Talk:Wikimedia LGBT

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Portal Activities Business History Participants & Supporters Privacy Resources Discussion


Wikimedia Conference 2017[edit]

Wikimedia Conference logo.png

Wikimedia Conference, the annual meeting of all Wikimedia organizations (Wikimedia chapters, thematic organizations, user groups, and the Wikimedia Foundation), will take place in Berlin from March 31 to April 2, 2017. Registration opened on Friday, November 18, 2016 and closes on Sunday, January 8, 2017, which is just around the corner. WMLGBT+ is eligible to send one delegate.

I've had the pleasure of attending the past two years, and I've tried my best to represent this affiliate by sharing about our goals and activities, especially Wiki Loves Pride. I enjoy meeting affiliate leaders from around the globe, and I have some ideas for a survey I'd like willing attendees to take in order for us to have a better understanding of LGBT-related activities within the Wikimedia movement, but at the same time I want to give other WMLGBT+ supporters opportunities to represent our group and learn from peers.

If you are curious, please see the conference details linked throughout this message and note your interest here as soon as possible. With deadlines approaching, we'll need to make decisions sooner than later. I hope project participants will help disseminate this invitation and opportunity via other channels. Thanks! -Another Believer (talk) 04:43, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

  • It would be nice to have a few possible candidates and we only have a few weeks to decide. I'll throw my hat in, mostly because I have not gone to any meetings since Wikimania 2014 and the LGBT+ photograph prize competition will hopefully have concluded just before despite its slow start, so that will be an experience to share. Plus I'm sure that a few of the affiliates will be interested in my GLAM related Commons projects, which manage to work without any funding, and that could be part of a wider discussion about better bots and perhaps how best to engage with long term independent volunteers. Face-smile.svg -- (talk) 10:40, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
  • I am not a candidate for attending this, but would like to help with candidate recruitment and the discussion process. I just sent an email to the wiki LGBT mailing list and will pass word around for people to participate. I wish to propose some minimal criteria for an ideal candidate:
    • Has developed LGBT+ content on a Wikimedia project in the past, however modestly
    • Has plans to organize a wiki LGBT+ outreach project or event in the next year, however modest
    • Has some experience with any part of the Wikimedia governance system, including participation as casual as joining an online or in-person program presented by any registered Wikimedia affiliate organization. I want this because the Wikimedia Conference is an event which features the discussion of managing outreach programs.
Thanks for the interest that anyone has. After we have a slate of candidates the discussion and selection process for choosing a representative will happen here. I propose that nominations for candidates be accepted until Wednesday 14 December, and that we anticipate candidate selection by Wednesday 28 December. From there the representative would register as soon as possible, and I would like to see the registration publicly posted by Wednesday 4 January in advance of the 8 January deadline. If anyone would propose an alternate schedule then speak up. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:28, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
An update - I am hoping to get a word from de:Wikipedia:Jungwikipedianer, which is an organization advocating for young Wikipedians in Germany and beyond. This group has been especially LGBT+ friendly. I asked about getting someone from that group to post here. It would be nice to have their input as they have made LGBT+ inclusivity a priority.
I do not know of a clever way to be more transparent, but I have asked around in other groups about other people participating in this process. I wish to avoid naming names of either individuals or groups, but I want to share that I am reaching out. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:22, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I would like to participate in the Wikimedia Conference as a LGBT+ represente. My user name in the Wikimedia projects is User:Freddy2001 and I started contributing in 2012. My main projects are Wikimedia Commons and the German Wikipedia, where I am member of the Arbitration Committee. I am member of the German "Jungwikipedianer", a community of about 40 young editors who are living all across german speaking countries. For this community, I have organisated some events and meetups; I could also imagine, that I can do this for a LGBT+ meetup too. I attended lots of Wikimedia events, like for instance some WikiCons in Germany, the Wikimedia Conferentie Nederland, where I hold talks about issues of young editors in the community or how to engage new editors to this project. On the Wikimania in Esino Lario, I attended my first Wikimedia LGBT+ meetup. Currently, I try to revive the trans portal in the German Wikipedia and started already with some translations of trans related articles. -- Freddy2001 talk 20:56, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Nominations closed. Next to choose from the three candidates - I will write you all soon. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:07, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Representatives[edit]

Update: After some discussion, User:Fæ and User:Freddy2001 will be representing our user group at the upcoming conference. I understand both have registered and will keep us updated about their work on behalf of WMLGBT+. -Another Believer (talk) 04:12, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Just a quick note that we should probably have these conversations on the mailing list as well. I recognize a note was sent initially, but I think things tend to get lost in inboxes if at least one reminder is not also sent as well. I do not think many folks are actively monitoring this page, and I heard from a few folks they were surprised this happened without them knowing about it. Their first heads up was the news being relayed on WikiCon page. I encourage us to utilize all our communications methods, as this has happened before. Given the loose structure of the group, and the lack of any formal structure/communications, I think it is wise to cast a wide net when "deciding things on behalf of the group" as was done here and has been done recently with grants. Not a complaint or major concern, just a friendly reminder. For what it's worth, as much as I adore Fæ, I think given the scope of this year's conference, we could have done a much better job finding some diverse voices to send. ;) Hopefully a bit more communications effort on that in the future will help increase those chances. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 17:42, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
@Varnent: Could you expand on your 'some diverse voices' point, and explain which past grants you are referring to that made decisions on behalf of the WM-LGBT+ user group without casting a wide net? Without context it is almost impossible to know what must improve and why. Freddy2001 and myself bring our experience from very different parts of the LGBT+ community and this was part of our decision making of who to put forward, so the criticism seems odd. Thanks -- (talk) 19:10, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
@: I never mentioned Freddy2001 and have no concerns there. :) However, let's be serious here. As a white gay man, I am many things, but diverse within a LGBT group is not one of them. ;) This user group has consistently sent gay men to this event. I think those selections have made a lot of sense, but if we are changing who goes, I think sending someone who has previously attended, and does not change the makeup of our representation, is a miss. Again, I adore you as a friend, but I think as a representative of this group, for the movement strategy track, I personally believe a more diverse choice would have been better. :) Regarding past grants, the only grant I am aware of is the photo project on Commons, which I think was a great effort, but I know caught some people by surprise. As I said on the mailing list, I encourage people to engage and share their thoughts as well, but I also recognize many user groups struggle with communicating widely to its audience. I think that these were surprises to people are suggestions that we need to all do better, perhaps creating a system of notifications via MassMessage to talk pages, or regular meetings of some type - not sure what the best solution is. If there were organized and recognized leadership, I think it would be different, but absent that, we are depend on making decisions via group consensus, and when that is the process, people being surprised by outcomes or "decisions" is not necessarily a good outcome for us long-term - regardless of how good those outcomes or decisions might be. Also, I want to be absolutely clear, this is my personal opinion and not in ANY way a reflection of anything related to others - including WMF - just in case that does not go without being said. ;) --Varnent (talk)(COI) 19:46, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, that's a bit clearer. A couple of clarifications you may find useful to report back to whomever is raising these points:
  • We are not sending any white gay men. One of our two representatives identifies as a gay man.
  • Freddy2001 has never been to a WMCON before. The last time I went to a WMCON was, I think, in 2012, that's a 5 year gap and I was not representing WM-LGBT+ as it we did not exist back then, so the fact is that neither of us has represented WM-LGBT+ at WMCON.
  • The grant you are referring to is the global $600 LGBT+ FP prize competition, it's not too late to make comments. The proposal was flagged up on the LGBT+ mailing list back in June 2016 and was commented on. The competition has not been launched. In fact the money has yet to be made available, and the intent is to notify 36 different projects in advance of the agreeing the notice to promote the competition. I would have preferred it if the grant could have officially been under the WM-LGBT+ umbrella, but the only option currently available with the WMF's systems is an individual grant, meaning that I take sole responsibility for the money.
Thanks -- (talk) 20:00, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
As I said, it is unfortunate that more people were not nominated to attend. I think that indicates we should step up our efforts to facilitate more discussion in the future. Also, as I have said before, I have no concerns regarding Freddy2001 - who as I understand it is filling the general representation slot. My concern is that you have attended WMCon before, in other capacities sure, but perhaps a better person would have been someone who has not been before. I recognize no one like that came forward, but that does not change my opinion that it would have been a better fit for the movement strategy slot. :) --Varnent (talk)(COI) 20:14, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Sure, there is definitely no harm in starting these discussions earlier. I thought I was getting the ball rolling in time by posting a reminder back in November, but we can start this conversation even earlier next time. Note: I'm not sure if plans are set in stone for the upcoming Wikimedia Diversity Conference, but I started a discussion for that event, which won't take place until the Fall, below. Thanks, -Another Believer (talk) 20:18, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
(Edit conflict.) @Varnent: Thanks for your thoughts and the reminder. WMLGBT+ members were informed about the upcoming conference here and on the mailing list, and only three people (including myself) expressed interest in attending. Each of us expressed why we hoped to attend, both online and offline, and had to decide who would represent our group (first, with only one invitation, then again once an additional invitation was extended to WMLGBT+). I thank User:Bluerasberry for the reminders and just a bit of facilitation in order to keep the conversation going, so we could get attendees registered in time. Since I have attended the conference twice, I wanted to give others the opportunity to represent our group, and I think folks had enough time to express their interest in attending or voice concern about those who volunteered. I acknowledge the importance of diverse representation, but also recognize some limitations when only three people (two of whom are gay men) raise their hands. I share this just to be transparent about how decisions were made. -Another Believer (talk) 20:10, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Varnent, it's strange to read that after 5 years of not going to WMCON, and never representing WM-LGBT+ before, I'm perceived by someone(s) as going too often. Sorry, that does not add up as a logical reason for me to withdraw. If there are real reasons why I should personally never represent WM-LGBT+ in the future or should never be invited to WMCON, even if they are purely political, you'll need to lay them out more clearly than this. Thanks -- (talk) 20:25, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
@: Where did I say you go too often? I always enjoy these engagements with you where you twist words, but I've grown wary of them over the years my friend. You need new tactics. I said it would be better if someone that has not yet been had this opportunity. Do you disagree? As to your list of past sins, they are not for me to catalog, but I am confident you know yourself what they are. What you choose to do with that information is not up for me to decide. ;) If you believe you are the best candidate for this role, I respect that, does not mean I have to personally agree with it. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 20:36, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm just going by your words. I'd rather not get drawn into your comments about my sins, or you being a friend, so let's just leave this as we disagree, as there are precious few measurable facts being presented to support your view that I should not be going to WMCON. No doubt we could talk about this at WMCON, but I'd much rather spend my time there productively. Thanks -- (talk) 21:03, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
You dispute the facts that we have primarily sent gay men from Europe/US in the past, that you are a gay man from Europe/US, that it is a shame only three nominees came forward, that we could do better work on communications, and that you have attended the conference before? Each of those seems pretty easy to measure, and I apologize that you felt there were not enough of them to support my view. Out of personal curiosity - which of those facts which I presented are you disputing and so I know for the future, what is your preferred minimum fact count? ;) --Varnent (talk)(COI) 21:08, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
I'll let others reply if they wish. I have already addressed the original points and see no benefit in writing further in the light of the personal comments you have made. -- (talk) 21:13, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
@Varnent: I think you've made your points. If there are others who share similar concerns, now would be the time to say so. Another Believer (talk) 21:53, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikimedia Diversity Conference 2017[edit]

Just putting the Wikimedia Diversity Conference on our radar...: Grants:Conference/Diversity Conference 2017. -Another Believer (talk) 18:16, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikimania 2017 + Canada Pride Montréal 2017 ?[edit]

Wikimania 2017 will be held in Montreal during August 9–13. According to Fierté Montréal, Canada Pride Montréal 2017 will take place from August 10 to 20. Might there be an opportunity to take advantage of here? -Another Believer (talk) 05:00, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

De-Recognition of Affiliates with Long-standing Non-Compliance[edit]

This is an update from the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee. Translations are available.

Recognition as a Wikimedia affiliate - a chapter, thematic organization, or user group - is a privilege that allows an independent group to officially use the Wikimedia name to further the Wikimedia mission. While most Wikimedia affiliates adhere to the basic compliance standards set forth in their agreements with the Wikimedia Foundation, a protocol has been developed to address the exceptional cases when a Wikimedia affiliate does not meet basic compliance standards and their continued recognition as a Wikimedia affiliate presents a risk to the Wikimedia movement.

In the past year, the Affiliations Committee - with support from Wikimedia Foundation staff - has made a concerted effort to address a handful of chapters with long-standing issues of non-compliance. As a result, in the coming days and months, a small number of chapters that have been unable to return to compliance through their efforts in the past year will not have their chapter agreements renewed. As a consequence, these organizations will no longer have the additional rights to use the Wikimedia trademarks, including the Wikimedia name, that had been granted under those agreements.

If you have questions about what this means for community members in the affected affiliates’ region or language areas, we have put together a basic FAQ. The FAQ talk page is available for additional questions and comments, and the Affiliations Committee is happy to answer questions directly.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Affiliations Committee, 15:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC) • Please help translate to your languageGet helpSubscribe or unsubscribe.

Review of initial updates on Wikimedia movement strategy process[edit]

Note: Apologies for cross-posting and sending in English. Message is available for translation on Meta-Wiki.

The Wikimedia movement is beginning a movement-wide strategy discussion, a process which will run throughout 2017. For 15 years, Wikimedians have worked together to build the largest free knowledge resource in human history. During this time, we've grown from a small group of editors to a diverse network of editors, developers, affiliates, readers, donors, and partners. Today, we are more than a group of websites. We are a movement rooted in values and a powerful vision: all knowledge for all people. As a movement, we have an opportunity to decide where we go from here.

This movement strategy discussion will focus on the future of our movement: where we want to go together, and what we want to achieve. We hope to design an inclusive process that makes space for everyone: editors, community leaders, affiliates, developers, readers, donors, technology platforms, institutional partners, and people we have yet to reach. There will be multiple ways to participate including on-wiki, in private spaces, and in-person meetings. You are warmly invited to join and make your voice heard.

The immediate goal is to have a strategic direction by Wikimania 2017 to help frame a discussion on how we work together toward that strategic direction.

Regular updates are being sent to the Wikimedia-l mailing list, and posted on Meta-Wiki. Beginning with this message, monthly reviews of these updates will be sent to this page as well. Sign up to receive future announcements and monthly highlights of strategy updates on your user talk page.

Here is a review of the updates that have been sent so far:

More information about the movement strategy is available on the Meta-Wiki 2017 Wikimedia movement strategy portal.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation, 20:27, 15 February 2017 (UTC) • Please help translate to your languageGet help