Talk:Wikimedia Österreich/Statuten/final/en

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

As being one of the members in Chapcom I here below give my feedback - that I include in both the German and English version of the statutes. Anders Wennersten 09:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

General comments[edit]

I see no critical problems in your bylaws but have many minor comments. I also would like your set up in general to be more coherent:

  • I should want to see your bylaws in two languages to be directly accessable from the Wikimedia Österreich page and the meta:chapter page.
Sure, that will be done once everything is fully set up, the meta pages here are only for the start of the Verein. --Chb 11:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I would still want some of this working now, for example links to the statutes from the meta-chapter page - I will fix this for you tomorrow if you have not done it. Anders Wennersten 18:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Well I'm not sure what you want have linked, but I added something to the chapters page, if there are other things you want to have added just tell me or add them yourself, thanks. --Chb 18:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I would like to see a translation of the full German bylaws into English. I have no problem with non perfect English and even alternative English words in a translation, but have problem when critical words like Schwerpunkt is not translated at all.--Anders Wennersten
There is a full translation in the making, it should be out today or tomorrow. --Chb 11:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Good, loking forward to it. Anders Wennersten 14:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
done :-). --Chb 17:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Paragraph 2&3[edit]

General: I am uneasy of your use of the word wiki. In my understaning (that could be wrong) it is a generic one meaning any type of set up that allows several person updating the same content. This then includes any set up by a company and organization with any type of content and purpose. I would prefer the use of WMF projects instead.--Anders Wennersten

Well our definition of Wiki and the terms containing the Word wiki are directly taken from the german Verein and the swiss Vereien ,as can be seen under:

http://www.wikimedia.de/satzung/ and http://www.wikimedia.ch/Bylaws - so if this is a problem, it is indeed a huge one, from my point of view. But I think the Chapter Section will later make that clear: "The Association shares the objectives of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a not-for-profit organisation based in Florida, USA. The Wikimedia Foundation coordinates activities along the lines of the Association's purpose within the international sector, and manages the name Wikimedia as well as the names of the various international Wikimedia projects. (also directly taken from the Swiss bylaws.) --Chb 12:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Not all in ChapCom agree with my point, but I persist, look for example at the description at en:Wiki. Germany started out years ago before terminology but now we must get it right for new chapters-the different names are also close of getting trademark status. Anders Wennersten 14:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I will answer on this what I did to the chapcom. As long as the sole goal of the association is not to support just wikis, I am totally fine with the use of "wiki" by itself in this context. notafish }<';> 15:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
When I see the whole text translated and getting used to the words wiki and wikimeda projects I have to obejection to your wordings any longer. Anders Wennersten 18:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

p2.1 - from based in Florida. Instead ow writing based on (which will not be correct in a couple of weeks time, I would prefer you to instead use founded in. The following sentences where you describe the role of WMF I would like to be excluded, as it confuse things if you in your statutes defines the role of WMF.Anders Wennersten

See above; we can't describe the role of the WMF, but we have to describe the role of the Verein related to the WMF. The "Florida based" should really be changed to "founded in FL", you are right. --Chb 12:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Still missing the change from based to founded Anders Wennersten 18:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


p2.2a - i do not understand the content (three uninterpreted words) --Anders Wennersten

Sorry, that line slipped through after the translation, I should make that clear when the whole thing is translated. --Chb 12:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Should be fixed now. --Chb 17:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes OK. Anders Wennersten 18:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

p2.2b- I am a bit surprised you mention free software. I do not see this as a core purpose of the WMF organsaitons but it is of course closely related. But if you want to have your org active in these activities which I otherwise see as the purpose of FSCONS, I suppose it could be OK --Anders Wennersten

The Verein should not be actively developing Free Software, but I see this paragraph as a useful thing when it comes to advance the Mediawiki Software, but I think we can remove this line if that is really a problem. The main focus is not on FOSS. (or better said it's about WMF related FOSS.) --12:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
OK with this meaning I see as a natural part. And even if you want to work with a more extended scope I would not object. Anders Wennersten 14:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

p2.2c I would prefer the wiki to be taken away, and would prefer to see see the second and third sentence taken away. --Anders Wennersten

See my general remarks about Paragraph 2 & 3. I took this definition from Wikimedia CH and DE. But There should be less usage of the term Wiki we should really write WMF Projects more often, or better said WMF related projects. --Chb 12:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

p2.2d - as said i would like you to replace the word wiki with WMF projects --Anders Wennersten

OK. --Chb 12:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I would get rid of wiki altogether and stick with "free knowledge" and/or "free content". I am not sure the use of "wiki" or "Wikimedia projects" in that sentence actually makes any kind of sense except it reduces the scope of the association. notafish }<';> 15:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

p 3a the word Wiki again --Anders Wennersten

OK. --Chb 12:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Same as above notafish }<';> 15:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

p 3b - would prefer use of WMF project in stead of Inernational wikimedia proejct --Anders Wennersten

OK --Chb 12:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
"Wikimedia projects" is fine to me, I strongly recommend the use of "Wikimedia projects" rather "WMF projects" to be consistent with the international use and to avoid the reference to an acronym. notafish }<';> 15:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Notafish. Anders Wennersten 16:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

p 3c Do not understand the meaning of this sentence --Anders Wennersten

Hard to translate, but in general we are allowed to redistribute printed Material about the work of the Verein as long as it is about Wikipedia or Wikimedia Foundation related content. Think of Flyers, Banners, Posters. The law would not allow us to use the Funds of the Verein, if this is not written into the bylaws. --Chb 12:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
OK Anders Wennersten 14:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

p.3d and p3e - OK --Anders Wennersten

p 4-p 9[edit]

p6.4 - this point confuses me. It refers to an interimistic rule. I thought the bylaws would be taken on in a constituting meeting and then refer to a permanent org, where an interimistic rule has no place? --Anders Wennersten

It's part of the Austrian Vereinsrecht.
Basically it allows you to elect people as committee members, even if the goverment has not yet given the permission. If that wasn't written in the bylaws only the two founders of the Verein would have all rights, to vote or elect committee members, after the verein is founded (get the permission from the government). So interimistic means, the period after we ask the State for permission and we get the permission. This has nothing to do with Verein related work after it is founded. --Chb 12:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
OK Anders Wennersten 14:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

p10-18[edit]

As said earlier I would prefer to have this translated too even if it is in a very simple English. --Anders Wennersten

The translation will be here, today or tomorrow. --Chb 12:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Done. --Chb 17:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

When I with my limited knowledge in German has read through it I see two a few things that I would like to understand better

  • The purpose of the Arbitration, which type of body I am not familiar with
The arbitration is part of the needed bodies of the Verein in the Vereinsrecht. You need to have some sort of arbitration board, were members of the Verein can go to, if there are issues emerging inside of the Verein.
OK Anders Wennersten 14:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
  • The procedures for electing and how long to be elected for

--Anders Wennersten

The general assembly is to be held every year, there everyone has the right to vote on issues concerning the Verein. The election of the committee members and the auditors is held every two years. There is no strict procedure for voting, as every member who attends the general election has one vote, it is also possible to vote via Mail. --Chb 12:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
OK Anders Wennersten 14:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

scientific[edit]

In the current draft there are several references to the word "scientific". Afaik they were part of an attempt to qualify for tax-excempt-status in Austria. If tax-excempt-status is no longer an aim, you should consider to remove them -- especially to avoid future discussions whether something is "scientific" or not. -- Arne (akl) 16:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Done that, please tell me if there are other mentions of scientific, other than in the name that should be removed. Otherwise having scientific in the name could open doors for us?! --Chb 17:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Which version shall I check? The English version seems to be fine, but the German still contains "Der Verein teilt die wissenschaftlichen Ziele der Wikimedia Foundation Inc." (just one example). I doubt that the word scientific can open doors - at least not more than the name "Wikimedia" will open. Seriously: We should not claim to be an "scientific" association when most of what we're doing can hardly be called "scientific". -- Arne (akl) 20:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah you are right, we have to remove that, or better said it is removed and will stay out. As for the mixup of languages, I thought the "working" version would be the english one, and after everything is sorted out I will add everything that has to be changed to the german as well? But If you want I can update the german version now. ---Chb 20:24, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Final comments?[edit]

I believe you are very close to have everything in place in order for us in ChapCom to start our final review. I just here want you to straighten out the last bits.

  1. You have two or three versions of the German text of the statutes on m:Wikimedia Österreich/Statuten and m:Wikimedia Österreich/Statuten/final also some on de:wiki. Can you please make redirects so only one German version exist?
Done that, I think. --Chb 07:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
  1. The last changes you did on p 3b and 3c in the English version made the text worse, I suggest you go back to the text in the earlier version for these two changes
I hope I made that clearer now. --Chb 07:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
  1. Make sure the texts in the German and English version are the same

Anders Wennersten 07:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Done --Chb 07:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Further comments of editing nature

  • p2a - The last sentence in the English version is missing in the German version.
  • p2b - In the English version you write wikimedia projects which I approve of, in the German one the words internationalen Projekte der Wikimedia-Foundation is used, please use the term (internationalen) Wikimedia-Projekte instead.
  • p2c - here you use Wikimedia Foundation projects in both languages. I have a felling the term wikimedia projects would be more appropiate
  • p3a - The last part in the German version internationalen Wikimedia-Projekten is bad wording and it is omitted in the English version. I would recommend to take away that part in the German version too.
  • p3b - the last part in the English version focusing on the contents of the international Wikimedia Foundation is missing in the German and is not English. I would recommend to take away that part from the English version too.

I have fixed the links om Chapters so if you can fix the things I mention above I am then ready to recommend your bylaws for approval. Anders Wennersten 12:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC) ready

Done that, I'm not sure if I could omit the sentence about The foundation in p2a as the focus is defined in p2b - but I'm ok with that added to it.--Chb 13:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Great!, I am happy now. Anders Wennersten 13:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

A few comments:

redigation collection of science based evidences and scientific documentation

Redigation seems to be a non-translated German word.

The redistribution and advancement of free software, in digital or printed form the, with its main focus on various wikimedia projects.

Should "the" be removed?

The minutes have two be signed by two committee members.

I guess two should be replaced by to.

Barcex 19:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, these were all typos, I have fixed them now. --Chb 20:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)