See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/Staff_proposal_assessment_fo... : there seems to still be an assumption that Wikipedia is ok by default while everything else needs to be justified.
Nemo
Again, money is not the problem. Chapters may probably help Wikisource. Crowdfunding could also be a solution.
Pyb
2014-11-26 12:38 GMT+01:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/Staff_ proposal_assessment_form : there seems to still be an assumption that Wikipedia is ok by default while everything else needs to be justified.
Nemo
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
I don't think that money is "strictly" the problem. I just think that if sister projects (well, I'll talk about Wikisource here) would be "in the minds" of developers and project managers, they would really scale. I mean: the WMF thinks all the time about Wikipedia. They have staff on it who thinks about software maintenance, software development, editor retention, GLAM relationships, and I could go on and on. Why sister project do not fit in *any* of this?
*Everything* which has been done on Wikisource has been done by volunteers (sometime by the chapters). All the crucial software developments I know (the proofread page, for example) has been done by ThomasV, Tpt, Phe (I personally don't know others). The community recently thought about Google Summer of Codes to have people deveops tools and piece of software. They do, but then it's almost impossible to really integrate them in the main software, so they are left there. The Individual Engagement Grant that me and David did was simply aimed to gather the community and try to do things together, spread the good ideas, join scattered individuals and communities. We had some results, that the WMF could take and build upon (think about the survey).
I'm getting a little tired, every year at Wikimania, to hear the same praise of Wikisource by WMF Board or Staff but being told that we are "supported" but not in the "priority list". I would think that there are some many low hanging fruits that donors money would be well spent (ie. the Wikisource contest that is running now on several Wikisources. In Italy, the chapter gave 100 euros for the prizes, and we gained 4300 proofread pages in a single week (it takes 6 months for the community to get those numbers)).
I'm sorry if I sound like a broken record, but it's my perception that a minimal effort from the WMF could lead to major results. I still don't understand why they do not think about that.
Aubrey
PS: I think about the WMF because for chapters is more difficult to step in and work on core software related matters. Chapters can and do work on GLAM partnerships, liasons, collaboration, digitization plans. "Local" stuff. At least, that is my perception (also, as a chapter president).
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Pierre-Yves Beaudouin < pierre.beaudouin@gmail.com> wrote:
Again, money is not the problem. Chapters may probably help Wikisource. Crowdfunding could also be a solution.
Pyb
2014-11-26 12:38 GMT+01:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/Staff_
proposal_assessment_form : there seems to still be an assumption that Wikipedia is ok by default while everything else needs to be justified.
Nemo
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
I would be happy to ask money to Wikimedia France. But right now, I don't know what is the most important thing to develop on Wikisource. It's clearly not Annotation and TEI. If it is Epub or OCR. Could someone describe what do you need ? An idea of the cost would be great, but just few sentences describing the project would be useful.
Pyb
2014-11-26 13:25 GMT+01:00 Andrea Zanni zanni.andrea84@gmail.com:
I don't think that money is "strictly" the problem. I just think that if sister projects (well, I'll talk about Wikisource here) would be "in the minds" of developers and project managers, they would really scale. I mean: the WMF thinks all the time about Wikipedia. They have staff on it who thinks about software maintenance, software development, editor retention, GLAM relationships, and I could go on and on. Why sister project do not fit in *any* of this?
*Everything* which has been done on Wikisource has been done by volunteers (sometime by the chapters). All the crucial software developments I know (the proofread page, for example) has been done by ThomasV, Tpt, Phe (I personally don't know others). The community recently thought about Google Summer of Codes to have people deveops tools and piece of software. They do, but then it's almost impossible to really integrate them in the main software, so they are left there. The Individual Engagement Grant that me and David did was simply aimed to gather the community and try to do things together, spread the good ideas, join scattered individuals and communities. We had some results, that the WMF could take and build upon (think about the survey).
I'm getting a little tired, every year at Wikimania, to hear the same praise of Wikisource by WMF Board or Staff but being told that we are "supported" but not in the "priority list". I would think that there are some many low hanging fruits that donors money would be well spent (ie. the Wikisource contest that is running now on several Wikisources. In Italy, the chapter gave 100 euros for the prizes, and we gained 4300 proofread pages in a single week (it takes 6 months for the community to get those numbers)).
I'm sorry if I sound like a broken record, but it's my perception that a minimal effort from the WMF could lead to major results. I still don't understand why they do not think about that.
Aubrey
PS: I think about the WMF because for chapters is more difficult to step in and work on core software related matters. Chapters can and do work on GLAM partnerships, liasons, collaboration, digitization plans. "Local" stuff. At least, that is my perception (also, as a chapter president).
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Pierre-Yves Beaudouin < pierre.beaudouin@gmail.com> wrote:
Again, money is not the problem. Chapters may probably help Wikisource. Crowdfunding could also be a solution.
Pyb
2014-11-26 12:38 GMT+01:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/Staff_
proposal_assessment_form : there seems to still be an assumption that Wikipedia is ok by default while everything else needs to be justified.
Nemo
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Pierre-Yves Beaudouin, 26/11/2014 12:53:
Again, money is not the problem.
Well, APG is about money so they talk about money there. But I do remember WMF coming at us and asking what's the "legitimacy" of spending resources (not necessarily financial) on sister projects. That drives me crazy.
Nemo
In my opinion, VE is a priority thing to develop in Wikisource. Catalan community is a VE-friendly. If three chapters funded a developer during few month, we would get it. I could try to ask money to Amical.
Carles
2014-11-26 15:10 GMT+01:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
Pierre-Yves Beaudouin, 26/11/2014 12:53:
Again, money is not the problem.
Well, APG is about money so they talk about money there. But I do remember WMF coming at us and asking what's the "legitimacy" of spending resources (not necessarily financial) on sister projects. That drives me crazy.
Nemo
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
I could maybe find money as Wikimedia Italy, but: * who would take care of the project? do we have a name for a developer? * how much would it cost? * do we have a plan or some specifics? If we have these things, money is the least of the problems. We can ask for a GAC grant as Wikisource Community User Group too, directly to the WMF.
Aubrey
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Carles Paredes Lanau < carlesparedes@gmail.com> wrote:
In my opinion, VE is a priority thing to develop in Wikisource. Catalan community is a VE-friendly. If three chapters funded a developer during few month, we would get it. I could try to ask money to Amical.
Carles
2014-11-26 15:10 GMT+01:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
Pierre-Yves Beaudouin, 26/11/2014 12:53:
Again, money is not the problem.
Well, APG is about money so they talk about money there. But I do remember WMF coming at us and asking what's the "legitimacy" of spending resources (not necessarily financial) on sister projects. That drives me crazy.
Nemo
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
I thought WMF board is chosen by Wikimedians and Wikimedia Foundation has the help to all WMF projects in its basical documents. So next time, we should chose just those candidates to he board, who will be willing to to give some portion of help.
I heard from WMF related people, that other projects are not so efficient, so they dont have more help. But they will never be more efficent without a help as they grow in the "shade of Wikipedia". If you provide them more light (in this case support from mother organisation) - they will have more equal conditions to Wikipedia and they can show up to be the same or more efficient as wp.
I am really sad to here voices in our chapter, we will not help other projects, because WMF doesnt support them. Its really sad. When I enter to the chapter I had to agree with the bylaws, that sais the Chapter is the local support for WMF project in the area. There is no word about inequality between project.
Regards, Juandev
2014-11-26 16:04 GMT+01:00 Andrea Zanni zanni.andrea84@gmail.com:
I could maybe find money as Wikimedia Italy, but:
- who would take care of the project? do we have a name for a developer?
- how much would it cost?
- do we have a plan or some specifics?
If we have these things, money is the least of the problems. We can ask for a GAC grant as Wikisource Community User Group too, directly to the WMF.
Aubrey
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Carles Paredes Lanau < carlesparedes@gmail.com> wrote:
In my opinion, VE is a priority thing to develop in Wikisource. Catalan community is a VE-friendly. If three chapters funded a developer during few month, we would get it. I could try to ask money to Amical.
Carles
2014-11-26 15:10 GMT+01:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
Pierre-Yves Beaudouin, 26/11/2014 12:53:
Again, money is not the problem.
Well, APG is about money so they talk about money there. But I do remember WMF coming at us and asking what's the "legitimacy" of spending resources (not necessarily financial) on sister projects. That drives me crazy.
Nemo
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Really? And what are those elections on Meta time by time. Can we chose our representatives in WMF leading body?
2014-11-28 15:49 GMT+01:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
Juan de Vojníkov, 28/11/2014 15:10:
I thought WMF board is chosen by Wikimedians
Wrong.
Nemo
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Juan de Vojníkov, 28/11/2014 19:28:
Really? And what are those elections on Meta time by time.
Assistance to cooptation.
Can we chose our representatives in WMF leading body?
* Representatives are not allowed by WMF bylaws according to WMF legal. ** «Board members are required by law to represent the interests of WMF» https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_Handbook#Election_to_the_Board_and_length_of_terms * Community is officially minority in the current WMF board (until further notice). ** https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2013-11-24#footer ** https://en.wikipedia.org/?diff=prev&oldid=624146586
Nemo
wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org