Wikimedia-l April 2022

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

103 participants
61 discussions

Happy #May17 #IDAHOT #IDAHOTBITQ
by Željko Blaće 18 May '24

18 May '24

What is May 17th? The International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia was created in 2004 to draw the attention to the violence and discrimination experienced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex people and all other people with diverse sexual orientations, gender identities or expressions, and sex characteristics. The date of May 17th was specifically chosen to commemorate the World Health Organization’s decision in 1990 to declassify homosexuality as a mental disorder. https://may17.org One year ago in 2020 we started QueeringW in hope #1 Queering Wikipedia conference would be happening with a year of delay...now we hope it is in 2022! Meanwhile we are "Together, we Resist, Support, and Heal" <https://twitter.com/may17org> Happy #May17 #IDAHOT #IDAHOTBITQ for those who celebrate and would support https://www.instagram.com/QueeringW @may17org <https://twitter.com/may17org> #IDAHOT <https://twitter.com/hashtag/IDAHOT?src=hashtag_click> #IDAHOT2021 <https://twitter.com/hashtag/IDAHOT2021?src=hashtag_click> https://twitter.com/QueeringW

2 2

Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and UCoC Enforcement Guidelines
by Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight 01 May '23

01 May '23

Hello, The Community Affairs Committee of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees would like to thank everyone who participated in the recently concluded community vote on the Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Universal_Code_of_Conduc…> . The volunteer scrutinizing group has completed the review of the accuracy of the vote and has reported the total number of votes received as 2,283. Out of the 2,283 votes received, 1,338 (58.6%) community members voted for the enforcement guidelines, and a total of 945 (41.4%) community members voted against it. In addition, 658 participants left comments, with 77% of the comments written in English. We recognize and appreciate the passion and commitment that community members have demonstrated in creating a safe and welcoming culture. Wikimedia community culture stops hostile and toxic behavior, supports people targeted by such behavior, and encourages good faith people to be productive on the Wikimedia projects. Even at this incomplete stage, this is evident in the comments received. The Enforcement Guidelines did reach a threshold of support necessary for the Board to review. However, we encouraged voters, regardless of how they were voting, to provide feedback on the elements of the enforcement guidelines. We asked the voters to inform us what changes were needed and in case it was prudent to launch a further round of edits that would address community concerns. Foundation staff who have been reviewing comments have advised us of the emerging themes. As a result, as Community Affairs Committee, we have decided to ask the Foundation to reconvene the Drafting Committee. The Drafting Committee will undertake another community engagement to refine the enforcement guidelines based on the community feedback received from the recently concluded vote. For clarity, this feedback has been clustered into four sections as follows: 1. To identify the type, purpose, and applicability of the UCoC training; 2. To simplify the language for more accessible translation and comprehension by non-experts; 3. To explore the concept of affirmation, including its pros and cons; 4. To review the conflicting roles of privacy/victim protection and the right to be heard. Other issues may emerge during conversations, particularly as the draft Enforcement Guidelines evolve, but we see these as the primary areas of concern for voters. Therefore, we are asking staff to facilitate a review of these issues. Then, after the further engagement, the Foundation should re-run the community vote to evaluate the redrafted Enforcement Outline to see if the new document is ready for its official ratification. Further, we are aware of the concerns with note 3.1 in the Universal Code of Conduct Policy. Therefore, we are directing the Foundation to review this part of the Code to ensure that the Policy meets its intended purposes of supporting a safe and inclusive community without waiting for the planned review of the entire Policy at the end of the year. Again, we thank all who participated in the vote and discussion, thinking about these complex challenges and contributing to better approaches to working together well across the movement. Best, Rosie *Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight *(she/her) Acting Chair, Community Affairs Committee Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/> Board of Trustees <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>

13 19

Open proxies and IP blocking
by Florence Devouard 24 Mar '23

24 Mar '23

Hello friends Short version : We need to find solutions to avoid so many africans being globally IP blocked due to our No Open Proxies policy. *https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking* Long version : I'd like to raise attention on an issue, which has been getting worse in the past couple of weeks/months. Increasing number of editors getting blocked due to the No Open Proxies policy [1] In particular africans. In February 2004, the decision was made to block open proxies on Meta and all other Wikimedia projects. According to theno open proxiespolicy : Publicly available proxies (including paid proxies) may be blocked for any period at any time. While this may affect legitimate users, they are not the intended targets and may freely use proxies until those are blocked [...] Non-static IP addresses or hosts that are otherwise not permanent proxies should typically be blocked for a shorter period of time, as it is likely the IP address will eventually be transferred or dynamically reassigned, or the open proxy closed. Once closed, the IP address should be unblocked. According to the policy page, « the Editors can be permitted to edit by way of an open proxy with the IP block exempt flag. This is granted on local projects by administrators and globally by stewards. » I repeat -----> ... legitimate users... may freely use proxies until those are blocked. the Editors can be permitted to edit by way of an open proxy with the IP block exempt flag <------ it is not illegal to edit using an open proxy Most editors though... have no idea whatsoever what an open proxy is. They do not understand well what to do when they are blocked. In the past few weeks, the number of African editors reporting being blocked due to open proxy has been VERY significantly increasing. New editors just as old timers. Unexperienced editors but also staff members, president of usergroups, organizers of edit-a-thons and various wikimedia initiatives. At home, but also during events organized with usergroup members or trainees, during edit-a-thons, photo uploads sessions etc. It is NOT the occasional highly unlikely situation. This has become a regular occurence. There are cases and complains every week. Not one complaint per week. Several complaints per week. *This is irritating. This is offending. This is stressful. This is disrupting activities organized in _good faith_ by _good people_, activities set-up with _our donors funds. _**And the disruption**is primarlly taking place in a geographical region supposingly to be nurtured (per our strategy for diversity, equity, inclusion blahblahblah). * The open proxy policy page suggests that, should a person be unfairly blocked, it is recommended * * to privately email stewards(_AT_)wikimedia.org. * * or alternatively, to post arequest (if able to edit, if the editor doesn't mind sharing their IP for global blocks or their reasons to desire privacy (for Tor usage)). * * the current message displayed to the blocked editor also suggest contacting User:Tks4Fish. This editor is involved in vandalism fighting and is probably the user blocking open proxies IPs the most. See log So... Option 1: contacting stewards : it seems that they are not answering. Or not quickly. Or requesting lengthy justifications before adding people to IP block exemption list. Option 2: posting a request for unblock on meta. For those who want to look at the process, I suggest looking at it [3] and think hard about how a new editor would feel. This is simply incredibly complicated Option 3 : user:TksFish answers... sometimes... As a consequence, most editors concerned with those global blocks... stay blocked several days. We do not know know why the situation has rapidly got worse recently. But it got worse. And the reports are spilling all over. We started collecting negative experiences on this page [4]. Please note that people who added their names here are not random newbies. They are known and respected members of our community, often leaders of activities and/or representant of their usergroups, who are confronted to this situation on a REGULAR basis. I do not know how this can be fixed. Should we slow down open proxy blocking ? Should we add a mecanism and process for an easier and quicker IP block exemption process post-blocking ? Should we improve a process for our editors to pre-emptively be added to this IP block exemption list ? Or what ? I do not know what's the strategy to fix that. But there is a problem. Who should that problem be addressed to ? Who has solutions ? Flo [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/Tks4Fish [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global_permissions#Request… *[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking*

33 61

The Wikimedia Enterprise API project
by Liam Wyatt 11 Feb '23

11 Feb '23

Dear all, Over the last few months, a small team at the Wikimedia Foundation has been working on a project that has been discussed by many people in our movement for many years: building ‘enterprise grade’ services for the high-volume commercial reusers of Wikimedia content. I am pleased to say that in a remarkably short amount of time (considering the complexity of the issues: technical, strategic, legal, and financial) we now have something worthy of showing to the community, and we are asking for your feedback. Allow me to introduce you to the Wikimedia Enterprise API project – formerly codenamed “okapi”. While the general idea for Wikimedia Enterprise predates the current movement strategy process, its recommendations identify an enterprise API as one possible solution to both “Increase the sustainability of our movement” and “Improve User Experience.”[0] That is, to simultaneously create a new revenue stream to protect Wikimedia’s sustainability, and improve the quality and quantity of Wikimedia content available to our many readers who do not visit our websites directly (including more consistent attribution). Moreover, it does so in a way that is true to our movement’s culture: with open source software, financial transparency, non-exclusive contracts or content, no restrictions on existing services, and free access for Wikimedia volunteers who need it. The team believes we are on target to achieve those goals and so we have written a lot of documentation to get your feedback about our progress and where it could be further improved before the actual product is ‘launched’ in the next few months. We have been helped in this process over the last several months by approximately 100 individual volunteers (from many corners of the wikiverse) and representatives of affiliate organisations who have reviewed our plans and provided invaluable direction, pointing out weaknesses and opportunities, or areas lacking clarity and documentation in our drafts. Thank you to everyone who has shared your time and expertise to help prepare this new initiative. A essay describing the “why?” and the “how?” of this project is now on Meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Enterprise/Essay Also now published on Meta are an extensive FAQ, operating principles, and technical documentation on MediaWiki.org. You can read these at [1] [2] and [3] respectively. Much of this documentation is already available in French, German, Italian, and Spanish. The Wikimedia Enterprise team is particularly interested in your feedback on how we have designed the checks and balances to this project - to ensure it is as successful as possible at achieving those two goals described above while staying true to the movement’s values and culture. For example: Is everything covered appropriately in the “Principles” list? Is the technical documentation on MediaWiki.org clear? Are the explanations in the “FAQ” about free-access for community, or project’s legal structure, or the financial transparency (etc.) sufficiently detailed? Meet the team and Ask Us Anything: The central place to provide written feedback about the project in general is on the talkpage of the documentation on Meta at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Enterprise On this Friday (March 19) we will be hosting two “Office hours” conversations where anyone can come and give feedback or ask questions: - 13:00 UTC via Zoom at https://wikimedia.zoom.us/j/95580273732 - 22:00 UTC via Zoom at https://wikimedia.zoom.us/j/92565175760 (note: this is Saturday in Asia/Oceania) Other “office hours” meetings can be arranged on-request on a technical platform of your choosing; and we will organise more calls in the future. We will also be attending the next SWAN meetings (on March 21) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Wikimedia_Affiliates_Network, and also the next of the Wikimedia Clinics https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Clinics Moreover, we would be very happy to accept any invitation to attend an existing group call that would like to discuss this topic (e.g. an affiliate’s members’ meeting). On behalf of the Wikimedia Enterprise team, Peace, Love & Metadata -- Liam Wyatt [Wittylama], Wikimedia Enterprise project community liaison. [0] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recomme… [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Enterprise/FAQ [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Enterprise/Principles [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Enterprise *Liam Wyatt [Wittylama]* WikiCite <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiCite> Program Manager & Wikimedia Enterprise <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Okapi> Community Liaison Wikimedia Foundation

8 17

Wikimedia Taiwan’s statement on the office actions of the Wikimedia Foundation on Chinese Wikipedia
by ffaarr＠wikimedia.tw 26 Dec '22

26 Dec '22

On behalf of Wikimedia Taiwan, we would like to say that this is long overdue. For more than half a decade, good faith volunteers from Hong Kong, the Chinese mainland, and Taiwan have raised concerns about dangerous members of that organization, including in the Signpost(1) (repeatedly(2)). It is not the kind of threat that communities or even larger ones, like our wiki, can deal with entirely on their own. We have been having very exhausting years. Now there is some hope. But we have a lot of work ahead of us as a volunteer community, and we call upon the Foundation to meet its commitment of support as we do. We need to rebuild an inclusive wiki that welcomes everyone from all places who wants to contribute to Chinese language Wikipedia in good faith. Many people have felt very unsafe for years, so restoring a shared sense of comfort will likely take a long time. Doing this work is very important to get back to focusing on knowledge and Wikipedia’s five pillars that should unite our community. Yuan Chang, Chairman of Wikimedia Taiwan (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2019-10-31/In_fo… (2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2021-07-25/Speci… 中文版本: 在此僅代表台灣維基媒體協會聲明，這個行動是遲來的努力。多年來，香港、中國大陸和台灣的用戶一再呼籲對該組織中的危險成員與行為的關切，包括但不僅止於之前於Signpost報導(1) (另一則報導(2))中所提及。這不是社群，或甚至整個中文維基，可以自行處理的威脅。這些年我們心力交瘁。現在的處置，讓我們覺得終於有了一些希望。但作為志願者組織，我們仍有很多工作要做，並希望基金會能大力支持。我們需要重建一個具有包容性的維基百科，歡迎來自所有地區，願意真誠貢獻中文知識的參與者。這幾年來，許多參與者感到不安，要恢復原本平和的氛圍，需要相當長時間的努力。這個工作非常重要，有助於我們把心力集中在知識，以及團結我們社群的維基百科的五大支柱上。台灣維基媒體協會理事長張遠 (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2019-10-31/In_fo… (2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2021-07-25/Speci… Original Link of the statement: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Taiwan/Declaration/Wikimedia_Taiw…

5 6

Luis Bitencourt-Emilio Joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
by Nataliia Tymkiv 14 Dec '22

14 Dec '22

Dear All, Please join me in welcoming Luis Bitencourt-Emilio to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. Luis was unanimously appointed to a 3-year term and replaces a board-selected Trustee, Lisa Lewin, whose term ended in November 2021 [1]. Currently based in São Paulo, Luis is the Chief Technology Officer at Loft, a technology startup in the real-estate industry. He brings product and technology experience from a globally diverse career that has spanned large technology companies including Microsoft, online networking sites like Reddit, and a series of entrepreneurial technology ventures focused in the USA and Latin America. Luis has led product and technology teams across Latin America, the United States, Europe and Asia. He is passionately involved in building and promoting the entrepreneurial ecosystem for Latin American-based startups. Luis has more than two decades of experience across product development, software engineering, and data science. At Microsoft, he led engineering teams shipping multiple Microsoft Office products. At Reddit, he led the Knowledge Group, an engineering team that owned critical functions such as data, machine learning, abuse detection and search. He was deeply involved in Reddit’s growth stage and worked closely with Reddit’s communities in that evolution. Luis also co-founded a fintech startup to help millennials manage and automate their finances. His career has also been shaped by a visible commitment to recruiting diverse leaders. At Reddit, Luis was a key member of the recruitment efforts that achieved equal representation of women engineering directors. Luis says his proudest achievement at Microsoft was building their Brazilian talent pipeline by working closely with local universities to place thousands of engineering candidates at Microsoft, as well as his involvement in expanding global recruitment to markets including Ukraine, Poland, Great Britain, the EU and Mexico. Luis was educated in Brazil and the United States, receiving a Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering with Honors from the University of Maryland. He is fluent in Portuguese, Spanish and English. He is also a proud father and dog lover. I would like to thank the Governance Committee, chaired by Dariusz Jemielniak, for this nomination process as well as volunteers in our Spanish and Portuguese speaking communities who also met with Luis or shared their experiences. You can find an official announcement here [2]. PS. You can help translate or find translations of this message on Meta-Wiki: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/Janu… [1] Lisa Lewin served from January 2019 till November 2021: https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Renewing_Lisa_Lewin%E2%80%… [2] https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/01/12/luis-bitencourt-emilio-joins-wikimedi… Best regards, antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees *NOTICE: You may have received this message outside of your normal working hours/days, as I usually can work more as a volunteer during weekend. You should not feel obligated to answer it during your days off. Thank you in advance!*

26 35

[Foundation-l] Improving search in Wikipedia through quality and concept discovery
by Brian J Mingus 10 Sep '22

10 Sep '22

This paper (first reference) is the result of a class project I was part of almost two years ago for CSCI 5417 Information Retrieval Systems. It builds on a class project I did in CSCI 5832 Natural Language Processing and which I presented at Wikimania '07. The project was very late as we didn't send the final paper in until the day before new years. This technical report was never really announced that I recall so I thought it would be interesting to look briefly at the results. The goal of this paper was to break articles down into surface features and latent features and then use those to study the rating system being used, predict article quality and rank results in a search engine. We used the [[random forests]] classifier which allowed us to analyze the contribution of each feature to performance by looking directly at the weights that were assigned. While the surface analysis was performed on the whole english wikipedia, the latent analysis was performed on the simple english wikipedia (it is more expensive to compute). = Surface features = * Readability measures are the single best predictor of quality that I have found, as defined by the Wikipedia Editorial Team (WET). The [[Automated Readability Index]], [[Gunning Fog Index]] and [[Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level]] were the strongest predictors, followed by length of article html, number of paragraphs, [[Flesh Reading Ease]], [[Smog Grading]], number of internal links, [[Laesbarhedsindex Readability Formula]], number of words and number of references. Weakly predictive were number of to be's, number of sentences, [[Coleman-Liau Index]], number of templates, PageRank, number of external links, number of relative links. Not predictive (overall - see the end of section 2 for the per-rating score breakdown): Number of h2 or h3's, number of conjunctions, number of images*, average word length, number of h4's, number of prepositions, number of pronouns, number of interlanguage links, average syllables per word, number of nominalizations, article age (based on page id), proportion of questions, average sentence length. :* Number of images was actually by far the single strongest predictor of any class, but only for Featured articles. Because it was so good at picking out featured articles and somewhat good at picking out A and G articles the classifier was confused in so many cases that the overall contribution of this feature to classification performance is zero. :* Number of external links is strongly predictive of Featured articles. :* The B class is highly distinctive. It has a strong "signature," with high predictive value assigned to many features. The Featured class is also very distinctive. F, B and S (Stop/Stub) contain the most information. :* A is the least distinct class, not being very different from F or G. = Latent features = The algorithm used for latent analysis, which is an analysis of the occurence of words in every document with respect to the link structure of the encyclopedia ("concepts"), is [[Latent Dirichlet Allocation]]. This part of the analysis was done by CS PhD student Praful Mangalath. An example of what can be done with the result of this analysis is that you provide a word (a search query) such as "hippie". You can then look at the weight of every article for the word hippie. You can pick the article with the largest weight, and then look at its link network. You can pick out the articles that this article links to and/or which link to this article that are also weighted strongly for the word hippie, while also contributing maximally to this articles "hippieness". We tried this query in our system (LDA), Google (site:en.wikipedia.org hippie), and the Simple English Wikipedia's Lucene search engine. The breakdown of articles occuring in the top ten search results for this word for those engines is: * LDA only: [[Acid rock]], [[Aldeburgh Festival]], [[Anne Murray]], [[Carl Radle]], [[Harry Nilsson]], [[Jack Kerouac]], [[Phil Spector]], [[Plastic Ono Band]], [[Rock and Roll]], [[Salvador Allende]], [[Smothers brothers]], [[Stanley Kubrick]]. * Google only: [[Glam Rock]], [[South Park]]. * Simple only: [[African Americans]], [[Charles Manson]], [[Counterculture]], [[Drug use]], [[Flower Power]], [[Nuclear weapons]], [[Phish]], [[Sexual liberation]], [[Summer of Love]] * LDA & Google & Simple: [[Hippie]], [[Human Be-in]], [[Students for a democratic society]], [[Woodstock festival]] * LDA & Google: [[Psychedelic Pop]] * Google & Simple: [[Lysergic acid diethylamide]], [[Summer of Love]] ( See the paper for the articles produced for the keywords philosophy and economics ) = Discussion / Conclusion = * The results of the latent analysis are totally up to your perception. But what is interesting is that the LDA features predict the WET ratings of quality just as well as the surface level features. Both feature sets (surface and latent) both pull out all almost of the information that the rating system bears. * The rating system devised by the WET is not distinctive. You can best tell the difference between, grouped together, Featured, A and Good articles vs B articles. Featured, A and Good articles are also quite distinctive (Figure 1). Note that in this study we didn't look at Start's and Stubs, but in earlier paper we did. :* This is interesting when compared to this recent entry on the YouTube blog. "Five Stars Dominate Ratings" http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2009/09/five-stars-dominate-ratings.html… I think a sane, well researched (with actual subjects) rating system is well within the purview of the Usability Initiative. Helping people find and create good content is what Wikipedia is all about. Having a solid rating system allows you to reorganized the user interface, the Wikipedia namespace, and the main namespace around good content and bad content as needed. If you don't have a solid, information bearing rating system you don't know what good content really is (really bad content is easy to spot). :* My Wikimania talk was all about gathering data from people about articles and using that to train machines to automatically pick out good content. You ask people questions along dimensions that make sense to people, and give the machine access to other surface features (such as a statistical measure of readability, or length) and latent features (such as can be derived from document word occurence and encyclopedia link structure). I referenced page 262 of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance to give an example of the kind of qualitative features I would ask people. It really depends on what features end up bearing information, to be tested in "the lab". Each word is an example dimension of quality: We have "*unity, vividness, authority, economy, sensitivity, clarity, emphasis, flow, suspense, brilliance, precision, proportion, depth and so on.*" You then use surface and latent features to predict these values for all articles. You can also say, when a person rates this article as high on the x scale, they also mean that it has has this much of these surface and these latent features. = References = - DeHoust, C., Mangalath, P., Mingus., B. (2008). *Improving search in Wikipedia through quality and concept discovery*. Technical Report. PDF<http://grey.colorado.edu/mediawiki/sites/mingus/images/6/68/DeHoustMangalat…> - Rassbach, L., Mingus., B, Blackford, T. (2007). *Exploring the feasibility of automatically rating online article quality*. Technical Report. PDF<http://grey.colorado.edu/mediawiki/sites/mingus/images/d/d3/RassbachPincock…>

3 2

[Foundation-l] Fwd: 18.1831, All: Call for Participation: Wikipedia Volunteers
by GerardM 09 Aug '22

09 Aug '22

Hoi, I have asked and received permission to forward to you all this most excellent bit of news. The linguist list, is a most excellent resource for people interested in the field of linguistics. As I mentioned some time ago they have had a funding drive and in that funding drive they asked for a certain amount of money in a given amount of days and they would then have a project on Wikipedia to learn what needs doing to get better coverage for the field of linguistics. What you will read in this mail that the total community of linguists are asked to cooperate. I am really thrilled as it will also get us more linguists interested in what we do. My hope is that a fraction will be interested in the languages that they care for and help it become more relevant. As a member of the "language prevention committee", I love to get more knowledgeable people involved in our smaller projects. If it means that we get more requests for more projects we will really feel embarrassed with all the new projects we will have to approve because of the quality of the Incubator content and the quality of the linguistic arguments why we should approve yet another language :) NB Is this not a really clever way of raising money; give us this much in this time frame and we will then do this as a bonus... Thanks, GerardM ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: LINGUIST Network <linguist(a)linguistlist.org> Date: Jun 18, 2007 6:53 PM Subject: 18.1831, All: Call for Participation: Wikipedia Volunteers To: LINGUIST(a)listserv.linguistlist.org LINGUIST List: Vol-18-1831. Mon Jun 18 2007. ISSN: 1068 - 4875. Subject: 18.1831, All: Call for Participation: Wikipedia Volunteers Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Eastern Michigan U <aristar(a)linguistlist.org> Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry(a)linguistlist.org> Reviews: Laura Welcher, Rosetta Project <reviews(a)linguistlist.org> Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/ The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, and donations from subscribers and publishers. Editor for this issue: Ann Sawyer <sawyer(a)linguistlist.org> ================================================================ To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html ===========================Directory============================== 1) Date: 18-Jun-2007 From: Hannah Morales < hannah(a)linguistlist.org > Subject: Wikipedia Volunteers -------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 12:49:35 From: Hannah Morales < hannah(a)linguistlist.org > Subject: Wikipedia Volunteers Dear subscribers, As you may recall, one of our Fund Drive 2007 campaigns was called the "Wikipedia Update Vote." We asked our viewers to consider earmarking their donations to organize an update project on linguistics entries in the English-language Wikipedia. You can find more background information on this at: http://linguistlist.org/donation/fund-drive2007/wikipedia/index.cfm. The speed with which we met our goal, thanks to the interest and generosity of our readers, was a sure sign that the linguistics community was enthusiastic about the idea. Now that summer is upon us, and some of you may have a bit more leisure time, we are hoping that you will be able to help us get started on the Wikipedia project. The LINGUIST List's role in this project is a purely organizational one. We will: *Help, with your input, to identify major gaps in the Wikipedia materials or pages that need improvement; *Compile a list of linguistics pages that Wikipedia editors have identified as "in need of attention from an expert on the subject" or " does not cite any references or sources," etc; *Send out periodical calls for volunteer contributors on specific topics or articles; *Provide simple instructions on how to upload your entries into Wikipedia; *Keep track of our project Wikipedians; *Keep track of revisions and new entries; *Work with Wikimedia Foundation to publicize the linguistics community's efforts. We hope you are as enthusiastic about this effort as we are. Just to help us all get started looking at Wikipedia more critically, and to easily identify an area needing improvement, we suggest that you take a look at the List of Linguists page at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_linguists. M Many people are not listed there; others need to have more facts and information added. If you would like to participate in this exciting update effort, please respond by sending an email to LINGUIST Editor Hannah Morales at hannah(a)linguistlist.org, suggesting what your role might be or which linguistics entries you feel should be updated or added. Some linguists who saw our campaign on the Internet have already written us with specific suggestions, which we will share with you soon. This update project will take major time and effort on all our parts. The end result will be a much richer internet resource of information on the breadth and depth of the field of linguistics. Our efforts should also stimulate prospective students to consider studying linguistics and to educate a wider public on what we do. Please consider participating. Sincerely, Hannah Morales Editor, Wikipedia Update Project Linguistic Field(s): Not Applicable ----------------------------------------------------------- LINGUIST List: Vol-18-1831

3 2

Form 990 clarification request (for the attention of WMF accounts staff)
by Andreas Kolbe 20 Jun '22

20 Jun '22

Dear WMF accounts staff, Could you kindly clarify whether the "Salaries, other compensation, employee benefits" figure in Part I, line 15 of the Form 990 relates solely to the 291 employees indicated in Part I, line 5, or whether it also includes salaries, compensation and benefits for the 82 contractors listed in Part V, line 1a of the Form 990. Thank you. Andreas

10 21

Recognition of Wikimedia Community User Group Rwanda
by Camelia Boban 06 May '22

06 May '22

Hi everyone! I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized [1] *Wikimedia Community User Group* *Rwanda *[2] as a Wikimedia User Group. The group aims to improve articles on Wikimedia Foundation project websites and promote free and open access to knowledge locally in Kinyarwanda & English. They also invest in projects that sensitize and train different communities in Rwanda about Wikipedia with much emphasis on Kinyarwanda Wikipedia*.* Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group! [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Recognit… [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Rwanda Regards, *Camelia Boban* *Chair* *Affiliation <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee>*

13 12

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Wikimedia-l April 2022