Wikimedia-l December 2016

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

94 participants
63 discussions

WMF and the Ladder of Citizen Participation
by Rogol Domedonfors 31 Dec '16

31 Dec '16

I was reading Sherry Arnstein's 1969 paper "A Ladder of Citizen Participation" (JAIP, Vol. 35, No. 4, July 1969, pp. 216-224) available at http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/sherry-arnstein/ladder-of-citizen-participation.h… or at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225 and found it remarkably relevant to the issue of the engagement beween the volunteer community and the formal structures of the WMF (Board and executive). The analysis proposes eight stages or rungs to the ladder: 1. Manipulation 2. Therapy 3. Informing 4. Consultation 5. Placation 6. Partnership 7. Delegated Power 8. Citizen Control They are grouped as 1-2: Non-participation; 3-5: Tokenism; 6-8: Citizen Power (see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ladder_of_citizen_participation,_Sh… ) Reading "volunteer" for "citizen" throughout, I thought it instructive to map some of the WMF activities onto the scale, with quotes from the analysis. 1. Manipulation "In the name of citizen participation, people are placed on rubberstamp advisory committees or advisory boards for the express purpose of "educating" them or engineering their support. Instead of genuine citizen participation, the bottom rung of the ladder signifies the distortion of participation into a public relations vehicle by powerholders." 2. Therapy "under a masquerade of involving citizens in planning, the experts subject the citizens to clinical group therapy." 3. Informing. "the emphasis is placed on a one-way flow of information - from officials to citizens - with no channel provided for feedback and no power for negotiation" 4. Consultation. "People are primarily perceived as statistical abstractions, and participation is measured by how many come to meetings, take brochures home, or answer a questionnaire. What citizens achieve in all this activity is that they have 'participated in participation.' And what powerholders achieve is the evidence that they have gone through the required motions" 5. Placation. "An example of placation strategy is to place a few hand-picked 'worthy' poor on boards [...] If they are not accountable to a constituency in the community and if the traditional power elite hold the majority of seats, the have-nots can be easily outvoted and outfoxed." 6. Partnership. "At this rung of the ladder, power is in fact redistributed through negotiation between citizens and powerholders." Can there be aby doubt that the majority of WMF group meetings world-wide falls under the heading of 1 and 2? Or that the communications strategy and product development strategy of the WMF falls under 3? Or that 4 is a desciption of the WMF approach to community consultation? Or that 5 is an uncannily exact description of the way the community nominates (under the guise of "electing") a minority of board members who may be removed if they ask impertinant questions? Or that there is precisely zero substantiative activitity that has risen to level 6? It is clear that on this analysis the WMF/Community engagement is still at best "Tokenism" -- discussion is invited. "Rogol"

2 3

Where is WMF with pursuing companies that offer paid editing services
by Jytdog at Wikipedia 30 Dec '16

30 Dec '16

I am interested to learn if WMF management or the board has discussed taking legal action against companies that offer services to edit Wikipedia and that have no on-Wiki presence disclosing their edits (in en-WP at least) per the Terms of Use. We all know the companies and their websites, where they use the Wikipedia name, etc. I have looked and never found disclosure by any of those companies in en-WP. I have looked and found no public evidence of WMF legal engaging with these companies, other than Wiki-PR. Some en-Wiki editors recently identified a long-term paid editor and brought the matter to ANI: thread is here <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noti…>. This brought this whole thing to mind, and is something I have been wanting to ask about. Three questions: Has this been discussed, and if so, what has/have the outcomes been? Also, is there budget for WMF legal to take action against such companies? If not, would you all please consider that? Thanks.

2 1

Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Delegation of policy-making authority" resolution
by James Salsman 27 Dec '16

27 Dec '16

Christophe, I agree with your statements: > That resolution provides staff the liberty to do their work more > efficiently. It doesn't remove our duty of oversight. Would a requirement to publish policy changes at least, say, a month before they go into effect along with a complete rationale allow nearly the same efficiency while immunizing the staff against hypothetical National Security Letters which would otherwise require them to violate existing policies? While I am asking you, would you please determine the Board's level of interest in moving general investments into e.g. Vanguard's endowment fund and/or other endowment grade mutual fund(s), please? How about an independent study of supply side and trickle down bias in the top-20 Wikipedias' economics articles? Thank you for your kind service. Best regards, Jim Salsman

1 0

Writing weeks about Norway start on Wikipedia
by Romaine Wiki 24 Dec '16

24 Dec '16

Hi all, As tradition describes we organise also this year the writing weeks on the Dutch Wikipedia We invite everyone, starting today in the coming two weeks, to write about the Kingdom of Norway (including Svalbard, Jan Mayen, Bouvet Island, Peter I Island, and Queen Maud Land). More information can be found on: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiproject/Schrijfweek/Noorwegen We would invite any other community to start a local writing week too! I wish you all pleasant days to come! Greetings, Romaine

1 0

December 23: Update on Wikimedia movement strategy process (#2)
by Katherine Maher 23 Dec '16

23 Dec '16

Hi everyone, As I mentioned last week, we plan to do more regular updates on the movement strategy process going forward. Last week's update was very long, out of necessity, so we hope sending updates more regularly will allow us to use a shorter format. While these will often come from me, I expect you’ll see other folks take turns sending them as the circle of participation widens. *Highlights from this past week:* - We are in the final stages of interviewing potential Lead Strategy Architects and hope to have a choice and contract by our next update. We will be able to share more information once a contract is in place. - We expect the community discussion around the proposed timeline and strategy process plan to kick off in January. - Our staff movement strategy study group met yesterday and discussed the types of groups we see in our movement and the impact that may have on this process and a future strategy. You can find out more information about the group on Meta-Wiki.[1] *Coming next:* - In the new year I look forward to introducing the Lead Strategy Architect and providing more information on the plan for January. You can also track our updates on the Meta-Wiki portal for the movement strategy.[2] I won’t make an update next week, as the Wikimedia Foundation offices will be closed for the holidays between December 25 and January 2. If you are celebrating the holidays, I hope they are full of good people and good cheer. I look forward to seeing you all in 2017! Katherine. PS. A version of this message is available for translation on Meta-Wiki: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Updates/23… [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Wikimedia_… [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017 -- Katherine Maher Wikimedia Foundation 149 New Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA 94105 +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635 +1 (415) 712 4873 kmaher(a)wikimedia.org

1 0

[WMF] Update regarding expiring Board terms
by Christophe Henner 23 Dec '16

23 Dec '16

Hi everyone, Last week, at our December meeting, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees made some decisions regarding the two Board terms expiring at the end of this year. Alice Wiegand sought and received reappointment for a term which will end at Wikimania 2018. Guy Kawasaki decided not to seek reappointment, and will complete his term at the end of December. Alice joined the Board in 2012 when she was selected to serve in one of the two affiliate-selected board seats. She was subsequently appointed to fill one of the four appointed expert seats, and will be completing her first full term in that role this month. Alice lives in Germany, and has been involved with German Wikipedia since 2004 and Wikimedia Deutschland since 2008. Her unique background brings an important perspective on matters related to the Wikimedia communities, strategy development, organizational structuring, and executive accounting and assessment. Given her skills, experience in the movement, and working knowledge of recent Board history, we felt it was important to retain her presence for an additional term. The Board appreciates Guy’s commitment to Wikimedia and the input he provided while serving on the Board. Guy joined the Board in 2015 when he was selected to fill one of the four appointed expert seats. A prominent figure in Silicon Valley, Guy has brought a unique perspective to the challenges and opportunities the Board has considered during his term. Even though we only worked together for a short time, I enjoyed his fresh point of view that forced us to step out of our comfort zone, and reconsider things we've done for years. In a time of evolution, the value from those questions was really high. Alice's new appointment will last 1.5 years as opposed to 2 years[1]. We have asked Alice to serve a term which ends at Wikimania 2018 (instead of in December 2018) to help consolidate Board transitions to the annual meeting at Wikimania, rather than spread throughout the year. Our hope is this shift will support a more effective onboarding process for new members. We will provide more information in January on our plans for filling the vacancy now left by Guy's departure, as well as the other vacancies on the Board. Until then, I invite you to join me in congratulating Alice on her reappointment, and thanking Guy for his service to Wikimedia. Congratulations, Alice, and thank you, Guy! As 2016 comes to an end, please allow me to take a moment and thank all of you, on behalf of the Board, for your support, efforts, and contributions this past year. We overcame many hurdles together and achieved many collaborative accomplishments. I am confident that we will make 2017 an amazing year. I am looking forward to continuing to work with all of you as we come together in service of the movement in new ways. There is still much to achieve and hurdles to overcome, but, together, we have what it takes. On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, Christophe Henner, Chair PS. An on-wiki version of this message is available for translation: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_ Board_noticeboard/December_2016_-_Update_regarding_expiring_Board_terms [1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Term_ Limit_Proposal_for_Bylaws Christophe HENNER Chair of the board of trustees chenner(a)wikimedia.org +33650664739 <+33%206%2050%2066%2047%2039> twitter *@schiste* skype *christophe_henner*

3 2

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Statement by Wikimedia Board on Healthy Community Culture, Inclusivity, and Safe Spaces
by Rogol Domedonfors 23 Dec '16

23 Dec '16

The statement by the Board that "The Board is committed to making our communities safer" is very welcome. Perhaps the Board will turn its attention to the process for developing the *Code of conduct for Wikimedia technical spaces* which has been under discussion in draft form at [ https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct/Draft] since *July 2015* and is still not agreed. The Board was asked to involve itself in this discussion in August 2015 [ https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_not…] but the only response was from one member whose view then was "It makes me feel sad to see that Board involvement is asked for. This is exactly the place where I thing the affected community should deliberate, find a consensus, agree on wording and implement such a policy. A code of conduct only works if it is backed up by those who have to follow it. A top-down-manner is not the best idea to create this ownership feeling." [ https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Code_of_Conduct/Draft&diff…]. I am glad to see that the Board's position is now very different. It is worth the Board's while considering why this initiative has stalled. In my view, apart from the Board's regrettable lack of interest in it at the time, this process has been over-managed and overwhelmed by a small group of developers almost all of whom are members of the WMF staff and who have chosen to run this process as as if it were a WMF project rather than a community initiative, and who chose to take various parts of the discussion to other venues without notification or the possibility of effective community-wide involvement. One significant obstacle to an effective and timely completion of this process has been the ineffective handling of a contract with two consultants to advise on the form that the process should take (see the extended discussions at [ https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/Draft/Archive_2] at "Done, down or defunct?" and [ https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/Draft] at "Advice provided by consultants Valerie Aurora and Ashe Dryden"). It appears that the consultants were paid out of WMF (ie donors') funds but did not engage widely with the community, and their report, if any, has never been made public. (Indeed, I have no reason to believe that a formal report was ever presented -- certainly none has ever been published.) As a completely independent question, the Board may wish to assure thmselves that this consultancy was properly tendered and procured; that it was effectively managed; and that the contracted-for outputs were satisfactorily delivered. This less-than-effective process delayed rather than accelerated the completion of the Code. A second and major obstacle, which in my view has delayed the drafting process for over a year, is an intransigent attitude on the part of WMF Legal towards a requirement that persons operating this Code to handle situations involving members of the WMF staff should be under an absolute obligation to notify the WMF of the details of any complait irrespective of the wishes of the other parties for privacy, the legal requirements for confidentiality applicable in the relevant jurisdictions and the personal or professional ethical positions of the people handling these potentially very sensitive incidents. Astonishingly, a Legal Counsel for the WMF has recently issued a determination [ https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Code_of_Conduct/Draft&diff…] which appears to forbid the community at large to discuss the issue further. This intransigence is quite incomprehensible and is certainly quite destructive of the community engagement that is required to deliver this Code initially or to make it a workable document. It seems very likely that the obllgation being imposed is unworkable in itself, that the community will not endorse any Code that formally creates two classes of participant with two distinct levels of protection and treatment, and that formally instituting a two-tier community is a matter that the Board might wish to consider as a specific, important and urgent question of policy. It is a matter of considerable surprise that with this Code not yet in place, with no clear timeline for delivery ever proposed, the Board have been informed [https://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?curid=24446] that this Code is due to be completed in a specific timeframe and that there will be a budget of around $25K per annum required to train the Committee who will oversee it. Is the Board quite confident that the Code will be completed at that (or indeed any) time, and more importantly, that when put to the community, it will command their acceptance? Since the Board quite rightly regard this area as a matter of importance, perhaps they will review the status of this project, take the steps necessary to bring to to an effective conclusion acceptable to the Community as a whole, ensure that approriate lessons are learnt from the unsatisfactory history -- and engage the Commuity fully in their deliberations and in the communication of their conclusions. "Rogol"

1 0

English Fundraiser Update
by Lisa Gruwell 23 Dec '16

23 Dec '16

Hi everyone, As most of you know, we run our English-language online fundraiser on Wikipedia every year in December. It’s our biggest fundraiser of the year. During this time we raise the bulk of funds to support our operating budget to support the projects, fund community efforts around the world, and run the Wikimedia Foundation. This year, we are happy to report we’ve reached our goal of US$25 million in record time. This is a testament to the importance of Wikimedia and how much support we have from people all over the world. Given this momentum, we believe that it would be wise and worthwhile to continue to fundraise more in the month of December, for the following reasons: 1. While we have reached our goal for the December campaign, we have not yet reached our fundraising goal for Fiscal Year 2016-17 (July 2016 - July 2017). Continuing the English fundraiser gives us security and flexibility through the end of the fiscal year. It allows us to have a less aggressive banner schedule in coming months, which gives us time for more research and better localization. 2. We have clear programmatic uses for additional funds. We have some important projects that could use additional funds and are ready to proceed. We plan to direct additional funds to the following work: 1. The buildout of an additional caching center, to improve site performance for users across Asia and Oceania [1]. 2. Investment in additional support for structured data on Wikimedia Commons and improved integration with the Wikidata roadmap [2]. 3. Support for community health initiatives, including additional support for the Community Engagement team [3]. 4. Support for an inclusive and truly global movement strategy process [4]. 5. Growing the endowment in order to secure our future [5]. You can find more information about each of these areas of work below. We have chosen these projects because they directly support our mission and respond to the needs of Wikimedia communities and users. We also believe these investments are investments in our future: support for a diverse global community, increased resourcing for sister projects, a healthier community culture, a shared direction for the future of the movement, and security for our mission in perpetuity. Here is what we will do: We intend to continue with the banners for a few more days. We would then take them down over the Christmas holiday, before making an end-of-year push in the final couple days of the year. (Many people choose to give at the very end of the year, and they are expecting to hear from us as usual -- so it is an opportunity to give people who plan to give the easiest means to participate). We’ve been following the conversations on this list about the fundraiser and the target. On Wednesday, we sent this recommendation to our Board of Trustees, who were broadly supportive of this course of action. Today, we are sending it to you. We believe we can make good use of the funds in the coming year, without additional unsustainable commitments into coming fiscal years. It is fiscally responsible and programmatically sound. The additional work strengthens our movement, and the additional funds make these efforts possible. We welcome your questions and feedback. Best regards, Lisa Seitz Gruwell and Jaime Villagomez More information about the projects: [1] An additional caching center to improve performance in Asia and Oceania Our current caching centers in have provided significant value to users, and the Wikimedia Foundation invested further in them in 2014-15. We believe that further expanding these efforts and their reach into other parts of the world would further help us provide the best user experience to our global audience. With that in mind, we are considering a number of different locations for an additional caching center to enhance our performance for Wikimedia communities in Asia and Oceania. Most internet organizations compete to reach users by establishing local points of presence, and as a result the performance expectations of users in Asia are getting higher. Establishing this new caching center will help us meet those expectations for site performance. [2] Structured data on Commons* The Structured Data project <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data> is an effort to store information for media files in a structured way on Wikimedia Commons, so they are easier to view, translate, search, edit, curate and use. This would be done on Commons with the same technology as the one developed for Wikidata. Wikimedia Commons holds a lot of data about the files it hosts. Structuring this data more and making it machine-readable would have many benefits to making our files more accessible in multiple languages, improving the process for uploading media, increasing the usability of the search function, and decreasing ambiguity for people interested in re-use of media on Commons. A demo system is currently available: https://structured-commons.wmflabs.org [3] Responding to harassment and toxic behaviour* On November 13th, the Board issued a letter <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-December/085668.html> to the Wikimedia community in support of efforts to improve overall community culture and health. The letter confirmed the value of allocating resources to this work. The WMF Support and Safety team detailed some of the possible approaches in a letter by Patrick Earley. Funding from this year’s fundraiser would be directed at supporting these approaches, including technical tools for better blocking and detection. [4] Movement strategy process Katherine recently shared the exciting news that the Board has approved a US$2.5million spending resolution to support the development of a Wikimedia movement strategy <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017>. Coming to consensus on a strategic direction will help us know what destination we are headed, which path we will take, and how we will ensure our work is well supported. [5] The Wikimedia Endowment The Wikimedia Endowment <https://15.wikipedia.org/endowment.html>, launched earlier this year during the Wikipedia 15 celebration, serves as a perpetual source of support for Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation. Since then, we have already received some major gifts and are recruiting a talented and committed board for the endowment. In June, we seeded the endowment in part with contributions from last year's campaign. Further investment in the endowment is an investment in building a sustainable future for Wikimedia projects. *Note: We are also seeking foundation grants for these projects – Structured Data on Commons and responding to harassing and toxic behavior – which may cover all or a portion of their costs this fiscal year.

9 10

Wikimedia Foundation holiday 24 December - 2 January
by Maggie Dennis 22 Dec '16

22 Dec '16

Hello, everyone. :) The winter holiday season is upon us, and the Foundation office will be closed from 24 December to 2 January, returning 3 January. We will, of course, be maintaining essential services, but we're encouraging staff to take this time to rest and prepare for the work of the upcoming quarter and calendar year. Emails sent to staff may be read but (unless urgent) probably won't be responded to until we return. Best wishes to all! Best, Maggie -- Maggie Dennis Interim Chief of Community Engagement Director, Support, Safety and Programs Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

1 0

VIDEO - Wikipedia: #FactsMatter2016
by Victor Grigas 22 Dec '16

22 Dec '16

Hi everyone, We just published our year-in-review video, *Wikipedia: #FactsMatter2016* Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipedia_-_FactsMatter2016.webm YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ4ba28-oGs Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/196775243 If you can, please translate the captions on commons. Once I have enough languages translated there, I'll migrate them to YouTube and Vimeo. Tomorrow morning (EST) we will be sharing this video to our Facebook and Twitter channels. :) -- *Victor Grigas* Video Production Manager Wikimedia Foundation vgrigas(a)wikimedia.org https://donate.wikimedia.org/

1 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Wikimedia-l December 2016