We are likely to eventually have a similar situation in my region of the Russian
Federation & we welcome this.
1) A recently recognized Wikimedia Community of Tatar language User Group (WUG TAT) is a
language-oriented UG without geographical borders.
2) At the same time, we will eventually need a Tatarstan-centered Wikimedia User Group /
Subnational Thematic organization without specific language focus.
I am actually in the process of laying the ground for the second. During
https://ru.wikimedia.org/wiki/Умный_регион/05.02.2019/en I was given less than a minute,
but still managed to convince both Federal Deputy Prime-Minister and Regional President. I
will have to craft value proposition statements & roadmaps in a way as to try have
this implemented first in my Republic, then across Russia.
farhad
--
Farkhad Fatkullin - Фархад Фаткуллин
http://sikzn.ru/ Тел.+79274158066 / skype:frhdkazan /
Wikipedia:frhdkazan
06.02.2019, 21:02, "Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l"
<wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>rg>:
> I guess... probably one include also the majority of Kosovo, Albanian-speaking
regions of Greece, P.Y.R.O.M./North Macedonia and maybe even Southern Italy and the other
one is just centered on Albania as a state. This is not the same scenario as Brazil (not
sure if, partially, also Greece) since in that case we had two group precisely centered on
one country.
>
> It's not totally practical but the geopolitical situation is not practical in the
end by itself... You cannot force people to get rid of a group that might become a future
national chapter because their language is spoken by many other people in neighboring
countries who already clustered in a previous UG. So it should not be considered a
critical situation per se, although the interaction of the two UGs should be closely
monitored and addressed since the beginning.
>
> What is missing is a precise guideline or attention to UG related to languages (of
minorities or globally spoken). You could have the same problem with a future Italian
minor languages UG active in Corsica or Croatia, with a Retho-romance Alpine language user
group, with a gender gap UG active in a language distributed along various borders... and
so on. They don't seem to show huge problems when similar situation exist in reality
but they could degenerate, stop cooperation, or never start it with other UGs or national
chapters.
> I value plurality, I want UG to be created and catalyze activities, and I think that
the problem is mostly the character of people. However, I strongly advocate a more
structured architecture of language-based UG to be implemented. Basically what I suppose
was done with Catalan Wikimedia Thematic Organization, although in that case there is no
main entity competing on the area of a sovereign country where Catalan is spoken (which is
not necessarily a better scenario, just complex in a different way). We call them almost
all "User groups" but they are sometimes local geographical unions of users and
volunteers (embryonic future national chapters or just regional associations),
language-oriented associations created to involve minorities or cross-projects of
interested users unified by a topic. They all have different purpose and should be
rationalized somehow. I think I pushed a little bit in that direction on the application
to WikiSummit, stressing the importance to make order in the field.
> IMHO, we should have single-language thematic organizations (specifically for a
language), cross-language thematic organization or local UG centered on a vague historic
geographical area or a very precise administrative one. And think carefully about their
status. This is however just a vague idea.
>
> Alessandro
> Il mercoledì 6 febbraio 2019, 18:11:57 CET, Philip Kopetzky
<philip.kopetzky(a)gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
> Just to close off this thread, there seemingly is no plan and others are
> left to deal with the fallout of this decision.
>
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 at 08:23, Paulo Santos Perneta <paulosperneta(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Kirill,
>>
>> I join Philip and Mardetanha on their concerns and questions. Having
>> followed closely the Brazil situation - which ended up in the worst
>> possible way, IMO - I'm very interested in your answer.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Paulo
>>
>> 2018-06-11 13:07 GMT+01:00 Mardetanha <mardetanha.wiki(a)gmail.com>om>:
>>
>>> Hi Kirill
>>>
>>> Philip's concerns were not answered, would you please respond, I had
the
>>> very same question.
>>>
>>> Mardetanha
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Philip Kopetzky <
>>> philip.kopetzky(a)gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi Kirill,
>>> >
>>> > what's the difference/relationship between this group and the
>>> Wikimedians
>>> > of Albanian Language User Group, which is currently applying for a
>>> > simpleAPG grant? How do we avoid creating more Brazilian scenarios by
>>> > reconising even more user groups from the same area?
>>> >
>>> > Best,
>>> > Philip
>>> >
>>> > On 22 May 2018 at 22:07, Kirill Lokshin
<kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Hi everyone!
>>> > >
>>> > > I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee
has
>>> recognized
>>> > > [1] Wikimedia Community User Group Albania [2] as a Wikimedia
User
>>> Group.
>>> > > The group aims to improve content about Albania across the
Wikimedia
>>> > > projects, including Commons and Wikidata, and to collaborate with
>>> other
>>> > > Wikimedia user groups, chapters, and other free culture groups in
>>> Albania
>>> > > and across the region.
>>> > >
>>> > > Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user
group!
>>> > >
>>> > > Regards,
>>> > > Kirill Lokshin
>>> > > Chair, Affiliations Committee
>>> > >
>>> > > [1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/
>>> > > Resolutions/Recognition_Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Albania
>>> > > [2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_
>>> > Group_Albania
>>> > >
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > Affiliates mailing list
>>> > > Affiliates(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> > >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> > New messages to: 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 and
>>>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Affiliates mailing list
>> Affiliates(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/affiliates
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>