User talk:Sj

Thank you to all who supported me in the 2011 Board elections.

Archives : Quarto | Other | 2004 | 2005 |2006 | 2007-2009 | 2010 | 2011

Please leave me a message here.

History and collated comments

Separate simple... ratings scheme offense, IRC defense... black ants! Angela Uueh, Thanks! Sj Hi. improving interlingual ties : interesting and meaningful. I have some new ideas, too... Press Corps 17-yr cicada req. attracted en:User:Lupo, who added some photos. :-) User:Tomos hello :-) bad browser on meta? adding space between caracters. Anthere UTF-8 codes breaking! Please care about it. please. Suisui ugh! And sometimes it adds an "e" at the end of a block of text. And replaces certain international characters with a literal "?" [ :( ] Sj Multilingualism : Something has to be done on multlingual communication on wiki... one of its main powersouces I think. I contacted Arno Lagrange, Anthere. -- MattisManzel

wmf miscellany - jd ৸, August 2006

Communitas and thoughts on Wikipedia interlanguage priorities - [[user:Quinobi], July 2006]]

ludism's WikiNode preview in late '06 (NTS)

Fantasy, June 2007, asking about iswiki flagging (for sitenotice editing in '06)

user:Guaka gets a laptop, June 2007

Craig Franklin on a Brisbane bid, February 2008.

KTC statement thanks, and privatemusings talk request, May-June 2008 (UTC)

Mikhailov Kusserow revising a speedydel of userpages, March 2009 (UTC)

What do you think about commons:Commons:Village pump#Russian Copyright Law issues concerning edits in Wikipedia made by Russian citizens?

Hello Sj, this edit is correct? Greetings, 21:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC) (both from someone logged in as me!)

Image license for Wp 4juillet-board.jpg (early 2007, jusjih, pathoschild)

You've got email. Dragons flight, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Budget stuff (2005)

Hey - nice work on organizing this. :) I consider the budget passed today as a second beta budget, the next one will be a full version and I'd like your help beforehand in putting it together (need to start work on this early in March).

Some notes: We did not have enough money for a reserve this time (other than just saying that anything we take in that is over $75K is the reserve), but all the board members present indicated that this is very important and should be a budget item in the next budget. Your idea of 3 months' operations expenses is the standard recommended amount by GAAP for non-profits, so that is what I'm going to push for but it will likely not be that large until the end of the year. My proposed budget had $20K for special projects (such as outreach, WikiReaders, yada yada, Mother Teresa-type stuff, etc), but that was tied to being half of the Lounsbery grant. In the meeting I found out that that money was marked for 'physical expenses during quarter 1 2005', which wiped the special projects item (the $0 item). Once again, great work and I look forward to working with you. --Daniel Mayer 06:22, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

PS - If you are interested, IRC is a good place for us to work together. #wikimedia is the logical choice so long as it stays fairly quite. I'd also like us to eventually form a real finance committee with at least one board member being an active participant (Anthere seems to be obvious choice). A way to logically coordinate what is put on meta and what goes on the foundation wiki also needs to be worked out. We also need to draft a contract for Brion and maybe for Chad. Sensitive stuff like contract development may need to happen on the grants wiki. --Daniel Mayer

Wikimedia budget/2005/Q4

Any help, esp on the detail pages, would be greatly appreciated. :) --Daniel Mayer 00:04, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Good deed (wikiliterature)

Hello Samuel,
I just wanted to let you know how much pain I've had to draft a decent letter/email in English announcing the creation of Wikipen. I don't know if I succeeded but at least, it is there : http://en.wikipen.org/wiki/User:Aurevilly/Presentation_letter Since I dont want to be ridiculous as to sent such letter announcing a literary project, full of spelling mistakes and such, could you be as nice as making some necessary copy/edits ? FYI, when that letter is done, it is expected to be sent (email or snail mail I don't know yet, to entities that I've began to list at http://en.wikipen.org/wiki/Wikipen:Let_them_know Anyhow, thanks for any help you can provide. Cheers, villy ♦✎ 09:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC) (PS: I've made the same request to Mindspillage and Amgine).

I still visit wikipen, verrry occasionally :) -- sj | help translate |+ 23:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

since 2008

Board election question : image licensing

Hi. If you would, please answer this question. I'm not involved with WikiNews, but it's very important to me, too. — Omegatron (talk) 00:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Board election question : regarding Wikiversity

Hello Samuel, since there are only a few days left until end of election I personally hope I still can see your response about this question regarding Wikiversity. Thank you very much in advance, ----Erkan Yilmaz (Wikiversity:Chat, talk) 15:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello Samuel, thank you very much for your answer. We will think about all answers, e.g. here: Wikiversity:Vision/2009. About: "For future elections, how can we help more Wikiversity contributors get involved?": I guess that is a general problem also in the real world, that people are not interested much. For this election actually I also was like this. But I got involved when I got contacted with this virus: being involved by asking a question created in collaboration with User:Darklama + User:Cormaggio. And since then I watched the page and other pages and also spread the virus to other Wikiversity contributors. So, I'd say you must infect as many people as possible and hope for the chain reaction. ----Erkan Yilmaz (Wikiversity:Chat, talk) 16:57, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Thx to User:Hillgentleman ([1]) I have revoted and you have now a better place than described here, ----Erkan Yilmaz (Wikiversity:Chat, talk) 17:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikimedia Quarto

Hi Sj, is Wikimedia Quarto still active? If not, I am thinking about a reviving, how do you think of it?--Wing 08:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I think you speak of two very critical points. The one is recruiting authors, the other is translating. How was these done in the past? On the authoring side I am thinking of invite people write articles, and I would also accept people write articles in their own language and try to find translators to do the translation for them. How do you think of this?--Wing 13:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

It has been dormant, but I think the need for something like it across the projects has only grown over time. I would love to spend some time recruiting new authors and translators, showing them how we produced that sort of visual newsletter without too much trouble. +sj | help with translation |+

Replies on your talk page . +sj | help with translation |+

Wikizine move

Sj, if you wish to move all Wikizine editons to Meta, many are there already, look at this, and all others are in a simmilar form at the wikizine wiki. All editions must be somewhere in the "construction-layout". --Walter 12:44, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Super, thanks. It's on my weekend plan while in Chicago :) I commented it out until I have time to work through the list. -- sj | help translate |+ 20:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Babel

Translation offer

You probably have enough people already, but if you ever need help here on Meta translating between English and German (in either direction), drop me a note on en.wikipedia. Cheers, --Goodmorningworld 19:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: language and outreach questions

Just so you know, we're not ignoring you... Alex and I are just thinking about it. ;-) A quick question though, does it just have to be "technical improvements" (as in related to technology)? Cbrown1023 talk 22:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Not at all. most tech solutions have social equivalents and vice-versa. I think some of the most telling changes would be social. Simply stating there are core languages that should be considered equal for the purposes of a main jumping-off point for localization, or a canonical document about the Projects, would be a significant change for language issues. Or conversely, the proposed explicit statement that all strategic planning be done in English will define how groups are formed and discussions started. For outreach, wiki and social issues about where presentations (or conference papers) are shared and archived, where event calendars are posted and updated, & how requests to talk are shared are all relevant. -- sj | help translate |+ 23:11, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: New languages

At the very least, you could bring up the topic at the English Wikipedia's village pump. But before any change can take place, we need to involve a very broad swath of the Wikimedia community.

We could conduct a poll similar to the various logo selection processes. Each of the Wikipedia editions would have to carry a visible notice about the poll, because the portal is by far the most visible of Wikimedia's webpages, and every language (at least the 100+ languages) would be affected to some extent. And of course, we can add a little blurb on the portal itself, maybe just below the search bar. Ideally, we'd involve the translation community here; visitors from non-English projects may feel left out of the decision if we allow most of the discussion to take place in only English.

So far, the only serious proposals I know of are Catherine's current design and Forseti's. We should expect a good deal of support for the current design, so we'll have to make a good case for changing it (internationalization, expandability, newer is better, etc.). We also need to make clear the new design's requirements, based on our experience as admins having to maintain the portal regularly. For example, we can't just say that every language with over 100,000 articles gets to be at the top, unless we have some way of accommodating 15 or 20 languages up there, even on lower-resolution screens. (Because we should expect the new design to last awhile.) We also need to keep an eye on page size, load time, and accessibility. So although a clickable Flash map of the world would be a cool way to select a language, we really can't use it.

By involving the wider community in designing the portal, the portal will seem like less of a temporary hack (which it is currently), and maybe the developers will finally get around to fixing bugs like 4501, 1534, 15518, and 15758. We could really excite volunteer designers with a well-publicized poll.

 – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 06:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

It's certainly a long-term discussion. And strange that only those two proposals have been considered seriously -- this is a famous and highly visible page! Now that Jack and others are actively working on improving the page, it seems like a good time to get new designers involved. Thanks for highlighting those related bugs; I've been trying to gather important bugs for various long-term projects, since we don't have a unified set of priorities at the moment (or even a list of a hundred different clusters of priorities belonging to different groups).

Before any large poll is started, existing discussions about the portal should be consolidated -- they are hard to follow, especially for someone coming in fresh. The odd naming convention for the portal pages doesn't help. We need to convert something like Initiatives into a meta-equivalent of w:Wikipedia:Wikiprojects, and organize a discussion there - that is something that visitors from large wikipedias might be more comfortable with. -- sj | help translate |+ 06:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the poll that decided the current design was between Catherine's design and a temporary design that really no one liked. [2] (It looked something like the current "Wiki does not exist" error page.) Unfortunately, Forseti introduced his design just a bit too late for the majority of voters to take notice, and efforts to merge the two designs as a compromise never resulted in much change. Forseti's design did get reused for some Toolserver tools and the old server downtime message.

But none of these designs really did anything about the severe usability issue of choosing between hundreds of languages. Plenty of websites feature a language selection page upfront, but Wikipedia's the only site I know of that suffers from the issue to that extent. Even a clickable Flash world map wouldn't work for us, because of geopolitical issues and the sheer number of minority languages represented here. So not only do we need designers to step up, but we also need to engage usability experts. WikiProject Usability at the English Wikipedia might have some professional usability/HCI contacts who might be of help in creating a new proposal.

 – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 06:13, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Board question

Well, yes... but I would prefer general answers (something like "stewards will delete such images", or "small projects without an EDP and proved skills have by default they're local upload disabled", I really don't know). --Nemo 07:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Congrats

Good luck over the next two years. Sarcasticidealist 20:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations and a lot of luck as a board member. I am really happy to see you in the board. Dror_K 20:33, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Call it intuition, but I knew you would be within the first five members of the list. My congratulations to you and the best of luck. You deserve it and I'm sure you will do a perfect work. --Góngora _(T•ES) 21:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, and congratulations! Looking forward to seeing you again at Wikimania. Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 21:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Good luck to you in this new role! --BradPatrick 21:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll be standing ready with the aspirin :) congratulations! -- phoebe 21:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Eh ! you made it in the end ! That's a good thing and I'm happy you'll be there in the next two years. Thanks. Anthere

Nod, I guess it will be a very different job. But no less fascinating ;) Anthere

Congrats! --MaanMeis 01:19, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm late, but... Congrats! --Nemo 22:07, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Congrats SJ :) --Bcjordan 00:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on being elected as Trustee. – Kaihsu 11:38, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Congrats. --Ascánder 14:26, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I am very happy for your victory, I´m a new user in es wikipedia and I only want to wish you happiness and prosperity in the mandate, I only ask you to be benevolent and friendly and have good luck in the future Attentivly: NazcaiN

Congratulations for win the 2009 Board Elections! Good luck! =) Tosão 19:26, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you all for the warm wishes! You are the best. –SJ talk | translate  

Strategy Wiki

Hi SJ,

I'm Serita Cox, a member of the strategy development project team, and project manager from Bridgespan. Tyler forwarded me your message as it expanded beyond her area of focus (Content stub) into process and I wanted to respond to the entirety of your posting.

First, thank you so much for your input, it is greatly appreciated. To answer your questions: 1- Process. Yes, the project team has now thought through the process sufficiently that we have identified activities, roles, timelines, and deliverables for the entire strategy development process and are looking to post them for Community input this coming week. We wanted the Community to have something logical to react to, but given your comment re: Content/Quality stub being "too polished" I worry we might get similar reactions to posting the process. It is a fine balance to strike between giving the Community some starting point and appearing too set/decided. Your feedback would be greatly appreciated on how to hit this right balance.

2- Your message around editing the Content/Quality stub couldn't have been more timely. I had that very day raised the concern that these stubs were not getting the kind of traction we were hoping in terms of views, edits, inputs, comments. Clearly, they are sub-optimal in engaging the Community. Their purpose is to provide a place to start collating and analyzing data around Content/Quality, Participation, Reach so that the Community Task Forces set-up in Phase II have a starting point to begin analyzing and defining potential strategic opportunities and priorities for expanding reach, expanding content, improving quality and expanding participation. It is true that the Bridgespan-side of the team is tasked with providing the first development and subsequent synthesis of these fact bases which is why you see large postings, but again, it would be very helpful to us to get your thoughts and input on how we can clarify the purpose of these fact bases, the continuous "work in progress" nature of these fact bases, and how best to frame/layout these fact bases for maximum Community engagement.

I would really appreciate any feedback you can give us regarding our transparency of process, clarity of purpose, and desired engagement with the Community. You can reach me via my User page http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Serita

Thanks, Serita

Hi, Serita -- I responded on stratwiki. I'll get over my concerns about founding a new wiki one I have a process for synching it with meta... -- sj · translate · + 15:53, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Wmania 2010

No I didn't. But 2011 or 2012 i can to think ... :) Maybe it will in Rio de Janeiro, where i live. Tosão 12:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, hope to see you one way or another! -- sj · translate · + 20:44, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Are you from Boston, really? Tosão 01:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes; come to a meetup one day! –SJ+

Grants

SJ- I saw that you were active on an inactive Meta page about grants. While that conversation seemed to be more focused on getting external grants, we're now trying to pull together the WMF Mission Activities Grant process which was piloted this fiscal year with chapter grants. I welcome your input on any part of the process. Thanks!Jennifer Riggs 20:47, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I was active there once and even on the long-dormant grantswiki (!)... which we should finally close and definitively merge (say, into a combination of meta and internal, to preserve history). I'll think a bit about how to handle MAG ideas - is there more written about it than on the WMF grants page you link above? -- sj · translate · + 13:14, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments on the Chapter Grants feedback page: NB: it can be hard to get feedback when you ask for it with too much specificity :) Inviting anyone to leave comments may draw more input than breaking it down into this fixed set of topics. -Does creating other categories for general questions or feedback invite more participation? Or is better to just wipe out all categories and group them together later for summary? Thanks for your input!Jennifer Riggs 17:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Things of beauty

Things of beauty or things that make you smile? Perfect. :-) What a wonderful question. I'm going to use that often. --Philippe 02:05, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposal: The general rules of language use in Wikimedia

Hello, Sj!

I am a professional anthropologist and at the same time, a man with considerable experience as a politician and as a party to legal conflicts. I am very interesting by those most bitter conflicts in the Wikipedia community around the creation of Wikipedia in those or other languages. This, in particular, the sharp conflicts over language: Volapük, Lombardian, Siberian, Klingon, Quenya, Toki Pona, Moldovan.

[I note that the closing pages of the Moldovan and Siberian languages was partly inspired by political motives, respectively, the representatives of Romanian and Russian languages. There is no doubt in the existence of a group of Siberian dialects of the Russian language, and there is no doubt in the existence of a formal written language, which was called "Moldovan" and was considered different from Romanian.]

I believe that decisions on these matters do not meet many of the panellists. This means that the problem of the continued functioning of languages of the Wikipedia needs more regulation. Should be introduced simple and obvious rules, which could satisfy all. Moreover, these rules should be considered obvious and fair to all members of the Wikipedia community. These rules I have set out in the form of a few simple and universal legal norms. These rules have a few sources.

....for the full comment, see Proposal: The general rules of language use in Wikimedia

Best Regards, Ihor Rassokha, Ukraine Paccoxa 20:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for this detailed proposal. Some of these ideas are both good and new. The right place to take this up is with the language committee, or on the discussion page about language-acceptance standards. Their work is currently supported by the Foundation and communities. You can also raise such issues on Meta's Wikimedia Forum if you do not find the answers you seek. –SJ · talk | translate 01:07, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

since 2010

boston meetup

Hi SJ. Thanks again for organizing the wikipedia meetup yesterday. I had a great time! 209.6.54.113 22:42, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Any time :-) Come again next month if you can... we'll have another speaker then. Sj+ help translate 00:36, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikiquote

Hi, Sj. Any progress on this: «Wikiquote is occasionally maligned as being a legal liability; something which should be publicly recanted (assuming this is not true) or remedied (in cases where it is). This is an assessment that the Board is in a position to make»? Thanks, Nemo 07:16, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

In general, it does not seem to be a legal liability. Some countries have laws making collections of modern quotes difficult; and just as we try to be nice and follow buth US and local law where there is a clear single country that predominantly uses our Projects in that language, but collections of historical quotes are fair game everywhere. So we need to get on with the recanting and firming up of the idea that quotations are delightful and deeply educational. I think we may want to move towards having one page per quote... that makes translation easier. And great quotes have a pedigree and are often said and resaid by many people; and some great unattributed quotes are just that (despite lots of potential attributions). –SJ · talk | translate 15:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. What I liked most of your proposal was the "publicly recanted" part. An official statement by the Board, while not urgent, would be a useful point of departure and, given what you have written here, non so difficult to write. Even better if the WMF gives some suggestions to avoid another fr.wikiquote or similar problems, but this doesn't need to be an official resolution. Then, it would be great if WMF could develop MediaWiki for Wikiquote, and I have some ideas, but this is much more difficult and may be possible only after various usability improvements in prepation (e.g. forms). --Nemo 17:56, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I will try to work that into my current work and proposals on content scope, which I will start drafting here on Meta. As for the technical changes you have in mind, my experience is that the urge to "fix" a class of technical problems comes in waves -- and it is very useful to have a list of desired features lined up in advance to accomodate the sudden desire to have work to do. [it's often not possible to draw in the depth of feedback / input from a broad community that one needs, over the course of the 4-6 weeks in which a focused project may be developing its scope]. So do please write about your ideas in detail; don't wait for usability improvements to exist first. –SJ · talk | translate 12:39, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Annotations

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Quality_Assessment_Tools_for_WP_Readers

Enjoy! -- ArielGlenn 11:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Sj, was an admin here years ago; just wondering what's changed with Meta since 2006... seems a bit different. Any suggested reading aside from the usual from years ago?

If you're swamped, you don't have to answer. Just stopping by to say hi. RN 22:05, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that is quite a bit for Meta. The meta changes are kind of confusing but make sense - I did notice the old essays being more properly archived (I remember trying to stop the mass deletions from back then ;p). Strategy-wiki is kind of strange... I was alerted to it by the resignation of Sjc on en who wrote a long essay about retaining editors, who I thought was you for a day or two (the c is kind of small :)). I'll definately have to get used to the new blogs and Planet thing. Being an old-school wiki editor from C2/Meatball and such Meta was my favorite wikimedia wiki at the time, I'll just have to readjust to new way things are done here I think.

As for en: there are a ton more administrators then there was years ago, I remember patrolling the candidates for speedy deletion category and seeing something like 500+ pages often.... after I got my admin bit back there after a bit of drama due to the years of inactivity, I went to patrol it again and basically there is like maybe 20 pages there on an average day; the vandalism problems seem less of an issue. As I mentioned there was some drama when I asked for my adminship back even though according to en policies it's supposed to be automatic, it seems in general there's a LOT more admin-related drama even for seemingly simple issues (perhaps due to the sheer number of admins) - I'm personally just avoiding it completely now; the speedy deletion policies are finally strict enough to where I can delete obvious advertising outright, I just hope the other 1000+ admins are as judicious as I am.

On the flip side for en: there does indeed seem to be a serious lack of content editors over there compared to years ago (I'm still trying to make sense of it); a fair amount of the same people who were great editors from years ago are still there - one I knew well got promoted to be a maintainer of featured articles (previously everything was handled by Raul), but the rate of new content editors seem even smaller then years ago and quite a few have left/inactive. I'll edit even a relatively hot article's talk page and usually get no response. Years ago I would a ton of comments and suggestions; I guess the positive side is that there are less edit wars - I admit I like the freedom to edit articles without much controversy; that was very common years ago. However, the requirements for featured articles are so much higher now, to the point where the first featured article I wrote is justifiably considered "crap" now, so input from other editors is basically required unless you are a professional writer of some kind. The higher standards are all necessary in the spirit of becoming an encyclopedia (I even fought for higher standards at the time, but I had no clue would turn into this). Basically, I've come to the conclusion that "article ownership" (used loosely, not the policy version), something previously heavily discouraged, is almost mandatory for getting an article to featured status.

To sum en up - it's all nice to see, but I'd like article discussion to at least come to some sort of medium to what it was years ago. It seems almost too admin-heavy in general.

Those are just my opinions though. Sorry that was long, and thanks a ton for the response and pointers! RN 00:15, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Also, I'm doing fine - thanks! Perhaps much more relaxed and mature then I was years ago. Which also means less "overnight editing". It was a nice break. RN 00:25, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

That's great to hear about the essays, and thanks again. RN 02:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Communications_subcommittees/Trans#Managing_translations

See. --Nemo 14:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Outdated private wikis

Talking about private discussions, what about merging to Meta some old, closed private wikis? For instance I've found this spcomwiki where I suppose everything is so old. Even some ArbComs have a policy to publish their private discussions after they've decided, and all classified information is eventually re-classified and published by State agencies. ;-) Moreover, it would be interesting to be able to learn from previous private wikis (if they worked and why, etc); if nobody can access them, every new private wiki will probably repeat the same errors, unless it includes somebody with previous experience. --Nemo 07:33, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

That's a great idea. I'm currently working through the Board wiki identifying pages that need to be made more public -- (some are best suited for meta, and were copied and pasted for historical reasons that no longer apply; others are only mildly private and similar to pages on the internalwiki.) I will work on the spcomm wiki as well. At one point I updated the Wikimedia wikis page with a list of all private wikis that had been generated over time, which we should work our way through. –SJ · talk | translate 08:50, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

open meetings

ohai. I'd be happy to see a regular time for open meetings rather than scheduling them one-off; is monthly too often? Anyway people need a good amount of notice. I'd be happy with monthly with two alternating times. and we should talk to others about what would be useful, too. -- phoebe 04:44, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Software development transparency etc.

I suppose you know already, but I think that you may be interested in mw:Development process improvement and related comments like mailarchive:wikitech-l/2010-July/048312.html, mailarchive:wikitech-l/2010-July/048326.html which lead at this suggestion; and tools:~mwbot/logs/#mediawiki/20100824.txt starting at about 20:34. Cheers, Nemo 22:25, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Wikimedia board manual

Please give a look at Talk:Wikimedia_board_manual#Votes_vs._resolutions.2C_quorum_and_required_majority. Perhaps it helps to address the previous message you wrote there. --Nemo 22:45, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Fundraising

Hi there! Thanks for volunteering to sit on the Fundraising committee. The work of the committee will be really valuable to making this year's annual giving campaign really effective. I've posted an overview to Fundraising 2010, and would love your thoughts on the talk page. I'm also going to try to set up an IRC meeting soon, and hope you'll join for that. Keep an eye Fundraising 2010/Committee for a couple of proposed times! Thanks again... Philippe (WMF) 18:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello SJ, Thanks for showing interest in the fundraising committee. You can see that we've started to develop the Committee structure and I'd like to encourage your thoughts and participation in the formulation of the important role Wikimedians will play in our drive this year. Please leave me a message if you have a specific request from me, otherwise head to the talk pages and lets get started brainstorming! Keegan (WMF), [[Fundrasing 2010]] 19:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Uso mpya on sw wikipedia

Salaam SJ nisipokosei unazoea habari za Meta. Nimejaribu kupata watu kule lakini hadi sasa bila jibu. Ok the problem is the new surface that popped up one day. Must be a change somewhere at Meta or Wikimedia. Do you know anybody who can switch it off? It gives us a problem with our help pages and the explanatiosn on them: icons, explanations about which window to use for what . Then the new users start automatically in the new mode. It is relevant now as we are getting new people doing the medical translations via the new google project.

Besides that I do not like it personnally - in German wiki I can at least return to the old surface as it was but not here (only partly). New users cannot do it as they do not know and we cannot start with them explaining 2 different surface versions. Why are people on other wikipedias being asked if they want it and we not???? 91.98.113.164 18:30, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello MuddyB, as I mentioned elsewhere: I know what you mean about the new text and help pages. Translatewiki can help with translation of the new messages in the Vector skin. All new wikis are treated the same way -- I think that because you had an existing account on the German Wikipedia (for instance), you were offered the chance to switch back to Monobook (or whatever skin you had been using before). If all of sw:wp decides to switch the default back to Monobook, you could ask for that to be the default -- but essentially all Projects are now moving to use the Vector skin, so I would recommend switching if at all possible. –SJ · talk | translate

WikiScholar

This sounds quite like the Cite namespace proposal discussed at Wikiversity. If you were to liaise with the community there, this proposal could likely be implemented there without a whole new project. Other proposals for new projects may be compatible with Wikibooks and Wikiversity as well. There is a discussion at Wikibooks spurred by the foundation-l discussion of new projects and incubation that may also be of interest to you. Adrignola 12:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikimedia CAT

Hello Samuel,

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 10:07, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi again,

I hope you had a nice fly back home.

Please could you help us in contacting Jan-Bart de Vreede he's discussion page is blocked.

Thanks. --Gomà 10:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Except for Jimmy, after two weeks of simplifying our proposal and asking Board members for comments we got the silent answer as usual. As we told you in Barcelona it seems that it is very difficult to get an open dialogue in Wikimedia. If you have any idea to unlock this we are looking forward to hear about it but we think that the only way is ask the voice of the community.--Gomà

I absolutelly agree, we feel dissapointed because silence is the only answer, always --Barcelona 08:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC) and SMP (talk page) 18:15, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello to you both, and thank you again for your help at the Drumbeat Festival. I will have more time to respond later this week. I understand your frustration with silence; this is largely a side-effect of having too many private channels. I will keep all of my thoughts about this and other community matters public. –SJ · talk | translate 21:15, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

It would be easier to comment if you point out the changes, the previous concerns, and your latest interactions with ChapCom.

• The survey doesn't link to what changed; is it just this bylaws update?
• Have you asked the Committee for feedback? What do they think? I don't see a public discussion.
• What was the last discussion that led to your chapter proposal being rejected? Were the bylaws rejected, or a proposal involving them? Is this an ongoing discussion? Again, I don't see anything public about it. Something like this, updated and in more than one language, would help.

The Board has delegated responsibility for chapter development to the Committee. I suggest engaging them, assuming good faith, and start an open dialogue about the process. The entire saga would make a good example for the movement roles talks. I suspect most of the 'locked' aspect of the discussion is tied to lack of information, differences in expectations, and assumptions of bad faith. –SJ · talk | translate 21:15, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi SJ. Thanks for your answer. We will wait until later this week.

We have added:

• A detailed explanation of the last changes.
• A list in English sumarizing the communications we had with the ChapCom and the Board.
• The documents with the content of those communications linked from the list.

I don’t see bad faith in ChapCom behaviour but an opaque and bureaucratic procedure addressed to check a list of requirements and say “yes” or “not” instead of a transparent dialogue addressed to help in defining and shaping the proposal to be accepted. Our expectation isn’t being called ”Chapter”. Our expectation is being able to promote and support the projects in our home having access to the tools we need to do it. The tools a chapter has. We detailed what we mean here.--Gomà 07:56, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedias in underrepresented languages

Hi Samuel

We have contacted the Director of Development and The Rosetta Project of the Long Now Foundation. She answered very interested in participating in the idea of creating 10 new language projects by the 10th anniversary. We also have contacted Cosmocaixa and they are ready to provide for free the venue for the conference in Barcelona by the week of 16-20 March 2011. We have prepared a draft project to coordinate all the activities around helping small wikipedias. Here you can see it. I also mailed Aaroni updating him. Do you think it could be a good idea to move this page to meta and invite users from those Wikipedias to join? --Gomà 01:26, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello Gomà, that is good news. Laura Welcher is an excellent person to have involved in the project. And having a confirmed venue is the start of a solid event for March. A page on meta would be a good place to invite multilingual discussion, including from users of those Wikipedias. –SJ · talk | translate 19:44, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

interwiki problem

Hello,

I left a question at Talk:Pywikipediabot/interwiki.py#possible problem. Can you help me?79.181.124.235 12:16, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm not sure what the problem is -- the other editors of that page are more likely to be able to help. –SJ · talk | translate 06:48, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Until you have told me that you're this person ...

namely: User:Sjª, that user is blocked. notafish }<';> 08:31, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Definitely not me... –SJ · talk | translate 21:16, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Msaada kuhusu haki za picha katika sw

Hi I hope you can give me some advice. I obtained the permit to use some images from a blog by Chemi Che Mponda (an obviously well known TZ- blogger now living in US). She requested, however, some form of attribution to her as author. So I decided on Laiseni Huria ya Umma "Attribution 3.0 Unported" (Cretaive Commons). Now I am not sure if it is enough if anybody opening the image files sees that attribution or if I have to include it also in the caption of the image e.g. here http://sw.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manda_%28Ludewa%29. The image file is http://sw.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picha:Mbuyu_Manda_Wiedhafen_2009_Chemi_Che.jpg. Appreciate your advice. (pls respond on my sw-page) Kipala 19:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Genealogy: WeRelate, Rodovid, and Wikimedia

We'd be glad for you to help out. The last time anyone tried was three years ago now (I sent out a group email) and it didn't come to anything.

I think because of software and other issues WeRelate would not want to participate. Their trees are done completely different from everyone else's, whereas it wouldn't be extremely difficult to import WikiTree records into Rodovid; and Dallan and Baya didn't agree much in their negotiations (granted, there was a language barrier). You can contact Tomáš J. Fülöpp by mobile using the number listed here and Baya is easy to reach on Rodovid or by email. If you take the group email approach, please cc in User:Bjwebb who was formerly very involved in trying to get merger discussions together.

(This is in response to the message you sent me on WikiTree, which I don't check often. Meta, Rodovid and email are probably the best ways to reach me.) Wikiacc (§) 15:56, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi. You left a message about WeRelate in July. Sorry, after no one responded to my proposal, I quit checking the page. I saw your message today. WeRelate is the largest non-profit genealogy wiki in the world. We have a small dedicated group of admins and a lot of wiki pages. We would love to work with Wikimedia in some way. We talked with Rodovid years ago and combining our sites didn't look promising. However, it might be now. In answer to your comment about the ads: we are not enamored with the ads, however as a non-profit we don't sell anything. We also do not get enough donations to keep the machines turned on. Our chief problem is funding. You can contact me at solveig@quass.org Thanks for your interest. --Solveig Quass

2011

Wikimania 2005 Links

Someone recently recreated a page at Wikibooks regarding Wikimania 2005 content that was transwikied here, to Meta. Maybe the content was then moved to the Wikimania wiki. It was noted that the links at http://wikimania2005.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programme still point to Wikibooks for the content. I was wondering if you'd be able to fix the links or failing that, whether you'd be able to create me an account on that wiki to do so myself. – Adrignola talk 13:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

How can I combine accounts

Hello Sj.

I have a global account "vaqo" and "vago-az". But basically I'm working in AzViki (account "vago") and this is not a global account. How can I combine accounts or how I can make an account vago global? Best regards, -Vago-az 08:35, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello Vago, since you already have the azViki account user:vago, I believe you can simply look in the user-preferences when logged into that account, and choose to make the account global. If you need to usurg someone else's inactive account (though I do not see one with that name), you can make that request here: Steward_requests/SUL_requests. Regards, –SJ · talk | translate

Thanks for the advice. Regards,--Vago-az 09:53, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikikids/Vikidia

Hi Sj,

I've seen your message to Barry Desborough about Wikikids. I would be glad to know more about this "recent recommendation to look more seriously into a project for children" and I would tell you with pleasure about Vikidia and its current situation. Vikidia in french does works quite well, with about 180 000 unique visitors a month. We nevertheless have quite more difficulties with the other version in spanish. Whenever there would be a way for it to be taken in charge by some new peoples/organization, that would be fine for me. I don't know about other working project but Wikikids in dutch. Feel free to contact me, be it by phone. Astirmays 10:34, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Astirmays, I was referring to this recommendation to consider a wiki aimed at children. It comes somewhat out of left field, but shows that people who have not been actively thinking about Wikikids or Wikipedia before can see a definite need for such a project. I would like to know more about the problems in Spanish, and why you don't see that in French! –SJ · talk | translate 11:39, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. I would like to react for two points :

• "a project specifically targeted to children, and to the quite different needs of children in different age groups" I would warn against the idea of dividing the content for age group as restricted as each year of age, following the pattern of school class. That point could (should) be expounded.
• "the scope of such a venture might necessitate the formation of partnerships with institutions who have experience and resources already devoted to this area." Thats quite a conservative point of view, kind of those that, if followed by Wikipedia, wouldn't have permit its developpment. I mean that in such a project, one should try to communicate with institutions, publicize what they do, share some points of view, competence and so on, but he shouldn't wait for those institutions as if they would have to approuve the project and its methods, as if just as you would think about a doctor, that only them could tell what is good for the project, since it deals with children.

About the problems in Spanish, and the difference with Vikidia in french, I guess that small wikis rely very much on particular people, and on chance. Chance that they are here, and if they quit one day that they succeed ones to other ones.

Did you know that they were another wiki for kids in dutch ? Wikiweet. It was lead by a bunch of teenagers that really amazed me in how they did well, how determinate, efficient and well organised they were. But it recently died out du to some quarrels. I still can't exactly say how they could be in the same time two wikis for children in dutch that did quite well, wheras there is no such thing in much more spoken language such as german or italian. (not to tell about english which case should be discussed in relation with simple Wikipedia) Astirmays 21:52, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Should we unlock then? --Jyothis 03:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Agreed --Jyothis 03:49, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Global cultural groups

Hi, Samuel, you've said "We are in the middle of relevant discussions about how to support global cultural groups of Wikipedians, including those without a state and those which don't map neatly onto a geography". I'm really interested on this issue, because I'm supporting the Esperanto projects. Is there something more I could read on this? Thanks (and sorry for the interception!). CasteloBranco^msg 05:41, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes! See the latest Movement roles discussions, including the recent notes on new models for partner organizations. I would be most interested to see an Esperanto-focused partner organization set up and proposed for official recognition. Unfortunately the Catalan group, which was previously the best example of such an organization needing formal recognition, may have abandoned that idea in favor of trying to become a traditional Chapter. –SJ · talk | translate 05:51, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Samuel. Additionally, I think it is a great ideia to invite Amir for mediating. CasteloBranco^msg 16:42, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

How can I begin to participate on discussions like these? I saw you talking about Brazilian case, Esperanto and catalan initiatives, and I'm very interested in those issues. Are you using IRC? Do I need to subscribe somewhere? Hugs, CasteloBranco^msg 01:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

response to your query

Hi Sj. I've left a brief response on my questions page to your query. Regards, ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 05:27, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I responded there as well. –SJ · talk | translate 09:51, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sj, just as a friendly heads up-- since you had indicated "and for now am neutral", if you were considering moving (or confirming) your vote as implied by the "for now" part, the elections are drawing to a close tomorrow. Regards, ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 08:23, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. My overall thoughts did not change -- I think you will make a great steward with a bit more experience with other wiki cultures. en:wp is a model for many, but there are some significant ways in which its culture differs from that of other projects (particularly in terms of how fast things should be done, and how notice should be given). –SJ · talk | translate 11:16, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

WM-CAT, Amical Viquipèdia

Dear,

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 is done with the firmest conviction, altruistically and voluntarily, spending my own 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 Wikipedia and free knowledge:

• Why should I stop before a line indicated on the map, when 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 SJ, maybe my speech will seem harsh, but this is a discourse that comes from the heart and mind of one who, as you, is convinced of the validity of the project, but at the same time sees that a right as basic as being made part of a group in equality with others, is denied.

SJ: When the Trustees left to be bold?

Yours,

--Mafoso 09:22, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I leave the message in my matern language in order to avoid translation errors (my english is basic).

Dear Mafoso, Thank you for sharing in both languages.

The work that Amical is doing is promoting the mission of the movement as much as some Chapters, and certainly deserves formal recognition. The current definition of Chapters is a narrow one, and involves "lines drawn on a map" and related legal definitions. Some community members, including myself, are working towards defining other types of partner organizations that can be recognized formally, just as chapters currently are. These groups would not be defined by country, and would not be geographically exclusive.

I believe that this idea of a 'partner organization', developed in part through discussions with members of Amical and similar culturally-defined groups, would match clearly the aims of Amical and the original WM-CAT proposal. Recognizing those aims will hopefully facilitate and promote what you do for the movement, for free knowledge, and for sharing across boundaries.

Let me add, however, that Wikipedia and its sister projects are built on a much more important principle than "official recognition" within our community. They are built on the principle that everyone, from anywhere in the world, whether or not they are "recognized" by anybody else, can create knowledge, can improve knowledge, can share and redistribute knowledge, and can improve education for themselves and for their communities -- in their own language. The chapters (and, one day, other partner organizations) are only one part of our global network of creators, facilitators, associations. –SJ · talk | translate 09:50, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt response ... My late, but is less than other board's fellow.

I know that you and others are working on what it's called partner organizations. With all due respect for the job, I do not think it necessary, why create a structure without a practical sense?, if the PO should be treated like the chapters does not make sense to have two names for the same thing.

Suffice to say that documents the requirements for future chapters rather says that this must be based on a state (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requirements_for_future_chapters).

Right, this will be the primary distinction between chapters and other partner organizations. –SJ · talk | translate

Let me add that I agree with you: I will do the same task to Wikipedia auqesta is much larger than the foundation. and although the WMF does not admit me in equality than other colleagues who want to be or have formed a chapter based on state borders will not change the fact that I continue to defend the validity of the project.--Mafoso 14:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Good. I will work with the WMF on proper recognition for all community groups, but I am glad that we agree here. –SJ · talk | translate

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 SJ , 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.

SJ: Quan deixaren els trustees de ser valents?

Thanks

Hi Sj, I am not an experienced user to become a steward, i will not be elected as stewards, at the time of nomination knowingly i applied for that. My intention is only to participate and see the election process closely. The users(voters) who opposed me, have given very good judgment, i respect them all. The Supporters have chosen me as their candidate and some were neutral I am very much thankful to them for their participation. Sir, I really thankful to you for your contributions( as user and steward). You have given a very good suggestion, I accept your suggestion. Regards --Bhawani 13:24, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much!

Dearest Samuel, Thank you so much. Your witty answers amused me. I thought you would be afraid to answer my questions but, well,, deep in my soul (yep... birds have souls!) I knew you weren't the coward I thought you could be before, when you didn't answer Amical's demands to the Board. You see at one moment I even doubted your integrity and thought all your restless moves within the Movement Roles happened because of the proximity of the elections, because you wanted to be reelected once more as a Board member with the help of the Catalan-speaking community. I am confident now, I know you care deep inside about the projects and its people, whether coming from small or big communities, dominant or dominated languages, and I am really glad to count you as a friend. Take care, I wish you all the best, keep the faith because I know that the path of justice is a long walk... Respectfully, Your flying and resurrected friend, Capsot's ghost 17:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again. As you can imagine it's Capsot again and not an ugly, nasty and evil sockpuppeteer. I hope you have a pleasant stay there. Well, I had to create a new name in order to be able to work on the Wikiccionari tonight and I am glad to concentrate on something more constructive. I hope my edits won't be reverted tonight. Take care, una abraçada, Claudi/Brave Capsot's Heart 21:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi

He provided a mail from Wikimedia Spain which had a footer who said that every providing to third person is forbidden, or something like that (you can see the whole mail in os revisions on his user page). The conten of the mail was posted in all his posts. I asked DerHexer to take a look, and he talked with other stews (I think) and drini oversighted it. Yesterday he tryed the same, and Dferg has made a oversight like drini has done a day before. --WizardOfOz ^talk 08:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

NP :) --WizardOfOz ^talk 09:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Capsot's message

I left this message to two administrators before being blocked again... Thankss and sorry! Dear Administrator and/or Steward,

My username is Capsot, and I think everyone here knows me... I apologize for using a new account but you all seem impervious to my case and I beg you to judge my case soon (because I cannot work on any projects and mainly on the Occitan Wiktionary) and determine truly what I am guilty of, initiate an investigation and determine if I am really guilty or if, in my opinion, some administrators acted too rashly and abused their administrative rights in ways that could be seen as totalitarian. It all seems as if there was some kind of scheme in which the only goal is to keep me from editing and voicing my opinions or concerns aloud; and I hope you will act consequently with justice and equity. It is not good for me and it may damage your credibility on the long run.

I wish I could have used other ways to reply but well in spite of the following message that seems to leave a last chance to speak your mind: "Blocked users can edit their own user talk page, unless specifically disallowed from doing so"; it seems that Magistral Mathematicae, who seem to believe I am Catalan, resorted to the more violent option, leaving me no other way to express my opinion than to create new accounts endlessly (I have serious concerns about freedom of speech here and it seems that I am not the only one, I have seen some other reverts... I hope you will prove me/us it exists)

I am really troubled by what happens here because even though I can take the blame of all of my actions if you can prove my infringements, I do not understand the current situation that blocks all my edits in each and every one of the Wikipedia projects. I stand here to be judged, some day I hope, by a Committee of Administrators or any Boards that make decisions here because I do not think this process has been done until this moment, and that my account has been blocked for many days now mainly, in my opinion, on false grounds.

• It seems that the main accusation that led to the block of all my accounts is: sockpuppet accounts [[3]].

However if I am not wrong (I have read what the Wikipedias say, but I guess you are experts and know much more than I do what the thing means) the general principle of sockpuppetry is to desguise or hide the true identity of the user (mainly in order to deceive or vandalize), and I have never done such a thing.

Either my accounts (Capsot's ghost and Brave Capsot's Heart had the name Capsot clearly visible on them (that is why I was blocked again so easily, had I used malice you would not have found me so easily...) or in the case of Wikiporros (in the Catalan Viquipèdia) or Wikipuerros (in the Spanish Wikipedia) I clearly said they were "vegetablegängers" accounts of User Capsot, but probably the allusion to "doppelgänger accounts" was too misleading to be understood...

I think, but I can be wrong, that there is no real problem in having multiple accounts as long as you state who they belong to and I did, especially in the "doppelgänger" ones but then it would be another accusation, not sockpuppetry: I admit it I am guilty of creating multiple accounts after I was blocked

So what can be the other charges I am responsible for? Please tell me, I am eager to know so I can defend myself and respond to the accusation(s)/prosecution(s), an option nobody had given to, nor seem willing to be giving, me until now. I would also greatly appreciate that you stated publicly and clearly in some page of your Arbitration Committee, if there are any, what are the other charges against me so I can respond to my prosecutors. Let it be known which users have left complaints so I can try to provide answers.

• I am also afraid that most, if not all (at first until Samuel Klein's message), of the messages I have sent were erased without even checking what they contained, and many users (Austin Hair and Samuel Klein) restored what you had erased. Samuel Klein also emitted a concern, not understanding clearly why I am blocked for (he thinks I am just blocked in Meta, I do not think he know you have blocked me on a general level).

I am confident that many of you act decently and honestly so I have faith that a proper attention and unbiased justice will be applied to my case. Thank you in advance. Sincerely,

Claudi Balaguer/Capsot

Ps: In the case you open the discussion I promise not to open any other accounts before the conclusion of it all. Thank you!

Re:

What lead a lock is that he started sockpuppeting to disrupt on several wikis: meta, eswiki and cawiki at once. es:Magister Mathematicae 01:34, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Here on eswiki: [4]

Here on cawiki: [5]

and several others I don't have the diffs at hand.

Now the excuse is "I didn't do it on my main account, and I always acknowledge those accounts were mine, therefore that's not sockpuppeting". But that doesn't fly.

Several people talked to me my by private asking for me tu unblock, I quote a small excerpt (bold is my own):

Since then we had several email conversations. He seems to regret what he had done and he is certainly more calm now. He expected to be blocked and he doesn't ask to be unblocked, at least for now. He would like, however, to request one thing from you, the administrator who blocked his accounts. He has no problem with his actions being called "libel", "vandalism" and "disruption" - he admits on all these accounts, but he is unhappy with the definition of his other accounts as "sockpuppets", because in his understanding a "sockpuppets" is a stealth account which doesn't admit its relation to another one. He didn't hide the relation between his different accounts, so he finds the "sockpuppet" label incorrect and needlessly hurting.

And that he indeed knew what he was going to do was a no-no is clear from [6] and even though he says he's not part of Amical, he accepts in [7] that he's doing it all because "Board didn't anser Amical's demand".

Now, you can't get away with disrupting sockpuppets just by openly acknowledging you're going to use alternate accounts to cause problems. Therefore I locked the account as we do with all other disrupting sockmasters. es:Magister Mathematicae 01:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

P.S. he seems to be sweet talking to you, as he's spamming on other pages: [8]. es:Magister Mathematicae 01:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

By the way, to all who approached me and asked if the account could be unlocked, I said yes, but he needs to commit stopping this, apologize and commit not to create new disruptive sockpuppets. But so far there has not been any acknowledging of that. es:Magister Mathematicae 01:57, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

As far as I remember, a lock won't prevent you editing your meta talk page in order to talk about your unblocking. And I never denied him the right to edit his own talk page. But feel free to unlock the account if you think it's the best on the project's interests. es:Magister Mathematicae 02:30, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'll unlock it then. es:Magister Mathematicae 02:56, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

RFD notice

Hello. This is to inform you that one or more files uploaded you are currently being discussed at Meta:Requests for deletion#Fair use images. Regards, Jafeluv 08:02, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Board election questions

For a full list of questions and other background information, see User:Sj/Q&A and my platform.

Question for current board members Re: May 2010 and Projects' Scope

I'm asking the same question of all current member seeking re-election. It concerns the "May 2010 'unpleasantness". In brief, Wales proposed that the board redefine all our projects' scope in a controversial way (specifically to exclude anything deemed 'pornographic'). Some board members strongly supported this idea, some opposed it from the outset, and some supported first and then opposed it after community feedback.

The question to you is pretty simple: which group were you in? Did you support or oppose the redefinition at the outset? If you changed your mind in May, when did you change your mind and what prompted it? Where are you on the issue now?

(I should say, how you acted in May 2010 is absolutely not a litmus test for me. Ultimately, it's how you're likely to act in the future that we care about.)

Long form:

In May 2010, Jimmy Wales announced and implemented a policy without prior community consensus. He made the following statement:

This is not merely the advice of one person. I don't intend to deadmin anyone - but I will. The order of operation here is going to be that we first [implement the new policy], and then we can open a broader discussion about [how to apply that policy]. I just don't want anyone to get the impression that we're going to have an open vote [on the policy]. We aren't. It isn't going to happen. This is not a democratic debate, this is policy. [9]

When pressed, Wales further clarified:

I am in constant communication with both the board and Sue Gardner about this issue, yes. I expect the board to issue a statement within a few days offering a general philosophical support for the serious enforcement of policy on this issue. [10]

Ultimately, the forthcoming board statement was quite clear that it no new policy has, in fact, been authorized. So my question is-- who was Wales in communication with, such that he believed his actions would be vindicated by the board? Who endorsed the idea that one individual, or even one handful of individuals, should be able to unilaterally declare a new policy of that magnitude?

The specific question over images isn't the "real issue"-- there's a legitimate diversity of views on that question. The big issue, to me, was that in May 2010, we learned some minority within the board had come to feel that board votes, not community consensus, should be able to redefine the projects and their policies in controversial ways.

In the interest of transparency and openness, perhaps the community should have learned by now who stood where during the events of May 2010. But given all the emotions running high during that time, it didn't seem prudent to actually ask. So long as board members didn't run for re-election, they had a good claim to "put the past behind them and just move on" with taking care of business. But now that the community has to decide whether to re-elect you, so I think that means it's time to for you to show your hand. Where were you on things and when? Alecmconroy 07:06, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello Alec, that's a good set of questions. A point of clarification: there had been no Board discussion before May 6 of the idea that "one individual, or one handful of individuals, should be able to unilaterally declare a new policy of that magnitude". Most of the discussion was about whether a policy change was going to happen through the ongoing community discussion, whether one was needed, and whether & how the Board should engage. –SJ talk | translate  

specific questions

These and other detailed questions are also answered on my questions page.

• Where did you stand on this issue before Jimbo's announcement on May 6? Did you endorse or oppose his stated plan?

I was firmly against the idea of acting without community consensus, and also against the idea that a small group such as the Board could work out the subtleties of major content policy change - beyond the very broad general suggestions that were made in the Board's statement.

• Where did you stand on the issues during the interim when Jimbo was implementing his new policy? Did you endorse or oppose his actions?

I opposed the idea of any preemptive action, and noted on Commons efforts that were not Board actions or reflective of Board consensus.

• Where did you stand on the issue during the board resolution vote? Did you advocate for the resolution that was more in support of Jimbo's new scope definition, or did you advocate for a version based on the status quo 'educational' test?

I did not think that Commons needed to revise its scope, nor do I now. I think it needs to clear up some confusions within current policy, and to have better ways to implement policy - particularly controversial or time-intensive ones - given the low ratio of active editors and admins to volume of new contributions.

We still lack a good test for the educational nature of material on our Projects, save on projects where there are tests for notability, which has limited overlap with educational value. And since educational value, like many other things, depends on context, we have an interesting challenge for Commons and any other meta-repository that proposes to archive material for many current and potential future contexts.

• Do you feel differently now, or wish you'd acted differently, or have learned anything from those experiences?

This was the first topic in my experience that led to hundred-message-long discussion threads among the Board. This was due in part to a diversity of views on precisely the point you raise - how policy change should ideally take place on the projects, and the Board's role in it. I didn't recognize how broad that diversity was at first. In hindsight I think we could have avoided most 'unpleasantness' by addressing that before being distracted by the emotionally-charged particulars. –SJ talk | translate   22:48, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi SJ

Personally, I see this dynamics of questions/answers to candidates as a very interesting exercise.

I believe it is a unique type of debate among us that is especially interesting.

I have noticed that User Alecmconroy suggested a very interesting series of questions on strategic issues. I have given my opinion, I see you have made your comments too.

I wish you the best possible result in these elections and, if you agree, I suggest that we continue having this type of debate regardless of who is chosen.

Cheers and good luck. --Gomà 09:18, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

from alecmconroy

The first few major sections below are a long set of questions from alecmconroy.

May 2010 unpleasantness and Projects' Scope

I'm asking the same question of all current member seeking re-election. It concerns the "May 2010 'unpleasantness". In brief, Wales proposed that the board redefine all our projects' scope in a controversial way (specifically to exclude anything deemed 'pornographic'). Some board members strongly supported this idea, some opposed it from the outset, and some supported first and then opposed it after community feedback.

The question to you is pretty simple: which group were you in? Did you support or oppose the redefinition at the outset? If you changed your mind in May, when did you change your mind and what prompted it? Where are you on the issue now? (I should say, how you acted in May 2010 is absolutely not a litmus test for me. Ultimately, it's how you're likely to act in the future that we care about.)

Long form:

In May 2010, Jimmy Wales announced and implemented a policy without prior community consensus. He made the following statement:

This is not merely the advice of one person. I don't intend to deadmin anyone - but I will. The order of operation here is going to be that we first [implement the new policy], and then we can open a broader discussion about [how to apply that policy]. I just don't want anyone to get the impression that we're going to have an open vote [on the policy]. We aren't. It isn't going to happen. This is not a democratic debate, this is policy. [11]

When pressed, Wales further clarified:

I am in constant communication with both the board and Sue Gardner about this issue, yes. I expect the board to issue a statement within a few days offering a general philosophical support for the serious enforcement of policy on this issue. [12]

Ultimately, the forthcoming board statement was quite clear that it no new policy has, in fact, been authorized. So my question is-- who was Wales in communication with, such that he believed his actions would be vindicated by the board? Who endorsed the idea that one individual, or even one handful of individuals, should be able to unilaterally declare a new policy of that magnitude?

The specific question over images isn't the "real issue"-- there's a legitimate diversity of views on that question. The big issue, to me, was that in May 2010, we learned some minority within the board had come to feel that board votes, not community consensus, should be able to redefine the projects and their policies in controversial ways.

In the interest of transparency and openness, perhaps the community should have learned by now who stood where during the events of May 2010. But given all the emotions running high during that time, it didn't seem prudent to actually ask. So long as board members didn't run for re-election, they had a good claim to "put the past behind them and just move on" with taking care of business. But now that the community has to decide whether to re-elect you, so I think that means it's time to for you to show your hand. Where were you on things and when? Alecmconroy 07:06, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello Alec, that's a good set of questions. A point of clarification: there had been no Board discussion before May 6 of the idea that "one individual, or one handful of individuals, should be able to unilaterally declare a new policy of that magnitude". Most of the discussion was about whether a policy change was going to happen through the ongoing community discussion, whether one was needed, and whether & how the Board should engage. –SJ talk | translate  

Specific questions 

• Where did you stand on this issue before Jimbo's announcement on May 6? Did you endorse or oppose his stated plan?

I was firmly against the idea of acting without community consensus, and also against the idea that a small group such as the Board could work out the subtleties of major content policy change - beyond the very broad general suggestions that were made in the Board's statement.

• Where did you stand on the issues during the interim when Jimbo was implementing his new policy? Did you endorse or oppose his actions?

I opposed the idea of any preemptive action, and noted on Commons efforts that were not Board actions or reflective of Board consensus.

• Where did you stand on the issue during the board resolution vote? Did you advocate for the resolution that was more in support of Jimbo's new scope definition, or did you advocate for a version based on the status quo 'educational' test?

I did not think that Commons needed to revise its scope, nor do I now. I think it needs to clear up some confusions within current policy, and to have better ways to implement policy - particularly controversial or time-intensive ones - given the low ratio of active editors and admins to volume of new contributions.

We still lack a good test for the educational nature of material on our Projects, save on projects where there are tests for notability, which has limited overlap with educational value. And since educational value, like many other things, depends on context, we have an interesting challenge for Commons and any other meta-repository that proposes to archive material for many current and potential future contexts.

• Do you feel differently now, or wish you'd acted differently, or have learned anything from those experiences?

This was the first topic in my experience that led to hundred-message-long discussion threads among the Board. This was due in part to a diversity of views on precisely the point you raise - how policy change should ideally take place on the projects, and the Board's role in it. I didn't recognize how broad that diversity was at first. In hindsight I think we could have avoided most 'unpleasantness' by addressing that before being distracted by the emotionally-charged particulars. –SJ talk | translate   22:48, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Other

Is Wikimedia most like..

... a library, a school, a museum? something else?

I find it most like a town dominated by guilds of practitioners. There are politics, art, infrastructure, and a shared sense of identity and mutual self-defense against marauding hordes. People are drawn to the town by rumors of what it does, and what one can learn or gainthere; later by reputation and legend. Guilds tend to have their own internal notions of aspiration, ability, and quality, and to know one another. People with shared hobbies tend to work together on weekends, or share ideas or discussions.

Other support

Of the other candidates, who do you most support?

I think that one thing we could use as an organization is fresh blood. I myself would not run for a third term, and some of the problems we face today (institutionally as well as on the Projects) might benefit from significantly new ideas and approaches.

So while I have had very good working relationships with Ting and Kat, Ting often inspiring me with his poetic sense of the projects, I am most interested in some of new candidates who have been successful in their own sphere of Wikimedia but have been largely separate from meta-workings.

Among those I have met personally, I support Harel and Patricio, as they have a clear sense of what the Foundation should be, new views to offer, and are good at staying cool under pressure and working towards consensus. My favorite of the new candidates, now that I have read her writing, is Jane Richardson.

Favorite article(s)

Do you have a favorite article (or more) that illustrates the 'best' of Wikipedia? Favorite on other projects?

I am drawn to the meta, and got started editing w:en:List of list of years, so my favorites are pages such as the 'Backlog' page on the English Wikipedia which help visualize the work and self-reflection of different parts of the community. One look at that page and one's impression of how the projects work is changed forever.

I admire recent improvements to Wikisource, and find this sort of overview page one of the best visualizations of the act of book-digitizing in the world today: Miss Mapp.djvu

Role models

Of the current board members, who do you think is our most effective leader / who do you look to as a role model?

Jan-Bart has always been a voice of moderation on the Board and helped hold discussions together. Recently, I also look to Phoebe as a role model. She is determined to make sure she understands new topics that arise, stays cool when discussions get hot, and has facilitated some of our toughest issues.

Myers-Briggs

What's your Myesr-Briggs type?

WM in Politics/Activism/Law

Advocacy role

Should WMF have an advocacy role in any circumstances? If so, broadly speaking, how do we decide what issues to take a position on?

Yes. Issues that directly impact how successful our Projects and work can be in achieving our mission - from supporting massively parallel collaboration online without undue legal risk, to providing effective access to knowledge around the world - deserve our support.

Does the WM Movement have a role to play in local, national and international politics? If so, what does that role look like in the future?

It asbolutely does. The movement and the Projects represent our capacity as a society to create monumental collaborations to improve all of our lives, and to realize the potential of the Internet. This is one of the great strengths in our public image which we could make better use of.

What can we do to help those directly-affected by 'The Arab Spring'? What can the WM movement do collectively do for those nations? What can the WMF foundation do? What can individual wikimedians do?

This sort of political question is a bit outside Wikimedia's scope, as I see it. We may advocate for access to knowledge and sharing of cultural works everywhere in the world, but not for any particular sort of government or national standards beyond that.

If it were feasible, should the foundation promote 'internet freedom'-- that is, advocate for or active provide unfiltered internet access to citizens of repressive regimes?

In context, yes - certainly unfiltered access to educational projects.

If it were feasible, should the foundation promote 'universal internet access'-- that is, advocating for or actually providing computer&internet access to impoverished peoples?

Yes - certainly access to educational materials on the internet.

Should the WMF promote "Net Neutrality" in the US?

Net neutrality is essential to providing access to unbiased knowledge [as well as any biased information that is subsidized by an interested party, which tends to edge out unbiased information in a non-neutral network]. As a movement we should promote this everywhere, the WMF should do what it can to support that advocacy everywhere, including in the US. [so: through local wikimedia groups as well as directly making statements as a global foundation]

Should WMF advocate any position on copyright reform?

Yes. We are the first major society-wide project to demonstrate the immediate benefits of making large-scale reuse and remixing free and simple. Even massively popular sharing sites such as youtube, while they scale in terms of the # of people they touch, are not primarily about remixing; whereas we could not possibly compile and edit our projects without that as a central focus. Our work would not be possible under the sort of copyright regime we have developed in the past few hundred years.

Now that Wikimedia projects are a notable force on the Internet, we should not only promote free licensing for contributions to our own work, but should help countries understand how they might revise their own notions of copyright to support and encourage the sort of work we do.

Movement Vision, Scope

What's our Big Purpose? What's our Mission? Jimmy Wales famously said "Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing." Without quoting or paraphrasing, how would you say it?

Organize and share the knowledge of our civilizations, large and small. Spread the idea that everyone has something to teach, and provide a way for them to do so.

The part of or mission where we support a global collaboration around our educational mission is what sets us apart from every other effort to share 'human knowledge' with 'everyone' (from Google to the Internet Archive). It invites all potential readers to contribute to how we understand both of those terms.

What is the "big new exciting amazing thing" that the Wikimedia Movement could potentially accomplish in the next five years?

Provide effective translation services for people who share/publish their educational materials under a free license. This service doesn't exist in a large-scale way today (though our community and many others, like universalsubtitles, offer narrow bits of it), is a significant reason for archives and authors to join free culture communities, brings different language communiteis closer together, and is a useful way for people to practice or improve their language skills -- all reasons this would be exciting and amazing. It could also spur a lasting wave of contribution to many of our existing projects (wikisource, wikibooks, wiktionary, wikiquote) beyond Wikipedia.

This is especially important now that organizations which have recently offered translation services start to close off access to their translation tools and databases. For instance, Google is cancelling access to its translate API.

Can WM host a 'non-educational' project if we want to? For example, suppose there was a multiplayer online game targeted at Israeli and Palestinian children, in the hopes that this childhood experience will promote future peace. If there's a broad consensus that the non-educational project would bring good in a clear way, could we host it if we wanted to?

Not without revising our mission and vision first. We could conceivably do this, if it seemed relevant to the spirit but not the letter of our work. War, for instance, has often been a cause of people losing access to (or destroying all trace of) human knowledge. But this would take a serious community discussion to reach such a consensus.

Should promoting "free culture" a goal in and of itself for the WM movement?

Yes, for a certain definition of free culture. And we should be part of shaping that definition. A culture of shared creation, sharing, and joyful reuse is central to our mission - which covers both historical, current and future human knowledge.

WM content has generally been described using terms like "knowledge" and "educational". Do you think WM has a role in hosting non-notable art, fiction, music, and other works of open-culture? As hosting expenses naturally approach zero due to ever-dropping technology cost, should WM host increasingly more diverse content, or should we stick to the domains we currently focus on-- namely, factual, notable, instructional content of the kind that might be found in an encyclopedia or textbook.

Looking far forward, beyond the next few years. Should each Wikimedia-named projects have to adhere to the same basic set of values we, as a community, currently hold here in the existing projects? (Namely, valuing the free distribution of factual knowledge). Or will falling hosting costs eventually mean that Wikimedia's projects will eventually become more diverse in their values, methodologies, and purposes?

Innovation

How can we empower our developers and other programmers to "be bold" in trying to create 'the next big Wikimedia thing' that will do good for humanity?

Highlight new labs work, encourage work on important small projects with obvious room to expand (wiktionary, wikisource), reach out to hackers in parallel spaces (but not mediawiki) to collaborate with us at least on brainstorming.

How do we fix the "MediaWiki Problem", namely, an over-reliance on a single software platform?

That's a tough question, and related to why we have such a hard time supporting some of the sister projects, like Wiktionary. One way would be to find an obvious candidate for a separate tool or platform and build it independently rather than as an extension. We might look to what derivative platforms (like Deki Wiki) have done, or how similar collaborative projects (like freebase, fotopedia, openstreetmap, or ]http://werelate.org werelate]) approach the platform question.

If it were technically feasible and of negligible cost, should we someday empower trusted users the "be bold" and create new projects on their own initiative, ala Wikia?

Yes - an improved incubator process could allow for this, both for new languages and for new project-types.

On projects like Wikipedia, how do we fix the quality problem? (some of our articles aren't very good and don't necessarily seem to be improving with time)

Among other things, we could add a flag for articles that have this problem, and develop different policies for them. Wikipedia has a pretty good low-bureaucracy way to develop 95% of our articles, which are long-tail topics developed from scratch.

Distributed Wikipedia-- great idea or greatest idea? ;)

Greatest idea! But there are many conflicting ideas about what this means, and some of them would be very hard to realize.

What I think is a great idea is recognizing that global usage of Wikipedia is already distributed today, in a few senses. People make frequent offline and derivative works based on Wikimedia projects - something we go to great pains to allow. But we do almost nothing to visualize or even recognize that reuse; no trackbacks, no standard way for a reuser to note which specific permalink of individual articles were captured for that use. We should work towards providing better explicit support for these types of use.

It would also be great to support distributed hosting and sharing of information - even if this remains a secondary mechanism not used by most readers. We should recognize that libraries want to be able to share and locally host digital collections, and give them a canonical way to host a local copy of Wikimedia material. We should recognize countries in which international bandwidth is expensive, but local bandwidth is not, and help them set up and synchronize local caches. Doing this in even a limited fashion would guarantee significant improvements in accessibility during a regional netsplit or infrastructure failure.

Finally, we should support a distributed model for editing that allows people to export sections of a project, edit it offline or on a local/regional network, and then push those changes back to the rest of the world. There are many excellent models for this in the world of version control for software; and we have people who care about this topic in our community. Making this work is far more than an academic exercise - it will enable entirely new uses of our projects, as well as improving current channels of reuse.

I've heard some interesting discussions recently about what this might look like from Rob Ochshorn and Mako Hill.

Help compile Objective Data about the Candidates

Posted to all candidates talk page:

To aid in the fair evaluation of all the candidates, especially those not active on EnWiki, verifiable data about the candidates is being compiled. Anyone is invited to help compile the data since it is all publicly available on-wiki.

But since the people best qualified to help are the candidates themselves, it seems reasonable to ask:

• Which languages do you speak? (voter statement)
• Which projects do you contribute to?
  • For each, when was your first edit?
  • For each, how many total edits? (exact figures not need)
• Which projects are you an admin on?
• Are you a bureaucrat? which projects? when?
• Are you a CheckUser? Which projects? When did you start??
• Are you a steward? If so when were you made one?
• Have you served in a verifiable leadership role on a project? (e.g. Like EnWiki's Founder or Arbcom member)
• Have you served in a verifiable leadership role on at the Chapter or Foundation level? (Trustee, etc)

Are there any objectively verifiable facts that should be included in this guide but aren't?

(Incidentally, this document won't reflect my own personal values or wikipolitical opinions. Ideally it will come to exist outside of my userspace in some neutral, visible location. -- Alecmconroy)

More 2011

Movement roles discussions

Hello Samuel! Thank you for inviting me. Now, I have exams at the university and the languages school, but I'll try to participate. I can't assure you that. Regards. --Millars 07:54, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I had seen you have a meeting by IRC tomorrow. Tomorrow and on Friday I have my Italian exams, but maybe I could be at the meeting. But in which channel? See you. --Millars 08:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikpedia logo change in Kazakh Wikipedia

Dear Samuel, Thanks a lot for your help in Kazakh Wikipedia. I have changed the first page of KK WP. However, we have some difficulties in changing the Wikipedia logo on left corner.

Here is a story. Since beginning of XX century Kazakh alphabet has been changed three times - Arabic, Latin and Cyrillic. Currently we use Cyrillic, but discussing probability of switching to Latin script again. That shiftings from one orthography to another took place during Soviet regime. That is why Kazakhs from different part of the world use different type of alphabet. In China it is arabic, in Turkey it is Latin, in Russia - Cyrillic and so on. But 90% of Kazakhs live in Kazakhstan and they officially use Cyrillic alphabet and spelling rules adopted to Cyrillic script.

Now there are big discussion about spelling of the name of KK WP. The person who launched KK WP for first time was Kazakh from China, and he named it "Укипидия" which phonetically close to "Ukipidiya" and grammatically out of the common rules. Many people here advocate for changing it according to the rules of official Kazakh orthography. In order to present authoritative opinion we addressed this question to linguists from Institute of Kazakh Language. They explained that we should change spelling of the name to "Википедиа" which would be more accurate from grammatical point of view and phonetically will be closer to "Wikipedia".

So we tried to change it on the first page of KK WP. But it looks like that admin has no access to that part. Would it be possible to contact to someone who can help us to sort it out.

Thank you in advance. User: Ashina

Certainly -- this is something handled at Requests for logos. –SJ talk | translate   03:15, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Please also note that there are some projects which use multiple scripts, where there is a natural way to change from one to the other when reading. You may be able to set up something like this. zh.wp offers an example of this. –SJ talk | translate  

WikiUsability

Hi Samuel, I just wanted to update you on the wikiusability idea, I'm in the process of getting a video made to put up on kickstarter.com, a website that supports unique projects and sets up users that want to contribute to funding these projects. I wanted to maybe get some feedback, I got friends helping with couple things, and wanted to see if maybe you had some ideas or comments about the project. I will be writing more of it out, and I can send more info your way if you want. Let me know, thnx, Attila.

That sounds good Attila, thank you for letting me know. I would definitely like to read more about this: you could create a page about it here (say "wikiusability") for input from other wiki-enthusiasts.

Ok sure, I'll update the page soon, and thnx for the interest :)

BTW my email is ati10mutu@hotmail.com, I'm not too familiar with this website, and am not sure how I would receive messages. Thnx again

Whoops -- #usabilityFail ! A fine example of the genre. [sorry...] –SJ talk | translate   07:38, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

not sure what that is?

Responded

here.  :-) Sorry for the delay, I didn't see that one. Philippe (WMF) 03:24, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Incidentally (i'm interrupting), the page you linked to above (at wikibooks:en:Index:Miss_Mapp.djvu wikisource:en:Index:Miss_Mapp.djvu) didn't work. I'm intrigued. Can you point me toward a correct link? Philippe (WMF) 03:27, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Fixed, thank you. Somehow my mind switched wikisource and wikibooks while adding the link. Man, it's really about time to fix our interwiki linking shorthand and tools -- still no redlink/bluelink generator across projects! –SJ talk | translate   03:42, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

{{yes}}

See this edit. Please reply here to say that this is OK, as to avoid any further controversy. — Waterfox ^~talk~ 16:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

That's just fine - thanks Waterfox. In general it's fine to edit my comments and userpages, as long as it is in good faith and doesn't alter what I meant to say. –SJ talk | translate   16:24, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

About checkusers and the legal situation.

See User_talk:Dferg#Request. Dferg has also resigned the checkuser tool, citing Barras' situation. I think this situation could be easily cleared up by clarifying checkuser policy, probably allowing disclosure of impeaching information to the user impeached, if the user consents to the public release of the information, which clearly, by policy, is allowed. This would not be allowed for "weak" identifications, only for ID so strong that, if the identification with a user is an error, impersonation or illegal device access, amounting to the same thing, was involved, providing the impeached user with a means to pursue other remedies. My opinion is that a user who suffers what Abigor suffered could legally demand such information be provided, but there should be no need for that. It should just be provided to him, justice and equity require that. He's permitted public disclosure, which would, then, be transparent.

I see the problem here, with Barras and Dferg, as being legal ignorance. There is some legal risk involved in the usage of the checkuser tool, but if a checkuser follows clear guidelines that protect from legal consequences, there is no real problem.

The paradox here is that by not disclosing the information, but by having made a public announcement providing personal conclusions from the evidence, it's not impossible that Dferg did create legal liability for himself, which could have been eliminated by prompt provision of the data. In that case, his personal conclusions would be moot, he would simply become a clerk reporting what is in the record, following procedure for such disclosure. I notice that Dferg went back and modified the report, obviously being aware of the problem. --Abd 16:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikinews

Hello (sorry if the odd word is misplaced, I do not speak English very well) I write on behalf of Wikinews in Spanish where we passed a few months ago "Reporters Accreditation Policy" However, the email is in this wiki was closed and redirected to us not for this application. I spoke with recommended that I Dferg who sent this message to you is the hicieras reach the team to review and approve or deny the policy.

I wonder if you have any mail that can send the policy in English and Spanish. Greetings from Costa Rica --MadriCR 22:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Creí que no hablabas español :P Escribo en nombre de Wikinoticias en español hace unos meses aprobamos la "Política de Acreditación de Reporteros" Sin embargo, el correo electrónico que nos dieron para enviar la política se cerró y nos redirigieron a otro en el que nos respondieron diciendo que ese correo no correspondía a ese pedido, Hablé con Dferg, quién me recomendó que hablara contigo para saber si puedes enviar el mensaje al resto de responsables para que aprueben o rechacen la política.

Me pregunto si tienen cualquier correo electrónico al que puede enviar la política en Inglés y Español. Saludos desde Costa Rica --MadriCR 01:32, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Per Wikinews accreditation policy board approval seems to be required, as those people are going to use the "Wikinews" trademark. The address boardwikimedia.org is closed and bounces all emails sent to it. And that's why I've redirected MadriCR here. See relevant thread here. Regards, -- Dferg ^{☎ talk} 10:24, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

As per your suggestion I posted here - eswikinews editors are still waiting for the Board to say OK or not. I've got questions yesterday. Best regards, -- Marco Aurelio 18:30, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Great work

Especially tues. movement roles is important. here's another model to think about.

a "Western Christianity" model

Most Christians are Catholic & accountable to vatican. Others are accountable to a protestant church but not catholic. Lots are ecumenical and not accountable to anybody.

The Wikimedia movement is Western Christianity. The foundation is the Vatican. Our chapters and projects are "catholic dioceses" that are semi-accountable to the Vatican. New projects are automatically Protestant.

We want everybody to still be a "Christian" no matter which group they're in.

Also edited [13] to add 'allies of wikimedia'. as you said, they're not priority but dont forget them. they are the place who will make us the wikimedia associations we want.

Closing projects policy

Hi SJ. I am afraid I have been making a pest of myself over at Talk:Closing projects policy, where you previously commented a couple times. If you think my concerns about the Board's role in this are much ado about nothing, just let me know and I will desist. Thanks. ~ Ningauble 20:28, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for staying on top of that process. Your recent updates look like improvements. –SJ talk | translate   20:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikiversity

Recently , I was reading over a custodian process at Wikiversity, http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Candidates_for_Custodianship/Abd_%28full_custodian%29&action=history

Now, I'm not a regular contributor at Wikiversity and thus might not understand the policy that project applies (I'm more used to policy at Wikipedia), However The points raised by SB_Johnny and Ottava Rima make for concerned reading.

Perhaps being a more experienced person in the way things work , and having greater expertise in such matters, you would be able to explain why Ottava and SB_Johnny felt they had to voice some of the concerns about Abd in the manner they did?

I will note that Abd has attempted to respond to some of the points raised by SB_Johnny here : (http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Candidates_for_Custodianship/Abd_%28full_custodian%29/Response_to_comments_of_SB_Johnny) which was located on a sub page linked from a 'collapsed' discussion.

I could of course be misreading what Abd, Ottava and SB_Johnny are intending, but in my reading there seems to be a degree of animosity between these individuals, something which does not bode well for the sort of stable administration a project like Wikiversity needs.

I'm also not sure about Abd's ideas for an 'Assembly' , given that like other projects, Wikiversity already has a number of talk pages and noticeboards. How would this assembly not be just another noticeboard?

Perhaps as an experienced contributor across many WMF projects, you could look over the contributors concerned views and comments on this matter, with a view to forming a more objective viewpoint that isn't as emotionaly charged as the Custodian discussion on Wikiversity seems to have become.

ShakespeareFan00 19:37, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia Venezuela

Hello,

I am writing to ask you a question regarding the status of our still pending request of Wikimedia Venezuela to become a local Wikimedia Chapter. We have started gathering people and ideas since October 2010, organised a series of lectures for Wikipedia TEN. Our proposed bylaws have been reviewed by members of the ChapCom as early as May 2011. We were informed that in June-July 2011, our proposal was scheduled to be submitted to voting and, as of October 2, 2011, we are yet to receive a notification, either approval, rejection, suggestions...we have received only silence. What is going on? What has delayed the ChapCom to close the voting on our case? Working groups in other countries have submitted their proposals/requests to form a local WikimediaChapter more or less at the same time that we did, and they have been approved already. Why not Wikimedia Venezuela? What is wrong with us? If we were told what is wrong with us, we could work it out and fix whatever is needed...but with no input, we are left sitting in the waiting room for months..

Could you please tell us what is delaying our approval? What do we have to do?

Our people (37) is anxious and wondering what is going on. We were more people, but we feel dissapointed and discouraged, and this doesn't help us at all. Could you please give us an update?

Many, many thanks in advance from Venezuela.

--Jewbask 01:35, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for answering! If I remember well, DamianFinol, who is also a member of Wikimedia Venezuela, clarified these questions with Effeietsanders last June. My mistake: not to have these clarifications posted on the Talk page. I'll post them right away. Sorry about that! --Jewbask 01:47, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. It is important to have these notes clarified on the wiki (and any changes made in the bylaws linked here) since we try to be transparent about the review process. Warm regards, –SJ talk | translate   03:46, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Global blocks/ban (un)merge

Hey Sj, per my email to you awhile back, I am shortly going to unmerge the bans material from Global blocks and locks into a separate draft because it is referred to specifically in the new Terms of use draft, and because I've expanded it. Let me know if you have any thoughts about page organization etc. going forward, I'm all ears. :) Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 21:56, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

The expansion looks good - separate articles is an improvement. The headers of each should link to the other clearly. –SJ talk | translate   12:46, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Is it allowed in Wikipedia?

To keep in the pages of wiki Administrator's personnel thesis? at http://sd.wikipedia.org ? Other problem is We call Computer as same in English, but admin forcibly used his word Ganpukar of Computer. I have proof that thousands of published books called it Computer not Ganpukar. If some one oppose him he started abusive language. That is the reason sd.wikipedia.org never got attraction to Sindhi community. Plz check record there. Other things are he locked CSS due to that on the same site there are lot of font styles appeared there. He is not able to set commonCSS or Monocss. We are in trouble to work in our local Sindhi language. I don't know where to say for this problem. Record history says all the situation there. I appeal plz warn him to follow en.wikipedia.org rules, other wise he will continue use his personnel details and personnel promoted articles there. Dear I am sorry If u r not right person to say all about this, Plz suggest me where I can raise this issue. My sd.wikipedia.org ID is same. His thesis is not a violetion? http://sd.wikipedia.org/wiki/ماحولياتي_انتظام_ڪاڻ_اُپُگِرَهِي_عَڪس_ضماءُ_۽_درجه_بنديءَ_جي_طريقن_جو_اَڀياس Alixafar 01:11, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

This has been replied to on Alixafar's talk page. –SJ talk | translate  

Laptop for every single child

Dear Samuel Klein and Laptop for every single Child,

My name is Camilla Hall and I love your idea about one Laptop for every single child and I would like to see how I thru my contacts/network and work with Dr Ashok Khosla can help you in your work to fill the laptop with content application and information so we transform the world thru education. Dr Ashok Khosla did together with Professor Revelle the first environmental course 1963 at Harvard and Al Gore was one of his students - Dr Ashok Khosla also was part of the team from Prof Maurice Strong that set up the world first environmental conference held in Stockholm 1972 that later became Rio de Janerio Kyoto south africa Copenhagen Cancun Darwin. www.khosla.in

To give you an idea about me - I started IndoChine Group www.indochine-group.com here in Singapore and i have also co founded SENATUS www.sentatus.net I have help to orgnised several Charity events since 2000 for SARS Tsunami flooding etc and since 2007 I work with Dr Ashok Khosla the founder of Development Alternatives www.devalt.org that have develop amazing solutions for instance to teach a woman to read write and calculate to a cost 100 USD per woman in India. Dr Ashok Khosla believe education is really one of the key solutions to stop climate change and population growth. Dr Ashok Khosla is the president of IUCN www.iucn.org and Co President of Club of Rome. I have also help to organize HSH Prince Albert gala dinner and i work with www.whateverittakes.org Charlotte de Vita and www.nonviolence.com. and www.accessh.org

Singapore is one of the richest countries in Asia and act as trampoline to get in to various markets here - I have also top contacts in the middle East as well with top schools around the world /mobilephone producers and media

So i would like to talk to you (skype) to discuss how we can realize everybodies dream to eridicate poverty and transform this world to place in PEACE!

kind regards

Camilla Hall

Special Advisor IUCN Dr Ashok Khosla

www.iucn.org

www.maangroove.com

skype camillahall

Camilla, I have put you in touch with the OLPC partner liaison. –SJ talk | translate   14:22, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

• Dear Sj, Against the laptop have you work out the option of tablet PC. In India we (Govt. of India) have come up with a 35$ tablet PC for school children. It can be a good option against the laptop. If you want any help on this please let me know. Thanks --Rahuldeshmukh101 19:00, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

  Hello Rahul, thank you. OLPC would love to work with or support the $35 tablet, and has shared its own tablet design. Have you done any work on the data wind project? They likely need help as well. There is a universal need for better software and content development for tablet interfaces, for instance. Warmly, –SJ talk | translate   14:22, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

SOPA etc

Just so you know (as you can see), I updated the info on harm SOPA/PIPA can do to overseas users and sites. Please check it and if an issue, let me know? Thanks!! FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 16:18, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, bad diff link! Fixed. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 16:21, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

That looks good. Thanks, FT2. –SJ talk | translate   18:47, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

yo dawg

I herd you like quotes! you should send that to comcom; v. useful.

Sent! –SJ talk | translate   17:21, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Mentoring for global wiki work

Dear Cekli, would you be interested in having a mentor who is currently a global sysop, who could help you take on more cross-wiki work? I think it is great that you want to be a steward. We need more stewards who are familiar with turkic and azeri. But you need a bit more experience with cross-wiki work and Meta policies first. You might first serve as a global sysop, for instance. Regards, –SJ talk | translate   01:07, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your valuable information. I do gladly a global sysop. Best regards, --►Safir yüzüklü Cekli^mesaj 05:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

frdisc

RFC page

Did you mean for [[14]] to be posted to the main RFC page or the talk page? I am not sure how it belongs at the main RFC page but, as it has been there for a while, I will defer to you. - UnbelievableError 05:12, 14 February 2012 (UTC)