Dear community:
Below you will find the report of activities of the month of May 2014 done
by the volunteers of Wikimedia Mexico. Please don't hesitate to get in
touch with us if you require extra information about this activities or
only to make some suggestions.
The report is also available on Spanish and English in our wiki:
https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Informes/Mayo_2014/ (Spanish)
https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Informes/Mayo_2014/en (English)
Kindly regards. On behalf our chapter.
Carmen Alcázar (User:Wotancito)
WMMX Secretary.
==Highlights==
===First meeting of volunteers for Wikimania 2015===
https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Primera_reuni%C3%B3n_de_voluntarios_y…
The Mexican chapter had its first meeting of volunteers for Wikimania 2015,
the Wikimedia movement international conference which is to be held next
year at Vasconcelos Library in Mexico City. The meeting was held at the
same place where the conference will take place. 32 persons attended. A
general presentation was offered, then the general coordinations and their
specific tasks were described.
===Wikimania 2015 announcement on the Internet Day===
Past May 16
Iván Martínez
, president of Wikimedia Mexico, was invited by the Laboratory for the City
of Mexico to preside over the Internet Day in Mexico City. The ceremony
took place after an inauguration of a Telmex Digital Classroom at the
Centro de Transferencia a Menores of Procuraduría General de la República
(Center for Minor Transfer of the Attorney General's Office of Mexico
City). By request of the city authorities,
Iván Martínez
made a speech focused on social participation and collaborative phenomenon
behind Wikipedia. This message was written by Salvador
Alcantar
. The mayor of Mexico City, Miguel Ángel Mancera, formally announced the
realization of Wikimania 2015 in Mexico City and expressed his approval.
Watch the video
:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ULTgf_hfjM
== Journal ==
May 2
Talks by
Gustavo Sandoval
about Wikipedia at two self-managed public high schools in Chicoloapan,
State of Mexico: high school number 55 and high school "Próceres de la
Educación". See,
http://linuxchicoloapan.org/flisol-2014-en-chicoloapan-resena/ here, a
brief review by Adrián Vergara, a local chronicler who assisted us; some
images and opinions of some of the students are also included. These talks
are some of the activities included in the Latin-American Festival for the
Installation of Free Software (FLISOL).
https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Pl%C3%A1tica_sobre_Wikipedia_en_secun…
May 6
Interview for Wikinoticias and presentation of Wikimania before the head of
the Government of the Federal District, Miguel Ángel Mancera.
Iván Martínez
and
Carmen Alcázar
attended the Government's office.
May 13
*
Iván Martínez
meets the authorities of the Institute of High School Education of the
Government of Mexico City in Iztacalco to talk about their interest in
joining Wikimedia México's Wikipedia Education Program.
*Wikimania 2015 staff work meeting at Jardín de Innovación, Mexico City.
May 14
*
Wikimedia Mexico
meets the authorities of the Laboratorio para la Ciudad (Lab for the City)
of the Government of the Federal District to talk about Wikimania 2015.
May 15
*Wikimania 2015 staff meets Biblioteca Vasconcelos' staff.
May 16
*
Iván Martínez
participates in the ceremony to celebrate the Internet Day in Mexico City,
invited by Laboratorio para la Ciudad of the Government of the Federal
District.
May 17
Iván Martínez
talks during the Latin-American Festival for the Installation of Free
Software (FLISOL) at National Polytechnic Institute's Escuela Superior de
Cómputo (ESCOM, School of Computer Science).
May 18
*Wikimedia México's board's monthly meeting
*Wikimania 2015 staff work meeting
*First meeting of volunteers for Wikimania 2015. Vasconcelos Library,
Mexico City.
May 22
*Presentation of the Report of Semester 2013-2 of the Wikipedia Education
Program at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)'s Faculty of
Higher Studies Aragón (FES Aragón).
May 23
*Talk by
Iván Martínez
at the Second Meeting of Digital Humanities, organized by Red de
Humanidades Digitales (Digital Humanities Network), UNAM's Faculty of
Philosophy and Literature (FFyL) and Biblioteca Vasconcelos.
May 27
*Participation of
Alan Lazalde
at Cumbre del Buen Conocer (Well Knowing Summit) in Quito, Ecuador,
organized by FLOK Society.
May 31
*Wikipedia Monthly Workshop at Telmex Hub.
During May
*Meetings and activities related to Wikimania 2015.
After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This
time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The
initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the
fellow wikipedians on svwp
It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc
was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some
examples
*The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment
to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These
became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way
helped/made possible by that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with
complete Taxobox, iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students
are expert on subjects not the wikispecialities
*the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus.
There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and
here Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500
disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting
the disputes, why, what and by whom. And when we compare these
manually created articles we find that on most other language versions,
these only take data from one authority and are not correctly describing
the dispute. Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but
also most correct version on species?
As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second
biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September
And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our
researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic
entities from all over the world by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a
source.
Anders
Hello all,
it is with great pleasure that I see the long and diverse list of
people having nominated themselves to participate in the FDC in the
years to come. [1]
The deadline for nominations has passed, and it is now time for the
community to ask questions to the candidates. While the next round FDC
members will be appointed and not elected, it is crucial that everyone
chips in and asks questions to the candidates, so as to allow the
Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation to have as much insight
as possible as to the skills, competence and motivation of the
candidates.
You can ask questions to all candidates or to specific candidates on this page:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/No…
Note that your questions are also a way for existing FDC members to
know what is important to you all as interested members of the
community regarding FDC activities and work, so please, do
participate!
Best,
Delphine
(current FDC member)
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/No…
--
@notafish
NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost.
Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org
Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org
I am looking for a productive mailing list that discusses matters of
importance to the Wikimedia community. That the people on such a list can
have these discussions politely, respectfully, and with concern for others
in that the words that say, and attitudes taken. I want to see
announcements, I want to see a higher quality of conversation on what
should be a flaglist in the mailing list space of Wikimedia.
We don't have it. One gets to the point of utter frustration with this
list, and it is time that the backstabbers, frontstabbers, bitchfighters,
venal, conceited, etc. need a place to kill each other with as much venom
as possible, but not under the more impressive and specific name of
wikimedia-l. So please rename this list, and take all its people to
something befitting the behaviour seen. Then please produce a clean list
for those who don't have to have the antics of these unbearable,
egotistical, and apparently intolerant and chauvinistic people, and please
don't let them join that list. They can have their shithole and revel in
it. They know who they are and they would feel ashamed if they had a
modicum of interest outside of themselves.
If that is not possible, then those of who us who want a higher quality
discussion will unsubscribe, and be unrepresented and unheard. Another win
for the trolls, and a sad reflection on the direction.
Regards, Billinghurst
All:
In other Wikimedia-related forums, recent discussions have focused on some
(alleged) comments at the Wiki Conference in New York. Apparently, some
people suggested that the WMF's Executive Director should "dump" her
significant other.[1] Many have expressed outrage about this. (For
background, see this blog post from May 30.[2] What's described there has
continued to play out in the weeks since, just not on this list.)
I think we all share a concern about the amount of "drama" in our
community-wide discussions. Expressing outrage (even though it's sometimes
appropriate and necessary) can often be the fuel of "drama" -- and I think
it's important to explore what's been going on in relation to that
principle. So, a couple points:
Point #1:
Gossiping about personal relationships, including points like who should
dump whom, is totally normal behavior in small group conversation.
Not outrageous -- totally normal behavior. In pretty much every social
context I've ever experienced.
I think that much is easily enough to explain and excuse any of the
comments people are complaining about. But in this case, there's of course
more going on:
Point #2:
The ED of the WMF can influence the world in significant ways, and we all
have a stake in how that goes. Her first day on the job was completely
overshadowed by her partner's aggressive pursuit of his own agenda. In the
weeks since, that has only intensified.
When the ED responsible for the largest online community in the world
declines to take decisive and effective action on something this
significant, and declines to take ownership of her own introduction and
priorities, many people -- both on this list and in the wider world -- will
take notice, and will talk about what might, or could, or should happen
next. That is the natural way of things.
One obvious "decisive action" she could take would be to "dump" her
partner. Her partner underscored that their connection was a legitimate
point of discussion by choosing to introduce himself entirely in reference
to her in his first email to this list,[3] and by then continuing to talk
about their relationship.
When the idea that she might "dump" him comes up, I doubt the main intent
is ever to meddle in anybody's personal life. I have (of course) made
comments like this, in many private discussions, and I wouldn't be
surprised if it comes up again. It's a comment that comes up while talking
about possible outcomes, and ones that might stand a chance of resolving
this mess. "Dumping" is rarely a central topic of interest, simply because
nobody I've talked to knows much about the relationship beyond the baffling
and frightening dynamic that has played out in public.
Right now, those who care about Wikimedia are in an incomprehensible
situation. The ED's partner, not the ED, is driving highly visible and
influential discussions. Of course all kinds of things are being said about
it, in all kinds of places. Anybody who acts surprised about that is in
some kind of denial, and -- probably unintentionally -- further fueling the
drama with their expressions of outrage.
Commentary about a high profile relationship is normal, and while it's
*possible* for it to be mean-spirited, it often isn't. Anyone who wants to
abolish gossip doesn't have a problem with Wikimedians' sense of propriety,
they have a problem with a basic aspect of normal, human social
interactions, and/or with the dedication of a worldwide community that
deeply values our projects, and prioritizes their well-being. So please,
let's let this one go. Let's keep our attention on more important matters
-- for instance, how we can build the health, productivity, and diversity
of our communities.
-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]] on English Wikipedia etc.
[1] I'm leaving personal names out of this post, to reduce the likelihood
of this message showing up in web searches on those names.
[2]
http://thewikipedian.net/2014/05/30/meet-lila-tretikov-wikimedias-new-leade…
[3] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-May/071519.html
I'm really not sure what rehashing old dramas which have already been
played out at Wikipediocracy and Jimbotalk on this list is meant to
accomplish unless it is to extend the pointless controversy.
It's all very Junior High School: People A, B, and C were catty about Bobby
and Suzie, and person D who heard them felt compelled to tattle to Bobby,
since he doesn't like Bobby anyway; and Bobby's feelings got hurt and he
got publicly upset, and then people E, F, and G, had their opinions, and
Bobby was even more upset, and blah blah blah yammer yammer yammer...
So on what planet does it make sense to rehash this garbage here with a
list post arguing that being catty is perfectly normal and that little
Bobby isn't cool anyway?
It's stupid.
Moving on...
Tim Davenport
Corvallis, OR
(Carrite on WP, Randy from Boise on WPO)
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 2:32 PM, <wikimedia-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
wrote:
> Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
> wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> wikimedia-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> wikimedia-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: On relationship gossip and appropriate conversation
> (Gerard Meijssen)
> 2. Re: On relationship gossip and appropriate conversation
> (edward)
> 3. Re: On relationship gossip and appropriate conversation
> (Milos Rancic)
> 4. Re: On relationship gossip and appropriate conversation
> (edward)
> 5. Re: Fwd: [Wikimedia Announcements] Israel’s Ministry of
> Education & Wikimedia Israel Agree On New, Unique Initiative (Yves Z)
> 6. Why Wil's actions in multiple forums are a matter of
> significant concern (Pete Forsyth)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 21:41:25 +0200
> From: Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] On relationship gossip and appropriate
> conversation
> Message-ID:
> <CAO53wxVsOM5ztoN9o=b=2ux=
> z83L9WjBGHf6dG3dN8RqbdBp1w(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Hoi,
> Please don't
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
>
> On 15 June 2014 21:19, Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Christophe Henner <
> > christophe.henner(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm puzzled of those emails.
> > >
> >
> > Christophe, thank you for explaining how this looks from your end. I
> > understand now why this would come across this way, and will put
> together a
> > more focused summary like you (and Nathan) suggest shortly. Yes, perhaps
> it
> > would have been better if I started that way.
> >
> >
> > > Hinting someone dumping someone else is NOT an organisational solution.
> > > From my culture and my values it's not only rude and violent, but way
> > over
> > > the line.
> > >
> >
> > Since this seems to be the most heated issue at the moment, I want to
> point
> > out: I am not the one who made these allegedly nasty comments public; the
> > person who made them public, and then proceeded to discuss them in
> numerous
> > public forums, was Wil Sinclair. If making them public is the problem,
> then
> > the aggressor and one of the victims are one and the same person. Yes, I
> > mentioned it here first, but only after it had been widely discussed in
> > other prominent forums (links in my next email). Again. I am not the
> person
> > who made these comments public.
> >
> > Pete
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 21:07:30 +0100
> From: edward <edward(a)logicmuseum.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] On relationship gossip and appropriate
> conversation
> Message-ID: <539DFD02.2010703(a)logicmuseum.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> On 15/06/2014 20:08, Milos Rancic wrote:
> > Christophe, Wil tried to open issues closed few years ago. Besides that,
> > not under ED mandate.
>
> In what sense were these issues 'closed'? 'Closed' usually means
> 'resolved'. As far as I know, they were not resolved.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 22:12:37 +0200
> From: Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] On relationship gossip and appropriate
> conversation
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAHPiQ2Hi8aH4R4zAjGfFBssH3jCVrKTqh8v7OrUcWAaLtj7xFw(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On Jun 15, 2014 10:07 PM, "edward" <edward(a)logicmuseum.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 15/06/2014 20:08, Milos Rancic wrote:
> >>
> >> Christophe, Wil tried to open issues closed few years ago. Besides that,
> >> not under ED mandate.
> >
> >
> > In what sense were these issues 'closed'? 'Closed' usually means
> 'resolved'. As far as I know, they were not resolved.
>
> Whatever fits best to you. You can use imagination, as well.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 21:19:32 +0100
> From: edward <edward(a)logicmuseum.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] On relationship gossip and appropriate
> conversation
> Message-ID: <539DFFD4.2070207(a)logicmuseum.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> On 15/06/2014 20:19, Pete Forsyth wrote:
> > Since this seems to be the most heated issue at the moment, I want to
> point
> > out: I am not the one who made these allegedly nasty comments public; the
> > person who made them public, and then proceeded to discuss them in
> numerous
> > public forums, was Wil Sinclair. If making them public is the problem,
> then
> > the aggressor and one of the victims are one and the same person.
>
> Ahem. After the conference, Kevin Gorman allegedly sent an email to Wil
> Sinclair telling him to 'back the fuck off'. Sinclair asked (on wiki)
> "Please, Kevin, in the future if you have anything to say to me
> regarding Wikipedia, try to do it on-wiki where everyone can take part.
> (10:37, 12 June 2014 UTC).
>
> Directly after this, Sinclair published an email from Gorman, as follows:
>
> "Given how cautious people have asked me to be in speaking to you I
> would normally hesitate to share this - but given the *sheer number of
> people who were reiterating the sentiment in NYC*, I don't think it has
> implications for anyone's anonymity - more than a couple people in NYC,
> including *in positions where this would normally get them in shit in
> any organization other than the Wikimedia movement - were pretty
> explicitly and pretty publicly asking why Lila hadn't either dumped you
> or banished you from the Wikimedia world yet*. That's not something I
> want to happen - least of all because it would be a bloody mess - but
> that's something that multiple influential people are already explicitly
> bringing up in semi-public settings. (This is pretty certainly on the
> list of issues people would rather I don't discuss with you... but I
> can't even think of every person at the conference who brought it up
> with me.)"
>
> It seems clear why Sinclair felt he had to publish the emails, i.e.
> being told to 'back the fuck off'. By the same token it is clear why it
> is such an emotive subject in the community.
>
> >>If making them public is the problem, then the aggressor and one of
> the victims are one and the same person.
>
> You are saying that Sinclair is the aggressor here?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 17:21:09 -0400
> From: Yves Z <zyzzyvy(a)outlook.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikimedia Announcements] Israel’s
> Ministry of Education & Wikimedia Israel Agree On New, Unique
> Initiative
> Message-ID: <BLU185-W361DBDB0ECC5F8F98BE9E8A9170(a)phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>
> Interesting, and nice publicity with an Education Minister.
> It mentions History and Geography as topics.Does this mean a similar
> project is needed in Palestine to maintain neutrality?
>
> > Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 09:01:11 +0200
> > From: ps.huard(a)gmail.com
> > To: wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikimedia Announcements] Israel’s
> Ministry of Education & Wikimedia Israel Agree On New, Unique Initiative
> >
> > Kudos WMIL and everyone involved \o/
> >
> > Pierre-Selim
> > Message d'origine
> > De: Pine W
> > Envoyé: mercredi 11 juin 2014 08:56
> > À: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org; education(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Répondre à: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Objet: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Wikimedia Announcements] Israel’s Ministry of
> Education & Wikimedia Israel Agree On New, Unique Initiative
> >
> > I'm forwarding this good news from WikimediaAnnounce-l that mysteriously
> > wasn't received by Wikimedia-l. I'm sending this to Wikimedia-l and
> > Education-l.
> >
> > Pine
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <itzik(a)wikimedia.org.il>
> > Date: Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 8:58 PM
> > Subject: [Wikimedia Announcements] Israel’s Ministry of Education &
> > Wikimedia Israel Agree On New, Unique Initiative
> > To: wikimediaannounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> >
> > (Posted also on the Wikimedia Blog:
> >
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/10/israels-ministry-of-education-wikimed…
> > )
> >
> > An agreement was met in a meeting between Rabbi Shai Piron, Israel’s
> > Education Minister, Jan-Bart de Vreede, Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation
> > Board of Trustees, Itzik Edri, Chair of the Wikimedia Israel Board and
> > Michal Lester, Executive Director of Wikimedia Israel, regarding a shared
> > cooperation with Wikimedia Israel in the framework of the ministry’s
> school
> > curricula in the coming years. Through the planned cooperation, history,
> > geography and science teachers will receive special professional training
> > to instruct students on how to contribute to new or incomplete Wikipedia
> > articles for which information is lacking or inadequate.
> >
> > The Education Ministry will also examine the possibility of integrating
> > Wikipedia writing assignments in the teaching of research and community
> > involvement. They will also consider having students who speak additional
> > languages (primarily English and Russian) write Wikipedia articles about
> > Israel in those particular languages.
> >
> > Education Minister Rabbi Shai Piron said, “It is important to us that the
> > education system in Israel leads in innovation and cooperating with
> > Wikipedia is a wonderful opportunity to think outside the box and enable
> > students in Israel to do things that make a difference from which others
> > can also benefit.”
> >
> > Jan-Bart de Vreede, Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> > said, “Israel is today among the leading countries in the integration of
> > Wikipedia in the education system and academia. I hope our joint work
> model
> > will also serve as an example to other education systems around the
> world.”
> >
> > In the framework of cooperation that is already in place between
> Wikimedia
> > Israel and the Ministry of education, several pilot projects are being
> > conducted. The projects involve teacher training in good Wikipedia usage,
> > article composition, Wikipedia article writing by gifted high school
> > students and the teaching of proper Wikipedia usage to elementary
> > schoolchildren. It is worth mentioning that through cooperation with
> > academics in a variety of universities and colleges throughout Israel,
> > hundreds of articles are written each year by students in courses. Thus
> > students write Wikipedia articles as part of their degrees, sometimes
> even
> > in lieu of exams or final papers. The Faculty of Medicine at Tel Aviv
> > University recently conducted a special 2-credit course on the subject of
> > Wikipedia and medicine.
> >
> > Survey results published last week as part of Wikipedia Academy 2014
> Israel
> > revealed that 84% of the Israeli public relies heavily on Wikipedia and
> 74%
> > say that it provides all the information they need. Over one third of the
> > population expressed interest in learning to write for Wikipedia.
> >
> >
> >
> > *Regards,Itzik Edri*
> > Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
> > +972-(0)-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
> > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> > sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately
> > directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
> > community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
> > WikimediaAnnounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 14:32:38 -0700
> From: Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Why Wil's actions in multiple forums are a
> matter of significant concern
> Message-ID:
> <CAGWts0G1wYW8pVSFiTx8LBLn_j_Me4FonuXuzhbNUr642A=C=
> Q(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Wikimedia has a problem right now, and in the absence of any effective
> intervention, it appears to be escalating, not receding.
>
> The problem, in a nutshell: Wil Sinclair, the partner of Wikimedia's new
> Executive Director Lila Tretikov, has taken strong, even radical positions
> on what is needed for Wikipedia's future well-being; and owing (by all
> accounts, unintentionally) to his connection to her, his views are
> receiving a much higher degree of attention than they would otherwise, and
> having significant impacts on our community. Lila, whose name and position
> are a key ingredient in the notoriety and influence Wil has so quickly
> gained -- and who is therefore in a uniquely responsible and uniquely
> influential position in this matter -- has made only one public statement
> on the matter, stating that she intends to do nothing about it.[1] But this
> is a problem that needs to be addressed.
>
> As Milos Rancic has said, "Wil tried to open issues closed few years ago."
> The issues he's raised, by and large, are ones that have been widely
> discussed many times; we see people bring them up often, and they generally
> don't get much traction or lead to 100+ comment discussion threads.
>
> The key difference, I am confident, is best exemplified with the first
> words Wil ever spoke on this list: "I'm Wil Sinclair, Lila Tretikov's
> significant other."[2] Regardless of his intentions, his introductory
> message to this list garnered "welcome" messages from three WMF staff, and
> also from three others, and many people (as I have confirmed in many
> offline conversations) made a mental note that here was somebody it would
> be worthwhile to keep on the radar. These 6 prompt messages foreshadowed
> the disproportionate amount of attention he would receive in the coming
> weeks. I believe this unusual level of attention derived almost entirely
> from his connection to Lila. (I don't know any way to prove that, but if
> any longtime subscribers think the attention he got was typical of a new
> list contributor without Wikimedia experience, I'd be interested to know.)
>
> Wil soon parlayed that popularity into other forums. He's now had extensive
> discussions on Wikipedia (WP), where 166 of his 400 edits are to his own
> User Talk page;[3] and Wikipediocracy (WO)[4] where he's posted 283
> messages in maybe a dozen topic threads; and relaunched his personal
> blog.[5] His blog's stated goal is to end what he calls the "Wiki War"
> between WP and WO; in the 10 days since he launched it, he's published 3
> blog posts, all on this topic, and collected about 70 comments. He also
> launched a petition on change.org,[6] calling for better treatment of
> (arguably) English Wikipedia's most notorious banned user.
>
> So although he is no longer posting multiple messages per day on this
> particular email list, his daily efforts to shape the direction of the
> Wikimedia movement has not slowed down.
>
> This is true of many dedicated Wikipedians, of course; but in this case, he
> is getting a disproportionately high level of attention from influential
> people. His user talk page contains 25 comment threads full of advice from
> Wikimedia Trustees, longtime Wikipedians, former ArbCom members,
> Wikipedians in Residence, staff and board of affiliated organizations, etc.
> By contrast, I have students and clients who have made more edits, over
> longer periods of time, who have received little more than a {{welcome}}
> message on their page. Wil, or his activities, have also ended up in
> extensive discussions on Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales' user talk page,
> most recently here.[7]
>
> This level of influence is, to my eyes, clearly a function of his
> connection to Lila. Not exclusively -- he has of course demonstrated a
> knack for presenting himself in a way that attracts attention -- but his
> connection to her is a vital ingredient in his success.
>
> But I'd like to get back to how he has used that influence. He has focused,
> as far as I can tell, almost exclusively on trying to stimulate discourse
> and reconciliation between the Wikimedia and Wikipediocracy communities.
>
> For those who are not familiar with Wikipediocracy: I am not one of the
> people who would paint it as "bad" with a broad brush. It's a tremendously
> active forum dedicated to criticizing Wikipedia and Wikimedia, and many
> well intentioned people say many useful things there. However, it is also a
> place that where *truly* mean-spirited and damaging things are sometimes
> said, and are frequently allowed to remain indefinitely.
>
> An example, drawn from the recent controversy, may help:
>
> A couple days ago, a regular, anonymous WO participant -- who has benefited
> from many friendly exchanges with Wil -- had the following to say about a
> longtime Wikipedian (who's not active on Wikipediocracy, to my knowledge)
> using their full given name: "[name elided], you're a cunt...You are the
> worst kind of coward" and then insults this person's physical appearance.
> Some forum participants objected to this comment,[8] and suggested it might
> be removed, but to date it hasn't been. Wil responded with light,
> good-natured scolding.[9]
>
> While we can all agree that discourse in Wikimedia spaces can be
> problematic, I do think that a vulgar, direct, personal attack like this --
> especially launched from behind a veil of anonymity, addressed to a
> person's full name -- would generally not be tolerated here. So there is at
> least one good argument in favor of maintaining some distance between
> Wikimedia and WO.
>
> I wouldn't say reconciliation between the WP and WO communities is
> necessarily a bad goal, but it is most certainly a *delicate* area. And Wil
> has exhibited, repeatedly and even explicitly, that delicacy is not his
> thing. His impact is, of course, hard to measure, as there are many
> judgment calls involved; but in my estimation, the discussions he's started
> or participated heavily in have (1) commanded a good deal of time from
> volunteers, staff, and Trustees who ideally would have something worthwhile
> to show for the time invested; (2) galvanized the community of, in some
> cases, the most disruptive banned users and critics of Wikipedia; and (3)
> created a central issue that, like it or not, will impact many parties'
> perception of Lila and her disposition toward community dynamics, at the
> expense of her ability to define that for herself.
>
> I believe this is a substantial problem, and one that is growing, not
> shrinking, with every passing day. I do not know what the solution is, but
> I do believe that Lila is the one person (apart from Wil, who seems to
> pride himself on disregarding advice, and who of course has no professional
> obligation at all toward Wikimedia) with the most at her disposal to come
> up with an effective resolution.
>
> I firmly believe that if Lila doesn't do something effective to address
> this problem soon, it will take on a life of its own, and encompass a lot
> more of the Wikimedia world we all care about than it has so far. If she
> doesn't do anything, yes, I think the rest of us need to address it
> somehow; I don't have a proposal for that, but I would be happy to discuss
> possibilities.
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> [1] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-May/072059.html
> [2] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-May/071519.html
> [3]
>
> https://tools.wmflabs.org/supercount/index.php?user=Wllm&project=en.wikiped…
> [4] Wil, who today stated that he's done posting to Wikipediocracy,
> previously posted to most of the recent threads in the "Governance" section
> of Wikipediocracy: http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=14 and
> also the parent topic area:
> http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=8
> [5] http://wllm.com/
> [6]
>
> http://www.change.org/petitions/wikipedia-make-wikipedia-conferences-truly-…
> [7]
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_wales#Regarding_the_nauseatin…
> [8] http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=99887#p99887
> [9] http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=99937#p99937
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
>
> End of Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 123, Issue 64
> ********************************************
>
Wikimedia has a problem right now, and in the absence of any effective
intervention, it appears to be escalating, not receding.
The problem, in a nutshell: Wil Sinclair, the partner of Wikimedia's new
Executive Director Lila Tretikov, has taken strong, even radical positions
on what is needed for Wikipedia's future well-being; and owing (by all
accounts, unintentionally) to his connection to her, his views are
receiving a much higher degree of attention than they would otherwise, and
having significant impacts on our community. Lila, whose name and position
are a key ingredient in the notoriety and influence Wil has so quickly
gained -- and who is therefore in a uniquely responsible and uniquely
influential position in this matter -- has made only one public statement
on the matter, stating that she intends to do nothing about it.[1] But this
is a problem that needs to be addressed.
As Milos Rancic has said, "Wil tried to open issues closed few years ago."
The issues he's raised, by and large, are ones that have been widely
discussed many times; we see people bring them up often, and they generally
don't get much traction or lead to 100+ comment discussion threads.
The key difference, I am confident, is best exemplified with the first
words Wil ever spoke on this list: "I'm Wil Sinclair, Lila Tretikov's
significant other."[2] Regardless of his intentions, his introductory
message to this list garnered "welcome" messages from three WMF staff, and
also from three others, and many people (as I have confirmed in many
offline conversations) made a mental note that here was somebody it would
be worthwhile to keep on the radar. These 6 prompt messages foreshadowed
the disproportionate amount of attention he would receive in the coming
weeks. I believe this unusual level of attention derived almost entirely
from his connection to Lila. (I don't know any way to prove that, but if
any longtime subscribers think the attention he got was typical of a new
list contributor without Wikimedia experience, I'd be interested to know.)
Wil soon parlayed that popularity into other forums. He's now had extensive
discussions on Wikipedia (WP), where 166 of his 400 edits are to his own
User Talk page;[3] and Wikipediocracy (WO)[4] where he's posted 283
messages in maybe a dozen topic threads; and relaunched his personal
blog.[5] His blog's stated goal is to end what he calls the "Wiki War"
between WP and WO; in the 10 days since he launched it, he's published 3
blog posts, all on this topic, and collected about 70 comments. He also
launched a petition on change.org,[6] calling for better treatment of
(arguably) English Wikipedia's most notorious banned user.
So although he is no longer posting multiple messages per day on this
particular email list, his daily efforts to shape the direction of the
Wikimedia movement has not slowed down.
This is true of many dedicated Wikipedians, of course; but in this case, he
is getting a disproportionately high level of attention from influential
people. His user talk page contains 25 comment threads full of advice from
Wikimedia Trustees, longtime Wikipedians, former ArbCom members,
Wikipedians in Residence, staff and board of affiliated organizations, etc.
By contrast, I have students and clients who have made more edits, over
longer periods of time, who have received little more than a {{welcome}}
message on their page. Wil, or his activities, have also ended up in
extensive discussions on Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales' user talk page,
most recently here.[7]
This level of influence is, to my eyes, clearly a function of his
connection to Lila. Not exclusively -- he has of course demonstrated a
knack for presenting himself in a way that attracts attention -- but his
connection to her is a vital ingredient in his success.
But I'd like to get back to how he has used that influence. He has focused,
as far as I can tell, almost exclusively on trying to stimulate discourse
and reconciliation between the Wikimedia and Wikipediocracy communities.
For those who are not familiar with Wikipediocracy: I am not one of the
people who would paint it as "bad" with a broad brush. It's a tremendously
active forum dedicated to criticizing Wikipedia and Wikimedia, and many
well intentioned people say many useful things there. However, it is also a
place that where *truly* mean-spirited and damaging things are sometimes
said, and are frequently allowed to remain indefinitely.
An example, drawn from the recent controversy, may help:
A couple days ago, a regular, anonymous WO participant -- who has benefited
from many friendly exchanges with Wil -- had the following to say about a
longtime Wikipedian (who's not active on Wikipediocracy, to my knowledge)
using their full given name: "[name elided], you're a cunt...You are the
worst kind of coward" and then insults this person's physical appearance.
Some forum participants objected to this comment,[8] and suggested it might
be removed, but to date it hasn't been. Wil responded with light,
good-natured scolding.[9]
While we can all agree that discourse in Wikimedia spaces can be
problematic, I do think that a vulgar, direct, personal attack like this --
especially launched from behind a veil of anonymity, addressed to a
person's full name -- would generally not be tolerated here. So there is at
least one good argument in favor of maintaining some distance between
Wikimedia and WO.
I wouldn't say reconciliation between the WP and WO communities is
necessarily a bad goal, but it is most certainly a *delicate* area. And Wil
has exhibited, repeatedly and even explicitly, that delicacy is not his
thing. His impact is, of course, hard to measure, as there are many
judgment calls involved; but in my estimation, the discussions he's started
or participated heavily in have (1) commanded a good deal of time from
volunteers, staff, and Trustees who ideally would have something worthwhile
to show for the time invested; (2) galvanized the community of, in some
cases, the most disruptive banned users and critics of Wikipedia; and (3)
created a central issue that, like it or not, will impact many parties'
perception of Lila and her disposition toward community dynamics, at the
expense of her ability to define that for herself.
I believe this is a substantial problem, and one that is growing, not
shrinking, with every passing day. I do not know what the solution is, but
I do believe that Lila is the one person (apart from Wil, who seems to
pride himself on disregarding advice, and who of course has no professional
obligation at all toward Wikimedia) with the most at her disposal to come
up with an effective resolution.
I firmly believe that if Lila doesn't do something effective to address
this problem soon, it will take on a life of its own, and encompass a lot
more of the Wikimedia world we all care about than it has so far. If she
doesn't do anything, yes, I think the rest of us need to address it
somehow; I don't have a proposal for that, but I would be happy to discuss
possibilities.
-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
[1] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-May/072059.html
[2] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-May/071519.html
[3]
https://tools.wmflabs.org/supercount/index.php?user=Wllm&project=en.wikiped…
[4] Wil, who today stated that he's done posting to Wikipediocracy,
previously posted to most of the recent threads in the "Governance" section
of Wikipediocracy: http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=14 and
also the parent topic area:
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=8
[5] http://wllm.com/
[6]
http://www.change.org/petitions/wikipedia-make-wikipedia-conferences-truly-…
[7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_wales#Regarding_the_nauseatin…
[8] http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=99887#p99887
[9] http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=99937#p99937
I'm forwarding this good news from WikimediaAnnounce-l that mysteriously
wasn't received by Wikimedia-l. I'm sending this to Wikimedia-l and
Education-l.
Pine
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <itzik(a)wikimedia.org.il>
Date: Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 8:58 PM
Subject: [Wikimedia Announcements] Israel’s Ministry of Education &
Wikimedia Israel Agree On New, Unique Initiative
To: wikimediaannounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
(Posted also on the Wikimedia Blog:
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/10/israels-ministry-of-education-wikimed…
)
An agreement was met in a meeting between Rabbi Shai Piron, Israel’s
Education Minister, Jan-Bart de Vreede, Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation
Board of Trustees, Itzik Edri, Chair of the Wikimedia Israel Board and
Michal Lester, Executive Director of Wikimedia Israel, regarding a shared
cooperation with Wikimedia Israel in the framework of the ministry’s school
curricula in the coming years. Through the planned cooperation, history,
geography and science teachers will receive special professional training
to instruct students on how to contribute to new or incomplete Wikipedia
articles for which information is lacking or inadequate.
The Education Ministry will also examine the possibility of integrating
Wikipedia writing assignments in the teaching of research and community
involvement. They will also consider having students who speak additional
languages (primarily English and Russian) write Wikipedia articles about
Israel in those particular languages.
Education Minister Rabbi Shai Piron said, “It is important to us that the
education system in Israel leads in innovation and cooperating with
Wikipedia is a wonderful opportunity to think outside the box and enable
students in Israel to do things that make a difference from which others
can also benefit.”
Jan-Bart de Vreede, Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
said, “Israel is today among the leading countries in the integration of
Wikipedia in the education system and academia. I hope our joint work model
will also serve as an example to other education systems around the world.”
In the framework of cooperation that is already in place between Wikimedia
Israel and the Ministry of education, several pilot projects are being
conducted. The projects involve teacher training in good Wikipedia usage,
article composition, Wikipedia article writing by gifted high school
students and the teaching of proper Wikipedia usage to elementary
schoolchildren. It is worth mentioning that through cooperation with
academics in a variety of universities and colleges throughout Israel,
hundreds of articles are written each year by students in courses. Thus
students write Wikipedia articles as part of their degrees, sometimes even
in lieu of exams or final papers. The Faculty of Medicine at Tel Aviv
University recently conducted a special 2-credit course on the subject of
Wikipedia and medicine.
Survey results published last week as part of Wikipedia Academy 2014 Israel
revealed that 84% of the Israeli public relies heavily on Wikipedia and 74%
say that it provides all the information they need. Over one third of the
population expressed interest in learning to write for Wikipedia.
*Regards,Itzik Edri*
Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
+972-(0)-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
_______________________________________________
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately
directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
_______________________________________________
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
WikimediaAnnounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
.jpg){kind=link}