Talk:Ombuds commission

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
(Redirected from Talk:Ombudsman commission)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is for discussions related to the ombudsman commission page and about the Commission itself.

Please remember to:

For older conversations you can see the archive index. SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 3 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 60 days.

Naming[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The proposal was successful. The metawiki pages have been renamed, as has the user group. I have sent the following message to my Commission colleagues:
Dear members, Just a heads-up that we have renamed from Ombudsmen Commission, and we are now the Ombuds Commission. The community held a vote on the issue at Meta <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ombuds_commission> in which no members objected. It was a well-attended vote, left open for some time. The new name is regarded as being less exclusionary, not least in terms of gender. The old name adopted the word "men" in referring to members, of course. I just wanted to ensure that all members know about our new name.
Further comments may still be made underneath the archive box. AGK ■ 17:01, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

A proposal has been presented to rename to "Ombuds commission". In my opinion this is perfectly reasonable and I support such a renaming. Anything I am missing or should consider before such a move? Also discussed here. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:54, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

  • I support this proposal. "Ombuds commission" is the name how I refer to the OC in communications. —AronM🍂 edits🌾 00:30, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Link to the thread. Esteban16 (talk) 00:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. Libcub (talk) 04:47, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support a rename to either "Ombuds commission" or "Ombudsperson commission". Jon Kolbert (talk) 08:24, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
    Oppose Ombudsman is a term taken from Swedish and is gender-neutral in that language. Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:35, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
  • I think this is fine. More inclusive language is always better. – Ammarpad (talk) 08:25, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support this proposal. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 12:12, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support logical Mardetanha talk 15:34, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
  • The current Commission, or at least myself, have already been using Ombuds in our communications. I think we could rename this page as well. But action is required by the board to update the name of the group in resolutions, etc. – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:42, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Why? "Ombudsman" is recognized as a gender-neutral term. And "ombudsperson" sounds silly. Natureium (talk) 15:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
    The same way the use of "firefighter" instead of "fireman", and "police officer" instead of "policeman" have become the accepted terms in the spirit of inclusivity. Ombuds works fine if ombudsperson is too much of a mouthful. Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. The word "Ombudsman" -likewise, "Chairman"- lacks precision as it is not gender-neutral. For this reason, it makes sense for "Ombuds" to replace "Ombudsman" in the same way that "Chair" has replaced "Chairman". --Rosiestep (talk) 16:37, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Ombuds sounds good.--HakanIST (talk) 10:12, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Meh. Neither Ombudsman nor Ombuds are accurate to describe the tasks of this commission. While I can see the analogy between the IRL ombudsman and the tasks of this commission, it does not really fit IMHO. I suggest an entirely new name as suggested here. For example, the enwp body that used to investigate complaints about CU/OS use was called "Audit Subcommittee" until it was repealed and merged into the ArbCom instead. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:43, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
    I agree with this; I've previously suggested Privacy Commission, but I don't think that's an explicit enough word choice either. Nonpublic Information Commission? Seems unwieldy. – Ajraddatz (talk) 18:56, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
    I agree as well. --MF-W 12:01, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
    FYI NIC is used for the National Institute of Corrections. -- (talk) 10:42, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
    Privacy Policies Commission. A bit unwieldy, but more accurate than just “Privacy Commission” since OC can’t do stuff like suppress private information, etc. The plural is there to acknowledge the relationship of the CU/OS policy to the larger privacy policy. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:53, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
  • I support the minor name change to Ombuds or Ombudsperson, and agree that a different name altogether might make sense. But I don't think that needs to stall making this common-sense change first. Legoktm (talk) 09:53, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Note: There is support from the board of the WMF to do this move to "ombuds commission". Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:47, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Maybe "integrity commission" or "integrity investigation". — Alexis Jazz (ping me) 17:02, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
    • With respect to secondary moves to a completely new title might make most sense to start a new section for this. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:44, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Ombuds sounds perfect and logically make sense.--Rajeeb (talk) 18:02, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 03:55, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Is 'Ombuds' even a word? It doesn't seem to appear in any of the dictionaries I consulted, always 'Ombudsman'. --Vogone (talk) 10:37, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
    I'm seeing 'ombud' in w:Ombudsman and wikt:ombud, so if the decision is to rely on an 'informal clipping' it should be 'Ombud commission' rather than plural 'Ombuds commission'. --Vogone (talk) 15:51, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support per Rosiestep's proposal. And as for @Vogone:'s above statement. "ombuds" is a plural, so the naming proposal makes sense: it's a commission of multiple ombuds. ミラP 01:53, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
    It was Ombudsman Commission before, not Ombudsmen Commission. Nor would anyone have the idea to name it Ombudspersons Commission. These names are always in singular. --Vogone (talk) 11:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The -s is the Swedish genitive.

(ON umboð = "commission")
the ombuds commission = the "of the commission commission" (or "commission of the commission", since really the space is extraneous). :)

As suggested in the phabricator thread, "mediator" is a better word, since everyone knows what it means. The faux posh circularity is kind of fun, though. SashiRolls (talk) 00:46, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

2021 Ombuds Commission nomination process now open![edit]

Hi everyone! It's coming close to time for annual appointments of community members to serve on the Ombudsman commission (OC). This commission works on all Wikimedia projects to investigate complaints about violations of the privacy policy, especially in use of CheckUser and Oversight tools, and to mediate between the complaining party and the individual whose work is being investigated. They may also assist the General Counsel, the Executive Director or the Board of Trustees in investigations of these issues. For more on their duties and roles, see Ombuds commission.

This is a call for community members interested in volunteering for appointment to this commission. Volunteers serving in this role should be experienced Wikimedians, active on any project, who have previously used the CheckUser/Oversight tools OR who have the technical ability to understand these tools and the willingness to learn them. They are expected to be able to engage neutrally in investigating these concerns and to know when to recuse when other roles and relationships may cause conflict.

Commissioners are required to identify to the Wikimedia Foundation and must be willing to comply with the appropriate Wikimedia Foundation board policies (such as the access to non-public data policy and the privacy policy). This is a position that requires a high degree of discretion and trust.

If you are interested in serving on this commission, please write me an email at kbrown(at)wikimedia.org to detail your experience on the projects, your thoughts on the commission and what you hope to bring to the role. The commission consists of ten members; all applications are appreciated and will be carefully considered. The deadline for applications is end of day on 31 December, 2020.

Please feel free to pass this invitation along to any users who you think may be qualified and interested. Thank you! Kbrown (WMF) (talk) 13:56, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Kbrown (WMF): You noted that the deadline is precisely the end of the day, but didn’t mention the time zone. Is it UTC? PST? Maybe something else? Tacsipacsi (talk) 13:35, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
@Tacsipacsi: To be honest, I don't really pay attention to the time zones for this. I'm in the US, which means most people's day is well over by the time mine ends, and I allow a little bit of grace period for applications exactly because I know time zones are a thing. So basically I'd say aim for whenever the end of the day is in your own time zone, but don't worry too much that you'll be disqualified over a few hours' difference. Kbrown (WMF) (talk) 15:20, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
@Kbrown (WMF): In this case I’d probably write something like “Applications are accepted on or before December 31”. This keeps the uncertainty you need without being overly specific. (Although this is merely for future reference, as there’s no need to rephrase your above comment, everything’s clear from the replies.) —Tacsipacsi (talk) 20:03, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Activity reports[edit]

Do we have any activity reports since March? --Rschen7754 01:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

14 cases left, 4 with motions to close in progress. If AGK doesn't make some sooner I'll probably do reports for the end of the term in Dec/Jan. – Ajraddatz (talk) 01:50, 14 October 2020 (UTC)