As we have stated in our annual plan , “currently, community members
must search many pages and places to stay informed about Foundation
activities and resources.” We have worked in the past two quarters to
create a single point of entry. We call it the Wikimedia Resource Center,
and its alpha version is now live on Meta Wikimedia:
As the movement expands to include more affiliates and more programmatic
activities every year, newer Wikimedians are faced with lack of experience
in the movement and its various channels for requesting support. In order
to expand Wikimedia communities’ efforts, we want to provide easy access to
resources that support their very important work. The [[m:Wikimedia
Resource Center]] is a hub designed in response to this issue: it is
intended to evolve into a single point of entry for Wikimedians all over
the world to the variety of resources and types of staff support they may
need to develop new initiatives or also expand existing ones.
This version of the Resource Center is only the beginning. For phase two of
the project, we will enable volunteer Wikimedians to add resources
developed by other individuals or organizations to the Wikimedia Resource
Center, and in phase three, the Wikimedia Resource Center will include
features to better connect Wikimedians to other Wikimedians that can
We want to hear what you think about this prototype and our plans for it!
If you have comments about the Wikimedia Resource Center, you can submit
your feedback publicly, on the Talk Page, or privately, via a survey hosted
by a third party, that shouldn’t take you more than 4 minutes to complete.
A feedback button is on the top right corner on every page of the hub.
Looking forward to more collaborations!
Communications and Outreach Project Manager, Community Engagement
I've told Jcb about this discussion
reminded them to check for license blanking vandalism and asked if they can
check the deleted edits of the license blanker in case they were able to
get any other files deleted that way.
I'm not an admin on commons, but where I am an admin it would be expected
that you would check the history of a file before deleting it.
On 30 January 2017 at 17:16, Maarten Dammers <maarten(a)mdammers.nl> wrote:
> Hi Lodewijk,
> On 30-01-17 17:28, Lodewijk wrote:
> OK, so in this case the information was apparently removed
> someone unrelated to the author - very odd - and deleted by an admin
> without further checking. I restored the image on the list of winners.
> Some of the Commons admins, especially the one that deleted this image,
> are very sloppy. They seem to act more like robots than like a humans. I'm
> afraid we already lost quite a few good images to these people. This kind
> of behavior is hurting not only Wiki Loves Monuments, but Commons as a
> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
Commons admins remain admins indefinitely, all they have to do is at least
5 logged Admin actions every 6 months and not break the rules to the point
that people decide to recall them.
Rather than ask the WMF to give someone an admin override facility for
Commons it might be easier if some more people from this list ran for admin
on Commons. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators
On 31 January 2017 at 12:58, Ynhockey <ynhockey(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Are Commons admins approved temporarily? I know some Wikipedias (including
> Hebrew) don't have permanent adminship and re-approve admins every once in
> a while, but it's probably a disastrous policy for Commons if it's the case.
> Anyway, as much as I am surprised that no top WLM organizer is a Commons
> admin (although there's clearly at least one admin on this mailing list),
> it's possible to get around this, although not easy. Lily has a good
> channel to the WMF and most of us are long-time users who know many others
> + many developers. The solution can be technical, and it can come from the
> WLM: perhaps a new user group that can only see historical revisions and
> restore without some of the other admin rights, perhaps an options to
> archive images that "need" to be deleted on groups of Commons policy, but
> aren't opposed by the foundation's legal team (might be a solution for URAA
> images as well), etc.
> I know that many in the community don't want any WMF interference, and the
> WMF wants to repair community ties—both are completely understandable. I
> don't want to suggest that we should interfere with these processes, but do
> think we can implement some kind of solution on the side. After all, WLM is
> a big project that costs a ton of resources. Just in terms of money, the
> WMF (or sometimes local donations) funds it with tens of thousands of
> dollars, directly or indirectly. It's therefore worth investing a little
> bit more to technically support projects like WLM.
> —Yan (Ynhockey).
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki(a)gmail.com
> > wrote:
>> WereSpielChequers, 31/01/2017 09:39:
>>> I'm not an admin on commons, but where I am an admin it would be
>>> expected that you would check the history of a file before deleting it.
>> It's expected on Commons too, see <https://commons.wikimedia.org
>> When mistakes happen on Commons, we're sometimes too quick at
>> generalising. Currently Commons has issues with one or two rampant admins
>> who make semi-random deletions en masse (and even edit war on deletion
>> requests). Hopefully the situation is temporary.
As I noted that two of the national nominees have been deleted after their
nomination, I was curious, are there any process improvements we could
consider to avoid this to some extent?
I would be curious to hear some best practices that countries have
implemented to check for formalities. For example, I noted that one image
from Korea was deleted apparently because the licese was missing. I'm
guessing that this is something we could check for semi-automated. Are
there countries that do this?
I do some manual checking for the top-50 internationally, just before we
enter the final round. But it is very hard to scale that, and it eats up a
lot of time. Any other ideas?
[apologies for cross-posting]
I'm reaching out to you on behalf of WLM international team to learn about
your experience as an organizer of WLM 2016. During the months of September
to December (and maybe even earlier than September and later than
December), you and your team of organizers have spent substantial amount of
time to make your Wiki Loves Monuments a success. We are eager to hear
about those experiences and learn how we can improve the infrastructure and
services that we offer to you for making 2017 a smoother, more efficient,
and fun year for you to organize WLM. Please help us achieve that! :)
We ask you to kindly do the following:
* Please take some time to respond to this survey
* Share the link to the above survey with all the people who helped you
organize WLM in your campaign and ask them to participate. We will need to
hear from as many organizers as possible.
* If you know of someone who had organized WLM in the past and didn't do so
this year, please share with them this other survey
the same deadline as 2017-02-04. We would like to learn how we can help
them come back as an organizer in WLM 2017. :)
If you don't have access to Google Forms, please email me offlist and I
will share a pdf version of the survey with you.
We really appreciate in advance the time you spend on helping us learn more
about your work.
Lily, on behalf of WLM international team 2016
[I'm writing this email at my capacity as one of WLM-IR organizers.]
An Iranian designer has created and donated a design for WLM t-shirts that
WLM-IR is planning to give to Iran's national winners. The t-shirts will
have the donated design in the front (in white and turquoise/blue), and the
WLM logo with a phrase such as (Iran's Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, in
Persian) in the back.
My question is regarding the WLM logo and the brand. Are there concerns
about changing the colors and fillings of the WLM logo which will be
printed in the back of the t-shirt (let's say to a design that is all
white)? Ideally, I would go with keeping the WLM logo colors untouched, the
issue is that the t-shirt can become too colorful with grey, red, and white
in the back, and white and blue in the front.
I personally think that we should either not change anything in the logo or
agree on some alternative shades of logo that WLM-IR and other WLM
organizers can use for these purposes. This way, we all will continue
sharing a single brand which is a good practice.