User talk:Adamw

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Adamw in topic T297888

Open Wiki Farm[edit]

The boundaries of our projects are tightly guarded. Any new communities can only launch after a long and difficult process, and only if they are similar to existing projects and rooted in similar values. The many who are denied must turn to commercial or other hosting, with inconsistent safety policies, licensing, and even with imposed advertising. Proposal: We need a diaspora of projects, such as an ad-free, open wiki farm with stable funding and consistent community safety.

Miraheze's direct competitor? Rtnf (talk) 14:09, 28 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Rtnf: Miraheze was one of the inspirations for my suggestion. I don't think we would need to be a direct competitor however, since non-profits don't follow the standard capitalist attention economy script. One potential strategy for resilience would be to support external wiki farms such as Miraheze, provide grants, and help improve safety. This allows communities to grow around multiple centers so different people can find their niche, and avoids the fragility and boringness of central control. Adamw (talk) 00:59, 2 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your answer. Since i'm involved in Miraheze community, i like your idea. Regarding "boringness of central control", this is quite an open question. Should we adopt all those project outside Wikimedia Foundation if those project's vision is aligned to WMF vision, or we should let them have their own independence and we just support them from the outside (something like current's knowledge equity initiative)? Good things that we have things like wikidata, so we can "glue it together", integrate and collaborate with other external project. Rtnf (talk) 04:05, 20 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Rtnf: Your question has made me start to think, it seems important to our resilience that a diversity of wiki farms continue to coexist so that we don't end up recreating the monolithic Wikipedia experience. Some of the details of this coexistence and mutual aid beg for a simple approach: legal and safety support could take the form of an independent organization whose mission is to defend small sites from harm. But I'm not so sure about other aspects such as infrastructure and administration, I can see benefits and risks to both centralization and decentralization. Even the assumption that we would share a single software platform feels wrong, we should be advancing the next generation of wiki- and open knowledge-aligned sites and not let MediaWiki be an anchor dragging us back. Adamw (talk) 21:11, 6 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
"Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That’s our commitment."
The problem is, everyone has differing definition of "knowledge". In some case, we can't really force them to compromise. Sometimes, the best solution is to "agree to disagree" then respecting each other's belief and opinion. This is why we usually have several differing "school of thoughts" in each of field of study. But, in Wikipedia, we are forced to make a compromise in the name of "community consensus".
Then we have copyright issues. Some people are too lenient, yet some people are too strict. Both extremes are not quite desirable to the sustainability of our movement. In my own observation, those are the two biggest reason why people are leaving Wikipedia and decided to start their own wiki movement.
My suggestion is "community-first" approach. Let's talk directly to the community members and leaders to talk about this issue. We dont have to force them to join our movement as our "underlings". We may walk together and collaborate as an equal to reach our shared vision : "free knowledge for all". Rtnf (talk) 06:36, 7 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
Anyway, the Miraheze community is inviting you to discuss this matter :'s_Foundation_Election Rtnf (talk) 02:30, 8 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
For what it's worth, from my perspective, as both a Miraheze community member and Miraheze steward,, I'm pleased to see Adamw (assuming Adamw on Wikimedia is the same as Adamw on Miraheze, though I have no reason to suspect they aren't) put forward this idea of expanding the Wikimedia Foundation financial granting policies, as it's something I wanted to propose when I considered running for the Affiliations Committee last year. I'm glad he's proposed the idea as part of his Wikimedia board candidacy and is now discussing it on our community noticeboard. Dmehus (talk) 00:14, 9 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
This is very interesting and hopefully it can be followed up in future discussions. --Zblace (talk) 09:49, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

We at Wiki Project Med have started a couple of our own content wikis. One being [1] and the other being [2] Agree that it is perfectly reasonable to have projects within the movement run by folks other than the WMF. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:26, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I want to ask a question[edit]

If you're elected what will you do for the next 3 years of term? KyleDJF34 (talk) 16:34, 24 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

The main ideas are in my candidate statement, but it goes something like this: Begin a discussion about publicly sharing recordings of Board meetings and exact transcripts. Meet and integrate with Board and find a way I can contribute to their work. Probably fit myself into the Product committee and the Board Governance committee, if they will have me. Feel out the potential for consensus around Bylaws changes, to push towards a fully elected Board—find a concrete next step and write a public strategy for how to shape and move towards a final goal. Find who is supportive of Wikimedia hosting an open wiki farm, and try to mobilize these contributors and other stakeholders; see whether there are historical discussions. Learn what the Board is planning to devolve funding, connect with community and advisors, help nudge our plans to align with the Movement Strategy, probably help shape Dariusz's "regional hubs" idea to avoid bureaucracy, and introduce stepped increases in how much money we are distributing. Engage with anti-abuse work and see whether my production software experience or feminist perspective allow me to contribute productively, prioritize ongoing work to hide editors' IP addresses from public view. Thanks for asking! —Adamw (talk) 19:13, 24 July 2021 (UTC)Reply


Did you by any chance create a Miraheze account? There's an account that has your username in the name. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 00:01, 9 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

@DarkMatterMan4500: Thanks for checking—yes, I made that account, I'll also link from my contact information. —Adamw (talk) 10:21, 9 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
Adamw Ah, okay. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 10:40, 9 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Wikisporadic Newsletter: August 2021[edit]

Wikisporadic, an Occasional Newsletter for our Germinating Community.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for the Wikisporadic Newsletter by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Feedback on any of these items is welcomed at your friendly Wikispore Greenhouse!

--Pharos 19:48, 11 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Leadership Development Working Group applications open until 10 April 2022[edit]

Hello, I hope you're well. I was hoping to share the below message with you and your talk page guests, as the call for applications for this working group is closing soon.

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

The Community Development team at the Wikimedia Foundation is supporting the creation of a global, community-driven Leadership Development Working Group. The purpose of the working group is to advise leadership development work. Feedback was collected in February 2022 and a summary of the feedback is on Meta-wiki. The application period to join the Working Group is now open and is closing soon on April 10, 2022. Please review the information about the working group, share with community members who might be interested, and apply if you are interested.

Thank you in advance for your consideration =)

(P.S. Sorry we haven't been able to connect yet!) Xeno (WMF) (talk) 02:30, 8 April 2022 (UTC)Reply


Hi Adam,

for some browsers (I guess? seems to affect a small subset of users) the default OAuth 2 grant types do not get submitted, rendering the app proposal useless (T297888). That seems to have happened with 0e2c8... as well. You can probably get around it by changing the value of the form field. Tgr (WMF) (talk) 22:02, 19 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

The note was helpful, thank you! I tried the workaround suggested in Phabricator, to delete and re-add the grants, but I can't tell from the UI whether this was successful or not for the "v1.1" consumer 45559.... No worries if I need to try again, it's not terribly urgent. Adamw (talk) 22:17, 19 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Wikisporadic Newsletter: September 2022[edit]

Wikispore lunch in Berlin

Wikisporadic, an Occasional Newsletter for our Germinating Community.

Participate: Comment on stories and ideas in this Newsletter, Join Wikispore on Telegram, Join Wikispore mailing list