Wikimedia-l February 2017

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

139 participants
95 discussions

The Signpost – Volume 13, Issue 3 – 27 February 2017
by Wikipedia Signpost 28 Feb '17

28 Feb '17

1 0

Using WMF employee accounts and employee personal accounts in the same community discussions
by Fæ 28 Feb '17

28 Feb '17

Could someone with an appropriate level of managerial authority within the WMF, such as an HR manager, confirm that staff accounts, which are supposed to be identified with "(WMF)", are intended to be used for an employee's job or contract role, rather than for personal editing and publishing personal views? I ask this question after a long term employee has recently caused confusion in a consensus building discussion, but refuses to stick to one account when voting and expressing their personal views, making this not a legitimate use of a staff account as this is outside of their employed role. As the personal and employee accounts would appear to most participants to represent the views of two separate people, this can be judged as a breach of the local policy on sockpuppet accounts, as well as a misuse of a staff account. I'm raising this here as the local policy appears insufficient to convince the WMF employee that they are not using multiple accounts in a legitimate way, consequently a clearer statement from the WMF may help to refine the wording of the sockpuppet policy on the Mediawiki project, and help decide whether it can apply to WMF employees in the same way it already applies to unpaid volunteer contributors. Links 1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Code_of_Conduct/Draft#WMF_employees_con… 2. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Sock_puppetry 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#Legitimate_uses Thanks, Fae -- faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

4 6

WMF advanced permissions for employees
by Fæ 27 Feb '17

27 Feb '17

The WMF grants special rights to employees on a case-by-case basis, by-passing the normal community driven process to grant admin, developer and other rights. A few years ago the WMF officially committed to making this process transparent, and maintains a public Google Spreadsheet [1] so that anyone can check exactly when rights are granted, why they are given and when they are withdrawn. Previously these were mirrored on-wiki but this process broke due to Google changing its proprietary spreadsheet code. Checking the latest version of the Google spreadsheet, the use cases have been hidden, so non-employees no longer can read the reasons why special rights have been granted. Can a WMF representative please explain why, or restore the use cases to public view? Thanks, Fae -- faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

21 50

proposal for regular surveys of community opinion
by Bill Takatoshi 25 Feb '17

25 Feb '17

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

2 1

February 24: Update on Wikimedia movement strategy process (#8)
by Katherine Maher 24 Feb '17

24 Feb '17

Hi all! Apologies for getting this out on a Friday, when so many of you are already enjoying your weekends. This week we hosted staff members from around the Foundation here in San Francisco for annual planning preparations. As a result, we have a slightly shorter update this week, but with some very exciting news: we’ve finalized the selection of the audience track leads! We also hosted the monthly WMF Metrics meeting - you can watch the update on strategy starting at 33:29 (video set to play at that time): https://youtu.be/-blWUhkm8g4?t=2009 Aa always, please read on for more details. *Feedback requested* There are two items in particular on Meta-Wiki ready for your feedback: - Updated processes and timelines for Tracks A & B: - https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10152629 - A briefing document for informed discussions: - https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10184031 *Track A (Organized groups) and Track B (Individual contributors)* - Starting on March 1, Nicole Ebber will be the Lead for Track A. Having Nicole join the strategy team as track lead is made possible through an agreement between Wikimedia Deutschland and the Wikimedia Foundation. We’re grateful WMDE has agreed to loan Nicole to the movement until the end of the year. - This means the Track A & B leads are: - Track A: Nicole Ebber, Wikimedia Deutschland's Adviser on International Relations - Track B: Jaime Anstee, Wikimedia Foundation's Senior Strategist, Manager, working closely with Maggie Dennis, Wikimedia Foundation's Interim Chief of Community Engagement - We shared the fourth, and near final, prototype for tracks A & B on Meta-Wiki.[1] - The Core Team has been working with experts in and outside the Wikimedia Foundation to further develop content for a universal briefing document.[2] The brief provides everyone a baseline of essential movement, demographic, and other information to support informed movement strategy discussions. - The Core Team is working on a toolkit for coordinating community discussions. A draft should be posted to Meta-Wiki by early next week. - Nicole and the Core Team worked on Track A organizational structure and a workflow for coordinating community discussions. - We are in the final stages of reviewing applications for movement strategy coordinators working in up to 1818 different languages.[3] We expect to have a strong team in place to help us really reach across the movement. *Track C (Partners and readers in high-reach markets) and Track D (Partners and readers in low reach markets)* - Our Track C & D Leads are: - Track C: Juliet Barbara, Wikimedia Foundation's Communications Director, working closely with Caitlin Virtue, Director of Development - Track D: Adele Vrana, Wikimedia Foundation's Director of Strategic Partnerships, Global Reach - We reviewed an initial draft of the Track C proposal, including a plan for research and expert convenings in high-reach markets. Juliet and Caitlin plan to post the proposal on Meta next week for input. - For Track C, Adele has been working with the strategy team together to identify potential market research firms and consumer research firms for Indonesia, Egypt, and Brazil. We plan to post the Track D proposal on Meta next week for input. *Next steps* - Final preparations for soft launch of Track A, including emails inviting people to host discussions (ideally before the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin in late March). - Nicole will be convening an advisory council with members from different regions, genders, languages, projects, and types and sizes of affiliates and groups to help ensure participation and perspective from groups that are often underrepresented. - Finalize Track C plan and budget for posting on Meta. - Build interview guide for Track D (will also be shared with Track C) to help facilitate discussions with outside experts. - Prototype the process and flow for tracking data we collect during the strategy and evaluation process. This is moving closer to being real - I can't wait to launch the conversation! Happy weekend, Katherine PS. A version of this message is available for translation on Meta-Wiki.[4] [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Process/De… [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Process/Fr… [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/People#Str… [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Updates/24… -- 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

2 1

What is our impact and how do we measure it?
by Chris Keating 24 Feb '17

24 Feb '17

Hi all, For a while now I've been thinking about different ways to define and measure the Wikimedia movement's impact. This started for me with various conversations about different iterations of the WMF's Global Metrics and different rounds of FDC bids, but it turns out to be wider than that. This is a big and thorny topic and one where we seem to have come up with a lot of implicit answers without spending much time thinking about in any detail, so I've written up my thoughts as a meta-essay here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:The_Land/Thinking_about_the_impact_of_… I'd be really interested to hear other peoples' views! Chris (User:The Land)

3 6

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Invitation to WMF February 2017 Metrics & Activities Meeting: Thursday, February 23, 19:00 UTC
by Lena Traer 23 Feb '17

23 Feb '17

REMINDER: This meeting starts in 30 minutes. On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Lena Traer <ltraer(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > The next Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities meeting will take > place on Thursday, February 23, 2017 at 7:00 PM UTC (11 AM PST). The IRC > channel is #wikimedia-office on irc.freenode.net, and the meeting will be > broadcast as a live YouTube stream. > > The theme of the February meeting is: “the future of open” – looking into > the future of free and open knowledge in the world and the role our > movement plays in a free and open internet. > > Meeting agenda: > > * Welcomes, theme introduction > * Movement update > * The Met Museum - Open Access policy > * Wikimedia Foundation values > * Movement strategy update > * Questions and discussion > > Please review > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_ > metrics_and_activities_meetings > for further information about the meeting and how to participate. > > We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting. > > Thank you, > Lena > > Lena Traer > Project Assistant // Communications // Advancement > Wikimedia Foundation > 149 New Montgomery Street > San Francisco, CA 94105 >

1 0

Applications for WikiCite 2017 (Vienna, May 23-25, 2017) close in 5 days
by Dario Taraborelli 23 Feb '17

23 Feb '17

A reminder that applications to attend WikiCite 2017 <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiCite_2017> close on *February 27, 2017* . Please consider applying <https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScWnCLfAt88cUWKSu_E-lU8m3te_r4P3ng…> if you work on sources and citations (or related tools) in Wikipedia, Wikidata, Wikisource or other Wikimedia projects. If there are other people in your network we should consider inviting to the event, please let us know. You can contact the organizing committee at: wikicite(a)wikimedia.org. Best, Dario -- on behalf of the organizers On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Dario Taraborelli < dtaraborelli(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: > Dear all, > > I am happy to announce that applications to attend WikiCite ‘17 officially open > today <https://goo.gl/forms/Kb9Wl6Xfw2EmFqEr2>. > > About the event > > WikiCite 2017 <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiCite_2017> is a 3-day > conference, summit and hack day to be hosted in Vienna, Austria, on May > 23-25, 2017. It expands on efforts started last year at WikiCite 2016 > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiCite_2016/Report> to design a > central bibliographic repository, as well as tools and strategies to > improve information quality and verifiability in Wikimedia projects. > > Our goal is to bring together Wikimedia contributors, data modelers, > information and library science experts, software engineers, designers and > academic researchers who have experience working with Wikipedia's citations > and bibliographic data. > > WikiCite 2017 will be a venue to: > > - > > Day 1. (Conference) – present progress on existing work and > initiatives for citations and bibliographic data across Wikimedia projects > - > > Day 2. (Summit) – discuss technical, social, outreach and policy > directions > - > > Day 3. (Hack) – get together to build, based on new ideas and > applications > > > > More information on the event can be found here > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiCite_2017>: > > How to apply > > Participation for this year's event is limited to 100 individuals. In > order to be considered for participation, please fill out the following > form <https://goo.gl/forms/Kb9Wl6Xfw2EmFqEr2> and provide us with some > information about yourself, your interests, and expected contribution. > PLEASE NOTE THIS IS NOT THE FINAL REGISTRATION FORM. Your application will > be reviewed and the organizing committee will extend an invitation by March > 10, 2017. This application form is to determine the best mix of > attendees. Not everyone who applies will receive an invitation, but there > will be a waitlist. > > Important dates > > > - > > February 9, 2017: applications open > - > > February 27, 2017: applications close, waitlist opens > - > > March 10, 2017: all final notifications of acceptance are issued, > waitlist processing begins > - > > March 31, 2017: attendee list is finalized > > > Travel support > > > Like last year, limited funding to cover travel costs of prospective > participants will be available. Requests for travel support should be > submitted via the application form > <https://goo.gl/forms/Kb9Wl6Xfw2EmFqEr2>. We will confirm by March 10, if > we can provide you with travel support. > > Contact > > For any question, you can contact the organizing committee via: > wikicite(a)wikimedia.org > > We look forward to seeing you in Vienna! > > The WikiCite 2017 organizing committee > > Dario Taraborelli > > Jonathan Dugan > > Lydia Pintscher > > Daniel Mietchen > > Cameron Neylon > > > > *Dario Taraborelli *Director, Head of Research, Wikimedia Foundation > wikimediafoundation.org • nitens.org • @readermeter > <http://twitter.com/readermeter> > -- *Dario Taraborelli *Director, Head of Research, Wikimedia Foundation wikimediafoundation.org • nitens.org • @readermeter <http://twitter.com/readermeter>

1 0

Blocks of new accounts in Angola?
by Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 22 Feb '17

22 Feb '17

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

7 6

Help! Can't save on any Wikipedia
by Enock Seth Nyamador 22 Feb '17

22 Feb '17

Hello Wikimedians, Saw the message in this image [1] one week ago but didn't take it serious. Now it seems to be real. I can't Save. The screenshot [1] show messages from frwp and enwp when I tried to save my changes. Yes, I've tried logging in and out several times. Best, 1. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B99n1pG7IHtJdy1VeFZXX19HYTQ/view - Enock

6 6

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Older →

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Wikimedia-l February 2017