Hi everyone!
Wikimania 2015 staff here. I'd love to see you all and learn from you. See
you Aug 7!
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Richard Symonds <
richard.symonds(a)wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
> For those interested in such things, the building is Wiki Loves
> Monuments-eligible, and has an article at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley's_Chapel.
>
> Richard Symonds
> Wikimedia UK
> 0207 065 0992
>
> Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
> Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
> Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
> United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia
> movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who
> operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects).
>
> *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control
> over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.*
>
>
> 2014-07-18 15:58 GMT+01:00 Dirk Franke <dirk.franke(a)wikimedia.de>:
>
> > Dear list readers,
> >
> > and hopefully the last Pre-Wikimania Volunteer Support Meetup Correction
> > mail. There is a room change. The workshop will happen at
> >
> > Wesley's Chapel and Leysian Mission
> > 49 City Road
> > London
> > EC1Y 1AU
> >
> >
> https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Pre-conference:_Volunteer_Support
> >
> > Thanks again for Wikimedia UK being attentive and acting so quickly.
> >
> > Best,
> > Dirk
> >
> >
> > Am 18. Juli 2014 14:00 schrieb Dirk Franke <dirk.franke(a)wikimedia.de>:
> >
> > > Dear list readers,
> > >
> > > I apologize for the inconvience, but have to make a small correcton.
> > >
> > > The Volunteer Support Workshop will happen on
> > >
> > > Thursday, August 7(!)
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Pre-conference:_Volunteer_Support
> > >
> > > not the day before as previously stated.
> > >
> > > Best wishes,
> > > Dirk
> > >
> > > --
> > > Dirk Franke
> > > Team Communitys
> > > Volunteer Support Dept.
> > >
> > > Fon +49 30 219158260
> > > E-Mail: dirk.franke(a)wikimedia.de <denis.barthel(a)wikimedia.de>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu
> der
> > > Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> > >
> > > Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > > Tel. (030) 219 158 260
> > >
> > > Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
> > > Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
> > unter
> > > der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> > > Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dirk Franke
> > Team Communitys
> > Volunteer Support Dept.
> >
> > Fon +49 30 219158260
> > E-Mail: dirk.franke(a)wikimedia.de <denis.barthel(a)wikimedia.de>
> >
> > --
> > Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu der
> > Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > Tel. (030) 219 158 260
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
> > Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
> unter
> > der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> > Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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>
>
--
"Imagina un mundo en donde cada persona del planeta pueda tener acceso
libre a la suma total de todo el conocimiento humano. Eso es lo que estamos
haciendo."—Jimmy Wales <https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales>.
Socio de Wikimedia México
<https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A1gina_principal>.
[image: Andrés C y C on about.me]
Andrés Cruz y Corro
about.me/andycyca
<http://about.me/andycyca>
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Luca Martinelli
<martinelliluca(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> so the Book Creator will still be active, maybe under another name,
> maybe with another engine, but still active?
Same name and functionality, just the "Order a printed book" feature
will disappear.
Erik
--
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Dear volunteer supporters all over!
For some years now all over the Wikimania movement people have been
building up structures and networks for Volunteer Support. Different
solutions have been found as to how volunteers can best be supported around
the Wikimedia movement.
We would like to invite you to a Volunteer Support meetup!
https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Pre-conference:_Volunteer_Support
barcamp - 06. August from 10-16h
Wikimedia UK
Development House
56-64 Leonard Street
London
England
EC2A 4LT
A barcamp-like meetup for all those who implement and take care of
Volunteer Support programs in the movement - be you volunteer or employee
of a Wikimedia organisation.
Whenever some of us doing volunteer support came together we quickly
noticed that we shared a lot of experiences and questions.
Let’s share those experiences we made, find answers to questions together
and find out what great solutions people in other parts of the world found.
Get to know your neighbouring volunteer supporters or find out what the
other side of the globe does to support volunteers!
See you there!
Muriel (WMCH)
Raimund (WMAT)
Dirk (WMDE)
--
Dirk Franke
Team Communitys
Volunteer Support Dept.
Fon +49 30 219158260
E-Mail: dirk.franke(a)wikimedia.de <denis.barthel(a)wikimedia.de>
--
Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu der
Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 260
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
Hi - copying this under a new subject that makes the topic more clear to
anyone skimming their inbox. Beyond the edits made below to clarify the
current practice, I was curious about the success and value of the RCOM in
general. First, I'm not aware of how active the committee was in the past
in reviewing proposals, and it's certainly possible a great deal of work
was done in this area.
But reading the "charter" for the committee and looking around meta for
related documentation, it appears that almost none of the elements of the
charter have been accomplished. Despite this, in an e-mail last year to the
RCOM list, Dario suggested that the continued operation of a membership
committee was no longer a priority. (Nor has it been for some time - the
last documented meeting was in 2011, the IRC channel has been mothballed,
and the last monthly report [issued in 2012] is no longer even available).
I gather that individually the members of the committee have created
research-related initiatives that are valuable, and that part of the
impetus for this work may have been collaboration through the vehicle of
the committee. However, the charter lays out some pretty worthwhile goals:
policies for conflicts of interest, guidelines for recruiting subjects, a
process for requesting non-public data, supporting research projects with
technical resources, creating an open-access policy, releasing a "starter
kit" for researchers, etc.
At least from the links within the orbit of the main RCOM page, it's not
clear to me that any of these goals have been achieved or even that
substantial progress has been made. If it has, then the RCOM is definitely
selling itself short by not making that more public. If indeed these are
all still outstanding goals, it's disappointing that the committee is
basically wound up without any hope or plan or achieving them.
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Nathan <nawrich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> To avoid confusion with researchers in the future, I've made some minor
> changes to the research related pages on Meta (see below). This should help
> ensure that outdated documentation does not cause unnecessarily delay
> and/or expense for those interested in doing Wikimedia-related research.
>
> 1: Posted a notice to the top of
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Subject_recruitment to the
> effect that RCOM no longer evaluates research projects or participates in
> recruiting participants, and removed the assertion that research requires
> approval from RCOM.
>
> 2: Updated https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:FAQ to make it clear
> that the WMF / RCOM does not evaluate specific research proposals or assist
> in recruiting, and that any researcher intending to conduct on-wiki
> interaction should seek approval from the local projects using whatever
> methods have been established locally.
>
> 3: Removed the reference to RCOM approval from
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Projects
>
The mother bless us ,
my all Dearer ,
as you know , all is well , but everyone can not feel as all , so please change your feeling and expresion .
Thanks ,
+91-9307788333
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: AFD survey (Fæ)
> 2. Re: AFD survey (Amir E. Aharoni)
> 3. Re: AFD survey (Marc A. Pelletier)
> 4. Re: Lsjbot i Wall street jpournal and BBC world (Ilario Valdelli)
> 5. On historical event / WMRS Microgrants 2014 (Milos Rancic)
> 6. Re: On historical event / WMRS Microgrants 2014 (Jon Davies)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:02:30 +0100
>From: Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com>
>To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
>Message-ID:
> <CAH7nnD3ddsG4HK-w85j+J=nU5zDEBXR-iEE=haL86WdxHhaG5w(a)mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>On 16 July 2014 12:39, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote:
>...
>> I asked this researcher to discontinue the survey pending a check on the
>> impact of it on the Wikipedia community. I said this because I feel they
>> are out of compliance with even the soft suggestions in research that are
>> available, and they know this.
>
>Good point. If anyone wanted to research deletion discussion patterns
>and outcomes on the English Wikipedia or other projects, I could knock
>out a nice analysis using a little passive but intelligent bot work
>depending on their requirements. I'm easy to find.
>
>I'm pretty sure this would be a lot cheaper in volunteer time or
>research time than creating surveys to answer very similar questions,
>particularly if the resulting report were freely published so that
>volunteers could give their "subjective value responses" to that
>instead.
>
>Fae
>--
>faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 15:43:48 +0300
>From: "Amir E. Aharoni" <amir.aharoni(a)mail.huji.ac.il>
>To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
>Message-ID:
> <CACtNa8tHeMQRxjnsGHdHDG5B=BX0BsMe4HwSt0GVWp18=84pQQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>Good points, Lane. Such things were possibly discussed before, but it's the
>first time that I see it it spelled out like this.
>
>This approach should be advertised a bit somehow, so that the researchers
>know how to do it ethically and for everybody's benefit, and so that the
>experienced Wikipedians would know not to start answering such surveys.
>
>
>--
>Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
>http://aharoni.wordpress.com
>“We're living in pieces,
>I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore
>
>
>2014-07-16 14:39 GMT+03:00 Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com>:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I feel that this is an unethical research project and I have told the
>> researcher so. We exchanged several emails and were unable to understand
>> each other. I asked them to please have their university ethics board
>> contact me.
>>
>> I asked the researcher about RCOM and other things. This person said they
>> posted to RCOM, but "the Meta page states that submissions should receive
>> responses within 1-2 weeks, and yet our messages went unanswered. We have
>> institutional ethics approval, but that doesn't last indefinitely, and so
>> after receiving no response we opted to go ahead."
>>
>> I am not going to share more than
I am finally able to share with you the biggest benefit of WMRS
Microgrants projects for this year. It's about cooperation with one
very old institution, and it was necessary to wait for their formal
letter.
But first about the side effects of the Microgrants project...
When you are going outside and tell people that you are willing to
support their projects, it could lead into interesting outcomes. It is
important to understand possibilities which could be opened and catch
them.
We got one interesting proposal. It was about a long term project of
making photos of one person. The project was very interesting, but it
turned out that it's not suitable to be supported by Wikimedia, as
well as the amount of needed money is so small, that I am able to fund
it personally.
However, that was not the end. That guy, an amateur photographer (with
professional skills) is actually the top Serbian lector. He proofread
the Orthography of Serbian language.
He is also a lexicographer, working in Matica srpska [1].
So, we met in my office. While drinking some alcohol, besides his own
project, we were talking about the state of Serbian lexicography and
culture in general.
We were talking about Matica srpska, as well; about present financial
state of the institution, which has money for salaries and the most
important projects, but doesn't have for a number of projects.
I had bold ideas, of course, but I was quite skeptical about rational
possibility of cooperation between WMRS and Matica srpska. However, he
convinced me that the president of MS is likely willing to cooperate
and that we should talk about that.
So he told me that he'll arrange the meeting with the president and
that we should talk about that.
Few weeks later I led WMRS delegation (our ED Mile and our program
manager Ivana were in the delegation) to the initial talks with MS.
I think we were talking two hours. And I am quite confident to tell
you that on June 20th, 2014 happened one historical event, not just
for Wikimedia Serbia, but also for Serbian culture and free knowledge.
I wasn't able to talk about this till today, when we got formal letter
from MS, which summarize our meeting and emphases their commitment to
accessibility of knowledge to as much people as it's possible.
If you are in Slavic culture in general, you should know what Matica
srpska is. As the most of you are not, here is the story in short...
MS is the oldest cultural and scientific institution in Serbia. They
are the main lexicographical and encyclopedistic institution in
Serbia. It isn't easily comparable with large cultures, but,
basically, if we don't count independent institutions, 90% of
dictionaries and the most important encyclopedias have been created
inside of MS or with MS as the leader of the project.
We share one important trait with the institutions like MS is. It's
about long term goals. We want to start cooperation and develop it.
So, we are starting with cooperation slowly. During the next year our
goal is to liberate two dictionaries. One is ornithological, the other
one covers dialects of Vojvodina.
That's just the beginning, of course. Their editions are the main
dictionaries of Serbian language and we'll discuss the next year about
the steps toward liberating them. They are also in charge for creation
of national encyclopedia, but it has its own Board and during the next
months we should start talking with the Board, as well.
The significance of this cooperation for Wikimedia is that we are at
the beginning of the first close relations with one main national
cultural institution, which focus is creating dictionaries and
encyclopedias. They share our goals, as well as they want to cooperate
with us.
And it's not just about liberating content because we will help it
financially. It's their commitment, as well. They want to share their
content on Internet. With our (technological, licensing etc.) help,
they will become the institution which shares their content by
default, no matter if we are involved or not.
I know that this story is not applicable in many cases. It's not
rational to expect that the University of Oxford would do the same.
However, I am sure that this story *is* applicable in many cultures of
the similar size, like Serbian is.
It is also important that the visibility of Wikimedia organizations
all over the world is very important. You could get something very
valuable if you show that you are friendly.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matica_srpska
We are looking for Wikipedians to participate in a survey. The survey is
designed to help us understand group decision-making and Wikipedia’s
Articles for Deletion (AfD) process. The research is being carried out
under the terms of the University of Western Ontario - Code of Conduct; it
will not lead to any sales follow up; no individual (or organization) will
be identified in our reporting.
If you are an adult Wikipedian, we would be grateful if you could spare
approximately 10-15 minutes to complete this survey.
As a token of our gratitude, for each completed survey we will make a
charitable donation of CAD$2 to the Wikimedia Foundation. If you have any
questions, please contact Lu Xiao at lxiao24 (at) uwo.ca.
To start the survey please click ONCE on the link below: http://
fluidsurveys.com/s/WikipediaSurvey/
Please try to complete the survey by August 1, 2014.
Thank you very much for your time, we really value your input.
Sincerely,
UWO Wikipedia Research Team
Perhaps Lane's involvement with RCOM would prevent submissions from going
unanswered for months - this is a huge roadblock to researchers who are
trying to do things ethically. On the other hand, if Lane were to accuse
other researchers of harming the community for personal gain, as he has
done off-list in this case, that too would be very problematic, IMO worse
than any survey of this type.
I would like to thank others for their feedback. Yes, we are aware of
NOTAVOTE - the terminology is a bit problematic, but we are trying to get
at the unique use of rationales that ideally constitutes the bulk of such
non-vote discussions.
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 15:43:48 +0300
> From: "Amir E. Aharoni" <amir.aharoni(a)mail.huji.ac.il>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
> Message-ID:
> <CACtNa8tHeMQRxjnsGHdHDG5B=BX0BsMe4HwSt0GVWp18=
> 84pQQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Good points, Lane. Such things were possibly discussed before, but it's the
> first time that I see it it spelled out like this.
>
> This approach should be advertised a bit somehow, so that the researchers
> know how to do it ethically and for everybody's benefit, and so that the
> experienced Wikipedians would know not to start answering such surveys.
>
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> “We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore
>
>
> 2014-07-16 14:39 GMT+03:00 Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com>:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I feel that this is an unethical research project and I have told the
> > researcher so. We exchanged several emails and were unable to understand
> > each other. I asked them to please have their university ethics board
> > contact me.
> >
> > I asked the researcher about RCOM and other things. This person said they
> > posted to RCOM, but "the Meta page states that submissions should receive
> > responses within 1-2 weeks, and yet our messages went unanswered. We have
> > institutional ethics approval, but that doesn't last indefinitely, and so
> > after receiving no response we opted to go ahead."
> >
> > I am not going to share more than this publicly, but in short, I talked
> > with the researcher to the limit of their interest and they feel that
> they
> > must proceed with the research. Their oversight is at
> > <http://www.uwo.ca/research/about/research_offices.html>
> > Their RCOM page is at
> > <
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:The_Use_of_Rationales_in_Wikipedia…
> > >
> >
> > My concern here, as with many surveys, is that the researcher greatly
> > values their time and assigns less value to Wikipedia community time, and
> > is comfortable asking for lots of volunteer time on the pretense of
> helping
> > our community. This kind of research is, in my opinion, not helpful to
> > Wikipedians because the questions make no sense due to having been
> designed
> > by an outsider, and additionally so many people have these same questions
> > and only want to target our most active and busiest and valuable
> > volunteers. Furthermore there is no compliance here with community values
> > in research. Bad surveys create "survey fatigue", in which volunteers are
> > later disinclined to participate in good and useful community-approved
> > research.
> >
> > If anyone sees research problems in the future I am interested in talking
> > about these things. I have been thinking of becoming more involved in
> > supporting RCOM for some time.
> >
> > The basic problem is that practically all researchers assume that the
> > number of highly active Wikipedians is huge, and therefore, they imagine
> no
> > problem for them to ask for any amount of volunteer time to be diverted
> > from Wikipedia to their personal and private collection of survey data.
> The
> > reality is that there are not more than hundreds or low thousands of
> > Wikipedians who are active to the extent they imagine. This survey is
> > targeting English AfD, where I imagine there are only low hundreds of at
> > most of continually active participants, and the reality may be much
> lower
> > participation than that.
> >
> > I asked this researcher to discontinue the survey pending a check on the
> > impact of it on the Wikipedia community. I said this because I feel they
> > are out of compliance with even the soft suggestions in research that are
> > available, and they know this.
> >
> > yours,
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Srikanth Ramakrishnan <
> > srik.ramk(a)wikimedia.in> wrote:
> >
> > > If the people who have created this survey can fix the problems raised
> by
> > > Fae, I'd be happy to share this with several language Wikipedians in
> > India.
> > > I'm sure that at this point nobody would want to be part of it.
> > > On Jul 16, 2014 1:54 PM, "Tomasz Ganicz" <polimerek(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In Polish Wikipedia there is no voting for deletion for around 3-4
> > > > years. There is discussion and then final decission is made by one of
> > > > admins who regularly maintains the deletion process.
> > > >
> > > > 2014-07-16 10:20 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki(a)gmail.com
> >:
> > > > > Thanks. All questions were generic and about "Wikipedia", so I
> > answered
> > > > > with the Italian Wikipedia in mind. Also note that it.wiki is
> perhaps
> > > > > the only wiki which switched deletions from voting to non-voting:
> the
> > > > > experiment was already done, you only need to measure and interpret
> > it.
> > > > > :-) See
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-January/123334.html
> > > > >
> > > > > I had problems with two questions:
> > > > > * "Are you concerned that somebody would change or remove your
> > > > > rationale? Please choose the most applicable response." This
> question
> > > > > assumes that removing a comment is bad; I would have answered "Yes
> > when
> > > > > appropriate per law or policy" but there was no such option.
> > > > > * "Do you read the rationales in the discussion before making the
> > final
> > > > > decision?" This assumes that this is just a matter of personal
> taste;
> > > > > sometimes policy and process requires it, sometimes not. (For
> > instance
> > > > > in the classic it.wiki deletion process, but certainly also in some
> > > > > specific sub-process triggers on en.wiki and others.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Nemo
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > > > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > > > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > > > http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29&title=tomasz-ganicz
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > > <
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.w…
> > >
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lane Rasberry
> > user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> > 206.801.0814
> > lane(a)bluerasberry.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 3
> Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 09:49:34 -0400
> From: "Marc A. Pelletier" <marc(a)uberbox.org>
> To: wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
> Message-ID: <53C682EE.8010705(a)uberbox.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On 07/16/2014 07:44 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> > AFAIK deletion has
> > never been a vote by policy on en.wiki.
>
> No, but it almost always devolves to a vote de facto. Interestingly
> enough, that particular question (did you close discussions by counting
> show of hand vs evaluating the rationales) appears in the survey, which
> shows that they are at least aware of the dichotomy.
>
> -- Marc
>
>
> ********************************************
>