In the run up to International Women’s Day on the 8th March, Wiki Loves
Women is launching the on-Wikipedia translation drive #16WikiWomen.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/16_African_Women_Translate-a-thon
The idea is for Wikipedians to take 16 days to make translate the
Wikipedia biographies on 16 notable African women, into at least 16
languages (African or international languages).
The articles to be translated will be the biographies of African women.
The list of language can be, but is not limited to:
* International languages: Arabic, English, French, Spanish, Portuguese,
Mandarin, German
* African languages: Akan, Afrikaans, Igbo, Hausa, Wolof, Tswana, Zulu,
Xhosa, Shona, Swahili, Yoruba, Sudanese, Amharic, Tsonga, Ewe, Sesotho,
Chichewa
The list of the 16 women biographies that will be translated are:
* Malouma, a Mauritanian singer, songwriter and politician
* Nozizwe Madlala-Routledge, a South African politician. The best
initial version was in French
* Cri-Zelda Brits, a South African cricketer
* Anna Tibaijuka, a Tanzanian politician and former
under-secretary-general of the United Nations
* Funmilayo Ransome-Kuti, a Nigerian women’s rights activist
* Flora Nwapa, a Nigerian author who writes predominantly in Igbo
* Samia Yusuf Omar, Sprinter from Somalia
* Maggie Laubser, a South African painter
* Fatima Massaquoi, a pioneering educator from Liberia
* Frances Ames, a South African neurologist, psychiatrist, and human
rights activist
* Asmaa Mahfouz, a Egyptian activist. The best version is currently in
Arabic
* Yaa Asantewaa, the legendary former Queen Mother of Ghana
* Fatou Bensouda, a Gambian lawyer
* Martha Karua, a Kenyan politician
* Chinwendu Ihezuo, a Nigerian professional footballer
* Nassima Saifi, a Paralympian athlete from Algeria
Please jump in ! And help relay this message accross communities !
If you wish to participate, please feel free to add your name and any
comments here :
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/16_African_Women_Translate-a-thon/participa…
Results will be tracked on this page :
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/16_African_Women_Translate-a-thon/tracking
Dear all,
We are looking for members of the 2017 Wikimania program committee!
The committee will help put together the program and schedule for
Wikimania Montreal, to be held on 9-13 August 2017:
https://wikimania2017.wikimedia.org/
Committee member responsibilities include helping promote the call for
submissions and recruiting speakers, helping design the program and
reviewing program submissions. Review dates this year are April 2017
and mid-May through June 2017; program committee members should commit
to having availability for reviewing submissions and regular meetings
during those times.
If you are a Wikimedian interested in building a great Wikimania, you
are welcome to apply! We are especially looking for committee members
with experience with (one or more of) sister projects, non-English
speaking communities, technical projects, or GLAM and education
projects. We are also especially looking for French speakers who can
assist in recruiting and reviewing French-language submissions.
Please let us know if you are interested by contacting
wikimania-program(a)lists.wikimedia.org with your name, interest, and
availability. We will be forming the committee quickly. More
information on the program, including the call for submissions, will
be coming soon.
Thank you!
Marc-Andre Pelletier (Wikimania chair)
Phoebe Ayers (program co-chair)
Deror Lin (program co-chair)
Guillame Paumier (program co-chair)
--
* I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers
<at> gmail.com *
This code has been under discussion at
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/Draft since the summer
of 2015, and is finally nearing completion. The original consensus in 2015
had been that the completed code would be submitted to the community for
ratification and adoption. However, since the end of 2015 the drafting of
the code has largely been in the hands of a small group of WMF staff, and
they have taken it on themselves to change that consensus and stated that
the code will come into effect as soon as the last section is agreed, which
will be quite soon.
Do the WMF and the wider Community wish to adhere to the initial consensus,
and put the draft code out to the comunity for adoption? Or will the WMF
choose to enact it on their own authority irrespective of any community
views on the subject?
If the code is to be voted on by the Community, what would be the
appropriate venue for the vote, and where should the vote be publicised?
"Rogol"
Hello, everyone.
I share the opinion that moderation actions should be transparent. So:
I have now placed Gerard Meijssen on moderation. He has been posting very
frequently to the list, far exceeding the requested "soft limit" of 30
posts per month, and has exhibited disrespectful discourse.
I encourage Gerard to revise his approach to communicating on this list.
He will be unmoderated next month.
A.
In addition to that thread, see also "https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case"
Best,
Isaac
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless handheld from Glo Mobile.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Olatunde Isaac" <reachout2isaac(a)gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:30:06
To: Wikimedia Mailing List<wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Reply-To: reachout2isaac(a)gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Blocks of new accounts in Angola?
Yes, there are some mass vandalism from Angola last year. Yaroslav, I think you may be looking for this thread, "https://www.mail-archive.com/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/msg23413.html"
Best,
Isaac
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless handheld from Glo Mobile.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yaroslav Blanter <ymbalt(a)gmail.com>
Sender: "Wikimedia-l" <wikimedia-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org>Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:17:32
To: Wikimedia Mailing List<wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Reply-To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Blocks of new accounts in Angola?
Did not we have some mass vandalism from Angola some time ago, and then
measures had to be taken? I do not remember the details.
Cheers
Yaroslav
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 8:57 AM, George William Herbert <
george.herbert(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Have them hit whatismyip.org and tell us what shows up..,
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Feb 21, 2017, at 5:58 PM, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton <
> rodrigo.argenton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I've been receiving complains via Facebook from people of Angola about
> not
> > being able to create new accounts, some know something about it? They
> > receive the as if the IP was blocked, however we receive more then 5
> > complains just in the Commons FB page.
> >
> > Any ideas?
> >
> > --
> > Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton
> > rodrigo.argenton(a)gmail.com
> > +55 11 979 718 884
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Forwarding.
Pine
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Samantha Lien <slien(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:28 AM
Subject: [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia community in
Iraq partners with Asiacell to bring Wikipedia to nearly 12 million
subscribers free of mobile data charges
To: press-release(a)lists.wikimedia.org
This press release is also available online here:
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/
Wikimedia_community_in_Iraq_partners_with_Asiacell_to_
bring_Wikipedia_to_nearly_12_million_subscribers_free_of_mobile_data_charges
*Wikimedia community in Iraq partners with Asiacell to bring Wikipedia to
nearly 12 million subscribers free of mobile data charges*
*Mobile data fees waived for Asiacell customers in Iraq to access
Wikipedia, a free collection of knowledge available in nearly 300 languages*
(Barcelona, Spain) February 28th, 2017 -- Today, Wikimedia community
members in Iraq, the Wikimedia Foundation, and Asiacell, one of Iraq’s
largest mobile operators, announced a new partnership to provide access to
Wikipedia free of mobile data charges to Asiacell’s nearly 12 million
subscribers in Iraq. The partnership was announced today at a press event
hosted by Ooredoo during Mobile World Congress 2017.
The partnership, developed in large part by Iraqi volunteer editor and
Asiacell employee, Sarmad Saeed Yaseen, marks the first Wikipedia Zero
program in Iraq. The program, overseen by the nonprofit Wikimedia
Foundation, addresses one of the greatest barriers to internet access
globally: affordability. In a recent phone survey in Iraq led by the
Wikimedia Foundation, roughly 80% of surveyed participants reported that
mobile data costs limited their use of the internet. About 33% of
participants also reported rarely or never being able to find online
content in their preferred language.
Through the Wikipedia Zero
<https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Zero> program, mobile data
fees are waived for subscribers of participating mobile operators so that
they may read and edit Wikipedia without using any of their mobile data.
Sarmad, who is part of a community of local volunteer Wikipedia editors in
Iraq, started the partnership to extend access to knowledge in his home
country of Iraq. Together, he and his wife, Ravan Jaafar Altaie, have been
active editors (or Wikipedians) since 2008.
“I've always believed that it is better to light a candle than curse the
darkness, so I decided to volunteer in Wikipedia to provide knowledge for
free to my people in their own language,” said Sarmad Saeed Yaseen. “When I
was first introduced to Wikipedia Zero, I felt right away that this could
be the best thing ever to share free knowledge in my country and encourage
the people of Iraq to contribute knowledge and share this with the world on
Wikipedia.”
Wikipedia is an online collection of knowledge written by volunteer editors
from every corner of the globe. Available in nearly 300 languages,
Wikipedia is a place to learn about virtually any topic -- from ancient
history to science to the arts -- in your local language, for free, and
without advertising. Wikipedia editors use reliable sources to support
information that is included in Wikipedia articles, so readers can explore
the sources that verify the facts. Wikipedia is completely non-profit,
independent, and maintained by everyday people around the world.
Wikipedia in Iraq is supported by a local community of volunteer editors in
almost every major city of the country. In 2015, Sarmad and Ravan organized
the first series of workshops in Erbil to teach Iraqi people how to edit
Wikipedia. The workshops led to 600 new articles and more than 12,000 edits
primarily to Arabic and Kurdish Wikipedia. In October 2015, this community
launched the first formalized Wikimedia group from Iraq, the Iraqi
Wikimedians user group <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Wikimedians>
(a formalized Wikimedia affiliate group that has been recognized by the
global Wikimedia community of editors). Today, the majority of unique
device visits to Wikipedia in Iraq come from mobile devices.
Worldwide, Wikipedia is recognized as an important learning resource, but
it also offers a platform to share knowledge with the world. Edits from any
country contribute to the world’s common knowledge repository, seen by
hundreds of millions of people every month. This allows many to learn from
what just a few people might otherwise know. As more voices contribute to
Wikipedia, it becomes a better representation of the diverse cultures,
history, people, viewpoints, and perspectives of our world.
“Asiacell believes that sharing knowledge is a way to enforce the
interaction among human beings. We strongly believe in contributing in the
global project of Wikipedia. Beside all the modern technologies that we
offer, this partnership with the Wikimedia Foundation is one of the
achievements that we are proud of. We will enable our 12 million subscriber
base to have free access to Wikipedia, this will enable them to widen the
scale of their knowledge and thus direct them towards a brighter future for
themselves and for humanity,” said Zring Faruk, Chief Commercial Officer at
Asiacell.
With this partnership, Asiacell customers will be able to edit Wikipedia
without mobile data charges -- adding to and improving articles in their
preferred language and sharing knowledge of Iraq’s rich cultural history,
heritage, and its people with the rest of the world.
“Wikipedia is guided by a powerful vision: that every single person should
be able to share in all of the world’s knowledge, for free and without
restriction,” said Katherine Maher, Executive Director of the Wikimedia
Foundation. “Sarmad, Ravan, and the Iraqi Wikimedians User Group have been
passionate advocates of this vision in Iraq. They've nurtured the growth of
Arabic and Kurdish Wikipedia for nearly a decade, and have built a vibrant
community committed to sharing knowledge of Iraq and its heritage, people,
and culture with the world. We are thrilled to have Asiacell join us as a
partner in this journey.”
The Wikipedia Zero program is overseen by the Wikimedia Foundation, the
nonprofit that supports Wikipedia and a number of other Wikimedia free
knowledge websites. Since the program first began in 2012, Wikipedia Zero
partnerships have taken place with 68 mobile operators in 52 countries.
*# # #*
*About Asiacell*
Asiacell is a leading provider of quality mobile telecommunications and
data services in Iraq with a subscriber base of nearly 12 million customers
as of December 1st 2016. Asiacell was the first mobile telecommunications
provider in Iraq to achieve nationwide coverage, offering its services
across all of Iraq’s 19 governorates including the national capital Baghdad
and all other major Iraqi cities. Asiacell’s network covers 99.06% of the
Iraqi population which makes its national coverage the widest among the
mobile operators in Iraq.
*About Wikipedia*
Wikipedia is the world’s free knowledge resource. It is a collaborative
creation that has been added to and edited by millions of people from
around the globe since it was created in 2001: anyone can edit it, at any
time. Wikipedia is offered in hundreds of languages containing more than 40
million articles. Wikipedia and its sister projects are collectively
visited by more than a billion unique devices each month.
*About the Wikimedia Foundation*
The Wikimedia Foundation is the non-profit organization that supports and
operates Wikipedia and its sister projects. More than a billion unique
devices access the Wikimedia sites each month. Roughly 70,000 people edit
Wikipedia and its sister projects every month, collectively creating and
improving its more than 40 million articles across hundreds of languages –
this all makes Wikipedia one of the most popular web properties in the
world. Based in San Francisco, California, the Wikimedia Foundation is a
501(c)(3) charity that is funded primarily through donations and grants.
*Press contact*
*Asiacell*
public.relations(a)asiacell.com
*Wikimedia Foundation*
Juliet Barbara
press(a)wikimedia.org
--
*Samantha Lien*
Communications Manager
Wikimedia Foundation
149 New Montgomery Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(To be unsubscribed from this press release distribution list, please reply
to communications(a)wikimedia.org with 'UNSUBSCRIBE' in the subject line)
_______________________________________________
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
I'm keen on surveys, used to work in that line a few years ago, and the first we did was I think at least in part a response to a proposal I made on the 2009 Strategy wiki. In hindsight the big mistakes of that survey were that we didn't repeat it annually, and the lack of community input in setting and analysing the questions.
I'm not convinced that we need to move to a monthly survey, I could live with quarterly but still prefer annual as the ideal interval - long enough to avoid survey fatigue, short enough that we can plan around it and use it to answer questions worth addressing. As for recruiting people, make it annual and I'd hope we could get consensus for a site notice. I'd like that site notice to be tailored to ask different and relevant questions based on people's number of edits. - not much point asking someone with less than a 1000 edits if they are an admin.
The place to set the questions is on meta, not on some external site.
There are of course biases in self reported surveys, there could even be a seasonal bias, but biases tend to even out as your sample size grows, and an annual survey of the editing community could get a very high turnout. Also biases don't necessarily hide trends, provided the biases are consistent. If we were doing an annual survey of the editing community I suspect we wouldn't need many years before we knew whether our gender skew was stable, growing or improving.
As well as the gender skew, it would be good to have an updated age profile of the community. We still sometimes see people referring to teenage admins without realising that the adolescents who were our youngest crats and admins ten years ago are now mostly graduates. I suspect that a new survey would confirm the theory of the greying of the pedia - our growing number of silver surfers combined with our near total failure to recruit very active editors from tablet/smartphone only users means that the average age of our most active editors is going up by more than a year a year.
I'm happy with most of Will's suggestions re questions, but instead of date people started editing you really want month or quarter to keep the survey anonymous. On smaller wikis that would need to be year.
It would also be good to survey former editors and particularly those who left after only a brief period of activity. We have a long tail of people who probably don't consider themselves Wikipedians but who have fixed one or two things while they are reading Wikipedia. But we also have a huge attrition rate among editors who have started out and done 50 or 500 edits. Many will have gone because sourcing edits is too much like hard work, their view on notability was different to ours or because they couldn't work out how to deal with an edit conflict. But it would be good to get an idea of the ratio between those main reasons, and also to find out if there are other significant reasons for losing goodfaith newbies.
Regards
WereSpielChequers
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 19:18:47 -0700
> From: Bill Takatoshi <billtakatoshi(a)gmail.com>
> To: wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] proposal for regular surveys of community
> opinion
> Message-ID:
> <CAETpP4uGv3O-=cjW8shgw5s6ax84O7+qn0rs1EJMozubf7nkNQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Over the past few weeks I have been discussing how to correct the lack
> of information about community opinion and the disadvantages of
> relying on opt-in (RFCs or less formal "speak up and stick your neck
> out") methods for addressing the problem with Foundation staff, other
> community members, and outside researchers experienced with surveying
> wikipedians. A number of themes are apparent, most prominently that I
> should, "collectively propose and work to develop additional systems,"
> as one Foundation staffer put it.
>
> So to get that ball rolling, I propose a monthly survey of editing
> community members as follows:
>
> (1) Anyone may suggest a topic or subject area to be included, for
> each of the top 20 largest language editions of Wikipedia by number of
> active editors, by sending email to an independent, outside firm
> experienced with surveying community members. All such emails will
> have their sender and other identifying information removed and then
> will be posted in a public location on the web for review by anyone
> interested.
>
> (2) Each month, the independent firm will pick the top five most
> popular topics to be included in each language's Wikipedia community
> survey, and will compose two to five opinion questions on each of
> those topics, with the goal of producing a neutral opinion
> questionnaire with about twenty likert and multiple choice tally
> questions. Every question will have an "other" option when
> appropriate, enabling a fill-in-the-blank opportunity when selected.
>
> (3) All questions will be clearly indicated as entirely optional. Each
> survey will conclude with demographic questions asking the
> respondents' age, sex, education, household income, and household
> composition, in compliance with the instructions at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Survey_best_practices along with
> state-level geographic location, estimated hours spent editing over
> the past month, and the date each respondent started editing.
>
> (4) When each month's survey is ready, the independent firm will use
> the Recent Changes history for one day randomly selected from the past
> two weeks to select 1,000 users with contribution histories of at
> least 100 edits and going back at least one year, and who have email
> enabled, and send a link to a Qualtrics survey questionnaire to each
> of those 20,000 users. I believe this step can be efficiently
> automated, but bot approval will be necessary at least for the final
> step of sending the survey email text and links.
>
> (5) The email will indicate that the survey will be open for two
> weeks. At the end of the two week period, the raw Qualtrics results,
> expected margins or error, and any significant cross-tabulations
> information apparent in the data will be made public at a new web page
> for each language each month, all linked from a static URL where
> highlights from the results will also be summarized in paragraph form.
>
> I would be thrilled to learn what you think of this proposal. I hope
> the Foundation will consider funding such a regular opinion survey,
> and I certainly hope they will help with implementing the technical
> aspects, but if not, I am willing to pass the hat in the form of a
> GoFundMe or similar.
>
> Finally, it seems to me that more than a few of the nagging
> controversial questions concerning the Draft Code of Conduct for
> Technical Spaces, a subject of ongoing apparent acrimony on this list
> recently, could easily benefit from such a facility, were it
> available.
>
> -Will
>
>
>
This came up the other day and someone emailed me off-list suggesting
it wasn't true. Since we've never had a real discussion about it, I
should explain:
> 17 U.S. Code § 203 - Termination of transfers and licenses
> granted by the author
>
> (a) Conditions for Termination.—In the case of any work
> other than a work made for hire, the exclusive or nonexclusive
> grant of a transfer or license of copyright or of any right under
> a copyright, executed by the author on or after January 1, 1978,
> otherwise than by will, is subject to termination under the
> following conditions:
>...
> (3) Termination of the grant may be effected at any time during
> a period of five years beginning at the end of thirty-five years
> from the date of execution of the grant; or, if the grant covers the
> right of publication of the work, the period begins at the end of
> thirty-five years from the date of publication of the work under
> the grant or at the end of forty years from the date of execution
> of the grant, whichever term ends earlier.
So, we still have 19 years, but, we're almost halfway there.
Hello,
The discussion is now wrapping up. The process and its outcome were
presented last week at the Metrics and activities meeting; you're
encouraged to watch the segment in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-blWUhkm8g4&t=17m18s
You can read the full transcripts of the discussions on Meta:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion/Transcripts
as well as browse through the main themes that emerged:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion/Themes
and their synthesis:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion/Synthesis
The discussion on the talk page of the synthesis is open until March 4
to finalize the language of the descriptions.
I want to thank everyone who participated in the discussions, and
everyone who helped with the organization. It was truly a joy to see
the interest of the participants and the deep, thoughtful discussions
that resulted from it.
I believe the values that have emerged as part of this process
constitute a part of our organizational identity that we had not
entirely codified, or even been conscious of, before. As our friend
Ray aptly put it in 2007, "The values were already there. Perhaps they
might have been poorly codified. Had they not been there, neither you
nor I would have stuck around for over five years."
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2007-September/079180.html
I hope that this exercise has helped us realize why we're here, and
that its outcome resonates with many members of our communities, both
present and future.
2016-10-18 11:27 GMT-07:00 Guillaume Paumier <gpaumier(a)wikimedia.org>:
> Greetings,
>
> As a community, we've talked a lot about values in the past year. The
> core values of the Wikimedia Foundation were first formulated in
> 2007−2008 and have not really been discussed in depth since then. In
> 2013, we also developed Guiding principles, a list of more practical
> norms and expected behaviors that guide our day-to-day work at the
> Foundation. Combined with our vision and mission statements, those
> documents represent the core facets of our organizational identity.
>
> Both staff and volunteers have expressed concerns that there isn't
> currently a shared understanding (among the staff and other
> constituents) of what our core values are, and how we express them in
> our work. We've also talked about a need to revisit or reinforce them.
>
> A few months ago, a working group formed to organize a series of new
> discussions about the WMF's values. The goal is to reflect on what is
> bringing us together, identify the core beliefs that motivate our
> vision, refine our list of values, and clarify our organizational
> identity.
>
> Discussions about values in nonprofit organizations are usually done
> internally. Given the open and collaborative nature of the Wikimedia
> movement, such a closed, internal process wouldn't make sense for the
> WMF. The Foundation is part of an integrated ecosystem of individuals
> and organizations that contribute to defining its identity. Input
> should be collected not just from staff and Board members, but also
> from volunteers, affiliates, and partners who wish to participate in
> this process.
>
> On behalf of the Values working group, I would therefore like to
> invite you to this discussion on Meta. There, you will find more
> information about the process, as well as a page to share your
> perspective on the Wikimedia Foundation's values. The framing that
> we're using for this discussion is one that considers values as the
> core intrinsic beliefs that drive our participation in the movement.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Values/2016_discussion
>
> The discussion will be open for a month, i.e. until November 20.
> Comments added after that date will still be welcome, but may not be
> included in the summary process.
>
> I hope many of you take this opportunity to help define (or refine)
> the Foundation's organizational identity.
>
> --
> Guillaume Paumier
> Wikimedia Foundation
--
Guillaume Paumier