Dear Wikimedians,
The last time you heard from us was when we announced the first round
of Working Group members right before Wikimania in Cape Town. [1]
>From then to now, we have focused on supporting the Working Groups
with their initial steps. At the same time, we have worked on some
reports to bring more information about the ongoing process to the
wider public. We are thankful for all the feedback we have received so
far on different channels and hope that you can find answers to many
of the raised questions in these reports:
If you are interested in knowing more about the application process,
and how Working Group members were selected, you can now read our
reports on the application process [2], and the role of the Steering
Committee in evaluating the applications [3] on the Movement Strategy
Portal.
During Wikimania, about half of the announced Working Groups members
were present, which gave them the chance to meet in person and
initiate their conversations. You can read more about what happened in
the Strategy Space at Wikimania in our report[4]. To all of you who
visited the Strategy Space and were curious about the Movement
Strategy Process, whether it was through listening, asking challenging
questions, or providing us with perspectives from your communities: A
very big thank you!
After Wikimania, throughout August, group calls and virtual
conversations have taken place in all Working Groups. Before they will
be able to continue working on content, they have been tasked to
define their own diversity gaps and suggest solutions to them. You can
consult the Diversification Report [5] to see how this effort is being
supported.
The immediate next steps (see the timeline [6]) in the Movement
Strategy Process are concentrated on the diversification of the
Working Groups with a deadline at the end of September. In October, we
plan to kick off the scoping process for the Working Groups and
initiate a community consultation to collect more perspectives for
them. After that, the groups will start to develop concrete
recommendations for change on the structural level of our movement in
key thematic areas, and how we might implement this change in the
future.
As always, your feedback is appreciated.
On behalf of the Core Team,
Kaarel and Nicole
[1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-July/090704.html
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working…
[3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/People/…
[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Wikiman…
[5] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working…
[6] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Process…
--
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.
Hi Yaroslav, I find your concern important so let me attempt to refine it to discussion points or a call for action. :) Firstly, I think it is unwise to assume what "everyone is interested in". You don't know personally all the people in the Movement, e.g. me and my interests. If you meant some particular people or body, please voice it clearly and we can go from that point. Secondly, there were signs showing people interested in your input: 1. while creating and filling a "diversity matrix" to check if we cover all the stakeholders, the non-representatives of affiliates, WMF or other bodies (FDC, sAPG, AffCom) this issue has been raised - certainly for the funds allocation group. I am not sure of the final outcome in terms of e.g. inclusion of particular names within the group (it is a pretty tricky to give some representativeness without overblowing the groups) but I am sure the strategy team has been working on this issue and can communicate something. :) 2. There are many ways to reaching out to the wider audiences: including surveys, online discussions, show and tell sessions (e.g. IIRC on Wikimania *all* strategic sessions, except the organizational/briefing for the groups, were fully open for all conference participants) and sessions dedicated to particular communities. E.g. in my home Poland there were strategy sessions for willing attendees of WMPL conferences, some languages also had dedicated online discussion venues, and everyone could contribute in English. Thus, let's give the credit where it is due. I am not discussing here if this interest was sufficient. And I am pretty sure that if needed we can explore this direction further (e.g. put more resources to discuss the strategy in particular national/regional communities and send it upstream) and many people don't participate even though they have very meaningful things to say. Perhaps what you wanted to write is e.g. "Please provide X seats in the [ Group 4: Additional participants – mostly members of the Movement Strategy working groups – invited to complement the conference program] for non-affiliated Wikimedians based on their editorship in Wikimedia projects and trust of their local communities". Did I understand you properly? Best Regards, Michał Buczyński Wikimedia Polska, FDC, Resource Allocation Working Group Dnia 27 września 2018 13:21 Yaroslav Blanter <ymbalt(a)gmail.com> napisał(a): This is very remarkable that nobody is actually interested in input from what the WMF functionaries now call "unorganized volunteers" - people who actually work in the projects. We are just not in the picture. Good luck with that. Do not be surprised to see a huge number of volunteers to oppose the strategy document again, as it happened last year. Cheers Yaroslav On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:54 PM Nicole Ebber <nicole.ebber(a)wikimedia.de> wrote: Hi Chris, I can comment on your question why we need another strategy conference: The Wikimedia 2030 process is ongoing, and is building – among many other inputs – upon the outcomes of the last two conferences. Organized groups are already working on the implementation of the Strategic Direction in their own strategic/annual planning and programmatic work, and Working Groups start developing recommendations for change on the structural level of the movement. In spring 2019, these groups will need feedback and input from the movement's organized groups and the Wikimedia Summit – alongside other opportunities for community consultations – will be build as a platform to synchronize the Working Groups' work and to gather and synthesize this input and agree upon next steps. I hope this helps to shed some light on the need for this event. Please let me know if you have further questions. We'll also be presenting the current state of the strategy process at today's activities meeting; if you're interested in tuning in: meta.wikimedia.orgmeta.wikimedia.org All the best Nicole On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 at 22:18, Chris Keating <chriskeatingwiki(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I have so many questions. > > Is anything concrete planned to replace the learning and capacity-building > work that used to happen at WMCON? (Or has the identification of capacity > building as a strategic priority just resulted in .... the abandonment of > the main capacity building event?) > > And why after two "strategy focused" conferences, do we need another one? > What will it achieve except acres more flipchart? How many conferences do > we expect to need before the strategic direction starts to become a > reality? > > Chris > > On Tue, 25 Sep 2018, 20:34 Cornelius Kibelka, < > cornelius.kibelka(a)wikimedia.de wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > > As Nicole Ebber already wrote a couple of weeks ago, we would like to > give > > you some further information about the next Wikimedia Conference, that > will > > take place from March 29–31, 2019 in Berlin, Germany. > > > > The next conference will focus on the Movement Strategy process and > > movement governance for the organized part of the movement in general. > The > > program will be designed according to the status and needs of the ongoing > > Movement Strategy process and its working groups. We are hoping to see a > > diverse group of participants next year, and look forward to creating > three > > days of working, discussing, and thinking together. The event is made > > possible through the generous financial support of the Wikimedia > > Foundation. > > > > Thus, to make it clearer that learning and capacity-building will not be > > part of the program and cut laces to the previous conference, we will > > change the name to “Wikimedia Summit” (#wmsummit). > > > > The change of the purpose of the event is accompanied by a change in the > > composition of the audience. The event will be a more focused one, and > > therefore we aim to scale down the audience to around 200 participants. > As > > it is this still the Wikimedia affiliates conference, every _eligible_ > > affiliate can send one (1) delegate. Furthermore, we will invite > > participants from the Wikimedia Affiliate EDs (~10), WMF Board of > Trustees > > (10), WMF staff (~10), the committees (~15 from FDC, AffCom and Simple > APG) > > and additional members of the Movement Strategy working groups, that do > not > > come in another role (~20). You can find more information regarding this > on > > Meta.[1] > > > > Registration for the Wikimedia Summit will open on November 2 and end on > > December 17, 2018. We urge participants that need a visa to register no > > later than November 19, so we can support them as best as possible to > get a > > visa for the event. > > > > We will keep you updated in the further weeks and months via the usual > > communication channels. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate > > to contact us, preferably via wmsummit(a)wikimedia.de. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Daniela Gentner & Cornelius Kibelka > > > > [1] > > > meta.wikimedia.orgmeta.wikimedia.org > > > > -- > > Cornelius Kibelka > > Program and Engagement Coordinator (PEC) > > for the Wikimedia Conference > > > > Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin > > Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0 > > wikimedia.de wikimedia.de > > > > Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen > > Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei! > > spenden.wikimedia.de spenden.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 > > ______________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > meta.wikimedia.orgmeta.wikimedia.org and > > meta.wikimedia.orgmeta.wikimedia.org > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.or > > Unsubscribe: lists.wikimedia.orglists.wikimedia.org > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@li > ______________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > meta.wikimedia.orgmeta.wikimedia.org and > meta.wikimedia.orgmeta.wikimedia.org > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.or > Unsubscribe: lists.wikimedia.orglists.wikimedia.org > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@li -- Nicole Ebber Adviser International Relations Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin wikimedia.de 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. ______________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: meta.wikimedia.orgmeta.wikimedia.org and meta.wikimedia.orgmeta.wikimedia.org New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.or Unsubscribe: lists.wikimedia.orglists.wikimedia.org <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@li ______________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: meta.wikimedia.orgmeta.wikimedia.org and meta.wikimedia.orgmeta.wikimedia.org New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.or Unsubscribe: lists.wikimedia.orglists.wikimedia.org <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@li
Hello everyone,
The next Wikimedia Monthly Activities meeting will take place on Thursday,
September 27, 2018 at 6:00 PM UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC channel is
#wikimedia-office on https://webchat.freenode.net, and the meeting will be
broadcast as a live YouTube stream.[
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTtb4dEypQk] We’ll post the video recording
publicly after the meeting.
During the September 2018 meeting, we will hear about how Wikimania 2018
went, receive an update on our Partnerships & Global Reach initiatives, and
learn more about the movement strategy process.
Meeting agenda:
• Welcome and introduction to agenda - 2 minutes
• Movement update - 3 minutes
• Wikimania 2018 recap-Douglas Scott (10 min)
• Partnerships & Global Reach Update- Jorge Vargas (10 min)
• Wikimedia movement strategy - Movement Strategy Core Team (15 min)
• Questions and discussion - 10 minutes
• Wikilove - 5 minutes
Please review the meeting's Meta-Wiki page for further information about
the meeting and how to participate:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_monthly_activities_meetings
The October 2018 monthly activities meeting will take place on Thursday, 25
October, starting at 18:00 UTC (11:00 Pacific Daylight Time). To sign up to
participate, please visit:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_monthly_activities_meetings/Sign_…
Thank you,
Sasha
Sasha Redkina
*The Wikimedia Foundation*
www.wikimediafoundation.org
Just a weird idea.
It is very interesting how neural nets can caption images. Quite
interesting. It is done by building a state-model of the image, that is
feed into a kind of neural net (RNN) and that net (a black box) will
transform the state-model into running text. In some cases the neural net
is steered. That is called an attention control, and it creates
relationship between parts in the image.
Swap out the image wit an item, and a virtually identical setup can
generate captions for items. The caption for an item is whats called the
description in Wikidata. It is also the first sentence with a lead-in in
Wikipedia articles. It is possible to steer the attention, that is to tell
the network what items should be used, and thus the later sentences will be
meaningful.
What that means is that we could create meaningful stub entries for the
article placeholder, that is the "AboutTopic" special page. We can't
automate this for very small projects, but somewhere between small and mid
sized languages it will start to make sense.
To make this work we need some very special knowledge, which we probably
don't have, like how to turn an item into a state-model by using the highly
specialized rdf2vec algorithm (hello Copenhagen) and verifying the stateful
language model (hello Helsinki and Tromsø).
I wonder if the only real problems are what do the community want, and what
is the acceptable error limit.
John Erling Blad
/jeblad
>We expect, however, to at least be told that you're planning to ignore our
>request. To simply thank us for clarifying it, as you did, while secretly
>having no intention of complying with it in the first place is hardly
>something one does when negotiating in good faith.
Just to clarify this point, whenever the board of WMPT (which consists of
me, André and Ana [before Béria]) was unable to comply due to legal or
logistic reasons we have clearly informed AffCom, and we did not ever
failed to comply with your requests, even if we did not like them or felt
they were uncalled for.
We have limitations that we are aware of, and have no problem admiting to
them. But we have shown nothing but good faith throughout this process.
I also think that AffCom is acting of good faith, just so I am not
misinterpreted, and I understand why they have tried to remain neutral in
what, to them, seemed like an internal struggle for power.
For me it was nothing of that sort, but the board of WMPT is not interested
at this time to keep revisiting these issues, and once we have fulfilled
the last step, which is to present a plan for capacity building (currently
in draft at https://pt.wikimedia.org/wiki/Plano_de_capacitação_2018), we
expect to be treated as a fully functioning chapter up to date with their
obligations.
Regards,
Gonçalo Themudo
*Presidente*
*Wikimedia Portugal*
*Email: *goethe.wiki(a)gmail.com
*Website: *http://pt.wikimedia.org <https://sites.google.com/view/themudo>
*Imagine um mundo onde cada ser humano pode partilhar livremente a soma de
todo o conhecimento, na sua própria língua.*
I believe administrators outside of the US, in en wikipedia and in wikidata etc.,
do not understand, our freedom of speech and our right to due process, and
that there is a cultural misunderstanding and a lack of patience on there part,
which leads to an abuse of power and a breaking of the rules when it comes
to blocking IP’s and others for just standing up for themselves. and to that end,
do not see the good faith edits made, that were not reverted, and based on
other’s intelligent level not there's. Everything starts out nice, on tea room’s,
noticeboards, forums, and on there talk pages etc., and then all goes south,
as in en wikipedia, and with a now “conflict of interest” just block you,
to end it.
In wikidata which is more technically challenging, editors that claim ownership
of pages and coming from outside of north America and europe, revert on
misunderstanding’s, and can not express themselves in english, so just rely on
administrators noticeboard to complain against IP’s without warning,
not giving the chance for the ip to defend himself, and to explain that it was
an edit war. administrators that see these posts at 100’s an hour, just block
the IP’s or the pages without any kind of investigation, based on lies of the
accusers. and these same administrators that have participated on
there talk pages are now in a “conflict of interest”, being directly involved.
and in ru wikipedia, ru wikidata, english speakers are not welcome, from
there board down to there users.
-------- Forwarded message --------
From: Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com>
To: Wiki Research-l <wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>, Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight <rosiestep.wiki(a)gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, September 25, 2018 10:08 PM -05:00
Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] Results from 2018 global Wikimedia survey are published!
I'm appreciative that we're having this conversation - not in the sense
that I'm happy with the status quo, but I'm glad that some of us are
continuing to work on our persistent difficulties with contributor
retention, civility, and diversity.
I've spent several hours on ENWP recently, and I've been surprised by the
willingness of people to revert good-faith edits, sometimes with blunt
commentary or with no explanation. I can understand how a newbie who
experienced even one of these incidents would find it to be unpleasant,
intimidating, or discouraging. Based on these experiences, I've decided
that I should coach newbies to avoid taking reversions personally if their
original contributions were in good faith.
I agree with Jonathan Morgan that WP:NOTSOCIAL can be overused.
Kerry, I appreciate your suggestions about about cultural change. I can
think of two ways to influence culture on English Wikipedia in large-scale
ways.
1. I think that there should be more and higher-quality training and
continuing education for administrators in topics like policies, conflict
resolution, communications skills, legal issues, and setting good examples.
I think that these trainings would be one way through which cultural change
could gradually happen over time. For what it's worth, I think that there
are many excellent administrators who do a lot of good work (which can be
tedious and/or stressful) with little appreciation. Also, my impression is
that ENWP Arbcom has become more willing over the years to remove admin
privileges from admins who misuse their tools. I recall having a discussion
awhile back with Rosie on the topic of training for administrators, and I'm
adding her to this email chain as an invitation for her to participate in
this discussion. I think that offering training to administrators could be
helpful in facilitating changes to ENWP culture.
2. I think that I can encourage civil participation in ENWP in the context
of my training project
< https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Rapid/Pine/Continuation_of_e… >
that I'm hoping that WMF will continue to fund. ENWP is a complex and
sometimes emotionally difficult environment, and I'm trying to set a tone
in the online training materials that is encouraging. I hope to teach
newbies about the goals of Wikipedia as well as policies, how to use tools,
and Wikipedia culture. I am hopeful that the online training materials will
improve the confidence of new contributors, improve the retention of new
contributors, and help new editors to increase the quality and quantity of
their contributions. I hope that early portions of the project will be well
received and that, over time and if the project is successful as it
incrementally increases in scale and reach, that it will influence the
overall culture of ENWP to be more civil.
Regards,
Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Kirill,
(changing the topic to reflect better the more abstract case: this is no
longer about WMPT, as I don't know enough about that specific instance)
I appreciate your concerns for embarrassing situations. This may be the
least painful approach in many of the cases. I also appreciate that the
Committee is between a rock and a hard place here: if such a situation
arises, there is no approach that makes everyone happy.
However, I think there's another complicating factor, which I'm not sure
whether it is currently considered sufficiently. The system of affiliates
has been designed so that there is always some level of 'democratic'
control: chapters and thematic organizations are required to have a
membership, and also user groups are required to have more participants
than just the liaisons. At least in the case of Thematic organizations and
Chapters, these membership bodies are also legally the highest authority of
the organization. (the user groups are more fuzzy, and I'll focus on
Chapters and Thematic Organizations for now)
If an organization gets suspended, that can be generally for two reasons.
First, there could be a simple misunderstanding. In that case, the board
can probably resolve this quickly, and a public announcement would
definitely do much more good than harm. But there is also the second
possibility: that there is a real problem. In that scenario, the democratic
control that we require, may be needed to manage the problem. Sure, it may
result in some messy questions to the board, and some embarrassment, but it
may also result in more actual resolutions. As a member, I would definitely
not appreciate it to only learn about the problems when there is no way
back (revocation of status).
Affiliation with the Wikimedia Movement is a core 'asset' for the Wikimedia
affiliates, and should not be revoked lightly - as I'm sure the Committee
will agree.
I would suggest that the AffCom reviews its approach here, and considers a
middle way, where the membership (or the whole community, if there is no
way to contact the membership) is informed. Whether that is through the
board or directly, whether publicly or privately will depend on the case.
The most important thing is that the membership can exercise their
responsibility and potentially decide that the board should be replaced, or
instructed to act in a certain manner.
I can imagine an approach where the board is given a week to respond to the
charges to resolve misunderstandings before the step is taken to inform the
membership (while leaving the board full discretion to contact the
membership earlier than that).
Chapters and Thematic Organizations have often a history going back many
years in our movement. They are larger than their boards, and if the
current board is unable or unwilling to resolve an issue, the membership is
at task to interfere.
Best,
Lodewijk
On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 7:39 PM Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> The Affiliations Committee would like to provide some clarification around
> the privacy of affiliate suspension notices, particularly in the context of
> ongoing conflict mediation within and between affiliates.
>
> When we conduct investigations into the behavior of individual editors, we
> strive to maintain privacy for the individual as to the specific concerns
> under investigation. In the case of affiliate compliance investigations,
> we similarly treat the specific concerns and the details of any
> intermediate measures (including possible suspensions) with an appropriate
> degree of privacy. This is to avoid undue public embarrassment or ridicule
> for the individuals involved in the conflict mediation process, and to
> ensure that people are able to work with us in good faith to resolve issues
> without feeling that they will be subjected to public shaming during the
> process.
>
> Basic reporting compliance is documented in the reporting table on the
> [[m:Reports]] page, where you can see those groups which have fallen behind
> on compliance [1]. The suspension-remediation-derecognition process is
> also publicly documented on Meta [2].
>
> It is 100% at the discretion of the suspended organization whether and how
> to communicate publicly about their suspension or the details of their
> non-compliance. Only upon revocation of recognition does the committee
> communicate publicly about the issue; even then, private details are not
> shared except as required to correct misinformation.
>
> As for ways this could be more transparent without causing undue
> embarrassment, perhaps suspension status could be indicated on the reports
> page on Meta; however, even this seems appropriate only if done at the
> discretion of those who have been suspended. We would be interested in
> hearing more thoughts about this from those who have been through the
> process. For anyone who wants to share their views without public
> disclosure, please feel free to message the private AffCom mailing list
> with your perspective on this topic at affcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org.
>
> Regards,
> Kirill Lokshin
> Chair, Affiliations Committee
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reports
> [2]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_movement_affiliates/Protocol_for_…
>
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 3:40 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulosperneta(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I second, and strongly support Pine's suggestion.
> >
> > Being the Affiliations Committee a community-run Wikimedia committee
> > emanating from the Wikimedia Movement itself, transparency is to be
> > expected whenever it is possible. As far as I know, there is nothing
> > confidential in that resolution.
> >
> > Obscurity is the mother of all rumors, and we're dearly suffering from
> > that.
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> escreveu no dia segunda, 3/09/2018 à(s)
> > 19:18:
> >
> > > Hello Gonçalo,
> > >
> > > Thank you for this report.
> > >
> > > I would like to ask the Affiliations Committee to post the July 2018
> > > resolution regarding Wikimedia Portugal to this mailing list and to
> > publish
> > > that resolution on Meta.
> > >
> > > I am an advocate for transparency about financial and governance
> matters,
> > > which includes the activities of the Affiliations Committee. I request
> > that
> > > going forward, all similar resolutions from the Affiliations Committee
> > > should be sent to Wikimedia-l and published on Meta within one week of
> > > their approval by AffCom.
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > >
> > > Pine
> > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 10:56 AM GoEthe.wiki <goethe.wiki(a)gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear all,
> > > >
> > > > As part of the roadmap AffCom agreed with us after they decided to
> > > suspend
> > > > some of our benefits within the Wikimedia Foundation programs
> > > > (
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/private/wikimediapt/2018-July/002625.ht…
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/private/wikimediapt/2018-July/002625.ht…
> > > > >),
> > > > Wikimedia Portugal held an Extraordinary General Assembly on the 1st
> of
> > > > September, and a board was elected. This board is identical, with one
> > > > exception, to the board elected in April of this year and that I
> > > announced
> > > > in a similar message (
> > > >
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-April/090073.html
> > > ).
> > > >
> > > > The board is now composed of:
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > Gonçalo Themudo, president
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > André Barbosa, treasurer
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > Ana Cravo, secretary
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > We also elected members for the other governing bodies of the
> chapter:
> > > >
> > > > General Assembly
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > Paulo Santos Perneta, president
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > Carlos Barradas, secretary
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > João Carvalho, member
> > > >
> > > > Fiscal Council
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > Waldir Pimenta, president
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > Manuel de Sousa, secretary
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > João Lemos, member
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The general assembly also approved the financial statement of our
> > annual
> > > > report, which is published at
> > > > https://pt.wikimedia.org/wiki/Relatórios/Anual/2017. An English
> > > > translation
> > > > is provided at
> https://pt.wikimedia.org/wiki/Relatórios/Anual/2017/en.
> > > >
> > > > The minutes of the meeting are available at
> > > > https://pt.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reuni%C3%B5es/XI_Assembleia-Geral (in
> > > > Portuguese only).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > We are currently working on the final step of the roadmap, which is a
> > > plan
> > > > for active contributor involvement and improved chapter capacity. The
> > > first
> > > > part is to gather signatures of at least 20 chapter members who are
> > > active
> > > > contributors to Wikimedia projects, which is currently underway at
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://pt.wikimedia.org/wiki/Utilizador:GoEThe/P%C3%A1gina_de_apoio_%C3%A0…
> > > > .
> > > > We will keep you informed of the second part, once we have developed
> > it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > Gonçalo
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
All that red makes the page look bad, and i would like to point out the abuse factor here, all those red links start edit wars,
and should be put there if any by people,
The creation of the wikidata page also creats a problem, because it does not establis a lable which should be mandatory
and in english,
in the save proses.
and this problem * https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Labels_and_descriptions#…
>Tuesday, September 25, 2018 2:58 AM -05:00 from Sergey Leschina <mail(a)putnik.ws>:
>
>I want to draw your attention to the problem from the other side. On the newly created page, which can be opened by the red link, there is no binding to the Wikidata. This means that after the creation, the page will not automatically be linked to the Wikidata. And if the project has templates that can use information from the Wikidata, they will not fully work until the page will be saved at least once and linked to an item. I already suggested to add the parameter for this: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T178249
>
>If something like this will be implemented, then it will be possible to make a template for the red links (with Lua and TemplateStyles) that will be connected to the Wikidata. Although I agree that it is better to have a syntax that will allow to make links without such difficulties.
>пн, 24 сент. 2018 г. в 20:50, Maarten Dammers < maarten(a)mdammers.nl >:
>>Hi everyone,
>>
>>According to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLuM4E6IE5U : "Semantic
>>annotation is the process of attaching additional information to various
>>concepts (e.g. people, things, places, organizations etc) in a given
>>text or any other content. Unlike classic text annotations for reader's
>>reference, semantic annotations are used by machines to refer to."
>>(more at
>>https://ontotext.com/knowledgehub/fundamentals/semantic-annotation/ )
>>
>>On Wikipedia a red link is a link to an article that hasn't been created
>>(yet) in that language. Often another language does have an article
>>about the subject or at least we have a Wikidata item about the subject.
>>Take for example
>>https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Friedrich_Ris . It has over
>>250 incoming links, but the person doesn't have an article in Dutch. We
>>have a Wikidata item with links to 7 Wikipedia's at
>>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q116510 , but no way to relate
>>https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Friedrich_Ris with
>>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q116510 .
>>
>>Wouldn't it be nice to be able to make a connection between the red link
>>on Wikipedia and the Wikidata item?
>>
>>Let's assume we have this list somewhere. We would be able to offer all
>>sorts of nice features to our users like:
>>* Hover of the link to get a hovercard in your favorite backup language
>>* Generate an article placeholder for the user with basic information in
>>the local language
>>* Pre-populate the translate extension so you can translate the article
>>from another language
>>(probably plenty of other good uses)
>>
>>Where to store this link? I'm not sure about that. On some Wikipedia's
>>people have tested with local templates around the red links. That's not
>>structured data, clutters up the Wikitext, it doesn't scale and the
>>local communities generally don't seem to like the approach. That's not
>>the way to go. Maybe a better option would be to create a new property
>>on Wikidata to store the name of the future article. Something like
>>Q116510: Pxxx -> (nl)"Friedrich Ris". Would be easiest because the
>>infrastructure is there and you can just build tools on top of it, but
>>I'm afraid this will cause a lot of noise on items. A couple of
>>suggestions wouldn't be a problem, but what is keeping people from
>>adding the suggestion in 100 languages? Or maybe restrict the usage that
>>a Wikipedia must have at least 1 (or n) incoming links before people are
>>allowed to add it?
>>We could create a new projects on the Wikimedia Cloud to store the
>>links, but that would be quite the extra time investment setting up
>>everything.
>>
>>What do you think?
>>
>>Maarten
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Wikidata mailing list
>>Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
>--
>Sergey Leschina
>_______________________________________________
>Wikidata mailing list
>Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Dear colleagues,
This is just to let you know that this past weekend of 22-23 September we've successfully had our 12th Annual Wikimedia Russia Conference, dedicated to Wikimedia projects in the languages of Russia, as well as overall challenges of free knowledge creation and dissemination.
This year's event was held in Saint Petersburg with live YouTube broadcast from the main hall (Opening, presentations, Wiki-award 2018 & Free Knowledge 2018 Awarding Ceremonies, brainstorming around round table results & closing). With 32 languages of Russia having their own Wikipedias
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedias_in_the_languages_of_Russia/Tables , we naturally use Russian as the working language of our cross languistic community events. You can watch the presentations & access the slides from the program page below
https://ru.wikimedia.org/wiki/Вики-конференция_2018/Программа/en
The event happened to be quite interesting that we started even thinking about organizing simultaneous interpretation into English for foreign Wikimedians who don't speak/understand Russian.
regards,
farhad
--
Farkhad Fatkullin - Фархад Фаткуллин http://sikzn.ru/ Тел.+79274158066 / skype:frhdkazan / Wikipedia:frhdkazan
(apologies for the cross-posting, it was wisely suggested I share this
here as well)
Howdy,
The Readers web team at the Wikimedia Foundation is working on
improving the contribution features on the mobile website. [0] The
team is working on showing pages that are currently unavailable on
mobile. We are starting by designing improvements to the mobile
navigation. We want your feedback on the latest navigation prototype.
If you have a moment, please visit the project page and try out the
demo on your mobile device. [1] Then help answer a few questions about
your experience.
Thank you!
[0] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Advanced_mobile_contributions
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Advanced_mobile_contributions/Na…
Yours,
Chris Koerner
Community Relations Specialist
Wikimedia Foundation