Re: [Wikimediauk-l] WMUK Facebook page

[David Gerard]

On 14 March 2014 19:31, Michael Peel  wrote:
> On 14 Mar 2014, at 19:19, David Gerard  wrote:

>> https://www.facebook.com/WikimediaUK
>> For your amusement.

> Not sure I get the amusement here?


I mean, just that it exists and is there!


> BTW, if you want a trip down history lane, have a look at:
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/5678482133/


Yeah, I was reminded 'cos apparently I'm an admin on that group and
got a join request from Chris McKenna ...


- d.

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] WMUK Facebook page

[Michael Peel]

On 14 Mar 2014, at 19:19, David Gerard  wrote:

> https://www.facebook.com/WikimediaUK
> 
> For your amusement.

Not sure I get the amusement here?

BTW, if you want a trip down history lane, have a look at:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/5678482133/

Thanks,
Mike

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [GLAM] Fwd: Community consultation on WMUK's Wikimedia in Residence programme

[Fæ]

On 14 March 2014 15:31, Daria Cybulska  wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> Just a reminder about our survey on Wikimedians in Residence. I'm really 
> looking forward to see what you all think about the programme!
> https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/MKMJCVR

Before I go through the survey, I would like to be able to compare the
original planned/proposed outcomes for each WIR funded over the last
year or so with the final reported outcomes. Is there a summary or
list of reports and agreements I can refer to? As I understand it,
this was a contract condition of funding in the standard UK WIR
chapter agreement.

Unfortunately, although I am quite aware of these projects, I have not
followed them in detail and so don't automatically know where to find
the reports on the UK wiki.

Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

[Wikimediauk-l] WMUK Facebook page

[David Gerard]

https://www.facebook.com/WikimediaUK

For your amusement.


- d.

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Letter to MEPs on copyright

[Michael Peel]

Hi Stevie,

Thanks from me also for sharing this. Some points:

# The images you are using all appear to be copyright violations - not the best 
move! Why not attribute the images, or link to where they're available on 
Commons or elsewhere? For the image not covered by FoP, why not do something 
like the photos in 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Censored_by_lack_of_FOP ?
# I'm never sure about how orphan works should relate to free licenses. I'm 
sure that a number of my CC licensed photos could now be claimed by others to 
be orphan works as people have taken them from Wikipedia and reused them 
without attribution. I'd actually suggest removing this point completely unless 
you can explain how it might work in this sort of case or better nuance the 
text here.
# "As can be seen in this article" won't work once you print the letter out!
# What does it mean by 'on your group of MEPs'? Aren't you addressing them 
individually with this? Are you meaning UK MEPs?
# If you want the MEPs to read through to the end, then I'd recommend 
condensing it down to two sides (and print it double-sided) so that they only 
have to flip the page over rather than flip through pages. Also, you only need 
the disclaimer on the first page rather than all three.
# I still don't understand why 'start-ups' are mentioned here (as I asked at 
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Talk:Free_Knowledge_Advocacy_Group_EU_statement_of_intent#Query
 but with no reply).
# I agree with Fæ's points below.

Thanks,
Mike

On 14 Mar 2014, at 17:54, Fæ  wrote:

> Thanks for letting people know that the UK chapter is sending this letter.
> 
> It is a shame that so few Wikimedians in the UK have contributed to
> the process, I think it is correct to say that even after counting
> employees and trustees, the number is fewer than could be counted on
> the fingers of one hand.
> 
> I am assuming that the UK charity is open to receiving feedback,
> though your email here, nor your equivalent notice on the UK wiki does
> not invite comment. My apologies if my assumption is unfounded, please
> ignore the following points if that is the case.
> 
> Three points:
> 1.
> I note that the letter appears to state that the Free Knowledge
> Advocacy Group EU is a UK charity, it might be an idea to get the
> prose slightly more specific.
> 
> 2.
> The lead paragraph states "We are the UK based charity that supports
> and promotes Wikipedia and its sister websites such as Wikimedia
> Commons". This is quite different from the WMUK Mission as recently
> approved by the board of trustees which does not mention Wikipedia or
> Commons. I suggest that in an official letter of this type, that the
> charity is described as accurately as possible, even in a plain
> English summary.
> 
> 3.
> Were I the recipient I would be unclear if in emailing back, I were
> responding to the WMUK charity or the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group
> EU. The Royal "we" used throughout the letter is more than a little
> confusing as it is signed by the CEO of possibly either (or both) of
> WMUK and the Advocacy Group and correspondence email is a different
> personal address. Is the letter intended to be from the UK charity or
> the group of organizations in the Advocacy Group?
> 
> Good luck with the letter. I'm sure that Jon Davies' practical
> experience in the world of politics will prove useful if any MEP would
> benefit from a follow-up, such as a discussion over lunch.
> 
> Fae
> -- 
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia UK mailing list
> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk


___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Letter to MEPs on copyright

[Fæ]

Thanks for letting people know that the UK chapter is sending this letter.

It is a shame that so few Wikimedians in the UK have contributed to
the process, I think it is correct to say that even after counting
employees and trustees, the number is fewer than could be counted on
the fingers of one hand.

I am assuming that the UK charity is open to receiving feedback,
though your email here, nor your equivalent notice on the UK wiki does
not invite comment. My apologies if my assumption is unfounded, please
ignore the following points if that is the case.

Three points:
1.
I note that the letter appears to state that the Free Knowledge
Advocacy Group EU is a UK charity, it might be an idea to get the
prose slightly more specific.

2.
The lead paragraph states "We are the UK based charity that supports
and promotes Wikipedia and its sister websites such as Wikimedia
Commons". This is quite different from the WMUK Mission as recently
approved by the board of trustees which does not mention Wikipedia or
Commons. I suggest that in an official letter of this type, that the
charity is described as accurately as possible, even in a plain
English summary.

3.
Were I the recipient I would be unclear if in emailing back, I were
responding to the WMUK charity or the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group
EU. The Royal "we" used throughout the letter is more than a little
confusing as it is signed by the CEO of possibly either (or both) of
WMUK and the Advocacy Group and correspondence email is a different
personal address. Is the letter intended to be from the UK charity or
the group of organizations in the Advocacy Group?

Good luck with the letter. I'm sure that Jon Davies' practical
experience in the world of politics will prove useful if any MEP would
benefit from a follow-up, such as a discussion over lunch.

Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

[Wikimediauk-l] Letter to MEPs on copyright

[Stevie Benton]

Hello everyone.

You may be interested to note that Wikimedia UK is writing to all 73 UK
MEPs regarding copyright. In line with the work we've done with the Free
Knowledge Advocacy Group EU (group of European Wikimedia chapters) we are
looking for support for change in three areas: freedom of panorama; public
domain of publicly-funded works; and use of orphan works. If you'd like to
see the letter, it's
here.
It will be going out next week (with a couple of minor modifications) in
the post and also by email.

Thank you,

Stevie

-- 

Stevie Benton
Head of External Relations
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173
@StevieBenton

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England
and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513.
Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street,
London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a
global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the
Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).

*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal
control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Community consultation on WMUK's Wikimedia in Residence programme

[Charles Matthews]

On 8 March 2014 20:23, Andy Mabbett  wrote:

> On 7 March 2014 11:28, Charles Matthews 
> wrote:
>
> > Bottom line: without WMUK having their finger in the pie, process and
> aims
> > of a WiR are entirely down to the institution.
>
> That simply isn't true.
>
> Each of the residences and similar work I've undertaken, independent
> of WMUK (and including the one that did involve WMUK, at ARKive), I've
> negotiated the role, making clear what I would /and would not/ be
> prepared to do, and that my edits would be made in the interests, and
> according to the standards, of Wikipedia.
>
>
It is what any serious community member would indicate, whenever the point
came up, relative to COI. It also, really, only speaks to implementation.

There is nothing at all to guarantee that the job spec that an institution
comes up with will permit this approach. If the Terms of Use of Wikipedia
are revised, as is quite likely, to treat "paid editing" more charily, the
whole business might become more fraught, or much clearer, depending on the
drafting.

I was going to bring up at some point the case of Benjamin Zephaniah and
the poet-in-residence position at Trinity College, Cambridge. A friend of
mine was involved enough to be able to say that Zephaniah was the most
talented candidate; but he didn't get elected. Institutions always do have
their own criteria, and they aren't necessarily what you'd think. It is a
bit facile to argue otherwise.

Charles
___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Allegation of thefts at London wikimeets

[Fæ]

On 14 March 2014 15:48, David Gerard  wrote:
...
> Well done on feeding it, though.

Don't worry, I keep a couple of cookies in reserve for latecomers.

Fae

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Allegation of thefts at London wikimeets

[David Gerard]

On 14 March 2014 15:39, Fæ  wrote:
> On 14 March 2014 11:17, Katie Chan  wrote:

>> I can confirm that no Wikimedia UK equipment has gone missing. All of
>> Wikimedia UK's laptops and cameras are either currently with the office, or
>> based in Wales as part of the 'Living Paths!' project.

> I see that "John4545" has claimed to have information from a WMUK
> employee that directly contradicts Katie's statement, so I think it
> reasonable to conclude that this is an anonymous troll on a drama
> creation spree or someone who has half the facts.



Well done on feeding it, though.


- d.

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Long-term loans of WMUK equipment (was Re: Allegation of thefts at London wikimeets)

[Andy Mabbett]

,
On 14 March 2014 13:43, Chris McKenna  wrote:
> I have no in-principle objections to this (on-wiki reporting of long-term
> loans of equipment)

I have no problem with it being known that I have WMUK's Zoom-1
digital audio recorder; it's implicit in the microgrant application[1]
that it would be with me long-term.

It't been very useful though the number of recordings are lower than I
had hoped[2]. I intend to address that over the coming months.


[1] https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Microgrants/Recorder_for_voice_intro_project

[2] Theatres, sports clubs and the like have been less cooperative
than anticipated. Most individuals approached have been cooperative.


-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Allegation of thefts at London wikimeets

[Fæ]

On 14 March 2014 11:17, Katie Chan  wrote:
...
> I can confirm that no Wikimedia UK equipment has gone missing. All of
> Wikimedia UK's laptops and cameras are either currently with the office, or
> based in Wales as part of the 'Living Paths!' project.

I see that "John4545" has claimed to have information from a WMUK
employee that directly contradicts Katie's statement, so I think it
reasonable to conclude that this is an anonymous troll on a drama
creation spree or someone who has half the facts.

Fae

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Community consultation on WMUK's Wikimedia in Residence programme

[Daria Cybulska]

Good points here, many thanks!

I thought it would help to provide some explanations to the discussion here:

- Yes there were residencies that are not taken into considerations here.
We wanted to consider the residencies that had institutions in significant
cooperation with the chapter, the BL being in the grey area. It was felt
it's an important case to consider though.

- Mike is offering good points for additional aspects that could be
considered. If anyone has thoughts that go beyond the survey's questions,
please do email me!

Otherwise, it would be great to have more people contributing to the
survey.

Many thanks again,
Daria


On 9 March 2014 10:19, HJ Mitchell  wrote:

> I agree with Mike, but I would add that it's good that the chapter is
> seeking input on this sort of thing. Perhaps there could be somewhere on
> the wiki where folks can add freeform comments about WiRs that don;t
> necessarily fit into the answers to the survey questions?
>
> Harry Mitchell
> http://enwp.org/User:HJ
> Phone: 024 7698 0977
> Skype: harry_j_mitchell
>
>
>   On Friday, 7 March 2014, 23:06, Michael Peel <
> michael.p...@manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> On 6 Mar 2014, at 16:37, Michael Peel 
> wrote:
>
> >
> > On 6 Mar 2014, at 16:30, Richard Nevell 
> wrote:
> >
> >> As a chapter we have run the Wikimedian in Residence (WIR) programme
> since May 2012, when Andrew Gray started his residency at the British
> Library.
> >
> > You've missed out a couple of years of history there - British Museum,
> Derby, ARKive...
>
> As promised to Richard offlist, I've just gone through the survey and
> filled it in. There were a number of questions that were rather odd in
> their phrasing or allowed answers though. For example:
>
> Question 2: these were all very general questions (e.g. asking about the
> lengths of WiRs and their benefits to the community) that could only be
> answered 'Not at all', 'Moderately' and 'Completely'. I went for
> 'moderately' for all of these as there wasn't really anything to completely
> disagree or agree with here - e.g. length of residencies, it's not clear
> whether saying 'Completely' would indicate support of 3-month or 1-year
> residencies.
>
> Questions 5 and 6: these are nearly impossible to answer as a 'select 3'
> question. Having a ranked answer here would be much more effective.
>
> I was also expecting to see more questions on topics like 'what are the
> most important aspects and outcomes of a successful WiR project?', 'how
> would you like to be involved in future WiR projects?' and 'how can WiR
> projects better engage volunteers?'.
>
> My main suggestion would be: please share drafts of surveys like this
> on-wiki and ask for feedback on them before starting to ask for answers to
> them! WMUK's membership survey is a really good example of how such surveys
> can be collaboratively designed and carried out.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
> ___
> Wikimedia UK mailing list
> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia UK mailing list
> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
>



-- 
Daria Cybulska - Programme Manager, Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0994
+44 7803 505 170
-- 

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).

*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

[Wikimediauk-l] Server upgrade and database migrations - possible downtime

[Katherine Bavage]

Dear all,

I pass on the following message:

---

Hi All,

We're seeing a sudden and unexpected ramp up in load on the Wiki and Blog
in the last week or so (nearly doubled over this time in February, I
think!). Which is causing a bit of slow down.

We have a mitigation plan which looks like this:

* Tonight upgrade the server to be much more beefy
* Over the next week work on an aggressive schedule to migrate the
databases to the new DB instance
* Assess whether we can then downgrade the server a little once it is free
of MySQL

This does mean some downtime tonight during the upgrade (say, 15 minutes).
And potentially a little more downtime over the next week as I move things
around.



Please email t...@wikimedia.org.uk if you experience issues or need
assistance.

Regards,

*Katherine Bavage *
*Fundraising Manager *
*Wikimedia UK*
+44 20 7065 0752

Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).

*Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Long-term loans of WMUK equipment (was Re: Allegation of thefts at London wikimeets)

[Fæ]

On 14 March 2014 13:43, Chris McKenna  wrote:
> I have no in-principle objections to this (on-wiki reporting of long-term
> loans of equipment) as long as:
> (a) "Long-term" is defined.

I suggest that "long-term" does not mean taking kit to coordinate
events such as WMUK trainers helping at editathons or giving
presentations.

It means loans of more than a week to help content creation,
potentially for months or years to support a project. A volunteer
borrowing a camera for a six weeks while they travel abroad, so they
can take better photos for Commons, or an established regular
Wikipedia editor who is saving to buy a new laptop as their old one
was broken, and would like a loaner for 3 months, or an established
volunteer who had their house flooded and could benefit from borrowing
a wifi-box until their broadband is restored, are all reasonable
examples and in every case the outcome in terms of volunteer
contributions during or after the loan can be measured and reported
(to help with future justifications for loan equipment to be purchased
by the charity).

In many of these cases (the forecast-able ones) it would be preferable
to see a proposal on-wiki that can be discussed in advance by
volunteers rather than the decision for significant long term loans
only being made by employees during unrecorded discussions.

> (b) There is no requirement to breach anonymity (+ c & d)

What matters for Wikimedia projects is the account name doing the
editing. I would prefer the account doing the content creation to be
the one named on any long term loan and associated project(s). Records
needed to ensure equipment is insured by the charity is a private
matter and I don't see that compromising anonymity, in fact I don't
think Wikimedia UK ever had a problem with that distinction even
before we had offices and employees.

In regard to security or safety, pragmatic common sense can prevail on
recording where the kit might be. I cannot imagine these concerns
would be a justification for the complete secrecy that exists at the
moment over existing long term loans.

Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

[Wikimediauk-l] Long-term loans of WMUK equipment (was Re: Allegation of thefts at London wikimeets)

[Chris McKenna]

I have no in-principle objections to this (on-wiki reporting of 
long-term loans of equipment) as long as:
(a) "Long-term" is defined. 
(b) There is no requirement to breach anonymity (e.g. recording against 
username OR realname, as preferred by the volunteer, not necessarily 
both),
(c) People borrowing the equipment are informed that it will be recorded 
publically in advance.
(d) The recording does not endanger the safety/security of the volunteer 
and/or equipment.


For example I borrowed a laptop for the train-the-trainers event at the 
beginning of February (as mine was broken) and also transported another 
laptop for the use of a second volunteer. I spent a few days with my 
family en-route back from the training and used one of the laptops for 
purposes including (but not limited to) Wikipedia and Commons editing 
during that time. The other was with me but not used. Does this count as 
long-term?


Regarding the security aspect, I took I think it was four WMUK laptops 
(and my own) up to Newcastle for the editathon at the Mining Institute in 
November. If it was publicly known that I was carrying five laptops then 
there is a (admittedly small) chance that I could have been targetted by 
someone with criminal intent. In this case reporting the details after the 
event would not have the same security implications, and for a 2-day event 
the delay would not be very significant. This might not be the case for 
all scenarios though - e.g. someone borrowing a DSLR for a fornight to 
take photos of remote parts of the Western Isles.


Chris

On Fri, 14 Mar 2014, Fæ wrote:


I have no idea why long term loans should be in secret. If someone
wishes to borrow a camera or a laptop for a project that helps create
content for Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, the charity should
encourage an *open and transparent* proposal and report on the project
as one funded/supported by the charity. This is a good thing and we
should celebrate it.

If it turns out that long term secret loans over the last couple of
years are mostly to employees (outside of their defined role) or the
friends and family of employees, it could damage the reputation of the
charity if questioned on how it manages its assets to ensure that
there are no inappropriate benefits, and how it maintains its
commitment for transparency. In comparison, when the WMF has provided
money and equipment to worthy projects that lacked funds (many laptops
have been given out over the years), as far as I am aware, this has
never been done in secret, even if the justification was that the
potential contributors were not rich enough to purchase their own kit.

Please openly report long term loans on the charity's wiki. For
example, I see no reason why my long term loan of a Macmini should not
be a matter of public record, and I am prepared to report on related
content creation - doing otherwise is likely to fall in conflict with
the proposed changes to the Terms of Use of Wikimedia Foundation
websites. It would be unwise and potentially misleading to give
volunteers or employees with long term free loans of equipment the
impression that they would not be obliged to declare that their
editing/contributions were directly supported and effectively
sponsored by the charity.

Fae

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk



Chris McKenna

cmcke...@sucs.org
www.sucs.org/~cmckenna


The essential things in life are seen not with the eyes,
but with the heart

Antoine de Saint Exupery
___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Allegation of thefts at London wikimeets

[Fæ]

On 14 March 2014 11:17, Katie Chan  wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I can confirm that no Wikimedia UK equipment has gone missing. All of
> Wikimedia UK's laptops and cameras are either currently with the office, or
...
Thanks for these clarifications against Leutha's question. In the past
I recall that a laptop was accidentally broken and I believe a
borrowed camera did go missing a couple of years ago, but I think this
was not an asset of the charity. It is nice to know officially that no
equipment has ever been stolen or is now missing and that no attendee
at a wikimeet or a charity supported event has ever reported their kit
or mobile phones going missing or stolen. With these facts it does
appear that Jimmy's correspondent was probably trolling for some
reason.

> The office operates an internal record of the chapter's volunteer equipment
> both for tracking who has what and for how long, but also to enable us
> produce appropriate reporting for the Board of Trustees and FDC.

I have no idea why long term loans should be in secret. If someone
wishes to borrow a camera or a laptop for a project that helps create
content for Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, the charity should
encourage an *open and transparent* proposal and report on the project
as one funded/supported by the charity. This is a good thing and we
should celebrate it.

If it turns out that long term secret loans over the last couple of
years are mostly to employees (outside of their defined role) or the
friends and family of employees, it could damage the reputation of the
charity if questioned on how it manages its assets to ensure that
there are no inappropriate benefits, and how it maintains its
commitment for transparency. In comparison, when the WMF has provided
money and equipment to worthy projects that lacked funds (many laptops
have been given out over the years), as far as I am aware, this has
never been done in secret, even if the justification was that the
potential contributors were not rich enough to purchase their own kit.

Please openly report long term loans on the charity's wiki. For
example, I see no reason why my long term loan of a Macmini should not
be a matter of public record, and I am prepared to report on related
content creation - doing otherwise is likely to fall in conflict with
the proposed changes to the Terms of Use of Wikimedia Foundation
websites. It would be unwise and potentially misleading to give
volunteers or employees with long term free loans of equipment the
impression that they would not be obliged to declare that their
editing/contributions were directly supported and effectively
sponsored by the charity.

Fae

___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Allegation of thefts at London wikimeets

[Katie Chan]

Hi all,

I can confirm that no Wikimedia UK equipment has gone missing. All of
Wikimedia UK's laptops and cameras are either currently with the office, or
based in Wales as part of the 'Living Paths!' project. The Wikimedia UK
office has also never received any complaint about personal properties
being stolen as a result of attending a Wikimedia UK organised event. Were
such a complaint to be received, it will be treated seriously and we will
assist the police in any investigation they may conduct.

Whether we are talking about a community organised event such as the London
Meetup, or a Wikimedia UK organised event, I would encourage participants
to exercise care for their belongings just as they would anywhere else.

The office operates an internal record of the chapter's volunteer equipment
both for tracking who has what and for how long, but also to enable us
produce appropriate reporting for the Board of Trustees and FDC.

Regards,

Katie

-- 
Katie Chan
Volunteer Support Organiser
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 20 7065 0990
+44 (0) 7885 980 534

Wikimedia UK is a Charitable Company registered in England and Wales.
Registered Company No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513.
Registered Office: 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street,
London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom.
Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The
Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate
Wikipedia, amongst other projects).

Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.
___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Allegation of thefts at London wikimeets

[fabian]

Hi all,

Firstly I would note that the item on Jimmy's talk page is from an account
with a one-off edit, that its language is inuendo and gossip with
potentially a significantly bad impact on the person being fingered.

I think this is trolling.

However, the term "Wiki-related events" could refer to the London Wiki
meetups, or events organised by Wikimedia UK. Also, there is a specific
allegation that WMUK procedures are so lax that there are no adequate
records concerning WMUK equipment. The vague nature of the slur offers a
number of interpretations, including that the allegedly missing property
belongs to WMUK, and that WMUK is implicated in not taking appropriate
action.

Mike Peel's comment that "Apparently WMUK's not missing any equipment..."
is useful, but I feel WMUK needs to issue official confirmation,
specifically addressing:

a) Whether any WMUK property has gone missing
b) Whether any complaint about missing property has arisen from any WMUK
organised event
c) If either the above situations have arisen, how it is being handled
d) Clarifying that the London Meetups are a community-organised event held
in a public place at which participants are encouraged to exercise the
same level of care for their personal belongings as they would in any
other public venue.

I feel we need to nip this in the bud.

all the best

Fabian
User:Leutha



> Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 20:08:07 +
> From: Richard Symonds 
> To: UK Wikimedia mailing list 
> Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Allegation of thefts at London wikimeets
> Message-ID:
>   
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> This is the first I've heard of it - but it is indeed something that
> should
> be reported directly to the police. If true then it may well be a theft.
>
> If anyone has any more information about this, then please contact the
> police as a priority (dial 101).
>
> Otherwise, I think we should keep discussion on this list relatively
> general, as talking about a specific unsolved incident with other people
> in
> a public forum makes it much more difficult for the police to get best
> evidence, because it taints the evidence of others.
>
> Richard Symonds
> Wikimedia UK
> 0207 065 0992
>
> Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
> Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
> Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A
> 4LT.
> United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
> movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
> operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
>
> *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
> over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*



___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk