Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Armenia candidate for the board

Is there any actual connection between Susanna and the high-level government interest or effort around the Armenian Wikipedia? What I'm asking is if there is anything here, other than supposition that because she is Armenian and the Armenian government is interested in Wikipedia that Susanna must

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open letter: Issues needing addressing by the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees

Jimmy - the limit is a "soft limit" of 30 posts per month. If someone goes well over you might get an e-mail from Austin or another moderator to cut back, but otherwise there is no need to ask for an exception. Chris Sherlock - It is certainly not "unambiguous" what qualifies in that statute as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A quick note about the future

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Jimmy Wales wrote: > > One of the things that someone asked me privately to discuss is what I > think of the possibility of James running for the board again. > > First, I have no opinion about whether or not he will be eligible at the >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Jimmy Wales' potential conflict of loyalties for Wikia Inc. versus WMF

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 5:35 AM, Fæ wrote: > > Ownership of Wikia is a relationship where loyalty will be perceived > by the public as questionable, and there may be indirect financial > gains, even though there is no traceable direct benefit. > > Fae, Is there any evidence

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lawrence Lessig for ... WMF

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: > I would like to continue the discussion of who, in an ideal case, would be > a good fit for the ED position. This person has to fit culturally, share > movement's values, and be a trusted figure in the time of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation report, July-September 2015

Tilman, are these quarterly reports no longer being released? On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Tilman Bayer wrote: > Hi all, > > please find the Wikimedia Foundation's report for the first quarter of > this fiscal year at > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Are we too rigid?

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Jake Orlowitz wrote: > Oliver wrote: > > "The Foundation I would return to is not an organisation with a flat > structure. In fact, it could be an organisation that looks a lot like > this one, because I don't believe reporting lines or

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why we changed

the OP here struck me as the best and most complete statement of this vision that I have read. If you are aware of a better one that I have missed (completely possible, even likely!), could you please provide a link? Thanks, Nathan ___ Wikimedia-l m

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why we changed

Lila's statement of her vision for WMF is compelling and attractive. If properly and faithfully executed, it seems like it would make just the right adjustments to the culture of the WMF and its interaction with and support of the Wikimedia community. I have long been concerned that a number of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Outcomes from the Consultation on Wikimedia movement conferences/Wikimania

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Risker wrote: > Hello Gerard, I believe the topic of capping costs is a reasonable one > because, simply put, there are not unlimited resources within the movement. > Some of us have the financial wherewithal to attend "on our own dime", but

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why take grants? (was: Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?)

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > Spending and fundraising are two sides of the same coin. I remember that it > was strongly suggested that money had to go through the WMF for all kinds > of political reasons. At the time it was the Dutch

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Appointment of María Sefidari to Wikimedia Foundation Board

Thanks Maria for agreeing to join the Board in this manner and at this time. On the subject of advantages vs. disadvantages... I imagine one of the most important is that a new election may have seen the community elect James Heilman again, requiring the board to publicly pass over him in favor

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Was the Wikimedia Foundation's removal of membership in 2006 legal?

kimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > Is the question of whether the bylaws ever automatically created an actual class of members relevant? Is there something in either the bylaws or Florida law that would prohibit the board from changing the str

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changes in the Board

Thank you Patricio and Arnnon, and good luck and best wishes to Arnnon. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Message from Arnnon Geshuri to the Wikimedia Community

It's unfair of anyone to expect Arnnon to comment about the legal case or the circumstances surrounding it. I'm sure he has a stack of legal advice and corporate policies that specifically prevent him from answering Todd's questions or others. Even though I don't support the corporate collusion

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Board-l] Fwd: WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: > > The identified mistakes/shortcomings of the whole process: > > 1. In the background check performed by the HR and the legal department we > have not had a specific PR check as an immanent part. While it sounds like

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google

the staff missed it entirely. If they were doing even a cursory review and reference check of the candidates through the very last stage, it's hard to imagine how that could happen. Perhaps more likely is that the staff happened upon the issue but didn't forward it to the Board? ~Nathan

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

I hope some day someone will be bold enough to tell the rest of us what this is all really about. I'm sure I'm not alone (though perhaps in the minority!) in not having inside staff contacts to provide the straight dope. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

t. We plan to make an > announcement on the roadmap for filling that seat by early next week. > > Patricio Patricio, I wish you and your colleagues the best of luck in recovering the trust and confidence of the many people who supported James' bid to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please stick to the 30-post limit

The 30 post limit came about in a different era, when the list had problems at a greater scale. I don't see any issues with post frequency recently that should have received moderator response. You are referring to GerardM, but the majority of his posts have been to a single thread. I can't speak

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 3:25 PM, olatunde isaac wrote: > I'm very disappointed to know that the board meeting was still ongoing as > at the time James revealed that he was ejected from the board. It is a > silly idea! Perhaps he felt the community can stop the meeting

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) wrote: > On Dec 30, 2015 12:33 AM, "Craig Franklin" > wrote: > > but also for why there was seemingly not any planning for how to deal > > with the fallout of that decision. > > That, at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

"Well, tell that to James. He's the one who went public without warning in the middle of the meeting. You are 100% wrong that this is a decision *against* the community. I know why I voted the way I did - and it has to do with my strong belief in the values of this community and the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 10:00 AM, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote: > Nathan wrote: > >In any case, its irritating to see people providing cover for the Board's > >lack of transparency or failure to be forthcoming in a timely manner. > > The removal resolution

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Newyorkbrad wrote: > I don't think it's been mentioned on this list that Jimmy Wales (one > of the board members) commented about this matter today on his En-WP > talkpage. Since I assume many people on this list don't follow that > page,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

I don't think all the legal speculation here is very helpful. I'm sure the Board or someone else will sagely advise us that the board is self-governing and self-perpetuating and no other legal authority is necessary. In any case, its irritating to see people providing cover for the Board's lack

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 8:39 PM, James Heilman wrote: > As Patricio stated the "Board has a responsibility to ... ensure that the > Board functions with *mutual confidence*" > > My fellow trustees need no reason beyond lack of trust in me to justify my > removal. No reason

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 9:17 PM, John Mark Vandenberg wrote: > Surely there must be a board resolution that needs to be pubished regarding > this? It was published. It contains no information beyond the OP. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

Add my voice to those waiting for the Board to provide something closer to the minimum necessary context for this decision. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

The reply every year is that the banners are keyed for maximum effectiveness, even if they are intrusive, in order to make the overall fundraising drive as short as possible. Fundraising has made small tweaks to various banners, but generally have not been willing to significantly reduce the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing the Wikimedia Affiliates mailing list

The purpose of "privacy" on a mailing list with hundreds of subscribers is to avoid easy scrutiny and to bar participation from those who aren't an approved member of the club. Note that affiliates can't simply add subscribers; they have to request them. So the questions are - is a private club

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikiconference USA 2015

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Anthony Cole wrote: > > > 2) Greg Kohs was banned from attending. I think that was a mistake. He is a > fierce critic of Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia. I am aware of the lines he has > crossed in the past (and the seemingly sincere apologies).

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > > I think that this is a very unhappy wording; there is nothing wrong > with the bid or the city by itself. As much as I find the wasted > effort scandalous, it is not the fault of our friends from Montreal. > > About

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimania-l] Coming up with a new process for Wikimania selection

James, Can you describe the source of your authority, and that of the committee, to make such a decision? Do you have the approval of Lila and/or the Board? Which movement organizations, including those responsible for funding endeavours like Wikimania, did you consult? ~Nathan On Sun, Oct 4

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimania 2017 Montreal - scooped by Signpost

Evidently the Signpost has scooped the WMF by revealing that Montreal has been selected for the 2017 Wikimania host city in a secret process that completed this past August. [1] It seems like the community could have been looped into this new method before it was a done deal. ~Nathan [1] https

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Collaboration team reprioritization

I don't know how Wikimedia engineering tracks project resource usage - is there a number out there for the total cost to the WMF associated with the Flow project? At a basic minimum, the number of developer and other hours dedicated to Flow (including fully dedicated contractors)? Is it likely

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement

Very sorry to hear that, Philippe. From the perspective of an outsider to the WMF and many of the "interior processes" of the Wikimedia community, you have always been a ray of light and a source of insight, knowledge and order. Your presence in a discussion, debate or process has always elevated

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wiki Loves Monuments] Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy largely blocked by WMF fundraising

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Antanana, And I forgot to mention, this same issue existed in 2014 as well, with also there the downside effects. This subject is of banners has been discussed internally with the local Wiki Loves Monuments

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect's first birthday

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: What I would hope for is guidance from the WMF Board that specifically outlines when WMF invocation of superprotect is and isn't appropriate [1], and which I believe is already being discussed internally by the Board. With

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cebuano and Waray-waray Wikipedias among Top 10

Craig - are you volunteering to lovingly handcraft the Waray encyclopedia article by article? Suggesting people go use Wikidata seems crazy. How will Waray speakers even know that Wikidata exists? How will they know how to manipulate the interface? More readable information available in the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changing our volunteer structure at Wikimedia UK

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote: The bizarre part of this is that the charity you are currently chairman of, does not do any meaningful checks on members when they join (for five quid). The fact remains that only one person is excluded from membership, voting or

Re: [Wikimedia-l] While Election committee counts the votes...

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote: On 2015-06-03 17:42, Raymond Leonard wrote: Folks, At the link, you can find List votes: Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees Elections 2015 https://vote.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:SecurePoll/list/512 Yours,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Indonesia 2014 Financial Statements

. Quick note on the report: In paragraph two, there is an error in the dates of the lease agreement on the English side - it should read 2014-2016, not 2016-2016. In paragraph 4, the starting account balance should be written in rupiah, not dollars. ~Nathan

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 7:30 AM, Gregory Varnum gregory.var...@gmail.com wrote: Some questions though - if WMUK staff are included, should WUG staff also be included? If they are included, why not include the people doing staff-level volunteer work for non-staffed affiliates? If those

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:43 PM, James Alexander jalexan...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel it...@wikimedia.org.il wrote: Any response or input from the Election Committee? I think Greg said it relatively well earlier as the coordinator

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

The idea of community elected seats is just that; the electors are members of the community. So if we decide that employees of community organizations, like the WMF, are part of the Wikimedia community... then they should have the right to vote on community seats of the Board of Trustees. Whether

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustee elections

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Aleksey Bilogur aleksey.bilo...@gmail.com wrote: Employees of WMDE, a large chunk of whose funding is dependent on the decisions of the body they have just been enfranchised to vote for. Yeah, no COI there *at all*. Er, no more than any staff member of the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF office location and remodel

On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: I like the ideas about setting up a variety of remote clusters as well as remote individual employees. Google, Microsoft and Facebook have remote clusters, and I'm sure that many other companies do this as well. Besides

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Net neutrality: since when has it had anything to do with price?

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Gilles Dubuc gil...@wikimedia.org wrote: To me Josh's point in the other thread settles this argument. I can't presume to know better than the people this service is made for what is good for them. People in other cultures have values as well. They might be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Net neutrality: since when has it had anything to do with price?

Jens - your reply to Gerard on the other thread (where it is surely off topic) was published a couple of hours ago. On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Jens Best best.j...@gmail.com wrote: Dear James, your praising of WP0 surely deserves or even needs an appropiated answer, but as I can't see my

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcing: The Wikipedia Prize!

I'm hoping this is satire, but if it isn't, I think anyone paying others to out Wikimedians should minimally be barred from further participation in the movement. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New financing model for editations

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 1:16 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote: when ticketed, this is usually to control numbers when space is limited. This model works pretty well and makes them popular events; indeed, they're one of our most visible public activities. I don't see where the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimediameta-l] Bye

On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 3:59 PM, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: Which email ? the crowdfunding email? Austin, do the list admins have another perspective to justify their action? -- John Vandenberg I'd like the answer to this question too.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Engineering Community

I think the goal with this message is to kick off a deeper, more meaningful engagement between engineering and the various communities that use MediaWiki. But it's hard to see how the message will move the needle. It's jargony, as if aimed at an audience of software developers. The mechanisms

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open Letter to Lila (Harassment Policy)

I wasted the few minutes necessary to read Trillium's blog post, and I don't recommend anyone else make that same mistake. He's taken a few incidents in a 7 year period, presented them utterly without the totally necessary context, and ignored any evidence that might make it clear how silly and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please report to Google [was Re: Warning: Wikimedia-l Google Group]

As was I. On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com wrote: I was resubscribed. Sydney Sydney Poore User:FloNight Wikipedian in Residence at Cochrane Collaboration On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 11:18 AM, rubin.happy rubin.ha...@gmail.com wrote: I was

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason

Please try not to split threads. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

You certainly put a lot of time and effort into being wrong. Any first year undergraduate writing course will tell you that to make an argument you need to address the counter-arguments, which you have failed even to mention. Diversity of contributors isn't a social justice goal, or even a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New project idea: WikiTribute

Matt, I think people politely declined to criticize your proposal in the knowledge that it was absolutely sure to fail, meaning vocal opposition was not required. But I can understand your frustration at the lack of response, so I'll briefly provide you with mine. The WikiTribute idea firstly

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Leigh Thelmadatter osama...@hotmail.com wrote: I dont think the issue is the idea of encouraging projects that increase the participation of women, but rather the message that everything else is getting shoved aside. I don't see how you can come to this

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons copyright extremism

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: Steven, Quite seriously, if you can't understand the concept of copyright and derivative works, then perhaps this is not the project for you. There's nothing more to say. Russavia That comment is unhelpful

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons copyright extremism

Maybe Russavia is having a bad day and needs a time out. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons copyright extremism

What about this file? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2007-11-21_Hammamet-VW-2.JPG The image is of a car, and the car has a logo and design motif on it that is surely eligible for copyright. COM:PACKAGING doesn't seem to refer to any packaging specific jurisprudence, so presumably the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons copyright extremism

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: Nathan To answer the tractor question first. Of course not, there is nothing copyrightable in this image. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Trademarked is never a reason for deletion. The logo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising in the UK

Wasn't there also an issue with WMUK processing payments, in that they couldn't pass 100% of the donations on to the WMF but had to retain some or most of the funds in order to remain independent under British law? That seems like a good reason why the WMF might not want WMUK to process payments,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Gendergap-I] Re: Fundraising banners (again)

On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Site Admin 1924@gmail.com wrote: Dear David This is yet another example of how Wikipedia is seriously broken Here is a screenshot of a deliberate full screen advt being thrust on the global south. http://i.imgur.com/2J0FgAP.jpg Our IT team has

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banners (again)

On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote: To others I imagine it reads like those spam emails with Have you seen this article? in the subject line with spoofed email addresses. Thank you for keeping working on this, and not getting pulled into emotion.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising in the UK

On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, For what it is worth ... http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_CJE-09-5_en.htm Thanks, GerardM For the benefit of others... The press release, from 2009, describes a preliminary ruling that states of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To donate or not

On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote: What differs us from Uber and makes our position better is the fact that we are community-driven movement (as well as encyclopedia publishers are on average much more predatory organizations than various organizations of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WaPo Wikipedia's 'complicated; relationship with net neutrality

On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: From my Australian perspective, it's interesting because we've never had 'net neutrality' in the way that it is described in the US and, with appropriate competition and regulation this is not been a problem. e.g.: Net

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC funds allocation recommendation is up

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: Excellently put Lodewijk. In an attempt to answer your question: I would like to ask for clarification the expectations of raising funds externally. In previous years, as has been mentioned earlier in this thread, it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FDC funds allocation recommendation is up

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Juergen Fenn schneeschme...@googlemail.com wrote: snip And isn't it ironic that at a time when the German chapter understood that it had to intensify links with the community and partly already succeeded in getting back on track it is given less money,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Audit - June 30, 2014

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: On 10/15/2014 04:52 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: I suggest that you need a stricter definition to start with. It's also highly disputable that the Foundation would be justified in reducing the fiduciary care it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation Audit - June 30, 2014

Thanks Garfield. The annual plan has a nice representation of staffing growth in the last 5 years. In 2009-2010, the WMF had 50 employees. In this fiscal year it anticipates having 240. The staff expense went from 2.2m in 2009 to nearly 20m in the recently ended year, and surely much more for the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimania-l] Wikimania 2016 - Jury Announcement and Start of Bidding

He's already stated his concerns repeatedly. It would be a lot more constructive if he had any suggestions for improvement. As always, the issue with Fae's comments is that he buries a valid point in a mess of combative argumentation and borderline offensive aspersions. If he believes the process

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call to Action

such as courage and integrity, I think it would have been better expressed without the ringing endorsement of Che Guevara. As you say, we should choose our words carefully and ensure that our language is positive and inclusive. This is obviously an area where we can all make progress. ~Nathan

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Lighter Side of the Movement

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 6:14 AM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: Coincidentally, when I eye up the participation levels on this project and other WP humor projects (there are several more listed near the bottom of that page) with some rough metrics, activity seems to have peaked around

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2015

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote: Against the funds of WMF. A second conference open to the public would be a second yearly Wikimania, and to open it means to have a budget more or less equal to Wikimania. In addition there are not represented some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2015

Since before planning gets underway is the perfect time to clarify the conference title, and Anh Chung was kind enough to create the pages, I've taken the liberty of moving them to [[Wikimedia Affiliates Conference 2015]]. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2015

Hi Bence, We strive not to be bound by bureaucracy, don't we? If we discover that a simple name (as generic as Wikimedia Conference) is slightly misleading, or not completely accurate, then why should we avoid changing it? Particularly as it appears that no process has begun to plan the next

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2015

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote: The name could be changed if the participants/organisers want to change it. As I tried to point out, I don't see the name as the underlying problem people really have, and changing it will not solve the problem of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference 2015

An editor has moved the pages back, for anyone interested. Amusingly illogical rationale in the edit summary, but what can you do. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Wikimedia Belgium as a Wikimedia chapter by the WMF Board

On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks all! The next step will be the actual founding. In two days we already have a meeting to talk about it. Anyone interested in the founding, you are welcome to sign up at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New movement org?

Hi Richard, any links to where you found this information? On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi all, I note that a new Wikimedia organisation has been setup in Michigan, called the Wikipedia Editors Foundation Inc, as of about a week

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New movement org?

On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:21 PM, James Forrester jdforres...@gmail.com wrote: On 21 August 2014 09:13, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Richard, any links to where you found this information? ​The ever-excellent OpenCorporates has its entry: https://opencorporates.com/companies

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Advocacy Advisors] Transparency and right to be forgotten notices from search engines

Thanks very much for this, Stephen and the legal team. I especially appreciate that the WMF has decided to make public the specific notifications of the use of the Right to be forgotten in the EU.[1] It's interesting that the bulk of the suppression requests have come from a single (ex?)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Effective censorship of Wikipedia by Google

On July 7th, Katherine Maher of the WMF said that they had not received any notifications and had not made a decision as to how or whether to publicize them. She did say that she thought it would be on next year's transparency report (the first instance of which either came out recently or is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Unacceptable -- CheckUser abuse gone uninvestigated

On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 1:25 AM, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: Russavia said something nice to someone in 2013 on their retirement, and raised a formal complaint about an unknown CU's action in 2014. How

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Effective censorship of Wikipedia by Google

On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: The title of the article above an image of Jimmy Wales, is: Wikipedia link to be hidden in Google under 'right to be forgotten' law Request for blocking of search results granted to anonymous applicant is first to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Unacceptable -- CheckUser abuse gone uninvestigated

On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 9:19 PM, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 August 2014 17:18, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote: ... i personally do not care about the russavia case in particular i must say. but i care about the (non-)care of persons having access to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] $20 donation to WMF for vandalism edit from US House of Representatives

On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Rjd0060 rjd0060.w...@gmail.com wrote: No, I'm saying this doesn't matter and people should get back to doing whatever they feel is actually important. Let it go. It really does not matter. AT ALL. I can't agree. It's clear that lives are at stake, not to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Unacceptable -- CheckUser abuse gone uninvestigated

On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: Commission, nor the WMF Board. Given this, I am asking very publicly the following questions: * (1) on what grounds a CheckUser action was performed on my account on Wikimedia Commons? * (2) who requested that it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] $20 donation to WMF for vandalism edit from US House of Representatives

On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Rjd0060 rjd0060.w...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Rjd0060 rjd0060.w...@gmail.com wrote: No, I'm saying this doesn't matter and people should get back to doing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] $20 donation to WMF for vandalism edit from US House of Representatives

On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: To make matters a little worse, the US House of Representatives IP has taken to vandalising the Russian Wikipedia article for the Russian national anthem,[5] replacing sheet music for the anthem with the sheet

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Research Committee

or on the other list. Thanks, Nathan On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Aaron Halfaker ahalfa...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hey folks, I appreciate your discussion here. However, you're unlikely to get any participation from actual wiki researchers on wikimedia-l See wiki-research-l[1], the mailing list

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Lane Rasberry l...@bluerasberry.com wrote: Hello, I feel that this is an unethical research project and I have told the researcher so. We exchanged several emails and were unable to understand each other. I asked them to please have their university ethics

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey

To avoid confusion with researchers in the future, I've made some minor changes to the research related pages on Meta (see below). This should help ensure that outdated documentation does not cause unnecessarily delay and/or expense for those interested in doing Wikimedia-related research. 1:

[Wikimedia-l] Research Committee

is basically wound up without any hope or plan or achieving them. On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: To avoid confusion with researchers in the future, I've made some minor changes to the research related pages on Meta (see below). This should help ensure

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Research Committee

And... unsurprisingly, Aaron has reverted the changes I referred to above. Not with any explanation, of course, other than not true. Looking at the list of reviewed projects (where the review appears to constitute a small handful of questions on the talkpage), the RCOM has reviewed a total of 10

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 1:40 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Gryllida, As I said on the Arbcom case page, RfCs result in changes to Wikipedia on a regular basis despite having a small numbers of participants in each RfC, and current English Wikipedia policy does not require a

<    1   2   3   4   5   >