User talk:Bluerasberry/Archive 3
IEG in Colorado
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.
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
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,
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.
- Please join us at the Harassment workshop!
- 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)
Inspire Campaign on content curation & review
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)
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
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.
- Submit a grant request or draft your proposal in IdeaLab
- Get help with your proposal in an upcoming Hangout session
- Learn from examples of completed Individual Engagement Grants
Grants:IdeaLab/Effective Engagement with Health Topic Experts using Guided Checklists
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)
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)
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)
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,
IRC office hour for Wikimedia Foundation copyright strategy
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)
Rapid grant final draft
I am about to finalize my rapid grant request. I just wanted to let you know that the grant has been modified. I wanted to make sure this did not change your support.--TonyTheTiger (talk) 15:08, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
A paper on personal attacks in English Wikipedia
Hi! You're receiving this message because you signed up as a participant to the m:Research:Detox project. We just wanted to let you know that some of the researchers on the project have released a paper that uses machine learning to analyze some aspects of the nature of personal attacks in English Wikipedia. The paper can be found on arxiv here. If you get the chance to read it, we'd love to hear your thoughts over on the m:Research:Detox page.
Invitation to Training Modules design conversation
Hello! We are leaving you this message because you have previously indicated that you interested in helping the Wikimedia Foundation Support & Safety team in developing our training modules this year.
We appreciate all the help and thoughts users like you have offered thus far. We would like to encourage you, if you are interested, to participate in the next step of our development: a community consultation about the design and structure of the modules. Note that we're not yet gathering feedback on the content of the modules - a separate consultation about that will be starting soon.
In this "design" consultation, we're looking for advice on things like the best place to host these modules, the accessibility of content, and other potential design decisions. Please feel free to leave any thoughts you have about these things on the talk page. Thanks! Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 18:12, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
2016 Community Wishlist Survey
You’re getting this message because you participated in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey and we want to make sure you don't miss it this year – or at least can make the conscious choice to ignore if it you want to. The 2015 survey decided what the Community Tech team should work on during 2016. It was also the focus of Wikimedia hackathons and work by other developers. You can see the status of wishes from the 2015 wishlist at 2015 Community Wishlist Survey/Results.
The 2016 Community Wishlist Survey is now open for wishes. You can create proposals until November 20. You will be able to vote on which wishes you think are best or most important between November 28 and December 12. /Johan (WMF) (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)