This one short. The next one will be much longer :)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Robin Pepermans <robinp.1273(a)gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 23:11
Subject: [Wikimedia Announcements] Language committee report - July 2011
To: the Wikimedia Incubator <incubator(a)lists.wikimedia.org>,
wikimediaannounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
See the wiki version here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_committee/Reports/2011-07
This is the language committee report for July 2011, written in Haifa,
Israel (Wikimania 2011) thanks to the scholarship provided to me by
the Catalan Associació Amical Viquipèdia.
=== Committee ===
Some talk about membership of the LangCom and closing projects.
=== Approvals ===
The Mingrelian Wikipedia (xmf.wikipedia.org) has been created.
=== Eligibility ===
Discussion about the request for a Wikipedia in Tunisian Arabic.
=== Related ===
Thanks to Ryan Kaldari
(<http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2011-July/054328.html>),
the Wikimedia Foundation is now an official liaison member of the
Unicode Consortium.
_______________________________________________
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately
directed to Foundation-L, the public mailing list about the Wikimedia
Foundation and its projects. For more information about Foundation-L:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
WikimediaAnnounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
cross-posting
_____
*Béria Lima*
<http://wikimedia.pt/>(351) 925 171 484
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre
acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a
fazer <http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos>.*
On 8 August 2011 17:00, Ashwin Baindur <ashwin.baindur(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am a subscriber to NYT online for almost ten years (its free so far at
> least but about to change). I was most pleasantly surprised to find this :
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/business/media/a-push-to-redefine-knowled…
>
> Great exposure & great publicity.
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Ashwin Baindur
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiConference-India mailing list
> WikiConference-India(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiconference-india
>
>
On 8/8/2011 12:41 AM, foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
> The problem with Incubator: An interactive
> journey
Written by geeks for geeks...
If you are truly serious about enabling new languages & dialects, it is
almost mandatory to include a link at the very top level of Wiki/Pedia/
like the "other languages" line on the_main wikipedia home page_ that
will take you directly to the incubator instructions, etc.
Otherwise it will languish until a true geek walks the twisted path.
All,
At the recent Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees meeting at Wikimania,
the Board approved sending the following letter regarding concerns with our
shared fundraising practice, and outlining principles for future fundraising
practices.
This will also be posted at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_accountability for discussion.
Note: for those currently at Wikimania, please feel free to ask us questions
in person as well as on the list or on meta.
best,
Phoebe Ayers
(2011-12 Board Secretary)
-------------------------------------------------------
The Board of Trustees has recently reviewed our fundraising model and issues
related to the way donor funds are received. This review followed detailed
discussions among the Board's Audit Committee and with our outside auditors,
which highlighted issues about the level of financial controls over donor
funds that go directly to the chapters who act as payment processors. This
review focused on the model established last year, under which donors in
certain countries are exclusively directed to the local chapter during the
annual fundraiser. In our 2010-2011 year, about $4M net went directly to 12
chapters, representing roughly 15% of the total funds donated to the
movement.
There are several problems with this model, and with the current fundraising
situation. Some chapters have received large sums of money early in their
organizational lives, before they have built the capacity and financial
controls to safeguard and best use those resources in pursuit of the
mission. Some chapters have received many times their planned budget in a
single fundraiser. Additionally, in some countries, transferring funds
internationally has been limited by regulatory constraints.
There are also currently no movement-wide controls applied consistently to
all entities that receive donor funds. Some chapters, despite being
well-funded, have not reported in a timely way on their activities, their
financial status, and their use of donor funds, or have had difficulties
following the regulatory requirements of their countries.
This fundraising model has also contributed to significant resource
disparity among chapters. Some of the largest fundraising chapters have
revenue far greater than their stated need and capacity to spend, while
other chapters receive revenue only from Foundation grants or have almost no
revenue at all. The model also suggests that chapters are entitled to funds
proportional to the wealth of their regions, which amplifies the gap between
the Global North and South.
We need to improve our model to address these concerns and to improve the
distribution of donor funds across the Wikimedia movement.
*
==Design principles==*
Our design principles for improving the fundraising model are:
* We are deeply committed to decentralized pursuit of our mission and to
supporting the long-term sustainability of chapters and other movement
partners.
* Because of its role as operator of the websites, the Foundation has to be
satisfied that any organization directly receiving donor funds will treat
them with an appropriately high level of care and transparency.
* An organization can directly receive donor funds as a payment processor if
the following criteria are met:
** There is sufficient money raised in the geography to merit the logistical
effort.
** The organization offers tax deductibility or other incentives to local
donors.
** Regulatory issues about any international funds flows are fully resolved.
** The organization's current financial resources are not enough to fund
proposed program work.
** The Foundation can confidently assure donors to the chapter that their
donations will be safeguarded, that our movement's transparency principles
will be met, and that spending will be in line with our mission and with the
messages used to attract donors.
* The donation process should clearly disclose basic facts about the
organization receiving the donation.
* The Foundation is committed to a grants program to continue to provide
funds to those who can most effectively pursue our mission.
*==Next steps==*
These concerns need to be substantially addressed prior to the start of the
2011 fundraiser. In particular, we expect all parties to live up to current
fundraising agreements including full compliance with all reporting
deadlines.
We appreciate that some chapters have already started working on their
budgets assuming that they would participate as payment processors in the
2011 fundraiser, but may not be able to meet the new criteria outlined
above. The Foundation will work with these chapters to follow through on the
principles of the current Fundraising Agreement to provide the necessary
funds to continue their programmatic work and to meet their operational
needs.
The Foundation will significantly expand its grants program, and should work
closely with the Audit Committee to continue improving the controls and
disclosures around grants.
Just to follow on from what John Vandenberg said, WMAU's fundraising report,
including all the facts and figures, was posted way way back at the
beginning of February. While there were some minor differences of opinion
between WMF and WMAU about some of the recommendations made, there was no
concerns raised on the WMF side about the actual numbers, which were the
important part.
You can read the report here:
http://www.wikimedia.org.au/w/images/6/66/Fundraising_Report.pdf
I'll also echo what's been said earlier that Wikimedia Australia is
extremely dismayed and disappointed by this latest development. While we
agree that transparency and accountability are very important, so is
providing a stable financial and regulatory environment for chapters and
other groups to operate in, so that time and effort can go into programme
work rather than arguing about issues such as this.
Cheers,
Craig Franklin
Treasurer - Wikimedia Australia
Hi everyone,
As many of you know, the results of the poll to keep Pending Changes
on through a short development cycle were approved for interim usage:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Pending_changes/Straw_poll_on_interi…
Ongoing use of Pending Changes is contingent upon consensus after the
deployment of an interim release of Pending Changes in November 2010,
which is currently under development. The roadmap for this deployment
is described here:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Pending_Changes_enwiki_trial/Roadmap
An update on the date: we'd previously scheduled this for November 9.
However, because that week is the same week as the start of the
fundraiser (and accompanying futzing with the site) we'd like to move
the date one week later, to November 16.
Aaron Schulz is advising us as the author of the vast majority of the
code, having mostly implemented the "reject" button. Chad Horohoe and
Priyanka Dhanda are working on some of the short term development
items, and Brandon Harris is advising us on how we can make this
feature mesh with our long term usability strategy.
We're currently tracking the list of items we intend to complete in
Bugzilla. You can see the latest list here:
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/showdependencytree.cgi?id=25293
Many of the items in the list are things we're looking for feedback on:
Bug 25295 - "Improve reviewer experience when multiple simultaneous
users review Pending Changes"
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25295
Bug 25296 - "History style cleanup - investigate possible fixes and
detail the fixes"
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25296
Bug 25298 - "Figure out what (if any) new Pending Changes links there
should be in the side bar"
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25298
Bug 25299 - "Make pending revision status clearer when viewing page"
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25299
Bug 25300 - "Better names for special pages in Pending Changes configuration"
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25300
Bug 25301 - "Firm up the list of minor UI improvements for the
November 2010 Pending Changes release"
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25301
Please provide your input in Bugzilla if you're comfortable with that;
otherwise, please remark on the feedback page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Pending_changes/Feedback
Thanks!
Rob