User talk:Bluerasberry

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

Afrikaans | العربية | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Boarisch | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | བོད་ཡིག | bosanski | català | کوردیی ناوەندی | corsu | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | ދިވެހިބަސް | Ελληνικά | emiliàn e rumagnòl | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | Nordfriisk | Frysk | galego | Alemannisch | ગુજરાતી | עברית | हिन्दी | Fiji Hindi | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Ido | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | ភាសាខ្មែរ | 한국어 | Kurdî | Limburgs | lietuvių | Baso Minangkabau | македонски | മലയാളം | молдовеняскэ | Bahasa Melayu | မြန်မာဘာသာ | مازِرونی | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | occitan | Kapampangan | polski | português | Runa Simi | română | русский | sicilianu | سنڌي | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | Soomaaliga | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ślůnski | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkmençe | Tagalog | Türkçe | татарча/tatarça | ⵜⴰⵎⴰⵣⵉⵖⵜ  | українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 吴语 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/-

Contents

Welcome to Meta![edit]

Hello Bluerasberry, and welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). If you would like, feel free to ask me questions on my talk page. Happy editing! Ottava Rima (talk) 14:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Your oppose vote[edit]

Hi Bluerasberry. I have to say, I found your oppose vote in my steward candidacy a bit offensive. I don't know what you were reading, but nowhere in my statement or questions have I ever implied that I was not mature enough for the position. We obviously don't know each other personally, nor do I recall knowing you in any professional capacity for which you could judge me. I do hope you'd change that particular part of your oppose vote to something a little more tasteful. Regards, SWATJester 15:08, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I cannot stop you from being offended if you choose to feel that way but I assure you that I did not intend for you to become offended. I think that you stated a lack of maturity when you said this - "Oh, and as a helpful bonus, my new job will be paying for me to go to language school for a year, so I'll have some multi-lingual capability as well." The situation is that you think being multilingual is a good trait for the position, but you are not by your standard sufficiently multilingual, so you state that you are taking classes to become more multilingual.
I am glad that you are continuing your education but the fact that you are taking education is not a distinguishing characteristic of a steward and not a trait on which your readiness for candidacy can be decided. Furthermore the fact that you are presenting this information indicates that you think that multilingual capacity is some skill which stewards ought to have, yet you do not have it, so you are saying that you have made arrangements to get it. In that case, why not just take the class for a year then apply for stewardship next year? I supported a different English-only candidate, so I voted not because of your skill but instead because of your stated self-perception. Be proud of the skills you have right now and do not advertise what person you think you will become.
Since you are offended I feel sad because it was not my intent to hurt anyone. I feel that I acted well in reading your statement and visiting your user page and even I was the one of only a few people who wrote more than a few words explaining my vote to you. If I am misunderstanding you in some way and you can guess my misconception then please talk more with me, but I think that I have done sufficient work to justify my vote at this time and would like to leave it as oppose. Blue Rasberry (talk) 02:27, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
And again, I think it is inappropriate for you to speculate on whether I'm proud of myself, or whether I'm trying to become someone else by going to mandatory language training for my job, or that somehow that reduces my maturity level. These are all personal judgments you have made about me as a person, not me as an editor, and you have no basis for making them. That is why I found your post, and your followup above, to be offensive. As for the vote change, it is irrelevant now as the election is over, however please understand that I'm following up in the hopes that you will realize that your tone and choice of words are offensive to people, so that you don't unintentionally offend someone else down the line. Regards, SWATJester 17:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for writing to me. I understand that you are upset and I am sorry that you disagree with my rationale for voting as I did, but if you do not like that rationale then I think that another one would be that I do not think that you would make a good steward because you are too easily offended. I tried to be thoughtful and am doing my best to be a good Wikipedian. The situation that I am facing now is that I spent time for your sake participating in an election and beyond not appreciating my effort you are taking offense at my work. Since both of us have good intentions I think the problem must be some miscommunication between us but with you taking offense and escalating the tension of the situation I do not anticipate a happy end to this discussion, nor would I expect you to be able to be a steward without taking offense at constructive criticism from other people. When stewards disagree with someone I feel that they ought to try to understand the other person's point of view, because even if I am a fool then it would be better for you to try to teach me another way than just make me feel guilty for having a opinion with an invalid basis. I do not know what to think now, but I very sincerely apologize for hurting your feelings. Still I do not want to change my vote at this time. Blue Rasberry (talk) 02:05, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I think we are in essence not disagreeing here but are failing to communicate effectively to each other. No offense is taken anymore, now that your reasoning is better explained. My apologies if I made you feel guilty, I did not intend to do that, or to intensify a situation here. Regards, SWATJester 06:17, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Election[edit]

Hi, and thanks for your comments in the election. Was there something specific you had in mind that was missing from my userpage? Regards, Jafeluv 10:55, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations on your election to stewardship!
I had the same complaint about the user pages of many other stewards. Your page is not bad but I feel that your user page should show that you are an open person.
Here is your page as it exists now. It is sufficient, but because you are steward some curious people will be coming to your page just to see how stewards present themselves. I think that you should take steps to be more welcoming.
Is it common that all stewards use all steward functions, or more likely that some stewards more frequently do some things and leave other business to other stewards? If you expect to more frequently do one thing, then perhaps you could state that as an area of interest. What about other administrative or bureaucratic functions? I think most people tend to only use some of them, and if you are a good person to contact for some particular function then best to state it.
Is there any particular article or Wikipedia project on which you have worked and about which you feel especially proud? I think many users who visit your page might be interested in seeing what kind of work their elected steward thinks is the best work. Perhaps you could have a description of some particular jazz article, or just show some personality by saying that you promote education about jazz in Finnish Wikipedia.
I do not really care what you say, but just say something more so that people visiting your page will know more about your interest in Wikipedia and what you do here. Thanks for your attention. Blue Rasberry (talk) 03:17, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. I'll definitely keep your comments in mind. Jafeluv 10:26, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

WMF Fellowships[edit]

Hi, I saw you active on those pages, and wanted to let you know I just added this proposal, in case you want to read it too! Have a nice day, --Elitre 17:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I just saw your message on Talk:Wikimedia Fellowships/Project Ideas/Using your languages across the Wikipedias, and replied. Please comment further if anything occurs to you. I'll watch more closely now that I know I have a reader! Andrew Dalby 14:06, 20 January 2012 (UTC)


criteria[edit]

hi, thank you for your vote and I appreciate and respect the fact that you actually have criteria to evaluate the candidates against. Since you said you make the criterion of edit count sort of conditional, let me just explain my view: I strongly believe that correcting commas and rollbacks on recent changes watch should not be systematically promoted as better Wikipedic work than longer, narrative input (be it either in the article creation, or discussion, but meritocratic). Of course I respect the fact that my opinion is in minority, and that many users will thrive in minor edits, easily inflating their edit count into over 100k. I even definitely believe that rollbacking and comma corrections are important. Yet, my post here is over 600 characters. I don't think it is 600 times less effort to write it than 600 comma corrections, that's all :) Pundit 01:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Of course there are ways to cheat my criteria. I also vote for sysops on English Wikipedia, and I participate in discussions about how to decide who should be elected and who should not. I feel like everyone has criteria for making decisions, even people who do not write their criteria. It is hard for me to say what would make me sure that I would vote for someone, but I am almost positive that anyone who had fewer than 500 edits on a given wikiproject could not consider themselves highly experienced in that project. Thanks for writing, and good luck in the election. Blue Rasberry (talk) 03:03, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Of course everybody has criteria, but people who do not make them explicit can unconsciously change them from voting to voting. It is good to have them formulated. Also, I agree that 500 edits on a project is probably a good general estimate of understanding more or less what's going on, especially for beginners. If I were to argue my case (even if only to persuade you to a neutral vote), I'd say that I do have such experience on 2 projects. I also have very high understanding of rules (declaration only on face value, but I did study them thoroughly and as a result have 2 publications on Wikipedia in the pipeline). My work on the ombudsmen commission, which does not count in any edit counters for obvious reasons, has lead me to discussing policy, rules, and CU/ComArb behavior practices on more than 10 different projects, afair. While there are many stewards well versed in cross-wiki antivandalism, my experience and knowledge seems to be quite complementary to theirs. Again, I take liberty to discuss it with you only because you clearly stated that you are open-minded about your criteria application, and allow arguments. In any case, I am grateful for your reply and serious, non-lemming approach. Pundit 16:26, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
How can I get any information about your participating on the ombudsman commission? You provided no links for me to see your personal involvement. Are discussions on this project closed? If so, can you provide an endorsement from any other ombudsman who can verify that you are in good standing?
Why do you not have 500 edits on at least 3 projects? Being a steward is partly about having some authority on multiple wikiprojects. If you have interest in multiple projects, then why have you not explored them? Do you think you will in the future?
I would be happy to support you, but if I were in your place, I am not sure that I would feel comfortable being a steward. I am fairly active on en.Wikipedia and I even do a lot of public outreach by hosting Wikipedia meetings, teaching Wikipedia at seminars, and in other ways. It is not obvious to me that you are more experienced on Wikipedia than I am, and I know that I do not have skills to be a steward, so I just wonder how you can be ready. If I saw a reason - and I am not looking for much - then I would support you. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
hrhgh... Proceedings of the ombudsman commission are private, and this is the reason why they are not published (and non-linkable). But you raise a good point - there are no clear outside measures of ombudsman good work. I will tell fellow commission members of your concern and ask them for either endorsement or clear statement that I don't do well enough :)
I am not particularly active besides 2 projects and this is definitely a flaw. I do intend to make a better use of my camera and intensify my work on commons. In general, I stick to Wikipedia (online encyclopedia) and there are only 2 languages I speak fluently enough to seriously contribute. My main experience with other projects is through usurpations and OC.
I am reasonably active in the real Wikiworld, too ;) doing my share of the outreach to the academic community. I have no way of measuring your skills, but it may well be that you just are modest. My perception of stewardship is that of added value: I don't think everybody should satisfy the same criteria, since adding the 31st steward with the same experience does not significantly add value to this group. On the other hand, adding somebody with slightly different experience, may. cheers Pundit 17:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Of course I want more diversity also. Your two languages are more than enough, and I would be happy if you contributed just a little to a second Polish-language wikiproject to learn what it is and how it works. If you make a commitment to participate in any other wikiproject (English or Polish Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikitionary, Wikinews, anything) over the course of the next three months for at least 10 hours total, and get a recommendation from another omsbudsman, then I would support you. Is that reasonable? Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi, yes, that's more than reasonable, and I believe I can use the experience indeed. I've also already written to OC, requesting support or opposition (so as to make the feedback transparent). Pundit 17:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
  • My fellow ombudsmen made a point that it would be quite inappropriate for OC members to vote in the elections. I understand these concerns. They did point out, however, that my good standing in the OC should not raise any doubts, since my term was renewed for another year. In particular, they stated:
Sir48:
for my part I will avoid to give any public "judgement" of any member

of the commission. Similarly, I don't vote for stewards and checkusers during my time here.

You have answered as best you can in the circumatance where our proceedings are confidential. It could be added, perhaps, that it looks like you have had your service on the commision extended for one year as the rest of us.

I wish you the best of luck in the election.
Thogo:
same for me. Although I have voted in the last election, I decided

this time not to vote or to comment on the candidates. But as Philippe had no problem with any of us continuing for another year I think it can be safely assumed that you served well in the committee which I

fully agree to. :) Good luck for your election!
  • Of course, you may consider this as insufficient. Yet, I also believe that it in general is the proper code of conduct not to engage in voting in case of OC members, since a day could come when OC had a case of a steward, who had been elected by the votes of OC members. Pundit 15:27, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Request for more info about ombudsman commission appointees[edit]

I would like to ask more of you. Can you arrange some changes to the ombudsman page to give more information? I would like to see something more like this there, but I do not have information to complete such a table. I think the dates also should link to a public statement or discussion about the user's appointment. How would you feel about arranging to make this information accessible?
Ombudsman appointments
name appointment reconfirmation wiki
Sir48  ?  ? Dutch Wikipedia userpage
Pundit 2010 2011 Polish Wikipedia userpage
I would have done this myself, but the ombudsman page seems to be tied up with templates and anyway I do not know how to find any stating verifying the appointments. Please share your thoughts on this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:32, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I think the info will be processed some time in February, by Philippe. You are right that it should be clearer. Thank you for your support! Pundit 17:45, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit]

Hi Bluerasberry. I deleted File talk:WALRUS logo notext.svg and moved the content to Commons as the image is stored on Commons and not here. Trijnsteltalk 19:07, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. My mistake. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:16, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikivoyage[edit]

Hi. Sorry for the late reply concerning the Wikivoyage discussion. We just started the process. I will let you know, when and where more information will be available. -- DerFussi (talk) 18:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:15, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Would love to meet you in Dhaka[edit]

Hi Bluerasberry, I will definitely meet you when you will be here in Dhaka. I think other Wikimedians from Dhaka (especially the members of Wikimedia Bangladesh) would also love to meet you. I'm just making a correction here: recently I have been appointed as a member of Funds Dissemination Committee of Wikimedia Foundation; but I am not judging the WLM:) Both news came on the Signpost. See you in Dhaka. - Ali Haidar Khan (Tonmoy) (talk) 18:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Travel Guide: Naming poll open[edit]

Hi there,

You are receiving this message because you edited the initial naming straw poll for the Wikimedia Travel Guide.

The proposed naming poll is now open and you can vote for as many of the proposed names as you wish, if you are eligible. Please see Travel Guide/Naming Process for full details on voting eligibility and how the final name will be selected. Voting will last for 14 days, and will terminate on 16 October at 06:59:59 UTC.

Thanks, Thehelpfulone 23:08, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Thematic orgs[edit]

I hope you don't feel like I'm targeting you personally. I'm uncomfortable with these thematic organization proposals in general, and I happened to pick on the two that I thought had the most objectionable proposals to approach. I later saw that you were involved in both. Anyway, it's nothing personal. Gigs (talk) 18:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I do not feel that way. We are in touch by email now. I hope to talk with you soon. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

WM:MED withdrawal[edit]

Did you withdraw your nomination to the board because of the possible perception of COI? I hope this doesn't mean you'll reduce your involvement in WM:MED. Your input has been crucial, and will continue to be.

There is a lot I'm very unsure about in the realm of COI. Can you tell me the thinking behind your decision to withdraw? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 12:43, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

It is only because of the perception of conflict of interest. I am happy to talk to you or anyone else about this. I may not be as involved in Wiki Medicine for now but I will continue to participate in WikiProject Medicine. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:17, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry to hear that. WhatamIdoing mentioned the advisory board. I hope you'll consider that. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 13:32, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Travel Guide: Naming poll open[edit]

Hi there,

You are receiving this message because you voiced your opinion at the Request for Comment on the Wikimedia Travel Guide.

The proposed naming poll opened a few days ago and you can vote for as many of the proposed names as you wish, if you are eligible. Please see Travel Guide/Naming Process for full details on voting eligibility and how the final name will be selected. Voting will last for 14 days, and will terminate on 16 October at 06:59:59 UTC.

Thanks, Thehelpfulone 21:49, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I proposed a name and voted. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:05, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

WM US Federation[edit]

I ask that you withdraw from the discussion of the bylaws abit. No one's vote is going to be discounted because of the reason for the vote or almost any other reason. This is not a kangaroo court, we are seeing if the proposal is backed by the community. --Guerillero 23:22, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I am sure you do not understand my position. Email me anytime if you want to talk on phone or video. Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:39, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Move[edit]

I fixed the page title of WikiProject Med, but still waiting for a local Meta admin to delete Wiki Project Med/left-over redirect. You might want to move Template:WikiProject Med/Reports/Timeline. πr2 (t • c) 21:26, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for moving it, and thanks for pointing out the template. I moved it also Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:54, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
Maybe also the stuff in Category:Wiki Med (and the category name), Special:PrefixIndex/Wiki Med. πr2 (t • c) 20:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Happy Bengali New Year to you too[edit]

Hi, I'm so glad to hear from you. Hope you got back to US safely. It was very nice meeting you in Dhaka & I would love to meet, greet & treat you in Dhaka again and again:) And full marks to your memory, seems you didn't forget our discussion;) You will be happy to know that we have started organizing programs in collaboration with different universities & we successfully did one last week. Thank you for all your good wishes. --Ali Haidar Khan (Tonmoy) (talk) 19:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

The Stethoscope: A Wiki Project Med Foundation Review (Issue 1)[edit]

Wiki Project Med Foundation

Wiki Project Med Foundation (WPMEDF) was formally incorporated in New York as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. Our mission is bold like Wikipedia's: Imagine a world in which every single person is given free access to the sum of all medical knowledge." That's what we're doing.

In this newsletter:

Wiki Project Med Logo.png
  • Designing our logos and name: How and why we made them
  • Creating Our Board: Who's involved and what they're doing
  • Adding 70+ Interested members: Participants from all over the globe
  • Furthering ongoing projects: Expanding exciting in many directions at once
  • Proposing Wikimania presentations: Sign up for the talks that interest you
  • Taking on on social media: Up and running with outreach (plus business cards!)
  • Charting pathways for how you can help right now: a great list easy and important areas to contribute


Read the Full Newsletter


We aim to run The Stethoscope at least once per quarter and no more than once per month. We only send to people who already signed on as WikiProject Med or Wiki Project Medicine Foundation interested members/participants. If you do not want to receive the newsletter, please add your name here.

It's been a pleasure so far, and we have so much more to do. Wishing you happy Spring up North and pleasant Autumn down South.

--Jake and the rest of the Wiki Project Med Foundation Team, Ocaasi (talk) 20:00, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Nice to talk to you[edit]

Do you have the Wikidata contacts?

Thanks, Mcnabber091 (talk) 20:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

No, not really. I have a friend who is promoting Wikidata and she may be able to direct you to other people if you have questions. See en:User:Aude. My personal interest is in d:Wikidata:Medicine task force. Even this I am not engaging as well as I would like. Unfortunately the best advice that I can give to you is to go to d:Wikidata:Community portal and look at what other people are doing, and to meet people there. Wikidata is a very new project and it neither has good documentation nor much community. A lot of people have hope for it and Aude would be able to tell you something about the time frames for rolling out features. Next Monday on IRC there are Wikidata staff office hours. It would be great if you could attend that. See details at IRC office hours. I am around - if you get stuck and can find no appropriate contact then please message me and I will make introductions, but first take a look yourself. Update me regularly, even if nothing is happening. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:56, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm on the IRC chat right now. So far no luck on contacts. I'm thinking about submitting the property list here: http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Place . What else about the list needs improvement? Mcnabber091 (talk) 19:02, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia LGBT / User Group[edit]

Please see this discussion regarding User Group status. Thank you! --Another Believer (talk) 15:42, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

IdeaLab/Colours of Bangladesh[edit]

Hi, thanks for your comment on the project proposal talk page(Grants_talk:IdeaLab/Colours_of_Bangladesh). i replied to all your comments, please check that and help me to fine the inconsistencies of the project.--Nasir Khan Saikat (talk) 08:14, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

I made some big changes to the Grants/IdeaLab proposal[edit]

I provided an explanation for the structure and added more material to the proposal. Mcnabber091 (talk) 05:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Maps[edit]

You got your answers: Grants_talk:IEG/Wikimaps_Atlas. Yug (talk) 21:30, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

IEG barnstar 1.png Individual Engagement Grant Barnstar
Lane, thanks for the thoughtful participation in IEG proposal discussions so far - I love it when I get to an idea, draft, or proposal and find you've already asked a million great questions! Siko (WMF) (talk) 05:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Upcoming IdeaLab Events: IEG Proposal Clinics[edit]

Idea Lab
Idea Lab

Hello, Bluerasberry! We've added Events to IdeaLab, and you're invited :)

Upcoming events focus on turning ideas into Individual Engagement Grant proposals before the March 31 deadline. Need help or have questions about IEG? Join us at a Hangout:

  • Thursday, 13 March 2014, 1600 UTC
  • Wednesday, 19 March 2014, 1700 UTC
  • Saturday, 29 March 2014, 1700 UTC

Hope to see you there!

This message was delivered automatically to IEG and IdeaLab participants. To unsubscribe from any future IEG reminders, remove your name from this list

IEG for Open Access Reader[edit]

Hullo! I know this is close to the wire but the Open Access Reader grant application is being submitted tonight - just flagging up in case Ed hadn't and you had time to look at it again this evening? Thank you! Leela0808 (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Leela0808 I left a short comment on the talk page encouraging the coordinators to proceed. If I criticized it was only to provide an alternative perspective, and not because I had any hesitation to supporting it as it was proposed. If you ever want to chat about then I remain standing by to give feedback on request. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Hey yes - that's great! I think its a really userful overall point and I would hope if the grant is supported it could scope out some of the side issues, perhaps even having to review and report on the problems they present needing to become their own project. Thankyou! The community feedback process will start soon so if you could check in around that and exploring/asking questions with interested commentators that would be great. Ditto if you know users who would want to have input, feel free to share :D Leela0808 (talk) 15:22, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

Hi, thanks for appreciating my participation in the CIS-A2K grant's community review.--Ravi (talk) 12:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Annual Plan Grant page moves[edit]

Hi Bluerasberry,

Thank you for your efforts to make things more clear. Unfortunately, as explained by Tilman on Grants talk:APG/FDC portal/Redesign, this broke a lot of links at a time when they are needed most. Would you consider reverting yourself until a solution is discussed again? The previous move required a great deal of clean up that we aren't prepared for at this time, and some redesign and archiving is in our plans for when FDC is not in review.

Thank you for understanding, heather walls (talk) 17:54, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

When lots of links are broken revert them when you see them. Sorry - I posted at Grants talk:APG/FDC portal/Redesign that I changed what I could but do not have admin rights for something else. I pinged you and the other both. Sorry. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:44, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

not just en...[edit]

We need to remember, imo, that Wiki Project Med is a worldwide venture, and that en:WP:MED is just one medicine project among many. Best wishes, MistyMorn (talk) 18:43, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar and a request for feedback[edit]

IEG barnstar 2.png Individual Engagement Grant Barnstar
Thank you for commenting on Individual Engagement Grant proposals during this recent round! We really appreciate that you took the time to share your thoughts.

To help us improve the IEG program for future participants, would you mind taking this quick 3-question survey?

Thanks again for your help,

--Siko and Haitham, Wikimedia Foundation Grantmaking

en:Wikipedia:DC

Letter petitioning WMF to reverse recent decitions[edit]

The Wikimedia Foundation recently created a new feature, "superprotect" status. The purpose is to prevent pages from being edited by elected administrators -- but permitting WMF staff to edit them. It has been put to use in only one case: to protect the deployment of the Media Viewer software on German Wikipedia, in defiance of a clear decision of that community to disable the feature by default, unless users decide to enable it.

If you oppose these actions, please add your name to this letter. If you know non-Wikimedians who support our vision for the free sharing of knowledge, and would like to add their names to the list, please ask them to sign an identical version of the letter on change.org.

I'm notifying you because you participated in one of several relevant discussions. -Pete F (talk) 22:01, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Art+Feminism IEG Budget[edit]

Hi Bluerasberry, I made a clarifying amendment to the budget. Is this more clear? Thanks! --Theredproject (talk) 03:09, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

IEG/Samskrit Shastra Project[edit]

Hello! I appreciate your approach suggesting dividing into different projects samskrit TEXTS and RESEARCH PAPERS; however, the objective of this project is NOT TEXTS but only RESEARCH papers. Please also refer User:Calliopejen1, who has expressed understanding of this aspect. Hope the issue is clear now. Thanks.-Shubha (talk) 12:15, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I replied at Grants_talk:IEG/Samskrit_Shastra_Project. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:14, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

WMFR crowdfunding[edit]

See for background. :) --Nemo 21:27, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Please fill out our Inspire campaign survey[edit]

Inspire astrocat aqua.png

Thank you for participating in the Wikimedia Inspire campaign during March 2015!

Please take our short survey and share your experience during the campaign.



Many thanks,

Jmorgan (WMF) (talk), on behalf of the IdeaLab team.

23:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

This message was delivered automatically to Inspire campaign participants. To unsubscribe from any future IdeaLab reminders, remove your name from this list

Community discussion on harassment reporting[edit]

There are many current proposals as part of the 2015 Inspire Campaign related to harassment management on Wikipedia. I’ve created a page, Grants:IdeaLab/Community discussion on harassment reporting meant to serve as a central space where the various stakeholders in these proposals and other community members can discuss which methods might serve our community best so that we can unify our ideas into collective action. I encourage you to join the conversation and contribute your ideas! OR drohowa (talk) 01:03, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride[edit]

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!

  • What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
  • When? June 2015
  • How can you help?
    1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
    2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
    3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.


Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

Global user page migration[edit]

Hello Bluerasberry. I deleted your local user pages on all wikis as you requested via Synchbot, and your global user page is now active. You can see the deletion log on your archive page. :) —Pathoschild 02:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

How can we improve Wikimedia grants to support you better?[edit]

Hi! The Wikimedia Foundation would like your input on how we can reimagine Wikimedia Foundation grants to better support people and ideas in your Wikimedia project.

After reading the Reimagining WMF grants idea, we ask you to complete this survey to help us improve the idea and learn more about your experience. When you complete the survey, you can enter to win one of five Wikimedia globe sweatshirts!

In addition to taking the the survey, you are welcome to participate in these ways:

This survey is in English, but feedback on the discussion page is welcome in any language.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 01:23, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Flow research[edit]

Hi, Bluerasberry. You're right, and I really apologize for not talking to you about WikiProject:Breakfast. Flow is still being maintained and supported, so it's not being abandoned. But we absolutely can switch the WP:Breakfast talk page back to wikitext, if you want to. The Flow conversations will be moved to an archive page, and we can move the previous wikitext archive back to the main WikiProject talk:Breakfast.

We have been talking to the communities that have been using Flow. But it's been so long since I've talked with you and the people at WP:Breakfast and WP:Hampshire that it slipped my mind to check in with you. That was foolish and disrespectful of me. I'm really sorry. Let me know what you'd like to do with the Breakfast page, and we'll get it straightened out. DannyH (WMF) (talk) 17:00, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

DannyH (WMF) I like the experiment and I want to continue to create situations where WMF researchers can recruit Wikimedia community members for user data.
Please just post notices when you have them. If you want to continue to collect data, then please do. The situation that I wish to avoid is having community members forgotten, or continuing to provide data that is not being collected or used. I hope that insights from Flow carry over into future research. Thanks - I would voice support for future research if requested. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:19, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Okay, good. Thank you; I appreciate it. DannyH (WMF) (talk) 23:05, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Last call for WMF grants feedback![edit]

Hi, this is a reminder that the consultation about Reimagining WMF grants is closing on 8 September (0:00 UTC). We encourage you to complete the survey now, if you haven't yet done so, so that we can include your ideas.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 19:08, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Project WIN[edit]

Hello,
We are planning a project to improve WikiProject India (English Wikipedia). I'd appreciate if you kindly leave your feedback here --TitoDutta 09:56, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 31 December[edit]

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.

Wmf logo vert pms.svg

As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are beginning the transition to the new policy.

An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.

The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that OTRS volunteers sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain their access. You are receiving this email because you have been identified as an OTRS volunteer and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015, you will lose your OTRS access. OTRS volunteers have a specific agreement available, if you have recently signed the general confidentiality agreement for another role (such as CheckUser or Oversight), you do not need to sign the general agreement again, but you will still need to sign the OTRS agreement.

Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign

If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnum@wikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain your OTRS access. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.

Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 21:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC) • TranslateGet help

What future IdeaLab campaigns would you like to see?[edit]

IdeaLab logo dark orange.png

Hi there,

I’m Jethro, and I’m seeking your help in deciding topics for new IdeaLab campaigns that could be run starting next year. These campaigns aim to bring in proposals and solutions from communities that address a need or problem in Wikimedia projects. I'm interested in hearing your preferences and ideas for campaign topics!

Here’s how to participate:

Take care,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation. 03:33, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Train-a-Wikipedian[edit]

Hello,
Thanks for your continued support to improve Indian Wikiprojects. I want to inform you about CIS-A2K/Train-a-Wikipedian, which I think, is an ambitious project. This month we have just started the trainings. Kindly share your suggestions and ideas to improve the project. You may write here on your talk page and/or Talk:CIS-A2K/Train-a-Wikipedian --TitoDutta 10:14, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

IEG in Colorado[edit]

Hello,

Thank you for your comment on my ieg talk page. I will be happy to share conclusions from this effort. Do keep an eye on it for intermediate progress reports and provide suggestions/comments if you have any.

Thanks again.

अभय नातू (talk) 21:36, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Is there any brochure related to Wiki MED foundation or WikiProject Medicine?[edit]

Hello there,

Last week I met with Doc James in Taipei. I am wondering is there any brochure that we can give out to medical students or professors. Doc recommend me to reach you to provide this kind of documents. It will be nice for us to take these documents a look as an inspiration of promoting WikiMED in Taiwan, thank you. --Liang(WMTW) (talk) 12:56, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

I replied on your page at User_talk:Shangkuanlc#Documents_about_Wikipedia.2C_education.2C_and_medicine. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:41, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Future IdeaLab Campaigns results[edit]

IdeaLab badge 1.png

Last December, I invited you to help determine future ideaLab campaigns by submitting and voting on different possible topics. I'm happy to announce the results of your participation, and encourage you to review them and our next steps for implementing those campaigns this year. Thank you to everyone who volunteered time to participate and submit ideas.

With great thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation. 23:56, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Harassment workshop[edit]

Greetings! You are receiving this message because, at some point in the past, you have participated in a discussion around the topic of harassment. The Support and Safety team is holding a series of consultations gathering feedback on the best potential solutions to the problem. The next stage is a workshop where we hope to narrow the focus to individual actionable ideas and explore how to bring some of these ideas to life.

Best regards, the Support and Safety team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Crowdfunding[edit]

Hi. From which page did you copy the content to Talk:Crowdfunding, and how do you secure that you fulfil the license it was originally released under? -- Tegel (Talk) 18:48, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Tegel en:Wikipedia:Crowdfunding Help please what is the interwiki attribution template? Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:50, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure if there is a template for this. The page that you refer to should be en:Wikipedia talk:Crowdfunding. Why copy the talk page at all? The discussions is not related to this wiki. -- Tegel (Talk) 19:02, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Tegel I thought it was related. That page was the origin of this one. I was going to redirect that one to this one so that discussion could be centralized. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:19, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Inspire Campaign on content curation & review[edit]

WPCube.png

I've recently launched an Inspire Campaign to encourage new ideas focusing on content review and curation in Wikimedia projects. Wikimedia volunteers collaboratively manage vast repositories of knowledge, and we’re looking for your ideas about how to manage that knowledge to make it more meaningful and accessible. We invite you to participate and submit ideas, so please get involved today! The campaign runs until March 28th.

All proposals are welcome - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive feedback on ideas is welcome - your skills and experience can help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign to improve review and curation tasks so that we can make our content more meaningful and accessible! I JethroBT (WMF) 05:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery.

Harassment training[edit]

Hey, I've been reading over some of the stuff you've written about harassment training, and am contacting you in hopes of getting some direction. I am an OTRS volunteer who recently reviewed a ticket from someone who claimed he was experiencing bullying (real world, not cyber) because the image that was being used on the English Wikipedia article for autofellatio looked remarkably like him. He was asking for the image to be removed. The image was within policy as far as its license went, but I filed a deletion request based on the real-world harm that was apparently being done by the image. The nomination was received coolly and looks like it is destined to be declined, but this ends up being irrelevant as I have switched out the photograph with an identity-neutral diagram. However, not long after I made the deletion nomination I was chastised by another editor as being unqualified/ untrained to handle such a complaint, and told I should have passed the ticket on to the WMF instead of handling it myself. As an OTRS volunteer I have already signed a confidentiality agreement, but it is true that I have had no special training on harassment issues and no special qualifications to address this one other than my eight years of editorial experience. My question, then, is this: does this sort of thing— a member of the general public contacting OTRS because of bullying being experienced because of a sexual image used in an article which is within policy and project scope— warrant declining to accept the ticket on the basis of "inadequate training" and passing the issue on to someone at the WMF? Because if that is the case, then no OTRS volunteer is "qualified" to handle any ticket on any matter, since none of us ever receives any formal training on anything and most of the time we do just fine on a wide array of sometimes very personal subjects. The ticket in question included no legal threat, no threat of harm to self or others— only a "Please do something because I am being humiliated and I don't know how to make it stop." I was told by the other editor that I should have explained policy to the client and done nothing so bold as to propose an image for deletion— because I am not trained to do anything more than that, and doing more opens Wikipedia to issues of significant public liability. If that is true, then the OTRS system is a time bomb. I feel like it was far more responsible for me to have taken action to solve the problem that was presented (action which did not include releasing any personal information other than a link to the OTRS ticket, a link that could only be followed by another editor with OTRS access) than to have let the client languish in a deep pool of "I am sorry, I cannot help you, here's some policy to make you feel better." That smacks to me of Brazil. Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks! KDS4444 (talk) 09:07, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

KDS4444 I checked out the ticket. My impression is that the request is not straightforward. I want the person's request to get a good response but they want the removal of a picture which is not them, but which looks like them. This might be a special case, but in general, Wikipedia does not delete content on that basis.
I would call their request a serious harassment concern needing attention from an expert in a relevant professional field. There are no OTRS policies for addressing serious harassment concerns, except that they should be discussed among the OTRS respondents or the Wikimedia community if anyone likes. You started a deletion discussion, and we are talking now, so you have followed policy and done every option available to you.
There are two ways that a ticket can go - either it really requires a expert attention or it does not. As you said, I have been talking with others about the line between these situations. Historically WMF guidance has been to send all concerns about fundraising to them, all violent threats, some legal threats (sort of optional at OTRS discretion), and no harassment concerns unless they include violence. The historical practice is that there is no expert attention available for harassment and that the community should decide these things. Such as things are, I think you have reached the limit of what can be done, because you are discussing the issue in two channels now.
There is a new third option. As of a few weeks ago, you can forward email or make reports to the Support and Safety team. They have not yet defined what they do or what they will handle, but if you want to do everything possible, then alert them as they are the only expert support available to address harassment. There is no need for you to feel the criticism of another Wikipedian because you did everything reasonably possible. The WMF makes no promises to support volunteers or people who write in for harassment, so even if other people told you that this was the thing to do, then that was their mistake. Lots of people expect that there is community support team standing by who knows how to handle these kinds of situations, but the reality is, there is no one in the world who knows what to do and no recognized expertise in this field. Probably the OTRS team are the world's only experienced experts, and the Support and Safety team are #2 in the world for qualification in this space but since they also are willing to take on stress, doubt, and blame, they are the best overall option that the world has to offer. For my own part, I would refer this to them, and I have been sending more people to them. In one sense that team defines their function, and in another sense, they will have to own whatever the Wikimedia community drops on them.
You talked about liability - the Wikimedia community assumes astounding liability on behalf of the international image of the movement. Still, volunteers tend to make the right decisions. I think you are making all the right decisions. I would not call this Brazil because there are big changes every ~6 months to so many policies, and I think over time, the processes are becoming less complicated. Know your limits, do what you can, discuss the problem so that it is not forgotten, and think over time what ought to be done. I am not sure in this case and so many others. More than anything else my preference would be to pass it on to someone who choose to dwell in discussions of sexual harassment and who had professional support to oversee their work in this space. In most organizations that address sexual harassment among other cases, the sexual harassment cases are moved into a different queue for special agents to handle, and I wish that we could do the same thing here. If you ever want to talk by phone or video then email me. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:37, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Open Call for Individual Engagement Grants[edit]

IEG barnstar 2.png

Greetings! The Individual Engagement Grants (IEG) program is accepting proposals until April 12th to fund new tools, research, outreach efforts, and other experiments that enhance the work of Wikimedia volunteers. Whether you need a small or large amount of funds (up to $30,000 USD), IEGs can support you and your team’s project development time in addition to project expenses such as materials, travel, and rental space.

With thanks, I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources 15:56, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Grants:IdeaLab/Effective Engagement with Health Topic Experts using Guided Checklists[edit]

Hi,

Thanks for your endorsement when my IEG was in the earliest form :-) . I put in more details about the project including a draft timeline. I welcome your support and more feedback. Sydney Poore/FloNight (talk) 00:15, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Hello from CIS-A2K Face-smile.svg, we have replied to your comments here. Thanks and regards. -- Tito Dutta (talk) 17:35, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Plagiarism detection[edit]

Hi! You voted for improving plagiarism detection as an important suggestions in the community wishlist survey last year. I'm pinging people who showed interest in that task to tell them we have some suggestions for how things could look, if you'd like to glance at them and give us some feedback. They're available here: phab:T120435#2266283. It's easiest if comments are left in Phabricator, since that's where much of the development is happening, but they can be left on Meta too, of course. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 17:19, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Survey on content curation & review Inspire Campaign[edit]

WPCube.png

Thanks for your participation in IdeaLab during the Inspire Campaign focused on improving content curation & review processes from February to March 2016. I'm interested in hearing your feedback about your participation during campaign, so if you're able, I invite you to complete this brief survey to describe how you contributed to the campaign and how you felt about participating.

Immediate results of the campaign can be found here. Please feel free to review them and let me know if you have any questions about the campaign or the survey. Thanks! I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 02:31, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

(Opt-out instructions)

Participate in the Inspire Campaign and help address harassment![edit]

NounProject Leaves.png

Through June, we’re organizing an Inspire Campaign to encourage and support new ideas focusing on addressing harassment toward Wikimedia contributors. The 2015 Harassment Survey has shown evidence that harassment in various forms - name calling, threats, discrimination, stalking, and impersonation, among others - is pervasive. Available methods and systems to deal with harassment are also considered to be ineffective. These behaviors are clearly harmful, and in addition, many individuals who experience or witness harassment participate less in Wikimedia projects or stop contributing entirely.

Proposals in any language are welcome during the campaign - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive feedback on ideas is appreciated, and collaboration is encouraged - your skills and experience may help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign so that we can work together to develop ideas around this important and difficult issue. With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 17:46, 31 May 2016 (UTC) (Opt-out instructions)

IRC office hour for Wikimedia Foundation copyright strategy[edit]

Hi there - thank you for your participation in the copyright strategy discussion so far! In addition to contributing on-wiki, you may be interested in an upcoming IRC office hour the Wikimedia Foundation legal team is holding to discuss the copyright strategy. It will be on September 15 at 14:00 UTC. More information is available on Meta-Wiki. Thanks! Joe Sutherland (WMF) 00:48, 8 September 2016 (UTC)