Dear all,
It is a pleasure for me to announce on behalf of the Affiliations
Committee the recognition of Wikimedians of Bashkortostan as a Wikimedia
User Group [1]. Among their many interests are developing free content
in the Bashkir language and content related to Bashkortostan in
different languages. They have already participated in some events and
projects with wikimedians from other affiliates, like the CEE Meeting
2015, a Thematic Week in the Ukrainian Wikipedia and a conference in
Ufa, the capital of Bashkortostan.
Welcome!!!
1: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedians_of_Bashkortostan_User_Group
--
"*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua
junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain."
Carlos M. Colina
Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 |
www.wikimedia.org.ve <http://wikimedia.org.ve>
Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee
Phone: +972-52-4869915
Twitter: @maor_x
Dear all,
I am honoured to announce on behalf of the Affiliations Committee, the
recognition of Wikimujeres [1] as a Wikimedia User Group.
The focus of Wikimujeres is supporting efforts to increase content and
contributor diversity across the different Wikimedia projects,
especially on those in Spanish. Apart from this and among other
interests, are organizing offline activities such as meetups and events
about gender diversity.
¡Bienvenidas!
1: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimujeres
--
"*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua
junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain."
Carlos M. Colina
Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 |
www.wikimedia.org.ve <http://wikimedia.org.ve>
Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee
Phone: +972-52-4869915
Twitter: @maor_x
Hi All,
Apologies for any confusion with the "powered by" language. The purpose of
the language was not, in any way, intended to provide advertising or
endorsement of the survey provider. The reasoning behind this language was:
(1) brevity given limited space; (2) notice to survey takers and link
clickers that they would be taken to a non-Wikimedia site; and (3)
transparency about the survey provider that we are using for that
particular survey and an easy link to that provider's privacy terms so that
users could make an educated decision about their own privacy. We are more
than happy to use alternate language that achieves those purposes.
Regarding why we don't use LimeSurvey - we actually used to use LimeSurvey
years ago. However, if I recall correctly, there were some major security
and scalability issues discovered and Tech decided it would be best to shut
the server down. That is when we started exploring use of third-party
survey providers like Qualtrics.
Hope that helps.
-Michelle
==
Michelle Paulson
Legal Director
Wikimedia Foundation
149 New Montgomery Street, 6th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
mpaulson(a)wikimedia.org
415.839.6885 ext. 6608 (Office)
415.882.0495 (Fax)
*NOTICE: This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you
have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the
mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation and for legal/ethical
reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community
members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more
on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer>.*
According to the Staff and Contractors page, May is a 'Visual Experience
Designer', which sounds like exactly what you're describing when it
comes to the overlap between interaction and visual design. Is it just
that you lack the visual design resources currently (one visual designer
who isn't even just visual design does seem a bit insufficient for such
a huge task!) to not overlap your roles?
Also, very cool to see how the roles interact laid out like this.
You're a UX engineer too, right? Does this mean you're often one of the
ones interacting with other engineers/developers?
Sorry if I'm getting a bit off track here - design has always been one
of the more opaque areas of the Foundation, at least from a volunteer
perspective, and it's really nice to get a view of what's going on in
such an integral part of the organisation.
On 10/11/15 22:50, Sherah Smith wrote:
> >>Why do you make the distinction that UX designers also do visual when you stated already that you
> also have specifically visual designers?
>
> Because interaction design and visual design are separate things.
> Visual designers are hired to design visual components, while UX
> designers are hired to design user experiences. Sometimes building
> experiences involves visual design, but not always - for example, in
> cases where we are innovating new ideas that do not yet have standards.
>
> >>Are the visual designers the ones doing the UI standardisation?
>
> May, who is a Visual Designer, is indeed working on UI
> Standardization, along with Volker, who is a UX Engineer.
>
> >>How does Design Research relate to the rest of this?
>
> Roughly:
> Design Researchers conduct user research ---> UX Engineers build
> interactive prototypes working with Design Research and Designers --->
> Designers polish and iterate the prototypes with the prototypers --->
> Engineers build the designs
>
>
> As for the difference between UX Designer and UX Engineer, the main
> difference is that the UX Engineer has an engineering background and
> applies that to the building (coding) of interactive prototypes.
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Isarra Yos <zhorishna(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:zhorishna@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Er, forgot to cc the main list, since I did cross-post in the
> first place.
>
> Sorry about that!
>
>
> On 10/11/15 22:25, Isarra Yos wrote:
>> Hi, thank you for your response. This does clarify a lot.
>>
>> Why do you make the distinction that UX designers also do visual
>> when you stated already that you also have specifically visual
>> designers? Are the visual designers the ones doing the UI
>> standardisation?
>>
>> How does Design Research relate to the rest of this? You state
>> that they are not designers, but their work is an integral part
>> of the user experience design process.
>>
>> Also, in the future, could you please use a darker colour (or
>> even just leave it as the default) for your emails? That grey is
>> really hard to read and I misread a few things the first time
>> that made it look a little... different from what you obviously
>> meant.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> On 10/11/15 22:04, Sherah Smith wrote:
>>> Hi Isarra,
>>>
>>> >> what is the 'design team'?
>>>
>>> Even though the design team (as it used to be) is now split out
>>> under different managers with no centralized Director, we still
>>> consider ourselves a "team" in that we still work together
>>> across teams to maintain consistency and provide feedback,
>>> collaborate, and review one another's work where needed. We have
>>> a weekly meeting and regularly talk and brainstorm in person
>>> across teams to support one another in our work.
>>>
>>> Design Research is the team that conducts research that informs
>>> the design of products we build on all other teams. The
>>> employees on this team are not designers.
>>>
>>> Reading Design is a sub-team under Reading, and it designs
>>> reading experiences, mostly for mobile platforms. Where you see
>>> "Visual Designer" as a title, that person works on visual
>>> designs. "UX Designer" works on combinations of visual and user
>>> experience design, mostly the latter, and "UX Engineer" builds
>>> interactive prototypes and interaction design.
>>>
>>> The reorganization that you reference happened in late April
>>> this year and was not a decision the design team itself made.
>>> Rather, it came from upper management. We do now work within the
>>> teams you see listed on the staff page, on experiences for those
>>> teams specifically. So for example, you will not see a designer
>>> on the Search & Discovery team working on experiences for the
>>> Editing team.
>>>
>>> Is there a particular concern you have about this organization
>>> that you feel like we should be discussing, or does this answer
>>> your questions?
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Isarra Yos <zhorishna(a)gmail.com
>>> <mailto:zhorishna@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> From time to time I see references to the 'design team' on
>>> lists and on phabricator. But what does this really mean
>>> now? As I understood it, the previous monolithic Design Team
>>> was essentially disbanded toward the beginning of the year,
>>> with the designers themselves distributed amongst the other
>>> WMF teams in order to more directly integrate their services
>>> into the development workflow (which sounds like a pretty
>>> good idea to me, at least, since design is such an integral
>>> part of most development). Did this happen? According to
>>> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors,
>>> there seem to still be two teams now with the word 'design'
>>> in their names, Reading Design and Design Research, though
>>> these both seem to have somewhat more specialised functions
>>> than just general design, namely Reading (sounds like
>>> front-end non-interactive mw stuff, the visuals perhaps?)
>>> and Research.
>>>
>>> So what is the 'design team'? Is it one of these, though the
>>> teams only have 5 and 4 people on them, respectively? Is it
>>> just WMF designers in general?
>>>
>>> As much as this is also just a plea to please be more
>>> specific, if you have an actual answer, or if you have been
>>> saying this, please, speak up, share your experience and
>>> where you're coming from. As confusing as it is, I suspect a
>>> discussion of what and why this has been going on could also
>>> clear up quite a bit.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> -I
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Design mailing list
>>> Design(a)lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Design@lists.wikimedia.org>
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Sherah Smith*
>>> UX Engineer
>>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>> 206-660-6585 <tel:206-660-6585>
>>> sherahsmith.com <http://sherahsmith.com>
>>> donate.wikipedia.org <http://donate.wikipedia.org>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Design mailing list
>>> Design(a)lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Design@lists.wikimedia.org>
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Design mailing list
> Design(a)lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Design@lists.wikimedia.org>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
>
>
>
>
> --
> *Sherah Smith*
> UX Engineer
> Wikimedia Foundation
> 206-660-6585
> sherahsmith.com <http://sherahsmith.com>
> donate.wikipedia.org <http://donate.wikipedia.org>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Design mailing list
> Design(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
Er, forgot to cc the main list, since I did cross-post in the first place.
Sorry about that!
On 10/11/15 22:25, Isarra Yos wrote:
> Hi, thank you for your response. This does clarify a lot.
>
> Why do you make the distinction that UX designers also do visual when
> you stated already that you also have specifically visual designers?
> Are the visual designers the ones doing the UI standardisation?
>
> How does Design Research relate to the rest of this? You state that
> they are not designers, but their work is an integral part of the user
> experience design process.
>
> Also, in the future, could you please use a darker colour (or even
> just leave it as the default) for your emails? That grey is really
> hard to read and I misread a few things the first time that made it
> look a little... different from what you obviously meant.
>
> Thanks!
>
> On 10/11/15 22:04, Sherah Smith wrote:
>> Hi Isarra,
>>
>> >> what is the 'design team'?
>>
>> Even though the design team (as it used to be) is now split out under
>> different managers with no centralized Director, we still consider
>> ourselves a "team" in that we still work together across teams to
>> maintain consistency and provide feedback, collaborate, and review
>> one another's work where needed. We have a weekly meeting and
>> regularly talk and brainstorm in person across teams to support one
>> another in our work.
>>
>> Design Research is the team that conducts research that informs the
>> design of products we build on all other teams. The employees on this
>> team are not designers.
>>
>> Reading Design is a sub-team under Reading, and it designs reading
>> experiences, mostly for mobile platforms. Where you see "Visual
>> Designer" as a title, that person works on visual designs. "UX
>> Designer" works on combinations of visual and user experience design,
>> mostly the latter, and "UX Engineer" builds interactive prototypes
>> and interaction design.
>>
>> The reorganization that you reference happened in late April this
>> year and was not a decision the design team itself made. Rather, it
>> came from upper management. We do now work within the teams you see
>> listed on the staff page, on experiences for those teams
>> specifically. So for example, you will not see a designer on the
>> Search & Discovery team working on experiences for the Editing team.
>>
>> Is there a particular concern you have about this organization that
>> you feel like we should be discussing, or does this answer your
>> questions?
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Isarra Yos <zhorishna(a)gmail.com
>> <mailto:zhorishna@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> From time to time I see references to the 'design team' on lists
>> and on phabricator. But what does this really mean now? As I
>> understood it, the previous monolithic Design Team was
>> essentially disbanded toward the beginning of the year, with the
>> designers themselves distributed amongst the other WMF teams in
>> order to more directly integrate their services into the
>> development workflow (which sounds like a pretty good idea to me,
>> at least, since design is such an integral part of most
>> development). Did this happen? According to
>> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors, there
>> seem to still be two teams now with the word 'design' in their
>> names, Reading Design and Design Research, though these both seem
>> to have somewhat more specialised functions than just general
>> design, namely Reading (sounds like front-end non-interactive mw
>> stuff, the visuals perhaps?) and Research.
>>
>> So what is the 'design team'? Is it one of these, though the
>> teams only have 5 and 4 people on them, respectively? Is it just
>> WMF designers in general?
>>
>> As much as this is also just a plea to please be more specific,
>> if you have an actual answer, or if you have been saying this,
>> please, speak up, share your experience and where you're coming
>> from. As confusing as it is, I suspect a discussion of what and
>> why this has been going on could also clear up quite a bit.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> -I
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Design mailing list
>> Design(a)lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Design@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Sherah Smith*
>> UX Engineer
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>> 206-660-6585
>> sherahsmith.com <http://sherahsmith.com>
>> donate.wikipedia.org <http://donate.wikipedia.org>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Design mailing list
>> Design(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
>
In the Community Tech team, we're constantly striving to make the world
better by creating helpful things and fixing unhelpful things. We're
basically superheroes, and we wear capes at all times. Here's what we've
been up to this month.
* We built a new Special:GadgetUsage report that's live on all wikis; it
lists gadgets used on the wiki, ordered by the number of users. Not to be
clickbait or anything, but THE RESULTS WILL SHOCK YOU. Check it out at
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:GadgetUsage or your own favorite
wiki.
* HotCat is one of the most popular gadgets -- see: GadgetUsage report
above -- which helps people remove, change and add categories. We fixed
HotCat on over 100 wikis where it was broken, including Wikipedias in
Egyptian Arabic, Ripuarian, Buginese and Navajo, and five projects in Farsi
-- Wikinews, Wikiquote, Wikisource, Wikivoyage and Wiktionary. You're
welcome, Farsi! (More info on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:HotCat
)
* CitationBot is a combination tool/on-wiki gadget that helps to expand
incomplete citations. We got it running again after the https change,
updated it, and fixed some outstanding bugs, including handling multiple
author names. (See http://tools.wmflabs.org/citations/doibot.html for more
info.)
* We also built a prototype of a new tool called RevisionSlider, which
helps editors navigate through diff pages without having to go back and
forth to the history page. The prototype is live now on test.wp, and we'd
love to get your feedback -- visit
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Tech/RevisionSlider
Coming up in November:
* We're starting a big cross-project Community Wishlist Survey on November
9th, inviting contributors from any wiki to propose and vote on the
features and fixes they'd like our team to work on. The survey page is on
Meta, at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey --
please join us there on Monday to add your proposals.
* While that's going on, we're currently considering work in a few
different areas, including completing Gadgets 2.0 and building some modules
to help WikiProjects.
You can keep track of what we're working on by watching Community Tech/News
on Meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Tech/News -- and feel
free to leave questions or comments on the talk page. Thanks!
DannyH (WMF)
Community Tech
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a
product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a
dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from
Wikimedia servers.
Without Superprotect, a symbolic point of tension is resolved. However, we
still have the underlying problem of disagreement and consequent delays at
the product deployment phase. We need to become better software partners,
work together towards better products, and ship better features faster. The
collaboration between the WMF and the communities depends on mutual trust
and constructive criticism. We need to improve Wikimedia mechanisms to
build consensus, include more voices, and resolve disputes.
There is a first draft of an updated Product Development Process [2] that
will guide the work of the WMF Engineering and Product teams.[3] It
stresses the need for community feedback throughout the process, but
particularly in the early phases of development. More feedback earlier on
will allow us to incorporate community-driven improvements and address
potential controversy while plans and software are most flexible.
We welcome the feedback of technical and non-technical contributors. Check
the Q&A for details.[4]
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Superprotect
[2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process
[3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering
[4]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process/2015-11-05#Q…
--
Quim Gil
Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil
"We invite you to participate in a survey about online harassment on
Wikimedia projects.
*Survey powered by Qualtrics"*
It's not the the first survey runs through the Qualtrics, but that's the
first time I see credit to them. We most of the time, even in GLAM and
others partnerships trying to avoid as much as we can mentions
organizations names, as it can be consider to be advertising.
But mention a company (that we even paid them), and linking to their
website? that's new and concern a bit. I'll be happy if someone related to
this decision can give more information about the idea behind it.
Thank you.
*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!
