Phoebe, this meeting is not the one to approve or not the Recomendations
from Sue, right? I always imagined that would be AFTER the meeting in Paris.
<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. Ajude-nos a
construir esse sonho. <http://wikimedia.pt/Donativos>*
On 27 January 2012 17:22, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> The WMF Board of Trustees is planning our winter meeting for next
> weekend. The draft agenda is posted here for comment:
> This is a very full agenda, focusing on three main topics: the WMF
> annual planning process for 2012/2013, fundraising and funds
> dissemination models, and the movement roles process.
> -- Phoebe
> (Board of Trustees Secretary, 2011-2012)
> * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers
> <at> gmail.com *
> foundation-l mailing list
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
The WMF Board of Trustees is planning our winter meeting for next
weekend. The draft agenda is posted here for comment:
This is a very full agenda, focusing on three main topics: the WMF
annual planning process for 2012/2013, fundraising and funds
dissemination models, and the movement roles process.
(Board of Trustees Secretary, 2011-2012)
* I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers
<at> gmail.com *
I opened a RFC request on Meta,
In my view, this is a situation similar to the one in Acehnese Wikipedia,
which we had recently - when a group of users basically "hijack" a WMF
project and start to promote goals incompatible with the WMF mission.
Whereas we still need to listen to all sides of the conflict and I might be
wrong on that, I still find the situation alarming and I would like to get
reactions. Note that I was not involved (and I would prefer not to be
involved), I am just an observer.
We'll be holding another AFT office hours session at 19:00 tomorrow, in
#wikimedia-office; hope to see a lot of you there :). If you can't make it,
drop me an email and I'll send you the logs.
Community Liaison, Product Development
I just filed a feature request which I think is of strategic interest
Bug 33889 - Request to add a comment section under every Wikipedia article
By providing a comment section under every Wikipedia article, we can enable
people interested in that topic to talk with each other, make friends and
exchange external resources pertaining to that topic (e.g. books, products,
jobs, external references, etc.).
Wikipedia is not just an encyclopedia; it is also a very valuable "topic
navigation and positioning service" that navigates you to any conceivable topic
in your mind, and once you're at that topic's Wikipedia article, the article's
URL becomes a unique address that "positions" that topic. With this position,
we can do many useful things (such as the ones mentioned in the previous
paragraph), just like we can do many useful things with a geographic
information system (GIS) such as Google Earth.
There are many MediaWiki extensions that can add a comment section to every
Wikipedia article. Just go to
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension_Matrix/AllExtensions and search for
"comment" or "discussion".
What I want is a wiki that indexes problems and each problem's wiki
page will also document solutions to that problem. Since problems and
their solutions are documented by humans, our remaining problem is how
can the wiki index problems efficiently?
Problem base (PB) wikis already exist, such as WikiHow and
WikiAnswers. But I think they're not well-organized enough. For
example, WikiHow has a category called "Air Conditioning" which
collects solutions related to air conditioning:
As you see, there are no subcategories in this category. All solutions
are just listed in A-Z order. A person must scan these solutions one
by one to find a solution that matches his problem.
What's the ideal PB in my mind? Under a topic like "Air Conditioning",
the PB should further categorize problems in three ways:
1. By symptom ("What's wrong?")
2. By task ("What do you want to do?")
3. By component ("What component is your problem in?")
Each of the above can walk a user down several levels of subcategories
until actual problems come into sight. This is what I call
"By symptom" and "by task" are actually approaches that categorize
objects (here, objects are problems) by function, while "by component"
is an approach that categorizes objects by structure.
I am applying for a summer student to do a Wikipedia Medicine research
project through my department at UBC. One potentially project I am looking
it is having them review all the edits made to Wikiproject Medicine
articles. The student will go through each edit and a) determine if the
edit is okay and revert it/fix it if it is not b) determine which edits are
made from IP/new users verses long term edits c) calculate the percentage
of positive/negative edits from each group d) they will be going over edits
from more than one day old thus we will be able to determine how good
Wikipedia is at repairing itself. I am thinking of collecting a weeks worth
While we have a list here
if multiple edits
are made to the same page in a single day it only shows the last one. Is it
possible to get a list of all edits? If should be possible to work with
this list if another is not available.
If I am able to get approval and funding from UBC I am hoping to run a
second round collecting the same data but with "pending changes" turned on
for a week on all medical articles. This students would be required to
handing all pending changes to all medical articles and will be collecting
the same data as before. This will allow us to determine 1) if pending
changes affects the numbers of IPs editing 2) if and to what degree pending
changes reduces the visibility of poor quality content. The proposed
student will be either between first and second year or second and third
year medicine and will be working 40 hours per week for 6-8 weeks during
the summer. If of course the last part of the project does not get approval
I will still try to go ahead with the first part and will have the student
join me on the "Medical Translation Project" as discussed here
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian