Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Recent changes and watchlists on the UK wiki are still broken

[Charles Matthews]

> On 08 January 2019 at 09:53 John Lubbock  
> wrote:
> Please ask us.
> 

Here's a thought I last expressed 20 years ago, to the chair of a voluntary 
organisation experiencing disaffection: when things get a bit better, people 
complain more.

That was in private, and I have no reason to assume it did any good. But I hope 
the logic might be taken on board in 2019.

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

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Recent changes and watchlists on the UK wiki are still broken

[John Lubbock]

But also: why not just do those small projects with the chapter? There's
nothing stopping anybody from organising an editathon and asking for help
and expenses for it by way of a small grant. I'd love to help people do
field trips for WLM, for example. I'm here to help, so please use me as a
resource within the chapter. The programmes team can also help you. Please
ask us.

John Lubbock

Communications Coordinator

Wikimedia UK

+44 (0) 203 372 0767



Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Office 1,
Ground Floor, Europoint, 5 - 11 Lavington Street, London SE1 0NZ.

Wikimedia UK is the national chapter of the global Wikimedia open knowledge
movement. We rely on donations from individuals to support our work to make
knowledge open for all. Have you considered supporting Wikimedia UK? Donate
here .

The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate
Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent
non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility
for its contents.*


On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 09:23, geni  wrote:

> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 23:41, Harry Mitchell  wrote:
> >
> > By the way, since I know you and I are not the only ones who feel, to be
> charitable to both sides, that WMUK's focus on large projects and
> residencies has squeezed out the smaller projects, why don't we set
> something else up?
>
> Because its another structure that needs supporting.
>
> >Not a chapter but a society of Wikimedians focusing on small projects
> that have a smaller but more immediate impact on editors and projects (for
> example editathons, field trips, events with small local history groups
> etc, experience-sharing events for experienced editors). There's no reason
> such a society couldn't dovetail with WMUK; it could even perhaps apply for
> some modest funding (low four figures at the very most) from WMUK or the
> WMF.
>
> I think you ultimately run into the issue that most wikipedians are
> quite happy editing on their own and have a fairly limited desire to
> get involved with other wikimedians through meatspace.
>
> --
> geni
>
> ___
> Wikimedia UK mailing list
> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Recent changes and watchlists on the UK wiki are still broken

[geni]

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 23:41, Harry Mitchell  wrote:
>
> By the way, since I know you and I are not the only ones who feel, to be 
> charitable to both sides, that WMUK's focus on large projects and residencies 
> has squeezed out the smaller projects, why don't we set something else up?

Because its another structure that needs supporting.

>Not a chapter but a society of Wikimedians focusing on small projects that 
>have a smaller but more immediate impact on editors and projects (for example 
>editathons, field trips, events with small local history groups etc, 
>experience-sharing events for experienced editors). There's no reason such a 
>society couldn't dovetail with WMUK; it could even perhaps apply for some 
>modest funding (low four figures at the very most) from WMUK or the WMF.

I think you ultimately run into the issue that most wikipedians are
quite happy editing on their own and have a fairly limited desire to
get involved with other wikimedians through meatspace.

-- 
geni

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

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Recent changes and watchlists on the UK wiki are still broken

[Harry Mitchell]

By the way, since I know you and I are not the only ones who feel, to be
charitable to both sides, that WMUK's focus on large projects and
residencies has squeezed out the smaller projects, why don't we set
something else up? Not a chapter but a society of Wikimedians focusing on
small projects that have a smaller but more immediate impact on editors and
projects (for example editathons, field trips, events with small local
history groups etc, experience-sharing events for experienced editors).
There's no reason such a society couldn't dovetail with WMUK; it could even
perhaps apply for some modest funding (low four figures at the very most)
from WMUK or the WMF.

Wikimedians are very good at disagreeing with each other over the best way
to provide and enhance open knowledge, but at the end of the day we all
share that same goal. Perhaps we should make a new year's resolution to
remember that more often?

Harry Mitchell
http://enwp.org/User:HJ
+44 (0) 7507 536 971
Skype: harry_j_mitchell


On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:09 PM Fæ  wrote:

> Seems negative Harry. This is surely the outcome that everyone
> expected when the WMUK board was professionalised by going from
> volunteer led, to appointing trustees without even minimal Wikimedia
> project experience. Add to this a significant reduction in
> transparency and reducing elections, while claiming improved
> governance, means that volunteers are disengaged and uninformed. We
> all saw this happening a long time ago.
>
> As evidence that something is amiss, the last AGM failed to be
> quorate, but this was spun as a great success. Underpinning this was
> the weirdness over membership numbers, which I guess is not important
> as members no longer have access to any regular reports of membership,
> so we cannot really make any comment about it.
>
> WMUK is a very different organisation from the one we established, and
> its function appears to be mostly as a funding partner for GLAMs to
> set up residential programmes, with a few editathons, rather than
> fostering a creative community of open knowledge volunteers doing new
> and different stuff. If us unpaid volunteers think we need
> coordination rather than just acting individually, then it makes sense
> that we go back to the way things used to work before 2010 and
> coordinate ourselves as a free society, rather than waiting for a
> charity which no longer has those skills, and certainly will not
> allocate the employee time, to do it to us.
>
> P.S. before someone sends me a haranguing email telling me what a
> terrible person I am, I refuse to feel bad about spending my volunteer
> time supporting open knowledge, or my lack of interest in covering
> every issue with soft soap.
>
> Thanks, and I hope everyone is planning lots of fun stuff for the New
> Year, not just talking about Brexit,
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 20:49, Harry Mitchell  wrote:
> >
> > The Wikimedia UK wiki used to see a lot of activity. It was never
> coherently organised, but the staff and volunteers who were running
> projects used it as a sort of filing cabinet for documentation of events
> etc, and a small group of us used to keep an eye on the recent changes for
> spam and other rubbish but those days seem to be long gone.
> >
> > With the key functions of the wiki non-functioning, it is close to
> useless as a coordination hub and discussion venue and therefore the WMUK
> community, such as it is (a smaller subset of the community on this mailing
> list with a more specific function) is essentially homeless. That this does
> not seem to be a high priority, much less cause for alarm, is in my opinion
> a reflection on the fact that there is nobody in any senior position at
> WMUK with any deep background on the Wikimedia projects - something it's
> hard to shake the feeling is a deliberate hiring decision.
> >
> > Harry Mitchell
> > http://enwp.org/User:HJ
> > +44 (0) 7507 536 971
> > Skype: harry_j_mitchell
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 10:09 PM Lucy Crompton-Reid <
> lucy.crompton-r...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks Chris, and apologies that these issues are still not resolved -
> I appreciate that this is very frustrating. I'll need to look into this
> over the next few days and get back to you, but just wanted to acknowledge
> your message in the meantime. Cheers, Lucy
> >>
> >> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 at 17:27, Chris McKenna  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This issue was raised on the wiki and this mailing list at the end of
> >>> November. We were assured then that the problem, apparently also
> affecting
> >>> QRpedia among other things, and action was in hand to resolve this
> problem
> >>> and prevent similar issues in the future.
> >>>
> >>> However, over a month later (albeit with Christmas in the way) there
> is no
> >>> evidence that anything has happened (I have made two edits to the
> sandbox
> >>> today, should anyone wish to do their own 

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Recent changes and watchlists on the UK wiki are still broken

[Harry Mitchell]

As I recall, there was a reason for that professionalisation. Something to
do with a mismanaged conflict of interest by a board member, compounded by
a PR scandal involving a certain other. Be careful where you point those
rose-tinted spectacles.

And re: Richard, diversity of experience is of course to be welcomed. The
skills required run an office, keep the books, manage staff, or ensure
compliance with byzantine charity and company law are not the same skills
required in writing and researching encyclopaedia articles about castles or
war memorials for example, but diversity is not achieved by only recruiting
people who are *not* from a specific background any more than it is by
recruiting *only* from a given background.

(I'm trying to choose my words very carefully here. My criticism is not of
the Wikimedia UK staff and certainly not of any individual staff member,
all of whom I know to be dedicated and hard-working, some of whom I am
fortunate to count as friends, and none of whom deserve to be singled out
on a public mailing list - something I've been careful to avoid.)

Harry Mitchell
http://enwp.org/User:HJ
+44 (0) 7507 536 971
Skype: harry_j_mitchell


On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:09 PM Fæ  wrote:

> Seems negative Harry. This is surely the outcome that everyone
> expected when the WMUK board was professionalised by going from
> volunteer led, to appointing trustees without even minimal Wikimedia
> project experience. Add to this a significant reduction in
> transparency and reducing elections, while claiming improved
> governance, means that volunteers are disengaged and uninformed. We
> all saw this happening a long time ago.
>
> As evidence that something is amiss, the last AGM failed to be
> quorate, but this was spun as a great success. Underpinning this was
> the weirdness over membership numbers, which I guess is not important
> as members no longer have access to any regular reports of membership,
> so we cannot really make any comment about it.
>
> WMUK is a very different organisation from the one we established, and
> its function appears to be mostly as a funding partner for GLAMs to
> set up residential programmes, with a few editathons, rather than
> fostering a creative community of open knowledge volunteers doing new
> and different stuff. If us unpaid volunteers think we need
> coordination rather than just acting individually, then it makes sense
> that we go back to the way things used to work before 2010 and
> coordinate ourselves as a free society, rather than waiting for a
> charity which no longer has those skills, and certainly will not
> allocate the employee time, to do it to us.
>
> P.S. before someone sends me a haranguing email telling me what a
> terrible person I am, I refuse to feel bad about spending my volunteer
> time supporting open knowledge, or my lack of interest in covering
> every issue with soft soap.
>
> Thanks, and I hope everyone is planning lots of fun stuff for the New
> Year, not just talking about Brexit,
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 20:49, Harry Mitchell  wrote:
> >
> > The Wikimedia UK wiki used to see a lot of activity. It was never
> coherently organised, but the staff and volunteers who were running
> projects used it as a sort of filing cabinet for documentation of events
> etc, and a small group of us used to keep an eye on the recent changes for
> spam and other rubbish but those days seem to be long gone.
> >
> > With the key functions of the wiki non-functioning, it is close to
> useless as a coordination hub and discussion venue and therefore the WMUK
> community, such as it is (a smaller subset of the community on this mailing
> list with a more specific function) is essentially homeless. That this does
> not seem to be a high priority, much less cause for alarm, is in my opinion
> a reflection on the fact that there is nobody in any senior position at
> WMUK with any deep background on the Wikimedia projects - something it's
> hard to shake the feeling is a deliberate hiring decision.
> >
> > Harry Mitchell
> > http://enwp.org/User:HJ
> > +44 (0) 7507 536 971
> > Skype: harry_j_mitchell
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 10:09 PM Lucy Crompton-Reid <
> lucy.crompton-r...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks Chris, and apologies that these issues are still not resolved -
> I appreciate that this is very frustrating. I'll need to look into this
> over the next few days and get back to you, but just wanted to acknowledge
> your message in the meantime. Cheers, Lucy
> >>
> >> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 at 17:27, Chris McKenna  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This issue was raised on the wiki and this mailing list at the end of
> >>> November. We were assured then that the problem, apparently also
> affecting
> >>> QRpedia among other things, and action was in hand to resolve this
> problem
> >>> and prevent similar issues in the future.
> >>>
> >>> However, over a month later (albeit with 

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Recent changes and watchlists on the UK wiki are still broken

[Fæ]

Seems negative Harry. This is surely the outcome that everyone
expected when the WMUK board was professionalised by going from
volunteer led, to appointing trustees without even minimal Wikimedia
project experience. Add to this a significant reduction in
transparency and reducing elections, while claiming improved
governance, means that volunteers are disengaged and uninformed. We
all saw this happening a long time ago.

As evidence that something is amiss, the last AGM failed to be
quorate, but this was spun as a great success. Underpinning this was
the weirdness over membership numbers, which I guess is not important
as members no longer have access to any regular reports of membership,
so we cannot really make any comment about it.

WMUK is a very different organisation from the one we established, and
its function appears to be mostly as a funding partner for GLAMs to
set up residential programmes, with a few editathons, rather than
fostering a creative community of open knowledge volunteers doing new
and different stuff. If us unpaid volunteers think we need
coordination rather than just acting individually, then it makes sense
that we go back to the way things used to work before 2010 and
coordinate ourselves as a free society, rather than waiting for a
charity which no longer has those skills, and certainly will not
allocate the employee time, to do it to us.

P.S. before someone sends me a haranguing email telling me what a
terrible person I am, I refuse to feel bad about spending my volunteer
time supporting open knowledge, or my lack of interest in covering
every issue with soft soap.

Thanks, and I hope everyone is planning lots of fun stuff for the New
Year, not just talking about Brexit,
Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 20:49, Harry Mitchell  wrote:
>
> The Wikimedia UK wiki used to see a lot of activity. It was never coherently 
> organised, but the staff and volunteers who were running projects used it as 
> a sort of filing cabinet for documentation of events etc, and a small group 
> of us used to keep an eye on the recent changes for spam and other rubbish 
> but those days seem to be long gone.
>
> With the key functions of the wiki non-functioning, it is close to useless as 
> a coordination hub and discussion venue and therefore the WMUK community, 
> such as it is (a smaller subset of the community on this mailing list with a 
> more specific function) is essentially homeless. That this does not seem to 
> be a high priority, much less cause for alarm, is in my opinion a reflection 
> on the fact that there is nobody in any senior position at WMUK with any deep 
> background on the Wikimedia projects - something it's hard to shake the 
> feeling is a deliberate hiring decision.
>
> Harry Mitchell
> http://enwp.org/User:HJ
> +44 (0) 7507 536 971
> Skype: harry_j_mitchell
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 10:09 PM Lucy Crompton-Reid 
>  wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Chris, and apologies that these issues are still not resolved -  I 
>> appreciate that this is very frustrating. I'll need to look into this over 
>> the next few days and get back to you, but just wanted to acknowledge your 
>> message in the meantime. Cheers, Lucy
>>
>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 at 17:27, Chris McKenna  wrote:
>>>
>>> This issue was raised on the wiki and this mailing list at the end of
>>> November. We were assured then that the problem, apparently also affecting
>>> QRpedia among other things, and action was in hand to resolve this problem
>>> and prevent similar issues in the future.
>>>
>>> However, over a month later (albeit with Christmas in the way) there is no
>>> evidence that anything has happened (I have made two edits to the sandbox
>>> today, should anyone wish to do their own testing).
>>>
>>> This leads to some questions:
>>> -Is it really the case that there is only a single volunteer who can fix
>>> the wiki?
>>> -If so, how and why has this been allowed to happen?
>>> -What contingency plans does WMUK have in case this volunteer dies or
>>> otherwise becomes permanently (or long term) unvailable, with or without
>>> warning?
>>> -If not, why has the problem not been fixed yet?
>>> In either case:
>>> -What is the timescale for fixing the problems?
>>> -What concrete actions have been undertaken since November to prevent this
>>> happening again?
>>> -What concrete actions are pl

Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.anned
to be undertaken in the future to
>>> prevent this happening again (short and long term), and what is the
>>> timescale for them happening?
>>>
>>> 
>>> 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
>>> 

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Recent changes and watchlists on the UK wiki are still broken

[Richard Nevell]

The fact that recent changes and watchlists are not working is certainly an
issue as it hinders the website's ability to function as a discussion forum
and it makes maintenance and dealing with spam much harder. And for anyone
who uses them to see what's going on and stay in touch it does look oddly
quiet. But that's not the sole purpose of the wiki and the pages are still
readable so people can find out about the charity's work which is an
important role.

For volunteers who use wikis day-in day-out it's obviously frustrating to
have the aspect you're most familiar with not work, but I don't think it
can be attributed to perceptions about the Wikimedia experience of senior
WMUK people. Amongst the board and staff there is a range of experience
within and without Wikimedia and in various parts of the movement. That
diversity in experience is a strength rather than a weakness.

Richard Nevell (on sabbatical)

On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 20:49, Harry Mitchell  wrote:

> The Wikimedia UK wiki used to see a lot of activity. It was never
> coherently organised, but the staff and volunteers who were running
> projects used it as a sort of filing cabinet for documentation of events
> etc, and a small group of us used to keep an eye on the recent changes for
> spam and other rubbish but those days seem to be long gone.
>
> With the key functions of the wiki non-functioning, it is close to useless
> as a coordination hub and discussion venue and therefore the WMUK
> community, such as it is (a smaller subset of the community on this mailing
> list with a more specific function) is essentially homeless. That this does
> not seem to be a high priority, much less cause for alarm, is in my opinion
> a reflection on the fact that there is nobody in any senior position at
> WMUK with any deep background on the Wikimedia projects - something it's
> hard to shake the feeling is a deliberate hiring decision.
>
> Harry Mitchell
> http://enwp.org/User:HJ
> +44 (0) 7507 536 971
> Skype: harry_j_mitchell
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 10:09 PM Lucy Crompton-Reid <
> lucy.crompton-r...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Chris, and apologies that these issues are still not resolved -  I
>> appreciate that this is very frustrating. I'll need to look into this over
>> the next few days and get back to you, but just wanted to acknowledge your
>> message in the meantime. Cheers, Lucy
>>
>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 at 17:27, Chris McKenna  wrote:
>>
>>> This issue was raised on the wiki and this mailing list at the end of
>>> November. We were assured then that the problem, apparently also
>>> affecting
>>> QRpedia among other things, and action was in hand to resolve this
>>> problem
>>> and prevent similar issues in the future.
>>>
>>> However, over a month later (albeit with Christmas in the way) there is
>>> no
>>> evidence that anything has happened (I have made two edits to the
>>> sandbox
>>> today, should anyone wish to do their own testing).
>>>
>>> This leads to some questions:
>>> -Is it really the case that there is only a single volunteer who can fix
>>> the wiki?
>>> -If so, how and why has this been allowed to happen?
>>> -What contingency plans does WMUK have in case this volunteer dies or
>>> otherwise becomes permanently (or long term) unvailable, with or without
>>> warning?
>>> -If not, why has the problem not been fixed yet?
>>> In either case:
>>> -What is the timescale for fixing the problems?
>>> -What concrete actions have been undertaken since November to prevent
>>> this
>>> happening again?
>>> -What concrete actions are planned to be undertaken in the future to
>>> prevent this happening again (short and long term), and what is the
>>> timescale for them happening?
>>>
>>> 
>>> 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
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
>>> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lucy Crompton-Reid
>> Chief Executive
>> Wikimedia UK
>> +44 (0) 203 372 0762
>>
>> *Wikimedia UK* is the national chapter for the global Wikimedia open
>> knowledge movement, and a registered charity. We rely on donations from
>> individuals to support our work to make knowledge open for all. Have you
>> considered supporting Wikimedia? https://donate.wikimedia.org.uk
>> Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered
>> No. 6741827
>> Registered Charity No.1144513
>> Registered Office Ground Floor, Europoint, 5 - 11 Lavington Street,
>> London SE1 0NZ
>>
>> 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 

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Recent changes and watchlists on the UK wiki are still broken

[Harry Mitchell]

The Wikimedia UK wiki used to see a lot of activity. It was never
coherently organised, but the staff and volunteers who were running
projects used it as a sort of filing cabinet for documentation of events
etc, and a small group of us used to keep an eye on the recent changes for
spam and other rubbish but those days seem to be long gone.

With the key functions of the wiki non-functioning, it is close to useless
as a coordination hub and discussion venue and therefore the WMUK
community, such as it is (a smaller subset of the community on this mailing
list with a more specific function) is essentially homeless. That this does
not seem to be a high priority, much less cause for alarm, is in my opinion
a reflection on the fact that there is nobody in any senior position at
WMUK with any deep background on the Wikimedia projects - something it's
hard to shake the feeling is a deliberate hiring decision.

Harry Mitchell
http://enwp.org/User:HJ
+44 (0) 7507 536 971
Skype: harry_j_mitchell


On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 10:09 PM Lucy Crompton-Reid <
lucy.crompton-r...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:

> Thanks Chris, and apologies that these issues are still not resolved -  I
> appreciate that this is very frustrating. I'll need to look into this over
> the next few days and get back to you, but just wanted to acknowledge your
> message in the meantime. Cheers, Lucy
>
> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 at 17:27, Chris McKenna  wrote:
>
>> This issue was raised on the wiki and this mailing list at the end of
>> November. We were assured then that the problem, apparently also
>> affecting
>> QRpedia among other things, and action was in hand to resolve this
>> problem
>> and prevent similar issues in the future.
>>
>> However, over a month later (albeit with Christmas in the way) there is
>> no
>> evidence that anything has happened (I have made two edits to the sandbox
>> today, should anyone wish to do their own testing).
>>
>> This leads to some questions:
>> -Is it really the case that there is only a single volunteer who can fix
>> the wiki?
>> -If so, how and why has this been allowed to happen?
>> -What contingency plans does WMUK have in case this volunteer dies or
>> otherwise becomes permanently (or long term) unvailable, with or without
>> warning?
>> -If not, why has the problem not been fixed yet?
>> In either case:
>> -What is the timescale for fixing the problems?
>> -What concrete actions have been undertaken since November to prevent
>> this
>> happening again?
>> -What concrete actions are planned to be undertaken in the future to
>> prevent this happening again (short and long term), and what is the
>> timescale for them happening?
>>
>> 
>> 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
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
>> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
>
>
>
> --
> Lucy Crompton-Reid
> Chief Executive
> Wikimedia UK
> +44 (0) 203 372 0762
>
> *Wikimedia UK* is the national chapter for the global Wikimedia open
> knowledge movement, and a registered charity. We rely on donations from
> individuals to support our work to make knowledge open for all. Have you
> considered supporting Wikimedia? https://donate.wikimedia.org.uk
> Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered
> No. 6741827
> Registered Charity No.1144513
> Registered Office Ground Floor, Europoint, 5 - 11 Lavington Street, London
> SE1 0NZ
>
> 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
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Recent changes and watchlists on the UK wiki are still broken

[Lucy Crompton-Reid]

Thanks Chris, and apologies that these issues are still not resolved -  I
appreciate that this is very frustrating. I'll need to look into this over
the next few days and get back to you, but just wanted to acknowledge your
message in the meantime. Cheers, Lucy

On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 at 17:27, Chris McKenna  wrote:

> This issue was raised on the wiki and this mailing list at the end of
> November. We were assured then that the problem, apparently also affecting
> QRpedia among other things, and action was in hand to resolve this problem
> and prevent similar issues in the future.
>
> However, over a month later (albeit with Christmas in the way) there is no
> evidence that anything has happened (I have made two edits to the sandbox
> today, should anyone wish to do their own testing).
>
> This leads to some questions:
> -Is it really the case that there is only a single volunteer who can fix
> the wiki?
> -If so, how and why has this been allowed to happen?
> -What contingency plans does WMUK have in case this volunteer dies or
> otherwise becomes permanently (or long term) unvailable, with or without
> warning?
> -If not, why has the problem not been fixed yet?
> In either case:
> -What is the timescale for fixing the problems?
> -What concrete actions have been undertaken since November to prevent this
> happening again?
> -What concrete actions are planned to be undertaken in the future to
> prevent this happening again (short and long term), and what is the
> timescale for them happening?
>
> 
> 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
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk



-- 
Lucy Crompton-Reid
Chief Executive
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 203 372 0762

*Wikimedia UK* is the national chapter for the global Wikimedia open
knowledge movement, and a registered charity. We rely on donations from
individuals to support our work to make knowledge open for all. Have you
considered supporting Wikimedia? https://donate.wikimedia.org.uk
Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered
No. 6741827
Registered Charity No.1144513
Registered Office Ground Floor, Europoint, 5 - 11 Lavington Street, London
SE1 0NZ

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
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk

[Wikimediauk-l] Recent changes and watchlists on the UK wiki are still broken

[Chris McKenna]

This issue was raised on the wiki and this mailing list at the end of 
November. We were assured then that the problem, apparently also affecting 
QRpedia among other things, and action was in hand to resolve this problem 
and prevent similar issues in the future.


However, over a month later (albeit with Christmas in the way) there is no 
evidence that anything has happened (I have made two edits to the sandbox 
today, should anyone wish to do their own testing).


This leads to some questions:
-Is it really the case that there is only a single volunteer who can fix 
the wiki?

-If so, how and why has this been allowed to happen?
-What contingency plans does WMUK have in case this volunteer dies or 
otherwise becomes permanently (or long term) unvailable, with or without 
warning?

-If not, why has the problem not been fixed yet?
In either case:
-What is the timescale for fixing the problems?
-What concrete actions have been undertaken since November to prevent this 
happening again?
-What concrete actions are planned to be undertaken in the future to 
prevent this happening again (short and long term), and what is the 
timescale for them happening?



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
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk