Hoi,
Now that we apparently all agree that this is a diversity issue. An issue
where the current practice is detrimental to our mission, what are we going
to do about it? Just accepting it means that we do not take our mission
seriously.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 25 June 2017 at 08:45, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonfors(a)gmail.com> wrote:
This is not surprising, when the Foundation and all
the external
consultants advising it on this exercise are all US-based.
On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 8:21 PM, Leinonen Teemu <teemu.leinonen(a)aalto.fi>
wrote:
Hej,
Gerard made some very important points. My observation (not an opinion
:-)
is also that the initiatives in, and with a focus
on, global south are
under served. They are more difficult to do, because of various reasons,
but this should not be a reason not to do them. It is also true that
large
majority of research on Wikipedia/Wikimedia is
about the en-Wikipedia. If
WMF could do something to promote research looking beyond it would be
great.
-Teemu
Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
kirjoitti 24.6.2017 kello
13.00:
Hoi,
The one serious flaw of the current practice is that English Wikipedia
receives more attention than it deserves based on its merits[1]. This
bias
can be found in any and all areas. There is for
instance a huge
educational
> effort going on for English and there is no strategy known, developed,
> tried to use education to grow a Wikipedia from nothing to 100.000
> articles.. the number considered to be necessary by some to have a
viable
Wikipedia. When you consider research it is English Wikipedia because
otherwise it will not get published [2].
A less serious flaw is that the WMF is an indifferent custodian of
projects
> other than Wikipedia. When it provides no service to Wikipedia like
> Wikisource, its intrinsic value is not realised to the potential
readers
that are
made available. There is no staff dedicated to these projects
and
> there is no research into its value.
>
> The angst for the community means that there is hardly any
collaboration
> between the different Wikipedias. Mostly the
"solutions" of English
> Wikipedia are imposed. There are a few well trodden paths that
habitually
> get attention. When it comes to diversity,
the gender gap is well
served
> but the global south is not. A lot of weight
is given to a data driven
> approach but there is hardly enough data relevant to the global south
in
English
Wikipedia to make such an approach viable.
Yes, I have tried to get some attention for these issues in the process
so
far but <grin> as bringer of the bad news I
am happy that it is the
message
> and not the messenger who is killed </grin>.
>
> Please tell me I am wrong and proof it by using more than opinions.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
>
> [1] less than 30% of the world populace and less than 50% of the WMF
> traffic.
> [2] comment by a professor whose university does a lot of studies on
> Wikipedia..
>
>> On 24 June 2017 at 12:33, Yaroslav Blanter <ymbalt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Strainu <strainu10(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>> 2017-06-23 23:48 GMT+03:00 Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com>om>:
>>> Could you elaborate on the benefits of this timetable change for
people
>> who
>>> are not involved with affiliates?
>>
>>
>>
>> Starting from this assumption, and considering the fact that even the
>> most active wikimedians (not involved in a chapter) have real life
>> commitments that do not allow them to follow this process carefully,
>> it is obvious that the main responsibility of the team that
>> coordinates the process should have been outreach. In my particular
>> geographic area, Track B contributors were engaged with only 2 weeks
>> prior to the end of the last cycle, which is hardly enough time to
>> read, understand, and think about the vast quantity of material
>> available in the strategy process.
>>
>>
>> I am an active Wikimedia not involved in a Chapter. In Round 1, I was
> pretty active, and in the Russian Wikivoyage we collected quite some
> feedback and translated it into English. It was essentially ignored.
None
> of us participated in Round 2 since we
thought it is a waste of time.
Round
>> 2 was organized in the same way as Round 1 (many discussions opened i
n
>> different places, meaning there is no
possibility to really discuss
>> anything, merely to leave one's opinion). I have corresponding pages
on
3
> projects on my watchlists (with is 15 pages,
and this is a lot), but I
have
> not seen in these discussions anything new
not said before in Round 1.
May
>> be smth useful would come out from other tracks, but I am not really
>> looking forward to Track B Round 3 either. I believe it is completely
>> failed, and individual contributors did not have a chance to form a
>> considated opinion. The message for me is essentially: If you want to
be
>> heard, find a chapter or a thematic
organization first. I hope the
next
>> process will be organized differently in
10 years from now.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Yaroslav
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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>