Foundation wiki feedback
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
 |
This page is only for discussing http://wikimediafoundation.org, the official Wikimedia Foundation website.
|
|
العربية (ar): التّعليقات على موقع مؤسسة ويكيميديا. بختياري (bqi): درباره موسسه ویکی مدیا. Brezhoneg (br): Evezhiadennoù diwar-benn lec'hienn Diazezadur Wikimedia Català (ca): Comentaris sobre el lloc web de la Fundació Wikimedia. Deutsch (de): Kommentar zur Webseite der Wikimedia Foundation. Ελληνικά (el): Παρατηρήσεις για τον ιστότοπο του Ιδρύματος Βικιμίντια. English (en): Feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation site. Español (es): Comentar en el sitio de la Fundación Wikimedia. Estremeñu (ext): Comental ena web la Hundación Wikimedia. Suomi (fi): Palaute Wikimedia-säätiön sivuista. Français (fr): Commentaires sur le site de la Wikimedia Foundation. Frysk (fy): Kommintaar op de webside fan de Wikimedia Foundation. Galego (gl): Comentarios sobre o sitio da Fundación Wikimedia. Magyar (hu): Ide várjuk a Wikimédia Alapítvány honlapjával kapcsolatos észrevételeidet. Bahasa Indonesia (id): Komentar dan saran bagi situs Wikimedia Foundation. Italiano (it): Commenti sul sito della Wikimedia Foundation. Македонски (mk): Мислења и коментари за страницата на фондацијата Викимедија. 日本語 (ja): ウィキメディア財団ウェブサイトへのご意見、ご感想。 Nederlands (nl): Opmerkingen over de website van Wikimedia Foundation. Occitan (oc): Comentaris sul site de la Wikimedia Foundation. Português (pt): Feedback na página da Fundação Wikimedia. Русский (ru): Обратная связь по поводу сайта Фонда Викимедиа. Svenska (sv): Kommentarer om Wikimedia Foundations webbplats. 中文(简体) (zh-hans): 维基媒体基金会网页的反馈 中文(繁體) (zh-hant): 維基媒體基金會網頁的意見反映 |
||
|
Inquiries about a particular Wikimedia project, like a comment about English Wikipedia, are expected to go directly to that wiki. Such comments may simply be removed due to irrelevance to the purpose of this page. General issues on the Wikimedia project are better answered on the general discussion pages, like Wikimedia Forum or your local project page or on the foundation-l Mailing list. You will not receive a reply by email for any feedback given on this page. Instead, feedback will be dealt with by knowledgeable volunteers. Responses below are from individual Wikimedians and have no official approval from the Foundation. All languages are welcome here, heuristically English enquiries are however expected to be replied more quickly than any other languages. To request the creation of a user account on the Wikimedia Foundation's website, not on any other wiki: Request for an account on the Foundation wiki Fulfilled requests are found at Foundation wiki feedback/archive. [edit] Admin noticeboardYou are invited to submit your request (except account issuing) to the foundation website admins. Typo correction and translation issues, which are easily handled by regular editors should be requested on the general feedback page for a quicker response. |
[edit] Main
|
|
[edit] Feedback on wikimediafoundation.org pages
Please note: This page is concerned with the website http://wikimediafoundation.org, the official website of Wikimedia Foundation, Inc, which runs over 700 websites. For comments and feedback to those websites, it is preferred that you go to them directly.
[edit] Grammatical error at Support Wikipedia/en
There is a grammatical error at the page currently linked to from the donation banner on Wikipedia. Under "FAQs," "We employ less than 30 people" should be "We employ fewer than 30 people" (less is only used for non-countable nouns--"less money" vs. "fewer dollars"). Thanks. Chick Bowen 05:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] More of a problem...
If you count, there's actually 31 members of staff listed (donation link says 'Where does my money go? People and technology. Even though Wikipedia is one of the top 5 most visited websites in the world, we employ fewer than 30 people.' Following the link, it says < 35) --129.234.252.67 11:59, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Link from - http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en
In the section:
How do you balance keeping Wikipedia open with making it more reliable?
We believe increased participation makes Wikipedia better. At the same time, we must maintain the tough standards that have made Wikipedia respected by scientists, academics, journalists, and foundations.
- the link from 'tough standards' leads to a 'no article' page:
"Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name. Please search for Editorial oversight and control in Wikipedia to check for alternative titles or spellings."
Fixed Thank you. - Rjd0060 13:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Giant sitenotice on top of Dutch Wikipedia
This thing is huge! This giant banner is showing for all of wiki-NL. Please make it smaller. User:Kwiki on Dutch Wikipedia 85.223.108.141 02:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- Hit the "[Verbergen]" in the upper-right corner to make it smaller. Cbrown1023 talk 02:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- I know, but millions of wikinoobs don't. Anyways, I spoke about it on IRC and they convinced me this is the "correct" size, since it was the same size last year. I still think its way too big and I hope they can take it off soon; but now I know it is not a mistake (at first I thought it was a mistake because on my 24" screen at 1920x1200 it is 3cm by 45cm). I will hide it with CSS. 85.223.108.141 03:54, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- Done
[edit] DISPLAYTITLE
Please use this magic word in wmf:Support Wikipedia/en etc, to localize page titles and avoid those ugly language suffixes. --Liangent 12:46, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Support buttons
Why not make a wikimedian button instead of just wikipedian? As for today I spend a lot more time taking picures for commons than writing articles. --Korall
I agree, Wiki button sounds good. Stuart Drossner
[edit] Hey, I don't think that I need an account BUT
Shouldn't it read "fewer than 30 people" rather than "less than 30 people" here?--138.38.221.18 07:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- Fixed, thanks! --Erwin 08:58, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Template:2009/Donate-banner/en
Please create templates on payments.wikimedia.org for different languages. Used by Special:PayflowProGateway --Liangent 13:23, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- We're working on getting the templates uploaded. We should have most of them up soon. --Az1568 (talk) 00:18, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Link Update for Canada/US Tax Treaty
On http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Deductibility_of_donations#Canada, the link to the US-Canada tax treaty needs to be updated. The new one is http://www.fin.gc.ca/treaties-conventions/USA_-eng.asp. --Dbo789 06:34, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
- Done, thanks. Cbrown1023 talk 03:20, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Please do not change the looks of your website
Hello,
I came to know that you gonna change the online foundation structure. Thus for you are wanting donations. You can do it obviously. But please do not change the layout of any of them. When we surfs net we noticed that each and every website has complicated designs, where as you guys have such a nice design which pleased our eyes. You may add functionality, but please please don't change the layout.
Regards, Samik Dutta
[edit] Re: Donations Needed
Respected Foundation Representatives:
Thank you for putting a banner asking for donations at the top of the website pages. It brought it to my attention and gave a wonderful visual for what you have and what you need.
Please note - it is not enough. For the one inch x 5 inch space. You NEED more information or something to grab attention and ask for help!
People can set up automatic deductions from bank account straight to you. It's only a suggestion but its an important one. A person might not have 1 million dollars to donate, but they might have 1 to 5 dollars once a month for 12 months = $12 to $60 a year. Put in that light its doable and helpful.
It puts people in a long-term, pro-active state of help.
Why do I care to say this?
Wikipedia has tremendous flaws, but it is by the people, for the people and through the people. It is knowledge for everyone, with safety checks - eyewitnesses can correct anything or send a flag up if information is sufficient, yet not objective enough.
THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.
History has always been written by the victors, the politicians or the slanted.
I have come here to research for my movie script because military-based data bases have almost no footnotes and very little eye-witness balances.
Please use the Foundation Banner space in a better way - PLEASE.
I have not donated yet, I am still a starving student living on student grants and loans, but I will put it on my Christmas list. So Best Wishes
Ms. Heidi Von Dunker
[edit] Raising Funds
I'm sure this has been suggested already but, if the foundation needs funds then perhaps it could consider opening itself up to advertising. This could be entirely optional. Users who follow the link to donate could be given an option "Enable Ads". Cookies would allow that user to be displayed ads whenever they use wikipedia. This could be turned off at any time. In terms of maintaining the integrity of the foundation, I'm sure that a set of guidelines could be established. These could ensure that advertising is not directed and that the foundation could be in no way considered to be taking donations from specific organisations. Perhaps give users a certain amount of control or establish an advertising "roulette" where ads could be displayed completely at random. While there are no doubt established issues in any kind of association with google there is no denying that tapping in to some of the massive revenue from google ads could raise significant funds. Good luck with your fundraising, hopefully I will personally be in a position soon to make a specific monetary donation.
[edit] Funding - attracting donations
If you need 6.6 Million dollars, have you considered having a Roll of Honour listing those individuals and organisations that have donated significant sums? (Or all donations?). I don't see one. Some people not currently donating might be willing to leave something in their will if they knew it would get their name up in 'perpituity'. They might even be moved to give something beforehand.
- Thanks for sending in your feedback! We have two pages that serve that purpose, actually. The benefactors page lists all large donors from individuals and companies, while the contribution history page gives a list of all the donations we've received, the amount, date, and a public comment. Cbrown1023 talk 21:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Support page error
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Support/en
No links on this page to enable placement on other websites - at least I could not find them. All I saw was "<a" and nothing in the drop down.
Why can't go to the bottom of this page and hit a "send" button!!!!!!!!!!!
- Hey, sorry for the trouble with this. It's actually a box with HTML code that you can copy to other websites. To reduce the confusion, we've made the box larger. Cbrown1023 talk 01:58, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Where Your Money Comes From
Hello, I just donated to the Wikipedia Foundation. I strongly believe in free, open sharing of information, so I support what Wikipedia does. Six conglomerates own all the media in the world: this is quite alarming, knowing that six conglomerates control most of what the entire human population sees and hears in all media. This is why I think it's so important that information sharing is returned to the autonomy of the people. However, I noticed in your annual report that Time Warner, one of those six conglomerates, is one of your big donors. Though I understand you need funding, I feel it is a conflict of interest to accept money from one of the conglomerates who stand in the way of objectivity and freedom in media. I worry that Time Warner may have (or at least may be aiming to) buy some sway in determining the content that is deemed acceptable on Wikipedia. On Youtube, for example, there are incidents of political content being censored due to Time Warner's meddling. I'm not accusing any staff on Wikipedia of any unethical activity, I'm just concerned about the idea of a free, communal information-sharing website being influenced by a corporate entity with its own monetary motives. One of the best things about Wikipedia is that it's run by a nonprofit, this means Wikipedia shouldn't be tethered to anything corporate, and Wikipedia can only stay true to its commitment to free and open sharing of knowledge if this is so.
To clarify, one reason the source of your money is so important to me is because I'm a canvasser: I raise funds for organizations like Amnesty International and the ACLU. The Rockefeller foundation actually offered the ACLU over a million dollars, but with restrictive and vague conditions attached. For example, they stated the ACLU couldn't use the money for any "unacceptable activities." So the ACLU turned the money down. I think it's important that nonprofits stay true to the causes they work for, especially when accepting money.
With that said, I'd like to suggest you invest in canvassers at some point. Canvassers would educate many people about all the work Wikipedia Foundation does, and they would raise money for you faster and more effectively than a web banner. Many canvassers also have experience in obtaining monthly sustaining donations that I'd imagine would be very helpful to an organization like this one that relies heavily on individual donors.
[edit] Fundraiser - Dutch version - spelling mistake
At the top of the Dutch version of the fundraiser page it says "Meer mogelijkheide om te doneren vanuit buiten Nederland". "mogelijkheide" should be "mogelijkheden" (possibilities).
[edit] Donations
I might have considered a donation, if not the damn link from wikipedia WAS A JAVASCRIPT LINK - enough with this javascript crap! Insert REAL html links (href) not all this javascript - half the pages end up looking like crap if you don't happen to use the computer the author was using. --Werwrwer 04:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say my decision to donate/not donate was affected by this, but it was certainly rather annoying. 82.6.105.198 23:18, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Fact #4: [...] the sum of all knowledge.
The fact #4 that I might not know reads: "We exist so that every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge."
I didn't know this indeed, since most Wikipedias explicitly reject all but the most select pieces of knowledge - like, for example, not particularly notorious knowledge. The knowledge that there is a pink house on my street certainly qualifies for "the sum of all knowledge" but it does not qualify for Wikipedia. There are many other limitations that make the above statement extremely misleading. 82.6.105.198 23:18, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
- While the pink-house example is perhaps a bit impractical, I completely agree with the underlying point. I used to be among the top 20 most active contributors in ~2003-2004, but now I've given up trying to create new articles or adding any new facts on both English and German Wikipedia because they just always get deleted for no reason. A project purporting to collect the "sum of all knowledge" would naturally welcome any such contributions about actual real topics, but clealy Wikipedia is not about collecting the "sum of all knowledge". — Timwi 05:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Donations online - information transmission security?
I would have donated, but I saw no indication that the information submitted online would be transported over the Internet in a secure fashion.
