Talk:Affiliations Committee/Archives/2019

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

Example of Wikimedia affiliate name

FYI I was reading the pages and I noticed this missing example.--Alexmar983 (talk) 20:49, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Those aren't examples. WikiDonne is a group of Italian language teachers connected to Wikimedia, and Wikimujeres is a Spanish womens issues group. WikiXxxx doesn't exist. ~^\\\.rT'{~ g 23:07, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
User:RTG WikiDonne is not a group of "Italian language teachers", where did you get that? WikiDonne is a standard usergroups like other affiliates which are group of users, and is described using a WikiXxxxx string.--Alexmar983 (talk) 23:50, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Role of AffCom discussion in Wikimedia Movement Strategy talks 2018-2019

Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:03, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

missing info about de-recognition process

It seems like the Wikimedia Foundation is the creator and only contributor to the de-recognition process, which is at

This protocol is on the {{Affiliations Committee}} template, which seems to be how people access it.

I see that verdy p added the link in that template to this protocol in a November 2012 edit. Something funny happened here though, because somehow, the "Derecognition Process Mapping" page dates from February 2017. It is unorthodox in wiki to remove page histories. I wonder what explanation there could be for this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:35, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Bluerasberry, the diff you've linked contains no references to the de-recognition protocol, so I'm really not sure what you're looking at here. Kirill Lokshin (talk) 10:19, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
@Kirill Lokshin:
This content linked here
Wikimedia movement affiliates/Protocol for noncompliant Wikimedia movement affiliates/Derecognition Process Mapping
seems to date from February 2017.
This template {{Affiliations Committee}}
has a link to that content piped by the text "Derecognition Process Mapping". Verdy p applied that link in November 2012.
I could be looking at this wrong, but if I am seeing this correctly, that means there was content in that link which was there 2012-2017, but then replaced in a strange way in 2017 and lost its history.
Are you able to see the link to that content in that template? Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Bluerasberry, I think I see what's going on here. The November 2012 edit was actually replacing the content of the {{Affiliations Committee}} template with a reference to the {{Affiliations Committee/en}} template, so if you're simply looking at the historical revision, it will render with the current contents of the referenced template (which, of course, include all of the modern links). The actual history that you're looking for is found under {{Affiliations Committee/layout}}; the de-recognition process link was added to it only a few days ago. Kirill Lokshin (talk) 00:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Proposal to add public notices to de-recognition process

The derecognition process is strangely closed and private. The major problem is that as written, every step in the process is a private conversation between AffCom/WMF and the affiliate organization. The wiki default is for conversation to be in public.

I propose the following changes:

  1. Establish a subpage of AffCom which is a log of all noncompliance warnings. Linked notices like "July 2019 - noncompliance warning posted to talk page of Wikimedia User Group X" are sufficient
  2. The warnings on that subpage should link to a talk page posting of the meta page of the Wikimedia affiliate. Posting to an organization's talk page is the orthodox way of communicating with Wikimedia organizations.
  3. With this planning in place, change the procedure to publicly post warnings at various stages of noncompliance
    1. Basic Intervention/Remediation
    2. Probation
    3. Final Intervention

So far as I can tell, the current practice for derecognition involves no public notice. The current procedure seems to not require it, and also it seems not to be a practice.

The point of posting notice is to communicate the existence of problems to stakeholders who might not otherwise know they exist. For example, without notice Wikimedia community members who are members of affiliate organizations may be unaware of problems. Also, in the Wikimedia community everyone feels some solidarity with everyone else. It is a huge shock to suddenly get notice that a Wikimedia affiliate is troubled, and the natural tendency of the Wikimedia community is to feel pain at such information and to provide peer to peer support. A lack of notice is a barrier to community collaboration. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:34, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Bluerasberry, public notifications regarding compliance issues are something that's currently being planned; please see Wikimedia movement affiliates/Compliance Portal for more details. Kirill Lokshin (talk) 10:24, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Resolved.
@Kirill Lokshin: thanks, after I posted this someone told me about that public notice process. I am happy with that process and the intent which is behind it. It is exactly what I wanted. Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:31, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Want to be a Voting Member

I would like to be a voting member of the Committee, please notify me when seats become available. --Manik Soren (talk) 16:24, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

"Wikimedia community-run committee"?

Why does Affcom keep defining itself as a "Wikimedia community-run committee", when it is not chosen by the Wikimedia community (and is often actually chosen - by Affcom itself, no less - *against* the express wishes of the Wikimedia community), much less run by it? Wasn't it about time already to change that misinformation in the page, which less informed WMF staff keep parroting?--- Darwin Ahoy! 23:00, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

In-Person Meeting With Affiliations Committee Members at Wikimania 2019

Hello @Kirill Lokshin: and others from Affcom, I am writing as per 1 and wanted to meet for Wikimedia India. I have already filled the form on Monday, 5th August 2019. I would be grateful to hear so that I may conveniently schedule or even re-schedule my other meetings and commitments. I will put this meeting on priority and do my best to find a mutually convenient time for all. Thanks. --Abhinav619 (talk) 11:39, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Branding

Pinging: Maor Malul, Emna Mizouni, Derick Ndimnain Alangi, Sami Mlouhi, Biplab Anand, Kirill Lokshin, Camelia Boban, Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight, Salvador Alcántar Morán, Farah Jack Mustaklem, Olushola Olaniyan, Reda Kerbouche, Manavpreet Kaur, May Hachem, Anasuya Sengupta, Patricio Lorente, Maria Sefidari, Jaime Anstee, Dumisani Ndubane, Kalliope Tsouroupidou, Charles Roslof, Stephen LaPorte, Winifred Olliff, and Delphine Ménard

The Communications department has been doing some research related to branding, in the context of the 2030 strategy. Communications/Wikimedia brands/2030 research and planning seems to be the central page. I want to very strongly encourage AffCom-related folks to join the discussions about things that do/don't work for the movement. Most of the attention at the moment seems to be on giving affiliates and projects more options. Depending upon future decisions, etc., it might be appropriate to change some AffCom-related policies, and of course I don't want any outcomes that make your job more difficult.

The place to watch is https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/g/brand-network Please follow Chuck's example and sign up for this discussion group. :-D Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:47, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Want to be a Voting Member

I wish to be notified when seats become available to join the Affiliations Committee as a voting member. —M@sssly 10:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

@Masssly: and @Manik Soren: The committee has posted this year's call for candidates. JAnstee (WMF) (talk) 18:33, 17 December 2019 (UTC)