Hi all,
Here is a question that came up during today's US GLAM consortium meeting: what's the current status of the 'movement partners' affiliation? http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_models/Movement_Partner...
Is recognition of movement partners something that AffComm will be taking on in future, or will it rest with WMF/Chapters for now? Not sure what the latest discussions have been.
thanks! Phoebe
On 4/29/13 1:03 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
Hi all,
Here is a question that came up during today's US GLAM consortium meeting: what's the current status of the 'movement partners' affiliation? http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_models/Movement_Partner...
Is recognition of movement partners something that AffComm will be taking on in future, or will it rest with WMF/Chapters for now? Not sure what the latest discussions have been.
thanks! Phoebe
That's a great question, and one the Open Knowledge Foundation was scratching its head about a few months back! I'd love to see this open up again, especially for OpenGLAM and GLAM-Wiki programs and initiatives. -Sarah
Hello,
I am not quite sure what will be the future of the "Movement partners". I can imagine that a museum (for example) can be a partner in an initiative set up by the WMF, a chapter or a thorg. WMNL and Teylers Museum together started the "Teylers Challenge", a edit competition. The museum could use the logo on its site, as a part of the joint initiative. When such an initiative is over, its over, so simple is it. But maybe I did not fully understand the concept of the Movement partners. Kind regards Ziko
----------------------------------------------------------- Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter http://wikimedia.nl
Wikimedia Nederland Postbus 167 3500 AD Utrecht -----------------------------------------------------------
2013/4/29 Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.com
On 4/29/13 1:03 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
Hi all,
Here is a question that came up during today's US GLAM consortium meeting: what's the current status of the 'movement partners' affiliation? http://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_** models/Movement_Partnershttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_models/Movement_Partners
Is recognition of movement partners something that AffComm will be taking on in future, or will it rest with WMF/Chapters for now? Not sure what the latest discussions have been.
thanks! Phoebe
That's a great question, and one the Open Knowledge Foundation was scratching its head about a few months back! I'd love to see this open up again, especially for OpenGLAM and GLAM-Wiki programs and initiatives. -Sarah
-- *Sarah Stierch* */Museumist and open culture advocate/*
Visit sarahstierch.com http://sarahstierch.com<<
______________________________**_________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-lhttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:33 AM, phoebe ayers phoebe.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Here is a question that came up during today's US GLAM consortium meeting: what's the current status of the 'movement partners' affiliation?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_models/Movement_Partner...
Is recognition of movement partners something that AffComm will be taking on in future, or will it rest with WMF/Chapters for now? Not sure what the latest discussions have been.
This is still under discussion between AffCom and WMF, Phoebe. The current discussion is focused on sharpening the definition, translating the concept into a clear easy-to-follow affiliation pipeline or pathway, and on the division of roles between AffCom and WMF.
We're hopeful that this will move to the next stage shortly.
Best Bishakha
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:10 PM, Bishakha Datta bishakhadatta@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:33 AM, phoebe ayers phoebe.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Here is a question that came up during today's US GLAM consortium
meeting:
what's the current status of the 'movement partners' affiliation?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_models/Movement_Partner...
Is recognition of movement partners something that AffComm will be taking on in future, or will it rest with WMF/Chapters for now? Not sure what
the
latest discussions have been.
This is still under discussion between AffCom and WMF, Phoebe. The current discussion is focused on sharpening the definition, translating the concept into a clear easy-to-follow affiliation pipeline or pathway, and on the division of roles between AffCom and WMF.
We're hopeful that this will move to the next stage shortly.
Best Bishakha
Thanks Bishakha! Has that discussion been on-wiki anywhere?
The context, as Sarah notes, is that there are a variety of big GLAM organizations who have done Wikimedia work who may well fit the idea of being a 'movement partner', and the question arose this past weekend of whether and where they might fit.
-- phoebe
Phoebe,
As Bishakha indicated, this is still actively being discussed amongst AffCom and WMF folks. Most of what's being discussed is based on on-wiki comments - but the actual conversations are happening via email (AffCom mailing list) and face-to-face conversations. My understanding is this follows a similar process used when the User Groups and Thematic Org processes were setup.
However, I will say that entities like GLAM partners has come up as examples of possible candidates in conversations I've had with folks.
Again, it is premature to commit to anything, but my personal hope is that the final outcome will be a good solution for the groups you're talking about. As someone who frequently works with outside groups on Wikimedia matters, I am empathetic to both the sense of urgency and interest from potential partners.
Also, AffCom members are available via wiki or email for comments about this - and I am generally lingering in IRC often.
-greg aka varnent
Disclaimer: These are my own views and not officially representative of any role I have within AffCom, Wikimania, or elsewhere.
On 30 Apr 2013, at 1:16 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:10 PM, Bishakha Datta bishakhadatta@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:33 AM, phoebe ayers phoebe.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Here is a question that came up during today's US GLAM consortium
meeting:
what's the current status of the 'movement partners' affiliation?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_affiliation_models/Movement_Partner...
Is recognition of movement partners something that AffComm will be taking on in future, or will it rest with WMF/Chapters for now? Not sure what
the
latest discussions have been.
This is still under discussion between AffCom and WMF, Phoebe. The current discussion is focused on sharpening the definition, translating the concept into a clear easy-to-follow affiliation pipeline or pathway, and on the division of roles between AffCom and WMF.
We're hopeful that this will move to the next stage shortly.
Best Bishakha
Thanks Bishakha! Has that discussion been on-wiki anywhere?
The context, as Sarah notes, is that there are a variety of big GLAM organizations who have done Wikimedia work who may well fit the idea of being a 'movement partner', and the question arose this past weekend of whether and where they might fit.
-- phoebe
--
- I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers <at>
gmail.com * _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org