Greetings,
The certified results of the 2017 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
election are now available on Meta-Wiki: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Results
Congratulations to María Sefidari (User:Raystorm), Dariusz Jemielniak (User:pundit), and James Heilman (User:Doc James) for receiving the most community support. Subject to a standard background check, they will be appointed by the Board at their August meeting at Wikimania.
These results have been certified by the elections committee, the Wikimedia Foundation staff advisors to the committee, and the Board of Trustees.
There were 5,581 votes cast, with 5,120 of those being valid. The 461-vote difference comes from recast ballots, where eligible voters recast ballots to change their votes, and struck votes, of which there were 34. (Some of the recast votes were also struck.)
Additional information is available on the Wikimedia Blog: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/05/20/board-of-trustees-elections-2017/
More statistics on the elections and a post-mortem from the committee will be published in the coming days. In the meantime, we would appreciate your input—what went well for you in this election? What could we do better next time? These reports are crucial to helping future elections be even more successful, and we hope that you will offer your feedback and ideas: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Post_mo…
The committee would like to thank everyone that participated in this year’s election for helping make it, again, one of the most diverse and representative in the movement’s history.
Sincerely,
– Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee
_______________________________________________
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
In some cases we need to attribute content created on external sites, and
reused on Wikimedia-sites. In Norway Åndsverksloven says "The creator has
the right to be named according to good practice" ("Opphavsmannen har krav
på å bli navngitt slik som god skikk tilsier") and for our content that is
given by our license and our terms of use. That means by a link to the page
if possible, or if possible an entry in the history.
Now we use a template on the page itself, or similar, but it is not the
page on our site that the external entity has provided, they have provided
the content at their site. So we must say that in some consistent way.
I believe that the best option would be to have a log entry injected into
the history for our page that says "this revision comes in full or part
from that external source". Such an entry could be made by the editor or by
an administrator, but must be made as an extension of the revision. It
should also be possible to delete such an entry.
An alternative could be to make the summary editable, but the summary is
the description of the revision, not the source of the revision.
Does this make sense? Will it solve the problem, or is it just another
level that makes things more confusing?
John Erling Blad
Hi all,
Wikimania is well over, and now that everyone is slowly getting home, I'd
like to touch on a hallway discussion that was going on during Wikimania.
This was regarding the centralnotice banners advertizing a livestream of
Katherine's and Christophe's presentation of the draft direction for the
2030 strategy.
First a few quick facts:
The banners were on Fri 11 Aug shown for 1,5 hour in 'emergency mode' on
all English language projects (including Commons, meta) to all logged in,
anonimous and mobile visitors. The campaigns can be found here
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CentralNotice&subactio…>,
here
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CentralNotice&subactio…>and
here
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CentralNotice&subactio…>,
for reference. The text in the banner was "Where will Wikipedia and
Wikimedia be in 2030? Find out LIVE from Montreal" with a link to a youtube
page with a stream <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdr2F8aB9y0> .
I was quite taken by surprise with this, and taken aback. Here we were, the
Wikimedia community telling all these visitors of Wikipedia and other
projects that we are so important, that we should have them watch a
presentation of a first draft of a direction of a strategy that still needs
to be worked out. Not only was the text in the banner a bit misleading (I
didn't see much crystal bowl gazing - but rather a statement of where we
would like to go - but soit, I can overlook that), but it feels especially
pretentious to me. Maybe this is a cultural matter, and in other cultures
this kind of bragging (which is what it feels like to me) is normal.
I could have understood an advertizement of this and other sessions to our
logged in community members - that would actually have been a nice way of
engaging them in an expensive conference that we would like more online
audience to be part of. But only this session, and then all visitors of
Wikimedia projects? No, thanks.
Totally separate of the message displayed and whether we want to show it to
this kind of large audience, I was surprised that this link was pointing to
Youtube. This goes against our policies on Centralnotice
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CentralNotice/Usage_guidelines>, stating:
"Wikimedia Owned - Banners must link to Wikimedia controlled domains (owned
either by Wikimedia Foundation, Wikimedia affiliates or Wikimedia
Volunteers identified to the Wikimedia Foundation)." I guess there is a
very remote interpretation possible that the channel is owned by the
Wikimedia Foundation, and I did not see any indication that Youtube was
running ads on that particular channel.
I was unable to locate any community discussions or consultation about
this. Could someone at the WMF share where this was discussed prior to the
decision, and could they explain their reasoning? I'm not looking to blame
anyone for this - shit happens - but I would like to see some discussion on
what we want and dont want to do in this field, so that we can actually
learn from this exercise. I was told in (very rapid and somewhat unwilling)
hallway discussions that this was signed off by multiple layers of
management at the WMF, so I assume some documented reasoning and
consultation is available.
Best,
Lodewijk
Hello everyone,
The next Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities meeting will take
place on Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 6:00 PM UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC
channel is #wikimedia-office on irc.freenode.net, and the meeting will be
broadcast as a live YouTube stream.[1]
During the August metrics meeting, we'll hear from staff and community
members about what it means to be a contributor to the Wikimedia movement.
Speakers will present and discuss different methods of contribution to the
movement in addition to research about new editor experiences.
Meeting agenda:
* Welcomes, theme introduction
* Movement update
* Community guest speakers
* New editor experiences research
* Questions and discussion
* Wikilove
Please review
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_metrics_and_activities…
for further information about the meeting and how to participate.
We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting.
Thank you,
Lena
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ7voHFIhRQ
Lena Traer
Project Assistant // Communications // Advancement
Wikimedia Foundation
Hi all!
As I write this, I feel almost like a student returning to school. With
Wikimania behind us and autumnal weather starting outside it feels like the
start of a new year - and a return to serious things after the last days of
summer sunshine, storms, and socializing at Wikimedia in Montreal. But I
was always the sort of kid who loved the return of the school season as
much as I regretted the end of summer holidays: it meant it was time to
return to learning, exploring, and doing substantive things.
And we have many substantive things to do! Phase I of the strategy is
drawing to a close, and Phase II will start in November. A reminder that
Phase I was about collectively developing a shared strategic direction, and
Phase II will be about developing plans for how we make the direction a
reality. We’re nearly halfway there!
*Draft strategic direction*. Throughout the past few weeks community
members have been reviewing the draft strategic movement direction[1] which
was presented shortly before Wikimania. Thank you to everyone who has
already shared feedback. For those who haven’t yet, I encourage you to join
the discussion on the talk page. Because of the high volume of feedback
collected at Wikimania, we are extending the timeline to ensure the draft
incorporates the feedback appropriately. We expect to publish draft 2
sometime in early to mid September. Then we will have a 2-week period for
community review. If all goes according to plan, the final draft will post
by the end of September.
*Wikimania movement strategy space*. At Wikimania in Montreal, we welcomed
the community to learn more about the strategy process and discuss the
draft direction in the movement strategy space. We held three feedback
sessions, five facilitated sessions, and two presentation-oriented sessions
over four days. They focused on sharing insights from New Voices (experts,
attitudes and usage research in high awareness regions, research in low
awareness regions, and key global trends), insights from discussions for
organized groups and individual contributors, and exploring considerations
for Phase II (roles, responsibilities, and resources). The feedback from
those sessions has been collected in a report available on Meta.[2]
*Strategy keynote and session materials*. At Wikimania, our Wikimedia
Foundation Board Chair, Christophe Henner, and I discussed the strategic
direction during the opening keynote [3], and held a panel discussion with
fellow community members Ivan Martinez, Mervat Salman, Magnus Manske, and
Anasuya Sengupta, where they shared their perspectives on the strategic
direction. I also joined the heads of Creative Commons (Ryan Merkley) and
the Mozilla Foundation (Mark Surman) for a discussion about “The Big Open”
and how open culture organizations can join forces to strengthen our
movement. In other sessions and events, the strategy team presented insight
from this process. Many of those session presentations and notes are posted
on Meta, and more materials will be published in the coming days.[4]
I’ll be sure to send an update as soon as the new draft direction is ready,
but for those who are watching as we go, keep an eye on Meta - we’ll be
making changes there over the next few days as we continue to integrate
your feedback. In the meantime, thank you for your insights and
participation!
مع أطيب التحيات (Arabic translation: “Best regards”)
Katherine
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Direction#…
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Sources/Wi…
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdr2F8aB9y0
[4] https://wikimania2017.wikimedia.org/wiki/All_Session_Notes
[5]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_metrics_and_activities…
--
Katherine Maher
Wikimedia Foundation
1 Montgomery Street
San Francisco, CA 94104
+1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635
+1 (415) 712 4873
kmaher(a)wikimedia.org
https://annual.wikimedia.org
Hello everyone,
Wikimedia is delighted to participate the eleventh time in the Outreachy
<https://www.outreachy.org/> internship program. The application period for
interns opens September 7th and will be due October 23rd. In the meanwhile,
we need your help -- we are looking for *suitable projects* and
*mentors*. Projects
could be anything ranging from programming, user experience, documentation,
illustration and graphical design, to data science.
If you would like to feature a project / become a mentor:
1. Get an overview of the selection process, and your responsibilities
before, during, and after the program
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreachy/Mentors
2. Create a task, or modify an existing one on Wikimedia's Phabricator
<http://phabricator.wikimedia.org>. Make sure it includes: *Project
title, description (summary in 8-10 lines), skills required (Phabricator
tags are welcome), mentors (required two), micro tasks (link to Phabricator
task that must be completed to become a strong candidate).*
3. Tag the tasks with #Outreach-Programs-Projects
<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/2537/> and
#Outreachy-Round-15
<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/view/2957/> on Phabricator.
Some more helpful information:
-
View accepted projects from previous round
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreachy/Round_14
-
If you know a newcomer, who meets the eligibility criteria
<https://wiki.gnome.org/Outreachy#Eligibility>and would be a good fit
for the program, encourage them to apply and follow our participation
guidelines <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreachy/Participants>.
Cheers,
Srishti
--
Srishti Sethi
Developer Advocate
Technical Collaboration team
Wikimedia Foundation
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:SSethi_(WMF)
(English translation is available below)
Bonjour,
Samuel Le Goff, président de Wikimédia France, m'a demandé d'assister à la
réunion des président-e-s des organisations affiliées à la fondation
Wikimedia [1], réunion qui a eu lieu le 12 août pendant Wikimania, parce
qu'aucun membre du conseil d'administration de Wikimédia France n'était
présent à Wikimania. Même si j'ai été nommé par le conseil
d’administration, la suite reflète mon opinion, pas celle du CA.
Le situation de Wikimédia France a été abordée en fin de réunion. Les
président-e-s ont notamment demandé comment ils pouvaient aider. Pour
résumer, j'ai indiqué ceci :
* la crise est toujours en cours ;
* il me semble difficile pour les autres chapitres d'apporter leur aide
pour l'instant ;
* deux assemblées générales vont avoir lieu en septembre et en octobre, ce
qui devrait renouveler en profondeur le conseil d'administration (a priori,
au moins 10 des 12 sièges) ;
* dès l'assemblée générale du 9 septembre, de nouveaux membres devraient
être désignés au conseil d'administration, probablement pour la plupart
inexpérimentés à ce poste, et une aide des autres chapitres leur sera alors
utile ;
* il n'est pas encore possible de faire un retour d'expérience sur les
problèmes rencontrés par le chapitre.
Lors de l'assemblée générale du 9 septembre, 6 nouveaux membres au conseil
d’administration seront élu-e-s, choisi-e-s parmi 12 candidat-e-s [2]. Et
encore d'autres en octobre [3]. Je les encourage vivement à utiliser l'aide
proposée par les autres chapitres. Même s'il y a beaucoup à faire, je suis
convaincu que la communauté française saura remettre son chapitre sur les
rails, et toute aide pour y parvenir est bienvenue.
Je remercie les président-e-s pour leur gentillesse lors du meeting.
(English translation starts here)
Hello,
Samuel Le Goff, chair of Wikimédia France, asked me to attend the
Chairpersons meeting [1], that took place on August 12th at Wikimania,
because no member of the Wikimédia France board attended Wikimania. Even if
I was appointed by the board, the following reflects my opinion, not theirs.
The topic of the situation of Wikimédia France came up at the end of the
meeting. Chairpersons asked how they could help. To sum up, I stated the
following:
* we're still in the middle of the crisis,
* it seems difficult to me that other chapters can help at the moment,
* two general meeting of Wikimédia France will occur in September and
October, and that will certainly deeply renew our board (a priori, at least
10 of the 12 seats),
* starting at the general meeting of September 9th, new board members will
be appointed, probably most of them unexperienced at this position, and any
help from other chapters would be useful to them,
* for now, it is not yet possible to make feedbacks on the problems
encountered by the chapter.
During the general meeting of September 9th, 6 new board members will be
elected, chosen among 12 candidates [2]. And also others in October [3]. I
deeply encourage them to use the help offered by other chapters. Even if
there is a lot to do, I'm confident that the French community can manage to
get its chapter back on track, and any help to do so is welcome.
Thanks to the chairpersons for their kindness during the meeting.
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate_Chairpersons_meeting_August_12_20…
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikim%C3%A9dia_France/Assembl%C3%A9e_g%C3%A…
[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikim%C3%A9dia_France/Assembl%C3%A9e_g…
--
Envel Le Hir / User:Envlh
