Hoi,
When you harp on things that do not truly matter, you get the wrong
results. It is not search that you are after, it is about aligning the
needs you feel about communication and openness and the lack of trust you
feel towards the WMF. I care about both. However, when Lila was hired it
was communicated loud and clear that the WMF would become more of an
organisation that would technically enable our projects. That in essence
means a change of culture. My appreciation is that this has not been really
taken on board by many and given the unfortunate changes at the board there
is a lack of trust in what is happening at the moment. It has been getting
towards a flash point for some time.
The whole thing with the Knight Foundation is what this flashpoint is
focused on and, it is a fight that will only have losers. When we have a
conversation of what kind of organisation we are, then fine. If we are to
be more activist, I want our endowment fund only to invest in green energy
to offset the harm that is done by using the electricity that is generated
by dirty sources. We hide behind our hosting company because it uses dirty
energy (and forget that we can offset that anyway somewhere else).
So what will it be, continue talk about things that are not the real issue
and fail or talk about what it is, where we really hurt. Trust in the
acceptance that the WMF and its board may be brave and do their job and
when this trust has broken down, what we can do to come to a workable and
acceptable continuation of what we do.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 15 February 2016 at 19:19, Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Gerard, you and I agree on most of these points.
Certainly, there is room
for improvement on intra-Wikimedia search, and such work is important, and
I would assume more pressing for non-English projects. And I agree, it is
quite possible Siko's concerns about integrity are not directly related to
the Knowledge Engine. (If they are unrelated, that would only more strongly
suggest there are fundamental issues to be addressed around integrity;
multiple issues would be worse than isolated incidents.)
But none of your points relate to whether Wikimedia leadership has been
honest and forthright in its public communications about the Knowledge
Engine. That is my concern here.
Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Feb 15, 2016 9:11 AM, "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hoi,
The notion that WMF should out google Google is stupid, certainly at that
kind of money. Search in the Wikimedia Foundation is much better but it
is
still easy for Magnus (for some time now) to
improve the search results
considerably.
The notion that search should not be strategic is laughable. Jane said
that
she uses Google to search results in our project
because it does a better
job. She searches in English !! Now consider searching in Tamil it finds
a
lot more than only results in Tamil. Then apply
this to our aim; provide
the sum of all knowledge.
Yes Siko left. It does however not follow that this has to do with grant
of
the Knight foundation. Yes she is outspoken in
what she says but it does
not follow that everything good is suspect. When James Heilman says that
he
has an issue with the focus on search, that is
different. It does still
not
follow that we do a good job on search or that
the additional effort as
described in the Knight grant is not an important persuit.
Thanks,
GerardM
Thanks,
GerardM
On 15 February 2016 at 17:57, Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Lila,
>
> The confusion, as you will surely agree, is understandable given the
> scattershot and often contradictory information provided by WMF to
> differing audiences. Above all, I hope the next volley of communication
> will address the central contradictions between what you and Jimmy
Wales
publicly
stated prior to the publication of the grant application, and
the
words in the application itself.
I will quote these below, but first to underscore the importance: when
Siko
questioned the integrity of the organization,
these are the apparent
willful lies that came to mind for me.
-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
Quotes:
"To make this very clear: no one in top positions has proposed or is
proposing that WMF should get into the general "searching" or to try to
"be
> google". It's an interesting hypothetical which has not been part of
any
serious
strategy proposal, nor even discussed at the board level, nor
proposed to the board by staff, nor a part of any grant, etc. It's a
total
lie." -J. Wales, Feb. 1
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=p…
>
> "Let’s all treat each other withcivility
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Civility> and etiquette
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Etiquette>, and see if we can
> collaborate
> to build a consensus <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Consensus> on
the
> WMF’s project direction to help readers
discover the high quality
content
and
knowledge our editors are creating." - L. Tretikov, Feb. 1
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)&a…
>
> "Knowledge Engine By Wikipedia is a federated knowledge engine that
will
give
users the most reliable and most trustworthy public information
channel on the web, applying fundamentals of transparent Wiki-based
systems
to surfacing the most relevant and important
information." Grant
application, August 2015
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-02-10/In_fo…
On Feb
15, 2016 2:35 AM, "Lila Tretikov" <lila(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hi Gnangarra,
>
> Thank you for forwarding, the authors of the article seem to be
confused
about the
nature of the project. Our Comms team is working to clarify
this.
> Please expect to see something from us in next few days.
>
> Lila
>
> On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Gnangarra <gnangarra(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> FYI making main stream media
>
>
>
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-15/wikimedia-foundation-aims-to-take-…
> > >
> > > On 14 February 2016 at 00:49, Anthony Cole <ahcoleecu(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Anne, we're talking about almost the same thing, but not
exactly. I
> say
> > > > "advised" you say "consulted".
"Consulted" implies soliciting or
> > > expecting
> > > > some kind of response or engagement - probably
> > > > approval/disapproval/critique/input. "Advised" means they
got the
> > memo. I
> > > > think "advised" is enough, and if the board wants more
engagement,
they
> > can
> > > initiate it - presuming the notification is clear and
comprehensive,
> of
> > > > course.
> > > >
> > > > Anthony Cole
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Well, I'm not sure about that, Anthony. By
"consulted", I
would
> mean
> > > > > something to the effect of "We're looking at applying
to XX
for a
> > grant
> > > > of
> > > > > $YYY to do ZZZ" and asking the Board if they would be
likely to
> agree
> > > to
> > > > > accept such a grant if the application is successful. The
grant
> >
> > application, evaluation and approval process is costly in both
time
> > and
> > > > > resources, and for both the applicant and the grantmaker.
Being
> >
informed
> > > > that a grant has been approved sounds more like a fait accompli
> > situation
> > > > for the Board - they look petty and ungrateful if they say no,
even
> > if
> > > > they
> > > > > don't think it was a reasonable grant application. In this
case,
> > we're
> > > > > only dealing with $250,000. What if this was $1 million? $10
> > million?
> > > > >
> > > > > I think it is healthier for everyone if the Board is properly
> > consulted
> > > > > before the application is submitted. (And again, I note that
we
> > don't
> > > > know
> > > > > how much was actually requested in this case, only what was
> granted.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Risker/Anne
> > > > >
> > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 21:23, Anthony Cole <
ahcoleecu(a)gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Anne, regarding:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Since the Board must approve acceptance of any
donations
over
> > > $100,000
> > > > > > USD, it seems to be obvious that they should be consulted
and
> > > possibly
> > > > > > should actively approve any grant applications where the
dollar
> > value
> > > > > > sought is higher than that amount."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not sure that the board should be *consulted* ahead
of
such
> >
> > > applications' or should prior-approve all such applications.
That
> > > seems a
> > > > > bit like micromanagement. But it makes sense to me for the
board
to
> be
> > > > *advised
> > > > *of such applications and when they're being actively
contemplated
> or
> > > > > prepared.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anthony Cole
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I'm sorry to hear that you feel this way, Gerard. I
personally
> > > would
> > > > > like
> > > > > > > to feel more assured that the WMF is looking into the
longer
future
> > and
> > > > > actively plannning for the day that donations no longer
support a
> > > large
> > > > > > staff doing lots of things.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am concerned today that the team specifically tasked to
work
> > > closely
> > > > > with
> > > > > > so many elements of the community has lost 7% of its staff,
and
> 30%
> > > of
> > > > > its
> > > > > > leaders, in a single week. This should be a concern in any
> > > > organization.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With respect to the Knight grant - I know that many times
grant
> > > > > > applications are
made for considerably more than is given,
and
I
am
> > > > > interested to know how much the WMF requested in the first
place.
> > I
> > > > > would
> > > > > > also like to know whether or not the Board was formally
advised
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > request before it was submitted. Since the Board must
approve
> > > > acceptance
> > > > > > of any donations over $100,000 USD, it seems to be obvious
that
> > > they
> > > > > > should
> > > > > > > be consulted and possibly should actively approve any
grant
> > > > > applications
> > > > > > > where the dollar value sought is higher than that
amount.
I
> > don't
> > > > > > believe
> > > > > > > the current policies require advance approval or even
advance
> >
> > > notification,
> > > > > > though.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Risker/Anne
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 03:54, Gerard Meijssen <
> > > > gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > > > I am not complaining. I point out that all this huha
does
not
> get
> > > us
> > > > > > > anywhere. I am not afraid to give an opinion and I am
not
> afraid
> > to
> > > > be
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > contrarian when I think it makes sense. Yes, things
happened
> that
> > > > were
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > > beautiful. They are not what upset me. What upsets me
is
that
> > > > people
> > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > Siko and Anna are leaving. Because they are part
of "my"
> > > Wikimedia
> > > > > > > > Foundation. What upsets me is that I routinely
use
Magnus's
>
tool
> > > and
> > > > > > > process hundreds of thousands of records and am to
understand
> > that
> > > > > > official
> > > > > > > query is stunted and does not allow for this
"because it
was
> > not
> > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > design" and it is then pointed out that it
takes money to
> solve
> > > > > this...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > My point is that baying for blood is not what
helps us
> forward.
> > > > What
> > > > > I
> > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > know is that when sheer negativity is not coupled
with an
> > ability
> > > > to
> > > > > > stop
> > > > > > > > and move forward, we will get in a downward
spiral. I
fault
> > Pine
> > > > for
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > being able to stop. What I wish for is for people
like
Anna
and
> > > Siko
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > money for our environment and not for an endowment.
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > GerardM
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 09:35, Michel Vuijlsteke <
> > wikipedia(a)zog.org
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Gerard,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I was waiting for this mail. For me personally,
your
> > complaining
> > > is
> > > > > > > > achieving exactly the opposite of what you
think.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It sounds as if you'd much rather prefer to
stick your
head
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > > sand
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > hope things will blow over. "Move
along, nothing to see
> here
> > --
> > > > oh
> > > > > > > look!
> > > > > > > > > something positive over there!" is not
going to solve
> > anything.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Michel
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 09:24, Gerard
Meijssen <
> > > > > > > gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > > > > > > Pine as you are talking about
"self inflicting
wounds"
I
> take
> > > it
> > > > > you
> > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > not talking in your personal capacity. When
is it
enough
> for
> > > you?
> > > > > > When
> > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > you going to talk about positive things,
things that
will
> > > move
> > > > us
> > > > > > > > > forward.
> > > > > > > > > > Why ask for blood and more blood? What
is it that you
> hope
> > to
> > > > > > > achieve?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Who do you represent in this unending
litany of
> negativity
> > > and
> > > > > what
> > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > you achieved in this way? When Lila was
engaged in
her
> > role,
> > > > she
> > > > > > was
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > direct in a different direction and she
is doing
that.
You
> may
> > > not
> > > > > like
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > and that is ok.
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > GerardM
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 12 February 2016 at 08:43, Pine W <
wiki.pine(a)gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Dariusz, thanks for continuing to
engage here.
Besides
> > the
> > > > good
> > > > > > > > > questions
> > > > > > > > > > > that others have asked, I'll
add a few:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 1. If the Knowledge Engine is such
an important
> project,
> > > why
> > > > is
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > > mentioned in
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2015-16
> > > > > > > > > >
?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 2. I realize that as a percentage
of the WMF
budget,
>
$250k
> > > is a
> > > > > > > > > relatively
> > > > > > > > > > small number. As others have said, this
is not a
reason
> for
> > > > > opacity
> > > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > > > it, nor a reason for not having a
conversation with
the
> > > > > community
> > > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > > > > something so strategically
important as a decision
to
> > > explore
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > question
> > > > > > > > > > > of "Would users go to
Wikipedia if it were an open
> > channel
> > > > > beyond
> > > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > > encyclopedia?" It's one
thing to have a blue-sky
> exercise
> > > > > > thinking
> > > > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > > > > possibilities, and another thing
to take a $250k
step
in
> > that
> > > > > > > > direction,
> > > > > > > > > > especially without consulting the
community.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 3. I am getting tired about seeing bad
news in
general
> > > about
> > > > > WMF
> > > > > > > > > > > governance, planning, and
turnover. I am curious
how
you
> plan
> > > to
> > > > > > > address
> > > > > > > > > those issues. Like you, I would rather that
we be
talking
> > > about
> > > > > our
> > > > > > > > > > movement plans for the next 10 years.
However, it's
> > difficult
> > > > to
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > those
> > > > > > > > > > conversations when WMF is making so
many
self-inflicted
> > > wounds.
> > > > > The
> > > > > > > > > recent
> > > > > > > > > > round of resignations is of respectable
people from
the
> > WMF
> > > > > staff
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > making
> > > > > > > > > > > the situation that much more
concerning and that
much
> > more
> > > > > > > difficult
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > recover from. It seems to me that
WMF leadership
has
lost
> > > > control
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > situation, and I'd like to hear
what the recovery
plan
> is.
> > > > > > > Personally,
> > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > feel that we need leadership that can
build good
> > > relationships
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > staff and community, is transparent by
default, and
is
> > > > capable
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > restoring
> > > > > > > > > > > the credibility of the
organization's planning,
> > execution,
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > > goodwill.
> > > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > > think that we may need new
leadership to make that
> > happen.
> > > I
> > > > am
> > > > > > > > > > interested
> > > > > > > > > > > to hear your thoughts.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Pine
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 7:32 PM,
Dariusz
Jemielniak <
> > > > > > > >
darekj(a)alk.edu.pl
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > 11.02.2016 10:23 PM
"SarahSV" <
> sarahsv.wiki(a)gmail.com>
> > > > > > > napisał(a):
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Dariusz,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > T
> > > > > > > > > > > > > he grant application
doesn't restrict the
search
engine
> > to
> > > > > > > Wikimedia
> > > > > > > > > > projects. It says that the
"Knowledge Engine by
Wikipedia
> > [is
> > > > a]
> > > > > > > system
> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > discovering reliable and trustworthy
public
information
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Internet.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > My understanding is that the top
range could
> potentially
> > be
> > > > all
> > > > > > > > > > open/public
> > > > > > > > > > > resources, but this is the far
stretched total
goal,
> > and
> > > > > still
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > > general search engine of all
content including
> > commercial
> > > > > one.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > And a rrasonable realistic
outcome can be just
> > improving
> > > > our
> > > > > > > > searches
> > > > > > > > > > > > across projects.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I can't comment on the
initial ideas or goals,
as I
was
> > not
> > > > on
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Board
> > > > > > > > > > > before August 2015, but this is
what I understand
we
> > build
> > > > now.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > The document says the
"Search Engine by
Wikipedia"
> > > budget
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > 2015–2016
> > > > > > > > > > > > ($2.4 million) was approved
by the board. Can
you
> > point
> > > us
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > which
> > > > > > > > > > > board
> > > > > > > > > > > > meeting approved it and what
was discussed there?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I dont recall this
specifically, and I'm going to
> elude
> > > > this
> > > > > > > > question
> > > > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > > > > going to sleep (and hoping
someone better
informed
> may
> > > > pick).
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Good night!
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Dj
> > > > > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list,
guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > > > New messages to:
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > > > >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list,
guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > > > >
>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > > New messages to:
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > > >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ,
> >
> > > > > > > >
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > New messages to:
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > >
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > New messages to:
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > GN.
> > President Wikimedia Australia
> > WMAU:
http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> > Photo Gallery:
http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Lila Tretikov
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> > *“Be bold and mighty forces will come to your aid.”*
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>