Dear Leila,
thank you for elaborating how this mailing came about.
I would like to address the ethical aspect of your project.
In saying
"For the purposes of this research, we are
taking the following approach: we take a
more global approach to identify missing
content, rank them by their importance,
and recommend them to editors. The
editor should make the final call
whether the recommendation they
receive should go to the destination
language."
you certainly leave it to the editor whether or not to take action and
actually translate an article you have suggested.
However, I think a threshold is crossed here with the Wikimedia Foundation
interfering into the editors' business. It has generally been accepted that
the Foundation will not care about content creation, except for handling
DMCA takedown requests as office actions.
It still has to be addressed whether the Foundation may solicit the
creation of content, and if so, in which manner? I gather from the
discussion on German Wikipedia that most experienced editors think no. This
is a volunteering project, and everyone taking part in it decides for
himself what he would like to do. We have never had suggestions like this.
Indeed, I think this is a delicate matter concerning the relation between
the Community and the Foundation that should be dealt with in the first
place. Which roles do we play? Or, which roles do you change, or rather
play with? when sending out such a suggestion?
And, of course, an opt-in for such experiments would be fine. I think a
lot of people would even be inclined to subscribe to such a list because
after all we are interested in what you are doing, aren't we? ;)
Best regards,
Jürgen.
I see no reason why anyone should be restricted from good faith
solicitations to add content. I particularly do not see why the WMF
wouldn't be permitted to do so; obviously the volume and quality of content
available across all projects is a core concern of the WMF. Soliciting the
creation of content - i.e. identifying gaps and asking volunteers to pitch
in - is not the same thing as "managing" content on the projects
themselves. Any such concerns are confusing the core mission of the WMF
with the legal particulars of Section 230 safe harbor.