Talk:Wikimedia District of Columbia

Issues and Concerns

Geographical scope

The DC metro area is big, one of the biggest in the US. So the question is, how far out do we extend it? It would be simplest to extend it to all of Virginia, Maryland, DC, and West Virginia. Problem is, there are people in the southern areas of Virginia and West Virginia, who aren't really DC accessible. So, should we attempt to include them under the scope? Or can we specifically target parts of northern virginia, and northeast West Virginia? The benefit of specific targetting is that it allows for the eventual creation of a Virginia chapter, or for example in the north, a Pennsylvania or Delaware chapter that wouldn't be competing with the DC area chapter. On the other hand, there's no guarantee such chapters will exist, or that they couldn't be better served by being part of the DC area chapter anyway. It's significantly easier to just say "the entire state". So what to do?⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 16:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I suggest the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area - this includes much more of Northern Virginia, and even a bit of West Virginia; essentially it covers suburbs within 90 minutes or so driving time to D.C. It's well-defined, and selecting it let's us move on to more important matters - such as what the chapter would actually do. If we should, in the future, run into issues with the scope being too big or too small, or overlapping with other chapters, I think that then would be the time to address that. Right now, I think a quick decision would be best, and using an official standard seems a good way to do that. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 17:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

That's basically where I was going. I'll go ahead and make that change now, since I agree a quick decision is best, and an official standard is even better. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

How about we keep it simple and declare the scope to be Maryland, District of Columbia, Virginia and West Virginia. If more chapters emerge in the future, we can cede some of the outlying areas? Racepacket 18:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

We should add Delaware, which is not part of WM NYC. Then between us and WM NYC, we have Connecticut to Virginia covered, with no gaps. Aude 18:56, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Pennsylvania is officially part of the WM NYC chapter, which really is a regional chapter with "New York City" as the official name. Their name doesn't necessarily convey the regional scope, though means the NYC region in a very broad sense. In the past there was discussion about there being a Wikimedia Pennsylvania chapter, but don't think it will happen anytime in the near future but who knows. Aude 19:02, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

BosWash Chapter?

Rather then trying to form a New York and a DC Chapter, why not form one for the BosWash Megaopolis? The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 17:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Goes wayyy too far north for people to be able to effectively attend meetings. Boston is an all day trip, NYC is a half-days transit. Plus, NYC is big enough that it should merit its own chapter, that would cover the NJ area as well. Likewise for Boston, probably doing a Mass. area chapter. Part of the goal here is to make sure we're small enough to be manageable, as well as not taking away from other chapters, which can more effectively benefit their own members. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict.)That might be too large to be feasible - meetings would have to be somewhere in northern PA to minimize driving time for everyone, and that's still several hours for those of us in Baltimore and those in Boston. I think each of these areas should be large enough to support their own chapters. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Bylaws writing

I'm pretty sure that I can find an attorney to write the bylaws pro bono either at my work (I intern at a major international law firm's pro bono department), or at my law school (my IP professor specifically is a huge fan of Wikimedia). ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

As another note, Newyorkbrad attended at least one of the DC meetings, (maybe 2? I can't remember) and is signed up for the next one. He's an attorney and might be willing to help out.⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe NYB will be available to help out with such matters. Kirill ^(prof) 18:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

If I may be so bold as to make a suggestion, I would like to recommend that whatever elections that are held by the group be conducted using instant-runoff voting. I do not recommend proportional representation because it's more of a hassle than it's worth for small groups.
--NBahn (talk) 18:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I am officially volunteering, as an attorney who has incorporated and written bylaws for a number of non-profirts, to incorporate and write bylaws for the chapter. Racepacket 18:49, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Huge help! :) Happy to work with you and help work this through the Wikimedia chapters process. Aude 18:57, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Here are the draft bylaws, copied from Wikimedia NYC: Wikimedia DC/Bylaws. harej 08:11, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Move to meta?

Love the idea of a DC chapter. One suggestion, though: could you maybe move this to meta? I think you'd get better participation from non-Wikipedians there. - Jredmond (talk) 17:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

No objections whatsoever, I just wasn't sure if it should be userfied at first, in case it got deleted at meta. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd just as soon keep it here or there. Just let everyone know if it gets moved :-). I'd personally say keep it here until we've got a stronger proposal to put on Meta. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 19:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

That's kind of my thoughts, and as well it lets people spend some time setting up meta accounts. If anyone wants to take it out of user space here though, into wikipedia space, I'm ok with that as well. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 19:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I've copied this over to Meta so the appropriate pages can be updated, however the copy in my userspace on en.wp is still there for the time being. Swatjester 20:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Logo

Might be slightly premature, but I was tinkering in Inkscape just now trying to put together the Chapter logo. I've almost got it, but I'm not sure what to put for the subline. "WIKIMEDIA" is required, of course, but under that in smaller print goes the name of the chapter. This page is titled "Wikimedia DC" but "DC" looks somewhat silly on the logo being so short. Alternatives could be "District of Columbia" (would necessitate two lines, breaking after "of"), "Washington, DC", "Washington DC" (no comma), just "Washington" (although that could get confused with Washington State). My personal favorite of these is "Washington, DC" because that just happens to be the same length as "Wikimedia" when formatted according to the guidelines and so looks nice and neat, but it's up to the working group as a whole. Hersfold ^(talk) 18:48, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I just want to thank you for actually knowing where that page is and taking that into account before you created your logo design! Too many people spend a ton of time on a pretty logo and are then told they cannot use it. :-( Just a comment though, other chapters have only two letters (Switzerland) and others even span two lines (Serbia). All of that being said, I share your favorite of "Washington, DC". Cbrown1023 talk 21:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Sample images have been loaded onto the Wikipedia version of this page - I'm keeping it there for now so I can delete the composite when we're done with it. Hersfold ^(talk) 06:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Note that this discussion was originally started on the Meta talk page.

Might be slightly premature, but I was tinkering in Inkscape just now trying to put together the Chapter logo. I've almost got it, but I'm not sure what to put for the subline. "WIKIMEDIA" is required, of course, but under that in smaller print goes the name of the chapter. This page is titled "Wikimedia DC" but "DC" looks somewhat silly on the logo being so short. Alternatives could be "District of Columbia" (would necessitate two lines, breaking after "of"), "Washington, DC", "Washington DC" (no comma), just "Washington" (although that could get confused with Washington State). My personal favorite of these is "Washington, DC" because that just happens to be the same length as "Wikimedia" when formatted according to the guidelines and so looks nice and neat, but it's up to the working group as a whole. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC) (NOTE: IMAGES ARE AVAILABLE ON THE ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA PAGE)

[[Image:Wikimedia DC Composite.jpg|thumb|800px|center|Some possible logos to choose from. Note that we are required to use the standard logo - what's up for debate is the particular subline we want to use. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)]]

Wikimedia Washington, DC looks the best, but at the same time, I think Wikimedia DC is the better name. Perhaps the two are not incompatible. If I'm correct (I may not be), Wikimedia DE is, fully written, actually Wikimedia Deutschland. So, the two are not necessarily incompatible with each other. PS amazing work!⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 06:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Germany's chapter is written out in full, but then there's others that only have two letters. I like the longer title, because only two letters seems a tad silly, and is also less descriptive of where we're located. Not many people outside of the US are going to know where "DC" is, and I'm sure there are many even within the US who would be confused (sadly). Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Can we also create a Wikipedia logo variation? I think Wikimedia best represents the group's goals and purpose, but the sad fact is that the Wikipedia logo is more recognizable. Zidel333 (talk) 23:32, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately no, not without the permission of the foundation, which is not likely. The chapter represents all Wikimedia projects, not specifically Wikipedia. Also, the guidelines adopted by the chapter committee require that it be the Wikimedia logo. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 23:51, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, just so we have something to show the world that yes, we are actually doing this, I've uploaded the logo shown on the main page to Commons. Should we wish to change the byline later on, that can be done fairly easily. Hersfold ^(talk) 17:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Expectations

From the m:Local chapter FAQ:

Chapters exist to further the goals of Wikimedia. They do so by engaging in a wide range of activities, which includes but is not limited to the following:

1. Promoting the Wikimedia projects so that new and different people join them or use them (academics, scientists, college students, schools, libraries etc.)
2. Investigating and negotiating partnerships on a moral or financial basis to support the Wikimedia projects.
3. Helping outside organisations use Wikimedia content, possibly for their own benefit (eg. help publishers of local history Wikireaders, of a Wikipedia DVD in a given language)
4. Organizing local and national events and initiatives (eg. participate in trade shows, set up Wikipedia parties, give lectures etc.)
5. Taking care of PR and lobbying in a given country, give the press an interlocutor in their own language and culture.
6. Enabling (where applicable) tax-deductible donations in the country they are based in.
7. Promoting Free Content and wiki culture in their respective territory.

I'm a bit concerned that we're going to look at the above items and get grand ideas that aren't really practical. The FAQ really is written for national chapters - organizations that have some leverage with a particular language version of Wikipedia (say, German or French) because they represent that community, to the extent anyone does. A local chapter in the U.S. has no such charter - we're not ever going to be the "go-to" guys for press quotes, or working with New York publishers to put out an English-language Wikipedia on DVD.

What I'd personally like to see is our trying to find things that will work for other local chapters in the U.S. - partnering with local academics that want to teach a course that involves improving Wikipedia articles, holding our own classes at local libraries, booths at county fairs - whatever takes only a relatively few people, and is replicable for other chapters. Fundraising - I really think not; the Wikimedia Foundation is now hiring three full-time people for fundraising. Testifying before Congress - I don't think so; we're just a chapter, not the Foundation itself. Working with other local chapters to create a sharing network - yes, definitely. In short, let's be realistic, and start with some goals that we're likely to be successful with. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 18:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Potential starting areas

This is in response to the above items posted by John Broughton. One of the benefits of the DC area is we can do much of this on a local level. For instance:

1. Promoting the Wikimedia projects: the DC/Baltimore area is home to dozens of universities, including, American University, Georgetown, GWU, George Mason, Catholic, Northeastern, Marymount, U of Maryland, Gaulledet (sic), Johns Hopkins, and is close proximity to UVA, Virginia Tech, VMI, and several more. We can do a lot to promote the Wikimedia projects on a local level.

   DC is one of the fundraising capitals of America, especially given it being the seat of government. There are governmental partnerships, library of congress partnerships, university partnerships, philanthropist partnerships, etc.

   Similarly, we can help these other organizations use Wikimedia content as well.

2. . Organizing events and initiatives is something that we can do locally, especially in common with the university, governmental, and educational programs available in DC.
3. . Taking care of PR: not an issue for us, WMF can do that. Lobbying, however, is something that we are able to do in DC. I have some lobbying experience, and finding other lobbyists to work on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation via the DC chapter is certainly doable (especially given that DC is the lobbying center of the US). Interlocutors are unnecessary in America; however DC and Baltimore do have their own "culture". There is a Baltimore culture, an inside the beltway culture, and it's something that we can identify with more easily than San Francisco can (which has its own culture).
4. . Enabling tax deductible donations: not an issue for us, however, we can expand the WMF's donation base by doing our own fundraising within the DC area.
5. . This goes along with lobbying. There is no better place to efficiently promote free content and wiki culture than in DC -- the center of the nation's government and an example of collaborative politics in action.

Along with this, I suggest some important places for us to start off and focus.

1. .: Building membership and outreach. This enables us to perform all other tasks. This can be performed on-wiki (by identifying and recruiting Wikimedians to join the chapter) and off wiki (by outreach to people in the DC/Baltimore area to learn more about Wikipedia, and to join the chapter).
2. . Develop relationships with educational institutions. Educational institutions are all over DC (as mentioned above) and much of our work and their work synergies well together. This also helps us develop a pool of experts in academia from which we can assist the foundation as a whole.
3. . Develop relationships with governmental institutions. Governmental institutions, specifically the ones that can most benefit the foundation, are heavily centralized in DC, and as such we are in the best situation of all the US chapters to help benefit the foundation. In this task, we would work with the Foundation towards achieving their goals with government, as well as developing our own relationships with governmental institutions. This can help with fundraising, outreach, PR, partnerships, exposure to the Wiki culture and free content, etc.
4. . Continue to hold meetups and other events for our membership. The DC wikimedians have been pretty active in having meetups and we want to continue to support and nurture that activity.

These 4 activities are a good place to start. They are tasks that will never be "completed" and we will continue to work on them as long as we exist as a chapter. They are tasks that not only support the WMF, but support the chapter. They are tasks that make our other activities easier (greater membership, more partnerships, etc. all make work easier). And they are tasks that we can begin working on as soon as we become a recognized chapter (and in the case of the 1st and 4th tasks, even before that time.). ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 00:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Knock, knock

Anybody here still? I just started being an editor, but I love it and am, well addicted. Would love to come to next meetup. Thanks. Lwoodyiii 13:17, 31 December 2008 (UTC) Anyone home? I'm on vacation, so sort of have an excuse for being silent, but is anyone else active on this? Hersfold ^(talk) 00:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm here, but I'm not really "active" - although I am willing to help out if someone tells what I should be doing. I'm a grad student at Georgetown, so I could help out with the academic part there. But I think we should get people together first. Maybe at the next meetup? Staeiou 15:00, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Answered on the en.wp page, but yes I'm still here, and also am on vacation. I think we should have a sitdown at the next Wikimeetup with a group of people who want to hash out the officials and the structure of this chapter, and lets get it laid out and planned out and the decisions made, and then we can move on towards getting bylaws written. Swatjester 04:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

DC Meetup 5 being planned

Hi guys, we're getting ready to start the planning for DC meeting 5, at which point I hope we can have a serious sit-down and hash out as many of the issues around the chapter as we possibly can. I think we could have our usual dinner, and then immediately afterwards, we get straight to work coming to a sort of consensus as to the main issues for the formation of the chapter. If this sounds good, please let me know (we're planning on holding the meeting regardless -- August is about that time, 3-4 months since last meeting.) Please see en:User talk:SchuminWeb, where we're setting up the planning. Swatjester 23:14, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Why is the meet up planning taking place on a user's talk page instead of here? - LA @ 22:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually it usually goes on its own page, Wikipedia:Wikimeetup DC 5, but nobody has made it yet. Swatjester 06:13, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Is there any real discussion about the August meeting at Wikipedia:Wikimeetup DC 5? Do we need to canvas previous attendees? 74.93.201.114 17:55, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Meetup 9 Agenda Items

Please take a look:en:Wikipedia talk:Meetup/DC 9#Agenda and provide feedback. Sadads 16:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia MidAtlantic

Should we merge/redirect this abandoned proposal?--Pharos 20:20, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Abandoned? Spoken like a true New Yorker. We haven't abandoned it; in fact the Wikimania bid has breathed new life into this chapter and we will be pursuing it once the bidding process is complete. harej 22:20, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I think the Wikimedia MidAtlantic page can be redirected here. Now, it's a relevant question whether we want to consider a name for our chapter that encompasses the region more, like Wikimedia MidAtlantic Region. Personally, I like Wikimedia DC better but open to ideas, consensus, etc. Aude 00:26, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

"MidAtlantic" is also rather ambiguous—the US is hardly the only country with an Atlantic coastline. "Wikimedia DC" might be understating our scope somewhat, but it has the advantage of immediate clarity. Kirill Lokshin 00:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I think Pharos was suggesting merging the MidAtlantic proposal here, not the other way around. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 00:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Er, yes. I apologize, Pharos, for the disparaging remarks. harej 03:27, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Scope

moved here from Wikimedia District of Columbia

The DC metro area is big, one of the biggest in the US. So the question is, how far out do we extend it? It would be simplest to extend it to all of Virginia, Maryland, DC, and West Virginia. Problem is, there are people in the southern areas of Virginia and West Virginia, who aren't really DC accessible. So, should we attempt to include them under the scope? Or can we specifically target parts of northern Virginia, and northeast West Virginia? The benefit of specific targeting is that it allows for the eventual creation of a Virginia chapter, or for example in the north, a Pennsylvania or Delaware chapter that wouldn't be competing with the DC area chapter. On the other hand, there's no guarantee such chapters will exist, or that they couldn't be better served by being part of the DC area chapter anyway. It's significantly easier to just say "the entire state". For clarity, Maryland, District of Columbia, Vriginia and West Virginia would avoid any ambiguity.

How to relate with other US-based chapters?

moved here from Wikimedia District of Columbia

How does the Wikimedia DC chapter want to relate with other chapters in the United States, such as Wikimedia NYC. There is a proposal to form a Wikimedia United States Chapters Council that can coordinate things like obtaining group tax exemption, and provide assistance to yet-to-be-formed chapters.

Collaboration with Local Organization

Hi! I work for the United States National Research Council here in Washington DC. We have a wealth of public domain content that could enrich Wikipedia articles -- and are interested in encouraging our scientists to contribute to Wikipedia. Any advice on how to get started/who to talk with? Earlgrey101 17:03, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Earlgrey101 -- shoot me an email using the Email User feature, and I'll get you situated. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 14:44, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

He came to my enwiki talk page and we have someone working with him now. Aude 15:02, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Or that. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 15:14, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Spanish

Do you have plans to have a limited number of Spanish translation pages?

While projects in non-English speaking countries have English translation pages, as a collary I think WP DC should have a limited number of pages in Spanish Thanks, WhisperToMe 00:00, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Large LGBT conference coming to DC/Baltimore in January - wiki interest?

Curious if any folks are attending this year's Creating Change conference for LGBT organizers/activists this January in DC/Baltimore. Considering a booth for LGBT wiki outreach efforts. Wondering if others are interested in that and/or perhaps a meet-up at the conference? For folks in the DC area, might be possible to do some things as non conference attendees, if you're interested, let me know - I'd have to check on details. --Varnent 21:06, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Old Weather Project

Hello. My name is Kathy Wendolkowski and I am working on Old Weather, a Citizen Science project that involves transcribing weather data and also narrative information from WWI era Royal Navy ship logs. As my fellow transcribers and I have progressed thru the pages, we have uncovered information that either expands on or corrects articles here on Wikipedia (and other sites). For example, please see the article on Cadmus Class Sloops. After some discussion, the Wiki Powers that Be have concluded that the information gleaned from the logs is not original research and fits the verifiability requirement. I have left messages at both the Military History and Ships project pages, but have had no response. I propose a joint project between Old Weather and Wikipedia. We are uncovering a lot of information, for example, we have found an hour by hour account of the 2nd Battle of the Heligoland Bight in the log of a ship that was there, but is not even listed in the Wiki article. I live in the DC metro area which is why I am also coming to you with this proposal. I invite you to visit the Old Weather site (Old Weather.org). My user name there is wendolk. Thanks for your time.216.15.44.249 12:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I have seen Old Weather and think it's a fantastic project. I'm not sure what a joint project would be but sounds interesting... maybe there are US ship records somewhere around DC that people want to digitize? I think few Wikipedians are interested in digitizing, so we're still figuring out how to make digitization projects work. We are meeting at the National Archives (College Park) on Saturday afternoon, if you want to come join us and we can chat more? Otherwise, we can chat another time? Cheers. Aude 22:21, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry I missed the meeting on Saturday - I had several prior commitments this weekend. What I had in mind for a joint project was not so much that Wikipedians digitize records - even though, they are more than welcome to come aboard and work on a ship. Rather, if those of us working on Old Weather find information in the logs that expands or corrects articles; or if we find ships that don't have wiki articles, for example HMS Foxglove, which didn't have one until this project, then we pass that information on to a group here at Wiki that expands/edits/creates the articles. Kwendolk 11:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

w:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships on Wikipedia is probably the best place to share information and connect with the right people interested in ships. There's also w:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. Those are good places to start, though I'd be happy to help guide you further. Cheers. Aude 16:24, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I approached those groups before I approached this group - so far, I have gotten no response from either one. I was hoping that perhaps the folks in charge of those groups would be more inclined to talk to established members of the Wiki Community. Kwendolk 12:07, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kathy, I'm a WikiDC person who works on WikiProject Ships. Have been on other projects lately. Just added HMS Aphis link to Old Weather under sources. Once a source link for Old Weather is added for a ship, the thing to do would be to put a note on that ship's talk page describing what you've spotted there for the article. Or you can always add the info to the article yourself. Since I'm local, I could also meet up with you and show you how the Wikipedia piece works. Give me a shout at English language Wikipedia talk page anytime. Djembayz 18:52, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Request for comment

I am drafting a proposal at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pine/drafts/ENWP_Board_of_Education and would like input from chapters. I would appreciate comments on the talk page. Thank you! Pine^(talk) 10:45, 4 May 2012 (UTC)