- 1 Wikisource User Group
- 2 Wikisource User Group and Community Poll
- 3 Lost blog
- 4 Upcoming IdeaLab Events: IEG Proposal Clinics
- 5 Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 31 December
- 6 Harassment workshop
- 7 Auerbach's comment
- 8 ARB mail
- 9 A Woman of the Century
Wikisource User Group
- Translate this WsUG invitation (thanks to Aarti for writing it!) into the to the languages you know
- The invitation is meant to be delivered to this list of wikisourcerors, check if we should add someone else!
- Read the new version of the WsUG page, and, if you feel like, add your thoughts about what should we do as a group on the talk page.
What do you think it's the first priority as a group of wikisource users, and what would you like to see accomplished? We'd very much like to understand what wikisourcerors want :-) --Micru (talk) 14:31, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
Wikisource User Group and Community Poll
Hi GorillaWarfare. You receive this message because you signed the Wikisource User Group page: the User Group, as you probably know, is being evaluated by the AffCom, and they asked some questions that involve all interested users (as you are :-). Could you please take a moment to read these questions and answers for yourself? It is very important. Moreover, make sure you read and review the Wikisource community poll: we would like it to be filled in by as many users as possible, and we need really your help for that. If you want and can translate it, please write it here. Please contact us if you want to help: Wikisource is an amazing project, and it can be much more amazing if we all work together :-) Thanks! --Aubrey (talk) 08:55, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Your (old) blog has been down for a while now: can you please do something about ? If the blog is irrecoverably lost, please recover the reports and GSoC-related stuff from caches, archives or whatever and drop the text on wiki. Regards, Nemo 23:34, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- Fixed. – GorillaWarfare talk 23:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. There are more on mediawiki.org  and elsewhere, please check all the wikis. With http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html in mind, I do wonder what forced to make the ?p= shortlinks unfunctional and not to redirect from blog/ to the new subdomain, my condolences for the catastrophe. --Nemo 08:45, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Upcoming IdeaLab Events: IEG Proposal Clinics
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 (gvarnumwikimedia.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.
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation
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!
For the record, I had encouraged Auerbach to ask about that because I did not see and he did not recall having mentioned Gamaliel publicly right before Gamaliel threatened his job. Given that it was one tweet in a reply he may have overlooked it as I did and it is quite plausible for him to forget a single tweet. The other comments you cited all came after Gamaliel's repeated contacting of Auerbach's employer with bogus claims about his supposedly objectionable views, so that hardly counts against his remark since the obvious point of his query is what prompted Gamaliel to suddenly threaten his job. Him tweeting about Gamaliel and you responding may be what got Gamaliel to check Auerbach's page, though it hardly warrants the reaction he had especially since it wasn't a hostile remark. I presume Auerbach saw Gamaliel's comment on Meta because he, like me, keeps an eye on Wikipediocracy. Of course, since Gamaliel wasn't directly pinged in that tweet it is still possible he wouldn't have seen it and was instead tipped off by a member of the Committee about Auerbach's e-mail. It does make it less certain that this is what occurred, however. Just thought I'd illuminate things so you can start climbing out of his throat.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 04:33, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
|Hello, GorillaWarfare. Check your email—you've got mail!|
A Woman of the Century
- @Slowking4: Oh cool, thank you! As long as they end up properly catalogued I don't think it was wasted effort :) GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:28, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
- yeah, when they say " and the women in this encyclopedia may share nothing noteworthy beyond being in the same book. Although we do have Category:Encyclopædia Britannica", we all know what that means. but the old methods of maintenance categories are being overtaken by wikidata. a project with a code of conduct, lesser notability, and queries of article subjects by reference work. i would recommend it to you for backround worklists. cheers Slowking4 (talk) 00:50, 12 July 2019 (UTC)