Even if you don't want mediawiki for various reasons, you can set it up in
Wikimedia Cloud. We already hosted Discourse there for years.
Even if you can't host in WMCS for other reasons, you still can have
internationalized discussions in mediawiki. The Desktop improvements team
does this in
)
and while not as great as auto-translate, it works.
Language barrier is a problem but so is privacy, there is a reason we host
everything onsite. For example, I don't know the details of how it uses
Google Translate but it is possible we end up sending some data to Google
that are either not anonymized or can be de-anonymized easily. Not to
mention the cloud provider hosting the website having access to everything
and so on. And not to mention auto-translate is not perfect and can cause
all sorts of problems in communication.
Best
On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 12:21 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
galder158(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
Since 2018 (!!) there's an Extension that allows
translation using the
Google Translate API (the same Discourse is using).
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Google_Translator
You can test it here, for example:
https://karaoke.kjams.com/wiki/System_Requirements
It took me literally 5 minutes to figure out that this exists. So, the one
and only feature where Discourse may be better positioned than Meta to
discuss about Wikimedia, can also be done perfectly with this extension.
Thanks
Galder
------------------------------
*From:* Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <galder158(a)hotmail.com>
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 1, 2022 12:01 PM
*To:* Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
*Subject:* [Wikimedia-l] Re: Join the new Movement Strategy Forum
community review
Let's see the "features" Discourse have and MediaWiki don't:
- Anyone can join with their Wikimedia account. No registration is
required.
- This is a feature we already have.
- Multilingual conversations are possible thanks to automatic
translation in more than 100 languages.
- How are they doing that? Discourse is open source, isn't it? Could
this feature be experimentally included at Meta? Are they using the Google
Translate API?
-
- Newcomers are welcomed with an interactive tutorial and badges for
achievements.
- This can be done in Meta. Even developing a system of easy tutorials
and gamification would be a great add-on for most wikis. So, if this is
something really important, we SHOULD be doing for ourselves, and not
letting MediaWiki abandonware.
-
- Notifications can be adjusted to follow or mute topics, categories,
and tags.
- This can be done with Flow.
- Conversations can use easy text formatting, expanded links, images,
and emojis.
- We can do this on wiki. Even the emojis thing.
- Complex conversations can be summarized by their participants, also
split or merged.
- We can do this on wiki. We have been doing this for ages.
- Posts can be flagged anonymously for moderation. Community
moderators ensure that the Universal Code of Conduct is observed.
- We can do this on wiki. Also, the Community moderators ensuring that
the UCoC is observed should be working on how to do that on... check
notes... Meta.
- All features are available on mobile and desktop browsers.
- Also on wiki. If something is missing on mobile, then, we should
invest all the necessary to get it. Not doing that only makes our platform
more obsolete.
-
- Congratulate newcomers each time they publish a post.
- This is a feature already available at Wiki. We can also
congratulate by hand if wanted.
Is Discourse better? I don't know. Abandoning our own software because we
have found that others are doing things better? A total error.
I have said this before, but we have plenty of money. We are swimming in a
giant money pool. Our software is obsolete, and every move we make away of
it, makes it even more obsolete, despite having the money to solve it.
Thanks
Galder
------------------------------
*From:* Quim Gil <qgil(a)wikimedia.org>
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 1, 2022 11:09 AM
*To:* Mike Peel <email(a)mikepeel.net>
*Cc:* Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
*Subject:* [Wikimedia-l] Re: Join the new Movement Strategy Forum
community review
Hi again,
The proposal for a new forum comes with a problem statement
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Forum/Proposal#Why_a_Movement_Strategy_Forum>,
a list of main features aimed to address this problem, and a set of
questions to help everyone find points of tangible discussion and hopefully
agreement.
Today, "use a wiki" or "we have Meta" alone doesn't solve the
problem. The
discrimination suffered by volunteers not fluent in English is real. The
intimidation and alienation felt by many volunteers and many groups that
are underrepresented in our movement or marginalized in our societies is
real. And simply, the difficulty to have multiple simultaneous complex
discussions in a structured and enjoyable way is very real.
We are not claiming that this forum can solve all these problems in one
strike. However, we firmly believe that this forum presents a better
alternative here and now for everyone interested in the Movement Strategy
implementation. Clearly a better alternative for those who are in practice
excluded or gone from traditional on-wiki conversations. But also to
everyone else (expert wiki editors included) who wants to get things done
in a context where diversity, equity, inclusion, efficient use of time, and
fun are naturally expected.
Many people have responded to this problem with their feet. Wikimedia
cross-project connections and conversations have been trending towards
"social media" platforms for years. Today they are all scattered and still
growing. And well, many years before social media, mailing lists like this
one were created "off-wiki" for a reason.
This forum proposes the creation of a platform fully functional today, to
host the conversations and collaboration needed to implement the Movement
Strategy. We can offer a platform as easy to use as the popular tools
people are using daily to connect and discuss. We can offer features none
of these commercial platforms offer today like automatic translation,
better organization of complex conversations, better search and memory, and
a much better alignment with the Wikimedia values. All this is available
today, one Wikimedia login click away. For you to review.
Keeping Meta updated including possibilities for participation is
perfectly possible. One of the questions
<https://forum.movement-strategy.org/t/are-there-other-channels-that-you-would-prefer-to-use-in-addition-to-or-instead-of-this-forum-for-movement-strategy-updates-and-feedback-why/54>
of the community review asks about how the support of other channels would
work in practice. If you appreciate Meta-Wiki as much as, say, Wikimedia
volunteers who don't speak English, please contribute your ideas to find
the best solutions.
I hope this expresses our general motivation to get out of everyone's
comfort zone (ours included) and propose this forum.
Florence asks:
Will there be any notion of Single Login in the
future (when/if it
starts being hosted by WMF) ?
Wikimedia login is in effect already now, and it's the only way to log in
to the forum. After logging in the first time, the browser keeps the
session for a period of time (that can be configured by the admins) so that
people don't have to log in again every day.
On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 12:36 AM Mike Peel <email(a)mikepeel.net> wrote:
See this pinned topic:
User privacy considerations in this forum
https://forum.movement-strategy.org/t/user-privacy-considerations-in-this-f…
<
https://forum.movement-strategy.org/t/user-privacy-considerations-in-this-f…
So this does not follow the WMF's privacy policy at:
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy
You didn't answer this.
Sorry, I had responded with a link. This is what the link says:
We are still working on the Privacy Policy and
the Terms of Use of the
Movement Strategy Forum.
They will be completed during the community
review. In the meantime, we
provide here information
about privacy for users of this platform.
Every single link under "Community review questions" goes to your new
website.
We are asking volunteers to review a proposed new forum. We have a forum
that people can use to inform their reviews. Sending people to the forum
being reviewed is only logical.
All wiki pages have a talk page, and the proposal's talk page also
welcomes people to contribute their feedback there too, providing a
structure to comment on the same questions.
--
Quim Gil (he/him)
Director of Movement Strategy & Governance @ Wikimedia Foundation
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Qgil-WMF
_______________________________________________
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