I'm glad we can share our annual report with you. The English version is
available on *Wikimedia_user_groups/Reports/Wikimedians_of_Republic_of_Srpska/Annual_2018
Your comments and suggestions are welcome.
of the Republic of Srpska
*Замислите свет у коме свака особа на планети има слободан приступ
целокупном људском знању. То је оно на чему ми радимо.*
I am very happy to share news with you of our latest appointment to the
Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. Please join me in welcoming Lisa
Lewin as our newest Trustee!
Lisa Lewin is Managing Partner at Ethical Ventures, a New York City based
management consulting firm. She has worked in strategic growth and
development her whole career, helping launch new ventures and increase the
impact and growth potential of legacy businesses. Her professional focus
has always been at the intersection of technology and learning - and we are
very fortunate to have her as a part of our team!
Below is the official announcement. Welcome, Lisa, and I look forward to
working with you!
*Wikimedia Foundation announces Lisa Lewin as new Trustee*
Lisa Lewin brings to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees over two
decades of experience in leading and growing companies focused on
educational media and technology
(San Francisco, California) 31 January 2019 -- Lisa Lewin, Managing Partner
at Ethical Ventures, a New York City based management consulting firm, will
be the newest member of the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees.
The Wikimedia Foundation’s Board of Trustees oversees the Wikimedia
Foundation and its work, and serves as the organization’s ultimate
corporate authority. As an incoming trustee, Lisa will serve a two year
term effective immediately.
Lisa has worked in strategic growth and development her whole career,
helping launch new ventures and increase the impact and growth potential of
legacy businesses. She began her career in research and consulting with The
NPD Group and BCG before joining McGraw-Hill and rising to vice president
of their professional education group.
She founded and led Mindgate Media, an education technology consultancy,
and later joined Pearson plc as president of their teacher education group,
eventually leading their global learning technology teams spanning six
continents. In 2016 she joined The Ready, a consulting firm specializing in
organizational transformation, where she remains a senior advisor. In 2018
she founded Ethical Ventures, which advises senior executives at
corporations and large nonprofits on navigating change and building
thriving organizations with a positive impact on society.
“I am thrilled to be joining an organisation that is committed to ensuring
the world continues to support freely accessible sources of information.
This is a critical mission given the shifts in the global internet space,”
Lisa's career long commitment to connecting the worlds of education and
technology matches her passion for the Wikimedia Foundation's vision of
bringing knowledge to every human being.
Lisa joins Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, Board Chair María Sefidari, Vice
Chair Christophe Henner, and Board members Esra'a Al Shafei, Tanya Capuano,
Dr. James Heilman, Dr. Dariusz Jemielniak, Raju Narisetti, and Nataliia
"The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is fortunate to have Lisa Lewin
joining us as a Trustee," said María Sefidari, Board Chair. "Her capacity
to connect technology with people who desire to learn will be invaluable as
we begin to implement our Wikimedia 2030 strategic direction. I am
confident she will both make a lasting impression on the Wikimedia movement
and feel right at home in our diverse and global community of people who
share that passion."
The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
-María Sefidari, Board Chair
-Christophe Henner, Vice Chair
-Jimmy Wales, Founder of Wikipedia
-Esra'a Al Shafei
-Dr. James Heilman
-Dr. Dariusz Jemielniak
About Lisa Lewin
Lisa Lewin is Managing Partner at Ethical Ventures, a New York City based
management consulting firm.
Originally from St. Louis, Missouri, she has worked in strategic growth and
development her whole career, helping launch new ventures and increase the
impact and growth potential of legacy businesses. She began her career in
research and consulting with The NPD Group and BCG before joining
McGraw-Hill and rising to vice president of their professional education
group. She founded and led Mindgate Media, an education technology
consultancy, and later joined Pearson plc as president of their teacher
education group, eventually leading their global learning technology team
spanning six continents. In 2016 she joined The Ready, a consulting firm
specializing in organizational transformation, where she remains a senior
advisor. In 2018 she founded Ethical Ventures, which advises senior
executives at corporations and large nonprofits on navigating change and
building thriving organizations with a positive impact on society.
Lisa is active on the boards of the Center for Responsive Politics and
DoSomething.org. She graduated with a Bachelor of Science in Business
Administration from Washington University in St. Louis, and earned a Master
of Business Administration with honors from Harvard Business School.
Lisa lives in New York City with her husband and daughter. She enjoys
making change, sense, mischief, and knitting scarves.
María Sefidari Huici
Chair of the Board
Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
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:
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
Mindful of the ongoing discussions about conferences, I think that it
would be helpful to have a big picture understanding of the goals, plans,
and budgets for conferences collectively.
As far as I know, these are the types of recurring conferences:
(1) Wikimania, which seems to be a multi-purpose international conference,
with somewhat open admission if someone can afford to attend, is willing to
attend, and can get the necessary legal permissions;
(2) the Wikimedia Summit (which I hope will get a name change to reflect
its actual scope, because it's not an all-Wikimedia summit) which will
focus on WMF, WMF committees that work with WMF affiliate organizations,
and WMF affiliate organizations;
(3) thematic conferences, such as the Wikisource Conference;
(4) regional conferences, such as WikiConference North America;
(5) organization-specific meetings of various kinds, including affiliate
organizations' annual general meetings and WMF All Hands, and
(6) the Wikimedia Technical Conference.
I believe that WMF intended to do some strategic planning for the
collection of conferences as a part of the larger WMF-led strategic
planning process. Is this type of planning underway for conferences, and if
so can we get an update from someone who is familiar with the situation? If
the person who will respond is a paid staff member, then please feel free
to wait to respond until a convenient workday next week. In the meantime,
other people may wish to comment or ask questions.
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
We are now experiencing a couple of cases where third party uses data
from Wikidata to create user interface of data from it without any use
of Wikipedia, to support their own systems. One is a genealogy website,
who use Wikidata to present where parish having genealogy records can be
found on a map, using coordinates etc for these parisihes from
Wikidata. Another in an early phase is a water authority who will load
Wikidata with their data and present data from there.
Is this part of a trend, are there many cases like these?
Does statistics exist giving how many acesses goes to Wikidata from
3-parties? Are we missing these in our use statistic by focusing on
access to Wikipedia?
(sorry for cross-posting, but since this is a time sensitive issue, I would
like to get as many comments as possible)
Last 30 October, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) decided it needed more time
to evaluate the case of Wikimedia Portugal, it extended the suspension of
Wikimedia Portugal, and said that they must use the time that would
otherwise be the termination period for the Chapter Agreement between
Wikimedia Portugal and the Wikimedia Foundation, therefore giving notice of
termination of the Chapter Agreement. WMF also said that if Wikimedia
Portugal fully and completely resolved the issues described above and
otherwise remained compliant with its obligations as a chapter - which
happened, and the suspension was lifted - then WMF would sign a new chapter
agreement with Wikimedia Portugal. The current chapter agreement therefore
terminates this 31 January. On 25 January WMF sent us a new proposal of
Chapter Agreement for Wikimedia Portugal to sign. It can be seen here, side
by side with the current Chapter Agreement Wikimedia Portugal has with the
This new proposal differs in many ways from the Chapter Agreement currently
in place, and from the ones other chapters have signed (at least the ones
that are public) and we have several questions about it, so we would like
to ask the Wikimedia Portugal associates, other affiliates and the
Wikimedia community in general to help us by clarifying some of these
questions and weigh in on the advantages and disadvantages of continuing
being a WMF affiliate under these changed conditions.
We have also accordingly asked from the WMF a two month extension of the
current Chapter Agreement, to allow for proper discussion of their proposal.
These are some of the main differences we found that are concerning us
(first in italic the current agreement, second in bold the new proposal)
“This Chapter is authorized to cover the geographic region of the
Portugal. The Foundation will not seek to create or authorize the creation
of any additional chapter within this geographic region. The Foundation
will not engage with other local organizations without consulting with the
chapter.” (Current CA) disappears entirely, and becomes “WMF hereby
recognizes Chapter as part of the Wikimedia movement supporting its Focus
Area.” (i.e. Portugal)
Chapter shall do business as “Wikimedia Portugal, an independent
organization for Wikimedia volunteers in Portugal”, irrespective of its
locally incorporated name. - this seems unique among chapters, and in
our view conflicts with the possibility of affiliates including both
volunteers and professionals, as well as both Wikimedians and people
otherwise engaged and interested in programs, such as teachers, librarians
and museologists. The tagline also seems cumbersome, awkward and we don’t
understand its purpose.
The Foundation agrees to support the activities of the Chapter and to
not engage in any activity that might negatively impact the work or image
of the Chapter. (This disappears in the current proposed agreement)
Exhibit B, 2. Approved use: Use of trademarks seems to be limited to the
geographic space of Portugal: “with respect to Chapter’s activities in
Portugal”. Does this mean that use in events, activities and
partnerships involving other countries (Wikimedia España, other Iberocoop
members, etc) requires a special authorization beforehand?
Exhibit B, 2. Approved use: “Promotion material that is not intended for
Wikimedia outreach activities or community-focused events as defined in the
Wikimedia Trademark Policy (which may be found at <
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trademark_policy >) are not
approved under this License and would require specific approval under
Section 3 below.” This one is a bit convoluted and even within our group
we have different understanding of what this means. Many of our present and
past activities include GLAM partnerships, photo contests, and conferences
not in “WikiCon” style. By following the link for the Trademark policy, it
is not clear if these activities are included in the definition of outreach
or if section 4 of the Trademark policy apply. This could mean that these
activities need a bureaucratic procedure defined as a permission in
writing (by physical mail or by an email to trademarks(a)wikimedia.org) to
use the Wikimedia Marks outside the scope of this License (“ Additional Use
”). Each such request must include: (1) reference to this agreement; (2)
attached samples of the proposed use; and (3) the date(s) and scope of the
proposed use. Bureaucratic procedures increase enormously from the
current situation, without giving any apparent advantage over non-affiliate
Use of the name and logo of Wikimedia Portugal in its fundraising
campaigns apparently must now be authorized beforehand (points 3.2 and 3.3
of the Trademark Policy
Exhibit A, 5.4 Chapter governance reports: “Upon the request of WMF,
but no more than once per year, Chapter shall provide WMF with a report
analyzing the effectiveness of Chapter’s governance structures. The report
shall be prepared by a firm external to Chapter, and Chapter shall provide
WMF with a copy of the report written in or translated into English.” In
an organization with limited resources such as Wikimedia Portugal, having
to comply with such a request without providing the means to realize it
would most probably dictate its end. We would rather have it explicitly
state what conditions would trigger such a report, and that it would not be
a financial burden;
Termination: “The term of this agreement is one year and is
automatically renewed unless notice is given three months in advance by
either party.” (Current CA) becomes (7.1) “This Agreement will
automatically renew for additional 1-year terms (“ Renewal Term ”), unless
either party provides written notice of its intent not to renew 30 days
prior to the end of the Term or Renewal Term.” (7.2) “This Agreement may be
terminated by either party without cause upon 60 days written notice to the
Thank you for your attention, and we appreciate any comment you might have.
*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.*
Both in Wikipedia and other parts of the Wikimedia-universe there are
a lot of jobs that should be done, but are not so popular. Because
they are not done, people get tired and backs away from whatever they
I could give several examples, but lets say spellchecking. It is not
fun doing spellchecking, even if you are spellchecking something
written by a professor. Instead of doing spellchecking you do
something else, like poking around in some code, or write about
Pokemon. While you do so the professor gets a bit annoyed over the not
so perfect article, and starts to wonder what happen to the crowd in
Somewhere along the way the it became so bad to talk about anything
except the pure wikipedian sitting on top of his pillar with a book
and a computer, writing articles in solitude, that we completely
missed the opportunities to get a much larger momentum.
The Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia has over a half a million articles.
About 10 % lack sources. Nearly all of them has spelling errors. It is
nothing unusual about this.
Could we use bounties to get some momentum?
John Erling Blad
In order to keep the community informed of threats against Wikimedia
projects and users, the Wikimedia Security team has some information to
Malware installed via pirated contented downloaded from sites such as the
Pirate Bay can cause web browsers compromised by the malware to create a
fake donation banner for Wikipedia users. While the actual malware is not
installed or distributed via Wikipedia, unaware visitors may be confused or
tricked by it's activities.
The malware seeks to trick visitors to Wikipedia by looking like a
legitimate Wikipedia banner asking for donations. Once the user clicks on
the banner, they are then taken to a portal that leads them to transfer
money to a fraudulent bitcoin account that is not controlled by the
The current version of this malware is only infecting Microsoft Windows
users at the time of this notification. To date, the number of people
affected is small. The fraudulent accounts have taken approximately $700
from infected users. However, we strongly encourage all users to use and
update their antivirus software.
Additional details and a screenshot of the fake donation banner on can be
found at Bleepingcomputer.com. 
It appears that Affiliate agreements with the Wikimedia Foundation are
not published on-wiki in a consistent way.
Though the standard templates are available, these have varied over
time, so at a minimum to understand which Chapter/Thorg/User Group has
currently agreed which legally binding statement, there should be an
indication or link to the specific version. The templates have to be
customized, and this may include some legally meaningful changes, not
just bureaucratic ones.
As an example, the table of 108 User Groups, simply gives the names of
the groups. It would be extremely difficult, perhaps impossible, to
work out exactly when each signed up to the UG agreement, or confirm
which User Groups legally signed up to the post May 2015 version that
makes compliance with the Code of Conduct mandatory. As a second
example, tracking down the UK Chapter agreement, a customized one
was agreed by the WMF and WMUK, but when I followed the 'official'
links, the version I was directed to was a 2009 draft version on the
UK Chapter wiki (no copy on Meta), which appears unlikely to be the
current chapters agreement due to a fairly obvious drafting error.
Could the Affiliates Committee look into this as a matter of its
necessary and tracked administration of a correct public record,
rather than relying on it happening ad hoc?