Hi everyone!
I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized Grŵp Defnyddwyr Cymuned Wicimedia Cymru (Wikimedia Community User Group Wales) [1] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to promote the Wikimedia movement in Wales and support the development of Wikimedia projects and content in the Welsh language.
Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Wales
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 10:32:34 -0400 Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone!
I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized Grŵp Defnyddwyr Cymuned Wicimedia Cymru (Wikimedia Community User Group Wales) [1] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to promote the Wikimedia movement in Wales and support the development of Wikimedia projects and content in the Welsh language.
Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
congratulations!
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Wales _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi Kirill!
It would be really helpful to outline these kind of decisions with arguments/deliberations that AffCom decided to follow, considering that this sets a precedence in the worldwide community. For example, UG Wales states that they "cooperate with and represent Wikimedia UK in Wales" - does this mean that we are now accepting UGs within chapters? Is this UG supposed to be able to apply for grants, despite its overlap with WMUK?
Best, Philip
On 11 March 2018 at 15:44, Shlomi Fish shlomif@shlomifish.org wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 10:32:34 -0400 Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone!
I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized Grŵp Defnyddwyr Cymuned Wicimedia Cymru (Wikimedia Community User Group Wales) [1] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to promote the Wikimedia movement in Wales and support the development of Wikimedia projects and content in the Welsh language.
Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
congratulations!
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Wales _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ My Favourite FOSS - http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/favourite/
Windows Update doesn’t. — http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Windows-Update/
Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .
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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Support the request that AffCom share their understanding of the scope and authority of the announced User Group.
From the wording of "represent Wikimedia UK in Wales"[1], the UG is
not independent of WMUK and consequently acts as a Chapter subsidiary. As far as I am aware, there is no other regional based UG which does this.
As a corollary, the representation has legal implications for UK Charity. WMUK must have both responsibility and the authority to monitor and control how they are represented by the UG. It is not clear from the meta web page or the community vote how this will work, apart from the implicit assumption that funding paid to UG projects is effectively managed as a WMUK continuing programme. Presumably the UG will not be requesting funds from the WMF or via the FDC process separate from WMUK's FDC procedure.
The original vote at the Welsh Wikipedia compared the aims to that of the Basque UG.[2] However based on their scope, the Basque UG does not officially represent any other affiliate or Chapter.
Links 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Wales 2. https://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicipedia:Sefydlu_Gr%C5%B5p_Defnyddwyr_Wicimed...
On 19 March 2018 at 00:10, Philip Kopetzky philip.kopetzky@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Kirill!
It would be really helpful to outline these kind of decisions with arguments/deliberations that AffCom decided to follow, considering that this sets a precedence in the worldwide community. For example, UG Wales states that they "cooperate with and represent Wikimedia UK in Wales" - does this mean that we are now accepting UGs within chapters? Is this UG supposed to be able to apply for grants, despite its overlap with WMUK?
Best, Philip
On 11 March 2018 at 15:44, Shlomi Fish shlomif@shlomifish.org wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 10:32:34 -0400 Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone!
I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized Grŵp Defnyddwyr Cymuned Wicimedia Cymru (Wikimedia Community User Group Wales) [1] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to promote the Wikimedia movement in Wales and support the development of Wikimedia projects and content in the Welsh language.
Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
congratulations!
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Wales _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ My Favourite FOSS - http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/favourite/
Wikimedia Australia also be interested in clarity on scope and over lap with WMUK activities as well as the legalities and implications to WMUK tax and charity status.
WMAU has its own semi autonomous groups in locations around Australia the implications on WMAU charity and tax status should one these groups be registered as WMF UG would be complex and significant.
On 20 March 2018 at 21:11, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Support the request that AffCom share their understanding of the scope and authority of the announced User Group.
From the wording of "represent Wikimedia UK in Wales"[1], the UG is not independent of WMUK and consequently acts as a Chapter subsidiary. As far as I am aware, there is no other regional based UG which does this.
As a corollary, the representation has legal implications for UK Charity. WMUK must have both responsibility and the authority to monitor and control how they are represented by the UG. It is not clear from the meta web page or the community vote how this will work, apart from the implicit assumption that funding paid to UG projects is effectively managed as a WMUK continuing programme. Presumably the UG will not be requesting funds from the WMF or via the FDC process separate from WMUK's FDC procedure.
The original vote at the Welsh Wikipedia compared the aims to that of the Basque UG.[2] However based on their scope, the Basque UG does not officially represent any other affiliate or Chapter.
Links
- https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Wales
- https://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicipedia:Sefydlu_Gr%C5%B5p_
Defnyddwyr_Wicimedia
On 19 March 2018 at 00:10, Philip Kopetzky philip.kopetzky@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Kirill!
It would be really helpful to outline these kind of decisions with arguments/deliberations that AffCom decided to follow, considering that this sets a precedence in the worldwide community. For example, UG Wales states that they "cooperate with and represent Wikimedia UK in Wales" - does this mean that we are now accepting UGs within chapters? Is this UG supposed to be able to apply for grants, despite its overlap with WMUK?
Best, Philip
On 11 March 2018 at 15:44, Shlomi Fish shlomif@shlomifish.org wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 10:32:34 -0400 Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone!
I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
recognized
Grŵp Defnyddwyr Cymuned Wicimedia Cymru (Wikimedia Community User
Group
Wales) [1] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to promote the Wikimedia movement in Wales and support the development of Wikimedia projects and content in the Welsh language.
Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
congratulations!
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_
Group_Wales
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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ My Favourite FOSS - http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/favourite/
-- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Descriptions of user group activities on Meta shouldn't be interpreted as legal documents under UK law (or any other legal code, for that matter).
Any questions regarding potential legal implications for Wikimedia UK should, of course, be directed to the chapter itself.
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 7:11 AM, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Support the request that AffCom share their understanding of the scope and authority of the announced User Group.
From the wording of "represent Wikimedia UK in Wales"[1], the UG is not independent of WMUK and consequently acts as a Chapter subsidiary. As far as I am aware, there is no other regional based UG which does this.
As a corollary, the representation has legal implications for UK Charity. WMUK must have both responsibility and the authority to monitor and control how they are represented by the UG. It is not clear from the meta web page or the community vote how this will work, apart from the implicit assumption that funding paid to UG projects is effectively managed as a WMUK continuing programme. Presumably the UG will not be requesting funds from the WMF or via the FDC process separate from WMUK's FDC procedure.
The original vote at the Welsh Wikipedia compared the aims to that of the Basque UG.[2] However based on their scope, the Basque UG does not officially represent any other affiliate or Chapter.
Links
- https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Wales
- https://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicipedia:Sefydlu_Gr%C5%B5p_
Defnyddwyr_Wicimedia
On 19 March 2018 at 00:10, Philip Kopetzky philip.kopetzky@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Kirill!
It would be really helpful to outline these kind of decisions with arguments/deliberations that AffCom decided to follow, considering that this sets a precedence in the worldwide community. For example, UG Wales states that they "cooperate with and represent Wikimedia UK in Wales" - does this mean that we are now accepting UGs within chapters? Is this UG supposed to be able to apply for grants, despite its overlap with WMUK?
Best, Philip
On 11 March 2018 at 15:44, Shlomi Fish shlomif@shlomifish.org wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 10:32:34 -0400 Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone!
I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
recognized
Grŵp Defnyddwyr Cymuned Wicimedia Cymru (Wikimedia Community User
Group
Wales) [1] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to promote the Wikimedia movement in Wales and support the development of Wikimedia projects and content in the Welsh language.
Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
congratulations!
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_
Group_Wales
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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ My Favourite FOSS - http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/favourite/
-- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 20 March 2018 at 15:03, Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
Descriptions of user group activities on Meta shouldn't be interpreted as legal documents under UK law (or any other legal code, for that matter).
Hi Kirill,
In the spirit of an open and transparent process, could you please provide a link to the scope of the new approved User Group is published, as the one on Meta is not the one that AffCom reviewed with the UG application?
Any questions regarding potential legal implications for Wikimedia UK should, of course, be directed to the chapter itself.
This brush-off is surprising, with the clear implication that AffCom has not approached WMUK with any question. I was mistaken in believing that AffCom had a responsibility to consider obvious legal implications, before approving a User Group that is granted the right to use official logos and the name "Wikipedia" and its language variants when advertising their events. It is disappointing to see that AffCom does not see their official process as needing to address these areas, which may well be a barrier to direct funding, legal recognition or represent a risk to other named pre-existing Affiliates within the scope of the proposed new UG.
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
Thanks, Fae, volunteer
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
On 20 March 2018 at 15:03, Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
Descriptions of user group activities on Meta shouldn't be interpreted as legal documents under UK law (or any other legal code, for that matter).
Hi Kirill,
In the spirit of an open and transparent process, could you please provide a link to the scope of the new approved User Group is published, as the one on Meta is not the one that AffCom reviewed with the UG application?
The Affiliations Committee publishes all of our application review and approval resolutions on Meta; the one for the group in question can be found at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recogniti... .
Any questions regarding potential legal implications for Wikimedia UK should, of course, be directed to the chapter itself.
This brush-off is surprising, with the clear implication that AffCom has not approached WMUK with any question. I was mistaken in believing that AffCom had a responsibility to consider obvious legal implications, before approving a User Group that is granted the right to use official logos and the name "Wikipedia" and its language variants when advertising their events. It is disappointing to see that AffCom does not see their official process as needing to address these areas, which may well be a barrier to direct funding, legal recognition or represent a risk to other named pre-existing Affiliates within the scope of the proposed new UG.
Your implication is entirely incorrect; AffCom consulted with -- and received an endorsement from -- Wikimedia UK prior to approving the user group. However, we are neither experts in UK charity law nor empowered to speak on behalf of Wikimedia UK; consequently, any questions regarding the chapter's legal position should be posed to the chapter, not to us.
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
On 20 March 2018 at 15:36, Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
On 20 March 2018 at 15:03, Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
Descriptions of user group activities on Meta shouldn't be interpreted as legal documents under UK law (or any other legal code, for that matter).
Hi Kirill,
In the spirit of an open and transparent process, could you please provide a link to the scope of the new approved User Group is published, as the one on Meta is not the one that AffCom reviewed with the UG application?
The Affiliations Committee publishes all of our application review and approval resolutions on Meta; the one for the group in question can be found at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recogniti...
Thanks for the link, that's great. It would be super to include a link to the relevant resolution when making announcements.
Unfortunately your emails seem in conflict with the resolution. The statement by the Affiliations Committee links to the meta page to define the reviewed scope, the words used are "The scope of the group, which can be found on their meta page" and then gives a link to the same page I used previously and read that the User Group represents WMUK. In fact there are no other links to any other document that can be interpreted as "officially" publishing the scope of the new user group.
Consequently there is no ambiguity that the AffCom approval was literally for a regional User Group with a stated objective to represent the national Chapter. The exact words are "Cooperate with and represent Wikimedia UK in Wales".
It is worth noting that the italicized sentence in the very brief summary appears to be intended to be a direct quote from the meta page, however it is a rephrasing which turns the sentence into an objective for the new User Group when the phrasing on the original page is a description of members (i.e. not the group itself). It is not stated whether the interpreted objective was part of the UG application, or someone else's interpretation of the published scope. This seems misleading unless the meta page is rephrased to include the statement of scope as explicitly that. This may seem a fine point, but there exact words that officially define a new Affiliate or User Group seem worth getting precise so everyone understands what has been authorized.
Thanks, Fae
Any questions regarding potential legal implications for Wikimedia UK should, of course, be directed to the chapter itself.
This brush-off is surprising, with the clear implication that AffCom has not approached WMUK with any question. I was mistaken in believing that AffCom had a responsibility to consider obvious legal implications, before approving a User Group that is granted the right to use official logos and the name "Wikipedia" and its language variants when advertising their events. It is disappointing to see that AffCom does not see their official process as needing to address these areas, which may well be a barrier to direct funding, legal recognition or represent a risk to other named pre-existing Affiliates within the scope of the proposed new UG.
Your implication is entirely incorrect; AffCom consulted with -- and received an endorsement from -- Wikimedia UK prior to approving the user group. However, we are neither experts in UK charity law nor empowered to speak on behalf of Wikimedia UK; consequently, any questions regarding the chapter's legal position should be posed to the chapter, not to us.
For the sake of openness and transparency, can you provide a link to where the endorsement and any questions raised are published? It is not included with the AffCom resolution.
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
I agree with Kirill, from the WMF point of view, as long as the chapter is informed and endorsed the creation of a user group within its covered territory, the WMF did its due diligence. After that, it is the responsibility of the chapter to do its homework about the local legal framework before endorsing the creation of the user group.
That being said, I would also be interested in hearing from Wikimedia UK's perspective on this new user group and the reasoning behind it.
Jean-Philippe Béland Vice President, Wikimedia Canada Coordinator, Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:37 AM Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 9:29 AM, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
On 20 March 2018 at 15:03, Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
Descriptions of user group activities on Meta shouldn't be interpreted
as
legal documents under UK law (or any other legal code, for that
matter).
Hi Kirill,
In the spirit of an open and transparent process, could you please provide a link to the scope of the new approved User Group is published, as the one on Meta is not the one that AffCom reviewed with the UG application?
The Affiliations Committee publishes all of our application review and approval resolutions on Meta; the one for the group in question can be found at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recogniti... .
Any questions regarding potential legal implications for Wikimedia UK should, of course, be directed to the chapter itself.
This brush-off is surprising, with the clear implication that AffCom has not approached WMUK with any question. I was mistaken in believing that AffCom had a responsibility to consider obvious legal implications, before approving a User Group that is granted the right to use official logos and the name "Wikipedia" and its language variants when advertising their events. It is disappointing to see that AffCom does not see their official process as needing to address these areas, which may well be a barrier to direct funding, legal recognition or represent a risk to other named pre-existing Affiliates within the scope of the proposed new UG.
Your implication is entirely incorrect; AffCom consulted with -- and received an endorsement from -- Wikimedia UK prior to approving the user group. However, we are neither experts in UK charity law nor empowered to speak on behalf of Wikimedia UK; consequently, any questions regarding the chapter's legal position should be posed to the chapter, not to us.
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee _______________________________________________ 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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi Philip,
The idea of local or regional user groups coexisting with a national chapter isn't a new one; in fact, it was one of the principal scenarios that was considered when the concept of user groups was first developed. There are many such user groups already in existence, including local groups that collaborate with Wikimedia India, Wikimedia Russia, and other chapters, and we are not aware of any significant problems in this regard.
Having said that: as part of our ongoing movement strategy-related activities, the Affiliations Committee is taking a deeper look at what overlapping and intersecting affiliate scopes and structures might look like in the future, and whether our current understanding of such scenarios is effective and sustainable. I would anticipate that we'll be releasing additional information on our initial thoughts in this area, and our plans for community consultations around those thoughts, in the coming months.
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 6:10 PM, Philip Kopetzky philip.kopetzky@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Kirill!
It would be really helpful to outline these kind of decisions with arguments/deliberations that AffCom decided to follow, considering that this sets a precedence in the worldwide community. For example, UG Wales states that they "cooperate with and represent Wikimedia UK in Wales" - does this mean that we are now accepting UGs within chapters? Is this UG supposed to be able to apply for grants, despite its overlap with WMUK?
Best, Philip
On 11 March 2018 at 15:44, Shlomi Fish shlomif@shlomifish.org wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 10:32:34 -0400 Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone!
I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has
recognized
Grŵp Defnyddwyr Cymuned Wicimedia Cymru (Wikimedia Community User Group Wales) [1] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to promote the Wikimedia movement in Wales and support the development of Wikimedia projects and content in the Welsh language.
Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
congratulations!
Regards, Kirill Lokshin Chair, Affiliations Committee
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_
Group_Wales
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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ My Favourite FOSS - http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/favourite/
Windows Update doesn’t. — http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Windows-Update/
Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply
.
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@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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org