After the last disastrous WMF intervention in Wikipedia - Framgate - I believe the timing is just perfect for the WMF to go forward with this fit of creativity of branding themselves as the "Wikipedia Foundation".
It's one after another, and never stops.
Best, Paulo
Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com escreveu no dia sexta, 6/09/2019 à(s) 18:25:
I agree with Fae. I strongly oppose the proposal, and I somehow used to assume that our opinion would be asked in a structured way.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:03 PM Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
If the WMF is going to make statements that are not derived from all the demonstrable facts, perhaps the community should now respond with a completely unambiguous RFC on meta so there can be no doubt?
Something along the lines of: "The WMF have employed Wolff Olins for rebranding advice, and they recommend that Wikimedia rebrands itself around the word "Wikipedia" and projects like Wikimedia Commons are renamed to "Wikicommons" to ensure marketing of the projects can easily be delivered by the WMF. Do you support or oppose this rebranding programme?"
With a straightforward RFC to keep on linking to in every discussion on every venue, we might then have tangible evidence of whether "There is considerable support for the branding proposal" or "There is considerable opposition for the branding proposal" is factual. Rather than drifting along for months with the debate and unhappiness that comes from arguing both sides of a mostly political case without firmly verifiable evidence available or relying on complex and less credible stats from surveys that are likely to suffer from embedded bias, especially considering the already banked investment in consultancy that drives the need to change something, to prove the spent money had impact and "value".
P.S. Zack and others, it's best to avoid the word "collaboration" when communicating with an international group. It has unfortunate history and gives the impression that you are quoting views from collaborators rather than holding open collegial discussion.
Thanks, Fae
On Fri, 6 Sep 2019 at 17:19, Diane Ranville <dranville-ctr@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Hi,
I agree with Pine. There is a majority of people who actually oppose the rebranding proposition. I don't quite understand why this is still going forward (except that
it
is
difficult to acknowledge a mistake and take steps backwards - but it is sometimes necessary). Have other options even been considered?
-speaking in my own name here-
Diane
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:35 AM Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Hello Zack,
Thank you for the report on Meta.
I am troubled by your statement in this email that "There is
considerable
support for the brand proposal and general appetite to improve our movement’s branding system." What that statement appears to omit is
that,
according to the report on Meta, there is also considerable
opposition
to
the rebranding proposal.
Can you explain why you characterized the proposal as having
"considerable
support" without in the same sentence acknowledging what appears to
be
considerable opposition?
Of the three top-level metrics that the report on Meta displays that measure community and affiliate support or opposition regarding the rebranding proposal, one of the three metrics is in favor and two of
the
three metrics are opposed. If this was an RfC, and I was using those measures of sentiment to evaluate support and opposition regarding
the
RfC,
I would probably close the current rebranding proposal as declined.
Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
On Thu, Sep 5, 2019, 20:49 Zack McCune zmccune@wikimedia.org
wrote:
*Summary* - We want your help with a voluntary, OPT-IN design
process for
movement branding. Please join the in-depth discussion group, or
watch
for
updates on Meta-Wiki.
Hello all,
After 4 months of community consultation, spanning dozens of
affiliates,
several mailing lists, community conferences, and Meta-Wiki, I am
pleased
to share a summary of feedback on the proposed 2030 movement brand
strategy
[1].
From more than 319 comments, representing 150 individual
contributors and
63 affiliates, we assessed 6 major themes in feedback:
Reducing confusion 2.
Protecting reputation 3.
Supporting sister projects 4.
Addressing (legal, governmental) risks 5.
Supporting movement growth 6.
The process of change
Please visit our feedback summary page to learn more [2]. You will
see
examples of comments within each section, along with a rough
indication
of
how many of the comments that we received were related to each
theme.
The comments sometimes contradict one another, showing that across
our
wide
movement’s experience, different points of view are common (and a
sign of
health!). To visualize these tensions, we have created “polarity
maps”
which are used to help visualize how different arguments coexist in
tension
with each other.
Ultimately, the comments provided from you all are very thoughtful
and
useful guidance on what is needed to make our movement’s branding successful. One can read the 6 themes above as “criteria” for
assessing
branding systems.
== Thanks ==
I would like to thank the organizers of Iberoconf, Wikipedia
Education
Summit, and the Wikimedia Summit for inviting us to hold
discussions
during
their sessions. I would also like to thank my colleagues Elena
Lappen,
Samir Elsharbaty, and Blanca Flores who conducted extensive parts
of
this
consultation. To the hundreds of people, and dozens of affiliates commenting, thank you for reviewing the proposal and offering your perspectives and insights.
== Next steps and staying involved ==
There is considerable support for the brand proposal and general
appetite
to improve our movement’s branding system. Further, we believe that critical feedback on the proposal offers direct guidance for
precisely
what
branding must do to be successful for our movement. We have shared
these
insights and our proposed continuance with the Board of Trustees,
who
approved continuing these efforts.
Acting on community insights, we will be collaborating on formal
brand
naming, visual identity, and brand system design that will use
“Wikipedia”
as the central reference point. The resulting system will be OPT-IN
for
affiliates.
This design process will be guided by a “brand network” – a group
of
volunteers who would like to continue advising on brand during this consultation. Dozens of people have already volunteered, and we
invite
you
to join the group. We will use a group on Wikimedia Space to host
this
discussion and the group will be closed to allow candid discussions
and
room for iterations. EVERYONE IS INVITED TO JOIN [3]. If you do not
want
to
commit to the in-depth, longer term discussions that will be
happening
within the brand network group, we will still be tracking comments
left
on
the project’s Meta-Wiki page [4]. Furthermore, all important ideas
and
updates originating from the brand network discussion will be
shared
publicly to mailing lists and Meta-Wiki.
The development of this proposed identity system will take
approximately
6
months. As stated, regular updates will be shared to mailing lists, Wikimedia Space, and Meta-Wiki [4]. Please engage us where you are
most
comfortable! Once complete, community groups will have the power to
decide
if/when they opt in to using the new system.
Yours,
Zack
[1]
https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2019/02/26/leading-with-wikipedia-a-bra...
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_researc...
[3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/g/brand-network and click
the
gray
"Request" button. When your request is approved, you will be able
to
see
and access the brand network discussion category on the Discuss
Space
main
page.
[4]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_researc...
--
Zack McCune (he/him)
Director of Brand
Wikimedia Foundation https://wikimediafoundation.org/ _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@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 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe