I do answer emails, more or less promptly; or you can leave me a message.
- 1 New images
- 2 Agenda item
- 3 adminship on vec.wiki
- 4 LSS
- 5 You Will Revise?
- 6 LSS
- 7 Hello
- 8 LSS
- 9 open meeting
- 10 2004-6: a good era for essays
- 11 G'day
- 12 sum sum sum
- 13 Just lookin for some info.....
- 14 Wikimedia CAT
- 15 G'day Phoebe
- 16 WM-CAT, Amical Viquipèdia
- 17 ConCon =
- 18 Image filter
- 19 http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Image_filter_referendum/en&oldid=2780160#Transferring_the_board
- 20 Image Filter comments from Alec
- 21 Sharing an update to the Harris report?
- 22 Model consent
- 23 Re: Question
- 24 WMF Fellowships
- 25 spam
- 26 Bot archiving
- 27 Collaborate with OTRS
- 28 Wikimedia Travel Guide: Naming poll open
- 29 Usurp request at the Dutch Wikipedia
- 30 SUL
- 31 You're welcome!
- 32 Improving quality
- 33 Ah!
- 34 Candidate statement
- 35 The Signpost
- 36 Board
- 37 Important announcement: Election delayed by one week
- 38 Wikimania - Advocacy Block
- 39 Questions regarding elections
- 40 Congratulations. We all win
- 41 Internal/Private wiki discussion
- 42 Internet Archive fire
- 43 Resolution:Media about living people
Hi, I've uploaded a banner with fuller geo description (Cambridge, Massechusetts, USA, or however you spell that) and also a compact version without any info.
- Sure, feel free. Tlogmer 08:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- I was thinking the compact one might be good for the main-header template. Tlogmer 08:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- In response to "Vivek! Hiya! I took the liberty of adding a calendar/signup to the events page... here's hoping some events will self-organize. Feel free to refactor, make prettier, move to the talk page, and/or promote :) Also, thanks for volunteering to be the field trip coordinator :) phoebe 04:15, 24 July 2006 (UTC)" on my talk page:
- - no problem Phoebe, thanks! --Vivek 17:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I've expanded it, but don't want to restrict the agenda too much by adding just my questions. I'm sure, given the interest in the SPCom, the difficulty will not be in coming up with what to talk about, but keeping the time given to any one topic to a reasonable amount.
I should point out that I have a scheduling conflict - a family event that overlaps the start of the meeting on Saturday. I can try to be online, but I can't make promises since I already committed to the other. - Amgine / talk meta 19:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Do you mind my asking why you removed my agenda item? - Amgine / talk meta 15:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)Ah! you moved it out of the overview, and down to discussion. Apologies. - Amgine / talk meta 15:28, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
adminship on vec.wiki
Hello Phoebe. I read that last June Sj granted you sysop access to vec.wiki in order to modify the local sitenotice. I hope you won't mind if I revoke your sysop access on that wiki. Today - luckily - the project can count on several sysops  which you (or anyone else) can rely on for modifications like that. Can I proceed? Thank you for your attention. Bye. --Paginazero - Ø 13:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
- of course, no problem. phoebe 23:38, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. The biggest challenge I face is bugging people on all the projects to make sure I can get translators for a bunch of languages. So far, apart from sj's post to translation-l, I've swung by the Spanish and German Village Pumps (Anthere asked for me on the French). If you can help rustle up translators who are willing to put in effort weekly for other languages, that would be really great. Take care. --Improv 05:59, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
You Will Revise?
Yesterday I recieved a email you are working with the LSS page. When needed i can make a archive for Commons-l and fundraiser-l.
Both the lists are low traffic so one update a month should be enough. When i have time i can also work backwards for a whole 2008 page.
You're welcome. I was thinking it would help if you could add something like File:Under construction icon-blue.svg and remove it when you think you have finished. Because I am realising that you have added new information since my translation of LSS/foundation-l-archives/2009 July 16-31. Teofilo 15:34, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
- Absolutely. -- phoebe 17:26, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
I've started September, but due to personal events this week-end, I won't be able to continue and I miught then just plainly forget ;-). If you think about telling me after the week-end, I'll just take where I left, or you can just do that :). Ah also, this edit link after the "Summary" section, that does not allow to edit, drives me nuts, so I might just get rid of it altogether :P. Hugs notafish }<';> 17:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- So I got rid of the section "summary" in the template. And I'm much happier :) notafish }<';> 20:19, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Awesome. :) -- phoebe 17:27, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
2004-6: a good era for essays
I was browsing around meta, and stumbled upon your userpage, and then followed a link to howwikipediaworks.com - which appears to have lapsed maybe? - It loads a sort of 'domain parking' type screen for me anyways, and I thought you'd like to know, in case there's something someone should do about it :-) cheers, Privatemusings 04:52, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
sum sum sum
the good old days -- we need to teach people how to summarize, write, and publish. Maybe LSS is just one more step along the road towards becoming a 'publisher' on the projects. –SJ · talk | translate 03:59, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Just lookin for some info.....
I am trying to locate info on Lionsmane flowers, I found good info before and am wondering why I can't get anything even remotely close to what I am looking for? Wikipedia has NEVER let me down before now! :( Hope you can help My email is email@example.com Thanks Sincerely Mrs. Christine Martin
in order to unblock the situation of Wikimedia CAT chapter, we have clarified and simplified the proposal at Wikimedia CAT.
We would highly appreciate that you could take a look at it and kindly give us your opinion at Survey. If you consider so, you can also express your support.
Thanks in advance. --Gomà 10:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I hope I'm not being rude, but I'm not sure if we've ever had the chance to chat in any of our involvement in the wiki world over the years, so 'hello' and a warm 'nice to meet you' too :-) - you may be aware that I've been a little bit active in discussing some aspects of the 'controversial content' stuff, and I noticed your post to foundation-l, and the reference to a 'working group' - do you think I'd be a useful member? - Down in WMAU, we've had a brief, early chat about how the Chapter might be able to foster some discussions (roundtable forum with some external folk is one idea) - perhaps being part of the foundation approach would be a good idea too :-)
Hope you're good, and fwiw I'm unable to copy Jan-Bart this message as his talk page is protected currently. I dropped Sj a note on this - someone else raised the matter with him also - I thought you might like to know, having invited folk to contact him too :-) cheers, Privatemusings 23:23, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
- following up :-) Privatemusings 23:03, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
WM-CAT, Amical Viquipèdia
let me introduce myself: I am a Catalan Wikipedian who, not only dedicated to write articles, also spends his time to promote the free knowledge and wiki tools where and how I can. For this reason I associate to Amical Viquipèdia amd I support the chapter WM-CAT. All this from the beech firmer conviction altruistically and voluntarily, spending my time and money.
As a Trustee of the foundation would ask me to answer these questions:
In relation to me:
- What's wrong with me?
- What's wrong with the group of people who make WM-CAT?
Regarding the promotion of knowledge Wikipedia and the free:
- Why should I stop before a line indicated on the map as I can share with people the other side of this, that speak, think and feel like me?
- Why can I not, along with those who speak, feel and think like me, be considered equal to others who feel and think like me?
In relation to the Foundation:
- when the various Foundation's committees have become more important than community?
- why people's interested in promoting the same that foundation aims to promote become a problem?
- When the foundation vision and values have gone down in the background?
- When the foundation has grown into something that can ignore Wikipedia principles?
Dear Phoebe, maybe my speech will seem harsh, but this is a discourse that comes from the heart and mind of one, as you, is convinced of the validity of the project but at the same time he sees That a right as basic as it should be made part of a group equal than others are denied.
Phoebe: When the Trustees left to be bold?
--Mafoso 09:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
I leave the missage in my matern language in order to avoid translation errors (my english is basic):
Apreciat, permet que em presenti : sóc un viquipedista català que no sols es dedica a escriure articles sino que també inverteix part del seu temps en promoure les eines wikipèdia i el coneixement lliure allà on pot i com pot , per aquest motiu em vaig associar a Amical Viquipedia i dono suport al capítol WM-CAT. Tot això ho faig desde la més ferma convicció, altruistament i voluntàriament , gastant el meu temps i diners. Com a Trustee de la fundació li demano em respongui aquestes preguntes: En relació a mi: Que hi ha de dolent en mi? Que hi ha de dolent amb el grup de gent que formem WM-CAT? En relació a la promoció de la Viquipèdia i el Coneixement lliure: per què m'haig d'aturar davant d'una línia senyalada en un mapa quant el que faig ho puc compartir amb gent de l'altre costat d'aquesta que parlen, pensen i senten com jo? Per què no puc, junt amb aquests que parlen, senten i pensen com jo, ser considerat en igualtat de condicions que altres que senten i pensen com jo ? En relació a la Fundació: quan els diferents comitès d'aquesta han esdevingut més importants que les comunitats? per què l'interes d'unes persones en promocionar el mateix que vol promocionar la fundació esdevè un problema? Quan la visió i valors de la fundació han passat a segon terme? Quan s'ha convertit la fundació en quelcom que és per sobre dels principis Viquipèdia? Apreciat Phoebe , potser el meu discurs li sembla dur, però aquest es un discurs que surt del cor i la ment d'un que com vostè es convençut de la validesa del projecte però que veu al mateix temps que un dret tant bàsic com hauria de ser el fet de formar part d'un grup en igualtat de condicions que altres es negat. Phoebe: Quan deixaren els trustees de ser valents?
- Hola! You asked Sj the same question, and I think he gave you a very good answer. I do appreciate your work and that of the Catalonian group; being part of the projects has nothing to do with chapter recognition -- for instance, I myself have never been part of a chapter, but I have been a contributor for a very long time. I hope that we can build a new structure of Wikimedia Groups that will fit WM-CAT well. -- phoebe | talk 04:11, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
I hope you'll contribute to the ConCon discussion here despite helping organize the committee.
I'm becomingconvinced that the only tags anyone should use are descriptive categories, and we can improve tools for reviewing/adding/visualizing cats if needed [David Weinberger wants 10x as many tags on pages, none of the category-shyness that WP has, and makes very good points. We might want to add a way to flag a category as "shown at the bottom when reading a page", with a new default which is "machine-readable, viewable via a 'more' link, and viewable to anyone who toggles a preference"].
I still haven't seen any suggestions about how creating new artificial categories could be done neutrally; if someone believes that to be true, I wish they would provide an example (set of categories or process) for discussion. –SJ talk | translate 12:04, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
(I'm assuming that since you're on the board and you commented on the IFR talk page that you're knowledgeable about the image filter.) I'd appreciate it if you could verify whether this comment is correct. --Yair rand 21:07, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Have you really though about the consequences when you agreed to this stupid idea? Thats the road to contentfilters and censorship. You are waisting the donated money to the wrong goal. If someone has problems with certain images they should not use the internet at all. --Eingangskontrolle 15:44, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
sorry, i don't know the ins and outs of your (our?) organization, but for a normal (dumb like me) user it is not quite obvious that the wmf is and remains us-based. where do i find material about this? votings? regards, aleichem 02:05, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Aleichem! I'll leave this on your talk page as well. You can check out http://wikimediafoundation.org for more info about the foundation, including tax documents, annual reports, etc. Here's a quick summary of our history (and it is your organization, too!): The WMF was founded a couple of years after Wikipedia by Jimmy Wales in Florida, USA, where he lived at the time; we needed a non-profit organization to start to manage the servers for the increasingly large Wikipedia. A few years after that, in 2007-2008, the WMF moved to San Francisco, and it has been there ever since. There were big discussions at the time on community mailing lists, etc., about whether SF was the best place, but it had many advantages such as being close to lots of technical talent and remaining in the US which has generous free-speech and internet openness laws. There are also local Wikimedia organizations, called chapters, all around the world; if you live outside of the US, you should check out the list of chapters to see if there is one in your country[although I see from your talk page that you are already a member of two chapters]. If you want to submit a formal proposal to the Board to move the WMF, you are welcome to do so -- I can submit it for you -- but it would help to have a very strong case and discuss it on meta or the mailing list foundation-l first. best, -- phoebe | talk 16:02, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Image Filter comments from Alec
Hi Phoebe, I just wanted to drop you a note, but really for all the people who have been working on the image filter and the controversial content image. Please share it with them if they'd benefit from it.
- I want to compliment you for all the work you're doing on the image filtration project. You are trying to take something fundamentally 'anti-wiki' and convince die-hard people that you can succeed in doing this right.
- They are very, very skeptical. That has absolutely nothing to do with you, it's just scars of history past.
- I think you have a good roadmap-- if we make a filter, yours will be a start in the right direction.
- I felt very respected by the whole process, I feel like my viewpoint has been respected, I feel like my values have been respected. I said long ago there was plenty of room for everyone to have their cake and eat it too on this issue-- and you all have consciously and visibly taken steps well-chosen to be consistent with our values as I understand them.
- You personally (phoebe) are doing very good at answering questions from a skeptical angry mob, and I say that as a longtime mob member. Consider a career in community interactions, this is definitely one of your strong suits. I see many examples of you taking really emotionally charged people and transforming them back into editors with calm reasoned dialogue. You're doing this not through admonishment but through example. Some other board members know they're good at this-- let me make it very clear to you that you are very good at it also. When the board needs a mediator to communicate between a community and a foundation, your name should come up.
- The poll should be called a poll, not a referendum. But far more importantly, good work for holding a movement-wide poll!! Rough edges notwithstanding, this is something we have to get good at, and I jump up and down with glee that you guys are developing a new tool for communicating with the global community.
The truth is I don't quite know how best to help WM. I did some bold interventions in May 2010 and again during the last board election, but to fair, I've always been a little uneasy about whether my interventions cause more harm than good. I feel a great passion for our cause, and I occasionally think I have unique insights or unique roles to play-- that is a very dangerous combination.
In May 2010, I was one of the most outspoken critic of the censorship. In August 2011, I feel it's my duty to be just a vocal in the opposite direction-- you and your team convinced me that you, SJ, and others know how to do this right. So, I posted another giant rant about why people should support this.
I'm really trying to getting out of the rant business, but karma demanded this pro-WMF rant. (You guys have got to open up some new english-language projects with new content, so old fogeys such as myself can have a place to just add content in peace, without getting all riled up like Grandpa Simpson. :) )
Good work; no matter what the outcome, this has been done thoughtfully, intelligently, and respectfully, and it restores my hope in the non-profit organization that you are getting this rightish or absolutely right. --AlecMeta 19:57, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you so much; this made my day. -- phoebe | talk 22:52, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Sharing an update to the Harris report?
It would be good to have closure to the process started last year. Something like an addendum to the Harris report:
- summarizing things like the CC workgroup recommendations,
- explaining the board resolutions
- describing the recent poll and reasons to want new broader input
- issues and suggestions raised and responses to them
- this can lead into a proper faq (with real asked questions superceding hypothetical faq's based on expected q's).
- who is coordinating ongoing discussion and where (for those who uncertainly post to mailing lists, their homewiki, and the Meta Forum)
- this should also be added to any navboxes on the topic
Example ideas worth answering from a recent query from shabidoo:
- "woah...what's this referendum? And why is the presentation of it so one sided? And why are the questions this way? Why was the community not invited to have a comprehensive dialogue about it first? What are your responses to these various problems we have?"
- I have read [in response] "come on guys, its opt in only, why would you care?" or "its just a referendum...theres lots to think about still" or "look...its the first time we've done something like this"...
- "how will the images be categorised", "how on earth will a consensus be met on the system of categorization and how to go about placing each image in a category", "can this tool be used by 3rd parties for underhanded means of censorship", "Is this the first step of a slippery slope towards censorship?"
- some users are very much against that the community will now be responsible for sorting out images that will now be cut out of view by some users (voluntarily or not).
- "whats the difference between filtering images and filtering text? Images are just as integral to an article as the text is."
Hi Phoebe :-)
- There is a new template on Commons, Template:Consent to be used as a way to affirm the consent of identifiable people.
See the link for the documentation.
Hopefully by getting affirmation by the uploader early on, we will resolve any issues while the user is still active.
A similar template would be useful for other WMF projects so it needs to be added to a discussion somewhere on meta. Not sure where.
- I began a list of sources that discuss the standards used for obtaining consent for medical images with identifiable people http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:FloNight/Resource_articles_for_later_use
I think that this information is useful for us when determining the ethical implications of collecting and disseminating images of people that will be used on our own medical and anatomical articles, as well as those reused by other people. Right now there is movement among medical groups towards requiring informed consent, and I don't want our images to lower these standards by making a large volume of poorly documented images available.
- Also, there is a discussion on Commons AN about the WMF Board May 2011 resolution.
I replied there with my interpretation of the situation. Thought that you might have something to add or correct. FloNight 21:29, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Phoebe, thank you for your reply. Don't worry, it was a small question for Geoff and he replied with the clarification I needed. :-) Nemo 21:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- I will try to be more specific :)
- In case you need to delete more than 1 page, you can use a feature called Nuke to delete them all from one window, you will be able to select all pages there and hit a button to delete them.
- In case you want to prevent bots from spamming the site, you can install some filters and captcha protections. If you wanted to know more, let me know! Petrb 08:58, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Phoebe. :)
I just wanted to let you know that the bot another user set up to archive the talk page on Sue's recommendation archived this section based solely on the datestamp. I'd been passing it over when doing manual archives because it seemed potentially still in use to me, but bots aren't exactly known for nuanced thinking. :/ I didn't feel I could pull it out once the bot had archived it, though, since I wasn't sure. Seeing that you're still editing it, I'd be happy to do that now, if you'd like. If we alter your signature line to remove the datestamp, the bot will not archive it again. Just let me know! --Maggie Dennis (WMF) 13:37, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- All moved to Fundraising and Funds Dissemination/Questions flowchart. I've put it in the template and have linked to it from the talk page.
- Your suggestion about an organizational page for alternative proposals is a good idea; once others appear, I'll be happy to set that up. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) 14:55, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Collaborate with OTRS
- Hi there... one of the OTRS admins can give you more information or answer questions. I'll direct you to User:guillom :) It looks like to volunteer for any of the queues you can fill out an application on this page. Thanks for volunteering! -- phoebe | talk 20:26, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Wikimedia Travel Guide: Naming poll open
You are receiving this message because you edited the initial naming straw poll for the Wikimedia Travel Guide.
The proposed naming poll is now open and you can vote for as many of the proposed names as you wish, if you are eligible. Please see Travel Guide/Naming Process for full details on voting eligibility and how the final name will be selected. Voting will last for 14 days, and will terminate on 16 October at 06:59:59 UTC.
Usurp request at the Dutch Wikipedia
Dear Phoebe, just in case you've missed it, I've responded to your request at the Dutch Wikipedia. Please let me know if you have any questions. Kind regards, Mathonius (talk) 18:13, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! Yes, I do wish to usurp firstname.lastname@example.org. -- phoebe | talk 21:10, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
I am finally cleaning up my SUL accounts. :) -- phoebe | talk 21:10, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Yeah I noticed that too when I clicked on the link, I didn't even realise we had a page about the Advisory Board on Meta! It seems like those meeting pages are the only ones on Meta, so I agree with the soft redirect. Where do you think we should move the meeting pages? Keep them here or maybe import them to Foundation wiki? Thehelpfulone 21:00, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for that frank and intelligent answer. I too think the wording of that particular strategic goal was problematical for the reasons you gave, but the goal in general is of course intrinsic to our purpose here.
I think that the quality of our content depends to some extent on improving the basics like the visual editor. (Busy potential expert contributors just bounce off the site when they're confronted with wikicode.) So, building tools for new and experienced editors is essential to improving quality. And support for on-the-ground groups to do outreach is, possibly, important, depending on the nature of the outreach. (I am of the view that chapters are all but useless in the first world, and that the apparent need for them is a manifestation of the poor user interface and TLDR/labyrinthine and sometimes (in the case of Commons) impenetrable and incomplete instructions.) Yes, liaison is poor between the volunteer community and the Foundation. Witness this lalala I can't hear you you morons response to the community's very valid complaint about the Echo/Notifications implementation, and the current brouhaha over sudden desysopping of most volunteers at the Foundation website.
I see the Foundation backing off from community management roles, such as the North American education initiative, and that pleases me. But I do believe there is a role for the Foundation in the many "meta" functions (such as research and analytics, and many others) that are not being completely or well taken up by volunteers.
I was disappointed to discover no one was tasked with at least analysing the different efforts within the movement for the improvement of content quality, such as the GA and FA processes at en.WP, and http://wikimedical.jmir.org/ at Wiki Project Med, or conducting research into the accuracy, completeness and readability of our content across categories. That kind of thing would be a far better use of donations than Wiki Loves Monuments-type initiatives.
Finally, the main function of board members in most US charities is fundraising. In our charity, that is pretty much taken care of by the staff. I would like this board to take on the task, personally through their own contacts, or publicly through the media, of persuading experts in every field to take responsibility for the Wikipedia articles in their field. Best of luck with this election. You have my vote. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 18:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's very kind. Interesting point about quality analysis. I've been involved in the larger research community too, and quality analysis seems like a good area for the WMF staff and outside academic researchers to work together.
- And yes, the Board is expected to do a large amount of outreach. I think we all do it in our own ways. I certainly saw the board seat as a good way to do outreach to the library community (as it raised my own visibility to get speaking invitations etc.). The next time we write a board seat description I'd certainly support emphasizing outreach -- thanks for bringing this up. -- phoebe | talk 19:38, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
But the question is, is it an effective meant state?
- :) it took me some googling, and then a few minutes to think "now where have I heard that name, and why do I want to call him Bernie"? But that is of course how he's referred to in library lore around here :) -- phoebe | talk 00:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Phoebe - Please note that I have trimmed your candidate statement to 1200 characters, as specified by the published rules of the election. You may wish to confirm that it still appropriately conveys the points you wish to convey, or rewrite it if not. I left the trimmed part in the raw wikicode, so you should be able to see it in the edit mode. For the election committee, Philippe (WMF) (talk) 01:44, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
- Pardon? It was under 1200 -- not counting spaces, which is how we've counted it in the past. Can you clarify? -- phoebe | talk 02:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
I've emailed you on a Signpost matter.
Important announcement: Election delayed by one week
The Election Committee regrets to advise that it is necessary to delay the start of voting in the WMF Elections 2013 for one week. This delay is being implemented for three reasons:
- We have been unable to verify that the list of eligible voters is complete and that all voters meet the published criteria
- We have been unable to verify that the SecurePoll setups for the election are properly functioning
- The voter interfaces have not been translated and are not currently available in any language other than English, thus disadvantaging Wikimedians who do not read English.
The following changes are now made to the Election timeline:
- 8-22 June 2013: elections
- 23-25 June 2013: vote-checking
- 25-28 June: publication of results.
Wikimania - Advocacy Block
Hi, I am Dimi and presenting the [EU Policy] project in Hong Kong. You wrote a note that it would be nice to have advocacy block to talk about the issues. As the legal stream of the conference is rather scattered (Mathias Schindler's presentation on PD for government works (WMDE) isn't even part of that stream) and there is no unconference day on Monday, it might be possible to organise something during the two preconference days. If you're up for it I'd be willing to co-organise a meet-up on the topic of advocacy. Dimi z (talk)
- Hi Dimi! I think it would be a good idea. I wish there was a track to organize unconference meetings throughout the conference... the preconference days are busy. I'm not sure I can help organize a meeting, but it seems like it would fit naturally with the chapter meetings. best, -- phoebe | talk 12:55, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Questions regarding elections
I have some questions regarding your candidate submission.
- Chapter financing. For the last years I hear from different chapters about the problems of financing their activities using WMF money. What do you thing about it? Did WMF done everything possible to solve this problem? What WMF should do in the future in the area of financing projects run by Chapters? What is the role of Chapters within Wikimedia movment? Do you think they still should be prefered upon other organisations like Amical (Catalunyan support group)?
- Sucess of projects. What do you think, about the succesfull projects? How doest it come that some projects seems not to be so much sucessful as Wikipedia? Was the help to the lest sucessfull projects sufficient? Should WMF close non succesfull projects? How should WMF handle with non sucessfull projects and which are they?
Regard and sorry for working. Hopefully you will got it,
- Hi Juan... there are many big questions here... I will have to think some about the answers. -- phoebe | talk 22:56, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations. We all win
Congratulations on the election, Phoebe. This is not just a win for you or me, it's a win for the entire Wikimedia movement. Having your help on the board will benefit everybody across the entire project.
Thanks very much for taking the time to answer my question. Of course I was hoping for some good anwsers, but I had no idea somebody could provide an answer that exceeded my expectations. You set the bar very high. There were some strong candidates and a lot of difficult questions—and you outshined everybody. Well done. I am so very pleased that we'll be having your support and I thank you kindly for offering to serve on the board. You efforts will be a great help to this project that serves all of humanity. This is a very joyous day for all of us. Thank you very much and congratulations. 220.127.116.11 00:53, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- Aw, thank you! I think everyone had good answers; it was a good field of candidates. best, -- phoebe | talk 12:53, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- Auguri e in bocca al lupo, Phoebe! Klaas|Z4␟V
- 08:06, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! -- phoebe | talk 23:52, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- Congratulations once again. I just read at en:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-08-07/News and notes#In brief that you've been appointed as the Vice Chair of the Board. This is great news. I just had to stop by and thank you again for your dedication to the Foundation and its projects. Thanks. 18.104.22.168 03:09, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Internal/Private wiki discussion
Hi Phoebe, following on from the question about the private wikis during the board elections, please could you add your thoughts on moving things forward at Talk:Wikimedia_wikis#Are we re-purposing Internal?. Thanks! :-) Thehelpfulone 00:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Internet Archive fire
Hi Phoebe, No doubt you've heard already, but a fire hit the IA scanning center in SF. No injuries, and damage was limited to equipment and materials in the process of scanning, but there will likely still have been a few irreplaceable items lost. :-(
They're estimating they need to raise about $600 K to get scanning back up and running. I'm wondering if there's anything WMF can do to help them out, perhaps with a loan in kind. It seems to me like their mission is pretty closely aligned with WMF's, they have certainly been very useful and helpful to WP editors.