Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice: Gerard Meijssen

[Nathan]

Asaf,

Thank you for notifying the list. I have read Gerard's posts to this list
since 2007, and it's a safe bet that his thousands of messages make him the
single most prolific contributor to this list since it was created. I
appreciate that the moderators felt compelled to act, but I find the
ultimate result unfortunate. I hope that he will reconsider and make the
needed adjustments in his posts; I know that Gerard is a deeply passionate
member of this community, and a particularly fierce and protective advocate
of Wikidata, and for me at least his perspective will be missed.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:22 PM Asaf Bartov  wrote:

> Dear list subscribers,
>
> In my volunteer capacity as list-admin, I write to let you know that
> subscriber Gerard Meijssen has been placed on indefinite moderation after
> making toxic comments to another subscriber, and failing to apologize for
> them after it was pointed out to him.  Gerard had been warned before about
> his aggressive conduct on this mailing list.
>
> As most of you know, being placed in moderation still allows moderated
> people to contribute to the list, but their posts don't go straight to all
> subscribers, but wait for an admin to review and release them, or reject
> them.  They are a compromise between wanting to be inclusive of people who
> are good faith volunteers but who sometimes find it difficult to maintain
> civil discourse on the one hand, and protecting the list's other
> subscribers from unacceptable discourse on the other hand.
>
> However, Gerard chose to unsubscribe himself from the list.  We want to be
> clear that the moderation remains in force, should he choose to
> re-subscribe in the future.
>
> Asaf
> on behalf of the list-admins
> --
> Asaf Bartov 
> ___
> 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] Board update on Branding: next steps

[James Salsman]

Hi Zack,

I filled out a survey request for "The Wiki Foundation".

Some of the text of the survey indicated that the legal department thought
that there could be a problem with that possibility, but didn't say why, so
I asked for the source for the claim I quoted in the survey.

How many questions (or, if it's easier '?' question marks) are currently in
the responses to your survey questions? Would you please publish them along
with your answers?

Best regards,
Jim


On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 5:37 PM Zack McCune  wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> We want to confirm that the Brand Project team has been directed by the
> Board to develop new branding options and to evaluate those options with
> communities. We invite your perspectives.
>
> We are asking that you continue to participate in the process which
> includes completing the survey, available in 7 languages.[1] Your
> participation in this survey will not be calculated as support for a
> change.
>
> We have been alerted to the Community open letter on renaming. We will take
> that information into the process.
>
> The Board will consider all the options, including the option to do
> nothing, and make a decision at their August meeting.
>
>-
>
>Zack & the Brand Project team
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Naming_convention_proposals
>
>
> On Friday, June 26, 2020, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> > The timeline is pretty clear. Glad to know about the special board
> meeting
> > in early July. Other than the open letter there was a straw poll also:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_
> > brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Community_feedback_and_straw_poll
> > The early July briefing, I hope that will be presenting all the aspects
> and
> > opinions.
> >
> > Thanks
> > User:Titodutta
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 04:57, Nataliia Tymkiv 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I want to share with you the next steps of the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board
> > > of Trustees about the Brand Project.
> > >
> > > Originally the Board meeting dedicated to the brand project was
> supposed
> > to
> > > happen no earlier than October. The expected outcome from the project
> > were
> > > the recommendations on what the rebranding should look like - from
> > changing
> > > fonts/logos to renaming. And if there is going to be a renaming - to
> > what.
> > > Of course, the Board’s role is not in approving a change in fonts, but
> > if a
> > > recommendation to rename was to be made - the Board’s role would have
> > been
> > > to make a decision on that recommendation. The timeline has now been
> > > changed, and the renaming part of rebranding will be discussed in our
> > > August meeting.
> > >
> > > Moreover, the Board will meet in early July to receive a briefing about
> > the
> > > project and talk about the process between June 2018 - June 2020. The
> > > consolidated materials on what the brand project team has been working
> on
> > > for a while now will be presented to the Board, and these materials are
> > > also going to be posted publicly. The more-strategic conversation is
> > > planned for the August meeting. Time to prepare the materials is
> needed,
> > > and the ongoing conversations need to be summarised, so the Board can
> > have
> > > an in-depth discussion about this, before making any kind of decision.
> > >
> > > We would like to continue with the survey [1] - we have discussed the
> > > possibility of technical changes to the survey with an additional
> option
> > > like “no renaming is needed” (not the exact words, mind you), but with
> > more
> > > than 700 respondents it is not methodologically sound to change the
> > survey
> > > now. Staff have confirmed to the Board that responses to the survey
> will
> > > not be calculated as support for a change. The survey was only designed
> > to
> > > collect feedback on the possible renaming options, not as a yes/no vote
> > on
> > > whether to adopt them.
> > >
> > > Thus the timeline on rebranding for the next 6-7 weeks is as follows:
> > >
> > > * Early July - special Board meeting with the Brand project team to
> > review
> > > and discuss the process so far, and for the Board members to receive
> the
> > > briefing on discussions happening;
> > >
> > > * July - consolidated materials prepared for the July meeting will be
> > > posted publicly after the meeting;
> > >
> > > * August 5th - the Board meeting on renaming part of the rebranding,
> not
> > > about the process. The Board will make the decision about whether to
> > stop,
> > > pause, or continue the work on this, within the framework of a
> discussion
> > > on strategic goals, tensions and tradeoffs, and potential next steps.
> > >
> > > * August (after the meeting) - the Board statement on the next steps
> > about
> > > the Brand project.
> > >
> > > I also want to acknowledge receiving the Community open letter on
> > renaming
> 

[Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice: Gerard Meijssen

[Asaf Bartov]

Dear list subscribers,

In my volunteer capacity as list-admin, I write to let you know that
subscriber Gerard Meijssen has been placed on indefinite moderation after
making toxic comments to another subscriber, and failing to apologize for
them after it was pointed out to him.  Gerard had been warned before about
his aggressive conduct on this mailing list.

As most of you know, being placed in moderation still allows moderated
people to contribute to the list, but their posts don't go straight to all
subscribers, but wait for an admin to review and release them, or reject
them.  They are a compromise between wanting to be inclusive of people who
are good faith volunteers but who sometimes find it difficult to maintain
civil discourse on the one hand, and protecting the list's other
subscribers from unacceptable discourse on the other hand.

However, Gerard chose to unsubscribe himself from the list.  We want to be
clear that the moderation remains in force, should he choose to
re-subscribe in the future.

Asaf
on behalf of the list-admins
-- 
Asaf Bartov 
___
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] EduWiki Leaders, and This month in Education, June 2020

[Sailesh Patnaik]

Hey everyone,

Did you know that:
Parvathishri from India is using Wikimedia projects to spread awareness on
digital literacy? or about Helena Dvořáková from Czech Republic as she is
working to support senior editors through Wiki Clubs in Prague? or about Oleh
Kushch from Ukraine who is highlighted in this month's Education Newsletter
for their experience in running Wikimedia education activities in High
schools?

There are other volunteers who are using Wikimedia projects in Education.
You can find some of them here: here:
https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Education_Highlights/Wikimedians
If you want to highlight someone from the education community for their
work, please follow this:
https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/t/highlighting-individuals-involved-with-wikimedia-education/1914
---

Also, the June edition of the Education Newsletter has been published, with
articles from Kosovo, Serbia and some updates from the education team! You
can find it here:
https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/Newsletter/June_2020.

Best!
-- 
*Sailesh Patnaik*
Program Coordinator, Education
___
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] Board update on Branding: next steps

[Nathan]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 6:36 AM Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> Just analyse the text, read the arguments. When you express an opinion, it
> warrants analysis. When this is not permitted it follows that you can not
> argue based on what people state. To what extend do you allow for the
> exchange of arguments when you do not allow for reading and commenting on
> what has been expressed?
>
> For the record I do value WereSpielChequers, he is imho an accomplished
> Wikimedian who I respect.
>
> When you tell me that I cannot comment on what people write, how do you
> expose a bias. What does it do for a freedom of expression? What I bring
> are arguments that you do not refute by dismissing them.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
>
I think the problem is that you appear to have misread what he wrote, or
maybe confused him with someone else entirely. Or are you replying, in this
thread, to something he wrote in another? As it stands, his comment
suggests that the WMF can and perhaps should change its name to something
"suitable for the parent of all projects, not just Wikipedia. " The point
being, as I read it, that other solutions to that problem may be available
and the survey neglects to touch on them at all.

Nothing in that sounds like an en.wp-centric view that one project should
be the flagship for all projects and that should be reflected in the brand.
Exactly the opposite.

This is the issue with imputing motives to individuals who haven't stated
them; you may be wrong, and if you are wrong, you may offend your target or
others.
___
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 servers

[Chris Danis]

An update: there *do* appear to be issues with Telkom SA (AS 37457) being
able to reach Wikimedia; I've reached out to their network operations
center.

Despite more investigation I did not find evidence of issues at other
African ISPs.



On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:57 AM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> That is plausible, I am in Cape Town
> P
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Joseph Seddon
> Sent: 29 June 2020 16:40
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers
>
> From reports I am seeing on facebook it seems this problem is localised on
> our Africa based users?
>
> Regards
> Seddon
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:05 PM Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > I get this:
> >
> > The connection has timed out
> >
> > The server at en.wikipedia.org is taking too long to respond.
> >
> > The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a
> > few moments.
> > If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer’s network
> > connection.
> > If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make
> > sure that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.
> >
> > After a long wait. Been like this for several hours now.
> > Most sites no problem
> > Cheers,
> > P
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Amir Sarabadani
> > Sent: 29 June 2020 15:31
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers
> >
> > Hey,
> > Can you elaborate more? I can access the website and graphs seems okay:
> >
> >
> https://grafana.wikimedia.org/d/RIA1lzDZk/application-servers-red-dashboard?orgId=1=now-3h=now
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:24 PM Peter Southwood <
> > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > > 
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Amir (he/him)
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> >
> > --
> > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > https://www.avg.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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> *Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
> *Advancement (Fundraising), Wikimedia Foundation*
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.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,
> 



-- 
Chris Danis (he/him)
Sr. Site Reliability Engineer
Wikimedia Foundation
___
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] Board update on Branding: next steps

[Fæ]

Agreed.

Gerard, WSC is a fantastic advocate for our projects, I recall us
working together on the first Commons based editathon many years ago,
it was a privilege to become friends with someone genuinely passionate
for public education and open knowledge.

These personal comments are misleading and hostile.

Fae

On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 10:43, Benjamin Lees  wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:56 AM Gerard Meijssen 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear WereSpielChequers, the thing with bias is that it shows in the choices
> > made. You are a Wikipedian, do not really care for the other projects and
> > you make that plain in what you say.
> >
>
> This sort of assumption-making about other list participants' motives is
> completely unwarranted.[1]  You've been doing it repeatedly.  Please stop.
>
> [1] As regards WereSpielChequers, it is also demonstrably false.  He has
> nearly 500,000 edits on Commons.
> ___
> 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, 
> 
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
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 servers

[Peter Southwood]

That is plausible, I am in Cape Town
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Joseph Seddon
Sent: 29 June 2020 16:40
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers

From reports I am seeing on facebook it seems this problem is localised on
our Africa based users?

Regards
Seddon

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:05 PM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> I get this:
>
> The connection has timed out
>
> The server at en.wikipedia.org is taking too long to respond.
>
> The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a
> few moments.
> If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer’s network
> connection.
> If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make
> sure that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.
>
> After a long wait. Been like this for several hours now.
> Most sites no problem
> Cheers,
> P
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Amir Sarabadani
> Sent: 29 June 2020 15:31
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers
>
> Hey,
> Can you elaborate more? I can access the website and graphs seems okay:
>
> https://grafana.wikimedia.org/d/RIA1lzDZk/application-servers-red-dashboard?orgId=1=now-3h=now
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:24 PM Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Amir (he/him)
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.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,
> 



-- 
Seddon

*Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
*Advancement (Fundraising), Wikimedia Foundation*
___
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, 


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers

[Chris Danis]

Hi,

I've done some looking around and don't see evidence of widespread issues
with connectivity to Wikimedia from either Telekom ZA, or Africa in general.

For any users who are having troubles, please see
https://wikitech-static.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reporting_a_connectivity_issue

Even if you can't follow every step there, the contents of a traceroute
would be helpful.

If you're unable to reach Phabricator to file a private task, you are very
welcome to email me directly!

All the best,

-- 
Chris Danis (he/him)
Sr. Site Reliability Engineer
Wikimedia Foundation
___
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 servers

[Amir Sarabadani]

Africa's traffic goes to Amsterdam datacenter (even South Africa)[1], if
that datacenter had issues, Europe would go dark too.

I bring it up with people.

[1]: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Clusters

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:41 PM Joseph Seddon  wrote:

> From reports I am seeing on facebook it seems this problem is localised on
> our Africa based users?
>
> Regards
> Seddon
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:05 PM Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > I get this:
> >
> > The connection has timed out
> >
> > The server at en.wikipedia.org is taking too long to respond.
> >
> > The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a
> > few moments.
> > If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer’s network
> > connection.
> > If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make
> > sure that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.
> >
> > After a long wait. Been like this for several hours now.
> > Most sites no problem
> > Cheers,
> > P
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Amir Sarabadani
> > Sent: 29 June 2020 15:31
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers
> >
> > Hey,
> > Can you elaborate more? I can access the website and graphs seems okay:
> >
> >
> https://grafana.wikimedia.org/d/RIA1lzDZk/application-servers-red-dashboard?orgId=1=now-3h=now
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:24 PM Peter Southwood <
> > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > > 
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Amir (he/him)
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> >
> > --
> > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > https://www.avg.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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> *Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
> *Advancement (Fundraising), Wikimedia Foundation*
> ___
> 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,
> 



-- 
Amir (he/him)
___
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] Board update on Branding: next steps

[Samuel Klein]

Thanks WSC; elegantly put.

On survey process: seconding what others have said,
if you have gotten ~1000 of a desired 4000 responses, and haven't asked two
questions that you realize are essential, yes it is absolutely worth
running a new survey w the new options.

You can even identify cross-survey-iteration correlation : after drafting
an updated survey (and a banner for it) you could randomly offer 20% of
participants the _old_ survey and use correlation there to infer a way to
jointly interpret both versions.

S.

On Mon., Jun. 29, 2020, 4:35 a.m. Ariel Glenn WMF, 
wrote:

>
> I understand that good faith efforts were made to investigate the usability
> of the terms "W" and "Wiki". [1] Once these wiki-related terms were off the
> table, the options were narrowed to "Wikipedia plus some term" for survey
> purposes. While the survey is thus useful to see which Wikipedia-based name
> community members prefer most, it excludes the options "no change" and
> "change but not to a Wikipedia-based term".
>
> It is possible that people crunching the numbers already know what
> percentages of the community(ies) support the other two options based on
> rfcs and so on. If this is so, it would be great for that information to be
> made public.
>
> If however those numbers are not known, I would urge that an addendum to
> the survey be run that asks people to select one of the following; "no
> change", "new name containing the term Wikipedia", "new name not containing
> the term Wikipedia". I believe that even if this would cause the timeline
> to slip a little, it would be worth it.
>
> Ariel "Wearing sporadic-volunteer hat" Glenn
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Naming_convention_proposals/Naming_FAQ#Were_there_other_naming_convention_proposals_that_did_not_end_up_in_the_survey?_Why_were_they_eliminated
> ?
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 12:06 AM WereSpielChequers <
> werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear Natalia,
> >
> > I wouldn't say that it was a badly designed survey, more that it was a
> > survey designed to constrain responses to three specific options. The
> > problem is with the choice of those options and that the survey seems to
> be
> > designed to push the community into a particular direction, rather than
> > find out what direction if any the community wanted to go in.
> >
> > "No name change is necessary" is not the only missing option. I'm sure I
> am
> > not the only person who accepts that Wikipedia and Wikimedia are
> > sufficiently similar that it causes confusion, or who knows that some
> > people assume that we are connected to WikiLeaks. Changing the name of
> the
> > WMF to something that is a suitable parent for all the projects, not just
> > Wikipedia, and that reduces confusion with WikiLeaks should be a
> relatively
> > harmless thing for the WMF to do. There are only a limited number of
> > projects that the WMF can take on at any time, and this wouldn't have
> been
> > my priority. But if you are going to rebrand, then doing so without
> > differentiating yourselves from WikiLeaks, and without maintaining some
> > sense of being a parent for multiple projects not just one favoured
> child,
> > does seem to me to be a mistake. So "if you want to change your name,
> don't
> > change it to Wikipedia, Wiki or to something you can't trademark" is
> also a
> > position, I suspect it is stronger than "no name change is necessary".
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > WereSpielChequers
> >
> >
> >
> > Message: 1
> > > Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 02:27:11 +0300
> > > From: Nataliia Tymkiv 
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> > > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps
> > > Message-ID:
> > > <
> > > cakt1n5oks9e_vaez4lkizjrv_9p4oqjscc26fvyvykip13y...@mail.gmail.com>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> > >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I want to share with you the next steps of the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board
> > > of Trustees about the Brand Project.
> > >
> > > Originally the Board meeting dedicated to the brand project was
> supposed
> > to
> > > happen no earlier than October. The expected outcome from the project
> > were
> > > the recommendations on what the rebranding should look like - from
> > changing
> > > fonts/logos to renaming. And if there is going to be a renaming - to
> > what.
> > > Of course, the Board’s role is not in approving a change in fonts, but
> > if a
> > > recommendation to rename was to be made - the Board’s role would have
> > been
> > > to make a decision on that recommendation. The timeline has now been
> > > changed, and the renaming part of rebranding will be discussed in our
> > > August meeting.
> > >
> > > Moreover, the Board will meet in early July to receive a briefing about
> > the
> > > project and talk about the process between June 2018 - June 2020. The
> > > consolidated materials on what the brand project team has been working
> on
> > > for a 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers

[Joseph Seddon]

From reports I am seeing on facebook it seems this problem is localised on
our Africa based users?

Regards
Seddon

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:05 PM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> I get this:
>
> The connection has timed out
>
> The server at en.wikipedia.org is taking too long to respond.
>
> The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a
> few moments.
> If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer’s network
> connection.
> If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make
> sure that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.
>
> After a long wait. Been like this for several hours now.
> Most sites no problem
> Cheers,
> P
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Amir Sarabadani
> Sent: 29 June 2020 15:31
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers
>
> Hey,
> Can you elaborate more? I can access the website and graphs seems okay:
>
> https://grafana.wikimedia.org/d/RIA1lzDZk/application-servers-red-dashboard?orgId=1=now-3h=now
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:24 PM Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Amir (he/him)
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.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,
> 



-- 
Seddon

*Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
*Advancement (Fundraising), Wikimedia Foundation*
___
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 servers

[Amir Sarabadani]

Thanks.
Can you please file a bug using this instructions?
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reporting_a_connectivity_issue
(If you can't access it:
https://wikitech-static.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reporting_a_connectivity_issue)
(If you can't access even that:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190620092417/https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reporting_a_connectivity_issue
)

Best

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:05 PM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> I get this:
>
> The connection has timed out
>
> The server at en.wikipedia.org is taking too long to respond.
>
> The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a
> few moments.
> If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer’s network
> connection.
> If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make
> sure that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.
>
> After a long wait. Been like this for several hours now.
> Most sites no problem
> Cheers,
> P
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Amir Sarabadani
> Sent: 29 June 2020 15:31
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers
>
> Hey,
> Can you elaborate more? I can access the website and graphs seems okay:
>
> https://grafana.wikimedia.org/d/RIA1lzDZk/application-servers-red-dashboard?orgId=1=now-3h=now
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:24 PM Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Amir (he/him)
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.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,
> 



-- 
Amir (he/him)
___
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 servers

[Peter Southwood]

I get this:

The connection has timed out

The server at en.wikipedia.org is taking too long to respond.

The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a few 
moments.
If you are unable to load any pages, check your computer’s network 
connection.
If your computer or network is protected by a firewall or proxy, make sure 
that Firefox is permitted to access the Web.

After a long wait. Been like this for several hours now.
Most sites no problem
Cheers,
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Amir Sarabadani
Sent: 29 June 2020 15:31
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers

Hey,
Can you elaborate more? I can access the website and graphs seems okay:
https://grafana.wikimedia.org/d/RIA1lzDZk/application-servers-red-dashboard?orgId=1=now-3h=now

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:24 PM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Peter
>
> ___
> 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,
> 



-- 
Amir (he/him)
___
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, 


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia servers

[Amir Sarabadani]

Hey,
Can you elaborate more? I can access the website and graphs seems okay:
https://grafana.wikimedia.org/d/RIA1lzDZk/application-servers-red-dashboard?orgId=1=now-3h=now

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:24 PM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Peter
>
> ___
> 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,
> 



-- 
Amir (he/him)
___
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] Community open letter on renaming

[Anders Wennersten]

I want to express my gratitude to the people who have put up this letter 
on meta [1)


I see it as a much more professional way of expressing movement 
opinions, then the usual Rfc's (that also already exist related to the 
2030 movement brand project).


I do like that both entities (Affiliates, User groups and Chapters) and 
users can express their opinions. And also that with the user 
signatures, there are  info on what projects they are active on and in 
what capacity.


Besides being an very strong message to the Board, I believe this way 
can also indicate ways of governing in the movement. In the strategy the 
creation of a Global Council is recommended. But I wonder if any type of 
representative body works well in our movement, or if it will just 
beanother entity for the "community" to get angry with.


Could this type of expressing the will of the movement be an alternative 
to creating a new body? And if we should learn to evolve this type of 
expressing opinions even further?


Anders

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_open_letter_on_renaming


___
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] Wikimedia servers

[Peter Southwood]

Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?

Cheers,

Peter

___
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] Board update on Branding: next steps

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Dunning and Kruger have nothing to do with it; I am perfectly able to get
it wrong. What you do is dismissive and you do not make a point. That makes
it a fail by default.
Thanks,
 GerardM

On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 13:58, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Dunning and Kruger identified the effect, unfortunately they did not
> identify a cure.
> Cheers,
> P
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: 29 June 2020 12:36
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps
>
> Hoi,
> Just analyse the text, read the arguments. When you express an opinion, it
> warrants analysis. When this is not permitted it follows that you can not
> argue based on what people state. To what extend do you allow for the
> exchange of arguments when you do not allow for reading and commenting on
> what has been expressed?
>
> For the record I do value WereSpielChequers, he is imho an accomplished
> Wikimedian who I respect.
>
> When you tell me that I cannot comment on what people write, how do you
> expose a bias. What does it do for a freedom of expression? What I bring
> are arguments that you do not refute by dismissing them.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 11:43, Benjamin Lees  wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:56 AM Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear WereSpielChequers, the thing with bias is that it shows in the
> > choices
> > > made. You are a Wikipedian, do not really care for the other projects
> and
> > > you make that plain in what you say.
> > >
> >
> > This sort of assumption-making about other list participants' motives is
> > completely unwarranted.[1]  You've been doing it repeatedly.  Please
> stop.
> >
> > [1] As regards WereSpielChequers, it is also demonstrably false.  He has
> > nearly 500,000 edits on Commons.
> > ___
> > 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,
> 
>
> --
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.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,
> 
___
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] Board update on Branding: next steps

[Peter Southwood]

Dunning and Kruger identified the effect, unfortunately they did not identify a 
cure.
Cheers,
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: 29 June 2020 12:36
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps

Hoi,
Just analyse the text, read the arguments. When you express an opinion, it
warrants analysis. When this is not permitted it follows that you can not
argue based on what people state. To what extend do you allow for the
exchange of arguments when you do not allow for reading and commenting on
what has been expressed?

For the record I do value WereSpielChequers, he is imho an accomplished
Wikimedian who I respect.

When you tell me that I cannot comment on what people write, how do you
expose a bias. What does it do for a freedom of expression? What I bring
are arguments that you do not refute by dismissing them.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 11:43, Benjamin Lees  wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:56 AM Gerard Meijssen  >
> wrote:
>
> > Dear WereSpielChequers, the thing with bias is that it shows in the
> choices
> > made. You are a Wikipedian, do not really care for the other projects and
> > you make that plain in what you say.
> >
>
> This sort of assumption-making about other list participants' motives is
> completely unwarranted.[1]  You've been doing it repeatedly.  Please stop.
>
> [1] As regards WereSpielChequers, it is also demonstrably false.  He has
> nearly 500,000 edits on Commons.
> ___
> 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, 


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps

[Peter Southwood]

So far it has been an ongoing process. No obvious reason to expect a change.
Cheers,
P

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Dan Szymborski
Sent: 28 June 2020 18:13
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps

Question about the timeline: will the community's opinions be ignored at
the July or at the August meeting? Or is this considered a continual
process? This information would help people with their planning.

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 8:37 PM Zack McCune  wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> We want to confirm that the Brand Project team has been directed by the
> Board to develop new branding options and to evaluate those options with
> communities. We invite your perspectives.
>
> We are asking that you continue to participate in the process which
> includes completing the survey, available in 7 languages.[1] Your
> participation in this survey will not be calculated as support for a
> change.
>
> We have been alerted to the Community open letter on renaming. We will take
> that information into the process.
>
> The Board will consider all the options, including the option to do
> nothing, and make a decision at their August meeting.
>
>-
>
>Zack & the Brand Project team
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Naming_convention_proposals
>
>
> On Friday, June 26, 2020, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> > The timeline is pretty clear. Glad to know about the special board
> meeting
> > in early July. Other than the open letter there was a straw poll also:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_
> > brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Community_feedback_and_straw_poll
> > The early July briefing, I hope that will be presenting all the aspects
> and
> > opinions.
> >
> > Thanks
> > User:Titodutta
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 04:57, Nataliia Tymkiv 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I want to share with you the next steps of the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board
> > > of Trustees about the Brand Project.
> > >
> > > Originally the Board meeting dedicated to the brand project was
> supposed
> > to
> > > happen no earlier than October. The expected outcome from the project
> > were
> > > the recommendations on what the rebranding should look like - from
> > changing
> > > fonts/logos to renaming. And if there is going to be a renaming - to
> > what.
> > > Of course, the Board’s role is not in approving a change in fonts, but
> > if a
> > > recommendation to rename was to be made - the Board’s role would have
> > been
> > > to make a decision on that recommendation. The timeline has now been
> > > changed, and the renaming part of rebranding will be discussed in our
> > > August meeting.
> > >
> > > Moreover, the Board will meet in early July to receive a briefing about
> > the
> > > project and talk about the process between June 2018 - June 2020. The
> > > consolidated materials on what the brand project team has been working
> on
> > > for a while now will be presented to the Board, and these materials are
> > > also going to be posted publicly. The more-strategic conversation is
> > > planned for the August meeting. Time to prepare the materials is
> needed,
> > > and the ongoing conversations need to be summarised, so the Board can
> > have
> > > an in-depth discussion about this, before making any kind of decision.
> > >
> > > We would like to continue with the survey [1] - we have discussed the
> > > possibility of technical changes to the survey with an additional
> option
> > > like “no renaming is needed” (not the exact words, mind you), but with
> > more
> > > than 700 respondents it is not methodologically sound to change the
> > survey
> > > now. Staff have confirmed to the Board that responses to the survey
> will
> > > not be calculated as support for a change. The survey was only designed
> > to
> > > collect feedback on the possible renaming options, not as a yes/no vote
> > on
> > > whether to adopt them.
> > >
> > > Thus the timeline on rebranding for the next 6-7 weeks is as follows:
> > >
> > > * Early July - special Board meeting with the Brand project team to
> > review
> > > and discuss the process so far, and for the Board members to receive
> the
> > > briefing on discussions happening;
> > >
> > > * July - consolidated materials prepared for the July meeting will be
> > > posted publicly after the meeting;
> > >
> > > * August 5th - the Board meeting on renaming part of the rebranding,
> not
> > > about the process. The Board will make the decision about whether to
> > stop,
> > > pause, or continue the work on this, within the framework of a
> discussion
> > > on strategic goals, tensions and tradeoffs, and potential next steps.
> > >
> > > * August (after the meeting) - the Board statement on the next steps
> > about
> > > the Brand project.
> > >
> > > I also want to 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps

[Gnangarra]

It's not rocket science, ask an advertising/PR consulting company what they
think about renaming, they are going to go with the easiest option that's
the best known identity.   It's a no brainer exercise of take the money and
run.

There is more to this community/movement than its choice of name, to get to
those aspects and come up with something new is an exercise that no
PR/advertising company wants to take on without substantial outlay and
healthy profit because failure will be remembered long after the last
cheque is cashed.  You only need to look at how the outcome of
Alphabet/Google naming to realise that deeper meanings exist.  Wikipedia is
more than just a brand outside the movement, it's synonymous with it being
a community, with trusted knowledge, and significantly something that
somehow worked when everything the experts assumed about collaboration said
it shouldn't.

Yes we know the board can do whatever they want, call themselves whatever
they want,  the question has always been should they?, even then they
should have known not to.

The Wikimedia Foundation will always be a distant second to Wikipedia even
if they try to take on the name Wikipedia, which is as it should be as
Wikipedia is not about the Board or Foundation both of whom are there to
only support the projects.  It's beholden upon us as community members to
grow the community, to grow the content , and ensure its quality the
Foundation is there to provide the support/foundations we need to do our
part. While the Board is there to ensure that the WMF acts within the
bounds of its scope and complies with its legal requirements as a charity.

WMF and the Board are just the pilot and tug boat whos knowledge is meant
to keep us off the rocks, tug boats dont take on the name of the ship they
have their own identity.

On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 18:36, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> Just analyse the text, read the arguments. When you express an opinion, it
> warrants analysis. When this is not permitted it follows that you can not
> argue based on what people state. To what extend do you allow for the
> exchange of arguments when you do not allow for reading and commenting on
> what has been expressed?
>
> For the record I do value WereSpielChequers, he is imho an accomplished
> Wikimedian who I respect.
>
> When you tell me that I cannot comment on what people write, how do you
> expose a bias. What does it do for a freedom of expression? What I bring
> are arguments that you do not refute by dismissing them.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 11:43, Benjamin Lees  wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:56 AM Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear WereSpielChequers, the thing with bias is that it shows in the
> > choices
> > > made. You are a Wikipedian, do not really care for the other projects
> and
> > > you make that plain in what you say.
> > >
> >
> > This sort of assumption-making about other list participants' motives is
> > completely unwarranted.[1]  You've been doing it repeatedly.  Please
> stop.
> >
> > [1] As regards WereSpielChequers, it is also demonstrably false.  He has
> > nearly 500,000 edits on Commons.
> > ___
> > 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,
> 



-- 
GN.

*Power of Diverse Collaboration*
*Sharing knowledge brings people together*
Wikimania Bangkok 2021
August
hosted by ESEAP

Wikimania: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
My print shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u
___
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] Board update on Branding: next steps

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Just analyse the text, read the arguments. When you express an opinion, it
warrants analysis. When this is not permitted it follows that you can not
argue based on what people state. To what extend do you allow for the
exchange of arguments when you do not allow for reading and commenting on
what has been expressed?

For the record I do value WereSpielChequers, he is imho an accomplished
Wikimedian who I respect.

When you tell me that I cannot comment on what people write, how do you
expose a bias. What does it do for a freedom of expression? What I bring
are arguments that you do not refute by dismissing them.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 at 11:43, Benjamin Lees  wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:56 AM Gerard Meijssen  >
> wrote:
>
> > Dear WereSpielChequers, the thing with bias is that it shows in the
> choices
> > made. You are a Wikipedian, do not really care for the other projects and
> > you make that plain in what you say.
> >
>
> This sort of assumption-making about other list participants' motives is
> completely unwarranted.[1]  You've been doing it repeatedly.  Please stop.
>
> [1] As regards WereSpielChequers, it is also demonstrably false.  He has
> nearly 500,000 edits on Commons.
> ___
> 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] Board update on Branding: next steps

[Benjamin Lees]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 4:56 AM Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Dear WereSpielChequers, the thing with bias is that it shows in the choices
> made. You are a Wikipedian, do not really care for the other projects and
> you make that plain in what you say.
>

This sort of assumption-making about other list participants' motives is
completely unwarranted.[1]  You've been doing it repeatedly.  Please stop.

[1] As regards WereSpielChequers, it is also demonstrably false.  He has
nearly 500,000 edits on Commons.
___
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] Board update on Branding: next steps

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Dear WereSpielChequers, the thing with bias is that it shows in the choices
made. You are a Wikipedian, do not really care for the other projects and
you make that plain in what you say. The problem with bias is that it has
consequences in how you approach issues. When Wikipedia "consensus" has it
that we do not collaborate with Wikidata, it follows that you will not
consider linking blue and red wiki links to Wikidata items and not to
Wikipedia titles. From a Wikipedia point of view it is perfectly acceptable
but no longer a great choice. From a Wikimedia point of view,
not considering options shows that there is no consideration for our
overall goal; sharing in the sum of all knowledge.

Wikimedia has multiple projects and we will have more impact when we
collaborate. Commons is searchable in any and all languages thanks to
Special:MediaSearch [1], when we expose it on every Wikipedia, it will be
easier to illustrate Wikipedias. Wikidata can rid Wikipedia of much of its
false friends problem and it can ensure that lists are better maintained.
Magnus has shown that this is true even for English Wikipedia and as always
English Wikipedia is only one of the Wikipedias.

When Wikipedia is mentioned, English Wikipedia is implied. It has something
like 50% of our traffic and it does represent less than 50% or our target
audience. I am all for improving the marketing of our projects but the bias
for and the toxicity of English Wikipedia makes me oppose it. In essence,
it is English Wikipedia that has to polish up its act, accept
opposing points of view from others before it becomes reasonable to accept
it as a flagship.
Thanks,
  GerardM



[1]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MediaSearch?type=bitmap=boomkikker

On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 at 23:06, WereSpielChequers 
wrote:

> Dear Natalia,
>
> I wouldn't say that it was a badly designed survey, more that it was a
> survey designed to constrain responses to three specific options. The
> problem is with the choice of those options and that the survey seems to be
> designed to push the community into a particular direction, rather than
> find out what direction if any the community wanted to go in.
>
> "No name change is necessary" is not the only missing option. I'm sure I am
> not the only person who accepts that Wikipedia and Wikimedia are
> sufficiently similar that it causes confusion, or who knows that some
> people assume that we are connected to WikiLeaks. Changing the name of the
> WMF to something that is a suitable parent for all the projects, not just
> Wikipedia, and that reduces confusion with WikiLeaks should be a relatively
> harmless thing for the WMF to do. There are only a limited number of
> projects that the WMF can take on at any time, and this wouldn't have been
> my priority. But if you are going to rebrand, then doing so without
> differentiating yourselves from WikiLeaks, and without maintaining some
> sense of being a parent for multiple projects not just one favoured child,
> does seem to me to be a mistake. So "if you want to change your name, don't
> change it to Wikipedia, Wiki or to something you can't trademark" is also a
> position, I suspect it is stronger than "no name change is necessary".
>
>
> Regards
>
> WereSpielChequers
>
>
>
> Message: 1
> > Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 02:27:11 +0300
> > From: Nataliia Tymkiv 
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps
> > Message-ID:
> > <
> > cakt1n5oks9e_vaez4lkizjrv_9p4oqjscc26fvyvykip13y...@mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I want to share with you the next steps of the Wikimedia Foundation Board
> > of Trustees about the Brand Project.
> >
> > Originally the Board meeting dedicated to the brand project was supposed
> to
> > happen no earlier than October. The expected outcome from the project
> were
> > the recommendations on what the rebranding should look like - from
> changing
> > fonts/logos to renaming. And if there is going to be a renaming - to
> what.
> > Of course, the Board’s role is not in approving a change in fonts, but
> if a
> > recommendation to rename was to be made - the Board’s role would have
> been
> > to make a decision on that recommendation. The timeline has now been
> > changed, and the renaming part of rebranding will be discussed in our
> > August meeting.
> >
> > Moreover, the Board will meet in early July to receive a briefing about
> the
> > project and talk about the process between June 2018 - June 2020. The
> > consolidated materials on what the brand project team has been working on
> > for a while now will be presented to the Board, and these materials are
> > also going to be posted publicly. The more-strategic conversation is
> > planned for the August meeting. Time to prepare the materials is needed,
> > and the ongoing conversations need to be summarised, so the Board can
> have
> > an in-depth discussion about this, before 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps

[Ariel Glenn WMF]

Thank you WereSpielChequers for writing so clearly and concisely what I
have been struggling to put into words for some days.

I understand that good faith efforts were made to investigate the usability
of the terms "W" and "Wiki". [1] Once these wiki-related terms were off the
table, the options were narrowed to "Wikipedia plus some term" for survey
purposes. While the survey is thus useful to see which Wikipedia-based name
community members prefer most, it excludes the options "no change" and
"change but not to a Wikipedia-based term".

It is possible that people crunching the numbers already know what
percentages of the community(ies) support the other two options based on
rfcs and so on. If this is so, it would be great for that information to be
made public.

If however those numbers are not known, I would urge that an addendum to
the survey be run that asks people to select one of the following; "no
change", "new name containing the term Wikipedia", "new name not containing
the term Wikipedia". I believe that even if this would cause the timeline
to slip a little, it would be worth it.

Ariel "Wearing sporadic-volunteer hat" Glenn

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Naming_convention_proposals/Naming_FAQ#Were_there_other_naming_convention_proposals_that_did_not_end_up_in_the_survey?_Why_were_they_eliminated
?

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 12:06 AM WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Natalia,
>
> I wouldn't say that it was a badly designed survey, more that it was a
> survey designed to constrain responses to three specific options. The
> problem is with the choice of those options and that the survey seems to be
> designed to push the community into a particular direction, rather than
> find out what direction if any the community wanted to go in.
>
> "No name change is necessary" is not the only missing option. I'm sure I am
> not the only person who accepts that Wikipedia and Wikimedia are
> sufficiently similar that it causes confusion, or who knows that some
> people assume that we are connected to WikiLeaks. Changing the name of the
> WMF to something that is a suitable parent for all the projects, not just
> Wikipedia, and that reduces confusion with WikiLeaks should be a relatively
> harmless thing for the WMF to do. There are only a limited number of
> projects that the WMF can take on at any time, and this wouldn't have been
> my priority. But if you are going to rebrand, then doing so without
> differentiating yourselves from WikiLeaks, and without maintaining some
> sense of being a parent for multiple projects not just one favoured child,
> does seem to me to be a mistake. So "if you want to change your name, don't
> change it to Wikipedia, Wiki or to something you can't trademark" is also a
> position, I suspect it is stronger than "no name change is necessary".
>
>
> Regards
>
> WereSpielChequers
>
>
>
> Message: 1
> > Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 02:27:11 +0300
> > From: Nataliia Tymkiv 
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Board update on Branding: next steps
> > Message-ID:
> > <
> > cakt1n5oks9e_vaez4lkizjrv_9p4oqjscc26fvyvykip13y...@mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I want to share with you the next steps of the Wikimedia Foundation Board
> > of Trustees about the Brand Project.
> >
> > Originally the Board meeting dedicated to the brand project was supposed
> to
> > happen no earlier than October. The expected outcome from the project
> were
> > the recommendations on what the rebranding should look like - from
> changing
> > fonts/logos to renaming. And if there is going to be a renaming - to
> what.
> > Of course, the Board’s role is not in approving a change in fonts, but
> if a
> > recommendation to rename was to be made - the Board’s role would have
> been
> > to make a decision on that recommendation. The timeline has now been
> > changed, and the renaming part of rebranding will be discussed in our
> > August meeting.
> >
> > Moreover, the Board will meet in early July to receive a briefing about
> the
> > project and talk about the process between June 2018 - June 2020. The
> > consolidated materials on what the brand project team has been working on
> > for a while now will be presented to the Board, and these materials are
> > also going to be posted publicly. The more-strategic conversation is
> > planned for the August meeting. Time to prepare the materials is needed,
> > and the ongoing conversations need to be summarised, so the Board can
> have
> > an in-depth discussion about this, before making any kind of decision.
> >
> > We would like to continue with the survey [1] - we have discussed the
> > possibility of technical changes to the survey with an additional option
> > like “no renaming is needed” (not the exact words, mind you), but with
> more
> > than 700 respondents it is not methodologically