Dear all,
The next WMF metrics and activities meeting will take place on
Thursday, July 2, 2015 at 6:00 PM UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC channel is
#wikimedia-office on irc.freenode.net, and the meeting will be
broadcast as a live YouTube stream.
Each month at the metrics meeting, we will:
* Welcome recent hires
* Present a community update
* Present reports/updates that are focused on a key topic or theme; the
topic for July's meeting is Community Consultation on Strategy
* Engage in questions/discussions
Please review
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings for further
information about how to participate.
We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting.
Thank you,
Praveena
--
Praveena Maharaj
Executive Assistant to the Vice President of Engineering
Wikimedia Foundation \\ www.wikimediafoundation.org
The website findarticles died in 2012 causing over 20 000 articles to have dead links on them. A few of them was backed up on Wayback, but their robot.txt changed so all those archives were deleted as well. So either articles have a dead link showing as 200 (which findlinks.com does) or they are claiming to be archived while they are not.
Read more in my blog post about this: https://jonatanglad.wordpress.com/2015/06/29/findarticles-com/
Can we use a bot to remove all instances of this link, or should we go through them all manually? Can we use bots such as CItation bot (which is currently blocked) to find doi's and other links to replace these links with? Ideas people! Barely any of these links are tagged as dead, and can't by Checklinks (unless done manually) since they show as 200.
/Josve05a
Jonatan
Svensson Glad
President of SSU Tyresö and Editor on
Wikipedia
<redacted phone number> |
gladjonatan(a)outlook.com
All views and opinions expressed in this email message are
the personal opinions of the author and do not represent
those of any organization which might be related to this message. No liability can be held for any
damages, however caused, to any recipients of this message.
Dear members of the Wikimedia community,
On behalf of the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation, I want to
share the news that we have approved [1] the Funds Dissemination
Committee’s Round 2 2014-2015 recommendations [2] for the Annual Plan
Grants. In this round, five Wikimedia organizations will be receiving a
total of roughly $1,248,913, for a total of $5,060,913 allocated in both
rounds in 2014-2015. Grants are made in local currency, so the USD figure
is approximate. The remaining $939,087 from the FDC’s $6 million grants
envelope this year will be returned to the Wikimedia Foundation.
Congratulations to Wikimedia Armenia, Wikimedia Italia, Wikimedia
Norge, Wikimédia
France
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2014-2015_round2/Wikim…>,
and Centre for Internet and Society (CIS)! To the volunteers, staff, and
boards of these organizations receiving annual plan grants, we commend you
for your good work. It is not easy to develop strategic and impactful
annual plans, and we thank you for all you have done. We look forward to
the year ahead.
Sincerely,
Frieda and María, on behalf of the WMF Board of Trustees
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Board_decisions/2014-2015_round2
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2…
[3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals
___________________________________________
Frieda Brioschi
mail: ubifrieda(a)gmail.com - skype: ubifrieda
cell: 328 0731320
http://it.linkedin.com/in/frieda
_______________________________________________
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
_______________________________________________
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
WikimediaAnnounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
This draft WMF annual plan was first published on Meta on the 25th.[1] It
was then announced by the mailing list late on the 26th. Yet the document
itself says, "The comment period for this version will close May 29, 2015".
This gives approximately 3 days to engage in community consultation on the
WMF annual plan (value: $67M) because it is important that "[we] make
certain that we have community feedback on this initial draft" and because
"we value this input".
I recognise that the deadline of the WMF Board of Trustees needing to vote
on this (June 15) is looming, so the timeline is short. I am sure the
original *intention* was to have a longer time period but that due to some
delays in preparing the document for review the time just slipped away.
Nevertheless, three days is not stakeholder engagement - it's just ticking
the box of "inform the community" before sending it to the Board.
The WMF talks about "eating your own dog food"[2] in terms of engineering,
but it would be good if something similar would take place in the annual
planning too... Chapters are required to submit their annual plans to a two
*month* period of quite thorough public review before the FDC gives its
recommendations, and then there's a further period before the actual
decision/appeals.[3] Some of these annual plans are also considerably more
detailed than the WMF's, while asking for a considerably smaller amount of
money.
It would be good if the WMF would *try to set a good example* by following
the rules that it sets for others, itself.
- Liam / Wittylama
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Pl…
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eating_your_own_dog_food
[3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Informationwittylama.com
Peace, love & metadata
Hi all,
This concerns all the editors and readers in the European Union and those
in other European countries as well (copying is possible).
*Subject*
Copyrights reform in Europe going in the wrong direction, damaging
Wikipedia.
*What is going on?*
In the European Parliament currently a proposal (amendment) is submitted
that will restrict Freedom of Panorama in Europe.
This means: you will be no longer allowed to upload images from modern
buildings and works of public art on Commons and not allowed to use those
images on Wikipedia.
Also if Freedom of Panorama is only allowed for Non Commercial purposes
only, this is a problem for Wikipedia!
*Some details*?
It concerns the amendment AM421 proposed by Cavada and passed in the JURI
committee.
*When is the voting about the amendment?*
Thursday 9th July
But we have one chance only!
*What can we do about this?*
- Forward this e-mail to anyone who should know about this.
- Talk to the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) in your country.
Especially the members of the EPP, S&D and ALDE groups. ->
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_European_Parliament,_2…
- Communicate this issue to users in your local community.
- Publicise a press release about this, write about it on your
website/blog, talk to the media how this can damage Wikipedia, etc.
- Use social media: Twitter, Facebook, and so on...
- Twitter about it and retweet them. Suggestions:
https://twitter.com/Wikimedia_BE/status/611000943908384768 -
https://twitter.com/Wikimedia_BE/status/610984311853064193 -
https://twitter.com/dimi_z/status/610792189631811584
- Twitter also directly to the Members of the European Parliament
directly and ask them if they want to turn Wikipedia into black.
Also there will be a CentralNotice banner to inform our readers. The
CentralNotice banner will lead to a landing page, which is at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Panorama_in_Europe_in_2015
More information will be on:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Panorama_in_Europe_in_2015/Learn…
A FAQ will be on:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Panorama_in_Europe_in_2015/FAQ
(or combined with the Learn more page)
*How can I help with the campaign?*
Go to:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_Panorama_2015/Propose…
and help with getting the texts of the banner, landing page and Learn more
page ready.
1. Banner:
* What should the text be of the title?
* What should the text be of the underline?
2. Landing page:
* What information should be on the landing page?
* What Twitter/Facebook/Google+ links do we place?
3. Learn more page:
* What information should be mentioned on the *Learn more* page?
* What actions would we recommend readers to take?
* Anything else?
If the banner, landing page and Learn more page are ready, they can be
translated on Tuesday 23 June to the various European languages. Also local
Wikipedia pages can be created for it.
*Where is the coordination?*
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_Panorama_2015
To have an overview it would be handy if you sign up for your country/area.
Collect here also your actions like press releases, tweets, Facebook posts,
etc. Those can be useful to read and to see where some action is missing or
needed.
*You need more information?*
Read the Signpost article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-06-17/Three…
*Other suggestions?*
Let us know! Add suggestions at:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_Panorama_2015
Thanks!
Romaine
Hi all,
Does your language Wikipedia have an article about Freedom of Panorama
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama>?
This public right is often not as such recognised, also often unknown or
considered naturally, but enables mankind in many countries to freely
publicize pictures of modern buildings and public art.
I think it would be good if Wikipedia has an article in many many languages
about this public right, so that the public can be informed about this
subject.
Does your language Wikipedia cover this topic?
Greetings,
Romaine
A few thoughts:
1) We do not need more simple language Wikipedias. We need to make our
current Wikipedias simplier. Yes I know it is an uphill battle but we just
need more people working on it.
2) It is the editors of content who have the greater authority. Editors are
somewhat curtained by what sources are avaliable. As much published
material is US centric and the US government releases nearly everything
they produce under an open license this perspective has the upper hand. I
would tell Jean Marie Cavada that maybe if France / the EU was also to
publish everything they do under open licenses that would allow the
European perspective to gain greater promience. Maybe they could also
convince the World Health Organization of the importance of open licenses.
--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
Starting July 2015 I am a board member of the Wikimedia Foundation
My emails; however, do not represent the official position of the WMF
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
So as part of https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Increasing_article_coverage
, it appears that unsolicited emails have been sent out encouraging
people to translated articles into needed languages.
I am all for improving article coverage, etc, but I'm concerned about
the use of user account emails to send unsolicited mail that the user
has not opted into. I think use of user email addresses for purposes
other than the user has agreed to, is not ok.
--
bawolff
Hi Ricordisamoa,
There are multiple chapters, user groups and thematic organizations that
are active in the US and have a degree of separation from WMF. The US
affiliates are cooperative with each other, and the affiliate leaders
communicate with each other fairly frequently. May I ask what benefits you
think would come from having a consolidated US chapter? We've talked about
this casually among ourselves but so far we seem to be satisfied with a
confederation of smaller affiliates instead of a single national affiliate.
Thanks!
Pine
On Jun 27, 2015 7:20 PM, "Ricordisamoa" <ricordisamoa(a)openmailbox.org>
wrote:
> The WMF will become a truly global organization when a Wikimedia US
> chapter is founded ;-)
>
> Il 08/04/2015 06:58, Pine W ha scritto:
>
>> Hi Garfield,
>>
>> I'm asking this on Wikimedia-l because a number of Wikimedians have noted
>> the expensiveness of the San Francisco area including its high cost of
>> living for staff, employer competition for engineering talent, and
>> associated high salaries for WMF employees.
>>
>> I see on
>>
>> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/8/8a/RFP_for_Real_Estate_S…
>> that WMF is considering relocating its offices when its current main
>> office
>> lease expires.
>>
>> Questions:
>>
>> What happens to the remodel expenses that WMF is paying for at its current
>> location? If WMF vacates the premesis, will it be compensated for the
>> remodel by the building owner?
>>
>> I hope that WMF is contemplating fully exiting the San Francisco market
>> area in order to economize, get better value for our donors' funds, have
>> less competition for talent, and lower costs of living for staff. Is this
>> being considered?
>>
>> Thanks very much,
>>
>> Pine
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Hi,
I appreciate people answering questions on weekends.
After reading this thread, it sounds like this is a well-intentioned
research project but there are opportunities for improvement. If someone
(maybe Leila and Michelle?) could compile a timeline, a list of the issues
raised in these email threads, a list of open questions about policies and
processes, and a list of opportunities for process improvement based on
discussion in these threads, then I think we can use this series of events
to make improvements and clarifications that will benefit future outreach
and research.
Thanks,
Pine