My post was sharded to just the wikidata list, copying the others :)
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 12:59 PM Patricio Lorente <
patricio.lorente(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you, SJ. I fully agree with your recommendations.
>
> El jue, 13 ene 2022 a las 14:55, Samuel Klein (<meta.sj(a)gmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
>> Kay, bless your heart.
>> Galder, Gereon, Xavi: I would be *particularly* interested in research
>> in other languages, since it's harder for me to run across that in my
>> regular feeds. (that may also be true for some of the reviewers :) but
>> they're also lang and time limited)
>>
>> Recommendation that might conceivably be implemented for this cycle:
>> -- Update "can submit" to "encouraged to submit" in any languages
>> -- If in a language other than {core langs} <-- which may be only
>> English this year, ask submitters to recommend a reviewer who can share a
>> review of the work in English
>> -- To Andy's point, confirm the license of the research is one that is
>> open (so that it can be independently translated)
>> -- Have a two stage award: the first stage, based on a quick review for
>> significance and interest, identifies finalists which are, if not already
>> in one of the {core langs}, translated into one of them. (at least in
>> abstract + summary; we facilitate this translation by supporting /
>> sponsoring community translation; it's a universal benefit for researchers
>> around the world)
>> -- Second stage is as currently imagined: review of finalist papers in
>> {core langs}.
>>
>> <3. SJ
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 10:27 PM KAY WOODING via Wikidata <
>> wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I SPEAK ENGLISH THABKS I APPRECIATE IT JESUS LOVES YIU I LOVE YOU GOD
>>> BLESS YOU HAVE A BLESSED DAY
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, January 12, 2022, 09:55:21 PM EST, Leila Zia <
>>> lzia(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> We gave the option of accepting nominations in more languages some
>>> more thought. I want to be very honest: I don't have a good solution
>>> to accommodate more languages in this cycle. We considered the option
>>> of allowing/encouraging nominations in other languages, and not doing
>>> the broader search we do in English in those languages. However, even
>>> this option is not really guaranteed to work because we consider
>>> "scholarly publications" which can be papers of a few pages or books
>>> that can be hundreds of pages. We cannot guarantee that we can
>>> translate the scholarly publication (independent of its length)
>>> in-time for the review.
>>>
>>> Given the above, my suggestion to you is that if you know of a
>>> scholarly publication that is in another language than English and you
>>> think we should consider it, still nominate it. We will consider it,
>>> even if I can't guarantee that we review it.
>>>
>>> I'm sorry that I am not able to offer a better solution for this
>>> cycle. We will continue thinking about this point for the future
>>> cycles.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Leila
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:46 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
>>> <galder158(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Leila,
>>> > I have read it, that's why I'm confused.
>>> > ________________________________
>>> > From: Leila Zia <lzia(a)wikimedia.org>
>>> > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 9:40 PM
>>> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
>>> > Cc: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org <
>>> wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>; Discussion list for the Wikidata
>>> project. <wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
>>> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia
>>> Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
>>> >
>>> > Hi Galder,
>>> >
>>> > Please see below.
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:26 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
>>> > <galder158(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks, Leila, for answering the question raised.
>>> >
>>> > Anytime.
>>> >
>>> > > I'm a bit confused with this, I supposed that the Wikimedia
>>> Foundation Research Award was an initiative from the Research team of the
>>> WMF (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research), but I read in
>>> your answer that "WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research
>>> published in English". I understand that the main working language of the
>>> WMF is English, as this mailing list is, but I would assume that an Award
>>> promoted by the WMF should be multilingual.
>>> >
>>> > Sorry. Let me clarify. What I was referring to when I used
>>> > WikiResearch in my email was the WikiResearch twitter account:
>>> > https://twitter.com/WikiResearch . I did not intend to refer to the
>>> > WMF Research team or Wikimedia Research community. And to repeat: this
>>> > is one source we use to find research done on the Wikimedia projects.
>>> > There are other sources as I mentioned in my response.
>>> >
>>> > > Me, as a Basque Wikimedians User Group member, I promote Wikimedia
>>> activities in Basque language, because that is our goal. But the WMF is not
>>> the English Wikimedians User Group, as far as I understand. Our designated
>>> lingua franca may be English, but the WMF can't exclude research that is
>>> not made in this language from an Award. I would understand if the
>>> (non-existing) English Wikimedians User Group created the "EWUG Research in
>>> English Award of the Year", but is not the case.
>>> >
>>> > I understand and acknowledge your point about inclusion. I hope some
>>> > of the points I shared about our existing process in my other email
>>> > can help you find possible solutions we can consider doing. :) On my
>>> > end: I have a todo to come back to you all.
>>> >
>>> > Best,
>>> > Leila
>>> >
>>> > > Cheers,
>>> > >
>>> > > Galder
>>> > >
>>> > > ________________________________
>>> > > From: Leila Zia <lzia(a)wikimedia.org>
>>> > > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:04 PM
>>> > > To: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org <
>>> wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
>>> > > Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>;
>>> Discussion list for the Wikidata project. <wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
>>> > > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia
>>> Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
>>> > >
>>> > > Hi all, Thank you for your feedback. I take your comments as a sign
>>> of
>>> > > genuine care and I'm happy to engage and learn with you how we can do
>>> > > better. (Note: I'm responding to all lists, though some of the
>>> > > feedback has been sent only to wikimedia-l.)
>>> > >
>>> > > * Galder, Gereon, Xavier, Gnangarra, and Andy: thank you for your
>>> feedback.
>>> > >
>>> > > * Andy, I'll respond to your comment first. We do not require the
>>> work
>>> > > to be published under a free license for us to consider it for the
>>> > > award. However, if the work is shortlisted, we reach out to the
>>> > > authors, tell them that it's shortlisted, and it can be considered
>>> for
>>> > > the award if the work is at least made publicly available. At that
>>> > > point, we also encourage the authors to publish under a free license
>>> > > and share with them a few ways they may be able to (even if the work
>>> > > is published somewhere already with restrictions). The issue of
>>> > > licenses is on top of our mind and we actively look for ways to push
>>> > > for more Wikimedia research work to be published under free licenses.
>>> > >
>>> > > * I am going to share with you some of my thoughts, and a possible
>>> > > improvement we can make in the process.
>>> > >
>>> > > ** Let's try to keep things simple to be able to improve things
>>> > > together. This is not a case of "WMF did x". The idea of the award
>>> was
>>> > > created in the Research team, and both last year and this year, we've
>>> > > been grateful to have the support of researchers outside of WMF for
>>> > > it. (Aaron Shaw (Northwestern University), and Benjamin Mako Hill (U.
>>> > > of Washington)). I take full responsibility for the execution of the
>>> > > award and I can take your feedback and see where we can improve the
>>> > > process. :)
>>> > >
>>> > > ** In order to be able to improve the process, I should share more
>>> > > details about how we do the search for the publications first. We
>>> have
>>> > > multiple sources for searching for research published in a given
>>> year:
>>> > > 1. The nomination process we shared on this thread.
>>> > > 2. Research publications shared in WikiResearch twitter account.
>>> > > 3. External research search engines and repositories for different
>>> > > fields: we use scholar.google.com, dblp.org and more.
>>> > >
>>> > > To give you a sense of the distribution of scholarly publications we
>>> > > identified last year from each of the above sources: 11 nominations
>>> > > and 170+ research publications through the twitter account and
>>> > > external searches. The award chairs (2 people; this year it is going
>>> > > to be Mako and I) reviewed all identified publications. We discussed
>>> > > every publication at varying depth depending on the result of our
>>> > > initial reviews.
>>> > >
>>> > > ** Knowing the process, there are at least a few ways I think the
>>> > > process must be improved. I'm sure now that you see more you can
>>> > > critique even more. :) I proactively share with you some of them
>>> here:
>>> > > ::* I need to have an easychair account to nominate. That can/must
>>> > > change (but to what? we want these nominations to be private, and we
>>> > > need a way to be able to process them efficiently because we're only
>>> 2
>>> > > people. We are considering openreview.net for the future years
>>> because
>>> > > they're open source; but they still have other limitations. For this
>>> > > year, easychair it is.).
>>> > > ::* We need more people on the committee: both for workload sharing,
>>> > > and also including more perspectives. (This is /a lot/ to ask of
>>> > > researchers. I'm grateful that Mako and Aaron have supported us in
>>> the
>>> > > past.)
>>> > > ::* We need other non-English sources to source community research.
>>> > > (WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in
>>> > > English.)
>>> > > ::* The shared language of reviewers is assumed to be English. If we
>>> > > are going to at scale consider other languages, then we need a way
>>> > > that this group of people can converse on academic topics with one
>>> > > another without having to share a language.
>>> > >
>>> > > ** I also understand the reality of the resources available to me and
>>> > > our team. I understand the importance of working on multiple fronts
>>> > > with regards to the research community (Wikimedia Research Funds,
>>> Wiki
>>> > > Workshop, global research competitions, research showcases, monthly
>>> > > office hours, talks and presentations, formal collaborations, and
>>> > > more). I believe in the importance of motivation (and we have seen a
>>> > > very good momentum around the award idea from last year's run). We
>>> > > need to do many things, with very limited resources; Our values and
>>> > > ideals are important and we have to attempt to hold them all as we
>>> > > make decisions. In practice, sometimes we can't meet all the
>>> ambitions
>>> > > we have. We need to make trade-offs. What is important is to be
>>> aware,
>>> > > to listen, to try to improve, and to be honest.
>>> > >
>>> > > I will leave you with the above and I commit to talk with Mako to
>>> > > consider ways to open up the process for more languages to be
>>> included
>>> > > (in 2021 or in 2022+; I can't promise changes for the 2021 process.).
>>> > > One of us will write back here with what we decide to do.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks,
>>> > > Leila
>>> > >
>>> > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:42 AM Andy Mabbett <
>>> andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 at 19:48, Leila Zia <lzia(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > =Eligibility criteria=
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > * The publication must be available in English.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I echo others' concerns about this.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I'm equally concerned that, while WMF regard being in English as
>>> > > > essential for one of their awards, they do not regard the use of an
>>> > > > open licence as a requirement.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > --
>>> > > > Andy Mabbett
>>> > > > @pigsonthewing
>>> > > > https://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>>> > > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > > Wiki-research-l mailing list --
>>> wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> > > > To unsubscribe send an email to
>>> wiki-research-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org,
>>> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> > > Public archives at
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
>>> > > To unsubscribe send an email to
>>> wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org,
>>> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> > > Public archives at
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
>>> > > To unsubscribe send an email to
>>> wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org,
>>> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> > Public archives at
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
>>> > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org,
>>> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> > Public archives at
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
>>> > To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikidata mailing list -- wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikidata mailing list -- wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikidata mailing list -- wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>
>
>
> --
> Patricio Lorente
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list -- wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
--
Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
[Apologies for cross-posting.]
Hi all,
We invite you to nominate one or more scholarly research publications
to be considered for the Wikimedia Foundation Research Award of the
Year. Learn more below.
=Purpose of the award=
Recognize recent research on or about the Wikimedia projects or recent
research that is of importance to the Wikimedia projects. Recognize
the researchers behind the research.
You can learn more about 2021's winners at
https://research.wikimedia.org/awards.html .
=Eligibility criteria=
Your nomination must meet the following criteria:
* The research must be on, about, using data from, and/or of
importance to Wikipedia, Wikidata, Wikisource, Wikimedia Commons or
other Wikimedia projects.
* The publication must be available in English.
* The research must have been published between January 1, 2021 and
December 31, 2021.
=Nomination process=
Submit your nominations by 2022-02-07 through
https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=wmfray2021 . We will ask you
to provide the following information in your nomination:
* Title of the manuscript
* A copy of the manuscript you are nominating
* A summary of the research and a clear justification for why the work
merits the award (in 350 words or fewer in English).
Note that self-nominations and nominations of others' work are both welcome.
==Winner(s)==
The winner(s) will be announced in a ceremony as part of Wiki Workshop
2022: https://wikiworkshop.org/2022/ .
If you have any questions, please contact us at
wmf-ray-2021(a)easychair.org or here.
Best,
Benjamin Mako Hill (University of Washington)
Leila Zia (Wikimedia Foundation)
Hello fellow Wikimedians, librarians, and bibliophiles,
I hope you are doing alright and staying healthy in this new year. The
January round of the 2022 1Lib1Ref <https://1lib1ref.org/> starts on the
21st birthday of Wikipedia,15th January, and will run until 5th February.
I am thrilled to share that 2 more languages from the CEE region have been
added to the list of languages supported by the CitationHunt tool over the
holidays, which makes it a total of 9 new languages added for the upcoming
round of the campaign. Huge thanks for the volunteer efforts of Guilherme
Gonçalves <https://github.com/eggpi> and Gorana Gomirac
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gorana_Gomirac_(VMRS)>.
As always, participation is pretty simple. All you need to do is add more
references to Wikipedia articles, type #1lib1ref in the Edit Summary. In
case you are a newbie and would like to learn how to add references to
Wikipedia articles, Open Foundation West Africa <https://ofwafrica.org/> is
hosting an online Citation Masterclass on 14th January at 4 PM UTC. Sign up
here <https://t.co/ViqhZiJxc7>.
If you are already familiar with editing Wikipedia and would like to
experiment a bit, we are piloting a couple of contribution methods for
advanced contributors
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Library/1Lib1Ref/Participate#…>
in the January 2022 round.
*If you are an organizer, remember to add your local events to the campaign
dashboard
<https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/campaigns/1lib1ref_january_2022/overv…>,
so we can learn and track activities happening across the world.*
Check the blogpost for more information about the campaign :
https://diff.wikimedia.org/2021/12/16/1lib1ref-2022
See you all in a couple of days!
Regards
Satdeep
--
Satdeep Gill (pronouns - he, him)
Program Officer
GLAM and Culture
Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
(Speaking in my volunteer capacity)
I doubt there is any malicious intent by WMF. I personally think the
underlying problem is time. Let me explain.
Fixing a big issue in software takes time (I wrote a long essay about it in
this thread) so it makes sense WMF annual planning to focus on issues
before they get to a level that hinders community's work. The problem is
that an issue doesn't get enough attention if it's not severe enough to
affect users so the cycle of frustration continues. For example, I sent an
email in February 2021, at the start of annual planning, to one of the
directors at product outlining all of the issues of multimedia stack.
Because at that point, it wasn't this bad, it didn't make it to FY21-22
plans. Now I feel like a cassandra. We have similar issues in lots of other
places that will lead to frustration. Load balancers (pybal), dumps, beta
cluster, flagged revs, patrolling tools, etc. etc.
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 8:21 AM bawolff <bawolff+wn(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Honestly, I find the "not in the annual plan" thing more damning than the
> actual issue at hand.
>
> The core competency of WMF is supposed to be keeping the site running. WMF
> does a lot of things, some of them very useful, others less so, but at its
> core its mission is to keep the site going. Everything else should be
> secondary to that.
>
> It should be obvious that running a 300 TB+ media store servicing 70
> billion requests a month requires occasional investment and maintenance
>
> And yet, this was not only not in this year's annual plan, it has been
> ignored in the annual plan for many many years. We didn't get to this state
> by just 1 year of neglect.
>
> Which raises the question - If wmf is not in the business of keeping the
> Wikimedia sites going, what is it in the business of?
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 6:01 AM Kunal Mehta <legoktm(a)debian.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 1/1/22 12:10, Asaf Bartov wrote:
>> > It seems to me there are *very few* people who could change status quo,
>> > not much more than a handful: the Foundation's executive leadership (in
>> > its annual planning work, coming up this first quarter of 2022), and
>> the
>> > Board of Trustees.
>>
>> If the goal is to get paid WMF staff to fix the issues, then you're
>> correct. However, I do not believe that as a solution is healthy
>> long-term. The WMF isn't perfect and I don't think it's desirable to
>> have a huge WMF that tries to do everything and has a monopoly on
>> technical prioritization.
>>
>> The technical stack must be co-owned by volunteers and paid staff from
>> different orgs at all levels. It's significantly more straightforward
>> now for trusted volunteers to get NDA/deployment access than it used to
>> be, there are dedicated training sessions, etc.
>>
>> Given that the multimedia stack is neglected and the WMF has given no
>> indication it intends to work on/fix the problem, we should be
>> recruiting people outside the WMF's paid staff who are interested in
>> working on this and give them the necessary access/mentorship to get it
>> done. Given the amount of work on e.g. T40010[1] to develop an
>> alternative SVG renderer, I'm sure those people exist.
>>
>> Take moving Thumbor to Buster[2] for example. That requires
>> forward-porting some Debian packages written Python, and then testing in
>> WMCS that there's no horrible regressions in newer imagemagick, librsvg,
>> etc. I'm always happy to mentor people w/r to Debian packaging (and have
>> done so in the past), and there are a decent amount of people in our
>> community who know Python, and likely others from the Commons community
>> who would be willing to help with testing and dealing with whatever
>> fallout.
>>
>> So I think the status quo can be changed by just about anyone who is
>> motivated to do so, not by trying to convince the WMF to change its
>> prioritization, but just by doing the work. We should be empowering
>> those people rather than continuing to further entrench a WMF technical
>> monopoly.
>>
>> [1] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T40010
>> [2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T216815
>>
>> -- Legoktm
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikitech-l mailing list -- wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikitech-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/wikitech-l.lists.wikimedia.org/
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list -- wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikitech-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/wikitech-l.lists.wikimedia.org/
--
Amir (he/him)
*You can find this message translated into additional languages on
Meta-wiki.
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Boa…>*
*More languages
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Boa…>
• Please
help translate to your language
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Translate&group=page-W…>*
Hi everyone,
The Call for Feedback: Board of Trustees elections is now open and will
close on 7 February 2022.
With this Call for Feedback, the Movement Strategy and Governance team is
taking a different approach. This approach incorporates community feedback
from 2021. Instead of leading with proposals, the Call is framed around key
questions from the Board of Trustees. The key questions came from the
feedback about the 2021 Board of Trustees election. The intention is to
inspire collective conversation and collaborative proposal development
about these key questions.
There are two confirmed questions that will be asked during this Call for
Feedback:
1. What is the best way to ensure more diverse representation among
elected candidates? *The Board of Trustees noted the importance of
selecting candidates who represent the full diversity of the Wikimedia
movement. The current processes have favored volunteers from North America
and Europe.*
2. What are the expectations for the candidates during the election? *Board
candidates have traditionally completed applications and answered community
questions. How can an election provide appropriate insight into candidates
while also appreciating candidates’ status as volunteers?*
There is one additional question that may be presented during the Call
about selection processes. This question is still under discussion, but the
Board wanted to give insight into the confirmed questions as soon as
possible. Hopefully if an additional question is going to be asked, it will
be ready during the first week of the Call for Feedback.
Join the conversation.
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Boa…>
Best,
Movement Strategy and Governance
--
Jackie Koerner (she/her) Communication Specialist, Movement Strategy and
Governance Location: Midwestern US (UTC-6)
Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>