User talk:Tony1/Archive 1

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

Your FDC page edit[edit]

[1] I believe that you have changed 1-2 years (misreading it as 12 years) to 12 months. I suspect the correct edit was to insert some other dash. I believe you should return that to its original state; further down on the same page, it is made clear that the commitment is for 18 to 24 months. Incidentally, enwp MOS standards are pretty much deprecated on this project. Risker (talk) 13:36, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

It's not my prejudices, Tony. It's the fact that people on this project don't appreciate their watchlists being bumped because of changes that don't make a substantive change to the document. Remember, every single person who has that page on their watchlist got an email telling them that you had made a change to the page. Risker (talk) 15:38, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Is this an argument against fixing sloppy language? The whole point of a wiki is that text can be improved by anyone, at any time. When I found hyphens here, dashes there, inconsistent date formats, and upper-/lower-case tangles in the section titles, I judged that it was worth fixing. Professional standards in the basic text – just simple things like consistency – promote professional standards in the movement activities (or am I being old-fashioned?). Tony (talk) 16:29, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
What language did you fix, Tony? Perhaps I missed that in amongst the fancy dashes, most of which cannot be made by normal keyboards, particularly ones attached to mobile devices, which are the main editing tools of about 10-15% of our editors now. (Keep in mind their editing interface is considerably different from our desktop one.) I suspect that there are a fair number of people who would take umbrage at the insinuation that they're writing in an unprofessional way because they don't completely follow the enwiki MOS; after all, very few global organizations use that format for anything but their glossy public-facing publications, certainly not for their day-to-day internal communication. I hope you can see that there is a difference between an article in a Wikipedia and a global community discussion page on Meta. This project (Meta) is global, and that means we need to be tolerant of the fact that the preferred guidelines from one project are not the only acceptable manner in which to edit. I'm suggesting that yes, you should relax a bit. The content was clear, despite the fact that a few letters were capitalized differently than one would see on enwiki, and the dashes were a different size. The more serious concern on this project, I would suggest, is trying to get information translated into various key languages. Risker (talk) 17:12, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry you've decided that simple, professional typography that is required by all of the major style guides in English is "fancy". And I can't quite see the point of griping and criticising me for improving the readability and appearance of the page, rather than thanking me. A few letters were capitalised in a way that was inconsistent within the page—nothing to do with en.WP MoS, just basic copy-editing for any kind of consistency. So perhaps you should be doing the relaxing. Wherever I see inconsistent formatting and language within the same meta page (including variety of English), I'll be harmonising it. That is the least required, unless you believe the project should aim for sub-professional text. As for the gripe that Windows users don't have a dash key, there's a button right below the edit-box, or you can wait for someone else to gnome it right, and rather than criticise them for raising standards, thank them or stay silent—either is fine. I agree that translation is a more serious concern, but I don't translate; so again, why am I being beaten about the head? Tony (talk) 17:59, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

RE: Referendum report[edit]

Replied at enwiki. --Michaeldsuarez 12:40, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Report, August 2011 c-e[edit]

FYI, reverted a small piece of your change: diff --Jeremyb 16:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Draft FDC proposal to the Board - your thoughts requested[edit]

Hi Tony,

I’m a consultant on the Bridgespan Team, working with the Wikimedia community to develop the Funds Dissemination process for the Wikimedia movement. We’re in the process of drafting the recommendations that Sue will give the Board of Trustees on what the FDC and the Funds Dissemination process will look like. As we do this, we’re seeking community input on the draft, and on the process more broadly. You’ve been mentioned several times as someone who might be able to provide great perspective on this process. If you’re interested, it would be great if you could take a look at the draft proposal and provide any thoughts that you have. Or, if you’d rather talk over your thoughts, I’d be happy to do a call with you – you can leave a message on my talk page or email me if you’d prefer that!

Thanks in advance!

Meerachary TBG (talk) 22:21, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your edits and feedback[edit]

Hi Tony,

Thanks for the edits, comments, and questions. We appreciate the input. I kept most of the edits but did revert back a few where I thought the meaning had been changed. As of now, we'll be closing off the draft to editing so Sue and her team can make their final round of edits for submission to the board. Definitely feel free to continue to comment on the talk page if you have further feedback.

Thanks again-- Meerachary TBG (talk) 15:35, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

The proposal form[edit]

Hi Tony, I've replied to your comment on the form talk page. Apologies again for the misunderstanding. heather walls (talk) 15:43, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

FDC question[edit]

Hi Tony. Please could you clarify your question 3b - "The efficiency with which funds would be spent "on the ground" in terms of the anticipated goals of each funding request?" I'm not sure that I understand what you mean by 'on the ground' funding? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:29, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Here, on the ground refers to the details of what would be spent on what, and what employees would be responsible for what. Too much detail would be annoying for all parties, of course, but I see no example of the right level of detail that would make me think ... ah, they really do need that person to be full-time, and 0.6 seems about right for a person with that skill-base. Or ... isn't that rather a lot of paid employees to organise wiki-conferences? Tony (talk) 23:19, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Staff Proposal Assessment - Open for Feedback[edit]

Hi Tony,

We're working on finalizing the Staff Proposal Assessment for the FDC, and I wanted to let you know that it's up and open for feedback if you'd like to take a look, copy-edit, or provide additional feedback. It is located here if you would like to take a look. We'd love to get any thoughts / feedback by Friday August 24th so that we can take a look and incorporate feedback before the end of the month.

Thanks in advance for any thoughts you have!

Meerachary TBG (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the sensible editing on Grant Advisory Committee. Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 17:18, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you very much for correcting the flow funding pilot project proposal. TSB (talk) 09:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Grants:WM RS/Annual plan 2012-2013[edit]

Hello Tony. How are you doing. I just stopped to let you know there is one question for you. Bye, bye --MikyM (talk) 01:09, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Nice[edit]

[2] Glad to see you poking about on a project that I am on again. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 14:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

E-mail[edit]

It doesn't bounce. I never receive your mails, but I receive everyone's else. Everyone see my mails (since they answer they) but if you preffer you can use the direct mail [berialima@gmail.com]. Béria Lima msg 01:39, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

WMVE Start-Up[edit]

Hi Tony1, just for your information: In Venezuela, Bs.F. are represented with stops between thousands and commas to separate full numbers from decimals, just like this: 1.216.451,25 so, even though it might be nonsense to you..it is mandatory for us. --Maor X (talk) 18:16, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Not in writing them in English. Sorry, you'd use dots as decimal points and commas for thousands. If the application were written in Spanish, French, German, etc, we'd be insisting on the other way around. Tony (talk) 01:29, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Report Card[edit]

Hi Tony, sorry for late response, I should check my user talk page more often. I am less involved with the Wikimedia Report Card. I do supply raw data, but presentation is now done by Dan Andreescu. I will pass the suggestions on to him, and assuming your mail address hasn't change in last year, cc you. Resuming processing of full dumps on the new server is still on the back of my mind, but I have to confess it never reached first priority yet. I need to rework scripts so that a job can run for several months (wp:en) and in the meantime monthly updates based on stub dumps can go on without interference. Cheers, Erik

WCA election for Chair[edit]

A reminder that some interesting pieces have been written whilst serving time in gaol...

Hi Tony, it might be good for the community to have a piece on Signpost about the context of the election, to help promote nominations and to openly address the issue of my en.wp ban. I am unsure how a direct piece involving me stands against my ban ("banned is banned") but I am open to advice and we could always arrange someone else from the Council to make a relevant statement if I am not allowed to.

Anyway, drop me a note if you are interested. Cheers -- (talk) 12:48, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Fæ, thanks for your message. Regrettably, I've been in real-life work gaol for months now—mornings, afternoon, evenings—so can't contribute to the movement. This will change on 5 March, the last in a series of horrible deadlines, so life will return to normal for many months from then onwards. I've communicated your note to the Signpost's editor in chief, The Ed17. Tony (talk) 06:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi and thanks for the heads-up. We are covering Commons' PotY this week in "News and notes", but will possibly give it attention next week, depending on events. In the meantime, we will note the coming election in our "In brief" section. Regards, Ed [talk] [en] 06:43, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
No worries. It might be neat to pose any questions for me (or others) openly on Talk:Wikimedia Chapters Association/Elections/2013 Chair if you would like to see any clarifications. Cheers -- (talk) 09:49, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Your comment on project closure proposal[edit]

Ideally I would like to encourage not biting entire projects like the proposal you effectively supported — it demonstrates lack of understanding of the unique bits and twits Wikinews has shaped during the years — as it is may be worse than the behaviour of the person you criticised at the proposal page. While that person shapes something, even in not in line with your views of etiquette and atmosphere, I suspect that the part of your work which aids toward closing Wikinews shapes broadly licensed output neither directly nor indirectly. Gryllida 08:58, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

FWIW I commented there suggesting to resolve the issue locally with Wikinews. I am unaware of any Wikimedia policies enforcing etiquette across projects; if an Administrator is not civil, it can only be resolved locally, and requirements for project closure are more strict. I, personally, suffered cruel behaviour of an Administrator on one non-English project; it had only 5 admin/crat folks and appeal was not feasible. I got information that nothing can be done other than locally. (I later had a break and found common language with that folk, luckily.) Gryllida 09:11, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Seeing that your have not started talking to me but keep doing your thing, I resorted to asking for help. Progress of that may be of interest to you. Gryllida 05:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

"Progress of that may be of interest to you."—Not really. Tony (talk) 09:48, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Your opinion[edit]

... and how you repeatedly voice it, this time around here (1, 2).

As I linked you to a village pump section earlier, local news could be removed from main page (using a Category:Local tag) once the traffic is decent. This is for one simple reason: Freshness has a higher priority than absence of local news on the main page. Were people willing to implement your view, it would hurt the freshness of stories on the main page, or it would have to be smaller.

Hopefully I'd help you to not put your time into asking the "what is local news doing on the main page" question over and over. Thanks. --Gryllida 10:32, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Gryllida, while it's true that I was shocked at the toxic social environment at en.WN, and at the steady stream of refugees leaving it, and the fact that hardly anyone remains to do the key work, my concern at the moment is with the quality of the product and the use of donors' funds. It doesn't help that no one will engage with criticism, and therefore with ways of improving the project. I'm interested to hear you talk of the local vs the fresh. I'm afraid the weird mixture of the big-picture and the local is very strange. There are far too few people involved. And the quality is a real problem. At the very least, it needs more people and proper oversight by some kind of editor in chief, even if that position rotates. I'd be hooking up with the people who run and edit the main-page-linked unfolding events (ITN) at en.WP ... but then, someone seems to make a living out of rallying the troops against en.WP. That's a quick step into the grave. Tony (talk) 10:36, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
At Wikinews, I think the lack of bias -- which is so overwhelmingly common at mainstream media -- is some progress. It is achieved by not paying people for good stats of their stories: they go away from the "make it sensational and publish asap" paradigm most modern news sources adhere to, while miss accuracy or don't get it comprehensive enough. Larger traffic would help to approach the problem of removal of local news (please don't hinder the ThematicOrg progress, it is intended to help that happen in the first place).
Sorry, I missed the "against en.WP" point in your message.
I would expect articles to be free from factual errors, but if they're not, you may see it in the bylaws: people must and will issue a correction when it's due. It would appear as a separate line at the article top. If you collect some factual errors in articles and prove each article wrong, reviewing policies would inevitably be reviewed to avoid such errors, and quality would improve. --Gryllida 10:47, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Having reread it again, I'd like to ask you to clarify what exactly Wikinews goes against Wikipedia: I can see they have different policies, i.e. replace AGF with NA (Never assume), but I'm not seeing any anti-WP cooperation at Wikinews; even if a few Wikinewsies disagree with how Wikipedia works, they do not carry out actions that paint Wikipedia in bad light, and they do hold faith in its ability to resolve issues locally. What are you referring to, here? --Gryllida 11:05, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

vote[edit]

plesae step up ; damn —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BreannaWren (talk) 18:59, 17 May 2013

Re:The SignPost[edit]

Dear Tony, I haven't received it. Care to send it again? Many thanks, Raystorm (talk) 09:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I've checked the spam folder too, but nothing. I am getting the email notifications of you editing my talk page, so it's kinda weird. In any case, I've emailed you, maybe that will work. :) Kind regards, Raystorm (talk) 09:51, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Didn't get it, I'm afraid. :( Raystorm (talk) 09:59, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Iberoconf 2013[edit]

Dear Tony, I'd like to ask for your comments on our pending grant for Iberoconf 2013. Thanks in advance, --ProtoplasmaKid (WM-MX) (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: The Sign Post query.[edit]

Hi, I need to admit like the previous poster, that neither I have received an original letter with questions. However, I got a correcting one and as my candidature seems to remain valid (I have not received any official yes or no but my submission could be simply deleted, which did not happen), so probably I should answer.

I will try to elaborate on it within a few hours, O.K.? aegis maelstrom δ 14:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Aegis. But please not on-wiki. I'll try emailing you again, and do let me know if there's still a question-mark over your candidature. The story won't be published until next week's edition. Tony (talk) 00:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

vocal concert[edit]

Hi Tony,

Please have a look to my draft about vocal concert in Kiev on May, 15 - wmua:Vocal concert 15-05-2013. I`m going to ask for it`s publication on WMF blog, though I feel it needs some stylystic editions an maybe it is not clear enogh terminologically. Could you help me with it? --A1 (talk) 15:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I published this article as Draft in meta m:Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/Free vocal music concert in Kiev. --A1 (talk) 20:54, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Next time[edit]

Tony, I do hope that you'll give serious consideration to participating in the Election Committee next time around. Your eye for detail and organizational skills, not to mention your ability to write clearly and succinctly, would all be a good fit. Risker (talk) 03:43, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Risker, for your kind words. Tony (talk) 04:32, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Grants:WM UA/Programs in Ukraine 2013[edit]

hello! thank you for your questions. please, look at our submission --アンタナナ 00:06, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Help test better mass message delivery[edit]

Hi. You're being contacted as you've previously used global message delivery (or its English Wikipedia counterpart). It doesn't feel so great to be spammed, does it? ;-)

For the past few months, Legoktm has built a replacement to the current message delivery system called MassMessage. MassMessage uses a proper user interface form (no more editing a /Spam subpage), works faster (it can complete a large delivery in minutes), and no longer requires being on an access list (any local administrator can use it). In addition, many tiny annoyances with the old system have been addressed. It's a real improvement! :-)

You can test out MassMessage here: testwiki:Special:MassMessage. The biggest difference you'll likely notice is that any input list must use a new {{#target:}} parser function. For example, {{#target:User talk:Jimbo Wales}} or {{#target:User talk:Jimbo Wales|test2.wikipedia.org}}. For detailed instructions, check out mw:Help:Extension:MassMessage.

If you find any bugs, have suggestions for additional features, or have any other feedback, drop a note at m:Talk:MassMessage. Thanks for spamming! --MZMcBride (talk) 05:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

thanks[edit]

Hey Tony -

I just wanted to thank you for the detailed set of questions you put up on WMPH's annual program plan proposal. I have a large number of questions about the proposal that I'm hoping to get the shot to write up within the next few days, but you hit on a lot of the questions I had, and your work will allow me to further tailor my remaining questions. Thanks for putting as much work in to GAC stuff as you do, I'm sure I'm not the only person who appreciates it. Kevin (talk) 04:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Upcoming IdeaLab Events: IEG Proposal Clinics[edit]

Idea Lab
Idea Lab

Hello, Tony1! We've added Events to IdeaLab, and you're invited :)

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

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

Hope to see you there!

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

Slight changes for Rintis[edit]

Hi Tony, just want to notify you that there are slight changes in Wikipedia Rintis proposal. Please kindly assess it. Thanks. :-) --Ricky Setiawan (talk) 04:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia: Rintis is approved[edit]

Hi Tony, I would like to inform you that grant proposal of Wikipedia:Rintis is finally approved by WMF! I also would like to thank you for all of your comments and inputs, they are all significant for the project. We will work hard to make sure that the project can be finished successfully and give a big impact to the community. Thank you again Tony! --Ricky Setiawan (talk) 09:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

You're very welcome, Ricky. Tony (talk) 09:52, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

WikiTrans grant proposal[edit]

Hi Tony. I only would like to ask you to read again the original grant request before you spread words about don't springboarding to another languages. You should search the keyword "Danish". I think that new read will help you to understand th real meaning of the grant request. Also reading of the talk page can help you to make opinion about attempts of the applicants to clarify this issue. Regards! --KuboF (talk) 22:00, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for Comment: Evaluation portal redesign preview[edit]

Dear Tony1 - The Learning & Evaluation team at the WMF is currently redesigning the Evaluation portal! Before we take the next steps in the redesign process, we'd really like to hear your thoughts and feedback about the new design. You have been involved in evaluation portal over the last year and can help us design an improved site.

When you have a moment, please visit the link below for screenshots and more information. We'd really like to hear your feedback by July 21 07:00 UTC so we can incorporate your ideas or comments into the design process.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Evaluation/Boiler_room/Portal_Redesign_Plan/Community_feedback

Thank you so much! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 20:18, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Grant proposal[edit]

Hey Tony, Thanks for your time reading and reviewing our grant proposal. I've replied to your questions on the talk page. Regards! -- Samir El-Sharbaty (talk to me) 05:35, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi![edit]

Hello Tony. While I understand that you're frustrated in the discussion over at Grants talk:PEG/Shared Knowledge/Annual plan 2014-15, please do try and remain civil and avoid personal attacks. They really serve no purpose and are unhelpful, as I'm sure you know. Kind regards, Snowolf How can I help? 17:43, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

You also should have probably been notified of the thread about you on Meta:RFH, but the thread has since been closed and no input on your part was really ever required. Snowolf How can I help? 18:25, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Care to help review a call for volunteers?[edit]

Hi Tony. Pursuing your offer at our grant request page, I'm contacting you in the hope that you could review our call for volunteers. Here is the google translation of the call. Thanks!--Strainu (talk) 16:34, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback!--Strainu (talk) 12:36, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

WM DC proposal[edit]

Hey Tony, I saw your comment on the discussion page, and I would like to thank you for your comments. I think the table is especially interesting (clear, concise), I'll use it in the future as well for my GAC work. MADe (talk) 13:24, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

MADe, you are most welcome. I'm not sure whether the "certainty level of scoring" is worth including. And they seemed to like the table at Wiki Loves Africa, although I need to go back and respond further to their posts.

I'm interested in your reaction to my post at the bottom of the Workroom talkpage thread on the rubric (I think it's more relevant now than the long thinking-out-loud post I put last week at the top of that page). Tony (talk) 13:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Letter petitioning WMF to reverse recent decitions[edit]

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

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

I'm notifying you because you participated in one of several relevant discussions. -Pete F (talk) 22:23, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

  • I'd be less inclined to regard this as canvassing if there were a section for those who want to sign in disapproval of the letter. Tony (talk) 01:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
    I was bold and added one. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:26, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Learning Pattern Library updates[edit]

Hi Tony1, I've created a WikiProject space for coordinating the future development of the learning pattern library. Not much there there yet, but over the coming days I will be continuing to flesh it out with lists, boards, and related links to help us track some of the ideas for improvement that you and I have discussed. Please feel free to add in whatever stuff you think would be helpful, and direct other interested participants there as well.

Also: I've put together a draft of a new workflow for creating patterns, which features a new Lua-based infobox and some nifty 'endorsing' functionality. If you have time to walk through it and create a test page or two, I'd love your input. More to come! Cheers, Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 22:28, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Changes to APG forms[edit]

Hi, Tony1: First, thank you for your attention to the APG forms. I wanted to write you a note to explain why I am reverting your changes to Grants:APG/Impact report form v2.

We keep versions of these forms here for historical purposes, but they shouldn't be changed after the forms have already been used or while the forms are currently in use:

  1. Any changes made to the forms need to be applied to multiple pages, including templates and preloads, since these pages should always match. That's why we have staff who are very familiar with the way the forms work (usually Heather or me) manage the changes.
  2. Any changes applied to a preload will not appear in pages already created by using that preload. Any made changes to a Template already in use could disrupt pages currently using that Template or may end up not accurately showing what the applicant or grantee was really viewing at the time they filled out that form. Furthermore, we currently have grantees using this form to make reports that are due soon, and we don't want to make changes this late in the process, even if the changes are small. We think it's important to make sure that grantees and applicants area all viewing and using a consistent version of the form and that this form doesn't undergo changes after it has been submitted or while it is a work in progress.

We'll certainly keep in mind the style issues you've brought up in your edits to make future translations easier, and to improve future versions of the form. FYI, for 2013-2014 Round 1 grants (impact reports due in late March) we will be creating a significantly revised version of the impact report form called v3, and we will be tracking suggestions made about the current version of the form called v2 so we can implement improvements. We will make sure your suggestions are tracked as part of that process so that we can integrate them into the new version of the form.

We realize this might feel annoying or perhaps seem overly bureaucratic, but we are trying to manage the many challenges that come with making a good grants process happen on Wiki by balancing openness to changes with keeping the process fair and consistent for applicants. As always, we appreciate your thoughts and suggestions in this area. Best, Winifred Olliff (FDC Support Team) talk 16:56, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Changes to GAC criteria[edit]

Hi Tony1. Thanks for your attention to the PEG pages. I appreciate your copy-editing and more strategic ideas for changes. However, I did revert your changes to the GAC membership criteria. Substantive changes to the criteria (and all PEG processes and policies) should only be done by WMF staff. If you have ideas for future changes, please put them on the discussion page or talk with me directly. A number of your changes were good, and I have implemented them either as written or slightly modified. I felt it was important to keep the mandatory requirement that members been in good community and legal standing. After more consideration, I agree that programmatic/project experience specific to the Wikimedia projects is not mandatory, but experience implementing relevant programs and projects more generally is. I also appreciated the addition of a requirement around understanding of diversity. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 21:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

PEG statistics[edit]

Thank you. --Ilario (talk) 18:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

[Learning patterns] Wikimédia France board handbook[edit]

Hi Tony1,

Thank you for your copy edit. Jean-Frédéric did a lot of work to improve my part on this learning patterns, but your help is much appreciated ! ShreCk (talk) 09:51, 16 December 2014 (UTC).

Please fill out our Inspire campaign survey[edit]

Inspire astrocat aqua.png

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

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



Many thanks,

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

23:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

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

Signpost enquiry[edit]

Thanks for the notification Flixtey (talk) 07:40, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Felix, I'm sure I put a notification here (even counted them on my watchlist). But clearly I messed up. Very sorry, and glad you got my email. We look forward to your response. Tony (talk) 09:00, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Oh, and I really am messing up: this is my talkpage, not yours! Best. Tony (talk) 09:01, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I didn't get it. Could another contributor send it? --Raystorm (talk) 07:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Maria, this happened last time, I seem to remember. I can't imagine why my emails via the Meta email function don't get through, but (presumably) others do. Please check your junk folder. I'll re-send. Tony (talk) 14:35, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Sign Post Enquiry & My Response[edit]

Hi Tony,

Thanks for your signpost query. I've emailed responses to your queries.

I found it some what difficult to give numeralized responses to some of the questions and this can be misleading if things are quoted out of context.

For example, take the case of the following question:

  • The WMF's terms of use should forbid paid editing of any type on its sites. [Numerical response = ]

My input here is for a more policy clarity and emphasis - take the case of Samskrita Bharati employees contributing on the language Wikipedia in my WMF blogpost:

http://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/09/samskrita-bharati-and-sanskrit-wikipedia-the-journey-ahead/

There are a few volunteers and even full time “workers” editing Wikipedia.

Will you try to stop this?

My feeling is we should stop paid editing for promotion or those edits which forward some agenda – ideological or political as seen on English Wikipedia, though this is often curbed by other editors/ admins here. --Muzammil (talk) 18:58, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Signpost[edit]

-- Sailesh Patnaik (Talk2Me|Contribs)

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

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

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

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

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

With thanks,

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

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 01:24, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Last call for WMF grants feedback![edit]

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

With thanks,

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

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 19:09, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

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

IdeaLab logo dark orange.png

Hi there,

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

Here’s how to participate:

Take care,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation. 03:34, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Future IdeaLab Campaigns results[edit]

IdeaLab badge 1.png

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

With great thanks,

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