Hi,
Also posted on https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Social_media/Calendar
. Please review when you get the chance, ideally before the respective
publication dates :)
Thanks!
=== March 25 (today) ===
Tech discovery report 1/6 (@wikimedia, retweeted by @wikipedia and @mediawiki)
* t: Seeing through the eyes of new Wikimedia technical contributors
to make their first steps easier:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/03/25/seeing-through-the-eyes-of-new-techni…
* f/g: It’s incredibly valuable for a community to identify (and be
reminded of) the hurdles that newcomers must overcome when they first
join. In this series, new tech contributors share their impressions,
frustrations and discoveries as they explored MediaWiki’s and
Wikimedia’s technical world.
=== March 26 ===
Hovercards blog post (@wikimedia, retweeted from @Wikipedia and @mediawiki)
* t: Hovercards are now available as a Beta Feature on all Wikimedia
wikis. Log in and tell us what you think! <LINK>
*f/g: With Hovercards, whenever you hover over a link to another
article, a short summary of the article and a relevant image is
provided to you so you can make the decision about whether you want to
read the full article. Log in, enable it in your beta options, and
tell us what you think! <LINK>
=== March 27 ===
Tech discovery report 2/6 (@wikimedia, retweeted by @wikipedia and @mediawiki)
t: Tech discovery report: What is this Wikitech thing anyway?
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/03/27/tech-discovery-report-what-is-this-wi…
*f/g: In this guest post, Code-in student Ashwin Bhumbla shares his
experience discovering the MediaWiki and Wikitech wikis, whose purpose
may not be as straightforward as experienced users think.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/03/27/tech-discovery-report-what-is-this-wi…
Typography Refresh blog post (@wikimedia, retweeted by @wikipedia and
@mediawiki)
* t: Typography refresh: A new look for text, coming soon to all
Wikimedia sites. <LINK>
* f/g: Coming soon to Wikimedia sites: A small but important
typography refresh for better readability, consistency and
accessibility. <LINK>
=== March 29 ===
Tech discovery report 3/6 (@wikimedia, retweeted by @wikipedia and @mediawiki)
* t: A newcomer's journey through the maze of the @MediaWiki developer
documentation: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/03/29/through-the-maze-of-newcomer-develope…
* f/g: A newcomer's journey through the maze of the MediaWiki
developer documentation:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/03/29/through-the-maze-of-newcomer-develope…
=== March 31 ===
Tech discovery report 4/6 (@wikimedia, retweeted by @wikipedia and @mediawiki)
* t: A junior developer discovers @MediaWiki, its ecosystem &
community, and shares his experience:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/03/31/a-junior-developer-discovers-mediawik…
* f/g: A junior developer discovers MediaWiki, its ecosystem &
community, and shares his experience:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/03/31/a-junior-developer-discovers-mediawik…
== April 2014 ==
=== April 2 ===
Tech discovery report 5/6 (@wikimedia, retweeted by @wikipedia and @mediawiki)
* t: Discovering @MediaWiki's community and learning by asking
questions: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/04/02/discovering-and-learning-by-asking-qu…
* f/g: In this guest post, Code-in student Vlad John explains how he
realized that asking questions to fellow developers was the first step
towards solving problems.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/04/02/discovering-and-learning-by-asking-qu…
=== April 4 ===
Tech discovery report 6/6 (@wikimedia, retweeted by @wikipedia and @mediawiki)
* t: A young @MediaWiki developer’s story of discovery, perseverance
and gratitude: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/04/04/a-young-developers-story-of-discovery…
* f/g: In the last post of our Code-in stories, student Jared Flores
tells us about software that won't compile, messing up code commits on
Thanksgiving dinner and how fellow MediaWiki developers helped him
sort it all out.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/04/04/a-young-developers-story-of-discovery…
--
Guillaume Paumier
Technical Communications Manager — Wikimedia Foundation
*Hello,*
*Please take a moment to read and review the updated SM calendar which has
a message which we plan to post today on behalf of Wikimedia Russia
regarding the Crimean crisis and Wikipedia editors. *
*Thanks! *
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Social_media/Calendar#March_25
*f/g:
The following post is from Wikimedia Russia.
Most people know what the Crimea crisis is and everybody has their own
opinion about who's right and who's wrong. Unfortunately, such situations
happen, but what should we, editors of Wikipedia (and especially Russian
Wikipedia), do?
It's important to state the following principles to understand this
question better:
1. Russian Wikipedia is Wikipedia in the Russian language, not Wikipedia of
the Russian Federation. We have active editors and sysops not only from
Russia, but also from Europe, Asia and America. Due to this fact we have
different opinions that help us produce neutral point of views.
2. Wikipedia isn't looking for absolute truth; it should represent "fairly,
proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of the
significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic."
That means that we are not stating, for example, that Crimean referendum
was legitimate or not, we provide different points of views: what Ukrainian
view is, what Russian view is, what other countries do and think, according
to reliable sources.
3. Wikipedia describes disputes but doesn't engage in them. We want to
state once more, that we are not looking for absolute truth and we won't
agree with personal attacks from one group of editors to another group of
editors: all of them have equal rights.
4. We don't encourage mass edits in such a hot topic without prior
discussion with other editors: that's why a lot of articles of this
category are protected from editing - propose your adjustments at the talk
page and discuss them with other editors, that's the most constructive and
effective way of editing.
5. We admit that such articles require additional attention and that's why
our community is discussing nominations for the new mediators of this
topic. Nevertheless, even now editors and sysops invest much time and
effort to keep Wikipedia neutral and true.
6. Wikipedia already had some similar situations. Our previous experiences
prove that "discuss, then edit" is the best practice. For example, the
similar disputes are connected with Nagorno-Karabakh, Kosovo, etc.
We kindly ask editors to stay calm, show respect to other editors and
discuss all edits based on reliable sources. Wikipedia has rules and
policies, we hope that our editors and readers are able to cope with this
accordingly.
--
Carlos Monterrey
Communications Associate
Wikimedia Foundation
+1.415.839.6885 ext 6881
www.wikimediafoundation.orgblog.wikimedia.org
Hello to everybody!
Crimean question is a hot topic on Russian Wikipedia now and we want to
share some basic Wikipedia principles from our Facebook page (
https://www.facebook.com/russian.wikipedia), would you agree to share it
via Wikipedia account in Facebook/Twitter?
I haven't posted it at Russian Wikipedia page yet and want to discuss it
before.There are a lot of questions received by our community and local
chapter and I think that this post will be useful.
Do you agree with such post or not?
Best regards,
Linar
----------------------post below----------------------------------
Everybody knows what Crimea crisis is and everybody has his own opinion
about what happened and who was right and wrong.
Unfortunately, such situations do happen sometimes, but what should we,
editors of Wikipedia (and especially Russian Wikipedia), do?
it's important to state the following principles to understand this
question better:
1. Russian Wikipedia is Wikipedia in Russian language, not Wikipedia of
Russian Federation. We have active editors and sysops not only from Russia,
but also from Europe, Asia and America.
Due to this fact we have different opinions that help us to produce neutral
point of view with all aspects shown.
2. Wikipedia isn't looking for absolute truth, it should represent "fairly,
proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of the
significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic".
That means that we are not stating, for example, that Crimean referendum
was legitimate or not, we provide different points of view: what Ukrainian
view is, what Russian view is, what other countries do and think, according
to the reliable sources.
3. Wikipedia describes disputes but doesn't engage in them. So we want to
state once more, that we are not looking for absolute truth and we won't
agree with personal attacks of one group of editors to another group of
editors: all of them have equal rights.
4. We don't encourage mass edits in such a hot topic without prior
discussion with other editors: that's why a lot of articles of this
category are protected from editing - propose your adjustments at the talk
page and discuss them with other editors, that's
the most constructive and effective way of editing.
5. We admit that such articles require additional attention and that's why
our community is discussing nominations for the new mediators of this
topic. Nevertheless, even now editors and sysops invest much time and
effort to keep Wikipedia neutral and true.
6. Wikipedia already had some similar situations and our previous
experience prooves that "discuss, then edit" is the best practice here. For
example, the similar disputes are connected with Nagorno-Karabakh, Kosovo,
etc.
Dear editors, we kindly ask you to stay calm, show respect to other editors
and discuss all your edits based on the reliable sources.
Wikipedia has all rules and policies required and we hope that our editors
and readers are able to cope with this.
Dear Admin@ Wikimedia,
I am a researcher from Aalto University, Finland. We are currently conducting an online survey on photo sharing practices and motivations. Audience of your mailing list are highly suitable participants for our study. Would it be possible to post the following text on your mailing list?
Thank you and have a great day.
Best regards,
Aqdas
___________________________
Researchers from Aalto University, Finland are investigating the practices and motivations behind photo sharing activity. We would highly appreciate if you can participate to our study by filling in the online survey that will take approximately 5 minutes to complete. Results from the study will be published in peer reviewed journal or conference.
If you have any further questions relating to this research, please feel free to contact the researcher.
https://www.webropolsurveys.com/S/9923BBCAB850688B.par
Thank you in advance.
Best regards,
Aqdas Malik
aqdas.malik(a)aalto.fi<mailto:aqdas.malik@aalto.fi>
Researcher, Strategic Usability Group
Aalto University
