Sir, I have been editing in wikipedia and uploading pics on wikimedia. and
use them for my articles.
I'm an editor for kannada language wikipedia.(Radhatanaya)
I'm an editor for english mediam wikipedia. (Ragakuvara)
I have contributed more than 900+ articles for kannada.
For english nearly 10-12 articles. all approved.
This information I have given in my page. Why I have been banned. Please
try to help me. I'm very hardworking and faithful person. I have not done
any adverse work. I was a technical offier (Retired in 2004) in a reknowned
Research organisation for cotton !
Please help me so that I can upload photos and fix them for the articles I
write both in kannada & English
Regards,
-Holalkere rangarao laxmivenkatesh
Mumbai-400084
M : 9004356819
M : 9867606819
Hello friends,
This is a link I recommend you to bookmark.
http://wiki.wikimedia.in/Geographical_distribution_of_Indian_Wikipedians
This list is useful for outreach & also whenever someone needs Wiki-Help in
a particular city. It would be great if Wikipedians could update this
list.:)
We have the following completely unrepresented states/UTs:
* Andaman & Nicobar Islands
* Arunachal Pradesh
* Assam
* Chandigarh
* Chhattisgarh
* Dadra, Nagar & Haveli
* Daman & Diu
* Goa
* Himachal Pradesh
* Jammu & Kashmir
* Jharkhand (AngPradesh is in Mumbai)
* Lakshadweep
* Manipur
* Meghalaya
* Mizoram
* Puducherry
* Punjab (oye, ye ki hoya!)
* Nagaland
* Uttar Pradesh
* Uttarakhand
Okay, all you admins, please update your status (Mikey my boy, that means
you too)!
Abroad, we dont have Indic Wikipedians listed for:
* Africa
* Australia
* Asia (other than India)
* Middle East
* North America
* South America
Unless you would like to stay off list, of course that's acceptable too.
May I also request Tinu / list admins to please forward it all the Indic
language & city Wikimedia lists. We need this resource to be as
comprehensible as possible.
Warm regards,
Ashwin Baindur
------------------------------------------------------
Dear All,
Tulu language is being taught in schools of coastal Karnataka. The students
don't have much encyclopedic books or content to read other than the
textbooks. We at Karavali Wikimedians User Group have come out with a
project plan to add articles to Tulu Wikipedia based on the school
syllabus. The plan is to get enough number of articles in Tulu Wikipedia,
create offline Tulu Wikipedia using Kiwix and then distribute them to
schools. I have created a grant application for this project [1]. I request
everyone to go through the grant application and provide useful suggestions
in the talk page. Also please endorse the grant application once you are
convinced that this project needs support.
Notes: 1. Grant application -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Pavanaja/Tulu_offline_Wikiped
ia_to_schools
2. For endorsing -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Pavanaja/Tulu_offline_Wikiped
ia_to_schools#Endorsements
3. For discussions -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:Project/Pavanaja/Tulu_offline_Wi
kipedia_to_schools
Thanks and regards,
Pavanaja
Hello one and all,
I hope this email will find you well. Earlier we informed you about the
project Supporting Indian Language Wikipedias Program (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Supporting_Indian_
Language_Wikipedias_Program).
Here we want to request you something.
For proper and systematic distribution of the resource we'll make a
committee who'll share and expertise to make the process and the selection
better.
If you are an experienced Indic Wikimedian, you are requested to show
interest to join this review committee.
If you are interested please write to us at tanveer(a)cis-india.org,
tito(a)cis-india.org with your name, username, and a brief statement on why
do you want to join this committee.
Please send your response before 4 February . If you have questions, please
contact us.
Greetings,
As it has already been notified about Wikigraphists Bootcamp in India, for
training related to creation drawings, illustrations, diagrams, maps,
graphs, bar charts etc. and to tune the images to meet the QI and FP
criteria, *please fill the survey form at: *
https://goo.gl/forms/JeyW7vDzGnYohdyv2*. *It'll help the organizers to
assess the needs of the community, and plan accordingly. Please ignore if
already done.
For more information, please visit:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikigraphists_Bootcamp_(2018_India)
Regards,
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Asaf Bartov <abartov(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 1:59 PM
Subject: Let's map capacities! (Announcing the CCM)
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Dear Wikimedians,
*How many Wikimedia communities have embraced advanced Wikidata use? How
many have active social media accounts, and are there geographic or
cultural patterns to which groups have and have not? Which groups have a
written, current strategy? What are the most common gaps in capacity in
Latin America? or in Eastern Europe? What kind of investment in capacity
building would be likely to bring the most value?*
To answer these questions and more, we invite all of you to participate in
the new *Community Capacity Map (CCM)*: a *self-assessment exercise* for
communities, groups (whether formally recognized user groups or not),
thematic organizations, and chapters, to *map capacities* across the
movement, with a view to identifying *existing gaps* as well as *opportunities
for capacity-building*.
The CCM is here on Meta:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Capacity_Map
The context for this work, as well as "likely-asked questions, with
answers" ("LAQ"?), are explained here, including an answer to "*why should
I take the time to read all this?*" --
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Capacity_Map/About
(and also pasted at the bottom of this e-mail, for your convenience.)
The self-assessment is to be done based on the detailed *Guidelines* provided
here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Capacity_Map/Guidelines
I am looking forward to learning more about your groups' and orgs'
capacities and gaps, and to do my best to play matchmaker between those
needs and our available resources and opportunities. While I encourage you
to begin contributing straightaway, *there is no deadline *-- this is
envisioned to be a long-term, ongoing, and tracked-over-time tool -- so
contribute if and when your group is able to make the time.
(don't forget to scroll down to the LAQ!)
Warmly,
Asaf Bartov
Senior Program Officer, Emerging Wikimedia Communities
==========================================
Likely-asked questions, with answers
this exists with working links and [modest] formatting here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Capacity_Map/About#Likely-asked_q…
Why do this at all? The Community Resources team is doing this to attempt
a more *comprehensive* view of capacities and gaps across the movement, to
enhance our existing, anecdotal and ad-hoc, impressions of only some of the
communities and affiliates. See the goal statement above. Why now? The CCM
experiment is an implementation of one of the recommendations made at the
conclusion of the Community Capacity Development pilot year
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Capacity_Development/Overall_pilo…>
. Why should I spend the time to read through it or go through the
self-assessment? There are a couple of reasons you may want to put in the
time: First, by self-assessing your group/organization's capacities and
gaps, you are giving WMF and other potential investors in community
capacity a chance to provide your group/org with resources and
opportunities to *build up* those capacities. Secondly, self-assessing
according to the Guidelines page
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Capacity_Map/Guidelines> may be
in itself a worthwhile exercise and discussion-starter for your group/org,
pointing at potential areas for proactive work by *your org/group itself*,
for example in your next annual plan. Finally, self-assessing (at least
some) capacities today would enable you to review and re-assess in six
months, or two years, and see how your group/org has developed (or not) in
each of these aspects. So does WMF expect all groups and organizations to
do this? No. This is an opportunity and a tool. Like all other tools, you
are free to use it or not, and we certainly understand that it would take
time and that you may have more pressing priorities in your group/org. We
*hope* as many groups, organizations, and communities eventually take the
time to self-assess, at least on some capacities, but it is not mandatory,
and there would be no penalty for not participating. Would we have to
provide self-assessments for *all* of the capacities? No. Feel free to
self-assess on as many or as few capacities as you are able to, interested
in, or find relevant. You can also add assessments gradually, as your
group/org finds time to discuss and agree on assessments. Should I assess
capacities in the context of my wiki community, my user-group/chapter, or
what? It depends. It may make sense to do separate assessments, or just
one. For example, while the English community has plenty of bot builders
and technical experts, you may belong to a small community contributing in
English in a country with little or no bot-building expertise, such as
Wikimedians in Uganda. In this case, it would make sense to describe the
capacities of the Ugandan group you're part of, and not of the whole
English Wikipedia community. On the other hand, it is possible that there
is a very high degree of overlap between the Estonian community's
capacities and the Estonian chapter's capacities, and in that case, it may
be most useful to assess just once, for the Estonian community *or*
Wikimedia Estonia, or possibly once for the community for on-wiki
capacities, and separately for Wikimedia Estonia only for the
organizational and off-wiki capacities. See the Guidelines
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Capacity_Map/Guidelines> page
for more details. Okay, and suppose we did put in the time and provided
some assessments. What can we expect next? You can expect, at the very
least, one program officer at Community Resources paying attention to your
contribution, and possibly, depending on each specific capacity and
assessment, that officer may have resources or opportunities to suggest to
your community/group/org. *The more groups provide assessments, the
better-informed WMF would be*, and the more likely it would be that *WMF
could allocate resources and create training opportunities* for your group.
Shared needs in a region would increase the likelihood of WMF acting even
further, as it would allow economizing on the investment by
training/supporting several groups/communities at once. Are you saying if X
number of communities demonstrate need Y, WMF is *guaranteed* to allocate
resources to fill that need? I'm afraid not. But it does make it *more
likely*, in that it demonstrates the need, making it easier to argue for it
in internal budgeting and allocation discussions, and to marshal internal
WMF resources (such as borrowing the time of subject experts at WMF to
conduct training or mentor groups). Okay, so how would WMF decide which
communities to offer resources to? There's no simple deterministic
algorithm, but WMF would prioritize emerging communities
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement/Defining_Emerging_Comm…>
over other communities, larger groups serving larger populations over
smaller ones, and at least at first, would probably prioritize "low-hanging
fruit" -- lower-cost/lower-risk investments, as we learn and improve this
program's use of resources. Wouldn't the fact these are self-assessments
mean we'd be comparing apples to oranges, given some groups would
overestimate or underestimate their own capacities? No. We do understand
there are some cultural tendencies (some cultures are more self-critical
than others, or have rosier or more pessimistic views of future prospects
and current capabilities). However, we think the fairly coarse granularity
of the assessments (none/low/medium/high), coupled with *the Guidelines
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Capacity_Map/Guidelines>* for
self-assessing, would lead most groups to make reasonably comparable
assessments. Ultimately, these would remain subjective and unscientific
assessments; but they would certainly at least indicate a group/org's *own*
perception of their capacity. And before WMF (or others interested in
investing in capacity building) make a decision to tackle a particular
capacity with a particular community/group/org/region, we would be sure to
take into consideration *all the relevant context* we have, i.e. not just
the aggregate of the self-assessments in the CCM, but also all the
accumulated experience, context, and history we are aware of at WMF,
regarding that community/group/org/region. Okay, this may not be *the worst*
idea ever to come from WMF We're glad you think so. :) What if none of
this turns out the way you hope? Then we'll archive these pages and look
for other ways to do effective capacity building. The CCM is an experiment,
based on observed needs and an expectation that it would be useful. But we
are ready to learn that it may not, and to change course if necessary.
Let's give it a shot, though! What if I have another question? Use the
talk page! :)
Greetings,
I am planning for Wikigraphists Bootcamp in India, please fill out the
survey form to help the organizers. Your responses will help organizers
understand what level of demand there is for the event (how many people in
your community think it is important that the event happens).
Survey form: https://goo.gl/forms/JeyW7vDzGnYohdyv2
To start with, English Wikipedia has a dedicated team of editors to work on
computer generated images, illustrations, and maps. The platform is
referred as the Graphics Lab <https://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab>, and the contributors are called
Wikigraphists. Wikigraphists work to improve the quality of the images that
have been proposed by the community. This involves work such as extracting
key elements from photos, improving the color of images or emphasizing the
main subject, stitching multiple images together and often vectorizing
images — converting to Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG). They also create new
drawings, diagrams and maps when requests are made to do so. The Graphics
lab functions as Illustration workshop, Photography workshop, and Maps
workshop, depending upon the type of request by a user.
However, the use of SVG format, and other above mentioned graphic
techniques are not seen much seen in practice among the Indian community.
The plan is to organize a bootcamp for 3–4 days to train the participants
on the above said. The workshop will emphasize on the "Graphics lab" of
Wikipedia, and the technicalities and image parameters of Quality images
(QI) and Featured pictures (FP), on Wikimedia Commons. At the end of the
day, the participants will turn out to have knowledge to create drawings,
illustrations, diagrams, maps, graphs, bar charts etc. and get to know to
how to tune the images to meet the QI and FP criteria.
Survey form: https://goo.gl/forms/JeyW7vDzGnYohdyv2
Regards,
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga
