User talk:EGalvez (WMF)

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

If you have specific feedback for the global survey - you can also add your comments on this page: Community_Engagement_Insights/Feedback. Thank you!


wiki is a thankless community ..but the code is good[edit]

your survey

can't sign,,, who says thanks.

O and the stakers..on wiki.. are really professional.!

Test mass message[edit]

This is a test message! Hooray!

06:13, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Re: ¡Haga la encuesta ahora![edit]

No he podido superar el inicio de la encuesta, donde se pide tipear "Wiki": allí queda trabado independientemente de todas las variantes que uno podría suponer se solicitan, con y sin comillas, mayúsculas al inicio o no, etc... --Antur (talk) 01:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Hola User:Antur - ya debe estar arreglado. Muchas gracias por decirme!! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 03:08, 11 January 2017 (UTC) EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 03:08, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Wrong translation[edit]

Hello EGalvez. I have received your message right now. There are some relevant mistakes in the translation (and a missed sentence), please let me fix them for you: ;) --Lucas (talk) 09:17, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Veo que hablas espanol. Si quieres puedes contestarme en espanol. ;) --Lucas (talk) 09:20, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Muchas gracias User:Lucas por tu mensaje. Desafortunadamente - ya he mandando todos los mensajes al italiano :(. No voy a poder arreglarlo. Pero me gustaría saber -- cuál es el error? --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 09:28, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
De nada, bueno, no es muy grave... :) Aquí puede ver las diferencias. Algunas son simplemente "estilísticas", otras varias ortográficas... ;) --Lucas (talk) 09:46, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Global Survey[edit]

Hello, i'm sunymaey and you chose me for the global survey, i'm very grateful but i'm under-age so i can't do it. Thank you anyway. By 🤗 Sunymaey (talk) 14:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Questions for you[edit]

I posted some questions for you at Talk:Wikimedia_user_groups#Recognition_process.

Thanks for anything you can share. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:29, 12 January 2017 (UTC)


Hi Edward, On some talk pages on the Dutch Wikipedia I came across a message of a survey being held. I am a bit concerned by this message as if I would just be active as a user on a wiki, I would not take this message seriously. Already the message is pushing people away from actually taking the survey, as the message provides statements WMF believes in, but the local community does not. I am already flabbergasted by the suggestion the Wikimedia Foundation thinks it is providing actual support to the local community. (Yes, I am aware of what WMF is doing, but locally this is often not seen. And the one way to inform the community was a monthly message that is no longer received.) And reviewing the survey itself I feel disappointed by the questions. In general they do not give the impression to understand the local community and are based on assumptions that are not shared in the local community. And certain questions are strange: "I know how to contact the people I need at the Wikimedia Foundation" On the contact page it clearly reads users answer your questions, not WMF staff. And almost all the questions local users have are answered by other users in the community, as for 99% the Wikimedia movement is built by volunteers. And if local users wish to be supported, local chapters provide much more support, and this support is without the hell of a bureaucracy. But to summarise my concerns, I hope that many many users fill in this survey, but I think by seeing already the message on the talk pages and the kind of questions, that already the number of answering users cause a too large bias as the large disappointed part of the users does not fill in this survey. Greetings - Romaine (talk) 10:11, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Romaine, these are really great points. We decided that we needed to say what the purpose of the survey is for and who is sending the survey in our invitation. Maybe next time we can collaborate with you/other dutch wikipedians on the messaging? It was really, really hard to come up with the right words to use. My hopes and dreams for the future are that we would be able to have a highly collaborative survey that has questions the wmf, but from wikipedians and affiliates as well who want to learn more about their community's they serve. This is just a first iteration :) We want to get better. We want to improve. I've added your notes to the CE Insights feedback page because they are really good points that I want to keep in mind when we design next year's survey. About the assumptions - You should first know that the survey is different for everyone who takes it because we have a lot of questions to ask. So we randomized the questions so each person only gets a few. We definitely know that each community is unique and may not be close to the WMF. We are asking this question mainly because we know that Wikimedians might not care about the wmf, but there might be things that only the WMF can address. We want to know if people know about the wmf, and if they know to get a hold of us if they need to. They don't just need to use the contact us page, they can also use staff email address, or staff user names, as you are doing now :) Thank you for all your ideas! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 18:05, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi Edward, The problem often occurs with messages is that a message does not match with the way how people perceive and experience it. In Dutch we even have a word for this: belevingswereld. (Google Translate does not translate it well.) In general this can be caused by two things. 1. Providing insufficient information and reasoning. It happens too often that it is not explained what the purpose is or what the background is. This does not work, people need background information to understand what is going on. Too often is assumed that people already know certain things. 2. A second problem that can occur is that the message is written from a total different perspective than the one of the reader. Resulting in that the reader does not recognise the described situation.
In the past years I helped a lot of Wikimedia teams to translate (not the language in what a text is written, hut the language of how a text is written) their message they wrote to one that the community understood and accepts. The Dutch community is direct in communication and usually makes quickly clear when she does not like it. The results are clear: with no rewriting a lot of criticism each time, with rewriting thank you messages for making it clear. And with all the criticism, WMF does not get a good reputation.
"I've added your notes to the CE Insights feedback page because they are really good points that I want to keep in mind when we design next year's survey." -> you missed my points.
"Watch out for talking about the WMF in the invitation, since local communities may not know who the WMF is or the community leadership might not agree with the statements being made -- (paraphrasing Romaine)" - I did not say that!! Not even paraphrased! To me this makes clear that my words are not understood.
"We decided that we needed to say what the purpose of the survey is for and who is sending the survey in our invitation." -> That you say that is I think a requirement for good communication.
"Maybe next time we can collaborate with you/other dutch wikipedians on the messaging?" -> I am willing to help improve it, certainly.
"It was really, really hard to come up with the right words to use." -> I do not want to offend you, but reading the text of the message and seeing the reactions from the various users on this message, this message would end up high in list of 10 worst messages. Just changing the words does not solve the problem. To write a good message requires to take the perspective from the reader and thinking what does the local user want to read. The current message does not give the users the feeling that they are taken seriously.
"My hopes and dreams for the future are that we would be able to have a highly collaborative survey that has questions the wmf, but from wikipedians and affiliates as well who want to learn more about their community's they serve." -> I have been looking at how users reacted to the message, and I think WMF created with this message a problem for itself: users are now even less agreed/interested/helpful to fill in a survey.
"You should first know that the survey is different for everyone who takes it because we have a lot of questions to ask." -> I think it are still too many questions.
"We are asking this question mainly because we know that Wikimedians might not care about the wmf, but there might be things that only the WMF can address." -> I know this. Most local users on Wikipedia do not. This kind of stuff probably should have been mentioned in the message. In the message is very vaguely explained why the survey is taken, and I am active for many years, search for background info, talked to WMF staff, and I can guess for a large part the background, but local users do not. For them an alien spaceship landed on their talk page, and users ask: what are they doing here?
"We want to know if people know about the wmf" -> I think for WMF this wish is a good thing. But this approach does not seem to match. I think you would get much better qualitative answers by just asking a few people if they are willing to participate in an in-depth interview. The current approach feels more like shooting a canon ball to a mosquito (Dutch expression). The local community feels themselves on their own, having to rely on themselves. WMF takes care of the servers, software, donations, some users may know also about grants, legal things, and if you are lucky also about Wikipedia Zero and Harassment. There is a huge difference in how the local community sees WMF and in how WMF sees WMF.
And you mention affiliates, how WMF is serving those. Besides getting grants, we do not see any support. The only other thing we get from WMF is a pointless overdose of bureaucracy. I can't speak for other affiliates, but speaking with some of them I get the same impression of how they experience it.
"and if they know to get a hold of us if they need to" -> When should users contact WMF? Nothing seen about this in the many questions. When do users have the need? This in general remains a mystery seeing the message and the questions.
Am willing to believe it is hard to write a good message, but I can write you one in just one hour (if I have all required information). I do not think this is something anyone can. Yes, anyone can write a message, but not everyone can write a successful message. Maybe it would help if I analyse the message for you:
  • "The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey." -> This is how an advertisement agency is asking people to respond in commercials, spam, etc. Reason 1 not to respond. You know Wikipedians are fighting every day against spam and advertisements in Wikipedia, to keep Wikipedia factual and neutral. Our own organisation (they do not think WMF is their organisation, that is a problem for WMF!) is doing the same as advertising companies, they just do not understand us! Would I start this way? no! This information is already said in the header + in the big link below.
  • "We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki..." -> The first 5 words of this sentence are already in the first sentence, header, etc, as these words are a description of what a 'survey' means. Then we are supporting your work -> first thought: we never see you. Also this would raise many many question marks because they do not understand about what you are talking. Context is completely missing. And off wiki, for WMF perhaps it looks like many people visit activities/meetings offline, but I think that is less then 1% of the users, and mostly only the most active ones. See people think this is not relevant for them. Another 3 reasons not to do the survey.
  • "and how we can change or improve things in the future" -> During the year, a lot of users complain that too many changes happen. As well as that they do not understand why things that work good have to be changed. They think: Why more changes? We get sick of all the changes. (Reason 5)
  • Reference: "This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy." -> This provides zero extra information. But as already made clear below, references on talk pages are never a good idea. (Reason 6)
  • "The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation." ->This is a promise that can't be made true. This sentence suggests that if one user says X goes bad, WMF will adjust this X directly. This can't be true. People do not believe this. Compare this sentence with the many times used commercial slogan: "If you buy this product, it will change your life immediately." People do not believe commercials, they fight every day against companies that try to put their commercial nonsense on Wikipedia. Users do not believe this and recognise this as commercial, two reasons not to buy this product.
  • "You have been randomly selected..." -> This message has been posted 620 times on just only the Dutch Wikipedia! With a core community of about 500 people... randomly? It is more like that the one who did not get a message are randomly unselected. If users are active and communicate with other users, they just can't miss this message. It is almost everywhere... This is not users experience as "randomly". (Reason 9)
  • "we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community" -> What do you like to hear? What you like to know does not get clear from the message. Besides "support" is as vague as possible, it is not recognised. And do users recognise themselves in being part of the Wikimedia community, a part not. (Reason 10+11)
  • "To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey." -> I would consider this the sentence I would not fall over. Wrong thinking! On the Dutch Wikipedia already some comments were made. A reaction was that that person does not wear t-shirts, do you have any Wikimedia waistcoats? Or reactions like why only 20 t-shirts, every participant in the survey should get one. And then I thought, a part of the Wikipedians who go to meetings value a Wikipedia t-shirt. But does the general majority value it? I doubt that: they often work secretly, not knowing their environment knows about it, or very limited, and are not the extrovert/proud users. So this does not provide a motivation, but another reason not to take the survey.
  • "Legal stuff" -> No, this is nonsense. You ask members of what you consider as your community, and then throw on them "legal stuff", then you are not talking to your community. This is what you also see in advertisements in the small notes. Basically you say: we do not trust you, you can't trust us, and therefore we have to use legal stuff to stay save. N trust in what you consider your own community? (Reason 13)
  • "No purchase necessary" -> If you give away something, it is free, unless like an advertisement... (Reason 14)
  • "Must be the age of majority to participate." -> A part of our community is under 18, so those community members are excluded... To answer questions and in a rare case receive a t-shirt you must be 18 years or older? I do not understand why. And how is this going to be checked, which privacy infringements will take place? (Reason 15+16)
  • "Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105." -> Who else? This survey came from WMF right? Sponsoring indicates an external partner. Or is the survey not from WMF? This is just strange, and another reason.
  • "Click here for contest rules" -> I started reading a message of a survey, and I end with reading it is a contest. Is giving away t-shirts a contest??? (Reason 18)
  • "The survey is available in various languages" -> That a survey is available in French, Spanish, Russian, Portuguese, German, Italian and other languages has zero relevance for Dutch speaking users. This sentence suggests the survey is available in Dutch, but I haven't seen a Dutch survey. Wrong expectations created (Reason 19).
  • "will take between 20 and 40 minutes" -> So much time? 40 minutes for the simple question of ... This this time investment worth it considering what I as user get out of it? No. (Reason 20)
  • "This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement." -> Users dislike third party services very much, a big reason no to participate. (Reason 21)
  • "It will also record your IP address and location information." -> No thanks! (Reason 22)
More than 20 reasons why just the message is problematic for users. To summarise how users have reacted in just one day time on nl-wiki:
  • Already 25 times the message has been removed, including remarks like "spam".
  • Another 20 users complained somehow about the references, including removals.
  • Multiple users indicate they do not want to read, will not read, and never want to receive this mailing nor future mailings. Including messages like that this message belongs in a trash can.
Some users noted they can't fill in this survey as they can't access it. Here a big error occurred, and here added twice.
And a user is asking which research methodology is used, what setup is used, how anonymity is guaranteed, giving some t-shirts away is likely considered a different cultural thing instead of just giving all the participants something, disappointing that no translation has asked to the Dutch speaking chapters, and the total unawareness of what kind of support is provided to users besides infrastructure maintenance.
I think the appreciation rate of the WMF went down. The community is not amused. Romaine (talk) 10:09, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • And, if you would be so kind to actually care, do not use reference tags in any user messages anymore. You bloated thousands of user talk pages across Wikimedia projects with unrelevant references. Even on your talk page there is at least one example why that usage was unacceptable. Saint Johann (ru) 15:53, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi Saint Johann - I hear you - Thank for that feedback. I was concerned about this, but some Wikipedians told me it would be the way to go. It might be that for Russian Wikipedia we should not do this? Do you know how many people are annoyed by the references? I am taking all feedback here about how we can improve this process. Thanks :)--EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 23:31, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
The issue, I think, is that the references drop all the way to the bottom of the page (under other sections). On the English Wikipedia (I don't know about others) there's a {{Reflist-talk}} template that can add a references section just for that talk section, meaning they don't go wandering off elsewhere. Samwalton9 (talk) 22:39, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Samwalton9! So maybe using references should only be for English Wikipedia next time? --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 23:31, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure, but on the English Wikipedia adding {{Reflist-talk}} to the end of the message would keep the references within that section. Not sure if other wikis have an equivalent. Might be best to just avoid footnotes altogether if possible. Samwalton9 (talk) 00:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Avoiding references on the talk pages is certainly advisable. On more wikis this is not wanted. The English Wikipedia template is not common elsewhere so far I know. Not on the wikis I am active on. Romaine (talk) 06:02, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Just use references groups --Wargo (talk) 10:32, 14 January 2017 (UTC)


Please don't spam my user page again. Hchc2009 (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Same here! Please dont spam my talk page on Talk 21:57, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Same here. Stop this shit. --Edoe (talk) 22:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Same. Please don't send the planned 2nd message. And any other. Writing here as I shouldn't have to send an email to stop this. Thanks. Od1n (talk) 02:27, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello Hchc2009 , Rovoobob, Edoe, Od1n - No problem. Consider yourselves removed from the lists. I understand that many folks are not happy with this kind of messaging. Any feedback you have about process for this kind of survey, I am all ears. We want to try to make this work for you. If you have feedback please leave it here. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 05:04, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello again Hchc2009 , Rovoobob, Edoe, Od1n, I should have also asked -- can you share why you call this survey spam? I am more than happy to listen to your thoughts about what I can do to make it less "spammy" :) The point of the survey is to learn how we can help you do what you do. Thanks! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 07:11, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

EGalvez, if you're unfamiliar with spam, there's a wiki article on it here, [1]. In this case, a paid editor such as yourself is putting out unsolicited electronic messages en masse (I've left a copy below), which I've certainly not asked to receive. As I say, please don't contact me again. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it's simple, the User-Talk page is meant for one-on-one conversations, you are using it for mass announcements. Your purpose may be honest, but the method is not acceptable. Find other ways. --Edoe (talk) 00:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
EGalvez (WMF) can you remove that survey from my talk page please?--Rovoobob Talk 22:59, 21 January 2017 (UTC)


Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hchc2009 (talk) 08:19, 14 January 2017‎ (UTC)


Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

(Included hidden subtext:)
Message sent by User:EGalvez (WMF)@metawiki using the list at Community Engagement Insights/MassMessages
(↑ The whole above message was sent to you via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:25, 13 January 2017‎ (UTC) --Info added by .js 18:50, 15 January 2017)

Message fixed by adding <references/> by Stobaios 23:13, 13 January 2017‎ (UTC)

Use of Tracker in Survey[edit]

I could not open the survey page. My browser blocks sites with Website visitor tracking, so i won't contribute to that crappy stuff. --Stobaios (talk) 23:09, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Stobaios - Thanks for letting me know. We are using qualtrics to help us know if we are getting feedback from smaller wikis. We dont have another survey tool at the moment. Would you like to respond to the survey in another way? (One example might be I send you the questions in a Special:Emailthisuser?) Any other feedback you'd like to share about the foundation using this kind of technology? Thanks! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 04:56, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Site keeps crashing. Please fix. Neferkheperre (talk) 00:53, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

hi Neferkheperre can you say more? What device are you using? What browser? Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 04:56, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
I have Linux Mint OS using Google Chrome. What I was getting is error message. When I just now went to survey page, it worked completely. Whatever happened seems to have fixed itself. Thank you for your attention. Neferkheperre (talk) 14:07, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

It is disingenuous to write that "we don't have another survey tool". Alternatives which respect privacy (in EU sense, for instance) are readily available, see also phabricator:T94807. It might be that user tracking is an unstated requirement for the WMF, while for the users it's a bug. The privacy statements are also often omissive in this regard, cf. wmf:Category talk:Survey privacy statements. --Nemo 10:51, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Apart from the fact that you created a mess on hundreds of talkpages on Wikimedia Commons which you haven't fixed yourself. I agree with Nemo. Why you use qualtrics (does the Foundation has to pay for qualtrics)? Please use a free and open source survey tool on a wikimedia server. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:49, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Steinsplitter and Nemo. Nothing is off the table to not change for this survey. There are so many moving pieces to this survey (from the tool we use, questions, translators, analysis, everything!) that we need to be very open to change and we would like to make sure that as this project evolves, we have a system we can all agree on.
To clarify, we do not require the use of tracking. One of the biggest reasons it is strongly preferred is to discourage users to take a survey more than once. I am also not sure if user tracking is the only way to make sure this doesn't happen, but I am open to other alternatives. One idea is we would have a completely anonymous survey on qualtrics and perhaps a system on the projects (like board voting tool) that vets user accounts before they get access to a link so we can measure response rates. Just one idea, I'm sure there might be others.
More broadly, we do not have another survey tool ready to be used like qualtrics. The security vetting, implementation, and learning required to use a new survey tool takes time. Qualtrics is what we have now and what we know how to use. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't be open to exploring other tools. I am trying to think through how to have a process to the major changes/improvements for this survey process next year. I'm not sure what that evaluation would look like yet, but its sounding like we need to come up with a process to prioritize among the different needs. Some of the things I'm already hearing: translation, survey software, question design, communications/community engagement, invitation design. When this process starts, I would be more than happy to invite you. Let me know if you're interested.
Finally, someone is working on a bot to fix the references "mess". It's coming soon hopefully!
Thanks! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 18:30, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Your mass messages with malformed references[edit]

Hi Edward, the mass messages you sent out are containing <ref></ref>-tags, that cause problems on talk pages, because the references always stick to the last section, so they get separated from your message and get muddled into the following messages.[2] [3] Could you please fix them. Thx --.js 06:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi User:.js - thanks for that feedback. Im not sure what I can do at this point about this except never do it again. We have heard feedback from other wikis as well that we should not use ref tags. I have added this feedback to Community Engagement Insights/Feedback. Let me known if there is anything else I can do. Thank you!! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 07:14, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
You're welcome. In some wikis you can add {{Reflist-talk}} to the bottom of your message, in all others <references/> (what is not optimal but better than leaving it like that). And, yes, next time better choose another format than refs on talk pages. :-) --.js ((())) 07:23, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Using <ref name="abc"> and <references name="abc"/>, where "abc" is a unique string (e.g. the section header), should work anywhere. --LPfi (talk) 20:54, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes, adding {{reflist-talk}} to the end of the section is what you need to do, at least on the English Wikipedia. Please do so. Jonesey95 (talk) 04:05, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Opted-out of message delivery[edit]

Emblem-very-very-evil.svgFireIcon.svgEmblem-very-very-evil.svg Your mass-message didn't respect the "Opted-out of message delivery"! Your userpage is therefor doomed to burn in the cache-memory of an 8080-processor. FireIcon.svgEmblem-very-very-evil.svgFireIcon.svg -- Innocent bystander (talk) 08:51, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Innocent bystander - I was under the impression the opt-out category automatically excluded users? Was I wrong? Thanks for your help. --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 09:20, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
That was what I also thought. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 09:23, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
@Innocent bystander: If you want to exempt your talk page from Mass Messages, then you should add that category to your talk page, not your user page. Matiia (talk) 19:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
They have done that correctly at Category:Opted-out of message delivery, but now I see that you are referring to wikidata:Category:Opted-out of message delivery. So it is necessary to put your talk page for each and every WM-project into the local Cat?! That is a very user-unfriendly procedure, especially as all this is not mentioned on the Cat pages, and the Cat only exists in very few (19) projects. And it shouldn't be too hard to teach the bot to respect userpage entries. --.js ((())) 06:32, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
@Matiia: The user_talk is a place where anybody can edit and bots moves content to subpages. The user_talk is therefor not the best place to put anything you want to keep there! I know of a better thing than opt-out-categories and templates: UNINSTALL THIS BOT! IF YOU CANNOT PREVENT NIGERIAN PRINCES FROM SENDING SPAM WITH IT, IT SHOULD PROBABLY NOT EXIST AT ALL! -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:28, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
@.js: well, it's mentioned on its help page, but you have a good point. Feel free to open a bug proposing a global opt-out.
@Innocent bystander: Bots shouldn't move categories from user talk pages, and if a user remove it, you can easily put it back. Matiia (talk) 17:49, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
@Matiia: I prefer another workaround. You massmessage me ONLY when I want to be mass messaged. Otherwise, you stay out of my user_talks. I have ~700 user_talks only on THIS account, and I have several. There are both flaged and unflaged bots, a special account for Commons and a former unflaged sysop-bot. I do not know how many user_talks each account has, but there are thousands. I can more or less count on being spammed every time WMF wants random users something. Instead of an "Opted-out"-category, there should be an "Opt-in"-category. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 18:17, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

No english[edit]

Ho sento, però entre les meves llengües no hi és l'anglès. Us podeu adreçar a mi en català, francès o italià i, si no hi ha més remei, en espanyol. Gràcies.

Je le regrette, mais parmi mes langues, l'anglais n'y est pas. Vous pouvez m'adresser vos messages en catalan, français ou italien et, s'il n'y a pas aucune autre solution, en espagnol. Merci.

--Claudefà (talk) 11:18, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Hola Claudefà - La encuesta esta disponible en español, frances y italiano. ¿Lo pudiste abrir? ¡Gracias! =) --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 01:19, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Writing a message containing references[edit]


Thank you for your message about the survey. Nevertheless, when sending a message containing references, please consider using the <references /> tag at the very end of your message so that references are displayed at the end of the message, rather than at the end of the page. That's more convenient since user talk pages don't have a Footnotes section at the bottom, and therefore references are displayed at the end of the last message of one's user page. It's of course a detail. Regards, — Automatik (talk) 18:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Stop immediately your sending messages with references to user talk pages or reverts your sendings . The references destroy content on the user talk page. --Orik (talk) 08:06, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, can you understand at all what you have done? [1]. Hope this helps. --Pxos (talk) 11:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


  1. Why is this line here?

Sendings to user talk pages with references[edit]

Stop immediately your sending messages with references to user talk pages an revert your sendings . The references destroy content on the user talk page. --Orik (talk) 08:06, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

You can see in the prevoius topic how your references work. My edit put at the end of the topic is because of your references hidden in the content.
Ask please experienced users before doing such big surveys and remove the highfalutin words about your behavoiur as an second Einstein. This is only ridicolous. --Orik (talk) 08:19, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm here for the same. If you will introduce references, please add {{reflist}} at the bottom or something, but it really looks strange, and breaks TP sets up when they've got. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 13:38, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, putting inline cites in posts to talk pages is a pretty dumb thing to do. At least include {{reflist-talk}} in your post so the references stay with your post, but better would be to give the link in the text as an external link rather than as a reference. SpinningSpark 12:12, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

It's not cool at all to have references floating around discussion pages. You can check how I solved it (for next time) in this edit. Ciao! --Ruthven (talk) 09:46, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Orik, Ganímedes, Spinningspark,Ruthven, Pxos ! I am really sorry about this and have learned my lesson.... I can't use "{tl|reflist}}", because templates are not necessarily available on all wikis. Do we know if the "references group" tag is available on all Wikimedia wiki's? That might be a wonderful solution to this. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 02:03, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Please do not use references on talk pages at all. As Spinningspark proposed, use other means. It is astonishing, that a member of meta.wikimedia starts a global survey not knowing the principles of editing on wikipedia, which is an editing project. Stop your survey and learn at first editing. --Orik (talk) 07:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm tripping across this left messily on user's talk pages, it actually gets worse once the user has other messages. Could you sort out a mass fix please? If necessary raise a request somewhere like bots/requests. -- (talk) 12:32, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Duplicated mass message[edit]

On plwiki users received multiple messages. At least two but in some czases in all languages :] Wargo (talk) 10:35, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Wargo - Thank you for letting me know - Do you have an example? I'd like to cross check this with our lists to see what went wrong. Thank you for letting me know!--EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 18:48, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
huge and test before sending --Wargo (talk) 19:36, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

You really should include a {{reflist talk}} on this template, to keep the refs from perpetually populating on the bottom of talk pages of especially new users who do not know how to fix the problem. Timothyjosephwood (talk) 14:46, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

It's enough to see the lines below this, coming from your example, several messages up this. Please stop sending messages and fix the problem. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 14:52, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Also possible to fix locally by the communities using a bot, see for example. I already wrote a message on Meta that someone would fix those messages in this wiki. --Stryn (talk) 14:57, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


I participated in your survey but was rather shocked that there is not a single issue in your question list that interests me as an active Wikipedian. On the other hand, there are grossly misleading questions. The worst example is the question about cooperation with "libraries and tech firms". These are two totally different kinds of partners. I am a strong enemy of cooperation with tech firms but a friend of cooperation with libraries. By mixing this up, you make the answers to the question worthless. Please: if you want to do a survey, you should show at least a little interest in what people might think about WMF. This kind of survey won't be any good because it simply follows a preconceived and fixed WMF-agenda.--Mautpreller (talk) 20:15, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Mautpreller for that feedback and thank you so much for taking the time to fill out the survey! Here are my responses to your questions:
  • We actually did include a question that asks what people think of the WMF! But not everyone got the same set of questions, so you might not have seen that question. We did this so that the survey is not excessively long.
  • I also agree with you that unfortunately the questions we ask are based on the interests of the WMF and not necessarily the interests of wikipedians/wikimedians. I personally don't want it to stay this way. It is our first time doing it using a new process and we are just getting started with this new system. We took a different approach to doing this survey, where staff at the WMF proposed questions of their interest and based on their goals -- sort of like a scholarship application. Those questions were reviewed/improved and added to the survey. My hope is that as the survey evolves, anyone (wikimedians, wikipedians, affiliates, etc.) can propose questions or get involved with which questions get asked. I don't think its healthy for the WMF to be the only one coming up with the questions.
  • Also, about the tech companies and library question - you have made me realize that we might need to re-write the question so its clearer what we are asking. I can flag to fix this question next time. The idea is to keep on improving :)
If you'd like to stay up to date, feel free to sign your name at the bottom of this page. You can also leave other ideas you might have on the feedback page. Happy to chat here too of course.
Thanks so much! :) --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 01:54, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

wiki survery[edit]

i am so busy i can take out 10 seconds, wiki is a thankless community ..but the code is good.. and wikipedia has many one sided articles like the one on oxy coin and another for art forgery! i got to get back to a job that says thanks!

Ref-talk template[edit]

Hi EGalvez – this is just a gentle reminder to use the ref-talk template on the en Wikipedia whenever you send messages such as this one. That will contain the citations to the bottom of your message and will not add them erroneously to the bottom of a user's talk page. Thank you for your consideration, and Happy New Year!  Paine Ellsworth  u/c 17:01, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Paine Ellsworth - i have received this feedback quite a bit :) I may use the <references group> tag instead since not all wikis have the reflist template. Thank you for your help and feedback! Much appreciated :) --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 02:06, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Sì, para la próxima vez por favor no te olvides lo que sugirió Ruthven (usar un codigo como <references group="nombre" /> o al menos un <references />, pero no un template que puede no existir in algunas wiki), estoy arreglando páginas de discusión en toda :) --Lucas (talk) 06:54, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
@EGalvez (WMF): As someone has already noted above, the Ref-talk template most probably will not work in every wiki (for instance, we don't have it in Bulgarian Wikipedia, and it will be useless there. However, you may consider trying the (universal) <ref> tag with the additional parameter group=
Text text text <ref group="specific-ref-group-id"> ... </ref> 
Text text text

; References
<references group="specific-ref-group-id" /> 
It is similar to the parameter name= used for muliple referencing. The use group= parameter is that it generates separate reference lists for citations and miscellaneous footnotes and you can control the location where it appears, in the end of *your* message, not at the bottom of the user's talk page. You can also see the Extension:Cite documentation. Hope this helps, Spiritia 21:13, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


Thanks for the survey my friend, regards!!--Lomeno 24 (Contact me here) 22:12, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the thank you, Lomeno 24! :) --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 02:07, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Your welcome!!--Lomeno 24 (Contact me here) 20:51, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Translation in Italian[edit]

Pd: la traducción de el survey en italiano era mal hecha y muy ambigua, la próxima vez deja un mensaje en el "village pump" (bar) o en mi página de discusión si necesita ayuda. ;) --Lucas (talk) 07:02, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I know it's not your fault, and I know it's a bit too late but here you'll find a better translation (well, I wouldn't define it as "better" or "proper", but just "a translation"). Sorry to say, but the first one made by Giaccai was simply awful... Where can I find the text used for the surevy? That one was the most problematic. Thanks. --Lucas (talk) 07:28, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Another little suggestion about links and their accessibility. It's always better to write a text like:
The second type of links are abiguos and deprecated by international usability and accessibility guidelines. Thanks. ;) --Lucas (talk) 07:37, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Living Country in Survey[edit]

Thanks for inviting me to join this survey. There is a problem. One question in it asks "which country are you living now?" (Just like that means, I can't remember all the same words.) And I can just choice "Refused to answer" because "Taiwan" isn't on the answer list.

I think that will confuse other users because in Chinese Wikipedia, editors come from Taiwan is much more than China, but we can't find our home when both China & Hong Kong are in the list. Can you help us to respond the problem?--Reke (talk) 18:59, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

HI Reke - I am sorry for this mistake. I've added Taiwan. --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 17:19, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you so much. --Reke (talk) 05:56, 25 January 2017 (UTC)


Saludos Edward. He completado la encuesta. En la sección EDICION, la Actividad 6 de 11: carecía de encabezado en español. Mejor suerte para la próxima.--Sanador2.0 (talk) 15:14, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Muchas gracias Sanador2.0 - voy a copiar su comentario a otra página para que este documentado :) muchas gracias por tomar el tiempo para decirme y por completar la encuesta. Saludos! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 18:09, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Broadcasted messagges to users talks[edit]

Hello. Please do not send messages to users talk with references like this [1]. There is no a reference section in users talk so the references will be attached to the last section. IF you can't at least add a <references/> tag in your message but it is not the best solution. Thanks. Regards--Pierpao (talk) 09:47, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

  1. As you can see it can be a messy thingummy :)


testing section

Probable illegal lottery[edit]

Edward, I've worked for decades in the field of market research. I just wanted to give you a friendly note about the prize drawing that you're holding for the Community Engagement survey. I'm not a legal expert, but I've worked closely often enough with them to point out that because your sweepstakes drawing (for t-shirts) demands a consideration (completing a survey), without an alternate form of entry (such as filling out name, address, and phone number on a post card), it would likely be interpreted by the courts as an illegal lottery. I'll assume that you can find out more about this from the legal professionals in your office in San Francisco, but you might also find this handy. Basically if there is consideration, chance, and a prize, that's a lottery -- and the WMF isn't authorized to run a lottery. - Thekohser (talk) 15:29, 27 January 2017 (UTC)


請恕我無法參加〈wikipedia:zh:User talk:S099001#在這全域調查中分享您作為一名維基人的見解和意見〉,我尚未成年(在臺灣,成年年齡是18歲),依據您在<ref>標籤內的描述,我不具備資格。--S099001 (talk) 08:17, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

ウィキメディアンとしてのご経験とご意見をシェアする世界的調査 の表示について[edit]


Learning Quarterly: February 2017[edit]

L&E Newsletter / Volume 4 / Issue 11 / February 2017
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

Leave your mark on Meta!
Inspiring ideas and learning patterns you can contribute to.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Survey Reminder[edit]

Hi! About Community Engagement Insights/MassMessages/2016 - Reminder: "this survey will close on 31 January 2016" - sure? --Kaganer (talk) 11:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Kaganer - Nice catch. I am actually not quite ready to seek translations on this page yet. Any way we can suppress translations? i'll mark the page as a draft for now as well. --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 04:27, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Ok, this page was marked as "translations is discouraged". --Kaganer (talk) 20:49, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Traducion en Italiano[edit]

Hola EGalvez, talvez no viste mi precedente mensaje. Quería ayudar a traducir/corregir la versión italiana del survey? Donde se puede hacerlo? No encuentro el texto específico. Gracias. ;) --Lucas (talk) 07:16, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey problem[edit]

You included two references in your mass message without including the {{ref talk}} template. This means that the references show up at the bottom of the talk page, and unless your message is the last message on the talk page, they obviously show up in someone else's post. It took me about 10 years to discover this, by the way. :-) It looks as though the lack of a template works differently here. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey. Doug Weller (talk) 12:26, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

No need to fix MassMessage error for ruwiki[edit]

I saw this page with ruwiki substitution strings. But there's no need to fix it in our project--we have done it with bot. Jack who built the house (talk) 14:23, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Jack who built the house! User:Quiddity (WMF) - just a heads up that the ruwiki is fixed already :) Thanks --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 18:48, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Your survey[edit]

Hi EGalvez. I see you have been posting requests for people to participate in your survey. Looking at all the complaints, I can only imagine it is not going well. I would like to know if this is even an official survey/ contest. It is amateurish, poorly presented and the translation in Portuguese reads like it was written by a 12-year old to be read by other 12-year-olds. In my experience, serious projects by the Foundation are posted on the translators' project page for proper translation and vetting. Did you follow this process? Thank you and regards, Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 06:49, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Rui Gabriel Correia! I very much appreciate your feedback. The survey is actually going well despite what you might see on this talk page :). We have about 3000 responses so far and are hoping to get a few more. I appreciate your feedback about the portuguese translation. Because of the software we used for the survey, we had to do the translation on a google sheet rather than using the translation extension on Metawiki - there was just so much to translate it would have been hard to do the import/export into qualtrics. We asked community members to help us translate the survey, but we didn't get much help for portuguese (although we got a lot of help for French, Spanish, Arabic, and German). Ultimately, we ended up having to pay for the portuguese translations. I am wondering - are you from Brazil or Portugal and does that make a different with how you find the translation? Also - what is the "Translation project's page?" I am not aware of this page. I have been mainly sending message to the translators list (translators@). Also, I want to add that this is the first time we have done this survey in this way and it will be annual. Each year we will get better at this process. For next year's survey, we are not planning on changing the questions substantially, so perhaps one thing we can focus on is fixing the portuguese translations. What do you think about this? I can add this to the Feedback page about the project. --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 22:37, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi EGalvez. Thanks for your reply. The whole thing needs to be redone. Just an example, look at "Purpose": You don't mix things up, with expressions of appreciation etc. You state the purpose clearly and succintly. And a purpose is defined with an active verb (the purpose is to). Presently there is no purpose merely a description "members of Wikimedia communities can give feedback". And it must be enunciated from the perspective of the person driving the project, so it cannot be "communities give", but "obtain from the community". It just does not look professional, which is why I asked if this is an official Foundation project. It surprises me that with so much at stake in terms of image, the Foundation would release this without it haveing been properly vetted by people qualified to do so. Even the register of the language needs to be addressed - take this: just who are you speaking to in this tone? Ooh, yipee! Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 08:06, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Just went through your own edits and see that you have been changing the original text of your invitation to participate. This, I see, is based on the numerous complaints from the community, which bears out the fact already pointed out that this survey lacks in professional standards. The fact that you are now changing the text after members having already participated is extremely troubling. I would like to know who else but you worked on this and worked on the text. And offering (20) t-shirts? Really? This is your idea how how to get people to take your survey seriously? Rui Gabriel Correia (talk) 08:27, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Fixing the survey references[edit]

Hi all. This error was partially my fault. I tried to fix it myself but ran into difficulties. I've now requested assistance, and the fix is currently being added. (all the details) I'm very embarrassed about this. My apologies to you all for the error and distraction, and the delay to resolving it. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 06:25, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

The problem with footnotes on talk pages[edit]

Hey Edward, you probably already know that you owe a few people a drink at Wikimania for forgetting to put a <references /> tag at the end of your mass message, right? :-) Gnom (talk) Let's make Wikipedia green! 13:39, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi there! I've had to add <references /> to a great number of talk pages following postings such as this one. So I wholeheartedly support the feeling expressed above. In the future you may even get better results to the surveys following better proofreading. Best of wishes.--Paracel63 (talk) 17:24, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi Gnom and Paracel63 - I appreciate your kind way of letting me know about this problem :) We are working on a fix for this. Perhaps, if you find me at a conference, you have to say "fix my references" to unlock an easter egg ;). No promises though! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 17:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
;-) --Gnom (talk) Let's make Wikipedia green! 18:31, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for caring to read the comments and trying to fix the issue/issues.--Paracel63 (talk) 19:37, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

New translations[edit]

I aswered here: User_talk:Lucas#Help_with_another_translation.3F (I am writing here just because I forgot the ping ;-). --Lucas (talk) 00:42, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Spam run[edit]

See here. I have now had to block the message bot for an hour on nl-wiki before our whole community is flooded with spamreminders with the annoying reference fault again (read a bove the "we are working on it"<sigh>). This is utterly unwanted. Many users complain since they did not ask for this to happen and nuw you repeat it even. Regards, MoiraMoira (talk) 16:45, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

I can confirm previous message. The way how this MediaWiki message delivery bot is used is 'abuse. If someone is not able to handle rights (like the use of this bot well), this right should be taken away. Romaine (talk) 17:08, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi MoiraMoira - Thanks for messaging. I did not use references this time. We can ask Quiddity (WMF) how the fix is going. I understand this can seem like spam, however, we don't have another way to message people in a personal way. I'd be more than happy to work with you or someone else from nlwiki next year to find a better solution. We need to continue making software improvements for the projects and the best way we can reach a lot of users to learn what decisions to make is by using something like a survey. Thanks --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 17:28, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Isn't there a way to opt-out? That would probably be a good solution. People who still want to receive such messages do, and people who don't don't. Regards, Xxmarijnw (talk) 17:50, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
No it is the other way around. You will have to ask people to opt-in next time EGalvez. You can do this via a message in nl:WP:K. Next time I trust that a next run will be done only to those who have opted in. Otherwise we'll have to take this elsewhere I am afraid. I also trust that once the deliverybot is unblocked you will stop this run on nl-wiki. MoiraMoira (talk) 18:00, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks MoiraMoira I will see what I can do. Is it possible for you to give me more time? Thanks --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 18:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I really don't understand why just global banners are used for these kind of messages. You want to reach everybody, that is what global banners are for. Even if people opt-in, it is highly anoying to be remembered on your watchlist who are on there ... Akoopal (talk) 19:26, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I agree with Akoopal. For these calls global banners are way more appropriate, and probably more effective as well. Trijnsteltalk 21:57, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Spam messages with notes[edit]

Hi EGalvez, if you plan to post any more mass-messages in the near future, would you then be so kind as to not include notes, or, if you really can't do without them, include a provision so they will get displayed immediately under your spam? For the second time you messed up a lot of talk pages on the Dutch Wikipedia.

Another solution would be to send a really short message with a link to the page where we could read more, and where you could also include as many notes as you would like. The last thing you want to do by sending these mass-messages is to annoy people and you just succeeded in doing this big time. Hope this helps for planning your next events. Thanks for taking notice. Wikiklaas (talk) 17:21, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Wikiklaas - I did not use references in my message this time. We are working on a fix for the last message we sent. Perhaps I should pause sending this until the fix is completed? --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 17:29, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry, EGalvez. Those were indeed the old notes, still there from your previous mass-message. Wikiklaas (talk) 21:25, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
No see above. Stop this run (period). Opt in rule first otherwise this is unacceptable on nl-wiki and we can and will take this further so you cannot do these kind of mass messages any more. And that includes your account with us. Next time this happens your editing rights on nl-wiki will be suspended. MoiraMoira (talk) 18:02, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi MoiraMoira I am not sure it is possible to stop the message after they've been sent, but I have messaged other staff to see what we can do, but will need more time to figure it out -- it is still the weekend for many of us. Otherwise, I am hearing you that for nlwiki, we must use opt-in next time. Thanks. --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 18:28, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! MoiraMoira (talk) 19:28, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
++ annoyance at use of <ref>, but nice that you have already addressed this. - Amgine/meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news 00:57, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

please look at my contrib's[edit]

y there is period (ful stop) on sections 1-2 but no in 3+?? 22:02, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Survey ending 28th of February 2017[edit]

Ciao mr(s) Galvez,

Today you decided to write a request on my Dutch talkPage to participate in a survey with the warning last reminder while you never minded me before... Weird. Another weird thing is the first question: to type the word "Wiki". Who you were thinking talking to with this question: an idiot who is not able to copy and paste? So there a reason (apart the length of ±30 minutes) not to answer your questions. In bocca al lupo anyways and kind regards from Amsterdam, Netherlands, the city of 180 nationalities,  Klaas `Z4␟` V:  07:48, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Gracias EGalvez, por avisarme de la extension de tiempo para hacer la encuesta, saludos Alexav8 (talk) 15:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
@KlaasZ4usV: The word "wiki" was clearly a simply anti-bot system, there's no reason be mean or unpolite (although I agree that it should be better explained). --Lucas (talk) 06:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
So you guys are against bots? Do you know how many bots are happily running around on the various WMF-projects doing thigs that could be done by humans as well (or even better)? There are (were perhaps?) even bots who paste Welkome-templates on talkPages... Kind regards from Leidsebuurt, City of 180 nationalities, Kingdom of Netherlands,  Klaas `Z4␟` V:  07:17, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
KlaasZ4usV, I am not against bots, they're a life saver sometime, but I definitely don't like automatic generated answer to a poll. It was just a conjecture, by the way. Kind regards from Italy. --Lucas (talk) 10:41, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi EGalvez, on 14 January 2017 you wrote this: Hello Hchc2009 , Rovoobob, Edoe, Od1n - No problem. Consider yourselves removed from the lists., and today you still did this. Why would you do that if you said you removed me from the lists?? I don't want to participate in any of the surveys.--Rovoobob Talk 10:09, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Rovoobo I am very, very sorry! I had tried to remove you but for some reason I couldn't find your username but just realized what went wrong - Your username here is "Rovoobob" but your username in your wiki is "Rovoobo" without the b- I am very sorry - a silly mistake. I did remove the others. Thank you for checking in on this - I feel bad I did not fix it the first time. --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:13, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
OK. Thanks.--Rovoobob Talk 08:38, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Re: Help with another translation?[edit]

Hello Edward, Fringio did a very good job with it. ;) As you know (considering your "thank you"), I fixed and localised the messages just a little bit more. But what concern me is the text of the survey (questions, answers, etc.): they are ambiguous, unclear and sometime mistaken. Is the original text on translatewiki or elsewhere? Can I help you in translating it properly? --Lucas (talk) 00:38, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Lucas -- I would be more than happy to have your help with this :) However, since we are nearing the end of the survey for this year, perhaps I can reach out to you in a few months to fix the questions we will use again next year? I don't have a timeline yet, but will be working on this in the next few weeks. --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:16, 24 February 2017 (UTC)


I did the survey as you requested, but I have no indication that it has been successfully submitted. Such things usually have a "Submit" button on the last page. LynwoodF (talk) 10:53, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Request to remove your mass message rights[edit]

Dear EGalvez (WMF),

Since you continue your spam runs I asked for the removal off your mass message rights. Regards, Natuur12 (talk) 14:23, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

This Month in Education: [February 2017][edit]

Wikipedia Education Globe 2.pdf
This Month in Education

Volume 6 | Issue 1 | February 2017

This monthly newsletter showcases the Wikipedia Education Program. It focuses on sharing: your ideas, stories, success and challenges. Be sure to check out the full version, and past editions. You can also volunteer to help publish the newsletter. Join the team!

In This Issue


Featured Topic

Newsletter update

Common Challenges: Time is not an unlimited resource

From the Community

Medical Students' contributions reach 200 articles in innovative elective course at Tel Aviv University

Wikilesa: working with university students on human rights

An auspicious beginning at university in Basque Country

The Wikipedia Education Program kicks off in Finland

The Brief Story of Mrgavan WikiClub

Citizen Science and biodiversity in school projects on Wikispecies, Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons

From the Education Team

WMF Education Program to be featured at the Asian Conference for Technology in the Classroom

Opportunities to grow in Oman

An invitation to participate in the "Hundred Words" campaign!

Education Collab updates membership criteria

In the News

Students Can Learn By Writing For Wikipedia

Online communities are supercharging people's careers

Using open source to empower students in Tanzania

Signpost Special Issue: Wikipedia in Education

We hope you enjoy this issue of the Education Newsletter.-- Sailesh Patnaik using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:54, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

:RE:Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]

Hello @EGalvez (WMF)! I address you with respect to your message you left on my talk page on Commons. I'm Italian and I not speak English, I tried to translate the message with the Google translator but, this translator, produces horrible translations, so that I understood very little of your message, I'm sorry! --Nicholas Gemini (talk) 20:53, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

About your message "Comparta su experiencia y retroalimente como wikimedista en esta encuesta global"[edit]

That message dated January 2017, you sent to several users in spanish wikipedia used <ref></ref>. I think that if the use of references in a message to a user is absolutely necessary, you should add {{listaref}} at the end to prevent them from remaining below the discussion page, interfering with later message sections. This is only a suggestion to improve the legibility of such pages. Greetings --Antur (talk) 02:34, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Antur ! I realized that I made a very annoying mistake and I apologize. I will not use references ever again on talk pages. Thank you for letting me know! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 22:49, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

This Month in Education: [March 2017][edit]

Wikipedia Education Globe 2.pdf
This Month in Education

Volume 6 | Issue 2 |March 2017

This monthly newsletter showcases the Wikipedia Education Program. It focuses on sharing: your ideas, stories, success and challenges. Be sure to check out the full version, and past editions. You can also volunteer to help publish the newsletter. Join the team!

In This Issue

Featured Topic Newsletter update

Overview on Wikipedia Education Program 2016 in Taiwan

From the Community

High School and Collegiate Students Enhance Waray Wikipedia during Edit-a-thons

Approaching History students as pilot of Education program in Iran

An experience with middle school students in Ankara

Wikishtetl: Commemorating Jewish communities that perished in the Holocaust

From the Education Team

UCSF Students Visit WMF Office as they start their Wikipedia editing journey

Meet the team

In the News

Från dammiga arkiv till artiklar på nätet

If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription.

The new issue of the newsletter is out! Thanks to everyone who submitted stories and helped with the publication. We hope you enjoy this issue of the Education Newsletter.-- Sailesh Patnaik using Saileshpat (talk) 19:07, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Reference on talk pages[edit]

Hi EGalvez (WMF)

Your mass-messages include ref-tags. Have you noticed that they keep sticking to the bottom of pages?

As long as your mass-message remains on a talk page, this clutters the last section on that page with your stuff. --Jura1 (talk) 05:24, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jura1 Is this on your personal talk page? I can remove it from yours if you'd like me to - which project is the message on? You can also typically archive messages on talk pages. Thanks --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 22:47, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

EGalvez regards to wikipedia..wikimedia..SURVEY ...very very thankless..i edited an article to get scolded.!- a good quote from a nameless former user[edit]

a thank you is just way way too much for anyone.!

not a fun group at all ..extremely cold..

Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your tireless contributions of ...!! keep up the great work..! NOBODY SAYS THANKS;:: THIS IS THE sad truth for the wiki community! very thankless.! but thanks for asking about what i thought. a barnstar for your hardwork and constant dedication to this worldwide project EGalvez
Thank you anonymous user! Much appreciated :) --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 22:45, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Guianan version of Wkipedia[edit]

Hi, I'm french but I learned english and a lot languages alone, so it's already been a few months since I registered the proposal of the Guianan Wikipedia Project [1] but nobody checks or gives me a final decision about my project ! Please, can you at least take a look or talk about this to someone who takes care of these projects ? Thanks for your understanding !


your post on my talk page & formatting[edit]

Hi there, Last January (sorry, I've been busy) you posted "Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey" (which I can't figure out how to link here). It has two references at the end which I'm wondering if there's any way to format so that they stay with your post and don't end up at the bottom under other subsequent poster's posts. Thanks very much.--Philologia Sæculārēs (talk) 13:27, 28 April 2017 (UTC) p.s. Or how to add a Reference section that is anchored to the bottom of my user page so that people's "new topics" will appear above it. --Philologia Sæculārēs (talk) 13:33, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Philologia Sæculārēs! Thanks for letting me know. I've removed them :) --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 22:45, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

This Month in Education: [April 2017][edit]

Wikipedia Education Globe 2.pdf
This Month in Education

Volume 6 | Issue 3 | April 2017

This monthly newsletter showcases the Wikipedia Education Program. It focuses on sharing: your ideas, stories, success and challenges. Be sure to check out the full version, and past editions. You can also volunteer to help publish the newsletter. Join the team!

In This Issue

Featured Topic

How responsible should teachers be for student contributions?

From the Community

Cairo and Al-Azhar Universities students wrap up their ninth term and start their tenth term on WEP

Glimpse of small language Wikipedia incubation partnership in Taiwan

Key to recruiting seniors as Wikipedians is long-term work

Education at WMCON17


Western Armenian WikiCamper promotes Wikiprojects in his school

Building a global network for Education

From the Education Team

Mobile Learning Week 2017

If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription.

The new issue of the newsletter is out! Thanks to everyone who submitted stories and helped with the publication. We hope you enjoy this issue of the Education Newsletter.-- Sailesh Patnaik using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:18, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: May 2017[edit]

L&E Newsletter / Volume 4 / Issue 12 / May 2017
Learning Quarterly


Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

Leave your mark on Meta!
Inspiring ideas and learning patterns you can contribute to.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:52, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Broadcasting messages with footnotes[edit]

Regarding your surveys: When broadcasting messages to en:wikipedia talk pages, which contain footnotes, please include {{reflist-talk}} at the bottom of your message. [1][2] Staszek Lem (talk) 19:48, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


  1. Your the footnotes will be restricted only to your subsection
  2. Otherwise it creates inconveniences, such as confusion for readers of the very last section of the talk page.
Hi Staszek Lem! Thank you so much for letting me know about this. Others have told me the same. I am very sorry that this happened and will definitely use a reflist template like that in the future, or just never use references again. Thanks! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 22:42, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
It would be great if you also fixed the talk pages which continue to be affected. You can use pywikibot for the purpose. --Nemo 13:18, 28 June 2017 (UTC)


Can you add the page of Wikivoyage Association to the Wikimedia user groups template? Thanks in advance. --RolandUnger (talk) 06:06, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

hi RolandUnger - Thanks for asking. The user group was there, but the logo wasn't. I've just added it. Thanks! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 21:18, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
@EGalvez (WMF): eh, but why that's linked to Main page instead of it's own page? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:39, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

User:Baskervill (Azerbaijani wikipedia)[edit]

Hi, Mr. EGalvez (WMF)! I have a complaint from a Baskervill user who works as an administrator in my Azerbaijani Wikipedia. This user has not implemented any action against the rules grossly violating the rules in the following places:

Please take action against this user.--Corc vaşington (talk) 06:03, 7 August 2017 (UTC)


Hi! regarding the notice you recently posted (Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey), please compare the following versons of this talk page:

Notice how in the first version the references from your "Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey" section are at the bottom of my " Proposal with legal aspects" section?

Now compare the second version, where the references are in the right place.

In the future, you may wish to use the reflist-talk template to avoid these sort of problems. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:13, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

I see that you have already been told this twice, first in the "Survey" section then again in the "Broadcasting messages with footnotes" section. You really need to go back and fix this on every talk page that you have messed up. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:21, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
There are many more notices about it, but over 6 months ago already. They (some WMF users) have tried to fix them globally, but unsuccesfully I think. I fixed them all by myself on fiwiki using AWB. Stryn (talk) 13:55, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Template:Reflist-talk appears to exist on just 22 wikis, so it is not a good approach.
Stryn, I have overheard staff talking about this problem, and I am under the same impression as you: some progress, but incomplete. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:03, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
I will try to [find help to] complete this cleanup, as soon as possible. Sorry again. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:11, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: August 2017[edit]

L&E Newsletter / Volume 4 / Issue 13 / August 2017
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

Leave your mark on Meta!
Inspiring ideas and learning patterns you can contribute to.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:14, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

This Month in Education: September 2017[edit]

Wikipedia Education Globe 2.pdf
This Month in Education

Volume 6 | Issue 8 | September 2017

This monthly newsletter showcases the Wikipedia Education Program. It focuses on sharing: your ideas, stories, success and challenges. You can see past editions here. You can also volunteer to help publish the newsletter. Join the team! Finally, don't forget to subscribe!

In This Issue

Featured Topic "Wikipedia – Here and Now": 40 students in the Summer School "I Can – Here and Now" in Bulgaria heard more about Wikipedia

From the Community

Klexikon: the German 'childrens' Wikipedia' in Montréal

Wikipedia is now a part of Textbook in Informatics

Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 02:24, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

This Month in Education: October 2017[edit]

Wikipedia Education Globe 2.pdf
This Month in Education

Volume 6 | Issue 9 | October 2017

This monthly newsletter showcases the Wikipedia Education Program. It focuses on sharing: your ideas, stories, success and challenges. You can see past editions here. You can also volunteer to help publish the newsletter. Join the team! Finally, don't forget to subscribe!

In This Issue

Featured Topic

Your community should discuss to implement the new P&E Dashboard functionalities

From the Community

Wikidata implemented in Wikimedia Serbia Education Programe

Hundred teachers trained in the Republic of Macedonia

Basque Education Program makes a strong start

From the Education Team

WikiConvention Francophone 2017

CEE Meeting 2017

Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · For the team: Romaine 02:05, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: October 2017[edit]

L&E Newsletter / Volume 4 / Issue 13 / August 2017
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:45, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

This Month in Education: November 2017[edit]

Wikipedia Education globe
This Month in Education

Volume 6 | Issue 10 | November 2017

This monthly newsletter showcases the Wikipedia Education Program. It focuses on sharing: your ideas, stories, success and challenges. You can see past editions here. You can also volunteer to help publish the newsletter. Join the team! Finally, don't forget to subscribe!

In This Issue

From the Community

Hashemite University continues its strong support of Education program activities

Wikicontest for high school students

Exploring Wikiversity to create a MOOC

Wikidata in the Classroom at the University of Edinburgh

How we defined what secondary education students need

Wikipedia Education Program in Bangkok,Thailand

Shaken but not deterred

Wikipedia workshop against human trafficking in Serbia

The WikiChallenge Ecoles d'Afrique kicks in 4 francophones African countries

From the Education Team

A Proposal for Education Team endorsement criteria

In the News

Student perceptions of writing with Wikipedia in Australian higher education

Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · For the team: Romaine 17:23, 1 December 2017 (UTC)