Wil Sinclair wrote:
I'm not against anyone participating in any site that criticizes or mocks Wikipedia or the WMF. But I do get the sense that Wil is jumping into his wife's new territory with both feet, and not necessarily taking the ginger approach to the most controversial issues that have confronted the projects.
Hi Nathan, like I said, I am not Lila, and I am in no way associated with the WMF. Also, Lila is not technically my wife. :) I honestly don't see what my personal relationships have to do with these issues.
Hi.
From the interactions I've observed, you (Wil) are too smart to be doing
what you're doing, which makes some of your behavior all the more worrying.
You're willfully ignoring the consequences (real and potential) of your actions. I'm worried about what it says when you have 18 posts to wikimedia-l this month and your partner has one. I'm not even sure she's subscribed to this mailing list, a big official forum, much less registered and actively posting in forums such as Wikipediocracy. But you are.
Even if you had no connection to Lila, what would you or anyone else around here think about a contributor who suddenly starts wanting to get involved and is immediately posting to Wikipediocracy and poking around child protection issues (one of the most sensitive issues in the community)? People are obviously going to be wary of someone like this.
Wikimedia is about creating free educational content. I look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Wllm and I see you have fewer than 50 edits to articles, and the last two are (minor) edits to your partner's article. I'm pretty worried about what that says.
I'm not sure you're someone who wants to be involved in Wikimedia. Not yet, anyway. There's a concern that you're simply someone whose partner just got a job as the head of the Wikimedia Foundation and you want to dig into the drama and other juicy parts. There's a concern that you're not here to contribute Wiktionary entries or Wikisource transcriptions or Wikipedia articles or other free educational content. Or perhaps put another way, you have 110 posts to Wikipediocracy and you've been registered there since May 2014. Meanwhile you have 79 total edits to the English Wikipedia and you've been registered there since July 2006. This is absolutely not a means of wiki-dick measuring or editcountitis, I'm just looking at what you've been saying versus what you've been doing and how it might affect both perceptions and the future reality.
These issues are swirling around in my head. Wikimedia is unusual, I realize, but nowadays every time I hear about someone's partner getting (overly) involved in that someone's work, I can't help but think of both GitHub and its recent issues (real-life) and the relationship on "House of Cards" (fiction). Real life and popular culture have their influence on us, of course. :-)
Both of these (GitHub + "House of Cards") are obviously very extreme examples, but given your (Wil) recent hyper-involvement, the juxtaposition of it with your partner's lack of involvement, your on-wiki track record (few substantive edits or involvement... and you've been editing your partner's article?), and your off-wiki track record (Wikipediocracy and here), I can't help but wonder what your role is here. I'm not sure the Wikimedia Foundation has ever had or ever should have a consort.
Are you acting as a surrogate for your partner in forums that she doesn't have time or inclination to participate in herself? Is this a good cop/bad cop type of situation? I'm still not sure what to think. I imagine there members of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees that also still aren't sure what to think. I hope the Board is paying close attention.
You seem to be fairly self-aware and proactive about combating the notion that you have any influence over the Wikimedia Foundation, while simultaneously wishing ("I'm a father and I want my kid...") to someday make big changes to Wikimedia and its policies. It's a mixed bag around here. It's very difficult to tell if you'll be a blessing or a curse.
I've read your replies and I understand what you're saying (succinctly summarized by you as ",Wil!=Lila&&Wil!=WMF"), but what you're saying and what your actions are saying seem to be in contrast. If you want to get involved with Wikimedia, by all means, that would be great. But getting involved means contributing to free educational content and the surrounding movement. All you have to do is be bold and just click edit, as they say. Until then, there will be a sizable contingency watching and waiting for what will come of the decision to appoint your partner as Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation and what her role and yours mean to the future of Wikimedia.
MZMcBride