Talk:Hubs

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
(Redirected from Talk:Hubs/Participate)

The following Wikimedia Foundation staff monitor this page:

In order to notify them, please link their username when posting a message.
This note was updated on 10/2023

Painfully vague[edit]

Is a hub an office with hired staff? Or is it something else? Right now WALRUS is in the middle of meeting and even we are not sure of the answer. - Jmabel (talk) 03:00, 10 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If it were an office with staff, then Hubs could be effective organizing structures. If there's a funded office supporting chapters (e.g. in the US) then it's easier to hold events, to have someone answering the emails, etc. Would these be WMF staff, you suppose? -- econterms (talk) 03:03, 10 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel and Econterms: While earlier drafts of the Strategy Recommendations specified that hubs would have paid staff, the final version leaves it ambiguous.
Since part of the rationale for creating hubs was to deal with the "concentration of power" (referring to the WMF, I assume), it's a safe bet that these would be pretty independent, and any paid staff would not be WMF staff. --Yair rand (talk) 03:17, 10 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Preparing for translation[edit]

Andreas Something is wrong with the links, it seems.--Felipe da Fonseca (talk) 17:58, 14 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New Regional Committees for Grants[edit]

Check the new Regional Committees for Grants. They are related to the implementation of the Movement Strategy priority Funding for Underrepresented Communities. They also honor the priority of Hubs and stronger regional communities. Consider joining your region's committee! Qgil-WMF (talk) 08:03, 21 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Current status vs Recommendations text[edit]

@Abbad (WMF): Regarding the November 9 edit: The descriptions in the original version of this page were essentially entirely copy-pasted from the Recommendations text (somewhat refactored). The edits make several substantive changes to the outline of what hubs are intended to be. I haven't been following the off-wiki discussions, so perhaps there's been consensus to change the original specification? Some differences:

  • What seems like a modification of the scope of thematic hubs: The Recommendations only mention the line about specialization/shared objectives/coordinated solutions, and the examples of thematic areas ("advocacy, capacity building, partnerships, research, etc.") (these are in the final text, not the earlier version, as the edit would indicate). This doesn't, afaict, match up with the idea of thematic areas as being based on "topic, e.g. GLAM", which sounds more like thematic hubs are equivalent/analogous to current thematic organizations.
  • The Recommendations had a focus on hubs "identifying and advocating for the needs of the communities and organizations they serve", which is no longer present in this page's text.
  • The removal of the mention of varying governance models.

--Yair rand (talk) 08:27, 19 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Yair rand: Hello Yair. Thank you for always following up. The change was mainly meant to simplify the language. The new text is mostly quoted from a brief one-pager that was prepared in anticipation of the upcoming hubs workshop, which I consequently merged into your text and tried to ensure it covers both. It is my personal inclination that direct quotations from the recommendation may not help with this simplicity, but I'm happy to fix you points:
  • This was not a change I made, but something kept from the previous version of the page, which attributed this passage to "earlier drafts" of the recommendation. Since I did not realize it was otherwise, I left it as it was. In any case, I just fixed it.
  • I believe the essential meaning is there, but I did also add the direct quotation to the relevant passage.
  • I'm not sure what the "varying governance models" refers to, but I'm also happy to add it. Also, feel free to directly edit and add, and I'll mark the page for translation afterwards.
--Abbad (WMF) (talk) 14:36, 22 November 2021 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Language hubs[edit]

@Abbad (WMF) I believe language hubs should augment regional and thematic hubs. Language is of utmost importance to guarantee diversity, inclusion and representation amongst dispersed communities (sharing the same language). Language is perhaps the most important cultural component of the movement. It often occurs that one country has multiple official languages, and one language is spoken in multiple countries.

I am referring to WikiFranca or Dutch (including the Netherlands, Suriname, Vlaanderen), Fries, Zeelands, West-Vlaams, Limburgs, Afrikaans. Other structures might exist for German, Spanish, Portuguese, or Russian (might overlap with CEE). Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) (talk) 09:18, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) I definitely agree. Language hubs were one of the core concepts discussed in the January conversations, and they do appear as a category on the list of current hub plans. The concept is neglected on this page, however, because language hubs were not directly mentioned in the recommendations, probably because they tend to be blended with the regional hubs (most language, e.g. Arabic, Russian and German, are usually tied to specific geographic areas). Do you think they are distinct enough in their needs or definition from the regional hubs to be discussed differently? I'm particularly asking because one of the recommendations from the 27 November workshop was to separate the future discussions of regional and thematic hubs --Abbad (WMF) (talk) 11:16, 30 November 2021 (UTC).Reply[reply]
I would prefer to add "Linguistic hub" as a separate type. If I can take the concrete example of WikiFranca, this would not be a regional hub, because French is used all over the world, not on one single specific continent... (including Europe, Canada, Africa, Asia). Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) (talk) 11:24, 30 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alternatively, language-based hubs can be taken as an instance of "thematic hubs", whose theme is not program area (e.g. GLAM) or activity type (e.g. capacity building), but operating language. I do think language-based hubs (such as a prospective WikiFranca hub) are quite distinct from regional hubs, but I think they fit comfortably within thematic hubs. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 18:33, 30 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposal for a Movement Strategy Forum[edit]

Hello everyone,

This is an invitation to all Movement Strategy participants to try out a new space for truly multilingual collaboration:  https://forum.movement-strategy.org/

Please join the Movement Strategy Forum and say "hi" to the community here.

We are starting a community review period of two months. If the community feedback is positive, the Forum will launch in August 2022 before Wikimania. If not, we will follow the feedback received, changing the proposal or closing it.

Looking forward to your first impressions! --AAkhmedova (WMF) (talk) 11:16, 24 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@AAkhmedova (WMF)thanks for posting this link here. I am already participating there regularly, and I highly recommend it, as a vaulable and helpful resource for the community, and for anyone seeking to help to develop new ideas, in a collaborative and open and positive atmosphere. thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 15:45, 15 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Criteria for hub pilots?[edit]

I was pointed today to this page: Hubs/Minimum Criteria for Pilots. –SJ talk  19:39, 5 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is a hub?[edit]

Sort of like a WikiProject writ large and extending over multiple Wikis? · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 09:52, 17 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]