For the interest of you fine men and women on foundation-l :-)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Craig Franklin <cfranklin(a)wikimedia.org.au>
Date: 7 August 2011 20:48
Subject: Draft version of WMAU's strategic plan
To: "Local Chapters, board and officers coordination (closed subscription)"
Wikimedia Chapters general discussions <chapters(a)wikimedia.ch>
As the chair of Wikimedia Australia's strategic planning subcommittee, it
gives me great pleasure to announce that we have released the draft version
of our strategic plan for the next three years for comment and feedback.
You can see the plan in full here:
If you are interested in the processes behind the drafting of this plan, or
you're a chapter thinking of starting this process (and if you are thinking
of starting, I'd encourage you to actually start!), I have posted a blog
entry here that goes over everything at a high level, and where I will be
happy to answer any technical questions:
Obviously, given the events of recent days, some aspects of this plan may
need to be revisited, but it's my hope that the funding issue will get
sorted out and we can get back to the ambitious but in my mind achievable
programme work we have outlined here.
It was interesting to hear from Switzerland, here in the UK things are very
different. One difference between the UK model and the US/Swiss model is
that the tax largely accrues to the charity not to the donor. Another
feature of UK charity giving is that it is heavily skewed towards legacies,
but with an important area of payroll giving.
And while we might be cautious about taking money from some companies
directly, it is a very different matter if that same company is matching the
charity donations that their employees give via Payroll giving.
There is also a tradition of charity endorsed calenders and Christmas cards
that for some charities can represent an important revenues stream. I would
suggest that a charity which can produce "Dad's presents" such as a
Battleship themed calender has a ready niche in this market.
Some of that may be similar to whatever country you live in, but the odds
are that unless you come from the UK parts of it will be very different. For
example Ireland has a system whereby charities endorse prize draws...
That's why big successful multinational charities tend to decentralise so
they can take advantage of such national differences.
An interesting thing happened today. I started receiving frantic calls
this morning from an officer at the National Gallery of Modern Art in
Bangalore, who shall go unnamed. She had got my number from a colleague,
who I met in the course of a GLAM meeting we organised earlier in the
year. This officer was trying to claim exemption from lifetime road tax
on her newly purchased car. (All central government employees are exempt
from this road tax). The Regional Transport Authority office she went to
refused to give her this exemption, on the grounds that the NGMA
Bangalore was not listed as a central government office or agency on
Wikipedia, either here:
or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Culture_%28India%29
(Additionally, NGMA Delhi and Mumbai were also not listed as
agencies/offices of the Ministry of Culture).
Now that the problem has been solved, after about 30 seconds of editing,
her bona fides as a central government employee will hold good for the
regional government department she is trying to convince, and she will
get the exemption she is entitled to.
It's funny how the world works...
I extended my Wikimania talk and, after a lot of technical problems,
I've finally managed to create videos from the presentations.
I uploaded the first couple of videos. Not all of them are
interesting, here are the notes for those who are interested just in
* Missing Wikipedias 1/7 , 12:20; that's about the project, not
* Missing Wikipedias 2/7 (1/4) , 7:20; substance: numbers
* Missing Wikipedias 2/7 (2/4) , 6:58; some explanations, not
* Missing Wikipedias 2/7 (3/4) , 10:51; more explanations, not
* Missing Wikipedias 2/7 (4/4) , 12:21; substance: numbers by regions
(I am talking slowly as I was a bit exhausted from searching for
appropriate tools; my English is not perfect; so if you could be
irritated by those facts, skip the videos until I find better speaker
I am not sure would I able to upload videos at Wikimedia Commons, as
the master files are more than 500MB up to now; but I'll upload files
from which I created videos.
More videos will come during the next days.
I am not sure if your wording implies that I am being excessively negative
or skeptical. But yes, I very definitely think it should be resisted at
every stage of implementation. What else can we do, if the people who
should be providing services to us, try to run things for us. the community
is sometimes wrong; the board is sometimes right. I would rather go wrong
with the community , than right with the board.T, there is no other way of
preserving the values of independence and spontaneity which are the essence
of our projects. The distinctiveness of Wikipedia is that we are a
community-directed project, and no person or group--even groups of our own
choosing-- has the authority to lead us. There are no doubt limitations of
what such a mode of organization can achieve, but we are here to see how
far we can get with this way of working; we have already gotten further
than anyone could have predicted, and perhaps we can get much further. I do
not have the knowledge to formally speculate about social organization. But
what I do know is that we have an idea, and we should pursue it as far as
it can take us. Perhaps conventional wisdom is wrong, and we can maintain
ourselves as we originally intended. The idea is very simple, and classic:
trust the community; trust each other; do not trust any organized group
withing us or speaking for us.
On Aug 26, 2011 11:12am, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 26 August 2011 16:06, David Goodman dggenwp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > This labeling is proposed to be done on the basis not of the regular
> > commons categories, but of special ones designed for the purpose; not
> > on the regular WP editors, but a special committee.
> Ooh, *really*. Then this initiative will be bitterly resisted at every
> - d.
> foundation-l mailing list
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Could you say a little more about the partnership with Arcanum?
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Bence Damokos
> Dear all,
> Please find below the report on Wikimedia Hungary's activities in April
> 2011. It is available online at:
> Best regards,
> Bence Damokos
> Executive Vice President,
> Wikimedia Hungary
> http://wikimedia.hu <http://wiki.media.hu>
> *Wikimedia Hungary Report*
> *Vol 4 Issue 4*
> *April 2011*
> *Prepared by: Bence Damokos*
> This is an update on Wikimédia Magyarország's activities covering April
> 2011. For more recent updates, you can follow our blog (in Hungarian) at
> In the month of April, we have held presentations about Wikipedia on the
> following occasions:
> - 8: A presentation at the the Apáczai High School in Budapest
> - 13: A presentation at the Humanities Faculty of the St Stephen
> University in Jászberény. The audience included students of library studies.
> - 26: A presentation at the Budapest University of Technology and
> - We have discussed collaboration opportunities with Arcanum, a
> publisher of digitised versions of out-of-copyright books, encyclopedias,
> maps and similar. In this spirit we have signed a partnership agreement with
> the publisher at the XVIII. International Book Fair of Budapest. (Press
> - We have also had a meeting with the researchers at the Hungarian
> Academy of Science (MTA-SZTAKI institute) about the possibility of using
> their anti-plagiarism software to detect copyright violations on Wikipedia.
> - We have submitted a report (
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_HU/Wikiconference/Report ) on
> our 10th anniversary conference held in January. Videos of the event are
> available on our YouTube channel at: http://youtube.com/WikimediaHU.
> - Also, we have submitted a report on the 4.3 million forint ($22000)
> grant we have received from the Hungarian Council of Internet Providers to
> buy a server (see previous coverage in August 2010:
> - In April we have received notification that our 0.25 million forint
> ($1250) grant request for the National Civil Fund was approved. The grant,
> covering June to September 2011 is intended to cover the costs of the
> development of a CiviCRM credit card gateway and the printing of outreach
> Marshall McLuhan <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan>
> A group called Kitchen Budapest has organized a Wikipedia editing sprint at
> Műcsarnok, one of the biggest art exhibition halls in Budapest to celebrate
> the 100th anniversary of Marshall McLuhan's birthday. As part of the sprint,
> they created and improved the McLuhan article in the Hungarian Wikipedia.
> A short video and a description of the event is available in English at:
> On 4th April we held a board meeting in a Budapest café to discuss pending
> projects, approve new members, the transfer of our share of the Wikimedia
> Fundraiser (see previous report) and similar. The minutes are available (in
> Hungarian) at:
> While the meeting was convened as a board meeting, it was public, and
> therefore we had quite a few of our members present.
> We have issued a press release and a blog post to mark the 10 millionth
> media file on Commons:
> Wikimedia Hungary participated in the 2009/2010 fundraiser as a partner of
> the Wikimedia Foundation. The amount of donations raised in Hungary in April
> was 15 000 forints ($75) by Wikimedia Hungary, and $17.8 by the Wikimedia
> 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:
> WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
I was wondering if there is any way to "officially" free Wikipedia
content under PD/CC-0? What procedure should one follow to use that
data on another website with an incompatible license?
Assumptions: we are talking about a single version of the page with
only one or just a few authors, and all authors have accepted to
release the data in the public domain.
Possible answers I have considered:
- a message from each author in the talk page of the article (pros:
easy to implement, wiki-based; cons: language barrier)
- a message to OTRS (cons: afaik, OTRS messages to WMF are only
considered "official" by the WMF itself)
I don't think the problem will be whether the contributors edited in
accounts associated with their legal identities, I think the problem will be
whether all the editors (or their heirs) are contactable.
Much of the pedia has been written by IP editors. IPs may be edited by
multiple people and by different people over time. So even if the IP address
in question is still active and agrees to the release into Public domain of
something contributed by that IP address three years ago, there is a real
possibility that the person currently editing at that IP address is not the
same as the one whose copyright they are willing to give away.
With logged in accounts you are on much firmer ground, if you post on the
talkpage of a contributor and they agree to waive their rights on an article
then you don't need to know who they are, but you can be pretty confident
that they are the same person as was editing that account when it
contributed to that article.
But a significant proportion of our editors are no longer with us and may
not even be monitoring their talkpage or the Email account they used for
Wikipedia, and 30% don't even have email enabled. A few have scrambled their
passwords, or been blocked and had their talkpage access revoked. Some are
dead. But if you can be patient, in the long run it may be possible to
assume that all editors involved have been dead for more than seventy years.
Though with some of our editors being as young as 8 that could be quite a
It might be easier to persuade whatever the organisation it is that insists
on PD to broaden their stance and become compatible with us.
> Message: 10
> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 12:37:08 +0100
> From: Fae <faenwp(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] How to free something from Wikipedia in
> the public domain?
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Sounds a little problematic depending on the details. If the text was
> released on Wikipedia first, then the contributors agreed "to release
> your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License". If the all the
> authors of the article can identify themselves as the same people who
> contributed under the named accounts for the original Wikipedia
> article then release to PD is no problem, in practice few articles
> only have a history of contributors who are using accounts associated
> with their legal identities.