On 20 March 2014 21:51, Anasuya Sengupta asengupta@wikimedia.org wrote:
Just to be clear and follow up on Lisa's mail: this project and process did not involve grants from WMF, and WMF's role (as Lisa explained) was as a fiscal sponsor, and thereby to provide initial advice as they began recruiting and to inform the community as they did so.
I am sure you are technically correct, however the blog post that Lisa linked to[1] appears to directly contradict your statement. In particular it informed the community that: "... the Wikimedia Foundation is pleased to announce ... We’re seeking an experienced Wikipedia editor for a one year," There is no qualification of any sort, so the blog post has been written so that the WMF is directly claiming to be running or responsible for the recruitment.
Further, Stephen Walling states in a comment that: ".... when we say we’re looking for a Wikipedian, that means we are looking for someone experienced as a volunteer editor of the free encyclopedia." This statement can only be read as the WMF running the recruitment, there can be no other interpretation of "we" when this is on the WMF blog and written by a WMF employee.
The post does state that "This position is funded by a generous grant from the Stanton Foundation This philanthropic institution has supported ... the Wikimedia Foundation in the past.." However there is no implication that the Stanton Foundation were doing anything other than providing a grant to the WMF and that the WMF were responsible for .
There is no doubt that the WMF provided its name against this post and officially promoted and endorsed it, putting the reputation of the WMF firmly against this project. I hope that someone can provide a report of the beneficial outcomes of this project for Wikimedia and open knowledge showing exactly what was purchased for this generous grant that was claimed to be provided to the WMF or for the benefit of WMF projects.
Links: 1. https://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/04/26/can-you-help-wikipedians-collaborate-w...
Fae