Salve, salve!
Parabéns a todos os envolvidos por essas bandas.
O Wikibooks teve um crescimento significativo!
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikibooks/EN/TablesWikipediaPT.htm
A média de usuários ativos vinha sendo de entre 9 e 13 mais ou menos - e em
fevereiro foi pra 23.
Será que divulgamos ou fizemos algo específico para isso acontecer?
Raylton, Helder, Argenton, Abdo, Everton, lembram-se de algo específico
para isso ter ocorrido? Raylton, como explica? Lições a compartilhar?
Vamos ver se mantemos? (as estatísticas são bem atrasadas, sabe dizer se a
sensação é de retenção?)
Abração
Oona
Hhehehehehe, ai ai, :D
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Fae <faewik(a)gmail.com>
Date: 19 April 2013 07:14
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Question: How much does administration in Chapters
cost the Wikimedia movement?
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
After seeing a few recent facts and figures about Wikimedia Chapters
(at the Milan conference), I think that "administration" versus
"project" activities is highly varied and may be something like 15% to
40% out of the overall budget. Unfortunately this figure can be a bit
hard to work out and (I think) almost impossible to ensure we would be
comparing like for like based on current reports.
It would make a great top level key performance indicator for our
organizations if this could be reported using an agreed standard
definition as to what administration means, with such a definition we
could even make this an expectation for the public annual financial
reports. Hopefully reporting such a ratio could then be a target for
improvement and any strategic plans for growth could be accountable
against this and other top level performance measures.
My rule of thumb would be that "administration" is composed of:
* Staff salaries, contractor payments and professional advice fees
* Offices and fixed or hired assets used for non-project activity
(such as financial reporting, accounts, board meetings)
* Expenses for non-project activity
I have yet to have a confirmed figure for WMUK, but I would be
interested any any current figures for other chapters for
comparison/benchmarking and any explanation of the 'norms' we might
expect to calculate these.
Cheers,
Fae
--
faewik(a)gmail.com http://j.mp/faewm
Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
--
Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton
rodrigo.argenton(a)gmail.com
+55 11 979 718 884
Opa, o Felipe havia falado do WikiDay no fora do Eixo e a Ana Carolina que
é tipo a responsável técnica disto veio falar comigo
*quinta e sexta agora vamos fazer um programa na postv sobre a wiki*
**
*ensinando o pessoal do Fora do Eixo a mexer pra gente fazer um mutirão de
atualização lá nesse fim de semana*
**
*aí queria ver com vc duas coisas *
**
*eu tenho ainda algumas dúvidas sobre a wiki, e queria saber se tem algum
tutorial/manual que eu posso ir seguindo*
**
*e tbm se algm da Wiki pode participar do programa.*
**
*eu e o Ricardo, da Casa FdE Amz que vamos apresentar*
**
*eu vou falar da parte técnica, ensinando a upar conteudo, editar, etc*
**
*e o Ricardo vai mediar, puxando alguns convidados para falar na
transmissão e lendo os comentários do IRC*
A transmissão começa as 20h e a participação pode ser por skype, então quem
puder participar, dá um alo pra falar com eles. Abraço.
--
Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton
rodrigo.argenton(a)gmail.com
+55 11 979 718 884
Agora que você estão acordando.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Everton Zanella Alvarenga <tom(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:13 AM
Subject: Pad of the education meeting in Milano
To: Wikimedia Education <education(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
http://etherpad.wikimedia.org/eduleadersworkshop
It is happening now.
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."
--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
"A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more useful
than a life spent doing nothing."
More useful than some silly fights we see here.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Patricio Lorente <patricio.lorente(a)gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:01 AM
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] FDC Letter of Intent process and schedule for 2013-14
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Dear friends and colleagues,
We want to share with you information about the Letter of Intent process
and the FDC schedule for next year (July 2013 - June 2014). As you may
remember, the *Letter of Intent (LoI)* is the first step towards applying
for funds from the FDC, as discussed in the FDC framework [1]. This was not
part of the first year's process, but is meant to be an integral part of
the FDC calendar from this next round (Round 1, 2013-14) onwards. *The
Letter of Intent asks all entities who intend to apply for Round 1 (or
Round 2) to formally state their intention to do so.* In addition, the LoI
now asks applying entities to include a notional dollar figure (or local
currency figure) in the Letter of Intent. Applying entities will be able to
update this amount in their final FDC proposals. The updated Letter of
Intent template will be available on the FDC portal [2] by May 1, but the
sample is here for reference [3].
With the Letter of Intent, the FDC staff can support applying entities in
their proposal process well before the deadline for proposals. We hope this
will remove some of the challenges faced by applicants in the first year of
the FDC process. The FDC can also plan better with a clear understanding of
who intends to apply, and an estimation of the funds requested.
The FDC framework originally stated that the deadlines for the LoI were
June 1 for Round 1 and November 1 for Round 2. However, we are pushing back
the deadline *by one week*, since the community review period was also
extended by two weeks. *The LOI deadline will now be June 8 for Round 1,
and November 8 for Round 2. *
For your reference, here is the updated 2013-2014 Round 1 proposal process
schedule:
- *Letter of Intent deadline for Round 1: 8 June 2013*
- Deadline for WMF Staff to post eligibility: 15 July 2013
- Deadline for entities to meet eligibility requirements: 15 September
2013
- Proposal submission deadline: 1 October 2013
- Community review period: 1 October - 31 October 2013
- Staff assessment deadline: 8 November 2013
- FDC recommendation due: 1 December 2013
- Board decision due: 1 January 2014
The schedule for the 2013-14 Round 2 proposal process:
- *Letter of Intent deadline for Round 1: 8 November 2013*
- Deadline for WMF Staff to post eligibility: 15 December 2013
- Deadline for entities to meet eligibility requirements: 15 February
2014
- Proposal submission deadline: 1 March 2014
- Community review period: 1 March - 31 March 2014
- Staff assessment deadline: 8 April 2014
- FDC recommendation due: 1 May 2014
- Board decision due: 1 June 2014
It is our hope that the Letter of Intent process will help in planning for
both the entities and the FDC, and ensure that the FDC and FDC staff are
supporting the applying entities significantly ahead of the proposal
deadlines.
As always, do not hesitate to let us or the FDC support staff (
FDCsupport(a)wikimedia.org) know if you have any questions or concerns about
this important process.
Warm regards,
Patricio and Jan-Bart
(Board representatives to the FDC)
[1]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Framework_for_…
[2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal
[3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Sample_letter_of_intent
--
Patricio Lorente
Blog: http://www.patriciolorente.com.ar
Identi.ca // Twitter: @patriciolorente
_______________________________________________
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."
Nota: Esse trecho abaixo (traduzido porcamente agorinha) é bastante
motivador e me faz lembrar do que o movimento "é", e esquecer um pouco
do que ele "não é":
Durante Wikimania, eu dei uma pequena palestra propondo algumas novas
funcionalidades para a Wikipédia. O público, que era formado
principalmente de programadores e outros wikipedistas de alto
prestigio, imediatamente começou a propor erros na ideia. "Isso não
vai causar o problema X?" "Como vai impedir que Y aconteça?" "Você
realmente acha que as pessoas vão fazer Z?"
Por um tempo eu tentei responder, explicando as formas técnicas para
resolver o problema, no entanto depois de alguns rounds, eu finalmente
disse:
"Chega!
Se eu aparecesse aqui há cinco anos e dissesse que eu estava começando
uma enciclopédia online, colocando um monte de páginas que qualquer
pessoa pode editar, vocês também levantariam mil objeções: Ela vai
ficar cheia de vandalismo! O conteúdo não será confiável! Ninguém vai
fazer esse trabalho de graça!
E vocês estariam certos. Estas eram expectativas completamente
razoáveis na época.
Mas tem coisa engraçada: Isso funcionou mesmo assim."
Na época, eu estava feliz por ter calado a boca deles. Mas depois eu
comecei a pensar mais sobre isso.
Por que a Wikipedia funciona afinal?
Não foi porque seus programadores eram eficientes e o software
resolveu todos os problemas. E não era porque as pessoas corriam para
colocar regras claras no lugar para evitar o mau comportamento.
Sabemos disso porque quando Wikipedia começou não tinha nenhum
programador (costumava usar um software wiki de terceiros) e não
tinhas regras claras (inclusive aparentemente uma das primeiras regras
foi ignorar todas as regras).
A razão para a Wikipedia funcionar é a comunidade, um grupo de pessoas
que trata o projeto como seu e cuida para torná-lo bem sucedido.
As pessoas estão frequentemente tentando vandalizar a Wikipedia,
substituindo artigos com texto aleatório. O que não funciona; porque
suas edições são desfeitas em poucos minutos, até mesmo segundos. Mas
por quê?
Não é mágica - é um grupo de pessoas extremamente dedicadas que se
sentam em seus computadores observando cada uma das mudanças. Alguns
os chamam de "patrulha das mudanças recentes" e hoje eles tem um
software especial que faz com que seja mais fácil desfazer as
alterações ruins e bloquear usuários maliciosos com alguns cliques.
É difícil imaginar alguém se sentir assim sobre Britannica. Há pessoas
que amam a enciclopédia, mas nenhum deles apareceu em seus escritórios
oferecendo-se para ajudar.
É difícil até de imaginar. A maioria das pessoas simplesmente não se
sente responsável pelo Britannica, há profissionais para fazer isso
(...)
By Aaron H. Swartz
Who Runs Wikipedia?(trecho): http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whorunswikipedia
Pessoal, acho que pode interessá-los. Principalmente o Rodrigo, Celio e
Nevio, que mais trabalharam com projetos Wikimedia nas escolas. Tom
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *Iolanda Pensa*
Date: Monday, March 25, 2013
Subject: [Wikimedia Kenya] project proposal - Wikipedia Primary School
To: "The discussion list for the Wikimedia Kenya chapter." <
wikimediake(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
dear Wikipedians in Kenya,
with Tobias Schönwetter and Kelsey Wiens from the University of Cape Town
and CC Africa, Isaac Rutenberg from the Strathmore University Centre for IP
and IT Law, and another partner from Germany we are currently identifying,
we are planning to apply for a project which it would great to link with
you.
The project is called Wikipedia Primary School and it aims at providing on
Wikipedia the information necessary to complete the cycle of primary
education in the languages used by the different education systems.
Our idea is to focus on Kenya and South Africa with the ERAfrica New Ideas
programme (2014-2016). you find below an overall description of the project.
The project actually comes from your experience of distributing offline
Wikipedia in Kenya and it would be great if some of you would like to
contribute to it.
Also the Africa Centre is working to organize trainings and activities for
wikipedians in residence in Kenya.
We don't need an official letter, but simply a letter for the people
interested in the project. you can also contact me directly or you can
maybe discuss among you if the project is relevant and write together a
letter with the names of the people who would like to participate. for the
moment i will keep you updated on the project development and invite you to
join the activities or to apply for open positions. I think it would be
also very precious to document your experience with offline Wikipedia,
maybe with some interviews. this could also be a specific activity directed
by your group. Maybe also the link with the Strathmore University Centre
for IP and IT Law can be useful for further initiatives linked to GLAMs. I
also just wrote to OER Africa - Open Educational Resources Africa which is
based in Nairobi.
what do think? would it be possible to collaborate on this project?
please consider that i would be more than pleased to change the project
also according to your ideas and proposals.
looking forward to hear your impressions and my very best regards
iolanda/iopensa
--
Iolanda Pensa - via Rabolini, 10 - 20125 Milano - Italia. Tel. +39 335 655
36 33, io(a)pensa.it <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'io(a)pensa.it');> -
http://www.iopensa.it - Skype: iopensa.
Researcher at SUPSI University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern
Switzerland
--------------------------------------
*Wikipedia **Primary School*
*Providing on Wikipedia the information necessary to complete the cycle of
primary education in the languages used by the different education systems.*
A project allowing students, families and teachers to find on Wikipedia the
documentation necessary to obtain the primary school qualification in their
country, in their language.
Wikipedia is meant to be an educational tool and it is currently available
online, via mobile phones and offline. Experiences have shown that, once
accessible, Wikipedia does not provide information that responds directly
to curriculum-based questions. The project relies on Wikipedia as an
existing and growing resource, it solves the need for an encyclopaedia
capable of responding to curriculum-based questions, and it fosters
Wikipedia content, quality and outreach.
More specifically the project aims at:
1. Bridging Wikipedia and primary education. This objective implies to
move the Wikipedia community towards a focus on primary education, and at
the same time to strengthen the capacity of the education ecosystem to
contribute to Wikipedia, and in general to open collaborative knowledge.
2. Enriching Wikipedia with new content relevant to primary education.
This objective implies an assessment of the articles produced.
3. Fostering the development of translations and new content in
different Wikipedia linguistic editions. This objective implies the release
of existing educational resources (OER in cc by or cc by-sa), the
production of datasets and the involvement of the Wikimedia movement.
4. Verifying and evaluating the use of Wikipedia as a source of
information for primary education. This objective implies the involvement
of stakeholders and data analysis.
*Wikipedia Primary School* contributes to universal primary education and
to the Millennium Development Goals (MDG2: Achieve Universal Primary
Education). Even if it is scalable and international, the project is
conceived primarily to address African countries and languages.
Wikipedia is a very peculiar encyclopaedia. It is a living organism made of
a wide community with specific policies, clusters and dynamics.
Contributing to Wikipedia means to play a fair game, and to respect the way
Wikipedia works, its rules and community. To strengthen the capacity of
Wikipedia to respond directly to curriculum-based questions, the project
does not simply transfer content from national schoolbooks into Wikipedia.
The methodology is centred around research and fieldwork activities.
Research activities focus on monitoring Wikipedia in different linguistic
editions; understanding the different national education systems and
identifying which are the content capable of responding to curriculum-based
questions; involving a scientific committee in contributing to the project;
establishing and managing a Wikipedia Scientific Journal, a peer-reviewed
scientific publication in Creative Commons attributions share-alike
license, designed to involve scholars and to assess Wikipedia articles, in
collaboration with other scientific journals and by fostering synergies
between scientific knowledge and Wikipedia and open access; producing
datasets to generate stub articles on Wikipedia in all linguistic editions;
uploading content, in particular OER Open Educational Resources already
available and images and texts provided with an open license compatible
with Wikipedia; supporting territorial development with tutors and with
upload capacities (in particular for countries with low connectivity);
monitoring and evaluating the project.
Fieldwork activities focus on testing and enhancing the use of Wikipedia in
primary school and it is developed in collaboration with the stakeholders
already working in education. They provide training, in particular training
for Wikipedians in residence; they organise Wikipedia events, in particular
Wiki Loves Monuments; they allow networking with institutions and
governments to facilitate the release of content with open licenses; they
tutor institutions and people; they develop pilot projects in schools and
in collaboration with NGOs working in education; they establish hotspots
where needed; and they facilitate the distribution of Wikipedia offline in
countries where relevant.
*What we do not do*
*Wikipedia Primary School* is a scalable and international project with a
specific goal: it responds to a real need, it relies on existing networks
and resources, and it is structured to allow people and institutions to
contribute to it. The very nature of the project is meant to produce a
broad impact. If the project *Wikipedia Primary School* is successful, it
can be developed in the future by producing content for other cycle of
education.
1. We do not break Wikipedia rules. The project respects Wikipedia
pillars and the opinions of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia communities.
2. We do not believe the project substitutes in any way the essential
role of people and institutions working in education. We want to contribute
in a specific way to the work many people and institutions are already
implementing and we believe only a collaborative approach can really allow
the project to be effective and relevant.
3. We do not produce a selection of Wikipedia articles. We want people
to access and benefit from the whole Wikipedia.
4. We do not address students, teachers and families only. Contributing
to Wikipedia is meant to provide better knowledge for everyone everywhere.
5. We do not work for governments and ministries of education. The
project is meant to be independent. It selects articles to be based on
national educational systems, but it does not implement on Wikipedia
governments’ strategies or requests.
6. We do not provide offline access to Wikipedia over online access. We
consider online access to Wikipedia a priority and the best way to access
Wikipedia, because it allows to contribute to it.
7. We do not consider Wikipedia a schoolbook. Wikipedia is not a
schoolbook and it can not substitute teachers and educators and other
appropriate educational resources.
8. We do not simplify Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia
and it requires a certain level of literacy in order to access it. We do
not want to adapt Wikipedia to primary school level; we want to include
topics and content relevant for primary education.
9. We do not make content available for Wikipedia only. Using Creative
Commons as part of the project methodology allows contents to be available
beyond Wikipedia.
10. We do not promote Wikipedia as a stable and passive resource. We
consider essential that people who use Wikipedia understand what Wikipedia
is. To understand it, the only appropriate way is to contribute to it and
being part of it.
11. We do not provide Wikipedia as it is. The project aims at fostering
a joint effort to improve Wikipedia and to assess its quality.
12. We do not centralise all the activities. The project can only reach
its goal and produce high quality content and impact, if people and
institutions can adapt them to their context, vision and work.
*What practically we want to do*
1) Involving governments in releasing dataset about public administrations
(to contribute to Wikidata and produce stub articles; at the moment only
Botswana is fully documented)
2) Asking OER open educational resources to be released in cc by or cc
by-sa (and not cc by-sa-nc-nd).
3) Asking other institutions working in education to contribute to OER.
4) Assessing Wikipedia articles by creating a Wikipedia Scientific Journal.
the idea is to assess wikipedia articles with the involvement of academic
peer-revierwes. this is specifically necessary for content related to
Africa because it needs to acknowledge the last 60 years of postcolonial
studies (which at the moment they are not well represented on
Wikipedia). the Wikipedia Scientific Journal is established in partnerships
with existing scientific journals; the peer-reviewers of those scientific
journals review the articles (existing ones and new ones) and we can make
calls for papers. those call for papers can address existing Wikipedia
authors but also scholars (who can add those publications to their cv since
they ae peer-reviewed and made in collaborations with scientific journals).
it is not a direct way of working on Wikipedia but i think it is the most
relevant on the long run.
Once articles are peer-reviewed they can be translated and they can be
rewritten in specific ways. At the same time also articles from Vikidia can
be a source.
5) Establishing a scientific committee who defines which articles
contribute to primary education and they overview and evaluate the project.
the scientific committee is also a communication tool which makes sure
stakeholders are involved.
6) Fostering communication and community building among the different
Wikipedia/Wikimedia clusters (project pages on Wikipedia, different
projects, different wikipedia linguistic editions, wikimedia chapters,
project such as wiki loves monuments which helps to understand what
wikipedia is and to start contributing)
7) Monitoring what happens with data analysis.
The project Wikipedia Primary School and all its documentation is under
Creative Commons attribution share alike license. Iolanda Pensa drafted the
project in 2012.
At the moment WikiAfrica
Cameroon<http://www.orange.com/en/news/2012/novembre/WikiAfrica-sharing-knowledge-in…>
promoted
by doual'art <http://www.doualart.org/> with the support of Orange
Foundation <http://www.fondationorange.com/?lang=en> is implementing a
pilot project around Wikipedia and primary school (2012-2013).The
WikiAfrica Primary School Feasibility Study has been developed in 2012 with
the support of volunteers and lettera27
Foundation<http://www.lettera27.org/> to
evaluate the possible synergies between Wikipedia and primary school with a
focus on the linguistic editions of Wikipedia and their use in primary
education in Africa, current Wikimedia projects, OER-Open Educational
Resources <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Open_educational_resources> and
case studies on the primary schools systems and current relevant projects
in the field of education in
Italy<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Education_in_Italy>
, Cameroon <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Education_in_Cameroon> and South
Africa <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Education_in_South_Africa>. The
Africa Centre based in Cape Town is currently developing trainings in
Africa for Wikipedians in residence. SUPSI University of Applied Sciences
and Arts of Southern Switzerland and University of Cape Town, in
collaboration with Wikimedia Switzerland and the Africa Centre based in
Cape Town have applied in March 2013 for a Swiss South African research
project related to Wikipedia Primary School within the SSAJRP programme.
--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
"A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more useful
than a life spent doing nothing."