Dear wikimedians,
Nearly one year ago, the Graphs extension was disabled from all wikis, because there was a security issue that should be solved (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T334940). A wide team from the WMF worked on a solution for some weeks, but after Northern Hemisphere spring ended, summer came, then the monsoon season, and now it is again summer in the Southern Hemisphere... and Graphs are still disabled. All the solutions proposed have been dismissed, but every two months there's a proposal to make a new roadmap to solve the issue. We have plenty of roadmaps, but no vehicle to reach our destination.
Seven years ago, we were discussing our Strategy for 2030. We used thousands of volunteer hours, thousands of staff hours and millions of dollars to build a really well-balanced strategy. There we concluded that "By 2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem of free knowledge". We also made some recommendations to improve the User Experience (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Recommendations/Improve_U…) and claimed that we wanted to Innovate in Free Knowledge (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Recommendations/Innovate_…). Well, the situation is now worse than it was seven years ago, let me give some examples:
* Graph extension is used in thousands of pages, some of them highly relevant, as COVID or Climate Change information. There are thousands of graphs broken now, and the only partial solution give is loading these graphs as images, instead of promoting an interactive solution.
*
Meanwhile, a place like Our World in Data has been publishing data and interactive content with a compatible license for years. (Remember, "By 2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem of free knowledge"). Trying to add this data and graphs to Wikimedia projects has been done by WikiMed, and it is technically possible, but still blocked to deploy (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T303853).
* Wolfram Alpha is like a light year ahead us on giving interactive solutions to knowledge questions, even the silliest ones (https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=how+many+oranges+fit+in+the+Earth%3F). We have good technical articles about a lot of things, but sometimes "becoming the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem of free knowledge" needs to provide solutions to exact problems, like the answer to an equation, and how to solve it. That's also "free knowledge".
*
Brilliant (https://brilliant.org/) is brilliant if you want to learn lots of things, like geometry or programming. Way better than Wikipedia. But... you need to pay for it. How could we even try if we can't add anything interactive to our platforms?
* We can build interactive timelines using Wikidata, but we can't embed them at Wikipedia. Weird, because I can do it in any external page. Hopefully, Histropedia will do it better. http://histropedia.com/<http://histropedia.com/>
* We could have something very special: inline links in video and audio subtitles. We used to have them, but the new video infrastructure doesn't allow it. Imagine a world where you can watch a video and link a link in the subtitles just to know more about that.
* ...
The list can go on an on ("which phase the moon is today?"), but I think that the idea is clear. We could have interactive content, but we are going in the opposite direction, and every year we are further from our goal, because other platforms are doing it better, way better. And this seems like some wild ideas, but then I read the 2023-2024 annual plan section called "Wiki Experiences" (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2023-2024/…) and it looks like we should be going there. But we aren't.
I'm sorry if this e-mail feels bitter. My experience in the last years is that we are now further of what we need that we were before, even if many chapters and volunteers are trying to overturn it.
Thank to everyone who have been trying.
Galder
Dear all,
I would like to share with you the outputs of the Wikimedia Foundation
Affiliate Strategy process [1], and to invite you to give feedback on the
proposed changes to requirements for all affiliates & to user groups
recognition process (more below).
The 2017 Strategic Direction
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017> says
that we, the Wikimedia Movement, would build “the services and structures
that enable others to … advance our world by collecting knowledge that
fully represents human diversity” while carrying on “our mission of
developing content”. As Wikimedia affiliates are a key and integral part of
the Wikimedia movement and have knowledge and expertise to share, the
movement’s success depends greatly on affiliates as they help people join
us in doing mission-aligned work. The Wikimedia Foundation Affiliates
Strategy report [2] identified a need to streamline the role of the
Affiliations Committee (AffCom) on recognition of Wikimedia Affiliates, and
identified issues with the current state of the process.
After conversations with AffCom, the Board liaisons to AffCom identified
two areas for improvement. These areas are about the relevant work and
mandate of the Board related to affiliate recognition:
1) requirements for affiliates; and
2) improving the workflows around the process for the creation and
recognition of a user group.
The proposal on Meta [3] is suggesting to change the requirements for all
existing Wikimedia affiliates, not just the legal entities. There are ten
proposed criteria for a healthy affiliate. Examples include focusing on
continuity by being an active group and welcoming new users, having good
governance, and actively delivering on mission goals. Compliance with these
requirements would be self-reported by the affiliates. The Board liaisons
will work with the Affiliations Committee to publish a resolution outlining
how affiliates would be expected to fulfill these requirements to remain in
good standing.
Throughout the Wikimedia Foundation Affiliate Strategy process, there was
also feedback about user groups. Initially, user groups were meant as a
first step toward creating chapters or thematic organizations. Over the
years, user groups have evolved and there are now legally incorporated user
groups, user groups with boards, etc. Getting started does need to be easy,
but also needs to make sense, and so there is a proposal for changes to the
current workflow. The recommendations [3] include an outline of the
sequential steps of a revised process.
The feedback can be given from today up till March 20, 2024 (Anywhere on
Earth). Hopefully a fairly long feedback period will allow affiliates to
consult with their membership, thinking it through practically.
To provide your feedback, please review the page here, on Meta, [3] and
leave comments on the talk page. Alternatively, you can join an open
call (February
14 and 28 at 14:00 to 14:30 UTC) or request a conversation as a part of
Talking:2024
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Community_Affairs_Comm…>.
You can use the Wikimedia Foundation Community Affairs Committee/Talking:
2024#Let’s Talk|Let’s Talk
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Community_Affairs_Comm…'s_talk>
feature to sign up for a time to speak with me and other trustees about
this conversation or any other topic regarding the Wikimedia Foundation
Board, Movement Strategy, and more.
Note: New user group applications will be placed on hold for the duration
of this conversation – but the ones received before will be reviewed
according to the current process.
Best regards,
Nat & Mike & Lorenzo
Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees Liaisons to the Affiliations
Committee
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Affiliates_Strategy
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/Wiki…
[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Affiliates_Strategy/Re…
Best regards,
antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv
Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
*NOTICE: You may have received this message outside of your normal working
hours/days, as I usually can work more as a volunteer during weekend. You
should not feel obligated to answer it during your days off. Thank you in
advance!*
What is May 17th?
The International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia was
created in 2004 to draw the attention to the violence and discrimination
experienced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex people and all
other people with diverse sexual orientations, gender identities or
expressions, and sex characteristics. The date of May 17th was specifically
chosen to commemorate the World Health Organization’s decision in 1990 to
declassify homosexuality as a mental disorder. https://may17.org
One year ago in 2020 we started QueeringW in hope #1 Queering Wikipedia
conference would be happening with a year of delay...now we hope it is in
2022!
Meanwhile we are "Together, we Resist, Support, and Heal"
<https://twitter.com/may17org>
Happy #May17 #IDAHOT #IDAHOTBITQ
for those who celebrate and would support
https://www.instagram.com/QueeringW
@may17org <https://twitter.com/may17org> #IDAHOT
<https://twitter.com/hashtag/IDAHOT?src=hashtag_click> #IDAHOT2021
<https://twitter.com/hashtag/IDAHOT2021?src=hashtag_click>
https://twitter.com/QueeringW
Dear all,
Some years ago, when we started the Education Program at the Basque Wikipedia, we used a lot the Book Creator (or Collections) extension. It allowed to bind some articles and download them in PDF or DOC/ODT formats for further editing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Book). This was a great feature, as it allowed us to send the teachers and students a collection of articles they had created. The teacher could create free learning materials from the articles created by their students, and download them in DOC/ODT format allowed to edit them, rearrange and add other materials. Some teachers said us that they have created learning materials using Wikipedia articles created by their students.
Anyway, in 2017 the Wikimedia Foundation decided to break the book creator, because there were some errors in the PDF creator. So they disabled the book creator and added a note saying that the system is "Undergoing changes". The message is still visible, but no changes are being done. (You can follow the last messages of redesigning the book creator here:https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T175681).
I know that this is not the most important feature that is broken. There are many other broken things. But creating materials for students, and being able to read them offline or edited by teachers is a feature that aligns with our mission and vision. As always happens, no one is accountable for having something broke for six years. And it doesn't seem that this feature will return in the future. At least, the PediaPress link is still working, but there you can't edit your book, only pay for have it printed.
I think no one knows what will happen with this feature. I write this message simply to say that I miss it a lot.
Thanks
Galder Gonzalez
Dear Pete and The Cunctator,
Surely, Twitter is getting worse by the day, and, surely, Elon is not the best practices person in the world. And, indeed, the WMF has lots of things to tackle and worry about. Nevertheless, the WMF has a Communications Team and the Communications Team has a Social Media department, and the Social Media department's job is to handle social media. So, even if these shouldn't be our main concern, is something we may talk about.
Sincerely,
Galder
________________________________
From: Pete Forsyth <peteforsyth(a)gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2023 2:44 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: @Wikipedia losing opportunities in Twitter
Twitter has a poor recent record on protecting its users from government interference and privacy invasion, an area in which the Wikimedia community and the WMF have typically taken a keen interest.
In 2015, Wikimedia's then-general counsel took pride in the WMF's perfect score on the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF) rating system for ethical response to government interference, a series that ran under the title "Who Has Your Back?"
https://diff.wikimedia.org/2015/06/29/whos-got-your-back/
As far as I can tell, the EFF hasn't run these ratings since 2019. In that year they focused on the issue of censorship (the specifics of the ratings varied in different year. They didn't consider Wikimedia that year, but Twitter got 3 stars out of a possible 6, putting it behind such companies as YouTube, Medium, the Google Play Store, and the Apple Store.
Now, in 2023, Twitter has apparently ceased self-reporting relevant data altogether to the Lumen group, which is connected to Harvard University's Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society. But according to the report linked below, it has not refused even one government request for data since Elon Musk took over in 2022. It previously refused about 50% of requests.
One example that may resonate for Wikimedians:
"Under previous ownership, Twitter actively resisted requests from many of these same regimes. For two weeks in 2014, the platform was banned from Turkey, in part due to its refusal to globally block a post accusing a former government official of corruption. (The executive who led that charge was Vijaya Gadde, one of the first executives fired after Musk took over.)"
https://restofworld.org/2023/elon-musk-twitter-government-orders/?ref=nobsb…
Twitter's choice to stop submitting data to Lumen as of April 15, 2023: https://twitter.com/shreyatewari96/status/1651865580629114880
I prefer to see the WMF follow the leadership of such organizations as the (USA-based) National Public Radio and Public Broadcasting Service, and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and officially de-emphasize Twitter as a means for public communication.
Wikimedia already has one of the top websites in the world; it is better to stand up for important shared values than to overlook this mismanagement of a highly popular website.
-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 5:27 AM The Cunctator <cunctator(a)gmail.com<mailto:cunctator@gmail.com>> wrote:
I honestly think the WMF has better things to do than worry about engagement on what is clearly a grossly mismanaged website.
On Tue, May 2, 2023, 3:53 AM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <galder158(a)hotmail.com<mailto:galder158@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Dear Justice,
Yes, it works that way, because we are not measuring the total engagement (where @Wikipedia wins @euwikipedia bat not @viquipedia) but the engagement rate per tweet, which is balanced with the number of followers.
Another topic is that the take-over by Elon Musk is affecting our engagement, but this should also be taken in account by the Social media team. In fact, there should be a discussion following up here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Social_media#Twitter_verification_chec….
Since the changes on the algorithm affects everyone, the @Wikipedia team should be interested in learning about successful stories and how other social media handles continue having engagement while the one that should be leading is losing engagement every month.
Finally, I don't think that any discussion is "settled" if there's no answer. For the moment, the answer to the proposal of working together is silence.
Thanks
Galder
________________________________
From: Justice Okai-Allotey <owulakpakpo(a)gmail.com<mailto:owulakpakpo@gmail.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2023 9:47 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: @Wikipedia losing opportunities in Twitter
Hi Galder,
Twitter has consistently seen a downward trend since the take over by Elon Musk. A lot of people are not using that platform like they did in the past.
And I thought this conversations was settled when WMF brought their social media strategy and engagement plan. But it looks like you keep bringing it up.
Again you don't expect accounts with less following to have same engagements with accounts with higher following it doesn't work that way.
Organizations define their own metrics and so success may mean different things to different organizations.
Regards,
Justice.
On Tue, 2 May 2023 at 07:41, Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <galder158(a)hotmail.com<mailto:galder158@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Dear all,
The impact of @wikipedia continues going down on Twitter. There's no strategy to turn this trend and the team seems happy with the numbers .https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Social_media#Organic_social_media_strategy_update.
For context, the "Engagement Rate per Tweet" (this is the metric that the Communications Team proposed as a benchmark) felt to 0.011% (benchmark average is 0.035% and 0.05% for non-profits). Compare it with 0.27% of the Basque Wikipedia or the Catalan Wikipedia accounts (both have the same impact factor), or the 0.23% of the French Wikipedia account. We are talking about strategies with x25 impact.
Some months ago, some users made an offer to collaborate in making the social media communication strategy better, but there's no answer from the Wikimedia Foundation. I'm still waiting for an aswer to the offer.
Sincerely,
Galder
________________________________
From: Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <galder158(a)hotmail.com<mailto:galder158@hotmail.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 11:36 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Re: @Wikipedia losing opportunities in Twitter
Dear all,
I write to send a small update on this. In a message about the methodology followed to measure success (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Social_media#Re:_Twitter_engagement_qu…), Laura Dickinson posted this: "According to its 2022 report<https://www.rivaliq.com/blog/social-media-industry-benchmark-report/>, the median Twitter engagement rate for brands across all industries is 0.037%; for nonprofits specifically, it is 0.054% [our engagement] over the last 28 day period is 2.7%."
I have measured the engagement with that methodology (https://www.rivaliq.com/blog/social-media-industry-benchmark-report/#title-…) for @Wikipedia in January (Likes+RT+Comments / Number of followers) and the result is: 0.012%, three times lower than the industry standard and 4.5 lower than for non-profits. For context, Basque Wikipedia had 0.055%, Catalan Viquipedia 0.060% and Indonesian Wikipedia an astonishing 2.79%. (You can check the numbers here: https://www.rivaliq.com/free-social-media-analytics/twitter-head-to-head)
There's an open question about the strategy followed and a sincere proposal of opening this account to a shared volunteers/WMF administration.
Sincerely,
Galder
________________________________
From: Àlex Hinojo <alexhinojo(a)gmail.com<mailto:alexhinojo@gmail.com>>
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2023 7:42 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: @Wikipedia losing opportunities in Twitter
+1
On Thu, 19 Jan 2023 at 07:13, Peter Southwood <peter.southwood(a)telkomsa.net<mailto:peter.southwood@telkomsa.net>> wrote:
A Wikipedia account should be under the control of Wikipedians, following the editorial policy for Wikipedia, but they could let WMF do the technical work if such exists. WMF can and should run Wikimedia accounts. WMF running a Wikipedia account could be misrepresentation.
Cheers,
Peter
From: Andreas Kolbe [mailto:jayen466@gmail.com<mailto:jayen466@gmail.com>]
Sent: 19 January 2023 02:46
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: F. Xavier Dengra i Grau
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: @Wikipedia losing opportunities in Twitter
Dear all,
The obvious question surely is: Why not let volunteers (co-)run the Wikipedia Twitter account?
A number of Wikipedia language versions (French, Catalan, Portuguese, Basque, Waray, etc.) seem to have volunteer-managed Twitter accounts that are doing fine. If volunteers are good enough to write the encyclopedia and curate the main page of each language version, aren't they good enough to write (or suggest) the occasional tweet?
Andreas
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:20 PM F. Xavier Dengra i Grau via Wikimedia-l <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>> wrote:
Hi/Bona nit,
This last tweet from @Wikipedia is a good example of what some of us have been mentioning in this list during the past days:
https://twitter.com/wikipedia/status/1615756186640334848?s=46&t=7wB7VI4gwIS…
Despite the fact that many Wikipedias have already had this new skin deployed since months ago as voluntary testers, not a single mention on their huge contribution was explained on Twitter (neither back then nor today…). We need to go to the 8th tweet of today's publication to read something like "The new features, which start rolling out on English Wikipedia today, were built in collaboration with Wikipedia volunteers worldwide."
If this is the situation in which the main account is monopolized only to the English version and its news/articles, why not specifying it as "English Wikipedia" in the profile and in the main link?
Days pass by and we keep sharing to this list proofs, data and justified arguments (even collagues offering themselves and willing to trace a joint planning!), but still not a word or single thought from the Comms department. Disappointing, I am sad to say.
Kind regards/Salutacions
Xavier Dengra
El ds, 14 gen., 2023 a 09:52, Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <galder158(a)hotmail.com<mailto:galder158@hotmail.com>> va escriure:
Egun on Boodarwun/Gnangarra,
You are righth in one thing: it is very difficult to prove a point only from one puntual statistic. That's why I have been tracking statistics for a long time, because patterns are here the most important thing. Neverthless, there is only one way to know if the point me and some other users in this thread are rising is valid: experimenting. @Wikipedia should try something: tweeting 6-7 times a day, with varied topics, "on this day" like tweets, varying timezones and even curiosities about how Wikipedia works (https://twitter.com/depthsofwiki/status/1614045362985082881 2 million impressions in 9 hours). Then, after -let's say- one month, if the results (engagement, followers, retention) are better, it would be quite obvious that there's a point changing the social media strategy. If not, if engagement is the same, no obvious uprise in followers or RTs is visible, the current strategy could be validated.
Me, personally, I'm ready to help the Communications Team with this task, proposing intercultural items that could be tweeted and promoted. If they want help, they know where to go for it. Again, I think that following the same pattern is a bad communication strategy (as we can see by our own eyes) and trying something new could be better. Is up to the communications team to aknowledge this and give a try.
Sincerely,
Galder
________________________________
From: Gnangarra <gnangarra(a)gmail.com<mailto:gnangarra@gmail.com>>
Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2023 6:00 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: @Wikipedia losing opportunities in Twitter
Kaya Galder
The assumption that despite there being a wider audience the interests of those audience members is exactly the same, if that was true why have multiple channels. What I am saying is that in different communities that doesnt and will never hold true. Using statistics to compare the two is the issue and then complaining about different audience responses to the same event being caused by those posting to the channel. Its not the channel operators, it's the underlying expectation that all audiences are the same and react exactly the same way every time even as the audience is increasing by many orders of magnitude.
Boodarwun
On Sat, 14 Jan 2023 at 02:06, Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <galder158(a)hotmail.com<mailto:galder158@hotmail.com>> wrote:
@Gnangarra: I would doubt on the idea that Pelé is not relevant to the English audience, as it was the most visited article by far that day (https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/topviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=a…), and the second most visited next day, just after the less known Andrew Tate. Also, the account is not ENGLISH Wikipedia. Is called Wikipedia, so it should take into account, even if it tweets only about English Wikipedia (as pointed by @Xavier Dengra) a global audience. Because, again, the goal is "By 2030, Wikimedia is to become the central infrastructure for Free Knowledge on the Internet.". Not only for US centered people, but by a global audience. Even with that in mind, Pelé was the most visited article in English Wikipedia.
@Yaroslav: Basque Wikipedia is not one of the few accounts tweeting about Pelé, and in perspective, there are more Basque tweeting accounts per speaker, than there are for other larger languages. We are not competing with major news outlets; we are competing to be "the central infrastructure for Free Knowledge on the Internet". Wikipedia is doing well on that: nearly 2,5 million visits in two days for the article about Pelé only in English. I think that there may be very few web services having 2,5 million visits for a page about Pelé in two days, if there's any. Also, next day the most visited article was about Andrew Tate. So, you are right: we are not a news outlet, but we are visited according to the news. Any strategy that doesn't have this in mind, will fail.
You also ask how many tweets a day would be enough. I don't have an answer for this. I would like the communications team to come with one, but they don't seem either to have one. I don't think that tweeting every hour is better, but I'll explain why one tweet per day is a bad strategy, based only in what we know about the Twitter algorithm:
* The Twitter algorithm tends to show a tweet to followers and others more often if it gets more engagements (RTs, likes, comments...). So, maximizing engagements seems a something positive if we want to reach to new people.
* It also shows an account more often if the user interacts with it. If someone likes, RTs or comments a tweet, it seems that this account will be shown again soon. That's why you see more often tweets from your friends than others. And that's why ideological bubbles are created.
* If people are engaged with a tweet, it will be shown more regularly after a tweet by other people you follow once you scroll down. This is why if you open a tweet by a far-right politician, you will see below other tweets by far-right sided politicians and the opposite for left, libertarian, green or vegans. It shows you similar content, based on people's interaction.
So, tweeting more doesn't maximize engagement (if you tweet every minute, you will lose it), but tweeting less minimizes engagement. If you only tweet once a day, and you don't get too much attention, your next tweet will be less important for the algorithm, and so on. The only valid strategy is one that gets people engaged to your tweet, so you get more impressions, and this drives more interactions, and this drives more followers. Because, at the end of the day, we want to be "the central infrastructure for Free Knowledge on the Internet".
I don't know how much is the ideal thing. In Basque Wikipedia our strategy is to publish 5-6 tweets every day, and then also interact with people talking about Wikipedia or speaking about articles they have created (like @viquipedia does, with great success). Our topics from the 5-6 daily tweets now (2023) are like this: every morning (yes, most of our followers live in the same time-zone) a biography of someone who was born/died on this day; then, something that happened 100 years ago. At noon, an artwork. If the artwork is depicting something interesting, a second tweet linked to that explaining the artwork itself. Two tweets in the afternoon: the first one, optional, about something related to Wikipedia itself (Statistics, projects, some user who has created something cool...) and then science/technology in a broad sense. At evening, we like to tweet something related to current events, if this is interesting. We have a shared doc with the daily tweets and we program them some days in advance. Also, we use MOA to have them copied to Mastodon.
I don't know, again, if this is the optimal. I know that is better than one-per-day, because data is obviously better. Engagements, followers and interactions are better this way, as I have proved above.
Best,
Galder
________________________________
From: F. Xavier Dengra i Grau via Wikimedia-l <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2023 3:37 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
Cc: F. Xavier Dengra i Grau <xavier.dengra(a)protonmail.com<mailto:xavier.dengra@protonmail.com>>
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: @Wikipedia losing opportunities in Twitter
Hi/Bon dia
Yaroslav: Also, you say one tweet per day is too little, how may do you think is normal? If I personally see an account which tweets more than say 10 per day (not counting threads) I start thinking may be it is a spam generator.
Since 4 years ago we updated the social media methodology for the Catalan Wikipedia Twitter account (approx 4.5M native speakers, 10M audience), we boosted from 15.3K to 45.4K speakers, now being the 4th most followed language of Wikipedia.
Our method in a nutshell: we have up to 23 knowledge themes that we oblige ourselves to post at least once every week. The number of our daily tweets vary from 6 to 10 only in content (i.e., articles). This depends on, ofc, whether it's a working day vs a weekend or other time aspects (peak hours). Plus the interactions (RT+kudos) with our wikipedians that share their new articles tagging us, which has been a massive way to appreciate their task and to visibilize to others the task of being a volunteer in Wikipedia. In fact, the latter has been especially critical to bring us huge additional views and to renew a few of our new, most active editing community (especially young users!).
If our account, managed by volunteers, can conduct this organized work for a small-medium size language, why should we accept that a whole staffed team from the WMF, firstly, rejects to provide engagement data on our common, biggest handle? And secondly, why should we give up on them preparing a strategy to improve its scope and objectives?
Regarding the last question, I'd like to add a last thought: never ever in the 4 years that I've been upfront in the handles in my language, the @Wikipedia account has given a simple, courtesy RT of any knowledge content (articles) from the Arabic, Bahasa Indonesia, Basque, Catalan, Galician, French, Suda or Portuguese (etc.) existing handles. That should be a key aspect in our debate.
Because if @Wikipedia is mostly used as the “central account” for the project, then it should also be very careful 1) to not always post in English and give some room to interact with the other language handles, 2) to stop centering their tweets on English-speaking culture, and 3) to post without clear range of topics to stay balanced. Oppositely, if it is decided that @Wikipedia is only the English-language handle, then it may change its profile name to "English Wikipedia" and not continue as the reference speaker either for the WMF nor for significant news or events.
Best/Salutacions,
Xavier Dengra
------- Original Message -------
On divendres, 13 de gener 2023 a les 14:56, Yaroslav Blanter <ymbalt(a)gmail.com<mailto:ymbalt@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Galder,
on the other hand.. Basque Wikipedia is one of very few accounts twitting on the Pele death in Basque, whereas a lot was twitted in English. I do not think English Wikipedia twitter can compete with major news outlets, they operate on a completely different scale.The low-hanging fruit would be twitting DYKs, FAs, GAs, or may be some other randomly picked stuff. Also, you say one tweet per day is too little, how may do you think is normal? If I personally see an account which tweets more than say 10 per day (not counting threads) I start thinking may be it is a spam generator.
Best
Yaroslav
On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 2:26 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <galder158(a)hotmail.com<mailto:galder158@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Some months have gone since I started this topic in this list, and still, we can't know how much engagement we have at Wikipedia, because data is not available. Twitter is now owned by Elon Musk, things are changing, there are more accounts in Mastodon daily, but still Twitter matters. I have been looking at the Twitter activity in the last days for @Wikipedia and I'm still very worried about the (lack of) strategy followed here. A full team, with staff members, which only produces one tweet per day, a lonely message in the vastness of the ocean, and gets really poor engagement numbers.
A couple of weeks ago Pelé, one of the greatest football players of all time, died. (English) Wikipedia Twitter account needed 7 days to tweet about it, even if the article was changed in a few minutes after the death (https://twitter.com/Wikipedia/status/1611363972174778368). The tweet had 13.729 impressions (now we can know the number of impressions), 14 RTs and 129 likes. Wikipedia account has nearly 644.000 followers. If we divide these two numbers, we get a rate of 2,13% of impressions per follower.
The same day Pelé died, Basque Wikipedia made a tweet. Not a week after, just when it was news (https://twitter.com/euwikipedia/status/1608541274491211776). The tweet had 964 impressions, 3 RTs and 2 likes. Basque Wikipedia account has 7,956 followers. This is a rate of 12,11% of impressions per follower. x5.68 times larger, relatively than (English) Wikipedia Twitter account.
(English) Wikipedia Twitter account has nearly 81 times more followers than the Basque one. English Wikipedia is more visible, because it has a (now golden) verified account symbol, so tweets are more often promoted. English has 1.500 million speakers around the world. Basque has fewer than one million. English Wikipedia should have around 1.000 more followers than Basque Wikipedia. English Wikipedia article about Pelé had 2,5 million pageviews in the two days after his death. Basque had 250 pageviews. This is 10.000 times more pageviews.
@Wikipedia has 644.000 followers, and @euwikipedia has nearly 8.000. Audience of English Wikipedia is 10.000 times larger for the same event. Why Wikipedia is not 10.000 times larger? Why doesn't Wikipedia account have 80 million followers? YouTube's Twitter account has 78 million followers. "By 2030, Wikimedia is to become the central infrastructure for Free Knowledge on the Internet.". How could we if Youtube's account has 100x more followers than we have? How can think that we are in a good shape if our tweets are only seen by less than 2% of our followers?
I hope that 2023 comes with a change. A change to open these accounts, have a fresh way of thinking on social media ,and building engagement, both with momentum, not losing opportunities, and promoting good content.
Sincerely
Galder
________________________________
From: Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <galder158(a)hotmail.com<mailto:galder158@hotmail.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 3:21 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Re: @Wikipedia losing opportunities in Twitter
Dear all,
Some weeks ago, we had a discussion here about the different approaches we have for the @wikipedia account at Twitter. We don't know yet how many interactions does the account has, but as I said in the discussion, we try to find ways to measure our work at @euwikipedia. Today I want to share with you that this account was ranked last week as the most influential social-movements account in Basque language (https://umap.eus/ranking/gizartea) and the 10th most influential account in all categories (https://umap.eus/ranking/orokorra). This is a good metric we use to know if we are doing fine or not.
Sincerely,
Galder
________________________________
From: Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk<mailto:andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk>>
Sent: Friday, August 5, 2022 8:50 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: @Wikipedia losing opportunities in Twitter
On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 at 18:48, Lauren Dickinson <ldickinson(a)wikimedia.org<mailto:ldickinson@wikimedia.org>> wrote:
> Also, Andy, we will follow up this week regarding your questions
> about the @WiktionaryUsers and @Wiktionary accounts.
Three working weeks have passed since the above was written; I've seen
no such follow-up. Have I missed something?
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
https://pigsonthewing.org.uk
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org>
--
Boodarwun
Gnangarra
'ngany dabakarn koorliny arn boodjera dardoon ngalang Nyungar koortaboodjar'
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org>
[X]<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_cam…>
Virus-free.www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_cam…>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org>
--
Àlex Hinojo
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org>
--
Regards
Justice Okai-Allotey
Board Member Wikimedia Ghana User Group<https://wmgh.org/>
Communications Officer Humanists Association of Ghana<http://www.ghanahumanists.org>
Africa Coordinator Young Humanist International<https://humanists.international/about/young-humanists-international/>
Freelance Digital Marketer
Freelance Visual Storyteller
Mobile: +233 (054) 039 4970 Skype: okai_allotey
|Avenger - Urithi Labs<https://www.facebook.com/urithimedia/>|
|Linkedin: Justice Okai-Allotey<https://www.linkedin.com/in/justice-okai-allotey-306b6354?trk=hp-identity-n…> | Facebook: Justice Okai-Allotey<https://www.facebook.com/wyzzlewany> | Twitter: @Owula_Kpakpo<https://twitter.com/Owula_Kpakpo> |
|Website: https://about.me/okai-allotey|
|Schedule A Meeting:meet with Justice Okai-Allotey<https://calendly.com/owulakpakpo/meet-with-justice-okai-allotey>|
"Our lives begin to the end the day we become silent about things that matter" - Unknown.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org<mailto:wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org>
Hello,
We are now only three weeks away from the Wikimedia Wishathon! Exciting
news - User:Lucas Werkmeister has signed up to host a piano concert during
a social hour 🎉
Join us and contribute to the development of community wishes between March
15th and 17th! Participate in discussion sessions and work on user scripts,
gadgets, extensions, tools and more!
The full event schedule is available here: <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Event:WishathonMarch2024>.
Explore the event wiki for project ideas and keep an eye out for
non-technical tasks (documentation and design-related) that will soon be
added to the Wishathon workboard: <
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/view/5906/>. Project breakouts
will also be added to the schedule, where you can participate in wish
development or explore innovative solutions as a user, developer, or
designer.
We are seeking volunteers to assist with a wide range of activities such as
monitoring discussion channels during hacking hours, answering technical
queries, and helping with session note-taking. Check out the Help desk
schedule and add yourself to a slot where you are available and interested
in providing assistance: <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Event:WishathonMarch2024/Help_desk>.
If you have any questions about the Wishathon, reach out via Telegram: <
https://t.me/wmhack>.
Cheers,
Srishti
On behalf of the Wishathon organizing committee
*Srishti Sethi*
Senior Developer Advocate
Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
Dear all, I am Laugriville, board member of les sans pagEs. We are pleased
to share with you our 2023 user group annual report.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Les_sans_pagEs/Report_2023 Hoping that
your projects are thriving and sending you friendship and power as you need
them to advance.
Warm regards. Laugriville
Chers toutes et tous, Je suis Laugriville, membre du comité de les sans
pagEs. Nous avons le plaisir de partager avec vous le rapport annuel de
notre user group https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Les_sans_pagEs/Report_2023.
Espérant que vos projets prospèrent, nous vous envoyons amitié et force
pour les faire avancer. Chaleureuses salutations. Laugriville.
Hello everyone,
Free Knowledge Africa is organising a contest; The 2024 Afrosport Writing
Contest!
Whether you're passionate about football, athletics, traditional games, or
any other sport, this is your chance to showcase your creativity and love
for sports.
Afrosports is an African games and sports writing contest on Wikipedia.
There is a huge content gap on the internet/Wikipedia as regards contents
on African Sports in English and other Languages.
This contest aims to bridge the African Sports content gap on Wikipedia by
writing articles about the historical and contemporary African Sports Scene
focusing on the English Wikipedia and 5 African languages; Wikipedia
(Igbo, Hausa, Yoruba, Swahili and Kinyarwanda.)
This is another opportunity to promote sports in your local community,
write about the favourite games and sports you grew up playing, translate
sport related articles on wikipedia to your local languages, or anything
related to the Sports scene in your country, join us on this exciting
venture!
Come join us on the 15th of March in The Afrosports Writing Contest. There
are amazing prizes to be won and also there will be training sessions.
Register here <https://bit.ly/Afrosport24>
Visit the project page on Meta
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Afrosports_Contest_20…>
to know more about the contest.
Remember, If we don’t write stories about Africa, who will?
Best regards,
Hopeabby
Associate, Free Knowledge Africa (FKA)
This message will be translated into other languages on Meta-wiki
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Chi…>
العربية • español • français • português • Deutsch• 中文
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Chi…>
You can help with more languages
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Chi…>
Hi everyone,
Since joining the Foundation I have tried to regularly write to you
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Chi…>
here and elsewhere, and I wanted to share a few updates since my last
letter. In October 2023
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Com…>,
I reflected that we were in a period of compounded challenges across the
world with escalating wars, conflict, and climate reminding us each week
that global volatility and uncertainty was on the rise. That feels even
more true now. My instinct then was to ask us to make more time to talk to
each other and to try and pull closer together. This feels even more needed
now.
I noted that the return of in-person gatherings has been essential for a
subset of our volunteers, providing spaces for reconnecting, recharging and
working through difficult issues together in the same room. Foundation
leadership has also been working harder to share organizational news and
have individualized conversations on-wiki and in other digital forums. Our
goal has been to put more effort and intentionality into communicating the
right information, at the right time, and in the right way, even knowing
that we can never meet everyone's expectations.
Most importantly, we had to keep talking to each other – formally and
informally – throughout the year. This was the basis of an open invitation
to Talking: 2024
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Com…>,
an effort designed to listen intently to what is on your minds now, to
share progress at the Foundation, and to also reflect on the needs for
multi-year strategic plans. (A reminder that our priorities for long-range
planning
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Community_Affairs_Comm…...>,
informed by movement strategy, are Wikimedia’s financial model,
product/technology needs, and roles/responsibilities.)
So far, Wikimedia Foundation Trustees, executives, and staff have hosted
130 conversations
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Community_Affairs_Comm…>
on-wiki, with individuals, and in small groups. These conversations have
stretched across all regions of the world. We have learned from
prolific community
members to recent newcomers, from technical volunteers to stewards, event
organizers, and affiliate leaders. Since these discussions were intended to
improve deliberations at the Board’s strategic planning retreat next week,
here is a summary of some of the feedback I've heard so far!
Continue focusing the Foundation on supporting product/technology needs. As
early as my first letter to you in January 2022,
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Chi…>
I understood that the central role of the Wikimedia Foundation is in
enabling our projects, which is core to every aspect of our movement's
mission. This was reinforced in most of the Talking:2024 conversations that
we hosted over the last five months – from the need for the Foundation to
remain focused on upgrading technical infrastructure to supporting
volunteer needs for tool maintenance and metrics. Our annual planning
continues to center the Foundation’s product and technology priorities. More
deliberate conversations are taking place at the Foundation about what a
multi-generational view of Wikimedia projects requires of us all. For me,
this remains perhaps the most critical topic for our strategic efforts as
we make tangible and practical a mission
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Mission> that calls for
our work to continue in perpetuity.
Recent discussions on this mailing list remind me that we can’t get to
everything fast enough, but we continue to move more in the right
direction. Chief Product & Technology Officer Selena Deckelmann recently
shared
<https://diff.wikimedia.org/2024/02/20/thinking-about-annual-planning-in-the…>
that: “In the last couple of months, we shipped changes that enabled a
better backbone for PageTriage
<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:PageTriage>, and worked closely
with volunteer developers to ensure future sustainability. Going forward,
we have a number of initiatives ranging from projects like Edit Check
<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Edit_check>, Discussion Tools
<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DiscussionTools>, Dark mode
<https://diff.wikimedia.org/2023/11/24/dark-mode-is-coming/>, Patrolling on
Android <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/Android>, Watchlist
on iOS <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/iOS>,
Automoderator <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Moderator_Tools/Automoderator>,
Community Configuration
<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Growth/Community_configuration>, the Wikimedia
Commons Upload Wizard
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Upload_Wizard>, and others.
We've resolved over 600 volunteer-reported issues in Phabricator in the
last 6 months, and we're using research methods that solicit prototypes
directly from volunteers
<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Accessibility_for_reading/Commun…>
for informing typography decision making. And we're learning not just the
basics of font size and spacing, we're also getting important information
about context, devices and cultural aspects of the use of Wikipedia which
are vital for helping make our software easier to use as how people use and
access it changes (and it has changed a lot over 20 years!).” She has
also already
published draft objectives for the product and tech teams, and your input
and on-wiki comments are always welcome
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Ann…>
.
‘Human-led, tech-enabled’ means that the humans still lead. While tech
featured prominently in most of these conversations, there remains no doubt
that Wikimedia is a human-led movement (“It’s all about people.”). This led
to exploring even more solutions that can address a familiar dilemma about
how to balance the needs of existing editors with initiatives to welcome
newcomers (“It’s always the war between ‘we need to protect the existing
content’ and ‘do we care about new users with a tolerance for errors.’”).
While some shared wonderful stories of their own journeys (“I wanna say
that the Newcomer tools have been a really great project and very glad to
see that energy was expensed there”), there was vocal urgency about the
sustainability of the projects for generations to come (“We are sending
away people who could be helpful to the projects”). In this regard, several
discussions highlighted the value of the Universal Code of Conduct
<https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Universal_Code_of_Conduct>
as a “game changer” in signaling to all communities that they are actively
invited and welcomed to safely contribute to the mission of free knowledge,
while still acknowledging there is more to do (“It’s probably a good thing,
but I don’t know if it will solve what I have faced.”). I learned in my
initial listening tour that we have to make all contributions count
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Chief_Executive_Office…>,
and all contributors feel welcomed. I found that the Talking:2024
conversations deepened my own understanding of the peer support and
mentorship needed for volunteers to thrive as active community members.
(One example are these reflections
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Clovermoss/Editor_reflections> where
140 other editors participated).
Finally, our human-led values came up in several conversations about
Wikimedia’s role in shaping the next generation of artificial intelligence,
a topic of ongoing discussion in the world
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/18/magazine/wikipedia-ai-chatgpt.html?unloc…>,
in our communities <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Future_Audiences>,
and at the Foundation. This is complemented by ongoing discussions about
the role of AI-generated content on our platform by various project
communities.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Large_language_model_policy)>
A recent effort to contribute to a shared research agenda on AI
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Artificial_intelligence/…>can
be found here – including the need for more research to understand human
motivation to contribute to the knowledge commons – it was created by a
small group working in the open who rushed to publish a ‘bad first draft’
that will benefit from more input.
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Talk:Artificial_intellig…>
Can our financial model provide more certainty, and also force difficult
trade-offs? In my last letter,
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Com…>
I shared that future projections indicate that, for a range of reasons,
fundraising online and through banners may not continue to grow at the same
rate as in past years. We have several long-term initiatives underway to
help mitigate this risk and also diversify our revenue streams, including
the Wikimedia Endowment
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Endowment>
and Wikimedia Enterprise
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Enterprise>.
Over the past two years, we have slowed the rate of growth
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Ann…>
for the Foundation itself, while increasing financial resources
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Ann…>
that support other movement entities. The Talking:2024 conversations
provided a space for movement entities to share a need for multi-year
financial certainty in their support from the Foundation, which we will
take into our planning for next year. Other conversations highlighted the
need to continue prioritizing limited resources and being more explicit
about trade-offs (“[We must] use the money we have as wisely as we can”).
These discussions have already improved the thinking for the Foundation’s
current and upcoming planning cycles.
<https://diff.wikimedia.org/2024/01/31/progress-on-the-plan-how-the-wikimedi…>
Movement roles need more clarity. The task of defining a Movement Charter
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Movement_Charter> came
up in several conversations with contributors of all kinds. These ranged
from reflections about movement strategy recommendations and principles
(“Will it always be first come, first served in this movement?”) to
questions about the purpose of different structures (“What decisions do we
need the global council to make? Why are decisions moving from one center
to another?” “We are taking a hammer to solve this issue when they are
simple screws.”). Unsurprisingly, there were varying perspectives (“The
editing community in many regions doesn’t see an immediate benefit in
affiliates, hubs, or other governance structures.” “The community still
feels unheard by the Foundation.” “The good work that affiliates do in
certain regions is commendable, especially where those affiliates are
deeply engaged with the community.”)
And a deep recognition of the complex task at hand (“The community is so
huge and it’s hard to tie everyone together.” “How do we make change in the
movement in a way that is understandable and doesn’t scare people.” “There
has to be control and risk management with empowering the community,
inviting everyone, and trying to grow while protecting what we have
meticulously built over the past 23 years.”).
Considering the investment of time and resources going into the charter, we
need to make sure that this effort will provide us all with clearer
strategic direction on what is needed to serve the future needs of our
movement, and meet the expectations of a rapidly changing world around us.
The Wikimedia Foundation recently shared these questions
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter#Wikimedia_Foundation_…>
with the Movement Charter Drafting Committee to identify areas of key focus
and concern. We will continue to review and comment on new drafts as they
are produced in the weeks and months ahead. The Board of Trustees will
dedicate time at its next Open Conversation with Trustees on March 21
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Community_Affairs_Comm…>
to talk more about this process and the Foundation’s hopes for a Movement
Charter.
+++
Talking: 2024 kicked off a useful check-in to hear how we are collectively
doing, and it continues. Your voice and contributions would help add to the
feedback we have already received—whether that is on-wiki, in 1:1
conversations, in small groups, in person. What we learn will continue to
inform the Foundation's long-term planning. Please consider joining a
conversation
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Com…'s_talk>
.
For me, each conversation has been a reminder that what drives this
movement is the people. We remain at a pivotal moment, where the world
needs Wikipedia and the Wikimedia projects more than ever. As one of you
shared, “I feel like there is a way because we have made a way, an
experience of community that connects people across the world.”
As always, I welcome your feedback either on my talk page
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/User_talk:MIskander-WMF>
or emailing me directly at miskander(a)wikimedia.org.
Maryana
Maryana Iskander, Wikimedia Foundation CEO
Dear Community members,
I hope you're doing well. We're excited to invite you to the upcoming Wiki
Loves Folklore 2024 Office Hour Part Two, where we'll be discussing how to
make our jury processes better.
Event Details:
- Date: March 2nd, 2024
- Time: 4:00 pm UTC https://zonestamp.toolforge.org/1709388000
- Where: Zoom
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/88637039784?pwd=AIGFVXsrMPB2piCVZ17acvacHuaZgR.1
What's Happening:
-
Introduction by Isaac Chabota Kanguya (Communication Officer): Isaac
will start things off with a quick 10-minute talk. He'll explain why having
fair and inclusive jury procedures is important for Wiki Loves Folklore.
-
Presentation by Suyash (Jury Coordinator for Wiki Loves Folklore
2024): Next,
Suyash will speak for 20 minutes about "How to Set Up a Good Jury for Wiki
Loves Folklore Photography Contest." He'll help to choose good pictures
-
Presentation by Nokib Sarkar (Lead Tool Developer for WLF 2024): Then,
Nokib will talk for 20 minutes about "How We Judge Writing Contests using
Campwiz Tool." He will show how to use the jury functionality in campwiz.
-
Questions and Chat Time: After the presentations, we'll have 10 minutes
for you to ask questions and share your thoughts.
We think this event will be really helpful, and we'd love for you to be
there. To save your spot, just click here
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Loves_Folklore_2024_Office_Hour_2#Part…>
Thanks so much for all your support with Wiki Loves Folklore. We're looking
forward to chatting with you soon!
Best,
Isaac Kanguya
Communication Officer International Team WLF 2024