Hi Maor/Kirill/AffCom,
Which organisations are we talking about here? From the crosses on the reports page on
Meta, it looks like it is:
- Wikimedia Chile
- Wikimedia Hong Kong
- Wikimedia India
- Wikimedia Macedonia
- Wikimedia Macau
- Wikimedia Mexico
- Wikimedia Philippines
- Wikimedia Uruguay
- New England Wikimedians
- PhilWiki Community
- Wikimedia Community User Group Pakistan
- Wikimedia Digitization User Group
- Wikimedians of Iceland User Group
- Wikimedians of Nepal
- Wikimedians of Uzbekistan Community
Is it all of those or a subset of them? Some of these seem to be active and/or have
representatives going to the Wikimedia Conference.
Thanks,
Mike
On 5 Feb 2017, at 10:13, Kirill Lokshin
<kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Nathan,
To expand a bit on Maor's reply: the Affiliations Committee and the
Wikimedia Foundation continue to view affiliate de-recognition as a last
resort for cases where an affiliate is not only in violation of affiliate
requirements or agreements with the WMF, but is also unwilling or unable to
fix the problem when asked to do so.
The underlying issue that causes an affiliate to be "non-compliant" will
usually be publicly visible (such as a lack of required reporting, for
example). The affiliate's inability or unwillingness to address it will
usually not be, as it's reflected in the affiliate's communications with
AffCom and the WMF (or lack thereof).
Regards,
Kirill Lokshin
Vice-Chair, Affiliations Committee
On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 6:33 AM Nathan <nawrich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi,
I fail to see who you are targeting and on what basis. My impression is
that it only has to do with money.. I understand this. For other parts
like
the language committee there are no reports
except for the activity on
its
mailing list. I fail to see why it has to report
to anyone. It is not the
task the committee seeks and it does its activity on behalf of the
Wikimedia board.
Thanks,
GerardM
You misread - evidently both the original message and my reply. I answer
your question in my prior post, and hopefully subsequent posts by others
have cleared up any other confusion.
Maor - thank you for your explanation. Would it be fair to say that the
criteria for considering denying renewal are informal, and that some
factors (including communication with AffCom) may not be publicly available
for review?
_______________________________________________
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>