Eu dei uma tunada nesse projeto de fellow:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Fellowships/Project_Ideas/Convidan…
>
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Convidando_o_Brasil
E adaptei para o Individual Engagement Grants, que se verem, nem é
idividual, e algumas propostas nem são para Engagement, também adaptei para
o Narrowing Focus. Mas ainda não terminei tudo, e gostaria que vocês dessem
uma olhada para propor mudanças, atividades e melhorias, se quiserem.
Pra facilitar tem um pedaço em pt
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Convidando_o_Brasil/pt, mas ainda
não passei tudo pra lá, e também ainda não abri para outras comunidades,
pois gostaria de deixar, digamos, à prova de bala antes. :D
Também não arrumei o inglês, pois eu fui montando direto, então sofram um
pouco hehehheeh.
--
Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton
rodrigo.argenton(a)gmail.com
+55 11 97 97 18 884
Wikipedia admins are editors entrusted with special privileges and
duties, responsible for the community management of Wikipedia. They
are elected using a special procedure defined by the Wikipedia
community, called Request for Adminship (RfA). Because of the growing
amount of management work (quality control, coordination, maintenance)
on the Wikipedia, the importance of admins is growing. At the same
time, there exists evidence that the admin community is growing more
slowly than expected. We present an analysis of the RfA procedure in
the Polish-language Wikipedia, since the procedure’s introduction in
2005. With the goal of discovering good candidates for new admins that
could be accepted by the community, we model the admin elections using
multidimensional behavioral social networks derived from the Wikipedia
edit history. We find that we can classify the votes in the RfA
procedures using this model with an accuracy level that should be
sufficient to recommend candidates. We also propose and verify
interpretations of the dimensions of the social network. We find that
one of the dimensions, based on discussion on Wikipedia talk pages,
can be validly interpreted as acquaintance among editors, and discuss
the relevance of this dimension to the admin elections.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13278-012-0092-6
Seria legal para a lusófona, não?
Tom
--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
"A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more
useful than a life spent doing nothing."
Oi pessoal,
Adorei a ideia e acho que todos devem participar dessa votação.
Abraço,
Jonas
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Carol Ann <carolann.ohare(a)wikimedia.fr>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 09:19:09 +0100
Subject: [Wiki-research-l] Wikimedia France research award : the
choice is yours !
To: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Hi all,
Wikimédia France, a non-profit organization supporting Wikimedia projects
in France, launched a few months ago an international research award aiming
to reward the most influential research work on Wikimedia projects and free
knowledge. After the initial submission of research papers by the wikimedia
community, our jury
members<http://researchaward.wikimedia.fr/en/page-d-exemple/>have
selected among a thirty
proposals<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikimedia_France_Research_Award/pap…>,
five finalists.
It's now up to you to choose the most influential. For that, please visit
this page :
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikimedia_France_Research_Award/nom…
vote. Deadline for vote is early March. The announcement of the winner
is scheduled to end of March.
If you have any questions, please use the project talk page, thanks !
--
Carol Ann O'Hare
Chargée de mission recherche et enseignement - Wikimédia France
www.wikimedia.fr
07.62.92.42.03
--
@Jonas_agx
<http://twitter.com/jonas_agx>
Melhor começar a se preparar para 2015. :) Não esqueçam da articulação
durante os eventos. ;)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: James Forrester <jdforrester(a)gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 8:44 PM
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Announcement of Wikimania 2014 jury
To: "wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org" <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
All,
For info.
Yours,
James.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: James Forrester <jdforrester(a)gmail.com>
Date: 17 February 2013 15:40
Subject: Announcement of Wikimania 2014 jury
To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)"
<wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
[Please note that I send this purely as a volunteer, and in no
connexion to the Wikimedia Foundation.]
Dear all,
I write to announce the Jury to select which bid will be chosen to
host Wikimania in 2014.
The twelve members will be:
* Deror Avi - [[User:Deror avi]] from Israel (Wikimania 2011 General Manager)
* Philippe Beaudette - [[User:Philippe (WMF)]] from the US (Wikimedia
Foundation Director, Community Advocacy)
* Jeromy-Yu Chan - [[User:Yuyu]] from HK (Wikimania 2013 Co-ordinator-in-Chief)
* Shujen Chang - [[User:Shujenchang]] from HK
* Florence Devouard - [[User:Anthere]] from France
* Orsolya Gyenes - [[User:OrsolyaVirág]] from Hungary (Wikimania 2012
Deputy Program Chair)
* James Hare - [[User:Harej]] from the US (Wikimania 2012 Co-chair)
* Achal Prabhala - [[User:Aprabhala]] from India - Wikimedia Advisory
Board member
* Konarak Ratnakar - [[User:Kondicherry]] from India
* Noopur Raval - [[User:Noopur28]] from India
* Manuel Schneider - [[User:80686]] from Austria (Wikimedia
Österreich; perpetual Wikimania organiser)
* [[User:Whiteghost.ink]] from Australia
Jan-Bart de Vreede and Sam Klein (of the Wikimedia Foundation Board)
will also be part of the Jury, as normal.
I and Phoebe Ayers - [[User:Phoebe]] - will be serving as moderators,
neutral aides for the Jury who do not vote.
To re-iterate what we've said before, it would be lovely if this was
the last year we used this process, and that for 2015 onwards we could
create a new, community-led and more open and transparent process.
Some earlier discussions took place at [[m:Talk:Wikimania Advisory
Group]]. Please feel free to give your thoughts there.
As a reminder, bids have two weeks (until 23:59 UTC on 3 March 2013)
until bidding creation closes. All cities which intend to run for the
bidding process should have created a page on meta and entered the
official list by this point.
Thank you, and good luck to all Bids.
Yours,
--
James D. Forrester
jdforrester(a)gmail.com
[[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]] (speaking purely in a personal capacity)
--
James D. Forrester
jdforrester(a)gmail.com
[[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]] (speaking purely in a personal capacity)
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
"A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more
useful than a life spent doing nothing."
Hi all.
I would like to recommend to see the Brazil case where the recruitment
of the coordinator of the Catalyst Project was done in partnership
with the community
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/01/11/brazil-recruiting-and-partnership-with…
After the community noticed the mistake being done in hiring and
expensive and useless headhunter, this was critized
<http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.org.wikimedia.brazil/161> and,
fortunately, promptly listened by Wikimedia Foundation people in
charge of the process. The community even had the idea of a more open
and transparent process, where the candidates would engage in a wiki
task - four finalists for the whole process engaged in such task. Also
in the interview with two wikimedians, the 10 candidates could have a
taste of what they would expect. :)
We all saw the dozens of mistakes of this headhunters, that luckly
were solved on time by the community, improving a lot the final
results. Not saying the model shouldn't be adapted and improved, it
must. And after all, no one better than locals to tell about their own
community.
Best,
Tom
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Jan-Bart de Vreede
<jdevreede(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hey
>
> Thanks!
>
> I am sure that Alice is grateful for the input. I must confess though that I think that most of these questions require a deep knowledge of the movement and the community and as such disqualify a lot of potential candidates… (I would hazard a guess that none of the past appointed candidates (including myself) were not able to answer 80% of these questions until about 6 months "on the job". So are you proposing these questions to select new candidates or are you simply trying to get attention for these issues (as you have been doing over the past months… which is fair enough to some degree?)
>
> (and to be fair: at this point, with all the experience I have within the movement I would want to see most of these decisions researched before committing to a point of view)
>
> Jan-Bart
>
>
>
> On Feb 18, 2013, at 9:19 AM, James Salsman <jsalsman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote:
>>> ...
>>> if you have questions that you think we should ask: feel free to suggest them here :)
>>
>> I have these ten questions:
>>
>> 1. What do you think a reasonable goal for the growth of the Wikimedia
>> Education Program over the next five years is?
>>
>> 2. Do you believe that the Foundation should establish an endowment?
>> If so, how large do you think such an endowment should be; in
>> particular, should the Foundation establish an endowment large enough
>> to subsist at present staffing levels and growth rates from current
>> investment grade bond interest rates without accepting additional
>> donations? If so, over how many years do you think it would be most
>> appropriate to establish such an endowment?
>>
>> 3. How often do you think the Foundation should propose advocacy
>> actions to the community? Do you believe the Foundation should survey
>> the opinion of the community and donors on this question?
>>
>> 4. Should the Foundation meet or exceed Silicon Valley competitive pay
>> to attract and retain the best talent while competing with firms able
>> to offer equity participation? Do you believe the Foundation should
>> survey the opinion of the community and donors on this question? Why
>> or why not?
>>
>> 5. Should the Foundation establish a system of awarding employee
>> bonuses in amounts determined by anonymous peer evaluations? Why or
>> why not?
>>
>> 6. Some proportion of long term project editors are impoverished,
>> probably within a few percentage points of the impoverished proportion
>> of the population as a whole. How do you think the Foundation could
>> best assist impoverished long term volunteers? Do you think it should?
>> Why or why not?
>>
>> 7. To what extent do you believe the Foundation should reimburse
>> travel and content development expenses for Wikinews contributors? In
>> particular, if you were to propose a pilot grant program to grant
>> travel and expense funds directly to individual Wikinews reporters,
>> how many such awards would you begin with and how would you measure
>> their effectiveness?
>>
>> 8. PeerWise is a popular closed-source assessment question and answer
>> database (http://peerwise.cs.auckland.ac.nz/) used in hundreds of
>> higher education institutions. Unlike textbooks, traditional courses,
>> MOOCs, and Moodle-style courses, PeerWise question databases can and
>> often are populated entirely by learners, with answers reviewed in a
>> style very similar to wiki content. Do you believe it would be
>> appropriate for the Foundation to develop an open source version of
>> PeerWise? Why or why not?
>>
>> 9. Do you believe the Foundation should employ professional fact
>> checkers who would not edit reader-facing content on the projects, but
>> who would be available to research questions pertaining to content
>> disputes at the request of projects' dispute resolution volunteers
>> (e.g. Wikipedia mediators) to prepare reports to help volunteers
>> resolve content disputes? Why or why not? Do you believe the
>> Foundation should survey the opinion of the community and donors on
>> this question?
>>
>> 10. What is your experience with editing or otherwise supporting
>> Foundation projects?
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> James Salsman
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
"A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more
useful than a life spent doing nothing."
---------- Mensagem encaminhada ----------
De: Evandro Oliveira <pyxisbr(a)gmail.com>
Data: 17 de fevereiro de 2013 10:08
Assunto: [thackday] Bolsas
Para: thackday(a)googlegroups.com
o UOL abriu projetos para bolsistas em vários estágios.
Embora as condições tenham cláusulas restritivas, para assuntos de
pesquisa, produção, melhoria e implementação de códigos abertos
que auxiliem a transparência da informação, podem ser formados vários
grupos, em locais diferentes que com as bolsas ajudem a avançar
na produção de ferramentas e até na pesquisa de temas não ligados
diretamente à TI e códigos...
Vejam os detalhes em
http://bolsapesquisa.uol.com.br/
Acredito que seja uma excelente oportunidade de financiamento para
iniciativas da Transparência Hacker.
--
abs,
Evandro Oliveira
(31) 9982-0221 (Vivo)
(31) 2552-1246 (GVT)
"Pássaros criados em gaiola acreditam que voar é uma doença."
A. Jodorowsky
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Marcio Vasconcelos <Marcio.Vasconcelos at avina.net>
Date: 2013/2/16
Subject: Fondo Acelerador de Innovación Civica - Nota de Prensa
To:
Estimados,
En diciembre de 2012 Avina Americas, Fundación Avina y Omidyar Network
formalizaron una alianza con el objetivo de fomentar el desarrollo de
proyectos de tecnología de carácter cívico, preferencialmente basados
en datos abiertos, que buscan aumentar la rendición de cuentas y la
participación ciudadana. En este contexto les hacemos llegar la nota
de prensa, para que puedan consultar la convocatoria de proyectos y
les solicitamos muy atentamente si pueden darle difusión con las
organizaciones que crean conveniente.
http://www.avinaamericas.org/fondo-acelerador-de-innovaciones-civicas/
Saludos
Márcio Vasconcelos
Coordinador General
Fondo Acelerador de Innovaciones Cívicas
Fundación Avina
MÁRCIO VASCONCELOS PINTO
Coordenador de Programas
Rua Ébano Pereira, 44, sala 802, Centro, Curitiba-PR. Brasil. 80.410-240
Skype: marciovp
--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
OKFN Brasil - Rede pelo Conhecimento Livre
http://br.okfn.org
Bem... Isso provavelmente só vai ser oficial no mês que vem.
Mas já está em planejamento[1] a participação do Mediawiki no Google Summer
of Code(GSoC) desse ano.
Em resumo é uma maratona de programação. Bem simples, você melhora algum
software livre (no nosso caso o mediawiki) e ganha 5,000 USD (cinco
mil dólares) ao longo de aproximadamente três meses.
Bem... Como eu disse, nada é oficial ainda, mas esse ano eu devo ser
(novamente) co-tutor de algum(ns) dos projetos[2]. Isso quer dizer que
participarei da mesa que vai julgar as propostas e ajudarei algum(ns)
estudante(s). Então se algum de vocês quer participar, posso mostrar a
direção :)
Os principais pré-requisitos são estar matriculado em uma universidade e
ter um inglês inteligível.
Atenciosamente.
[1]http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Summer_of_Code_2013
[2]http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Mentorship_programs/Possible_projects
---------- Mensagem encaminhada ----------
De: Carolina Rossini <carolina.rossini(a)gmail.com>
Data: 13 de fevereiro de 2013 22:52
Assunto: [REA] acesso aberto no Brazil
Para: rea-lista(a)googlegroups.com, GPOPAI interno <interno(a)lists.gpopai.org>
pessoal
comecei uma wiki sobre acesso aberto no Brasil aqui
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/OALATAM
se alguem tiver sugestoes de leitura, estatisticas, etc, favor enviar
principalmente sobre a visao e o papel das bibliotecas de
universidades nesse debate
bjs
Carol
--
Carolina Rossini
http://carolinarossini.net/
+ 1 6176979389
*carolina.rossini(a)gmail.com*
skype: carolrossini
@carolinarossini
Pessoal
rascunhei o seguinte email para enviar aos participantes das nossas
atividades recentes. Pedi ao Rodrigo, que concordou em mandar pelo email da
Wikimedia Brasil
A ideia é sempre utilizá-lo (eventualmente adaptando uma ou outra coisa,
incluindo alguma questão) em nossas atividades, para que possamos melhor
avaliá-los, saber a opinião das pessoas e melhorar alguma coisa.
Aliás, acho que ficou bem bom o questionário, mas revendo agora me dei
conta de que talvez um campo aberto pra demais observações pode ser
importante. Perguntas fechadas são melhores pra comparar e ver evolução,
mas uma pergunta aberta, com espaço pra sugestões, críticas e observações
tem mais importância/informação qualitativa pra nós.
Vejam se ok.
Abração
Oona
Prezado(a),
O movimento Wikimedia Brasil e a Wikimedia Foundation agradecem a sua
participação em nossa atividade.
É sempre um prazer dialogar sobre o conhecimento livre e envolver mais
pessoas nos projetos Wikimedia.
Queremos conhecer sua opinião sobre nossas atividades, para que possamos
melhor avaliá-las e aprimorá-las. Por isso, preparamos um questionário
breve, que não tomará mais do que 5 minutos do seu tempo.
Clique aqui
<https://s.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_eXuaZkTsIRAx261&Preview=Survey&BrandID=w…>para
responder o questionário.
Agradecemos sua participação e esperemos encontrá-lo(a) em nossos projetos.
Ao final da pesquisa, você encontrará mais informações e links para listas
e sites que podem ser do seu interesse.
Um WikiAbraço e até a próxima!
Wikimedia Brasil e WIkimedia Foundation