year, was rolled out almost
everywhere else in April with no issues, and has been on the de site since
early June. So clearly it has not broken things. Why did it get so "hot"
*after* two month of being in production, without reader complaints? Just
wondering..."

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, actua

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

[Tim Landscheidt]

Juergen Fenn  wrote:

> Only after the last editor has been been driven away
> Only after the last article written by a volunteer has been published
> Only after the last vandal has been reverted by a volunteer
> Then will you find that money alone cannot write an encyclopædia.

> See: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weissagung_der_Cree

> [...]

I doubt that WMF employees are paid in encyclopaedias :-).

Tim


___
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

[svetlana]

Hi,

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014, at 10:12, Risker wrote:
> Well, hold on here.
> 
> 
> On 17 August 2014 19:55, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
> 
> > I think it is also a problem to look at this in terms of "bugs." I don't
> > think you can retrofit good design into something that has a variety of
> > substantial problems, by merely "squashing bugs." You might say that is the
> > wiki way, but it is widely known that some tasks are better suited than
> > others to ad hoc collaborative processes.
> >
> 
> 
> Given the current use of bugzilla, which doesn't limit itself to bugs but
> also feature requests and enhancements over the base functionality, calling
> everything reported using bugzilla a "bug" is incorrect and inappropriate.
> 
> 
> >
> > In this case, we have a broad range of issues:
> > * does it let the reader know they can help improve the page or upload
> > another photo
> >
> 
> The Commons/File pages don't do that, why would you expect this software to
> do it?

It does. There is an Edit button at the top, and an Upload button at the left.

> 
> 
> > * does it reflect copyright holders' licenses accurately and effectively
> >
> 
> Agree this is important.  Do you have any evidence that it is any less
> accurate than the Commons/File pages?
> 
> 
> > * does it adequately respect the privacy of the subjects of photos
> >
> 
> The mere fact of the image being used on an article anywhere on a Wikimedia
> project suggests that this problem is in the actual usage, not in the
> software being used to display more information and detail in the image.
> If you believe that this is a serious issue, then it should be addressed
> where 100% of readers can see it, not in a subpage viewed only by the
> limited number of readers who click on the image. It's not a Media Viewer
> problem, it's an image usage problem.


Showing description is important for privacy of subject of photo in some cases. 
I.e. if I kill a cat for a movie and someone takes a picture, I should be able 
to tell readers that I'm doing this for a movie. The long description usually 
does so, if needed. Otherwise the readers might perceive that doing this is my 
usual activity.

This is probably not the original issue in mind of the first folk who mentioned 
privacy two paragraphs up there, but that's the first thing I can think of.

Another thing is slideshows. "The Big Pictures" website lets people browse 
pictures with long descriptions. We have galleries, and MV's left/right arrows. 
Why not make something in the middle, with both a long description/caption, and 
these left/right arrows?

> 
> 
> > * does it reflect a "look and feel" that we feel OK about and is consistent
> > with the rest of the software
> > etc. etc.
> >
> 
> What problems are you seeing here?  Spell it out, rather than making vague
> suggestions that there is an issue.

MV is inconsistent, because other pages (history, talk) still force a page 
reload, for instance, and returning from them back to an article isn't as easy 
as one 'X' button.

> 
> 
> 
> >
> > Fixing one "bug" may well lead to other bugs, or negatively impact those
> > already reported. What is needed, I believe, is a well-facilitated process
> > to identify the problems and the best solutions. This is not easy to do and
> > takes time. But I think the WMF has (not for lack of trying) managed to do
> > a very bad job of that with this software product, and with many software
> > products in the last few years. That does not mean it is impossible to do
> > it that way, only that those specific efforts were insufficient.
> >
> 
> 
> Why is this a Media Viewer issue?  This is a problem for all types of
> software on all types of platforms, and is a challenge even for IT
> departments hundreds of times the size of the WMF.  I cannot think of any
> software I have used in the last 20 years that has not had "bugs" or
> unsatisfactory UI elements or seems to miss a functionality I'd like to
> have.  It is unreasonable to hold a comparatively very small organization
> to a standard that can't even be met by IT giants.
> 
> Risker/Anne

No comment on this one.

svetlana

___
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

[svetlana]

Hi,

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014, at 10:12, Risker wrote:
> Well, hold on here.
> 
> 
> On 17 August 2014 19:55, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
> 
> > I think it is also a problem to look at this in terms of "bugs." I don't
> > think you can retrofit good design into something that has a variety of
> > substantial problems, by merely "squashing bugs." You might say that is the
> > wiki way, but it is widely known that some tasks are better suited than
> > others to ad hoc collaborative processes.
> >
> 
> 
> Given the current use of bugzilla, which doesn't limit itself to bugs but
> also feature requests and enhancements over the base functionality, calling
> everything reported using bugzilla a "bug" is incorrect and inappropriate.
> 
> 
> >
> > In this case, we have a broad range of issues:
> > * does it let the reader know they can help improve the page or upload
> > another photo
> >
> 
> The Commons/File pages don't do that, why would you expect this software to
> do it?

It does. There is an Edit button at the top, and an Upload button at the left.

> 
> 
> > * does it reflect copyright holders' licenses accurately and effectively
> >
> 
> Agree this is important.  Do you have any evidence that it is any less
> accurate than the Commons/File pages?
> 
> 
> > * does it adequately respect the privacy of the subjects of photos
> >
> 
> The mere fact of the image being used on an article anywhere on a Wikimedia
> project suggests that this problem is in the actual usage, not in the
> software being used to display more information and detail in the image.
> If you believe that this is a serious issue, then it should be addressed
> where 100% of readers can see it, not in a subpage viewed only by the
> limited number of readers who click on the image. It's not a Media Viewer
> problem, it's an image usage problem.


Showing description is important for privacy of subject of photo in some cases. 
I.e. if I kill a cat for a movie and someone takes a picture, I should be able 
to tell readers that I'm doing this for a movie. The long description usually 
does so, if needed. Otherwise the readers might perceive that doing this is my 
usual activity.

This is probably not the original issue in mind of the first folk who mentioned 
privacy two paragraphs up there, but that's the first thing I can think of.

Another thing is slideshows. "The Big Pictures" website lets people browse 
pictures with long descriptions. We have galleries, and MV's left/right arrows. 
Why not make something in the middle, with both a long description/caption, and 
these left/right arrows?

> 
> 
> > * does it reflect a "look and feel" that we feel OK about and is consistent
> > with the rest of the software
> > etc. etc.
> >
> 
> What problems are you seeing here?  Spell it out, rather than making vague
> suggestions that there is an issue.

MV is inconsistent, because other pages (history, talk) still force a page 
reload, for instance, and returning from them back to an article isn't as easy 
as one 'X' button.

> 
> 
> 
> >
> > Fixing one "bug" may well lead to other bugs, or negatively impact those
> > already reported. What is needed, I believe, is a well-facilitated process
> > to identify the problems and the best solutions. This is not easy to do and
> > takes time. But I think the WMF has (not for lack of trying) managed to do
> > a very bad job of that with this software product, and with many software
> > products in the last few years. That does not mean it is impossible to do
> > it that way, only that those specific efforts were insufficient.
> >
> 
> 
> Why is this a Media Viewer issue?  This is a problem for all types of
> software on all types of platforms, and is a challenge even for IT
> departments hundreds of times the size of the WMF.  I cannot think of any
> software I have used in the last 20 years that has not had "bugs" or
> unsatisfactory UI elements or seems to miss a functionality I'd like to
> have.  It is unreasonable to hold a comparatively very small organization
> to a standard that can't even be met by IT giants.
> 
> Risker/Anne

No comment on this one.

svetlana

___
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

[Risker]

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, 

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] Superprotect user right, Coming to a wiki near you

[Chris Keating]

>
>
>
I'm approaching this thread with some trepidation, but would someone mind
telling me more about this - or pointing to where this issue is already
documented? (I have no idea how to navigate Bugzilla ;) )


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

Chris
___
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

[Joe Decker]

Bugzilla is at:
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/

and you must create a login, as Bugzilla is not (so far as I know) part of
SUL.

--Joe


On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Chris Keating 
wrote:

> >
> >
> >
> I'm approaching this thread with some trepidation, but would someone mind
> telling me more about this - or pointing to where this issue is already
> documented? (I have no idea how to navigate Bugzilla ;) )
>
>
> > 2. Specifically it appears that MV breaks CC-BY-SA-3.0.  Details on
> > Bugzilla.
> >
> >
> Regards,
>
> Chris
> ___
> 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_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Recruiting for Wikimedia security newsletter

[Pine W]

Hi,

In collaboration with Chris Steipp, I am considering starting a monthly
security newsletter for Wikimedia, focused on common risks and mitigation
techniques. The target audience is the broad Wikimedia community including
developers, WMF and chapter employees, and volunteers with high risk
accounts.

Example topics:
Phishing
Coding best practices
Wifi security
Securing data stored on cell phones
Check fraud
Preventing insider theft of funds in Wikimedia organizations

If you are interested in contributing to the newsletter please email me off
list.

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] Email from tccgrp, is this legit?

[David Cuenca]

Hi,

I received an unsolicited email stating that "In collaboration with the
global Wikimedia community, we are working with the Wikimedia Foundation to
help movement organizations understand how they have an impact" and asking
me to fill out a survey. However there are no references about which
program or which collaboratio are they talking about.

I have looked for "tccgrp" on meta and there is no information about it,
nor on the wmf page. The only reference I could find is a mention to TCC
Group in the guest list:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Report,_April_2014

Should I consider this request legit?

Cheers,
Micru
___
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] Email from tccgrp, is this legit?

[Jessie Wild]

AH! Yes - this is a project contracted by the WMF Grantmaking team. Sorry
it was confusing: please do give them feedback!


On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:10 PM, David Cuenca  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I received an unsolicited email stating that "In collaboration with the
> global Wikimedia community, we are working with the Wikimedia Foundation to
> help movement organizations understand how they have an impact" and asking
> me to fill out a survey. However there are no references about which
> program or which collaboratio are they talking about.
>
> I have looked for "tccgrp" on meta and there is no information about it,
> nor on the wmf page. The only reference I could find is a mention to TCC
> Group in the guest list:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Report,_April_2014
>
> Should I consider this request legit?
>
> Cheers,
> Micru
> ___
> 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,
> 




-- 

*Jessie Wild SnellerGrantmaking Learning & Evaluation *
*Wikimedia Foundation*

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
Donate to Wikimedia 
___
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] Email from tccgrp, is this legit?

[David Cuenca]

Ok, thanks! For a moment I thought that they had taken advantadge of the
visit to steal contact details  :)




On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 11:24 PM, Jessie Wild  wrote:

> AH! Yes - this is a project contracted by the WMF Grantmaking team. Sorry
> it was confusing: please do give them feedback!
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:10 PM, David Cuenca  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I received an unsolicited email stating that "In collaboration with the
> > global Wikimedia community, we are working with the Wikimedia Foundation
> to
> > help movement organizations understand how they have an impact" and
> asking
> > me to fill out a survey. However there are no references about which
> > program or which collaboratio are they talking about.
> >
> > I have looked for "tccgrp" on meta and there is no information about it,
> > nor on the wmf page. The only reference I could find is a mention to TCC
> > Group in the guest list:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Report,_April_2014
> >
> > Should I consider this request legit?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Micru
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Jessie Wild SnellerGrantmaking Learning & Evaluation *
> *Wikimedia Foundation*
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
> Donate to Wikimedia 
> ___
> 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,
> 




-- 
Etiamsi omnes, ego non
___
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] Wikimedia Mexico. Report of Activities of July 2014

[Carmen Alcázar]

Dear community:

Below you will find the report of activities of the month of July 2014 done
by the volunteers of Wikimedia Mexico. Please don't hesitate to get in
touch with us if you require extra information about this activities or
only to make some suggestions.

The report is also available on Spanish and English in our wiki:

https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Informes/Julio_2014/ (Spanish)
https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Informes/Julio_2014/en
​​
(English)

Kindly regards.
On behalf our chapter.
Carmen Alcázar (User:Wotancito)
WMMX Secretary.

==Highlights==
===Three simultaneous Wikipedia workshops in three different cities===
On July 26, three Wikipedia workshops were given in three cities of Mexico.
The venues was TelmexHub in Mexico City by Omar Sandoval, Carmen Alcázar,
Iván Martínez, y Gustavo Sandoval; HackerGarage in Guadalajara by Salvador
Alcántar and Capilla del Arte in Puebla by José Flores. It is the first
time in the history of Mexican chapter that we have three training
activities in three Mexican cities simultaneously and in the case of
Guadalajara, this workshop was the first to be taught in that city. [1]

===Volunteer's WikiPicnic for Wikimania 2015===
On July 20, a Volunteer's WikiPicnic for Wikimania 2015 was held in the
Second Section of Chapultepec, bound for Wikimania 2015. Carmen Alcázar
initially spoke about the event and solve some questions about the
Wikimedia projects, giving way to a soccer match among the attendees. At
the end, the picnic was held with everyone within a casual and fun time.
The last to leave the park did about 6 pm. [2]


Jul 5
* Moebius radio program 14/19: "''De Juan O'Gorman a Alberto Kalach''"
(From Juan O'Gorman to Alberto Kalach)

Jul 10
* Working meeting for Wikimania 2015

Jul 12
* Moebius radio program 14/20: "''De lambada a murciélagos''" (From lambada
to Chiroptera)

Jul 14
* Beginning of Wikipedian In Residence project in
Museo Soumaya [3]

Jul 20
* Picnic at the second section of Bosque de Chapultepec in order to meet
the team of volunteers who will participate in Wikimania 2015.

Jul 23
* Participation of Carmen Alcázar in "Participación de las mujeres en el
campo tecnológico" discussion table at Universidad del Claustro de Sor
Juana, Mexico City, among other female involved in tech initatives. [4]
* Interview to Carmen Alcázar for La Jornada newspaper with the title
"Demandan políticas tecnológicas con perspectiva de género" on July 24. [5]

Jul 26
* Workshop: Introduction to Wikipedia at Capilla del Arte, Puebla.
* Workshop: Introduction to Wikipedia at Hackergarage, Guadalajara.
* Wikipedia Monthly Workshop at Telmexhub, Mexico City. [6]

Jul 30
*Virtual meeting of the Wikimedia Mexico board.

Jul 31
*GLAM meeting with Centro de Cultura Digital staff. [7]


[1]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_workshop_at_Telmex_Hub
Photos in Wikimedia Commons
[2]
https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Wikipicnic_Wikimania_2015_volunteers.jpg
[3] https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proyectos:Museo_Soumaya
[4]
https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Participaci%C3%B3n_de_las_mujeres_en_el_campo_tecnol%C3%B3gico..jpg
[5] http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2014/07/24/sociedad/039n1soc
[6]
https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Taller_Mensual_de_Wikipedia_Julio_06.JPG
[7] https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proyectos:Centro_de_Cultura_Digital
___
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,