Affiliations Committee/Candidates/June 2021

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


The Affiliations Committee (AffCom) – the committee responsible for guiding volunteers in establishing and sustaining Wikimedia chapters, thematic organizations, and user groups – is seeking new members!

The committee consists of five to fifteen members, selected at least once every year, to serve two-year terms. The committee decided to push its selection to June 2021 considering the Board Governance & Movement Strategy conversations happening last January. Those joining the committee during the current process will serve a term of two years from mid-July 2021 through July 2023.

If you would like to be considered for an appointment to the Affiliations Committee during our current recruitment cycle, please post your application on this page by 30 June 2021.

AffCom’s engagement with affiliates is divided into two sections - the Recognitions subcommittee and the Conflicts Intervention subcommittee. Recognitions deals with the recognition of User Groups, Chapters, & Thematic Organizations. Conflicts Intervention helps resolve conflicts within and between affiliates.

Step 1. Post your application here by 30 June 2021. Your application must include the following:

  1. Your full name and Wikimedia username
  2. A statement describing your relevant education, experience, abilities, skills, knowledge, availability, and motivation for joining the committee.

Step 2. Complete the self-assessment survey between June 01, 2021 and June 30, 2021.

  • The privacy statement that applies to the survey can be found here.
  • NOTE: The survey will take 15 mins. Please do not close your browser. If you need a break, you are advised to keep the browser open. In case of losing the link, please reach out to mkaur-ctr(_AT_)wikimedia.org
  • This survey must be completed before Steps 3 & 4, as it will provide more background as to the type of work and expectations of members of AffCom.

Step 3. Answers the following questions:

  • NOTE: Questions 1-3 are required for all candidates.
  • Question 4 & 5 should be answered by those interested in joining the Recognitions subcommittee.
  • Question 6 & 7 should be answered by those interested in joining the Conflicts Intervention subcommittee.
  • If you are willing to nominate yourself for both subcommittees, answer all questions.
  1. What roles have you served across any Wikimedia projects and affiliates that you think have prepared you for this role?
  2. AffCom members need to manage time, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and diverse situations across the global movement. How do you envision managing these?
  3. Members of AffCom serve on one of two subcommittees: Recognitions OR Conflicts Intervention. Which one of these are you most interested in serving on?
  4. If you are interested in serving on the Recognitions subcommittee, what do you think makes a group of Wikimedians ready to function together as an affiliate?
  5. If you are interested in serving on the Recognitions subcommittee, what do you think are the benefits and responsibilities of functioning as formal affiliates?
  6. If you are interested in serving on the Conflicts Intervention subcommittee, please describe your experience working with conflicts resolution.
  7. If you are interested in serving on the Conflicts Intervention subcommittee, please describe how you have helped build consensus and support diversity.

Step 4. Once you have completed the above, send an email announcing your application to affcom(_AT_)wikimedia.org before the application deadline.


All Wikimedians are invited to share endorsements and comments about candidates. If it is negative, please cite appropriate evidence; it is not appropriate to simply state a negative opinion. We would like to maintain a friendly space for candidates to state their interest without fear of public ridicule.


Candidates[edit]

Houcemeddine Turki (User:Csisc)[edit]

I am Houcemeddine Turki. I was born on May 24, 1994 in Sfax, Tunisia. I speak Tunisian Arabic as a native language. However, I am keen on other varieties of Arabic including Modern Standard Arabic, Algerian Arabic, Libyan Arabic, Egyptian Arabic and North Levantine Arabic. I speak French and English as an upper-intermediate user (CEFR B2) and Italian as an elementary user (CEFR A2) and I am a beginner in German and Maltese (CEFR A1). So, I consider myself as a polyglot. In my real life, I am a medical student and a research assistant in Biomedical Data Science, Computational Linguistics, Library and Information Science and Semantic Web at University of Sfax, Tunisia. As a Wikimedia volunteer, I have been a Wikipedian between 2009 and 2019 before shifting all my interest to Wikidata. I am mainly interested in developing tools and efficient methods to ameliorate reference support and data quality of Wikimedia projects and in ameliorating the coverage of regional and scholarly topics in Wikipedia and in sister projects. I have participated to several Wikimedia conferences and shown several works in this context: WikiConvention Francophone (2016), WikiIndaba Conference (2018), Wikimania (2019), WikiCite (2020) and Wikimedia Hackathon (2020 and 2021).

What roles have you served across any Wikimedia projects and affiliates that you think have prepared you for this role?

AffCom members need to manage time, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and diverse situations across the global movement. How do you envision managing these?

  • I manage to retire from all the Wikimedia affiliates I am involved in to avoid any conflict of interest. I am leaving my position at Wiki Indaba Steering Committee and Wikimedia and Libraries User Group very soon. Concerning Wikimedia Tunisia, I will leave my positive in December.
  • I will be free to allocate five hours per month for being an AffCom member. I am available any time in the afternoon or night UTC.
  • I will not disclose any information discussed in AffCom meetings.
  • If I see that a situation does not allow me to make good judgements on assessed facts, I will be neutral.

Members of AffCom serve on one of two subcommittees: Recognitions OR Conflicts Intervention. Which one of these are you most interested in serving on?

I am more comfortable working on Recognitions.

If you are interested in serving on the Recognitions subcommittee, what do you think makes a group of Wikimedians ready to function together as an affiliate?

  • Having at least two members with more than 2000 edits across Wikimedia Projects, with a successful Wikimedia grant application and with four years of history. This will allow to ensure that the affiliate will be stable in the next few years.
  • Having at least twenty members. It is useless to make an affiliate about a topic that does not interest anyone now.
  • Not having a conflicting Wikimedia affiliate. It will not be productive to have two affiliates working on the same topic or region. The two affiliates will be disputing all the time.

If you are interested in serving on the Recognitions subcommittee, what do you think are the benefits and responsibilities of functioning as formal affiliates?

  • Being known and tracked by the Wikimedia Foundation
  • Being supported in case of problems by other Wikimedia affiliates and the Wikimedia Foundation
  • Developing an annual plan for regular projects and campaigns
  • Coordinating efforts about the topic of the Wikimedia affiliate
  • Organizing specific events for capacity building

Endorsements[edit]

  1. Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support - A committed, experienced and hard working wikimedian, always available to help. I strongly support his application.Yamen (talk) 02:59, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  2. A committed, experienced and hard working wikimedian, always available to help. I strongly support his application--Ganlihao (talk) 08:03, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  3. Support Support A very good and experience candidate.- M-Mustapha (talk) 20:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Wojciech Pędzich[edit]

I feel I can enrich the AffCom with my experience as Wikimedia Polska's functionary and the functionary of the Wikimedia projects. I have a background in English and in organisational management, with my M. Sc. on content creation limitations on Wikipedia; I have also made a failed attempt at a Ph. D. in leadership in open collaboration projects. I am also a translator, including of Wikimedia and open collaboration-related books.

What roles have you served across any Wikimedia projects and affiliates that you think have prepared you for this role?

I am a long-standing administrator on Polish Wikipedia, as well as the project's bureaucrat and checkuser. Apart from these current roles, I have served as a Wikimedia steward, an OTRS volunteer, periodically an admin on other (usually Polish-language) Wikimedia projects. I have helped establish Polish Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee, preparing many of the rules, serving on the initial term and a few subsequent terms. I was also the godfather of sorts for Silesian Wikipedia, guiding the project through the requirements for it to be established as an independent language domain.

I am also a long-standing member of Wikimedia Polska, where I also served on the Board for three terms (2 years each, two of these terms as the Secretary of the Board). Even after stepping down from the Board seat, I am involved in a range of activities of the chapter as a volunteer. I have also been active in the offline space, being part of the CEE Meeting 2017 Warsaw team, as well as a participant to other CEE Meetings (including preparing and giving presentations) and the full range of events, both on- and offline, hosted by Wikimedia Polska, including providing simultaneous interpretation between Polish and English.

AffCom members need to manage time, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and diverse situations across the global movement. How do you envision managing these?

I see the management issues as a matter of finding common grounds with the other committee members - be it in terms of meeting times, tools to be used, etc. I have been in positions where confidentiality is a must (CU, OTRS, steward), and I feel I can manage varying levels of confidentiality / anonymity, as required by the situation. Experience has also shown me the need to take a different perspective, to be able to think out of one's box and to appreciate others' perspectives.

Members of AffCom serve on one of two subcommittees; Recognitions OR Conflicts Intervention. Which one of these are you most interested in serving on?

It is likely the part of me that has served on pl.wikipedia's Arbcom which has the voice now, but I rather see myself in Conflicts Intervention. By saying "rather" I am indicating that I am not totally polarised towards this option and depending on the mix of skills and preferences within the Committee, I may serve the other role as well.

If you are interested in serving on the Recognitions subcommittee, what do you think makes a group of Wikimedians ready to function together as an affiliate?

I found that - at least in the areas where I was active - a sheer sense of belonging is a powerful motivator for people to convene under a name, an organisation, a group. Even when not everyone within the group is always active, always helping out, being united by common values (with the drive to make the total of knowledge freely accessible to anyone a universal motivator in the Wikimedia world), feeling that together the group is stronger than the sum of its individuals, knowing that a group is more likely to reach self-set goals - these are the factors that I think of most strongly.

If you are interested in serving on the Recognitions subcommittee, what do you think are the benefits and responsibilities of functioning as formal affiliates?

The ability to shape the global voice of the movement but also to be the local part of this global voice. This meaning that the needs of the local communities can be heard by the Foundation and its bodies on the one hand - the other side is that the Foundation's mission and values are represented on the local level by an entity with a recognised name which can function as the extension of the Foundation.

If you are interested in serving on the Conflicts Intervention subcommittee, please describe your experience working with conflicts resolution.

Polish Wikipedia's Arbcom, established over a decade ago, has seen me serve on multiple terms, including the posts of the Head and the Secretary, with varying volumes of incoming cases. The establishment of the ArbCom was in itself an exercise in finding common grounds and reaching towards consensus so that the community felt the ArbCom was designed the way they can trust it.

Serving on the Board of Wikimedia Polska, including the post of the Secretary, has also been an extensive exercise in managing varied points of view and needs. Not necessarily a conflict resolution post but close enough to it so that it does not matter.

In 2021, I completed a base mediation course, with a certificate issued by the training organisation.

If you are interested in serving on the Conflicts Intervention subcommittee, please describe how you have helped build consensus and support diversity.

It is a matter of having all the voices heard - something that grows out of one of the fundamental rules Wikipedians must abide by, the neutral point of view rule, which is immensely helpful when building a decision that everyone will acknowledge. it needs time, sure, but haste makes waste and in situations where time in not of the essence, having more time is valuable, including the possibility of standing up from the table, regrouping one's thoughts, may lead to better solutions than sticking to one's point of view. During the mediator training, I found out that it will be very valuable to voice the rules at the beginning of a meeting, session, or project, and have all parties verbally agree to them - this makes enforcing the rules later much easier. One of the rules ought to be acknowledging - among the participants - the fact that we are different, that our points of view might vary, and be prepared to work with these variables.

Endorsements[edit]

  1. Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support – an experienced and helpful wikimedian, suitable for this ;) Aramil Feraxa (Write to me!) 20:02, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
  2. Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support - a person who is very actively involved in Wikipedia projects. PawełMM (talk) 11:11, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
  3. Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support - deeply engaged in Wikimedia mission, with a great understanding of the wikiverse, both on a global and on local level. And (I worked with Wojciech on some projects so I am speaking out of personal expierence here) - an amazing team player who is great in supporting fruitful cooperation and making sure that all the voices are heard. Magalia (talk) 14:55, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Linar Khalitov (rubin16)[edit]

I am a long-term Wikimedian mainly active in Russian Wikipedia and Commons. I started contributing in 2007, and during that time, I have been in different roles: sysop and bureaucrat in ru.wiki, OTRS member, sysop on Commons (still keep the status), ombudsman, member of IEG and PEG (still hold position), Wikimedia RU member (still there). I am also an active bot owner with more than 1 mln edits on the bot account.

I am based in Kazan, Russia, have a financial degree and have practically finished my EMBA in London Business School (graduation in July 2021). I know English, Russian and Tatar languages (though my English is better despite being a Tatar native). I have a full-time executive job in Russia. Still, I am sure that I will be available enough as my MBA finishes, and my grant committee participation will be over soon, too, due to the relaunch of the grant approach by WMF.

I believe in the mission of Wikimedia movement and have always tried to help and participate in promoting knowledge. I am sure that there is much work to do as even in my region (European part of Russia) most people still don't understand how Wikimedia projects operate, what benefits they provide and how others can contribute. I think that chapters are the way of promoting Wikimedia values around the globe and want to dedicate my experience and knowledge in helping chapters to build sustainable models. rubin16 (talk) 20:08, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

What roles have you served across any Wikimedia projects and affiliates that you think have prepared you for this role?

I am the member of Wikimedia RU and have some understanding of problems facing a chapter, especially in a not-friendly political/economical environment. I am also a member of grant committees (IEG and PEG) for a long time and got some experience of dealing with diverse grantees and communities while handling grant requests.

AffCom members need to manage time, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and diverse situations across the global movement. How do you envision managing these?

I am absolutely sure that I can manage my time as I revised it lots of time in my life: when job changed, when promoted to an executive role, when became a parent, when entered an MBA program, etc. I understand COI policies and feel myself mature enough to restrain from such issues. I also have experience of dealing and communicating with diverse communities (again, from MBA and grant committee experience).

Members of AffCom serve on one of two subcommittees; Recognitions OR Conflicts Intervention. Which one of these are you most interested in serving on?

Recognitions Committee.

If you are interested in serving on the Recognitions subcommittee, what do you think makes a group of Wikimedians ready to function together as an affiliate?

First, the chapter needs to be sustainable. It should be able to recruit new members and retain old ones, as people are the ultimate treasure of a chapter. Then, the chapter needs advice and help not to re-invent a bicycle every day and to concentrate resources on productive activities, not general administrative duties.

If you are interested in serving on the Recognitions subcommittee, what do you think are the benefits and responsibilities of functioning as formal affiliates?

It is easier to communicate with external partners, sometimes. It is more sustainable as projects and tasks are performed by an organisation, not an individual who can be sick, tired, etc. It can attract external funding (sometimes) easier and be more transparent in using these funds. And it gives a sense of affiliation to members that you are doing something together and you are supported by your peers, you are not alone.

Endorsements[edit]