Pe sâmbătă, 7 septembrie 2019, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz(a)gmail.com> a scris:
I think it's a fine idea. I know that nobody knows
what "Wikimedia means",
and see value to moving at least the Foundation's name towards a more
recognizable brand.
I also see valid points being raised from the community, such as the
distinction between Wikipedia and WikiBooks, -Versity, -Source, etc. Those
projects are often very different from Wikipedia, and further work should
be done to understand the impacts on brand perception if those very
different projects use a more similar name. But overall, I think the idea
is good.
What is bad is that this is another top-down change being apparently made
entirely by WMF staff. The question is "how should we implement this idea
that we have already come up with, and will implement anyway"? The question
should have been brought forward much earlier in the form of "how can we
improve our brand awareness". This idea could have been put forward and
refined as part of that collaborative process. Or at least that's how it
should have been done if the WMF cares about being a service organization.
I would say that it was pretty clear the change
will happen :)
No need to mock me based on my apparent position on the issue.
I was not mocking you. Maybe ":)" was not the most appropriate emoticon in
the context, but when the WMF comes up with such grand plans the default
line of thought should be the change will happen unless there is a huge
push back from the community. In this case, the push back has been mild at
best.
And I really
don't see how it is desirable that the Foundation
is willing to push ideas
through without community support.
I have come to realize that what the community *thinks* about our users and
the reality can be a world apart. We are also adverse to change (by design,
mostly). These things mean that sometimes courageous ideas will need to be
pushed in spite of the vocal opposition of some particularly conservative
members of the community.
Also, as I said, in this particular case the feedback has not been clearly
negative, so I would not call the process as being "without community
support". P
Again, are they a top-down governance
organization, or a service organization aimed at supporting and empowering
the editing community and readership?
Unfortunately right now more of the former. There is a significant number
of employees that simply don't understand why they should wait for and
listen to community feedback.
But employees can be replaced if there is enough will. The real danger
comes from the strategy recommendations that explicitly ask for more
coordination from the wmf regarding a range of subjects.
Strainu
Adrian Raddatz
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:05 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
galder158(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
I think a rebranding to Wikipedia is the best
branding option but, at the
same time, I aknowledge that this can cause a wide variety of problems to
so many people inside our community that doing it without a plan to give
safety (not only legal, as their lives could be compromised) is a bigger
danger than the benefits it causes.
2019 ira. 6 10:41 PM erabiltzaileak hau idatzi du (Isaac Olatunde <
reachout2isaac(a)gmail.com>)t;):
We sometimes spend several minutes trying to explain to potentials
partners
the difference between Wikipedia and Wikimedia
and the relationship
between
them.
In most cases we just use "Wikipedia" so as to not confuse them.
Of course some people would share an opposing view for many reasons but I
do think this rebranding is important.
Regards
Isaac
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019, 9:29 PM Strainu <strainu10(a)gmail.com wrote:
Pe vineri, 6 septembrie 2019, Adrian Raddatz
<ajraddatz(a)gmail.com> a
scris:
> Yet another potentially good idea from the Foundation killed by the
usual
> > atrocious style of stakeholder management. No benefits framed for the
> > community,
>
>
>
> >
> > no indication that this change is coming from the bottom up,
>
>
> Huh? Have you seriously never seen people asking the difference between
> Wikipedia and Wikimedia or wiki(m|p) edians complaining about how hard
it
> is to explain that difference?
>
> This change is very much a bottom up one, even if it is pushed by the
WMF
using
corporate procedures rather than by the community using an RfC.
no
assurance that this change happens or not based on the results of the
consultation.
I would say that it was pretty clear the change will happen :)
Strainu
>
> You can't figure out the benefits to the community - your key
stakeholder
> > group - entirely as part of the consultation. You need to frame the
> > consultation as figuring out how to achieve pre-identified benefits
to
> your
> > stakeholders in the optimal way. You should also try to get buy-in
from
> key
> > community groups *before* you start consulting, and use them as part
of
> the
> > consultation, so it stops being Foundation vs. the community and
turns
> into
> > the Foundation collaboratively supporting community-led ideas.
> >
> > It pains me to see this being done poorly, time and time again.
> >
> > Adrian Raddatz
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 3:28 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > paulosperneta(a)gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > After the last disastrous WMF intervention in Wikipedia - Framgate
-
I
> > believe the timing is just perfect for
the WMF to go forward with
this
> > fit
> > > of creativity of branding themselves as the "Wikipedia
Foundation".
> > >
> > > It's one after another, and never stops.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > Yaroslav Blanter <ymbalt(a)gmail.com> escreveu no dia sexta,
6/09/2019
>
à(s)
> > 18:25:
> >
> > > I agree with Fae. I strongly oppose the proposal, and I somehow
used
> to
> > > > assume that our opinion would be asked in a structured way.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Yaroslav
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:03 PM Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > If the WMF is going to make statements that are not derived
from
> all
> > > > > the demonstrable facts, perhaps the community should now
respond
with
> > > > a completely unambiguous RFC on meta so there can be no doubt?
> > > >
> > > > Something along the lines of:
> > > > "The WMF have employed Wolff Olins for rebranding advice, and
they
> > > > > recommend that Wikimedia rebrands itself around the word
> "Wikipedia"
> > > > > and projects like Wikimedia Commons are renamed to
"Wikicommons"
to
> >
> ensure marketing of the projects can easily be delivered by the
WMF.
> > > Do you support or oppose this
rebranding programme?"
> > >
> > > With a straightforward RFC to keep on linking to in every
discussion
> > > on every venue, we might then have
tangible evidence of whether
"There
> > > is considerable support for the branding proposal" or "There is
> > > considerable opposition for the branding proposal" is factual.
Rather
> > > > than drifting along for months with the debate and unhappiness
that
> > > > > comes from arguing both sides of a mostly political case
without
> >
> > firmly verifiable evidence available or relying on complex and
less
> > > > credible stats from surveys
that are likely to suffer from
embedded
> > > > bias, especially considering
the already banked investment in
> > > > consultancy that drives the need to change something, to prove
the
> > > > > spent money had impact and "value".
> > > > >
> > > > > P.S. Zack and others, it's best to avoid the word
"collaboration"
when
> > > communicating with an international group. It has unfortunate
history
> > > > and gives the impression that you are quoting views from
> collaborators
> > > > rather than holding open collegial discussion.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Fae
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 at 17:19, Diane Ranville <
> > dranville-ctr(a)wikimedia.org
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with Pine.
> > > > > There is a majority of people who actually oppose the
rebranding
> > > > > proposition.
> > > > > I don't quite understand why this is still going forward
(except
> that
> > > it
> > > > is
> > > > > difficult to acknowledge a mistake and take steps backwards -
but
> > it
> > > is
> > > > > > sometimes necessary).
> > > > > > Have other options even been considered?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -speaking in my own name here-
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Diane
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:35 AM Pine W
<wiki.pine(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello Zack,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thank you for the report on Meta.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am troubled by your statement in this email that
"There
is
> >
> > considerable
> > > > > > support for the brand proposal and general appetite to
improve
> > our
> > > > > > > movement’s branding system." What that statement
appears to
> omit
> > is
> > > > > that,
> > > > > > > according to the report on Meta, there is also
considerable
> > > > opposition
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > the rebranding proposal.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Can you explain why you characterized the proposal as
having
> > > "considerable
> > > > > support" without in the same sentence acknowledging what
appears
> to
> > > be
> > > > > > considerable opposition?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Of the three top-level metrics that the report on Meta
displays
> > that
> > > > > > measure community and affiliate support or opposition
regarding
> > the
> > > > > > > rebranding proposal, one of the three metrics is in
favor
and
two
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > three metrics are opposed. If this was an RfC, and I was
using
> > those
> > > > > > measures of sentiment to evaluate support and opposition
> regarding
> > > the
> > > > RfC,
> > > > > > I would probably close the current rebranding proposal as
> declined.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Pine
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019, 20:49 Zack McCune <
zmccune(a)wikimedia.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > *Summary* - We want your help with a voluntary, OPT-IN
design
> >
> process for
> > > > > > movement branding. Please join the in-depth discussion
group,
> or
> > > > watch
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > updates on Meta-Wiki.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > After 4 months of community consultation, spanning
dozens
of
> > > > affiliates,
> > > > > > > several mailing lists, community conferences, and
Meta-Wiki,
I
> am
> > > > pleased
> > > > > > > to share a summary of feedback on the proposed 2030
movement
> > brand
> > > > > > strategy
> > > > > > > [1].
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > From more than 319 comments, representing 150
individual
> > > > contributors and
> > > > > > > 63 affiliates, we assessed 6 major themes in
feedback:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Reducing confusion
> > > > > > > 2.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Protecting reputation
> > > > > > > 3.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Supporting sister projects
> > > > > > > 4.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Addressing (legal, governmental) risks
> > > > > > > 5.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Supporting movement growth
> > > > > > > 6.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The process of change
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please visit our feedback summary page to learn more
[2].
You
> > will
> > > > see
> > > > > > > examples of comments within each section, along with a
rough
> > > > > indication
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > how many of the comments that we received were
related to
> each
> > > > theme.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The comments sometimes contradict one another,
showing
that
> > > across
> > > > > our
> > > > > > > wide
> > > > > > > > movement’s experience, different points of view
are
common
> (and
a
> > > > sign of
> > > > > > > health!). To visualize these tensions, we have
created
> “polarity
> > > > maps”
> > > > > > > which are used to help visualize how different
arguments
> coexist
> > in
> > > > > > tension
> > > > > > > with each other.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ultimately, the comments provided from you all are
very
> > thoughtful
> > > > and
> > > > > > > useful guidance on what is needed to make our
movement’s
> branding
> > > > > > > successful. One can read the 6 themes above as
“criteria”
for
> > > > assessing
> > > > > > > branding systems.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > == Thanks ==
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would like to thank the organizers of Iberoconf,
Wikipedia
> > > > > Education
> > > > > > > > Summit, and the Wikimedia Summit for inviting us
to hold
> > > > discussions
> > > > > > > during
> > > > > > > > their sessions. I would also like to thank my
colleagues
> Elena
> > > > > Lappen,
> > > > > > > > Samir Elsharbaty, and Blanca Flores who conducted
extensive
>
parts
> > > of
> > > > this
> > > > > > > consultation. To the hundreds of people, and dozens
of
> affiliates
> > > > > > > commenting, thank you for reviewing the proposal and
offering
>
your
> > > > > > perspectives and insights.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > == Next steps and staying involved ==
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is considerable support for the brand proposal and
general
> > > appetite
> > > > > > to improve our movement’s branding system. Further, we
believe
> > that
> > > > > > > critical feedback on the proposal offers direct
guidance
for
> > > > > precisely
> > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > branding must do to be successful for our
movement. We
have
> > > shared
> > > > > these
> > > > > > > > insights and our proposed continuance with the
Board of
> > Trustees,
> > > > who
> > > > > > > > approved continuing these efforts.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Acting on community insights, we will be
collaborating on
> > formal
> > > > > brand
> > > > > > > > naming, visual identity, and brand system design
that
will
use
> > > > > > “Wikipedia”
> > > > > > > as the central reference point. The resulting system
will
be
> > > OPT-IN
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > affiliates.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This design process will be guided by a “brand
network”
– a
group
> > of
> > > > > > volunteers who would like to continue advising on brand
during
> > this
> > > > > > > consultation. Dozens of people have already
volunteered,
and
we
> > > > invite
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > > to join the group. We will use a group on Wikimedia
Space
to
> host
> > > > this
> > > > > > > discussion and the group will be closed to allow
candid
> > discussions
> > > > and
> > > > > > > room for iterations. EVERYONE IS INVITED TO JOIN [3].
If
you
do
> > not
> > > > want
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > commit to the in-depth, longer term discussions that
will
be
> > > > happening
> > > > > > > within the brand network group, we will still be
tracking
> > comments
> > > > left
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > the project’s Meta-Wiki page [4]. Furthermore, all
important
> > > ideas
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > > updates originating from the brand network
discussion
will
be
> > > > shared
> > > > > > > > publicly to mailing lists and Meta-Wiki.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The development of this proposed identity system
will
take
> >
> > approximately
> > > > > > 6
> > > > > > > months. As stated, regular updates will be shared to
mailing
> > > lists,
> > > > > > > > Wikimedia Space, and Meta-Wiki [4]. Please engage
us
where
> you
> > > are
> > > > > most
> > > > > > > > comfortable! Once complete, community groups will
have
the
> > power
> > > to
> > > > > > > decide
> > > > > > > > if/when they opt in to using the new system.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yours,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Zack
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2019/02/26/leading-
> > with-wikipedia-a-brand-proposal-for-2030/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_
> > brands/2030_research_and_planning/community_review/results
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [3]
https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/g/brand-network and
>
click
> > > the
> > > > gray
> > > > > > > "Request" button. When your request is
approved, you will
be
able
> > to
> > > see
> > > > > > and access the brand network discussion category on the
Discuss
> > > Space
> > > > > > main
> > > > > > > page.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [4]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_
> brands/2030_research_and_planning
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Zack McCune (he/him)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Director of Brand
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Wikimedia Foundation
<https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > faewik(a)gmail.com
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > > Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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>
> >
_______________________________________________
> > 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>
_______________________________________________
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>
_______________________________________________
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>