Talk:Wikimedia Clinics

Digest[edit]

Thank you very much for publishing notes about the calls, that's very useful. Nemo 07:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback! Asaf (WMF) (talk) 11:08, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Awareness[edit]

Hi,

Just dropping my early $0.02 that this page, and thus the clinics, are pretty hard to find out about. A little easier to find on meta-front page and perhaps a few village pump equivalents (obviously while it's in English, that would put a focus on en-wiki and simple-en). I couldn't make it to the last one, but it seems like a good idea, and would be a shame to lose it just for a lack of participation. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:52, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback! I announce the calls on "push" channels such as the Wikimedia-l mailing list, regional mailing lists, the Wikimedia General channel on Telegram, and the Wikipedia Weekly Facebook group. I accept your suggestion to also publish them on the Meta calendar, though it has been my experience that that reaches far fewer people. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 11:10, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Title[edit]

The word "clinics" has strong connotation linked with hospital, is it intended? Infovarius (talk) 02:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I named the program in an allusion to legal clinics, but I understand the medical connotation is stronger for most people. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 06:33, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FOSS options[edit]

Have options been explored that would not use Google Meet and instead use a w:FOSS alternative? Killiondude (talk) 16:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. What have you found reliable and easy for attendees? (e.g. not requiring installing software) Asaf (WMF) (talk) 17:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was also not a google meet fan, with a notable issue that I couldn't find anyway to change the given name from what it picked up from my email account, which obviously releases some personal data. Nosebagbear (talk)

I have been looking at Jitsi and it seems like a great alternative with some features not found in Google Meet. More customization is available should wmftech install its own instance of it. Killiondude (talk) 17:53, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Killiondude: They did. --Yair rand (talk) 18:25, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yair rand: That is great. It also makes me sad that there seems to be a lack of communication about communication tools within the WMF staff. Killiondude (talk) 18:27, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for the reminder! Since sent invitations for the upcoming clinic (in Spanish) already include the Google Meet link, I won't change that one, but I'll schedule the next clinic using Wikimedia Meet and see how it goes. If it works well for us, that'll become the default for these meetings. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 18:59, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful :) --Yair rand (talk) 06:28, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As promised, the upcoming calls will be in the Jitsi-based Wikimedia Meet service. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 20:10, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, after two reasonably successful calls using Wikimedia Meet (some audio problems, but browser refreshes worked), the Jitsi platform catastrophically failed during the last Clinic call, when it had to deal with over 50 attendees. Nobody could hear the speaker at all, and we paid in frustration and lost time. Amir, who had set up this Jitsi instance, confirmed it cannot be reliably used for groups larger than about 8 people. This unfortunately isn't workable for Clinics, so we are reverting to the reliable Google Meet for now. FYI, Yair rand and Killiondude. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 11:41, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note, just quick note: It works fine up to twenty people (we never got to test it properly for the upper limit). Definitely getting to work with 50 people would be challenge. I will look up to see if I can do anything about it. Amir (talk) 23:14, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Thank you for trying. I appreciate that. Killiondude (talk) 00:29, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how large Amir's Jitsi instance is, but I've seen Jitsi instances support 100 and more participants without issues. One of the largest is hosted by the Italian university network, https://open.meet.garr.it/ . For much larger meetings, other solutions may be in order. Nemo 12:54, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Next Clinic in English date?[edit]

Hi,

Great to see that the WMF are trying out the clinics in other languages, but not speaking Spanish, I was wondering if the next date/time for a Clinic occurring in English had been decided yet? Since these often overlap when I'd normally be doing other things, more forewarning helps me try to nudge them a little to let me attend more of the clinic.

Cheers, Nosebagbear (talk) 12:46, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They have now been scheduled, and additional dates will be added soon, including some for other languages. Stay tuned! Asaf (WMF) (talk) 20:11, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Should the program be renamed?[edit]

A few people have expressed puzzlement at the name "Wikimedia Clinic" (intended to evoke the concept of a w:Legal clinic rather than any medical connotation), and others have been troubled by the medical connotation in this era of pandemic. I am open to renaming the program to something easier to comprehend and less potentially triggering.

While I will not regard this as a binding vote, do feel free to suggest and endorse appropriate names for this program below, or contribute to the pros and cons sections. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 15:18, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not a proposal, but, assuming User:Bluerasberry (or anyone else, I suppose) intends to continue the Wikimedia Café, perhaps the Clinic could be rebranded as something implying it to be sort of a "WMF-sponsored version" of the Cafe. --Yair rand (talk) 05:54, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion #0: Wikimedia Clinics[edit]

(status quo; leave it as it is)

Pros: it is status quo. It has gained a little bit of recognition/reputation already. It implies taking care of things, being able to bring pain points or problems and receiving meaningful help.

Cons: perhaps more people think of disease or the pandemic than of a pleasant, helpful place.

Endorsements: (for no change)

When I saw it, I loved it - the name is ideal. he just needs a logo - a great logo. to get a clear picture in your head... --Mohammed Bachounda (talk) 14:55, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion #1: Video Village Pumps[edit]

Pros: clear wiki connection; differentiated from wiki village pumps by 'video'; evokes the get-together meeting-hall sense intended.

Cons: perhaps implies policy-making or decision-making off-wiki, which is certainly not the intent.

Endorsements:

Ziko (talk) 19:15, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
...

Concerns:

I would guess that "village pump" is not a very good cross-cultural name. Even as a white American, I didn't understand it for a few years. If we want to be welcoming to new folks, I think the name should be meaningful on its own. Also, I don't know how widely the term is used across our language projects, and in non-Wikipedia projects. Libcub (talk) 23:13, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is not an unreasonable comment by Libcub. It also makes it rather confusing for en-wiki editors as to whether this is part of the same set of boards or not. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:17, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion #2: WMF Live calls[edit]

Pros: emphasizes the guaranteed presence of WMF staff, which is the main characteristic of these calls as distinct from other online calls

Cons: a bit bland; may be confusing with other WMF calls such as individual team "office hours"

Endorsements:

Libcub (talk) 23:06, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
...

Suggestion #3: Wikimedia Coffee Break[edit]

Pros: It implies something informal: a conversation without clear agenda happening between sessions or (serious) work, during a coffee break :)

Cons: As any change, it might be not comfortable at first

Endorsements:

--アンタナナ 15:44, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion #4: ...your idea?...[edit]

Pros:

Cons:

Endorsements:

...

Conclusion[edit]

As there seems to be very little response to this survey (which was also mentioned in e-mails and social media posts, so reached thousands of people), I conclude almost nobody feels strongly that status quo must be changed. We shall therefore stick with Wikimedia Clinics. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 11:37, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First time I noticed this. I do not oppose the name, though it does sound a bit, well, clinical (in the medical sense).--Jetam2 (talk) 14:45, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft UCOC[edit]

I feel confident it would have come up anyway, but can we specifically add it as an agenda item. If there's a member of T&S' policy team, that would be icing on the cake.— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nosebagbear (talk)

Wikimedia Clinics aren't the only kind of live calls the Foundation hosts. Several other teams hold "office hours" to discuss their ongoing work, and I don't want to step into T&S's project plan by scheduling something about the UCoC. Also, this upcoming call already has Abstract Wikipedia as its scheduled topic, and from experience (since we've already had one), that topic (including questions and answers and discussion) is likely to take up most of the time of the call. The UCoC no doubt deserves its own dedicated time, and, as you say, the specific staffers in charge of the project. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 14:50, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Abstract Wikipedia[edit]

@Asaf (WMF): if this talk page is not the right on-wiki channel for questions, please point us to where you prefer. It seemed like Wikimedia Clinics/009#Questions and answers was inappropriate for a scheduled event that had passed.

Moved to Talk:Abstract Wikipedia/Architecture#Constructors

You may use this talk page, but really, the best place to discuss Abstract Wikipedia is its own talk page, where others are more likely to notice it, too. Asaf (WMF) (talk) 08:32, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I had missed that entire set of pages. I moved the question. James Salsman (talk) 13:13, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata world maps[edit]

@Asaf (WMF): in Wikimedia Clinic #7, a participant asked if we have updated Wikidata World Maps showing the frequency of geolocated articles. I asked Baha who supports our team with software engineering needs to look into it. He now has (link to a Google drive) updated maps for some of the languages. If there is a way to get back to the person who asked the question, they may find it helpful. Sorry for the long delay. It took a while to figure out how to generate the maps and also download/process the data. I'll ask Baha to upload them to Commons and link here. --LZia (WMF) (talk) 02:23, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Leila! I'm very glad to see this. Since it's been a while, I'm happy to wait a couple of days longer and be able to point to the images on Commons. (Also, what dictated the language choice there? vo and war but no he?) Asaf (WMF) (talk) 08:22, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Asaf (WMF), here are the links to Commons. The software I used to generate these maps had these languages enabled, so I just went with it.

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-items-arwiki-2880x1440.png

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-items-cawiki-2880x1440.png

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-items-commonswiki-2880x1440.png

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-items-dewiki-2880x1440.png

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-items-enwiki-2880x1440.png

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-items-eswiki-2880x1440.png

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-items-fawiki-2880x1440.png

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-items-frwiki-2880x1440.png

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-items-itwiki-2880x1440.png

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-items-jawiki-2880x1440.png

* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map-items-mswiki-2880x1440.png