Hi,
I have been looking for social networking service that would be fair: not abusing personal data, funded by community, respecting privacy, accepting anonymity, free/libre/ open source etc. Haven’t found many. The Diaspora* Project[1] is not moving forward very fast and the Mastodon[2] is more a microblogging service rather than a social network service.
Would it make sense for Wikimedia movement to build its own social network service?
In the "2017 Movement strategy” we state: “By 2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem of free knowledge”. If we consider discussions and information shared on social network services to be “knowledge”, I think we should have a role in here too.
We have 33 million registered users and fulfil all the requirements of being a “fair service”. A minimum list of features to make Wikimedia Social would be:
(1) Status updates
(2) Comments
(3) Likes
(4)Groups
maybe:
(5) Events
I am pretty sure that by integrating this to other Wikimedia services (Commons etc.) we could achieve something awesome.
- Teemu
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaspora_(social_network)
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_(software)
Hi Mario,
I don't think it will be considered harassment if the information is posted
here. I believe the WP:OUTING applies to the English Wikipedia and this is
not English Wikipedia mailing list.
Regards,
Isaac
On Jul 22, 2018 5:43 PM, "Mario Gómez" <mariogomwiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
There, is at least, one user that works for Go Fish Digital with a
sockpuppet account in English Wikipedia and has denied conflict of interest
or paid editing disclosure even if he was asked too, since some user was
suspicious. Should I send this privately? I don't want to incur in spurious
ousting/doxxing.
Best,
Mario
On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 12:24 AM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Go Fish Digital is a company that whitewashes Wikipedia. From its own
site:
>
> >The primary platforms that define your online reputation include:
> > [...]
> > * Wikipedia
> > [...]
> >
> > With Online Reputation Management, we work hard to make all of the
> >positive information easy to find. At the same time, we use many
> >different strategies and tactics to diminish the visibility of negative
> >content, or in some cases, remove it from the web altogether. The end
> >result is a positive online reputation because when people search your
> >name or brand, they immediately find positive content.
>
> Source: https://gofishdigital.com/online-reputation-management
>
> Wikimedia Foundation Inc. has been working with this company on search
> engine optimization: <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T198970>. I have a
> few questions about this work.
>
> How was this vendor chosen? Which other vendors were considered?
>
> Why is this work being undertaken? At least the English Wikipedia has some
> of the best search engine results placement of any site on the Web, so I'm
> curious to know who's prioritizing Wikipedia's search engine optimization
> and for what reason.
>
> How is it appropriate for Wikimedia Foundation Inc. to work with a company
> that is, by its own admission, whitewashing Wikipedia? Doesn't this give
> Go Fish Digital a ton of legitimization by now being able to say it works
> directly with Wikimedia Foundation Inc. ("with Wikipedia")?
>
> Is it appropriate to give a company that sells whitewashing Wikipedia
> services access to private user data, as was done in
> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T192893> and
> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193052>? The Wikimedia Foundation Inc.
> legal department apparently approved this access, but I'm curious to know
> why, given the company's role in selling an "Online Reputation Management"
> product. This looks bad to me.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
Dear Wikimedians,
Thanks to everyone who applied to participate in a Working Group and
for your interest and engagement in the process! We received a lot of
exceptional applications and we are excited to announce the first
round of selected members for our nine Working Groups. You can find
all names on the respective Working Group pages on Meta.[1]
Even though we received many exceptional applications, the Working
Groups don't yet have the level of diversity that represents the
movement and brings in new voices. This means we will increase our
outreach efforts and accept additional applications.
We will use Wikimania to reach out existing contacts from previous
processes, and will identify more connectors and multipliers to get
their expertise and support. This also means that the first task for
the selected members is to map the gaps and increase the diversity of
their Working Groups in consultation with the Core Team. After that,
we will also start bringing in external expertise to the groups.
== Wikimania Strategy Space ==
At Wikimania, on Friday, Saturday and Sunday, the Core Team will be
hosting Strategy Sessions, and a Strategy Bar, to provide an update,
seek your feedback, harvest your expertise, and respond to all
questions as the Movement Strategy advances. Please check the detailed
schedule on-wiki.[2] All are welcome at these sessions, and we look
forward to seeing many of you.
Following Wikimania, we will provide an update on progress to date, as
well as information on the process and timelines for collectively
advancing the Movement Strategy. We are thankful for your ongoing
contribution to the Movement Strategy process and look forward to
hearing from you during future consultations.
In the name of the Core Team
Kaarel & Nicole
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working…
[2] https://wikimania2018.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_2030
--
Nicole Ebber
Adviser International Relations
Program Manager Wikimedia Movement Strategy
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
http://wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.
V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts
Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig
anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin,
Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
Dear all,
It’s been a while since I sent out the last movement strategy update. A lot
has happened in the meantime, and I wanted to give you a heads-up regarding
an upcoming call for participation!
But first things first:
1. The report from the Wikimedia Conference Movement Strategy Track
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2018/Documentation/Mov…>
has been published[1]. It captures all the conversations, insights and
outputs from three days of intense strategy work, so it’s a (quite) long
but very interesting read. It is meant to document the state of the process
and to allow for a deep dive into it. It should be especially valuable for
those of you who did not have a chance to participate in the conference or
attended another conference track.
2. Based on WMCON outputs (and various conversations we’ve been having in
our movement for years), the core strategy team has mapped eight key
thematic areas
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working…>
[2] -- and some initial guiding questions -- that should to be answered to
enable us to advance towards our strategic direction. These areas include:
- Roles & Responsibilities
- Resource Allocation & Revenue Streams
- Diversity
- Partnerships
- Capacity Building
- Community Health
- Technology
- Advocacy
3. The core team will be supporting the creation of Working Groups to take
on these critical conversations. These working groups will be asked to
assess the current situation of the thematic area, and obstacles and
opportunities. They’ll have access to all the relevant information already
collected, and the chance to do further research if needed. They’ll be
asked to identify the changes needed in movement structures and develop
concrete recommendations for the movement on how to ratify and implement
them.[3] An open call for working group members will go out to the movement
this week -- please stay tuned for an update from Nicole!
I also had the chance to present more about these plans at last week’s
Metrics Meeting. Please do take a look, either look it all up on the
Meta[3] or watch the video![4]
Cheers,
Katherine
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2018/Documentation/Mov…
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working…
[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working…
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOaiU-v7PbE (from minute 24:25)
--
Katherine Maher
Executive Director
Wikimedia Foundation
1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
San Francisco, CA 94104
+1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635
+1 (415) 712 4873
kmaher(a)wikimedia.org
https://annual.wikimedia.org
I made an error with the URL. Apparently the link should be https://zoom.us/j/528900812 for people who want to join with the Zoom software.
Attendance has been very light but I will schedule a future meeting like this with more notice, perhaps a more structured agenda, and hopefully with a correct URL.
Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
null
Hi all,
I am scheduling this meeting for Monday, July 30th at 7 PM UTC / 12 PM
Pacific. The number of people who have indicated interest is small, so this
will be more of a casual meetup than a formal event. I think that this type
of online international meetup could be fun and interesting. We'll see what
happens.
To join the meeting, you will need the Zoom software from
https://www.zoom.us, or you can join by telephone.
If you install the Zoom software then you can join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS
or Android with this link: https://zoom.us/528900812
As an alternative, you can join by telephone from many places throughout
the world. Phone numbers are listed at https://zoom.us/zoomconference. You
will need the meeting ID, which is 528-900-812. If you join by phone then
your phone number will be visible to other participants in the meeting.
If more people are interested in the future then I may do some thinking
about how to plan and organize the meeting, but for now we can be
relatively casual. My plan is to do a brief round of introductions at the
meeting, review some of the top-level metrics from around Wikimedia, and
then open the floor for roundtable discussion.
I look forward to the conversation on the 30th.
Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
Dear Wikimedians,
We are happy to announce that the 2017 Picture of the Year competition is now open.
Picture of the Year 2017 is the twelfth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons image competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons (FP) during the year 2017, to produce a single Picture of the Year.
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, Commons features pictures of all flavors.
For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first (and current) round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.
To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2017 page on Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2017
Round 1 will end 24 June 2018, 23:59:59 [UTC].
Thanks,
POTY 2017 committee
Note: Users must vote with an account meeting following requirements: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2017/Rules
Hi.
Go Fish Digital is a company that whitewashes Wikipedia. From its own site:
>The primary platforms that define your online reputation include:
> [...]
> * Wikipedia
> [...]
>
> With Online Reputation Management, we work hard to make all of the
>positive information easy to find. At the same time, we use many
>different strategies and tactics to diminish the visibility of negative
>content, or in some cases, remove it from the web altogether. The end
>result is a positive online reputation because when people search your
>name or brand, they immediately find positive content.
Source: https://gofishdigital.com/online-reputation-management
Wikimedia Foundation Inc. has been working with this company on search
engine optimization: <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T198970>. I have a
few questions about this work.
How was this vendor chosen? Which other vendors were considered?
Why is this work being undertaken? At least the English Wikipedia has some
of the best search engine results placement of any site on the Web, so I'm
curious to know who's prioritizing Wikipedia's search engine optimization
and for what reason.
How is it appropriate for Wikimedia Foundation Inc. to work with a company
that is, by its own admission, whitewashing Wikipedia? Doesn't this give
Go Fish Digital a ton of legitimization by now being able to say it works
directly with Wikimedia Foundation Inc. ("with Wikipedia")?
Is it appropriate to give a company that sells whitewashing Wikipedia
services access to private user data, as was done in
<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T192893> and
<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193052>? The Wikimedia Foundation Inc.
legal department apparently approved this access, but I'm curious to know
why, given the company's role in selling an "Online Reputation Management"
product. This looks bad to me.
MZMcBride