Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2018-20/2019 Community Conversations/Partnerships

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

Area of inquiry[edit]

Current situation[edit]

Uneven professional level[edit]

Organisational partners are mostly professionals. Wikimedians are mostly volunteers with only partial time to spend on a project. There are few possibilities to build and keep a long-term collaboration between a Wikimedia Chapter or User group and a cultural institution. Wikimedians do not sufficiently understand the requirements of an institution. Institutions insufficiently understand the possibilities of the Wikimedia applications, tools, systems, and projects. Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) (talk) 16:51, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Aligned Players[edit]

It would always be great to have aligned partners working and most importantly assisting The Wikimedia Movement, however, it cannot be ascertained on how they intend to keep Affiliates (Chapter importantly) within the loop. It would be very unprofessional if two entities within the same geographical domain approach the same potential partner. Some problems in this regard have already occurred in India between Wikimedia India and CIS-A2K.--Abhinav619 (talk) 02:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC) Abhinav619, what is CIS-A2K? James Salsman (talk) 06:43, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@James Salsman: Please visit the page here. A staff based organisation working in India for Wikimedia Mission. --Abhinav619 (talk) 06:53, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
@Abhinav619: Thank you. Which has the better working conditions for interns? I propose that alignment issues be decided in favor of rewarding the side with the better working conditions for interns, and assisting to bring the other one up to the level of the winner. James Salsman (talk) 07:02, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
@James Salsman: Not able to understand your statement. CIS-A2K is a staff-based organisation and Wikimedia India is by the volunteers, the two can't be compared.--Abhinav619 (talk) 07:18, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
One of the Groups has a question related to this. Give me up to a week or two, please. James Salsman (talk) 07:55, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Why this scope[edit]

Key questions[edit]

Partnerships to beat back disinformation and take back the internet[edit]

Please see Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2018-20/Working Groups/Partnerships. James Salsman (talk) 13:43, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Privacy, tracking, and research partners[edit]

The Product & Technology WG suggested posting this here.

Today the assumption that Wikipedia readers are not tracked was stated by a subject matter expert in a different forum, and obliquely confirmed by a senior Foundation official. So (and partially in regard to the CTO criteria I requested above, in case they are disregarded wholesale) I want to remind the Working Group that dozens of the Foundation's research partners world-wide, who are covered by nondisclosure agreements that impose no specific data security requirements and who along with their coworkers are subject to subpoenas and national security letters, hold "the complete ... server logs from Wikipedia ... about 14 terabytes of raw logs per month" including the "IP address, proxy information, and user agent" of "Wikimedia’s full server logs, containing all HTTP requests to Wikimedia projects," as per pp. 19-20 here. James Salsman (talk) 16:53, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikimedia Deutschland staff perspective[edit]

Over the last weeks WMDE's Strategy Liaisons, Moritz Rahm and Cornelius Kibelka, have conducted interviews with 13 experts among our staff on the themes of the working groups. Mostly, the qualitative interviews were done with groups of 2 or 3 people, the texts provided are summaries of the statements.

If you have any questions, please let us know. Best regards, --Cornelius Kibelka (WMDE) (talk) 14:16, 2 July 2019 (UTC)