Is there anyone out there who has used the Wikipedia API or other "mass
edit" tools? We have a possible "cultural partner" who is interested in
cross-fertilising Wikipedia, but to progress the relationship would probably
require some degree of "semi-automation"?
Kerry
Hi All,
With the conclusion of our recent SGM, attention now turns to our upcoming
Annual General Meeting (AGM), which will be called "Soon(tm)". I intend
that this meeting will be a largely procedural affair, solely for the
tabling of reports and the announcement of the new committee. This is in
line with the practice of many other incorporated associations.
With that in mind, if you're thinking about running for the committee next
year, now is the time to decide which position you would like to run for,
and start lining up some nominators. For the first time this year, we will
elect a management committee of eight members, consisting of four officers
(President, Vice-President, Treasurer and Secretary), and four ordinary
members. You can be nominated for a maximum of one officer position and
one ordinary member position. In the event that not enough nominations are
received to fill all the positions, further nominations will be called for
at the AGM.
Further details will be released as they come to hand. In the meantime, if
you have not expressed a preference to receive notice of general meetings
via email, and do not have any particular requirement to receive a paper
copy of the notice in the mail, please do consider advising the Secretary
that you'd prefer to receive your notice electonically, per rule 12(2)(b)(
http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Rules#12._Notice_of_general_meetings).
Not only does this save the chapter money on postage costs, it also does a
little bit to save some trees and save the planet.
Regards,
Craig Franklin
President - Wikimedia Australia
Hi,
I'm in Rainbow Beach this weekend on holiday (and hadn't intended to get
involved in WP stuff), but Whiteghost is correct here. I would point out
that even Wikipedia, like most encyclopædias itself recommends that you use
the site as the start of research and gaining an understanding of a topic,
not as the complete sum of any reading you do on it.
A cursory reading of a Wikipedia article will not on its own give a
government minister enough depth of knowledge to start forming national
policy on any issue.
Cheers,
Craig Franklin
President - Wikimedia Australia
On 25 October 2013 09:08, <wikimediaau-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 10:07:58 +1100
> From: "G. White" <whiteghost.ink(a)gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Australia Chapter <wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Bushfire Wikipedia interview
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAMrpCZWJW3vof4YU8-WM6mUxMTNEwKdjEaB+WMz55ADaxc2Enw(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I heard that comment on radio and immediately added a balancing ref to a
> scientific opinion<
> https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#label/The+Conversation/141dca106db…
> >n
> that was published in *The Conversation* (an online journal of expert views
> in easy-to-understand language, or as they put it "academic excellence,
> journalistic flair"). This was followed by a ref to a more comprehensive
> report. Then a little while later a section on climate change was added.
>
> I don't think that the demographics of WP are relevant here. The points to
> make about this, I think, are these:
>
> - the politician using WP the way he did only referred to the first lead
> paragraph without reading or noting the following summary qualifiers that
> show the complexity of the matter.
> - WP provides this this complexity if you pay attention to it and read it
> properly;
> - the ongoing improvements show the continuous updating;
> - the usefulness is being able to find easily, for example, BOTH an easy to
> read scientific view AND a detailed report. A good reader service, really.
>
> Whiteghost.ink
>
>
>
>
> On 25 October 2013 09:52, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Younger editors are more likely to be defending against vandalism than
> > adding content (as a gross generalization)
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On 25/10/2013, at 9:49 AM, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I think that's a largely anecdotal depiction of WP editors. The 2011
> > survey showed average age of editors was 31 but that older editors made
> > more contributions than younger ones. The survey showed about 90% male.
> It
> > showed above average education levels and did not ask if they were
> > interested in military history (although I agree with you that military
> > history does seem to be well-covered in WP, but then so are episodes of
> > Seinfeld). I don't recall if it asked about location or languages
> spoken. I
> > do recall another study that concluded in the "western" English-speaking
> > nations, wikipedia editor numbers are broadly proportional to the general
> > population, so given a lot of people live in West Coast USA, one would
> > expect a lot of West Coast USA editors commensurately.
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On 25/10/2013, at 9:27 AM, Leigh Blackall <leighblackall(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > While I wouldn't advise mentioning it in a media interview, if there were
> > someway to remind people that Wikipedia is ultimately political, and
> deeper
> > analysis of the edit history and userbase reveals this wonderfully. If
> you
> > did venture into this topic Liam, you might point to the profile that the
> > stats for English WP paint... What were they: young adult male from the
> > West Coast USA, educated, interested in military history, English as a
> > primary or only language... If opportunity presented, you might point out
> > that this self consciousness is part of a larger openness in the
> Wikimedia
> > projects, something quite unique for large institutions. I guess it's a
> > complicated way of reinforcing the advice to "check sources".
> > On 25/10/2013 9:11 AM, "Kerry Raymond" <kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> One could also comment that the citations added in the climate change
> >> section are to major scientific organisations in Australia and
> >> internationally.
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >> On 25/10/2013, at 9:07 AM, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> The article has had a lot of edits in the past week and the climate
> >> change section looks like it has been added after the Greg Hunt story. I
> >> note a few familiar usernames in the edit history as well as IPs. some
> >> reverting has occurred.
> >>
> >> How to phrase it ... Hmm ... I think a key point is that WP is a living
> >> encyclopedia and events (being both the current bush fires themselves
> and
> >> the Greg Hunt statement) focus attention onto those parts of WP, which
> >> results in them being updated and improved. In that regard some recent
> >> edits have added information about the relationship between climate
> change
> >> and bush fires including citations. WP's role is not to tell people
> whether
> >> or not to believe in climate change but to present the best quality
> summary
> >> of factual information (with citations for people who want to dig
> deeper)
> >> and let people make up their own minds. Greg Hunt has made up his mind
> in
> >> one way, others may come to different conclusions. We are delighted that
> >> Greg Hunt regards WP as an authoritative source but we would urge all
> >> readers to read the cited material if they need a detailed knowledge of
> a
> >> topic on which to make important decisions.
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >> On 25/10/2013, at 8:43 AM, Liam Wyatt <liamwyatt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Good morning :-)
> >>
> >> I've just been called by the producer for ABC702 morning show (presenter
> >> is Linda Mottram) and asked to talk on radio sometime between 10 and
> 10:30
> >> about Wikipedia's errors, how we improve the contet etc, etc, - in the
> >> context of the recent bushfire / Greg Hunt story in the media.
> >>
> >> I can obviously talk about how we get better and that we don't pretend
> to
> >> be perfect and that we encourage people to check the footnote and make
> >> their own assessment... But can someone please advise on the best way to
> >> phrase how the specific article [[Bushfires in Australia]] appeared last
> >> week and what has changed? I see there is a "climate change" section -
> was
> >> that already there a few days ago? (I can check the history when I get
> to
> >> the office, on my mobile at the moment, wanted to write to you straight
> >> away).
> >>
> >> Any advice, ideas? I recall there being a userspace proposal on the
> >> chapter wiki - can someone point me to that again and advise if you
> think
> >> it's appropriate for me to try to quote?
> >>
> >> Sincerely,
> >> -Liam
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> wittylama.com
> >> Peace, love & metadata
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> wittylama.com
> >> Peace, love & metadata
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> >> Wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> >> Wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
> >>
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> > Wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
> >
> >
>
Good morning :-)
I've just been called by the producer for ABC702 morning show (presenter is
Linda Mottram) and asked to talk on radio sometime between 10 and 10:30
about Wikipedia's errors, how we improve the contet etc, etc, - in the
context of the recent bushfire / Greg Hunt story in the media.
I can obviously talk about how we get better and that we don't pretend to
be perfect and that we encourage people to check the footnote and make
their own assessment... But can someone please advise on the best way to
phrase how the specific article [[Bushfires in Australia]] appeared last
week and what has changed? I see there is a "climate change" section - was
that already there a few days ago? (I can check the history when I get to
the office, on my mobile at the moment, wanted to write to you straight
away).
Any advice, ideas? I recall there being a userspace proposal on the chapter
wiki - can someone point me to that again and advise if you think it's
appropriate for me to try to quote?
Sincerely,
-Liam
--
wittylama.com
Peace, love & metadata
--
wittylama.com
Peace, love & metadata
Hi all,
Just a reminder that there will be a Special General Meeting this Sunday, 20 October 2013 at 4PM AEDST (3PM AEST, 1PM AWST) in the #wikimedia-au-sgm channel on the Freenode network.
As a reminder, if you wish to vote at the SGM, please either fill in a proxy form or notify the secretary of your intended IRC nickname as soon as possible.
Regards,
Steven Zhang
Committee Member, Wikimedia Australia
steven.zhang(a)wikimedia.org.au
Hi All,
If you're in the Perth or the Wheatbelt Area, there are some Wikipedians
who will be at the Toodyay show tomorrow for a "Wikimedia Takes" event:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10202114507964131
If you've always wanted to learn a bit more about Wikimedia Commons, if you
enjoy taking photos (and there are LOTS of photo opportunities in the
Toodyay area), or you're an experienced editor interested in helping
prospective new contributors out, head on down and say hello!
Cheers,
Craig Franklin
Bidgee and Toby,
Thanks for preparing and adding your info to these spreadsheets. I know
that filling out paperwork isn't fun but it's one of those things that has
to be done, so thanks for stepping up and leading the way.
I do have some figures on editathons across NSW and Qld that I will add as
soon as I can locate them.
Cheers,
Craig
On 11 October 2013 18:35, <wikimediaau-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 19:35:13 +1100
> From: Robert Myers <bidgee(a)me.com>
> To: Wikimedia Australia Chapter <wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
> Message-ID: <271CCC96-0449-4D48-B0C5-CCDE898CDCB0(a)me.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> I've added my two grants, but the equipment cost (amount that I paid out
> of my own pocket) is just an estimate for now, until I can locate the
> receipt.
>
> -
> Bidgee
>
> On 10/10/2013, at 10:39 PM, Toby Hudson <tobyyy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Kerry,
> >
> > My preferred model would be that each project/editathon/grant leader
> > should report their results in this tabular format, (perhaps as a
> > partial replacement for the written reports we've previously
> > submitted). We are usually pretty proud of our how our events go, so
> > I expect individuals would often be happy to formally report that back
> > to WMAU if there's a procedure in place.
> >
> > To kick the process off, I've copied the WMF spreadsheet Whiteghost
> > linked to, and have started adapting it for her suggestions and for
> > the Australian context (e.g. Aussie dollars and Photographic Equipment
> > Grants). I've also added complete current data from my 2011 small
> > grant, and links to the reports from some others I know about.
> > Everybody should feel free to start adding data on programs they know
> > about, and changing field titles to suit the programs we run. I'll
> > start adding some of the SLNSW and QSA stuff I know about.
> >
> > Here it is in all it's glory - it is open for anyone with the link to
> edit:
> >
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvHbaGUCSbP9dGppX1dhOWxka1I5MT…
> >
> > Toby
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Toby
> >>
> >> You make an excellent point and I doubt anyone will disagree that it
> would
> >> be a Good Thing to do this. Would those volunteering to do it please put
> >> their hands up now?
> >>
> >> [Pauses, cups hand around ear listening ...]
> >>
> >> Therein lies the problem that most volunteer organisations face.
> Volunteers
> >> do the tasks they enjoy (or at least derive satisfaction from), because
> they
> >> do it for free in their leisure time. Now sometimes a volunteer
> organisation
> >> is fortunate that there are "different strokes for different folks" and
> >> someone else will be quite happy to pick up the tasks another person
> didn't
> >> want to do.
> >>
> >> But sometimes there is nobody to pick it up some tasks (I recollect
> another
> >> incorporated association that endlessly tried to establish a roster for
> >> cleaning the toilet -- which was doomed to failure because nobody
> wanted to
> >> do it, even though everyone was in favour of a clean toilet) and I fear
> that
> >> metrics may be in that category in WMAU. If so, this is when we need to
> look
> >> at outsourcing that task. As you will all know (but maybe don't
> remember) we
> >> do now have a contracting policy
> >>
> >> http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Proposal:Contracting
> >>
> >> and, any moment now (drum roll), John V will be outlining the
> arrangements
> >> for the contracting subcommittee so we can get outsourcing happening.
> >>
> >> If there are tasks we need to outsource, we need to do this now while we
> >> still have funds to pay for the work that needs doing. If we delay
> until we
> >> have no funds, then we are in a serious catch-22 situation. I note that
> a
> >> number of the chapters who receive FDC funding appear to use at least
> part
> >> of those funds to employ project management staff, suggesting that this
> is
> >> the kind of thing that is hard to resource with volunteers in most
> chapters.
> >>
> >> Kerry
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: wikimediaau-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >> [mailto:wikimediaau-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Toby
> Hudson
> >> Sent: Thursday, 10 October 2013 4:16 PM
> >> To: Craig Franklin; Wikimedia Australia Chapter
> >> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Craig Franklin
> >> <cfranklin(a)halonetwork.net> wrote:
> >>> I also agree that the chapter and its volunteers *have* done a lot of
> >> great
> >>> work over the past few years, and I think you've hit the nail on the
> head
> >>> that we've often failed to effectively communicate our successes.
> Part of
> >>> any projects going forward will be a need to say "here's how we're
> going
> >> to
> >>> measure success" before we actually dive in on any project, so that we
> can
> >>> either use that measurement as justification for further funding, or
> use
> >>> that measurement to figure out what went wrong and make sure we don't
> make
> >>> the same mistake twice.
> >>
> >> and then:
> >>
> >>> Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another
> >> and done some great work that have (in my opinion) led to positive
> outcomes
> >> for the movement. Enough that I'm not going to even try to enumerate
> them
> >> all for fear that I'll leave someone out :-).
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Craig,
> >> Although forward planning of outcome metrics is obviously a good thing
> >> for the future, I think we should make an effort now to compile
> >> outcomes and metrics for projects, programs and grants that have
> >> already taken place. Is there an onwiki page for this, or a table to
> >> fill out for each project or grant we have undertaken? I know there
> >> are some reports linked from here
> >> http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Reports#Small_grants but surely there
> >> are more hanging around? Even though you can't enumerate them off the
> >> top of your head, we *should* be able to enumerate them if everyone
> >> writes up the outcomes of projects we've individually been involved
> >> with. I know there are huge outcomes as a result of the SLNSW
> >> training and residency.. but maybe they have not been tabulated into
> >> reportable dotpoints?
> >> Toby
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> >> Wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> >> Wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> > Wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
>
> End of Wikimediaau-l Digest, Vol 85, Issue 20
> *********************************************
>
Hi Adam,
Thanks for the question. As you've noted, we haven't put in a funding
request to this round's FDC process. This has largely come about because
in discussions with members of the FDC and the Foundation staff supporting
the FDC, we were 'encouraged' not to apply in this round for a variety of
reasons. Chief among those was a desire to see a more substantial record
of evaluation, impact, and value for money in the projects that we do.
To this end, we need to reposition the chapter from an organisation that
attempts large, expensive, and complex projects to an organisation that
sets goals that are more modest, measurable, and achievable. This is going
to require a cultural shift in the way we administer the chapter, as our
previous success in participating in the fundraiser means that we have not
developed the evaluation and project management mechanisms that we would
have done if we'd continued to evolve without the sudden windfall injection
of tens of thousands of dollars.
In relation to the actual figures and numbers, I'm happy to share those.
Please note that the figures I'm quoting here are only approximate, I'm
sure that John Vandenberg can come and give more precise figures if they're
needed.
The commitment for the first round of the Paralympic project is in the
realm of $25,000. This payment has not yet been made, while we continue to
work with UQ and APC to determine how this will work administratively. As
you've noted, this money is quarantined and locked in, subject to the
necessary paperwork with UQ and APC being agreed to. At the moment, I'm
expecting the actual payment will probably not occur until early in
calendar year 2014 (but I might be pleasantly surprised). Kerry is
handling the direct negotiation with APC and UQ and may be able to provide
further context.
Year two and three come to about $50k a pop, but this money is *not*
guaranteed. We have been extremely upfront with everyone involved that we
will only be able to fund the second and third years if we get the money
from the Foundation (or from elsewhere). So at some point we're going to
need to ask for this money, but not for quite some time. Obviously, we've
been firm that the best way to actually guarantee that we'll get the
funding is for the first year's investment to produce those measurable
outcomes for the Wikimedia movement so we can make a good argument that
it's a project worth investing further in.
We currently have on the order of $80k in cash reserves, and if you
subtract the $25k for the APC project that leaves us with about Subtract
another $5k for essential running costs over the next year (financial
software, office supplies, etc etc), and that leaves us with about $50k to
play with. $50k is a lot of money and it should be possible to achieve a
lot of impact with this, especially if we keep in mind that projects should
be modest, measurable, and achievable.
More generally speaking, I am wary of equating success for the chapter
purely in terms of how many dollars we can squeeze out of the Foundation.
Success needs to be measured in terms of our impact, whether that is the
creation of new content, the recruitment of new editors, or encouraging
diversity. I believe that by concentrating on smaller and simpler
projects, we can have a measurable impact in those spaces within the next
twelve months, without exhausting our reserve funds, which will put us in a
much better position to request money for the Linkage Grant and other
programmes in the future.
Cheers,
Craig
Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2013 15:18:09 +0000
> From: Adam Jenkins <adam.jenkins(a)gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia-au <wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding query
> Message-ID:
> <
> CABRRgOA3EYqTKPiLw42AsfhW0qSvnnS5Ri_hRHxa+25iCOcq+A(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi!
>
> I was surprised to see that WMAU didn't put in an application for funding
> with the FDC in the October round. As a result, we won't be getting any
> funds from that route in 2013, especially as we didn't apply in the earlier
> round. As near as I can figure, we currently have commitments of at least
> $54k in 2014 as part of the ARC Linkage grant, along with the $29k
> commitment for 2013 (which was quarantined and covered), but it seems that
> meeting these commitments will drain us of remaining funds unless something
> has changed with the Linkage grant or we have an alternative revenue stream
> in place.
>
> In light of comments about the possible changes to FDC funding, where does
> this leave us? Do we have sufficient funds to see us out until June, 2014,
> when the next FDC round is due to be decided?
>
> It seems that this may be worth discussing, especially if there's anything
> that we can do to get alternative revenue sources in place.
>
> Regards,
>
> Adan,
>
Hi Nick,
Absolutely, a lot of volunteers have pitched in at some time or another and
done some great work that have (in my opinion) led to positive outcomes for
the movement. Enough that I'm not going to even try to enumerate them all
for fear that I'll leave someone out :-).
Cheers,
Craig
On 9 October 2013 12:22, <wikimediaau-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 10:42:29 +0000
> From: Nick Dowling <nick_dowling(a)hotmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Australia Chapter <wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
> Message-ID: <BLU173-W384C2D1BCF759720B58A47EF1C0(a)phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Bidgee has also provided excellent outcomes for the photography grant(s?)
> he received.
>
> > Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 18:38:19 +0800
> > From: gnangarra(a)gmail.com
> > To: wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > CC: cfranklin(a)halonetwork.net
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediaau-l] Funding Query
> >
> > well some that come to mind
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Freo - Freopedia only cost for
> > WMAU has been Craig to Perth for the Launch, and from reports was well
> > recieved at Wikimania in Hong Kong...
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Takes_Waroona,
> > prelude to a Wikitown there.
> > then there 2 of us doign a workshop tomorrow in Toodyay, and 3 of us
> > being part of the Shire of Toodyay demostrations on Saturday for a
> > third WikiTown there -- WMAU approved $200 to cover some expenses but
> > well below the true costs of running the two
> >
> > add to that, the work of SatuSuro
> >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Takes_Western_Australian_Wheat…
> > and to that a larger Wheatbelt project...
> >
> > Its not talking about ideas thats going to change things it needs more
> > people to get out there and do things,
> >
> > Gideon
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
>
> End of Wikimediaau-l Digest, Vol 85, Issue 14
> *********************************************
>