Re: [Wikimedia-l] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

[Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής]

Hello,
I'm really sorry to hear about the situation in Wikimedia Portugal. I hope
everything works out for the best soon.
I would really love to hear the side of the AffCom on the matter since,
from what I understand, there are many things unclear and we already
counding a similar situation in Wikimedia Brazil.

Regards
Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής



Στις Τετ, 10 Οκτ 2018 - 15:47 ο χρήστης Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulospern...@gmail.com> έγραψε:

> Some time ago, a Wikimedian friend told me AffCom is like the physician
> that comes to help with the cure when an Affiliate is ill. But that's
> really what they were in this WMPT case? This is a very bizarre situation,
> of which I'm personally having a lot of difficulties finding rational
> answers to it, let alone any conclusion. All I can offer is a personal
> account of the situation, to those who would be kind enough to have an
> interest on this case.
>
> Last May we at WMPT were really not expecting seeing AffCom bursting
> through the room in an emergency intervention, fixing what didn't need to
> be fixed, and willing to moderate what didn't need any moderation. As in
> the proverbial Monty Phyton scene[1], they quickly became the problem
> themselves.
>
> Many of us at WMPT are long-term Wikimedian volunteers, some of us for more
> than a decade already, in perfect good standing in our communities, where
> we hold and held responsibility roles. It includes current and former
> bureaucrats, sysops, ArbCom members, very active contributors to a number
> of Wikimedia projects. Most of us are founding members or directly
> connected to WMPT since its inception in 2009.
>
> Last March, when we took on ourselves this mission of fix and rebuild
> Wikimedia Portugal, who had been dormant for about 5 years, we were not
> expecting to face such a mighty and impenetrable adversary as AffCom has
> proven to be.
> For six months already we have been embroiled by AffCom in this Kafkian
> suspension process, where we are generally not told what the accusations
> are, and much less who is accusing us. It has been extremely painful,
> exhausting, and frustrating for everyone involved.
>
> We reached our limit. A number of us are now seriously considering
> abandoning not only the chapter, but the Wikimedia projects entirely, if we
> continue not being treated with the fairness and transparency we deserve.
> It truly begs the existential question of what are we all doing here,
> dedicating countless and very valuable hours of our lives for a Movement
> that lets this happen, for a Foundation-run committee[3] that apparently
> wants to kill us at all costs.
>
> Personally, I'm still confident that we'll successfully pass through this
> probation, and everything will become again the very optimistic scenario we
> all had last April, when we successfully elected a working board, and
> started working with great dedication in the many projects we have now
> running here in Portugal. I can only imagine how painful it was and is
> being for Gonçalo, to came here making this situation public and sharing it
> with everybody. We all have our dignity, nobody at WMPT likes this at all.
> For many months we tried to cope with this discreet and silently. But
> everything has a limit.
>
> Regards,
>
> Paulo
>
> [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spanish_Inquisition_(Monty_Python)
> [2] - As AffCom seems to be, despite what is written in their Meta page(
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee)
>
> GoEthe.wiki  escreveu no dia terça, 9/10/2018 à(s)
> 11:13:
>
> > The original message was rejected due to a filter rule match, but you can
> > access it here:
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediapt/2018-October/002698.html
> > I am sending it below without the links. Please access the link above for
> > the full version.
> > __
> >
> > Sorry in advance for the lengthy email – the tl;dr version is: Wikimedia
> > Portugal has done all it was asked to do, so the suspension that was held
> > conditional to performing those steps must be lifted accordingly. For the
> > sake of transparency, we are sending this out to not only the AffCom
> > mailing list, but also Wikimedia-l and WikimediaPT-l.
> > _
> >
> > Dear members of AffCom,
> >
> > (cc to the Wikimedia Portugal mailing list, Wikimedia mailing list)
> >
> > Last 5th October we were again surprised by the content of your email
> > (quoted below) in response to us completing the roadmap we had agreed
> upon
> > in order to remove the suspension of Wikimedia Portugal. On that message,
> > you say you have once more received information whose substantiation is
> not
> > mentioned, from sources that are not disclosed. And still you seem to
> > accept it as the truth without even providing us with the opportunity to
> > get properly acquainted with it, let alone rebate or contradict it. While
> > you speak of transparency, that message is unsettlingly opaque, as have
> > been multiple such 

[Wikimedia-l] Sign up to share your knowledge with others in the movement!

[Greg Varnum]

Greetings!

As you may have heard, the signup process to present at the Wikimedia monthly 
activities meetings (the meeting previously known as the Wikimedia Foundation 
metrics and activities meetings) has been opened to all within the movement!

Sign up page:  
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_monthly_activities_meetings/Sign_up

If you were hoping for an invitation to present - here it is! Please head over 
to Meta-Wiki and sign up to present if you have an exciting project update to 
talk about or have some helpful lessons from past projects to share.

This meeting is an opportunity to share our work and progress with each other 
in a visual format. For more information about the meeting itself, please visit 
it’s Meta-Wiki page: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_monthly_activities_meetings 


Thank you in advance for your interest!
-greg

---
Gregory Varnum
Communications Strategist
Wikimedia Foundation 
gvar...@wikimedia.org
Pronouns: He/Him/His

___
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] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

[Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l]

 When I read such mails, I think there is something that it's not 100% working 
in the workflow of AffCom. If i might say how i feel it, I would say that it is 
not perceived like a "catalyst" of good practices, but more like a bottleneck 
of processes.

Maybe more transparency could help. UG and chapters are an important part of 
our ecosystem and the interaction with communities should be put at the core of 
the process. Maybe there is some overflow, and they need more support and 
resources. Or we need a better system to minimize problems before they become 
so large.
In any case, I feel the current situation is not optimal. Many things aren't of 
course, so it's probably not critical. It's a delicate topic of course but 
that's also why it should need more long-term discussion. Soon or later, 
someone should gather the feedback produced by these occurrences and start a 
discussion about possible improvement. 




Il mercoledì 10 ottobre 2018, 22:54:30 CEST, Pine W  
ha scritto:  
 
 SJ, maybe I should explain my comments about involvement of legal counsel
in more detail. My understanding of the situation, which is far from
complete and may be wrong, is that AffCom decided to intervene in this
situation (1) before they had undertaken an effort to gather facts "on the
ground", and (2) with disregard for local laws that could apply to the
situation. (I wouldn't accept an excuse that AffCom lacked the time to do
legal research. It is my opinion that AffCom and WMF both should know
better, and that WMF should ensure that AffCom has access to knowledgeable
legal counsel when needed). If AffCom had taken the time to first gather
the facts of the situation from someone who could investigate it "on the
ground", and had taken the time to obtain knowledgeable legal counsel about
local laws, I wonder whether a significant amount of volunteer time and
stress could have been saved both for AffCom members and for WMPT members.

I don't mean to suggest that nothing is wrong at WMPT or that AffCom should
have remained uninvolved, but my impression is that there are changes that
should be made in AffCom regardless of whether there are problems with
WMPT, starting with AffCom's lack of transparency in general.

It's possible that what we're hearing from WMPT is entirely wrong and that
AffCom did everything well, but even if that is true, I think that AffCom
should be much more transparent.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
___
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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedians of Chicago User Group first annual report submitted

[effe iets anders]

Wow congratulations :)

I'm guessing this is the link you wanted to include:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Chicago_User_Group/2018_Annual_Report

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 3:51 PM Brian Choo  wrote:

> Fellow Wikimedians,
>
> Wikimedians of Chicago User Group has put together their first annual
> report!
>
> Cheers,
> Brian Choo
> (User:Airplaneman )
> ___
> Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately
> directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
> community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ___
> WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
> wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-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] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

[Pine W]

SJ, maybe I should explain my comments about involvement of legal counsel
in more detail. My understanding of the situation, which is far from
complete and may be wrong, is that AffCom decided to intervene in this
situation (1) before they had undertaken an effort to gather facts "on the
ground", and (2) with disregard for local laws that could apply to the
situation. (I wouldn't accept an excuse that AffCom lacked the time to do
legal research. It is my opinion that AffCom and WMF both should know
better, and that WMF should ensure that AffCom has access to knowledgeable
legal counsel when needed). If AffCom had taken the time to first gather
the facts of the situation from someone who could investigate it "on the
ground", and had taken the time to obtain knowledgeable legal counsel about
local laws, I wonder whether a significant amount of volunteer time and
stress could have been saved both for AffCom members and for WMPT members.

I don't mean to suggest that nothing is wrong at WMPT or that AffCom should
have remained uninvolved, but my impression is that there are changes that
should be made in AffCom regardless of whether there are problems with
WMPT, starting with AffCom's lack of transparency in general.

It's possible that what we're hearing from WMPT is entirely wrong and that
AffCom did everything well, but even if that is true, I think that AffCom
should be much more transparent.

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
___
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] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Hello SJ,

Thank you very much for those words, and for help dispelling the idea that
we are fatally bound to de-recognizement. I do hope we are not, but when
everything is done by the chapter according to what is asked, even ahead of
time and in a overzealous way, and we receive a new message from AffCom
with yet a new set of obscure accusations by unstated actors, that scenario
do come to mind. And seeing what Teles wrote here[1] about the affiliate he
belonged to being de-recognized with no warning from the AffCom, really did
rang all bells that we could be next in line if something was not done.

Anyway, from my part I just want this to end, so that we can return to
normality here, the way we were back in April before AffCom had come into
the scene. To the extent that it is still possible, after all the heavy
burnout caused by this whole situation.

Warm regards,
Paulo

[1] -
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-September/091050.html


Samuel Klein  escreveu no dia quarta, 10/10/2018 à(s)
18:32:

> Gonçalo, Goethe, and all: Thank you for your work, which I appreciate
> dearly, and for the public discussion.  I can also imagine this was a very
> hard letter to write.
>
> Paulo, to your concerns:
> > for a Foundation-run committee[3] that apparently wants to kill us at all
> costs.
>
> Euh... surely not  .v_v.
> These troubles can come up in good faith, when two groups work intently and
> separately on the same issue, ando d not talk openly to one another for
> reasons of imagined duty + propriety.  Tossing insults back and forth just
> makes it easier for people to shut down communication.
>
> Somehow I suspect that invocations of The Law and the intervention of legal
> anxieties (with their preoccupations with secrecy) has led to much of the
> trouble here.  So Pine, to your point: /more/ legal counsel reporting to
> only one of the parties involved might not help.  On the other hand, we as
> a movement deciding to share more openly our internal discussions around
> legal concerns — even if this means taking on slightly more legal risk —
> would reduce some of these evident social risks.
>
> Warmly,
> SJ
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 8:47 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Some time ago, a Wikimedian friend told me AffCom is like the physician
> > that comes to help with the cure when an Affiliate is ill. But that's
> > really what they were in this WMPT case? This is a very bizarre
> situation,
> > of which I'm personally having a lot of difficulties finding rational
> > answers to it, let alone any conclusion. All I can offer is a personal
> > account of the situation, to those who would be kind enough to have an
> > interest on this case.
> >
> > Last May we at WMPT were really not expecting seeing AffCom bursting
> > through the room in an emergency intervention, fixing what didn't need to
> > be fixed, and willing to moderate what didn't need any moderation. As in
> > the proverbial Monty Phyton scene[1], they quickly became the problem
> > themselves.
> >
> > Many of us at WMPT are long-term Wikimedian volunteers, some of us for
> more
> > than a decade already, in perfect good standing in our communities, where
> > we hold and held responsibility roles. It includes current and former
> > bureaucrats, sysops, ArbCom members, very active contributors to a number
> > of Wikimedia projects. Most of us are founding members or directly
> > connected to WMPT since its inception in 2009.
> >
> > Last March, when we took on ourselves this mission of fix and rebuild
> > Wikimedia Portugal, who had been dormant for about 5 years, we were not
> > expecting to face such a mighty and impenetrable adversary as AffCom has
> > proven to be.
> > For six months already we have been embroiled by AffCom in this Kafkian
> > suspension process, where we are generally not told what the accusations
> > are, and much less who is accusing us. It has been extremely painful,
> > exhausting, and frustrating for everyone involved.
> >
> > We reached our limit. A number of us are now seriously considering
> > abandoning not only the chapter, but the Wikimedia projects entirely, if
> we
> > continue not being treated with the fairness and transparency we deserve.
> > It truly begs the existential question of what are we all doing here,
> > dedicating countless and very valuable hours of our lives for a Movement
> > that lets this happen, for a Foundation-run committee[3] that apparently
> > wants to kill us at all costs.
> >
> > Personally, I'm still confident that we'll successfully pass through this
> > probation, and everything will become again the very optimistic scenario
> we
> > all had last April, when we successfully elected a working board, and
> > started working with great dedication in the many projects we have now
> > running here in Portugal. I can only imagine how painful it was and is
> > being for Gonçalo, to came here making this situation public and sharing
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

[Samuel Klein]

Gonçalo, Goethe, and all: Thank you for your work, which I appreciate
dearly, and for the public discussion.  I can also imagine this was a very
hard letter to write.

Paulo, to your concerns:
> for a Foundation-run committee[3] that apparently wants to kill us at all
costs.

Euh... surely not  .v_v.
These troubles can come up in good faith, when two groups work intently and
separately on the same issue, ando d not talk openly to one another for
reasons of imagined duty + propriety.  Tossing insults back and forth just
makes it easier for people to shut down communication.

Somehow I suspect that invocations of The Law and the intervention of legal
anxieties (with their preoccupations with secrecy) has led to much of the
trouble here.  So Pine, to your point: /more/ legal counsel reporting to
only one of the parties involved might not help.  On the other hand, we as
a movement deciding to share more openly our internal discussions around
legal concerns — even if this means taking on slightly more legal risk —
would reduce some of these evident social risks.

Warmly,
SJ

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 8:47 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Some time ago, a Wikimedian friend told me AffCom is like the physician
> that comes to help with the cure when an Affiliate is ill. But that's
> really what they were in this WMPT case? This is a very bizarre situation,
> of which I'm personally having a lot of difficulties finding rational
> answers to it, let alone any conclusion. All I can offer is a personal
> account of the situation, to those who would be kind enough to have an
> interest on this case.
>
> Last May we at WMPT were really not expecting seeing AffCom bursting
> through the room in an emergency intervention, fixing what didn't need to
> be fixed, and willing to moderate what didn't need any moderation. As in
> the proverbial Monty Phyton scene[1], they quickly became the problem
> themselves.
>
> Many of us at WMPT are long-term Wikimedian volunteers, some of us for more
> than a decade already, in perfect good standing in our communities, where
> we hold and held responsibility roles. It includes current and former
> bureaucrats, sysops, ArbCom members, very active contributors to a number
> of Wikimedia projects. Most of us are founding members or directly
> connected to WMPT since its inception in 2009.
>
> Last March, when we took on ourselves this mission of fix and rebuild
> Wikimedia Portugal, who had been dormant for about 5 years, we were not
> expecting to face such a mighty and impenetrable adversary as AffCom has
> proven to be.
> For six months already we have been embroiled by AffCom in this Kafkian
> suspension process, where we are generally not told what the accusations
> are, and much less who is accusing us. It has been extremely painful,
> exhausting, and frustrating for everyone involved.
>
> We reached our limit. A number of us are now seriously considering
> abandoning not only the chapter, but the Wikimedia projects entirely, if we
> continue not being treated with the fairness and transparency we deserve.
> It truly begs the existential question of what are we all doing here,
> dedicating countless and very valuable hours of our lives for a Movement
> that lets this happen, for a Foundation-run committee[3] that apparently
> wants to kill us at all costs.
>
> Personally, I'm still confident that we'll successfully pass through this
> probation, and everything will become again the very optimistic scenario we
> all had last April, when we successfully elected a working board, and
> started working with great dedication in the many projects we have now
> running here in Portugal. I can only imagine how painful it was and is
> being for Gonçalo, to came here making this situation public and sharing it
> with everybody. We all have our dignity, nobody at WMPT likes this at all.
> For many months we tried to cope with this discreet and silently. But
> everything has a limit.
>
> Regards,
>
> Paulo
>
> [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spanish_Inquisition_(Monty_Python)
> [2] - As AffCom seems to be, despite what is written in their Meta page(
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee)
>
> GoEthe.wiki  escreveu no dia terça, 9/10/2018 à(s)
> 11:13:
>
> > The original message was rejected due to a filter rule match, but you can
> > access it here:
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediapt/2018-October/002698.html
> > I am sending it below without the links. Please access the link above for
> > the full version.
> > __
> >
> > Sorry in advance for the lengthy email – the tl;dr version is: Wikimedia
> > Portugal has done all it was asked to do, so the suspension that was held
> > conditional to performing those steps must be lifted accordingly. For the
> > sake of transparency, we are sending this out to not only the AffCom
> > mailing list, but also Wikimedia-l and WikimediaPT-l.
> > _
> >
> > Dear members of 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Plea from Wikimedia Portugal

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Some time ago, a Wikimedian friend told me AffCom is like the physician
that comes to help with the cure when an Affiliate is ill. But that's
really what they were in this WMPT case? This is a very bizarre situation,
of which I'm personally having a lot of difficulties finding rational
answers to it, let alone any conclusion. All I can offer is a personal
account of the situation, to those who would be kind enough to have an
interest on this case.

Last May we at WMPT were really not expecting seeing AffCom bursting
through the room in an emergency intervention, fixing what didn't need to
be fixed, and willing to moderate what didn't need any moderation. As in
the proverbial Monty Phyton scene[1], they quickly became the problem
themselves.

Many of us at WMPT are long-term Wikimedian volunteers, some of us for more
than a decade already, in perfect good standing in our communities, where
we hold and held responsibility roles. It includes current and former
bureaucrats, sysops, ArbCom members, very active contributors to a number
of Wikimedia projects. Most of us are founding members or directly
connected to WMPT since its inception in 2009.

Last March, when we took on ourselves this mission of fix and rebuild
Wikimedia Portugal, who had been dormant for about 5 years, we were not
expecting to face such a mighty and impenetrable adversary as AffCom has
proven to be.
For six months already we have been embroiled by AffCom in this Kafkian
suspension process, where we are generally not told what the accusations
are, and much less who is accusing us. It has been extremely painful,
exhausting, and frustrating for everyone involved.

We reached our limit. A number of us are now seriously considering
abandoning not only the chapter, but the Wikimedia projects entirely, if we
continue not being treated with the fairness and transparency we deserve.
It truly begs the existential question of what are we all doing here,
dedicating countless and very valuable hours of our lives for a Movement
that lets this happen, for a Foundation-run committee[3] that apparently
wants to kill us at all costs.

Personally, I'm still confident that we'll successfully pass through this
probation, and everything will become again the very optimistic scenario we
all had last April, when we successfully elected a working board, and
started working with great dedication in the many projects we have now
running here in Portugal. I can only imagine how painful it was and is
being for Gonçalo, to came here making this situation public and sharing it
with everybody. We all have our dignity, nobody at WMPT likes this at all.
For many months we tried to cope with this discreet and silently. But
everything has a limit.

Regards,

Paulo

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spanish_Inquisition_(Monty_Python)
[2] - As AffCom seems to be, despite what is written in their Meta page(
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee)

GoEthe.wiki  escreveu no dia terça, 9/10/2018 à(s)
11:13:

> The original message was rejected due to a filter rule match, but you can
> access it here:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediapt/2018-October/002698.html
> I am sending it below without the links. Please access the link above for
> the full version.
> __
>
> Sorry in advance for the lengthy email – the tl;dr version is: Wikimedia
> Portugal has done all it was asked to do, so the suspension that was held
> conditional to performing those steps must be lifted accordingly. For the
> sake of transparency, we are sending this out to not only the AffCom
> mailing list, but also Wikimedia-l and WikimediaPT-l.
> _
>
> Dear members of AffCom,
>
> (cc to the Wikimedia Portugal mailing list, Wikimedia mailing list)
>
> Last 5th October we were again surprised by the content of your email
> (quoted below) in response to us completing the roadmap we had agreed upon
> in order to remove the suspension of Wikimedia Portugal. On that message,
> you say you have once more received information whose substantiation is not
> mentioned, from sources that are not disclosed. And still you seem to
> accept it as the truth without even providing us with the opportunity to
> get properly acquainted with it, let alone rebate or contradict it. While
> you speak of transparency, that message is unsettlingly opaque, as have
> been multiple such messages relayed to us in the course of this whole
> process.
>
> As you are well aware, Wikimedia Portugal was faced in March with a
> situation where the president of the Board, João Vasconcelos, became
> demissionary without any previous warning [1]. It should be noted that when
> Vasconcelos was elected as president of the Board back in 2015, he wasn’t
> elected based on any background as a Wikimedia editor, as he has no history
> of contribution to any of the Wikimedia projects, but rather on his self
> proclaimed merits on organisational and conflict management (!). Despite
> the best efforts of several 

[Wikimedia-l] An invite from the Goa Wikipedia Group

[Frederick Noronha]

https://bit.ly/2pE3POJ
Do come if possible...
Saturday, Oct 13, 2018. Panjim.

Fredericknoronha
+91-9822122436
___
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,