Hi everyone,
I am pleased to announce the launch of the second Inspire Campaign for
IdeaLab.[1] The theme of this campaign is focused on improving tasks
related to content curation & review in our projects:
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire>
Reviewing and organizing tasks are fundamental to all WIkimedia projects,
and these efforts maintain and directly improve the quality of our projects
in addition to increasing the visibility of their content. We invite
everyone to participate by sharing your ideas and proposals on how to
enhance these efforts. Constructive feedback and collaboration on ideas is
encouraged - your skills and advice can elevate a project into action. The
campaign runs until 29 March.
All proposals are welcome - research projects, technical solutions,
community organizing and outreach, or something completely new! Grants are
available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects developed during this
campaign that need financial support.[2] Google Hangout sessions are
available in March if you'd like to have a conversation about your ideas.[3]
Join the Inspire Campaign and let’s work together to improve review and
curation tasks so that we can make our content more meaningful and
accessible.
With thanks,
Jethro
[1] You can learn more about the results of the first Inspire Campaign
here: <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Spring_2015_Inspire_campaign
>
[2] <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Start>
[3] <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Events> (Note: If
another time would work better for you, feel free to e-mail me or ping me
on-wiki).
---
Chris "Jethro" Schilling
I JethroBT (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:I_JethroBT_(WMF)>
Community Organizer, Wikimedia Foundation
<https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home>
Hello, all.
I am delighted to announce that Katy Love has agreed to step into the role
of Director of Resources in the Community Engagement department, picking up
the baton so ably carried by Siko Bouterse before her. Katy has been with
the Wikimedia Foundation since January 2013, beginning as the first program
officer to work with the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC). I’m grateful
to her for moving into this role and am looking forward to collaborating
with her closely in WMF’s Community Engagement department.
We will be hiring her replacement to oversee the FDC/full annual plan
grants program in the weeks ahead.
Best regards,
Maggie
P.S. Their page! https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Resources
--
Maggie Dennis
Interim Sr. Director of Community Engagement
Director, Support and Safety
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
Dear fellow Wikimedians,
I have been closely following the developments of the previous weeks. A lot
of things have been said, concerns and frustration have been raised, hope
has been voiced, and many many questions have been brought up. It’s hard to
keep up with all the voices on all the different digital channels these
days, and hard to find solutions and agreement in an unfacilitated stream.
The first chance for many of us to personally meet, vent, and look ahead
will be the the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin. Wikimedia Deutschland is
hosting the event, and welcoming movement affiliates, committees and board
and staff of the Wikimedia Foundation from April 20-24.
The movement is standing at a crossroad, but I am confident we can find the
best path if we work together. Wikimedia Deutschland has gone through
turbulent times in the past as well, and we would like to offer our
experience and full support as host and facilitator of an essential part of
this process. With your participation and contribution, Wikimedia
Conference can be a platform for exchange and progress.
Let us use this opportunity to jointly figure out how we want to move
forward as a network of partners. The conference is the ideal platform to
discuss and define next steps to find answers to questions like: How do we
imagine a movement striving for free knowledge and what structure and
framework best serve these needs? How do the WMF and affiliates define
their role and responsibilities on a global and local level? How shall an
revamped search process for a new executive leadership of the WMF look
like, and what are the main qualifications new candidates should bring? How
will the strategy process for the WMF evolve and how can affiliates
contribute? How do we involve our stakeholders from within and outside of
the movement in this process? How do we manage to look ahead rather than
repeating the old narratives? How do we create consensus on all these
questions?
In light of the current situation, we would like to dedicate a whole
conference track to these issues. Of course, the initial conference topics
of impact and capacity building are still important and will be covered as
well.
We have set up a page on meta and encourage you to share your questions,
ideas, and concerns[1]. We intend to work closely with WMF and affiliate
representatives in the coming eight weeks and create the program along
their input.
Looking forward to seeing you in Berlin in April,
Tim Moritz Hector
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2016/Program_Design_Pr…:
How to move forward
--
Tim Moritz Hector
Chair of the Board
Wikimedia Deutschland e. V.
Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | D-10963 Berlin
http://www.wikimedia.de
With respect to paid promotional editing, I have done a bit work trying to
address it. For example I reached out to Upworks the company behind Elance
and Fiverr and they are interested in working together on this. Have been a
little distracted and not sure if there is sufficient community or
foundation support to move forwards.
With respect to using AI to detect paid editing, I spoke with Aaron
Halfaker about the possibility in Nov 2015. What he needed was datasets of
confirmed paid promotional editors. I have sent him some details. If others
have details that would likely be useful. Things are in the very very early
stages from what I understand.
--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
Per these questions:
1. When James was made to leave, then did anyone tell him that there was
going to be a joint or prepared statement from the WMF?
No one before I left the meeting suggested we come out with a joint
statement or that we prepare a joint statement.
2. If so, did anyone ask James not to email the mailing list? And why did
you feel that was so inappropriate?
No one requested I not announce my removal. Let me repost my removal
message here "On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the
Wikimedia Foundation. Many thanks to all those who gave me their support
during the last election. I have worked in the last six month to honor the
trust placed in me by advocating for our values, communities, and
projects."
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-December/080472.html
I find it strange that this message is deemed controversial. I would
consider that me pretending that I was still on the board of the WMF for a
few weeks until the board could come out with a statement even when I was
not on the board to be dishonest. I am not sure if that is what Jimmy Wales
wanted but it was not an option.
Finally facts are not determined by a vote. That you got unanimity for "The
board.. has offered no objections to any board member discussing long term
strategy with the community at any time" should make all of us worry. I
have provided evidence that refutes this claim here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-02-03/In_fo…
--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
One of the things that someone asked me privately to discuss is what I
think of the possibility of James running for the board again.
First, I have no opinion about whether or not he will be eligible at the
next election. That's a matter for people other than me to decide. I
don't know.
Second, if he is eligible, and if he runs, and if he wins, then I will
support his joining the board. Because I've been willing to be vocal
about what I view as his failures, people have sometimes gotten the
mistaken impression that this is primarily a personal conflict between
him and me. That's not true. Before the board vote to remove him, I
told him that I would vote with the majority - because it is my feeling
that on matters of trust, if he was unable to command the trust of at
least the majority of other trustees, his position would be untenable.
Third, it may interest you all to know that I did not and would not have
instigated the meeting in which he was removed from the board. Indeed,
I missed an online board meeting where things happened apparently that
brought this to a head, and in the final meeting with James, I mainly
inquired "What brought this up now?" as I thought things were settling down.
Fourth, having said all of that, I remain very disappointed in James and
the way he has spun this without coming forward with the community about
what happened. He claimed reasons for his dismissal that everyone else
on the board agrees unanimously are not the reasons. I haven't seen him
acknowledge that he was wrong about that, and I haven't seen him own up
to the things that actually upset people.
There are many narratives being spun by people who weren't there, who
have made all kinds of assumption that aren't true.
I'm switching to this email address for posting, because apparently
there is some kind of weird problem between yahoo and google such that
gmail users see all or most of my messages in their SPAM folder.
If you've asked me something and think that I didn't respond, I
recommend looking there.
Regarding to Oliver's comment: "My concern is that when staff reached out
the Board replied with a letter indicating they had full and unanimous
confidence in our
leadership."
This statement is not really true. We had a formal vote regarding the ED in
November and it was not unanimous. The vote unfortunately has not yet been
made public.
--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
Dear all,
I want formally introduce to you Wikimedia Ukraine’s Board, elected by our
General Assembly on December 27, 2015.
We can do it only now, as we have just recently successfully completed the
requirements from our state to change the people responsible for the
chapter officially [1].
Three people has decided not to run this year, and I want to thank them
wholeheartedly for all their time and efforts spent on our projects and
making this world better for a change:
-
[[User:Amakuha]], Andrii Makuha. He has been our Chair for the last two
years; his calm personality helped us a lot, especially during the most
turbulent times of transferring «power» from one to another Chapter Board
«without pain» [2], as Andrii has tried his best to understand everyone and
continue the dialogues even when it seems that we won’t be able to come to
any acceptable terms. By the way, awarding Wikizghushchivka [3] was his
idea.
-
[[User:NickK]], Mykola Kozlenko, our Treasurer, with great analytical
skills and profound knowledge about the Community (and I am talking not
only about our local community, but the global one as well) and the
Wikimedia Movement. He is actively engaged in Wikimedia Ukraine’s projects,
though he lives in France and can contribute almost only via Internet. But
he was able to be a vital part of organizing the rather successful regional
conference WIkimedia CEE Meeting in Kyiv in December 2014.
-
[[User:Ліонкінг]], Levon Azizian. He is a lawyer in real life, a
passionate Wiki(m|p)edian. He is blessed with the skills to make the
<s>dreams</s> ideas come into reality, as he is very convincing and one
just gets the feeling that (s)he can do it. And so they do it :) And then
there is only a pure wonder of: wow, we have organized a wikiconference in
2 weeks; wow, we have organized a CEE Meeting in a month; wow, we can
actually (but it is really hard!) organize wikitrainings for two weeks
non-stop in Luhansk region, go to librarians, preach about editing
Wikipedia… and just around the corner there is a real war zone…
These three are my dear friends, and I was really sorry to see them not
running. But it was our dream from a long ago: to have more great
Wiki(m|p)edians join the chapter and get interested in our projects. So
here we have our newly elected three Board members:
-
[[User:Olena Zakharian]], Olena Zakharian. She was (and still is!) our
press secretary, she is very keen about Nature and Freedom of Speech, she
believes in our Mission and has contributed greatly to most of our projects
before and she is a crucial part of our Board becoming more transparent for
our Community.
-
[[User:Helgi]], Oleh Yatsozhynskyi. He is an active member of Ukrainian
Wikipedia community, he has joined the organization only in September, but
he is an invaluable part of us now (especially his directness :)) He is
responsible for Wikiexpeditions now [4], and he is full of ideas and desire
to implement them (and that’s something really really important, you know)
-
[[User:Pavlo1]], Pavlo Lakiichuk. He is the Secretary of the Board now,
so he is responsible for all the boring stuff around the process of making
decisions. He is also an active member of our local community, he cares
about wikiprojects a lot. He has initiated a number of meetings for
creators of “real” encyclopedias and wikipedians to talk a few issues over
and get to know each other better (well, it works! quite a few myths were
dismissed by talking over a cup of tea :) )
The other four members of the Board, re-elected for this year, are:
-
[[User:Ilya]], Illia Korniiko. He is our Chair now. He codes. :) WLX
Jury Tool is his pet project, but he was deprived of almost all chances to
work on it, as our state’s bureaucratic system is quite a monster to
overcome...
-
[[User:Юрій Булка]], Yurii Bulka. He is responsible for Wikipedia
Education Program in Ukraine. And he was the one to suggest and implement
the project of digitizing and making available the phonograph cylinder
collection of Filaret Kolessa (early 20th century) [5]
-
[[User:Friend]], Pavlo Sokhan. He is an administrator of uk.wikiquote,
works in a library. He has contributed greatly into organizing of the first
Wikimedia CEE Spring article contest in 2015. He is now responsible for our
book scanning kit [6] and we hope to get lots of stuff scanned and uploaded
to Wikiprojects :)
-
and [[user:antanana]], Nataliia Tymkiv. I am an administrator of
Ukrainian Wikipedia, and I am quite active in a lot of Wikimedia Ukraine’s
projects. I am a member of Simple Annual Plan Grants Committee [7]
I am sorry for a bit long introduction. But I do believe that it is vital
for us all to work together, so even if you do not read the whole letter
and remember all the names, you’ll be able to find the info about the right
person to reach to, should you need to meet somebody in Ukraine or find the
answer.
Best regards,
[[User:antanana]] / Nataliia Tymkiv
Vice-Chair of the Board of Wikimedia Ukraine
[1] Well, they have changed a couple of laws during this period, so it was
not a pleasant task to do :)
[2]
https://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Submissions/How_to_transfer_%…
[3] The project is aimed at peer recognition and appreciation of new and
active editors' contribution by monthly awarding a can of Wikizghushchivka
(condensed milk) to the editor with the most contributions in that month
and the new editor with the most contributions in that month
[4] We have a very detailed (day-by-day) report, maps, videos, photos,
created and illustrated articles now:
https://ua.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3465
[5]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Filaret_Kolessa_phonograph_cylinder_coll…
[6] https://ua.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3448
[7]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Simple/Committee#committee-membe…
I found this the most interesting part of the recent IdeaLab discussion
about changing the Wikimania framework.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Towards_a_New_Wikimania
"*The total spend by WMF for Wikimania 2014 in London and 2015 in Mexico,
including all travel, accommodations, scholarships, staff support and
direct conference expenses, was ~$1 million USD*"
This is a pity. Small grants to support a con is one thing, but this is too
much.
Please let's stop encouraging conferences that do not cover their own
costs. A good conference series pays for itself, including its scholarship
pool. There are plenty of communities our size or larger with wonderful,
regular conferences of hundreds or thousands of people, which break even or
turn a small profit.
FUDCons are an interesting case in point. As I understand it, there was a
time when RedHat basically sponsored the events, with scholarships for all
active contributors and extensive grants. This was ok, but skewed
participation. Then the lavish sponsorship stopped. Attendance dropped;
community members felt unloved. Then after a time, this passed, and
everyone attended again. (Perhaps a core Fedora contributor can describe
this more accurately!)
SJ