This is final notification that we will stop accepting all Bids for
hosting Wikimania 2008 in just over 24 hours' time, at midnight
(00:00) GMT on Friday 31 August 2007. At that time, all outstanding
Bids including at least some of the fundamental information will be
taken through to the next round, as per the timetable on meta.
If you are considering placing a serious Bid, you have a *very* short
period in which to post it to meta, so please do not leave it any
Good luck to all involved!
On behalf of the Wikimania Jury,
James D. Forrester
jdforrester(a)wikimedia.org | jdforrester(a)gmail.com
I think that community needs a general wiki list. Such list would be
used for wiki projects in general, not only for WM projects.
For example, if someone wants to discuss about his/her idea for a new
wiki project, (s)he needs a general place to do that. In general, such
talks on wikipedia-l or foundation-l lists are off topic. Or if people
want to talk in general about wiki projects, it should be discussed
And I think that it should be hosted by WM because it is the center of
Anyone against it? :)
The Communication Projects Group or ComProj was set up some months ago
to provide a venue for collaboration between Wikimedians who want to
help with communication work. We do all sorts of things: preparation
of PR material, reaching out to specific groups to get them involved
in our projects, and encouraging inter-project communication.
While the group was started up by Sandra Ordonez, the Wikimedia
Foundation's Communications Manager, it could in its present form have
been started up by any Wikimedian - Sandy is always there to offer
guidance but she has made it clear she is not in charge and wants the
group to run itself. We do that.
How we work is that communication projects are put forward on our
mailing list, and people can volunteer to take them on in groups or
individually. These can come from all members and, unsurprisingly,
Sandy and Cary Bass, Wikimedia's volunteer co-ordinator at the office.
We also have weekly IRC meetings to discuss our projects.
At the moment we are struggling for members due to August dragging
many people away. Projects are not getting done as fast as they should
be and we could really do with more members. So, if you have an
interest in communications, please drop by
All that we require is that you are willing to put a decent amount of
time into our projects, prioritising it amongst your other valuable
Please distribute this to individual project mailing lists that I may
not be subscribed to, as ComProj is not just for Wikipedia.
For a long time the contentious issue of the Siberian Wikipedia has rumbled
on. There are people against it there are people in favour of it. There are
two types of arguments for the closure of the Siberian Wikipedia:
- political arguments they include nationalistic arguments
- these arguments are often countered by comparison to other
- they are considered to be POV, however this argument goes both
- aggravated by repeated vandalism by POV pushers in many
- linguistic arguments; the language is not recognised as such
It is unlikely that there will be a resolution and acceptance as a
consequence from the vote for closure that is said to be finished. Voting is
a bad instrument because an unreasonable majority can push its POV and a
reasonable minority will not accept such a POV when their arguments are not
addressed. Many of the arguments used are not acceptable and consequently
the result of the vote is not necessarily acceptable. It is also unclear
that the people to what extend the people that voted are genuine
The linguistic argument is fairly easier to resolve. When it can be
successfully argued that Siberian is indeed a language, it is possible to
get recognition for it. This will remove the only compelling argument for
closure. I would support this as the way to go when the consequences are
clear and accepted by all. When Siberian is indeed recognised as a language,
the Siberian Wikipedia can stay and when it is not, hosting for this project
is no longer an option within the Wikimedia Foundation.
Without a prior agreement about the consequences of this process, there is
no point for the WMF to support the start a procedure for evaluation of the
Siberian language. This does not prevent people interested in asking for
recognition for Siberian. It would strengthen their case. It would however
not necessarily make this controversy go away.
A bit late, but hopefully still useful:
Includes a brief summary of the first-ever Advisory Board meeting,
with personal commentary; Angela is working on the "official" report.
Toward Peace, Love & Progress:
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
I know this has come up some more times, but this time somebody
actually filed a deletion request about all Wikimedia logos, see
Note that the nomination is correct by the letter, so unless the
foundation changes the licensing policy, we will have to delete the
images. Nobody wants them deleted, so I would ask the board to clarify
on this issue.
This is, first and foremost, a (delayed) invitation to all interested
parties to continue to contribute to the discussion on meta at
[[m:Wikimania 2008/Judging criteria]] regarding the exact criteria
that that the Jury ([[m:Wikimania 2008/Jury]]) will be using in their
judgements on which Bid will be selected to host Wikimania 2008. We
would like as many people as possible to make suggestions as to what
they would want from the conference - after all, a large part of it is
for the community. These ideally should be finalised by 30 August, so
this is a priority.
Secondly, I would like to clarify and expand in slightly more detail
the time-line that the Jury will be using, as I have received some
questions as to how the process will work:
Firstly, on Thursday 30 August (3 days' time), any Bids which have
been put up on meta as proper attempts will be accepted for the next
stage; at this point, no new Bids will be accepted. This means that if
you are considering working on a Bid, *start immediately*.
Then, on Sunday 23 September (24 days later), all Bids should be
complete. This includes information on venue & accommodation, budget &
sponsors, proposed dates, and the local team who will work on it (see
[[m:Wikimania 2008/Official requirements for bidding cities]] for some
more information) on this. There will be a public IRC meeting (on the
Freenode network, probably in #wikimania - details to be announced
nearer the time) in which the Jury will discuss things with the Bid
teams and raise initial queries than they have.
>From this point on until Friday 5 October (12 days later) the Jury
will ask the Bid teams questions they have about their Bids, on meta
and also via e-mail. During this period we encourage Bid teams to
tweak their submissions in response to concerns and questions, though
teams are not meant to need to make significant changes to the content
of their Bids at this time.
There will be a private meeting of the Jury on 5 October at which
point they will each vote separately on a grid based on the criteria
that will be finalised soon, with discussion and options to change
votes until a Bid has gathered appropriately-strong support. The
result will be announced here by myself or one of my fellow
The exact voting mechanism is currently being discussed and will be
formally announced some time before the meeting for transparency.
Please note that it is not intended to release individual Jury
members' voting records, but general feedback on each criterion for
each Bid (successful or not) will be provided.
Once the 2008 Bid selection is finished, we will be setting up the
2009 Bid selection procedure, so feedback on how this system worked,
and what can be improved, is very welcome. The best place for this is
probably the talk page of the Jury page, [[m:Talk:Wikimania
James D. Forrester
jdforrester(a)wikimedia.org | jdforrester(a)gmail.com