I understand that it can be sometimes frustrating to be answering a bunch of questions
from other Wikipedians (including, perhaps me) however it serves a purpose.
You have suggested the formation, on this list, of a new entity. There are two things
worth congragulating you here. One, that you are willing to take a lead on the formation
of an entity. Second, that you have announced it on this list.
However, this act of creating a new entity comes along with it the responsoibility of
answering questions and concerns other members of the community may have. This helps
people who want to join in decide and understand what they are getting into.
It also makes things simpler for the teams and groups following your lead. Being a pioneer
requires effort because change is resisted. Alternatives will be suggested and the group
must stand the test of why another entity may not do the work that this group does.
Do engage with the community here. It may be frustrating and take your time in the
beginning but I believe it would be worthwhile in the long run. This has been my
How Pradeep uses email? - http://goo.gl/6v1I9
From: Arun Ramarathnam <arunram25(a)gmail.com
To: Wikimedia India Community list <wikimediaindia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Sunday, 6 January 2013 6:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimediaindia-l] Proposal for India's First MediaWiki Group Ahmedabad
First of all thanks to you and the volunteers in Ahmendabad who are keen to contribute to
Mediawiki. it is evident from your contributions to Gujarati (around Mediawiki) that you
and others are very interested to do your bit. Please continue to do this with the passion
and the enthusiasm some of you have show already.
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 12:34 AM, Harsh Kothari <harshkothari410(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Next is I don't want to get involved in this type of discussion. I just want to
contribute and code. This is probably the best we can do, since the rest of Ahmedabad
group members are also more interested in coding than in formal discussions like this one.
We silently help growing the MediaWiki community across India. That is what matters.
As a far these "formal discussions" go they are essential to sort out and bring
clarity to the emerging models proposed by the foundation. There are matters of scope of
multiple entities at play, overlapping turfs, trademark licensing, membership, continuity
of activities and funding that are involved.
Building volunteer groups is best done without the need for a registered entity as they
come with the burden of maintaining and ensuring compliance to the regulatory authorities.
The focus while bootstrapping these ought to be (as you right said) on building the
Let the chapter and the WMF sort out the larger model while you folks keep the focus on
the technical work that you are passionate about. I am sure the chapter or the WMF would
be happen to support if you were to need any help.
For now, it is unclear to me what treating the Ahmedabad Mediawiki user group as a formal
wikimedia user group actually means? Does that mean it would be non-incorporated entity
and have trademark reuse rights (from the chapter?). It suppose it would need to depend on
funding as needed from the chapter or WMF.
Can someone clarify?
Is there any other aspect that I may be missing?
To chime in on the observations made earlier on the thread...I for for one also
India has been a test bed to test out models without thinking through the ramifications
enough. The creation of India programs (first intended as a temporary office, then a
formal entity, subsequently wound up (which came as a huge shock to many) and handed over
to CIS (now A2K). I do think some of these moves ought to have happened with more chapter
If for one don't understand how first a focused Boots-on-the-ground initiative is
launched and subsequently there is a move to a narrowed focused model (a complete change
in approach). This move has surely impacted the dynamics at the ground in India immensely.
We have lost some truly good wikipedians who have moved on in disillusionment.
I care for the movement and do believe that strengthening chapters to be the custodians of
the movement in respective countries is the way to go forward. In my view, all movement
entities should focus on assisting chapters to be successful who in term focus on
supporting the community and local outreach. If there isn't belief in chapters, better
to scrap them than run parallel entities (I am not referring to the Ahmedabad initiative
What is sad is in the midst of this complexity of organisational entities, we perhaps risk
losing truly enthusiastic volunteers whose only interest is in contributing to the
movement. Catalysing and supporting volunteer enthusiasm and interest ought to be our
collective sole purpose and focus.
I request Harsh and the other volunteers to keep the focus on the "coding" and
the cool stuff than get caught up in the debate of the organizational complexity which is
best left to the chapter EC and the WMF to sort out quickly.
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit