Open main menu

Affiliations Committee/Candidates/December 2018

If you would like to be considered for an appointment to the Affiliations Committee during our current recruitment cycle, please post your application on this page. All applications must be submitted by 31 December 2018.

Your application must include the following information:

  1. Your full name and Wikimedia username
  2. A statement describing your relevant experience, skills, and motivation for joining the committee.
  3. Answers to the following three questions:
  1. How do you think affiliates work best together to partner on effective projects and initiatives?
  2. What do you see as the role of affiliates in the Wikimedia movement in the next three years?
  3. What do you feel you will bring to the committee that makes you a uniquely qualified candidate?

All Wikimedians are invited to share endorsements and comments about candidates. If you provide a negative comment, please cite appropriate evidence for your concerns; it is not appropriate to simply state a negative opinion without factual evidence. We would like to maintain a friendly space for candidates to state their interest without fear of public ridicule.


Reda Kerbouche (Reda Kerbouche)Edit

I am Reda Kerbouche, founding member and manager of Wikimedians of Tamazight User Group and head of communication of Wikimedia Algeria since 2014. I am an active member of the community with various contributions to Wikimedia projects since 2010. I have organized several Wikimedia project in the last few years (I am proud of the Arabic Wikipedia MOOC). I support all languages communities, mostly indigenous languages. I have organized with my group several Wikimedia contests (Wiki Loves X). I presented several projects at several conferences around the world about Wikimedia.

I speak in French, Arabic, Russian, Tacawit, and English. I work for developing African and indigenous languages. I was in the scholarship committee of WikiIndaba and WikiArabia. I am also a member of Wiki Indaba Steering Committee.

I know how the Wikimedia community work and how to influence the new communities to start working. With my new user group, now we are about to start a new project sister of Wikipedia in a new language.

  1. How do you think affiliates work best together to partner on effective projects and initiatives?
    I think the key to building high-impact projects is frequent meetings between affiliates who share common interests. Also the affiliates have quite active Wikimedians as members from all around the world that's make it very helpful for them to take effective decisions on recommendations.
  2. What do you see as the role of affiliates in the Wikimedia movement in the next three years?
    At this moment we have over than 100 user groups. I believe that we will see in the next three years, new chapters who have grown up from these user groups. as a result, it will extend the geography and ideologies of the Wikimedia movement, in the education, cultural and in the everyday life of the communities.
  3. What do you feel you will bring to the committee that makes you a uniquely qualified candidate?
    I feel I will bring experience in community building, as well as working within a diverse group. And as I said above I'm working on indigenous languages and in my sector, there are not many active users, if I will have the opportunity to be a part of the committee, my goal will be to help these communities to organize themselves and work in the Wikimedia movement.
    I have international experience and I know a lot of specificity of several countries (I was born in Asia, I grew up in Africa and I live in Europe). I am sure I will be an asset to AffCom if my application is given a consideration.

EndorsementsEdit

  1.   Strong support -- I strongly support the application of Reda as we have worked closely in different contexts and projects. He has proven to be a true leader and an inspirational person that can make people sit together and work actively on several projects. The results that he had achieved are the best proof of his character. Besides that, Reda has an extensive experience in managing, participating and organizing many Wikimedia related events, and has been member of different committees and jurys related to them. His international profile and ability to speak several languages and combine different cultural background comes also to play in my opinion, as a role in the Affiliation Committee requires this kind of profile. I believe that the Wikimedian community in general and the Affiliation Community in particular will win a lot by accepting Reda in this position. Anass Sedrati (talk) 10:21, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  2.   Strong support -- Based on my experience working and dealing with Reda, he has always shown diligence in working on different kinds of projects. I do think that he is going to bring added value to the work of AffCom thus my strong support. Good luck! --Abdeaitali (talk) 11:16, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  3.   Strong support - Based on Reda excellent qualifications, and on Anass evaluation, whom I trust. But please, in case you are chosen, don't be just another sheep in the flock.- Darwin Ahoy! 15:04, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  4.   Strong support -- Reda, He is a member who has many years of experience and has done a lot of projects in wikimedia, and is the founder of several user groups. He is very active with the community and has very good contact with international communities, especially in the African community. He attended several conferences (Wikimania, Wikiarabia, WikiIndaba, Wiki Convention froncophone, Wiki conference Berlin and Wiki conference Russia). He is very skilled in communication. He is doing interviews in the international press about wikimedia projects. Technically it is available and dedicated in software design and offline and online project. He has piloted several projects (all the Wiki Loves X, the MOOCs) he has developed communication strategies. And he masters several languages. He defends minorities. Finally he is very open and he knows how to listen to others.--Great11 (talk) 14:26, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
  5.   Strong support --Mehman 97 08:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  6.   Strong support --Jaba1977 (talk) 16:04, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  7.   Strong support Always supported kind and hard working persons!-Surprizi (talk) 16:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  8.   Strong support -- Before the creation of Wikimedia Algeria UG Reda has given us considerable support and strengthened the activity between the community of Algerian Wikimedans. He has participated in many regional conferences around the world. He is known to the international community and has good relations with all. as a member of the affcom, we trust his abilities to give more to the committee, we wish good luck to Reda--Mohammed Bachounda (talk) 10:03, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  9.   Strong support -- The amount of diverse contribution by Reda to the Wikimedia Community makes him a deserving candidate. --Rogueassasin123 (talk) 02:52, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  10.   Strong support -- he is the ideal person for the recruitment and motivation of projects and recognized for his vocation and commitment to make wikipedia a more open and accessible knowledge space and especially attractive through its multidisciplinary skills, energy and creativity.--Farajiibrahim (talk) 07:48, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  11.   Strong support -- Reda is highly motivated to provide support to his peers and communities. His insights and strategies on WISCOM gives me confidence in his ability to make immense contributions to the Affcom.--Flixtey (talk) 22:05, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  12.   Strong support Very active and productive. JukoFF (talk) 09:40, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  13.   Strong support He is at least well known in Russian and Algerian communities, he participated a lot of events. He knows a lot of languages. And knows a lot about Wikimedia in general and particularly about Wikimedia affiliates. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 12:44, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  14.   Strong support This is very positive man with very valued multi-cultural experience. This may be good choice! --Kaganer (talk) 16:30, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  15.   Strong support --Тимерхан (talk) 04:33, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  16.   Strong support, of course.--Ctac (talk) 09:48, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  17.   Support--Sandeep Raut (talk) 12:48, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
  18.   Strong support--David1010 (talk) 13:57, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
  19.   Support--Mahmood (talk) 21:07, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  20.   Strong support Dyolf77 (talk) 21:25, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  21.   Support Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 14:05, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  22.   Strong support--იაკობ მახარაძე (talk) 17:46, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  23.   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 18:39, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  24.   Support Reda is a dedicated member in the African community. I believe he'd bring value to AffCom.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:47, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  25.   Strong support --Reda benkhadra (talk) 08:30, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  26.   Strong support Reda is a very active wikimedian, he is doing an amazing work in Algeria. He is polyglot with an excellent knowledge of the wikimedia movement.Yamen (talk) 14:14, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  27. I strongly support Reda as he is a very active wikimedian in Algeria.Afek (talk) 20:02, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  28.   Support --Gereon K. (talk) 19:14, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  29.   Strong support -- un contributeur et guide, son vote à la tête vas être un soulagement pour nous les communautés naissante en Afrique principalement Aboubacarkhoraa (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  30.   Strong support --fatimah (talk) 19:19, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  31.   Strong support --Sayd (talk) 19:25, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  32.   Strong support --robben13 (talk) 19:26, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  33.   Strong support --falilou (talk) 19:27, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  34.   Strong support --sagesse de sagessee (talk) 19:28, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  35.   Strong support --independantee (talk) 19:29, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  36.   Support obviously. Cheers, VIGNERON * discut. 21:14, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  37.   Strong support Hamed Gamaoun (talk) 22:15, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  38.   Strong support I believe that Reda is the right person for the job.--Bright Kwame Ayisi (talk) 23:43, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  39.   Strong support For the short time that I knew him, I saw someone determine to move the Wikimedia movement forward.--Geugeor (talk) 07:23, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  40.   Strong support. It was interesting to listen his report at Wikimedia conference in this year. --Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 11:53, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  41.   Strong support -- User:Rossignol_Benoît I appreciated the great involvment of Reda in the project, and how he took time to answer my questions 13:50, 26 December 2018 (UTC)~
  42.   Strong support I saw Reda really active and involved in Wikimedians communities in Africa. I believe he is the man for the job Mah3110 (talk) 23:51, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  43.   Strong support I know Reda as very active Wikipedian, who has ties with different cultures.--Wertuose (talk) 07:01, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  44.   Strong support I know Reda and I think he is a real Wikipedian, working hard, bringing his knowledge from different places together. Yes for Reda! --Justine.toms (talk) 10:53, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  45.   Strong support Very active and zealous in getting work done.. Joy Agyepong (talk) 13:00, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  46.   Strong support Good Luck Reda   --Omar Ghrida (talk) 21:34, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  47.   Strong support I do appreciate Reda's work in Wikimedia movement and SUPPORT..Good Luck Kamal Osama (talk) 12:10, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  48.   Strong support I met Reda in two different Wikimedia meetings and he is definitely dedicated to the movement not only on a national scale, but an international one as well.--Houssem Abida (talk) 21:32, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  49.   Support --Galahad (sasageyo!)(esvoy) 04:07, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  50.   Strong support --Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 19:25, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  51.   Strong support -- --ElWaliElAlaoui (talk) 20:47, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  52.   Strong support --Sesita7 (talk) 17:47, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  53.   Strong support --Giga Doguzovi (talk) 17:51, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  54.   Strong support --Nika chareqishvili (talk) 17:52, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  55.   Strong support --Nina1009 (talk) 17:54, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  56.   Strong support --Lika Kharazishvili (talk) 18:10, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  57.   Strong support -- He is a committed member of the African community Uzoma (talk)
  58.   Strong support --Xenophôn (talk) 11:10, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  59.   Strong support Pradigue (talk) 08:42, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  60.   Support--Owula kpakpo (talk) 14:56, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
  61.   Strong support -- I have worked with him in several projects (3 MOOCs and photo constets, and a drone photo project), I feel satisfied with the results every time, I hope that you will be chosen my friend, good luck.--Zakaria Mimouni (talk) 12:58, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
  62.   Strong support The Living love (talk) 14:19, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
  63.   Support based on the feedbacks and crosswikiness. I did not find any reason to oppose.--Alexmar983 (talk) 11:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Questions for the candidateEdit

  1. Recently Affiliations Committee has not enjoyed the confidence of larger community on actions such as User Groups in Brazil and Chapter in Portugal. How do you wish to restore this confidence? What should effectively be the role of Affiliations Committee in such crisis ? How does Affiliations Committee determine it does not lead to excessiveness of its office. --Abhinav619 (talk) 02:52, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
    Hi @Abhinav619: First of all I apologize for my late response, And happy New Year. I do not accuse the committee, users or the groups. My opinion is that all good or bad activities should be put in group reports, to be able to visit them and to take them into account before authorizing new groups especially if there is an internal conflict like Brazil. And do not make personal decisions if you have a problem with a person or a group. The AffCom must be neutral, especially transparent, and give a chance to reconsider crisis situations to make the right decision and also to give feedback so that the community knows what to do to move forward without being frustrated.--Reda Kerbouche (talk) 18:43, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

David Cuenca Tudela (Micru)Edit

I am the co-founder of the Wikisource Community User Group and active Wikidatan. I am also a member of Amical Wikimedia, Wikimedia Deutschland, and Wikimedia Belgium. I am currently volunteering at the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU in Belgium because I am interested in giving our movement a voice in politics. I have presented at several conferences, and I have attended two Wikimanias and two WMCON. I was in the scholarship committee for the first Wikidata Conference. I am also involved with Creative Commons and Open Knowledge Belgium.

My motivation to join the AffCom is to achieve expertise about the challenges that our movement faces around the world, so that I can serve the movement better. I'm also interested in knowing the inner workings of the AffCom and help conceptualize tools (technological or social) that streamline its processes.

  1. How do you think affiliates work best together to partner on effective projects and initiatives?
    The organized part of the movement is based on personal relationships and trust, when that is present, then it is possible to assemble a group of volunteers that bring energy and dedication. Sometimes it is necessary to rely on paid staff or full-time volunteers because some projects are too time-consuming for the organizers. Additionally there should be an interest to start and join partnership projects, which is something that can be declared.
  2. What do you see as the role of affiliates in the Wikimedia movement in the next three years?
    If our movement aspires to be democratically steered, then the affiliates will have to get involved in internal political activities, which can be seen as time-consuming, but are necessary to keep the movement evolving and adapting to new circumstances. Affiliates can be the driving force of change in the structure of the movement, which should be editable just like any wiki policy.
  3. What do you feel you will bring to the committee that makes you a uniquely qualified candidate?
    Besides of the outlined experience, and my passion for the movement, I frequently come up with new ideas, which are not necessarily practical, however they always bring insight and inspiration. I am also quite experienced at identifying and crafting consensus.

EndorsementsEdit

  1.   Support--19Tarrestnom65 (talk) 12:39, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
      Support-- Darwin Ahoy! 21:06, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  2.   Support Of course. --Yeza (talk) 07:00, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
  3.   Strong support. Shani Evenstein. 22:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  4.   Support Strakhov (talk) 22:58, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  5.   Support Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 14:05, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  6.   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 18:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  7.   Support. —Teles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 19:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  8.   Support--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:54, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  9.   Strong support Flixtey (talk) 12:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  10.   Support--Galahad (sasageyo!)(esvoy) 04:07, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  11.   Support Ixocactus (talk) 19:31, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  12.   Oppose 1) Can't support a candidate that takes so lightly the fact that AffCom has directed - out if bad information, incompetence, ignorance, whatever - an affiliate to go against its country law, after suspending that affiliate precisely on the grounds of suspicion of being in breach of the country law, saying it's OK because "requests are not orders." 2) Can't support a candidate that excuses gross incompetence with the condition of volunteers. This is not a kids game, those actions have very serious consequences to the affiliates and to all people involved. If AffCom is not working properly on a volunteer basis, then we must find another solution. 3) Can't support a candidate that affirms that saying someone else is acting out of "remarkable and brazen bad faith" is not a personal attack, and excuses that kind of behaviour. I'm very sorry that you misinterpreted my right to give my opinion out of the direct experience I had with a specific member of AffCom as a "smear campaign", even after repeatedly presenting evidence about it, but the facts are there, anyone can see for themselves and take their own conclusions.- Darwin Ahoy! 02:19, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
    1) The AffCom has NOT "directed anyone to go against the law", it might have made "a request that may have not been fulfilled due to legal constraints". The first statement is a deceitful mischaracterization of the truth. "To direct someone against the law" would sound like this: "we know about this law and we want you to circumvent it doing this", and that is not what happened because there was absolutely no intent. 2) What you call "gross incompetence" is again a mischaracterization unsubstatiated by any source. 3) It is not a personal attack to say that someone else is acting out of "remarkable and brazen bad faith", if they are actually doing that, like what you are doing here. You are opposing everyone who doesn't agree with your crooked version of what happened instead of listening and trying to find collaborativelly a better representation of it. What you write and how you write it, makes me think that you are assuming bad faith. 4) The "facts" and "evidence" that you have presented so far do not substantiate your claims. The correct representation of the truth is above any right to give your opinion, that is why in the Wikimedia projects we have mechanisms to deal with people who behave in ways contrary to the spirit of the Wikimedia movement. The public arena should not be an exception, and I hope we can come up with ways to make users aware when the community perceives that they are bending the truth excessively, come up together with better narratives if they are up for collaboration, and invite them out if they refuse to abide to the collaborative mission of gathering truthful knowledge.--Micru (talk) 12:11, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
    1) I never said AffCom had any intend of making the affiliate breach the law, but it certainly would have been the consequence had the affiliate followed those directions, further complicating the whole process, inclusively for the real incorporated entity. AffCom requested that affiliate to go against the law, in a situation they were directing it on what to do in order to be in full compliance with the law. If you don't know the context of the situation you are talking about, nor have any interest in knowing it, maybe it's better not to comment on it in first place. 2) An affiliate asking WMF for legal support to deal with a situation, being promised that legal support, and being faced not only with no legal support, but with AffCom taking over the case and issuing a suspension against the affiliate, and replacing the requested professional legal support by decisions of their own, without any legal basis, and in fact against the law - if this isn't gross incompetence, I don't know what it is. If AffCom is the proper entity to deal with a situation involving law and legality, then it must be prepared for that, and not play the game of the sorcerer's apprentice with all its dire consequences. 3 and 4) Saying " It is not a personal attack (...) if they are actually doing that" is not evidence for anything. If you have evidence it was a display of bad faith, please state it, because you haven't done that until now. And neither "like what you are doing here", "your crooked version", etc., is evidence for anything, it's just aggression and destructive criticism. I would wish you would refrain from doing that here because, as you correctly state, this is a public space. If you have any concrete evidence of bad faith from my part, please state it instead of making gratuitous accusations, like you've been doing. "The "facts" and "evidence" that you have presented so far do not substantiate your claims" Why? You never said. One would expect that you would hold to yourself the standards you so brazenly defend for others.- Darwin Ahoy! 16:13, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
    You have said "AffCom has directed [...] an affiliate to go against its country law", and I label that bad faith because that has never been the case. At this point, I do not know which battle you are trying to win. If you want to get support for your cause, I must say that you are doing very poorly.--Micru (talk) 19:13, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
    Even if you chose to ignore the public evidence of AffCom asking the affiliate's board to not act like that, you were not in the meetings with AffCom to be able to say "that has never been the case", you've not the least authority on the subject to come here saying that I'm lying when I say AffCom directed us to convey a General Assembly using a procedure which is against the law. I've not come here to win any battle, I came here to express my opinion on the candidatures to AffCom, and that's what I've done. But enough with your constant gratuitous accusations of bad faith, argumentum ad populum ("if many persons say something, they must be right"), and whatever you've been doing here. I've already stated that opinion very clearly, as well as the basis for it, and will refrain to answer more provocations like those. Thank you, have an happy weekend.--- Darwin Ahoy! 19:35, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
    Look, I do not need to be there to consider absurd the story that you are presenting. Whatever they told you to do, if you think that it is against the law you can tell them and find something else to do. You are holding to a grudge and you seem unable to let go of it. Fine, if you want to live with that story in your head instead of finding a common story with the people who have "wronged" you, it's up to you. However, it is going to hurt you more than the people you are angry with. My argument is not an argumentum ad populum, but an argumentum ad consensum, which is that ideally everyone should participate in writting a common story. You are not doing that, you are pushing your one-sided view of the story instead of considering that the other side might have a different view than the one that you present. --Micru (talk) 10:50, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Questions for the candidateEdit

  1. Recently Affiliations Committee has not enjoyed the confidence of larger community on actions such as User Groups in Brazil and Chapter in Portugal. How do you wish to restore this confidence? What should effectively be the role of Affiliations Committee in such crisis ? How does Affiliations Committee determine it does not lead to excessiveness of its office. --Abhinav619 (talk) 02:51, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
    @Abhinav619: In my opinion the first step for a reconciliation would be to recognize the constraints under which each group operated. It is not possible to recover the trust without first understanding deeply all the factors that lead to the actions of each group. Then I would advise to see if it would be possible to affect the conditions that lead to the conflict. Maybe the policy can be clarified, or the process for suspension/de-recognition improved. Before reaching that end, a lot of work can be done to understand the diversity of the movement and to accommodate it. The AffCom should not be a tool to oppress affiliates, but a way to understand their local difficulties (and making them aware of the difficulties of the global movement), in order to allow the affiliates to shine in their own unique way. There must be some balance between the wishes of the AffCom and the affiliate wishes, in a way that the whole Wikimedia movement benefits.--Micru (talk) 21:50, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
    Just to clarify: In the case of Brazil there really was a conflict (mainly caused by the blind approval by AffCom of a clone of an already existing User Group, with the clone led by people already in open conflict with the existing User Group at the time it was proposed). But in the case of Portugal, as far as I know, there never was any conflict, internal or otherwise. If there was any conflict, it was with AffCom itself.- Darwin Ahoy! 23:31, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
    @Micru: Your statement here //The AffCom should not be a tool to oppress affiliates, but a way to understand their local difficulties (and making them aware of the difficulties of the global movement), in order to allow the affiliates to shine in their own unique way. // puts me in lot of belief and good vibes. Wish you the best and thanks for responding. --Abhinav619 (talk) 03:35, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  2. I have noticed that the Wikisource Community User Group has sort of stalled recently. What role will you play in trying to get it back up and actictive again? What are the plans for 2019? I am willing to receive my answer via email. Thank you. ―MattLongCT -Talk- 03:22, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Andrea Patricia Kleiman (Jaluj)Edit

I am a passionate wikipedian and wikimedian and I have a clear commitment to the movement. I am a sysop in Wikiquote. I am a founding member of Muj(lh)eres latinoamericanas en Wikimedia, Wikimedia Uruguay, Wikitherapy and Inter WikiWomen Collaboration. I am a very committed member of Wikimedia Spain and, currently, a Board Member of Wikimedia Argentina for the second term. I’ve been engaged with the Community Health and Harrasment Working Group, I am a member of the Wikimedia diversity Group and I am involved in the Iberocoop regional cooperation network. Online, I am a founding member of Wikiproyecto Mujeres, Mujeres en la Arquitectura, Proyecto mujeres árabes y latinoamericanas and Mujeres africanas in Wikipedia in Wikipedia in Spanish. I am the founder of Wikiquote en el hospital.

1- How do you think affiliates work best together to partner on effective projects and initiatives?

I believe that affiliates work best together when they know each other. Affiliates need to have many meetings, to share experiences and to establish realistic priorities when developing a collaborative work plan. In a collaborative environment, each user’s past experience, work style, cultural values, expectations, and self-interest will surface and impact the ability of the group to effectively work together. Communication is the key to work through challenging situations.

2- What do you see as the role of affiliates in the Wikimedia movement in the next three years?

The role of affiliates in the Wikimedia movement has a significant impact in the movement so it is very important to have healthy interplay among them and we need to understand it. Making a decision at the top of the organization it is useless if the affiliates don’t share it. There are many more chances of meeting the objectives and expectations when affiliates share the decision-making, so the role of affiliates should increase and should be much more important in the Wikimedia movement. We need direct communication channels and we need to encourage the movement to own the issues more collectively.

3- What do you feel you will bring to the committee that makes you a uniquely qualified candidate?

I can speak Spanish, English, French, Italian, Portugues and I understand some Hebrew. I have traveled a lot around the world and I have lived in several countries. I have strong experience in building new communities inside the movement. As a professional, part of my job as a counselor is to mediate between people in conflict. I am very good with interpersonal relationship building and I feel very comfortable working with collaborative groups. I am committed to learn and grow facing every new challenge and any new role which I would like to do. I believe that we should represent the movement's diversity and include more sensitive and diverse people. As a woman and as a Latin American, I believe that I can contribute not only with my experience and expertise but with my vision of the world.

EndorsementsEdit

  1.   Support Andrea is a passionate Wikimedian who has been active on several Wikiprojects for many years now. She is also an admin on Spanish Wikiquotes. Her work surrounding women and people with disabilities is quite notable. Given her passion, experience and hardwork, she makes the best candidate for AffCom. I wholeheartedly support Andrea's nomination to the AffCom. --Netha Hussain (talk) 14:07, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  2.   Support Andrea has been a wikipedista for quite some time and has demonstrated her capacity for the position.--Fedaro (talk) 14:37, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  3.   Support B25es (talk) 15:10, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  4.   Strong support I met Andrea Patricia Kleiman in Mexico and over time, I have been continually excited watching her grow in the movement. She comes complete with high analytical and people skills. -- Blossom (talk) 16:15, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  5.   Support --Roberto Fiadone (talk) 15:42, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  6.   Support Una mujer muy proactiva y comprometida con su trabajo. --Flomarciani (talk) 16:46, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  7.   Support She does an excellent job on Wikimedia, looking to reduce the existing gender gap. In addition, a female and Latin American representation is great. --Gastón Cuello (talk) 17:09, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  8.   Strong support I support Andrea's nomination. She is a user with many years of experience in wikipedia and creator of multiple articles, many of them of great importance, in addition to her many collaborations to improve articles not her own. Her experience throughout the world makes her a user to take into account to work on projects at a global level. In my experience, when creating my first article, she was the first person who approached me with suggestions for improvement and from there she is the first user I think of having any questions and I learn a lot from her tips. And you can see on his talk page she acts with others the same way. Therefore, and several other factors, I think that in Wikipedia we would win a lot with Jaluj in this position. --Gustavoippolito (talk) 17:13, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  9.   Strong support Andrea es una usuaria comprometida con el proyecto, todo mi apoyo. Laura Fiorucci (talk) 19:10, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  10.   Strong support Aporta un trabajo muy importante, es constante y rigurosa.Tiputini (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  11.   Strong support The presence of Andrea within Wikimedia is essential and as stated in previous comments, it adds value to reducing the gender gap, and also strengthens the achievement of projects in the Global South. Taichi - (あ!) 19:48, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  12.   Support I think she will do a great job. Alpinu (talk) 21:29, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  13.   Support I'm not supporting Andrea only because she's a woman or Latin American, but because besides that, she's trustworthy, compromised with and very active in Wikimedia projects, charismatic, and overall a friendly and nice person too. I believe she will be competent and able of independent thinking, something that is very much needed in AffCom. I very much disagree with the current system of AffCom candidatures, where whoever already is at AffCom gets to decides who joins or leaves the team, despite the will of the community, and ignoring any recommendations and warnings that are put forward by the community. That way the system tends to self perpetuate, and there hardly is any renovation at all. Last time Andrea proposed herself as a candidate she was not accepted, despite the overwhelming support by the Wikimedia community. I hope she will be accepted this time.- Darwin Ahoy! 22:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  14.   Support --Adolfobrigido (talk) 23:17, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  15.   Support --Gelpgim22 (talk) 02:33, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  16.   Support--Safi-iren (talk) 11:01, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  17.   Support--19Tarrestnom65 (talk) 12:38, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  18.   Support We need her. Wikimedia needs her.--Héctor Guido Calvo (talk) 17:50, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  19.   Strong support Can't think of somebody more apt to the work, a strong person, as much passionate as she's reliable. Of course I support her. Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 21:12, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  20.   Support I know about her work on and off wiki, and I trust she's a very strong candidate. Her presence in AffCom will add to a better view on gender gap issues and I believe she might work well with a diverse team in every level. --Edjoerv (talk) 21:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  21.   Support I know that Andrea will do her best in the committee. I am familiar with her gender gap, wikiquate activities, and her input in the committee wil be essential Armineaghayan ArmAg 05:54, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  22.   Support--Balajijagadesh (talk) 06:05, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  23.   Strong support Apoyo fuertemente la candidatura de Andrea. Desde los distintos proyectos en los que ha participado y con la consolidación del Grupo Muj(lh)eres Latinoamericanas, ha fomentado la participación de nuevas usuarias y la creación de contenidos de calidad sobre nuestra región. Destaco su gran compromiso con el movimiento y la preocupación por cuestiones de inclusividad y de cooperación internacional. Su formación académica fortalece las actividades que encara.--Imoisset (talk) 21:45, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  24.   Strong support off course Esteban (talk) 14:22, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  25.   Support Andrea is really capable and can manage the task of the AffCom --Sahaquiel9102 (talk) 00:26, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
  26.   Support Sin duda alguna. Ánimos y gracias por ofrecerte Andrea. --Yeza (talk) 07:06, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
  27.   Support Knowing Andrea through her work and having met her in person, I believe in the impact her positiveness will have in AffCom, which needs these qualities.   ManosHacker talk 21:51, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
  28.   Support --Butoro (talk) 03:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  29.   Support honesta y capaz. She will do great! Strakhov (talk) 22:57, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  30.   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 18:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  31.   SupportTeles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 19:41, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  32.   Support--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:55, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  33.   Support --Oscar_. (talk) 17:05, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  34.   Support Editor committed with the project and its interaction with the society --Antur (talk) 22:52, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  35.   Strong support Andrea is a passionate, hard-working Wikimedian with a kind heart and a brave spirit. I especially appreciate her work with mentally-ill editors in our joint Wikitherapy project. Whole-hearted support for her candidacy --Saintfevrier (talk) 09:34, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  36.   Strong support Flixtey (talk) 12:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  37.   SupportAndrea tiene una gran capacidad de trabajo en equipo. una amplia experiencia y un ritmo que inspira.--Caleidoscopic (talk) 22:16, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  38.   Strong support Ontzak   (Bilbo ta Bizkai guztia) 09:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  39.   Support AlvarezGomez (talk) 12:47, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  40.   Support Millars (talk) 12:59, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  41.   Strong support -anatdenisse- (talk) 14:44, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  42.   Support Jcfidy (Cuentame) (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  43.   Support Gauri 16:31, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  44.   Support I guess you didn't expect it Irwin talk2me 17:56, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  45.   Support Fixertool (talk) 19:24, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  46.   Support--Galahad (sasageyo!)(esvoy) 04:07, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  47.   Support --Vercelas (quæstiones?) 14:55, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  48.   Support Greta
  49.   Support --Yhhue91 (talk) 01:57, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  50.   Support Chico Venancio (talk) 19:15, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  51.   Strong support Don't know where does she get the time for this activities, but she's always there. --Marcelo (talk) 17:16, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Questions for the candidateEdit

  1. Recently Affiliations Committee has not enjoyed the confidence of larger community on actions such as User Groups in Brazil and Chapter in Portugal. How do you wish to restore this confidence? What should effectively be the role of Affiliations Committee in such crisis ? How does Affiliations Committee determine it does not lead to excessiveness of its office. --Abhinav619 (talk) 02:51, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
The committee is made up of people, by users who have their own opinions about the movement. I can not comment on how they were working because I do not know their motivations and their thoughts for the decisions they have made so far so I don't question them. They are responsible for their own decisions and I respect them. I can only be responsible for the decisions I can make if I belong to the committee. What I can say is that I think it is important that there is transparency in terms of decision-making, but I think that of the movement in general and not only in relation to the committee.--Jalu (talk) 16:06, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Manavpreet Kaur (Manavpreet Kaur)Edit

“Great success comes from small steps” and I have been taking small steps towards learning and gaining new experiences. As a wikimedian from a promising User Group, I have been contributing to various Wikimedia projects since 2014 and have been actively involved in planning and executing various promotional and collaborative activities related to Wiki. I’ve been involved in a number of offline and outreach activities and my major accomplishments related to Wikimedia work in India are- Program Coordinator for WikiConference India 2016, participated in the strategy track of WMCON-2017 and following the same, facilitated in organizing Affiliate led strategy salon in Patiala. I’ve been a resource person to the Train-the-Trainer program by CIS-A2K in 2017 and 2018 and have also assisted CIS-A2K in Wiki Advanced Training, where I shared my experiences, had sessions on different subjects, participated in brainstorming activities and got a chance to closely know and understand the wiki journeys of different participating wikimedians which helped us in designing our future projects. I have also been a part of the resource distribution team for Project Tiger and have been a jury member for Wiki Science Competition. The first experience of the cross-community association after WCI was with Hindi Wikimedians, where I joined the Wiki Awareness Campaign as a resource person and had a session on Wikimedia Movement: Diverse initiatives in India. I have also worked along with Wikimedians from different communities for projects like-WikigraphistsBootcampIndia, and Wiki Women for Women Wellbeing. I am also working for some future activities like Wiki Library Project and heritage project. A proposal regarding Wiki Women Meetup has been proposed to CIS-A2K where the issues faced by women editors and the probable solutions to retain and promote women editors will be discussed. As South Asian wikimedians, we have shared situations and concerns, interactions with other wikimedians at different events facilitated in noticing the common issues and to imply the probable solutions. As a member of the committee, I would be able to project these concerns to a larger community of people with diverse backgrounds, experience and wisdom which would help the Affiliates to deal with these issues in a better way and will also provide insight to the unexplored aspects of the challenges faced by communities which might act as a base to design future initiatives.

How do you think affiliates work best together to partner on effective projects and initiatives?

The knowledge comes not only from the people who agree, but a lot of the ones who disagree,  It is not always necessary to be directly involved in a project, but being a bridge and letting affiliates know about other affiliates focussing on the similar theme to establish collaborations, sharing the issues and experiences of affiliates with each other to assist them in countering issues or avoiding them.  In the pursuit of bettering the environment and knowing the team, frequent Meetups- online or offline should be organized. by focussing on the elements of diversity which are important in a jurisdiction and following the same, keep our initiatives user-centric and think of movement as service and experience. The team should be open and authentic in decision making, helping lift others up and working towards a shared goal of building influence. By never hindering each other from trying new things and giving everyone a fair chance to practice what they believe will work well for the community growth. I believe the most profound diversity is the diversity of thoughts and we should never fail to explore the same.  

What do you see as the role of affiliates in the Wikimedia movement in the next three years?

Wikimedians are learning a lot from each other and because of this exposure and enrichment of thoughts, the movement is growing and expanding the zones of consideration, which has lead to the formation of a number of user groups. The affiliates are facing their own set of challenges which are making them more empowered and also opening new horizons for all kinds of knowledge enthusiasts. In future, these affiliates will expand the theme, subject and scope of the movement and will be more inclusive, empathetic, focused and organized.

What do you feel you will bring to the committee that makes you a uniquely qualified candidate?

I have been involved in various online and outreach activities which made me understand the community context, planning, action, and mobilization. Interaction with wikimedians from different communities gave me insight into the different practices being followed by them. I also made some amazing friends who gave me a new perspective about the situation our communities face and also some probable approaches that may be tried to counter the same. This experience has inculcated in me the ability to work unitedly for the growth of the movement by respecting every individual, acknowledging the ideas, encouraging the contributions, empowering people and celebrating the differences.

EndorsementsEdit

  1.   Support - Satpal Dandiwal (talk) 04:47, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  2.   Support - Raju Jangid (talk) 04:48, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  3.   Support - ਲਵਪ੍ਰੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਸਿੱਧੂ (talk) 04:50, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  4.   Support -Sangaram Keshari Senapati (talk) 04:52, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  5.   Strong support - I am confident of her knowledge and skills, to serve in AffCom. She has not only led various initiatives but also helped other succeed in their endeavours, and is a team-player. KCVelaga (talk) 04:58, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  6.   Strong support Jagseer01 (talk) 05:05, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  7.   Strong support - Sushma Sharma (talk) 05:07, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  8.   Strong support Perfect user for Affiliations Committee, She has very good experence in wikimedia. And I think her skill will be very useful for Affiliations Committee.--Jayprakash >>> Talk 05:11, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  9.   Strong supportR.P.Joshi talk 05:20, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  10.   Strong support Abha Pradhan (talk) |Contribs) 05:30, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  11.   Strong support -- she has good communication and Management skills. Considerate in listening to people. Has patience and balanced mindset. In addition a wikipedian believing in open knowledge culture. Would be a good choice for affcom. -- Balajijagadesh (talk) 06:03, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  12.   Strong support Nirmal Brar Faridkot (talk) 06:06, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  13.   Strong support Nitesh Gill (talk) 06:10, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  14.   Strong support Her enthusiasm and skills in organising community programs has encouraging many people (incl me) towards contribution to wikipedia projects. I strongly endorse her application to serve in AffCom.-Jinoytommanjaly (talk) 06:14, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  15.   Strong support (Mr.Mani Raj Paul (talk) 06:16, 19 December 2018 (UTC))
  16.   Strong support She is perfect for Affcom. She has good communication and management skill in organising projects and encouraging peoples. She is a enthusias person.. --Parvathisri (talk) 06:26, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  17.   Support Manavpreet is good communicator and a organiser. Hence she is a good choice for affcom--கி.மூர்த்தி (talk) 07:30, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  18.   Strong support Benipal hardarshan (talk) 07:40, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  19.   Strong support Ahmed Nisar (talk) 07:41, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  20.   Strong support Based on her role during Wiki Conference Chandigarh and during the Advanced Wiki Training at Ranchi. --Muzammil (talk) 08:11, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  21.   Support - Diptanshu 💬 09:03, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  22.   Support Manavpreet has planned, run and reported several events related to women, healthcare and India. She is experienced with the way how stuff works in the Wikimedia movement, and is definitely a suitable candidate for AffCom. --Netha Hussain (talk) 09:04, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  23.   Strong support -J. Ansari Talk 09:52, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  24.   Strong support - Along with leadership qualities, she hv the quality of a person who can work on weaknesses of other volunteers and change those into strengths and strengthen them to be a good leaders too. Latest proof 'Wiki Women for Women Wellbeing project'. Sumita Roy Dutta (talk) 10:57, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  25. Strong Support - Competent candidate. Kind regards, — TBhagat (contribs | talk) 10:59, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  26.   Support - Aditi1601 (talk) 06:14, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  27.   Support ---Dolon Prova (talk) 13:52, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  28.   Support - MNavya (talk) 14:15, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  29.   Support - Strong support, Manavpreet kaur has a good leadership quality to take initiative in organizing number of projects. She is working on wikipedia, wikimedia and wiki commons from last 4 years. Based upon their previous work i strongly recommended a suitable candidate for affcom. Best wishes.-(talk) 09:46, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  30.   Support -Gurlal Maan (talk) 15:59, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  31.   Support -Stalinjeet Brar (talk) 16:13, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  32.   Strong support - I have worked with Manav during Wikimedia Conference India and Project Tiger. I have found her commitment and enthusiasm for the movement extraordinary. She is an ideal candidate to serve in the Affiliations committee. Best wishes. --Ravi (talk) 03:58, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  33.   Support -- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 04:11, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  34.   Support - Deserving candidate --Nilamkarn (talk) 05:42, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  35.   Strong support - Her enourmous interest and dedication is helping Indic wikipedia community to grow even better. She can do more with this affliation committee. --Tshrinivasan (talk) 09:02, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  36.   Strong support Shani Evenstein. 10:49, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  37.   Strong support - Zeetendra ») 11:05, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  38.   Strong support Manav has shown a strong leadership in the Wikimedia movement and she joining the Affiliation committe will be an asset for the committee--Sailesh Patnaik 11:27, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  39.   Support --Tiven2240 (talk) 02:56, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
  40.   Support Nrgullapalli (talk) 10:37, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
  41.   Strong support --Abhinavgarule (talk) 12:33, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
  42.   Strong support Manav is very good and strong supporter for me . She guide me very well . --Aliva Sahoo (talk) 09:29, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
  43.   Support --Afifa Afrin (talk) 06:16, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  44.   Strong support --Atudu (talk) 07:54, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  45.   Strong support ----Jaskirandeep (talk) 05:57, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  46.   Strong support - Suyash Dwivedi (talk) 15:25, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  47.   Support An obvious candidate. Highly dedicated towards her mission. Can help reduce gender bias in Wikipedia. Hence, my support. Wassan.anmol (talk) 17:55, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  48.   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 18:41, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  49.   Support --Janak Bhatta (talk) 06:32, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  50.   Strong support Flixtey (talk) 12:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  51.   Strong support --Abhinav619 (talk) 02:40, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  52.   Support I trust her to be diligent in all that she does. --Dharav.solanki (talk) 06:39, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  53.   Strong supportTired less team leader; The lighthouse for Indic wiki women--Info-farmer (talk) 01:03, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  54.   Support --Galahad (sasageyo!)(esvoy) 04:07, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  55.   Strong support--Nina1009 (talk) 17:59, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  56.   Support Vote of confidence, per Flixtey and Shani Evenstein.- Darwin Ahoy! 21:39, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  57.   Strong support R Ashwani Banjan Murmu (talk) 06:24, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
  58.   Strong support Rajeeb (talk) 19:05, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  59.   Strong support Satdeep Gill (talk) 12:34, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
  60.   Support Based on personal interaction during Wiki Science Competition 2017, I think she is a very supportive wikimedian. --Alexmar983 (talk) 18:56, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  61.   Strong support She is a champion of Diversity and I'm sure that her joining the Aff Comm would be a step towards a lot of great work... Shypoetess (talk) 18:14, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
  62.   Strong support Jagmit Singh (talk) 12:06, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Questions for the candidateEdit

  1. Recently Affiliations Committee has not enjoyed the confidence of larger community on actions such as User Groups in Brazil and Chapter in Portugal. How do you wish to restore this confidence? What should effectively be the role of Affiliations Committee in such crisis ? How does Affiliations Committee determine it does not lead to excessiveness of its office. --Abhinav619 (talk) 02:50, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
@Abhinav619 Hi, I am sorry for the delayed response. I am sorry, but I can't make any statement in this regard because I don't have  access to information about what happened and the limited information that I got from different portals doesn't allow me to pass judgement. I believe whosoever is involved in the process, takes the decision to best of their ability to understand and analyse the situation. The decision making should be transparent, objective, and inclusive. The team should evaluate feasibility, acceptability and suitability of the decision and then review the decision. Feedbacks may also assist in drawing learnings.-Manavpreet Kaur (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (KCVelaga)Edit

I’ve been contributing to Wikimedia projects since 2014. I predominantly contribute to English Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, and Wikidata. I’ve experience working with quality content on English Wikipedia, both developing and reviewing. I was also a coordinator for the Military History WikiProject. I’ve organized several outreach activities including Wiki Love contests, edit-a-thons, conferences and skill building activities for Wikimedians. Noteworthy of them are the Strategy Salon, OpenCon 2018 New Delhi, Wikidata editing campaign, #1Lib1Ref sessions, a series of activities to form a Wiki-club in my college; VVIT WikiConnect, and the Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018 India). By leading several projects, I’ve experience working grant programs of WMF, and with various affiliates in India, including being on the board of India chapter for a brief period. During my time with the national chapter, I’ve closely seen problems faced by Chapters often legally binding and working with overlapping affiliates. I’ve also recently been elected to the board of Education UG. I have also been an outreach coordinator (partnerships in past) for The Wikipedia Library.

How do you think affiliates work best together to partner on effective projects and initiatives?

I would like to see affiliates collaborating with each other projects. There is lack of communication between affiliates, both in terms of sharing the best practices and learning from the mistakes. This gap should be bridged to achieve synergy between various affiliate models and also foster community health. When I mean collaboration, it may as simple as a online campaign or a long-term support to develop capacity. I’ve recently come across collaboration between Ukrainian and Urdu communities which I felt is quite interesting and unique. I believe that such project should be done affiliate level to build a strong and a healthy affiliate network. Institutional knowledge sharing is a crucial process that needs to give more attention, and AffCom should be able to to make sure to that this process happens smoothly and is effective.

What do you see as the role of affiliates in the Wikimedia movement in the next three years?

Since the adoption of new (current) model in 2012, there has been a clear evidence of community’s interest in forming affiliates. However, in-line with the movement strategy process, I believe there is a dire need for the current structure to be redesigned (exploring the scope for new models if needed). Some of these could communities below the UG scope, such as Wiki-clubs at institutions to, above Chapters’ scope, transnational collaborations such CEE, SAARC, also a solution for overlapping scope such as countries like India. I would also like to see affiliates investing their resources on retention-focused outreach rather numerical targets. Since affiliates serve as gateway for WMF and for the larger movement to organise activities and promote the concept of “Wikimedia” in regional communities, capacity development of affiliate governance structures should be prioritized. As mentioned above, trans-affiliate collaborations must be encouraged, which will us foster international relations among regional communities and also community health.

What do you feel you will bring to the committee that makes you a uniquely qualified candidate?

With a decent experience of handling projects and sound understanding of the Wikimedia community + the affiliate structure, I am confident to support volunteers in forming and managing affiliates, as the primary function of the AffCom. I bring along the experience of experience organizing unique on-Wiki and offline (outreach) Wiki and experience working with various affiliates on various instances. I am greatly interested to contribute to the strategic discussions around the models and processes whenever required, and assist other stakeholders (WMF, board etc.) about the same.

EndorsementsEdit

  1.   Strong support - Krishna has taken various diverse roles in the Wikimedia Community and has time and again shown exceptional leadership, organization, and communication skills. The Affiliations Committee will definitely be benefited from having Krishna in its team. I fully endorse Krishna for this candidature. --Rogueassasin123 (talk) 10:23, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  2.   Strong support I have full faith in Krishna's capabilities and believe that he will be a valuable addition to the team.-Manavpreet Kaur (talk) 10:25, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  3.   Strong support I have watched Krishna getting more actively engaging with the Wikimedia movement first as a contributor and then as an Executive Committee member of the Wikimedia India Chapter. Forming a Wiki club in his college and organizing many events is also a commendable achievement. I hope his addition to the affiliation committee will be beneficial. --Ravi (talk) 11:14, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  4.   Strong support Sincere, dedicated, level headed, manage his team very well. Sumita Roy Dutta (talk) 11:30, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  5.   Strong support Nitesh Gill (talk) 12:27, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  6.   Strong support Stalinjeet Brar (talk) 14:38, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  7.   Strong support No doubt, He should be the part of Affiliations Committee.--Jayprakash >>> Talk 14:40, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  8.   Strong support Krishna has been part of organising many events. I have seen him working sincerely with lots of zeal and enthusiasm. His presence in the committee will surely be benefit the affiliation process. --User:Sushant savla
  9.   Strong support Krishna has been instrumental in establishing the Wiki club in our college. He guided several volunteers and strived hard for the development of the club. --Sumanth699 (talk) 15:21, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  10. Strong Support - Genuine candidate for AffCom. Kind regards, — TBhagat (contribs | talk) 15:56, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  11.   Strong support --KartikMistry (talk) 17:00, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  12.   Strong support --Gurlal Maan (talk) 17:28, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  13.   Support - Sangaram Keshari Senapati (talk) 01:49, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
  14.   Strong support --Tiven2240 (talk) 02:54, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
  15.   Support -Nizil Shah (talk) 11:03, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
  16.   Strong support - Krishna has taken various lead roles and conducted several outreach activities for development of Wikimedia Communities. So i believe in his capabilities and strongly endorse him for affiliation committee team.--Jinoytommanjaly (talk) 04:21, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
  17.   Strong support - Always supported the volunteers of Wiki club in our college. He is a hard working person with many skills. I think his skills will be useful for Affcom.--MNavya (talk) 05:45, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
  18.   Strong support Have seen him working hard to accomplish several projects related to Wikimedia and also successfully accomplishing them. I strongly believe he will be a great asset to the affcom team. SuswethaK (talk) 11:24, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
  19.   Strong support --Aliva Sahoo (talk) 12:07, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
  20.   Support--Sandeep Raut (talk) 13:39, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
  21.   Strong support He is one of the most experienced and wisest Wikimedians in terms of organizational administration and functioning and has been instrumental in bringing new and fruitful projects in India, enriching large number of Wikimedians with skills in the process of doing that. With his knowledge, wisdom and skills, I strongly believe he can bring a remarkable impact in the Affcom Committee with his skillset.Wikilover90 (talk) 05:55, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  22.   Strong support A self motivated person, always advises and helps volunteers. He is good at organizing things and planning events. His suggestions and ideas are different and unique. So I strongly endorse him for affiliation committee team. -Nivas10798 (talk) 07:53, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  23.   Strong support--Atudu (talk) 07:55, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  24.   Strong support - Suyash Dwivedi (talk) 15:24, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  25.   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 18:41, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  26.   Support--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:54, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  27.   Strong support - Bodhisattwa (talk) 02:51, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  28.   Strong support good candidate -J. Ansari Talk 03:27, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  29.   Strong support -Gazal world (talk) 08:19, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  30.   Strong support - Krishna has taken various roles in the Wikimedia Community with his brilliant leadership quality. So definitely. Mohammed Galib Hasan (talk) 15:29, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  31.   Strong support Krishna has had the opportunity to work with several affiliates and I believe his experiences will add a lot to Affcom. He is devoted to every cause he chooses and has shown a lot of zeal for several projects in the movement Flixtey (talk) 12:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  32.   Strong support--Joy Agyepong (talk) 13:00, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  33.   Strong supportMan with a different approach for the Indic wiki movement progress--Info-farmer (talk) 00:55, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  34.   Support--Galahad (sasageyo!)(esvoy) 04:07, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  35.   Support - Darwin Ahoy! 13:24, 31 December 2018 (UTC) Vote of confidence, per Flixtey
  36.   Support -- He is not afraid of engaging in complicated conversations. -- Balajijagadesh (talk) 08:33, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  37.   Support --Safi-iren (talk) 07:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  38.   Strong support -- krishna has a really good understanding of Wikimedia programs and their impacts.Sejal Khatri (talk) 23:58, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  39.   Strong support --Rajeeb (talk) 19:07, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  40.   Strong support Satdeep Gill (talk) 12:36, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
  41.   Strong support This response shows a great understanding of the potential Affcom can play in the movement. Chico Venancio (talk) 15:20, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
  42.   Support I had some times to read these answers, they seem ok.--Alexmar983 (talk) 14:01, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
  43.   Strong support From Military to TWL and WikiGraphists... Krishna has a diverse field of involvement yet his enthuciasm remains the same. His proactive nature will bring a lot of energy to the Aff Comm. Shypoetess (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Questions for the candidateEdit

  1. Recently Affiliations Committee has not enjoyed the confidence of larger community on actions such as User Groups in Brazil and Chapter in Portugal. How do you wish to restore this confidence? What should effectively be the role of Affiliations Committee in such crisis ? How does Affiliations Committee determine it does not lead to excessiveness of its office. --Abhinav619 (talk) 02:49, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
@Abhinav619: Hi Abhinav, thanks for the question. Since I'm not directly involved in the decision-making process of the affiliates mentioned above, I wouldn't comment much about that. However, I would voice my opinion on the process than the decision itself. I believe, a bad process might (not necessarily always) lead to a bad decision, and vice-versa. However, I would say this; the process could have been better by making it much more transparent—clearly stating circumstances to arrive at a decision. One more thing that I would like is to welcome comments from the community in the process. Eventually, this helps the AffCom to be close to the community, and also to the community to understand the process. Moreover, I believe, in the movement, community engagement is crucial for any process, project, committee, affiliate or any other body. AffCom's "What do we do?" section says "providing help and advice on solving common technical, trademark, administrative and community-building" Considering the last part, "community-building." If an affiliate has to be de-recognized for any reason(s), it would be great if AffCom plays an action to resolve the issues and make sure that the mistakes are not iterated, thereby, helping the community to come together, organize themselves to form a new affiliate. I say this because a national affiliate (be it UG or a Chapter) is very much required. KCVelaga (talk) 04:04, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

May Hachem (May Hachem93)Edit

I am a woman, who lives in Africa with Arabic roots with multicultural perspectives and background. And! a Wikimedian since 2013. I started from Wikipedia Education Program then became a campus leader for a couple of years where I successfully launched the program in 3 universities. I started the first WikiWomen initiative in the middle east" strong believer and supporter of Wikimedia 50/50". Since 2016, I was the first Arab to be a Wikimedian in Residence with UN agencies till now. I have wide experience in community engagement and volunteers management and campaigns launching.

How do you think affiliates work best together to partner on effective projects and initiatives?

  1. I appreciate personal initiatives, but at the same time, I would rather like to see initiatives where all affiliates of the same region or of the same language working on or contributing for.
  2. Also, following Wikimedia Strategy for 2030 in terms of goals and objectives, which I assume most of the affiliates are doing or trying to pursue.
  3. Working with partners regionally, for example, the WikiGap initiative was a brilliant example of how Wikimedians work together on one goal, effectively. I can see the impact of collaborating on this initiative, in a very short time "March 2018 to August 2018". This was impressive!
  4. Sharing knowledge. We are the best to talk about sharing knowledge and experiences. A better knowledge sharing is required and appreciated.

What do you see as the role of affiliates in the Wikimedia movement in the next three years? After three years, I hope we have:

  1. More equal and powerful representation from ALL affiliates in decision making within the movement,
  2. Better coordination within affiliates regionally and within the same affiliate internally,
  3. Initiatives or campaigns working on the Sustainable Development Goals for 2030,
  4. Working on Wikimedia Foundation branding within affiliates' communities,
  5. More attention to new sister projects, other than Wikipedia, individuals would be doing this, but if affiliates coordinated on this, things will be different, for instance: WikiData.


What do you feel you will bring to the committee that makes you a uniquely qualified candidate?

  • Wikimedia and Community Engagement Experience to share with the affiliates:
  1. Active Wikipedia member since 2013, Here Here
  2. Wikipedia Education Program Campus Leader, Here
  3. WikiWomen founder in the Arab States, Here
  4. Cofounder member of Wikimedia Egypt,
  5. Scholarships Committee member at WikiArabia2019,
  6. Member of the Wikimedia Foundation Strategy for 2030 Partnerships Working Group,
  7. Visible WikiWomen project coordinator,
  8. Since 2016, I was the first Arab to be a Wikimedian in Residence with UN agencies till now.
  9. I have wide experience in community engagement and volunteers management and campaigns lunching. Training more than 3000 volunteers within 4 years. Here
  10. Strong community building skills, reaching out for up to 500 volunteers per event. Facilitating up to 10 events per year regionally and online. I will be glad to share this experience with the affiliates.
  • UN Partnerships Experience that I can bring to the affiliates:
  1. Member of Gender Innovation Agora, UN Women Regional office for Arab states,
  2. Co Founder HerStory, even it is a personal project but I successfully developed series of partnerships with (UN Women, UNESCO, UNDP, UNICEF, League of Arab States, WFP, UNFPA, Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, Swedish Embassy, Canada Embassy, Embassy of Japan in Egypt), Please read more, Here Here HereHere Here
  3. During the 16 days of Activism, I successfully collaborated with Wikimedia Tunisia and Wikimedia Morocco and created partnerships with the two affiliates with HerStory and the UN Women Regional Office for Arab States.
  4. During the WikiGap event I also successfully created new partnerships with Wikimedia Levant, Wikimedia Iraq along with the Swedish Embassy. Increasing the number of volunteers in Lebanon and Iraq. The capability of connecting user groups and creating a one goal target is what I am proud of during 2018. Here
  5. Steering Committee member of Africa Youth Conference, Here

EndorsementsEdit

  1.   Support i trusted may because she is one of the most active users in Education program and she helped me a lot in sharing her experience in this regard.--مصعب (talk) 20:48, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  2.   Support--Sky xe (talk) 22:43, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  3.   Support--Anabmap (talk) 16:18, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  4.   Support I Know her personally. She is active in HerStory --Mahmood (talk) 21:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  5.   Support, I know May due to her work on Wikipedia especially in Gender equality and UN Women field. I highly endorse her. She is a WikiWoman--TonJ (talk) 21:08, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  6.   Strong support May is one of the most active wikimedians I know. She is a trusted person who has a great knowledge of the movement. --Dyolf77 (talk) 21:22, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  7.   Support--Meriem Mach (talk) 21:45, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  8.   Strong support An outstanding and trusted Wikimedian involved in so many projects. With her excellent knowledge of the Wikimedia movement she deserve to be in the Affiliations Committee.Yamen (talk) 22:00, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  9.   Strong support. We need more strong and reasonable women in AffCom. Shani Evenstein. 22:03, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  10.   Support May has shown initiative and leadership in the wikisphere. I believe she has a wide vision of where this aspect of the movement should be going, and therefore belongs on AFFCOM.
  11.   Support --Alaa :)..! 23:05, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  12.   Support --Gereon K. (talk) 00:22, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  13.   Support John Cummings (talk) 00:27, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  14.   Support ZachMcDowell (talk) 02:23, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  15.   Strong support In the Wikimedia movement, May is one of the most ambitious and talented women that I knew. At a young age, she already demonstrated her qualities by working on different projects to support communities on both local and global scale and by being one of the cofounders of Wikimedia Egypt. She puts a lot of efforts especially when it comes to gender equality projects and implementing projects in Egypt. She's not showing any signs of recession as well. May’s has demonstrated during her previous experiences a great sense of leadership and she managed to become a trustworthy person in the community through the years. I’m persuaded that she will do a great job and invest with all her knowledge into the Affcom. Youssef Ben Haj Yahia (talk) 06:59, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  16.   Support marcmiquel
  17.   Support May is certainly a unique asset for the affiliations committee through her background and work she has been performing for years. She has a good understanding of gender issues online in the Arab world, and can help advocate and solve the same problems in other parts of the world. Moreover, she is an experienced Wikimedian and has a notable experience in several conferences in the community, and a large network from the whole world. Anass Sedrati (talk) 12:44, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  18.   Support As per Anass, who actually said what I wanted to say. Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 14:03, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  19.   Strong support May is one of prominent energetic women who grew up from a education program. she showed her knowledge and skills and in many fields of the Wikimedia movement. I think May would be a great chance for AffCom to fill gender gap in this area. I endorse her with confidence.— Arash 14:04, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  20.   Support Impressive background and a profile & motivation that would add to Affcomm -Bence (talk) 16:12, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  21.   Strong support May is one of the Wikimedians who inspires me in the movement, she's truly an inspiration and some of her work are the best examples of projects in the movement. She's indeed one of the best candidates for this position, wishing her good luck! --Sailesh Patnaik 16:31, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  22.   Strong support One of the most inspiring women I have met during Wikimania'18. Definately she deserves to get this position. Good luck to her!--Safi-iren (talk) 16:45, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  23.   Support An obvious candidate. Highly dedicated towards her mission. Can help reduce gender bias in Wikipedia. Hence, my support. Wassan.anmol (talk) 17:54, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  24.   Support I have known her for may years, she is a good fit Mardetanha talk 18:34, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  25.   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 18:42, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  26.   Strong support A very active user with a great background. --J. Patrick Fischer (talk) 19:29, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  27.   Support. Strong background and commitment.—Teles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 19:39, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  28.   Support I think May will be a huge asset for the committee thanks to her different approach and background. I totally support her membership.--Houssem Abida (talk) 21:16, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  29.   Support May has been very active in Wikimedia and in civil society associations as a whole. A trustworthy and very dynamic person. ---Ssouissi (talk) 22:08, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
  30.   Support May is a very active member of the African community. I believe she can do great in the committee.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:43, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  31.   Strong support -J. Ansari Talk 03:29, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  32.   Support May is a dedicated Wikipedian and she is a perfect fit for this role. --Meno25 (talk) 05:17, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  33.   Strong support --Reda benkhadra (talk) 08:29, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  34.   Strong support She is one of the strong leaders and inspirational Wikimedians I know. She can be a good adition to the committee. Wikilover90 (talk) 10:14, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  35.   Support May is one of the energetic wikipedians I know. I like "HerStory" and would love to see May in the committee Armineaghayan--ArmAg 11:44, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  36.   Strong support May's a member of the egyptian community and arabic , she launched a successful project in collaboration with the ONE and participated in a many other projects before. --Mohammed Bachounda (talk) 13:04, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  37.   Support I have just met her once during Wikimania 2018 and attended some of her sessions during the con! She has a sweet personality and is inspiring! So I think she will be a good asset for the affiliations committee. 🍂 Notanotheramy (talk) 14:22, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  38.   Strong support May is one of the most active wikimedians I ever met, I learned a lot from here. I believe she deserves the best.--Mohammad Hijjawi (talk) 14:27, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  39.   Support My lovely may, she deserve all the best and will be the best addition to aff. committee, hope her the best of luck! براء (talk) 14:59, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  40.   Support --Muzammil (talk) 15:28, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  41.   Support She will do a great job as AffCom member! --Oscar_. (talk) 17:04, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  42.   Support I believe that, given her extensive expertise, in-depth knowledge of the Movement and qualified abilities, May will make a great addition to the AffCom --Abbad (talk) 19:54, 25 December 2018 (UTC).
  43.   Support You're great! Best of luck. --نادين (talk) 20:09, 25 December 2018‎ (UTC)
  44.   Support YOU DESERVE IT. --سامر (talk) 20:44, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  45.   Strong support May deserves to get this position.--Afek (talk) 21:53, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  46.   Support May is a proven Wikimedia veteran with impressive achievements. Also, one of the best possible options to increase diversity in any Wikimedia body. --Millosh (talk) 21:22, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  47.   Support --PierreSelim (talk) 21:25, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  48.   Strong support Hamed Gamaoun (talk) 22:28, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  49.   Strong support I know May through HerStory, a Wikipedia initiative with the UN to bridge the gender gap in content on Wikipedia. Working with her on the 2018 event in Rabat, I have known her to be highly engaging, energizing, and dependable. I consider the work she does of utmost importance and I enthusiastically support her candidacy. —Sambasoccer27 (talk) 00:22, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  50.   Support May is a very active Wikipedian , and she deserve it . Mohamed Ouda (talk) 05:31, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  51.   Support She will do agreat job to AffCom, she have many abilitities, i see her at Wikimania Cape Town, very active personGreat11 (talk) 05:35, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  52. Support Kind regards, — TBhagat (contribs | talk) 06:18, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  53.   Strong support --IMHO May will be good at Affcom, she is active contirbutor of Africa. Best Wishes Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 08:27, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  54.   Strong support --Aliva Sahoo (talk) 08:48, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  55.   Support --Saintfevrier (talk) 09:37, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  56.   Support -- Stephane (talk) 10:22, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  57.   Strong support -- May is a hardworking and have shown commitment in diversity related issues. Her views and experiences with education programs, gender programs and participation in discussions about the movement in Africa complements her abilities to make meaningful submissions to the committee as well as provide diverse perspective at the table Flixtey (talk) 12:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  58.   Support -- A maraqa (talk) 12:32, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  59.   Support May is a very active wikimedian and worked on many women projects and events. she will be a great asset to the AffCom. -- ARASH PT  talk  12:54, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  60.   Support As Sysop & Check user and Bureaucrat in ar.wiki i want to make it clear that May has full confidence from me and from all society members.--Abbas 15:37, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  61.   Support May would be a valuable member for the AffCom. She is trustworthy and has shown a long standing dedication within the movement. African Hope (talk) 20:14, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  62.   Support--Janak Bhatta (talk) 02:50, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  63.   Support--Very active Wikipedian, She is a suitable member for the AffCom Sarmad Yaseen (talk) 02:50, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  64. May is a long-standing and highly productive contributor with a history of brilliant contributions in the Wikimedia movement. She has a wide network of friends among our global communities, and is also rightly recognized as an empathetic person with a deep understanding of our mission and values in the Wikimedia movement. I wholeheartedly and unreservedly   Support May's candidature for this important position as a member of the AffCom. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 11:43, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  65.   Support-- From the few times we worked together, May showed engagement, dedication and very good ability to work as a team member, hence my support for her added value to the AffComm, Good luck May! -- Abdeaitali (talk) 12:35, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  66.   Strong support May has exhibited strong leadership with success in all fields shes worked in. She is also very active and zealous in getting work done. I believe she is the right candidate and will do an excellent job .. Joy Agyepong (talk) 13:05, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  67.   Support- Youssefbensaad (talk)
  68.   Support Of course, Good Luck May   --Omar Ghrida (talk) 21:35, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  69.   Support. Good luck. --Mervat (talk) 21:54, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  70.   Support-- Siarus1074 (talk)
  71.   Support May is a person with the talents and skills to build bridges between regions and language communities in our movement.--Señoritaleona (talk) 21:48, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  72.   Strong support I had the opportunity to learn about May's work and she is doing an amazing work in the arab region especially with the HerStory project. Strong Support for her. Nasreddine Nas'h (talk) 22:31, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
  73.   Strong support--Galahad (sasageyo!)(esvoy) 04:07, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  74.   Support--Alina Vozna (talk) 19:31, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  75.   Strong support ----ElWaliElAlaoui (talk) 20:49, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  76.   Strong support Greta
  77.   Support - Vote of confidence (see below) - Darwin Ahoy! 17:05, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  78.   Support Good luck :) --Mehman 97 17:41, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  79.   Strong support She is doing an amazing work especially with the HerStory Project. Uzoma
  80.   Strong support on the surface (as i know) she is having the required skill sets for the Affcom work -- Balajijagadesh (talk) 08:36, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  81.   Strong support--Xenophôn (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  82.   Support -- Ата (talk) 11:20, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  83.   Strong support Pradigue (talk) 08:41, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  84.   Support i trusted may.Usamasaad (talk) 11:54, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
  85.   Strong support --Rajeeb (talk) 19:09, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  86.   Support, good luck! - Mahveotm (talk) 10:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
  87.   Support--Pablísima (talk) 11:45, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  88.   Strong support Satdeep Gill (talk) 16:19, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Questions for the candidateEdit

  1. Recently Affiliations Committee has not enjoyed the confidence of larger community on actions such as User Groups in Brazil and Chapter in Portugal. How do you wish to restore this confidence? What should effectively be the role of Affiliations Committee in such crisis ? How does Affiliations Committee determine it does not lead to excessiveness of its office. --Abhinav619 (talk) 02:48, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Dear Abhinav, Hope you are doing great, and Happy New Year! I have closely followed what happened to these two communities and I had the opportunity to discuss it during the last Wikimedia in Cape Town with other fellow wikimedians. Based on my humble experience with the community and trust in the AffCom, and what I have learnt through years, there are always details that we as audience might not be fully aware of or cannot consider because we are a third party. I trust that discussions have made its way from both parties but I’m sure, that there is and must be always room for dialogue, transparency, and reconsideration. This is why we are here. To listen, exchange experiences, and support.May Hachem93 (talk) 09:41, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@May Hachem93: Our case at WMPT is kind of closed now, with our situation returning to the exact point it was before AffCom involving itself in the process, and we never had any explanation about why they have involved themselves into it, causing that whole mess (nor are we expecting to have one, anyway). From my part, and after seeing what I saw in all those months, I can say I do not trust the current AffCom in the least. Any vote I'm giving here is merely of confidence in the future. Excuse me if I got it wrong, but your posture here seems to be of acceptance of the current situation, and that, I believe, we don't need more than what we already have. Anyway, good luck and all the best if they happen to chose you.- Darwin Ahoy! 13:36, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
@DarwIn: I understand your situation, I also respect your point of you. But I have not commented on any past events. On the contrary, at this particular moment, as I explained I am a third party and I cannot be biased toward any team. Moreover, You and I share the same positive hopes of a good future, that's why I always believe discussion and speaking up what we want is a good sign and healthy for our communities. I am, generally speaking, Darwin. AND! I am glad we are having this conversation now. Wish me Luck :) Happy New Year to you and all your affiliate members. May Hachem93 (talk) 16:01, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
@May Hachem93:You have an excellent record as a Wikimedian, and you're certainly very well recommended. I believe you have a good probability of being chosen for AffCom. If you are, please don't get involved with dirty politics and try to be as transparent as possible, and please, don't be just another sheep in the flock, if you disagree about something, stand for that. AffComers can be excellent wikipedians, but be virtually absent from AffCom stuff, possibly to avoid trouble upon themselves. If you are running to that place, I hope you will stand for your values, and don't be just another number in the stats. Happy New Year to you, too. :) - Darwin Ahoy! 17:05, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
@May Hachem93: Many Thanks for writing. Your messages bring certain amount of positive vibes. All the best.--Abhinav619 (talk) 03:40, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
@May Hachem93:Your professional and volunteer experience with different organizations is really powerful and I am confident you will add value to Affcom with your skills and experiences from global organizations. Wikilover90 (talk) 15:48, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin (Kirill Lokshin)Edit

I’ve been member of the Affiliations Committee since January 2014, serving as the committee’s vice-chair from April 2016 to March 2017 and as its chair since March 2017.

Since first joining the Wikimedia movement 13 years ago, I've spent a great deal of time working with Wikimedia affiliates in a spectrum of different roles. I was one of the founders of Wikimedia District of Columbia in 2011, and been an officer and board member of the chapter since that time. I've also served, at various times, on the Grant Advisory Committee, the Individual Engagement Grants Committee, the Project Grants Committee, and the Simple Annual Plan Grants Committee.

In working with numerous affiliates, informal groups, and emerging communities during my years on the committee, I’ve had the privilege to witness the tremendous potential of our global affiliate ecosystem to contribute to the broader success of the Wikimedia movement. I remain deeply interested in helping Wikimedians around the world realize our shared aspirations by building viable and sustainable affiliate groups, and hope to have the opportunity to continue doing so as a member of the Affiliations Committee.

How do you think affiliates work best together to partner on effective projects and initiatives?

Our movement has a rich history of inter-affiliate collaboration on specific programs, both in terms of collaboration among geographically-oriented affiliates and in terms of collaboration between geographically- and thematically-oriented affiliates. The key factor in these cases, in my opinion, is that collaboration follows the development of specific programs rather than vice versa; once a scalable program has already reached an advanced stage of planning, it is relatively easy for an affiliate to join in, even if that affiliate would not have the capacity to independently develop such a program on their own. Conversely, organizing inter-affiliate collaboration without having specific, tangible program objectives in mind has not, in general, been as successful.

What do you see as the role of affiliates in the Wikimedia movement in the next three years?

As the 2030 movement strategy continues to evolve, I believe that affiliate organizations will continue to play a crucial role in fulfilling our shared strategic objectives. The strategic direction envisions a broad spectrum of partnership, expansion, and engagement, which requires a strong global ecosystem of affiliates to execute. While the precise nature of the future affiliate model remains a topic for the strategy process to consider, I am confident that affiliates will continue to be a critical part of the movement going forward.

What do you feel you will bring to the committee that makes you a uniquely qualified candidate?

As someone who has worked with Wikimedia affiliates for almost a decade, I have a variety of hands-on experience working with affiliates in various capacities and in various stages of organizational evolution, ranging from the formation of new and emerging groups to funding, evaluation, and oversight of mature affiliate organizations.

EndorsementsEdit

  1.   Strong oppose For the personal attacks here, for speaking publicly on behalf of AffCom about issues he apparently was not informed about, and for the whole way Kirill's chaired AffCom dealt with the Wikimedia Portugal process between April and December this year, specially the obscurity and opacity that still surrounds that process. And I'm not even getting into the case with the Brazilian affiliates, which seems to have been dealt with with a "throw the baby out with the bathwater" kind of "solution", still with a lot of important questions waiting for an answer. We should expect better than this from the Affiliation Committee members, specially the person who is chairing it.- Darwin Ahoy! 16:54, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  2.   Strong oppose Per DarwIn. I think that Affcom need more transparency. Ixocactus (talk) 18:57, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  3.   Strong oppose He is not accessible to community members when they approach him or perhaps he isn't interested in responding or believe in speaking. --Abhinav619 (talk) 00:57, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  4.   Support The comments above are an inaccurate caricature of the person I know. Calling that blunt but diplomatic response to a bizarre and nonsensical claim that Affcom was forcing the affiliate to break Portuguese law a "personal attack" is absurd. It's clear that he is getting scapegoated for being the person who signs the emails by those unwilling to place the blame where it actually belongs. While I think highly of a number of people who are getting showered with endorsements here, what we need instead of a popularity contest is to appoint people who are willing to do the work and make tough decisions and face the risk of being a scapegoat. Most of the affiliate activity in the United States simply would not exist were it not for him and if he brings that same level of effort and commitment to Affcom then the choice is clear. Gamaliel (talk) 15:48, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  5.   Strong oppose given the terrible decisions made by Affcom in the Brazilian and Portuguese cases and the false statements later sponsored by Affcom, I cannot trust the Wikimedia movement is best served by the continuation of these practices. Chico Venancio (talk) 19:48, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  6.   Support I'm quite disappointed by the tone and inaccurate representations above, in particular, the first oppose commentary. The email cited above does not engage in any recognizable "personal attack" within our community guidelines. Second, the unsubstantiated innuendo in using terms like "apparently" and "seems to have been dealt with" conjures up the worst possible motives imaginable and is almost the textbook definition of assuming bad faith, which goes against one of the Wikimedia community's core principles going back to 2001. As for Kirill's navigation and leadership in this area, I'll quote the wise words of the excellent candidate User:May Hachem93 in her commentary above: "there are always details that we as audience might not be fully aware of or cannot consider because we are a third party." There have been tough cases in the last year, and the Affcom cannot be "fully transparent" about all the proceedings for legal reasons, especially in cases where complaints of harassment and inappropriate conduct are an issue – the whole system of reporting, follow-up and safety would be completely compromised and unworkable if confidentiality was not maintained. As someone who has been involved with trust and safety within the movement for conferences, groups, committees and events since the first Wikimania going back more than a decade, I know this first hand. I have seen the information asymmetry that is a result of this, and how in public there can be one telling of the events that is far from the full picture. For one small faction, there is dissatisfaction with the outcomes announced by Affcom as it pertains to their community. I am sympathetic to how Affcom's announcement was a disappointment to the communities involved as tough cases have tough outcomes. I really do feel for them. But it is unfair to direct the frustration of those outcomes on an individual. For the vast majority of Affcom proceedings, Kirill has done an exemplary job leading the way for establishing and nurturing affiliates at a key time within the movement's history across different themes, geographies, and approaches. -- Fuzheado (talk) 20:51, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  7.   Strong support I am applying myself above, however I am supporting Kirill for several reasons: 1) I do not agree with the characterization that his opposers make of him based on the linked information. I do not recognize any evidence of personal attacks. And also, requests are not orders. If someone asks you to do something that you are not able or willing to fulfill, then you can inform them about your situation and find a way forward through dialogue. 2) AffCom opperates under many constraints and I do not find necessary to add more, like "fear of retaliation", or "fear of making mistakes". The decisions were taken with the best interest for the movement with the knowledge and tools available at the time. We cannot expect volunteers to have some kind of superpower to always know the right thing to do, or to please everyone with their decisions, plus there is no public information on the details and perhaps it needs to be that way. 3) I do not agree with the dynamics that this page is creating. While it is nice that people say good things about you, I find pretty useless to start popularity contests where volunteers are expected to groom a contact network. If that would be that way, we would end up getting "popularity experts", not "tough decisions experts" which is what we need. 4) Kirill has *a lot* of expertise that I think it is worthwile to keep. 5) To endure such community pressure and *still* wanting to serve the movement, that is something that I admire. Summing up, I really expect that his candidacy is evaluated beyond the votes on this page. Additionally, I would wish that the community would come up with ways to protect volunteers from smear campaigns. This feels to me like one, and I do not like it.--Micru (talk) 01:23, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
  8.   Support, I do admit that this use has a strong past that supports him to continue on his role at affcom. The experience and volunteership is much appreciated.--1233 | Questions?| This message is left by him at 01:09, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  9.   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 11:38, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Questions for the candidateEdit

  1. ...

@Gamaliel: I believe you misunderstood the situation. Kirill never "signed" any email to us, or took any decision related to that, as far as I know. Instead, he came in a public mailing list with vicious personal attacks (In case you didn't noticed, I highlighted those for you: "For you to now insist that the committee's request was a demand that you violate Portuguese law -- an interpretation that you somehow neglected to mention to anyone at the time -- is a remarkable and brazen display of bad faith.") about something that was not even about *himself*, and speaking publicly and making public statements about issues he was apparently not well informed, as what he wrote there simply does not correspond to the (documented) reality. It's not a mater of "willingness to do the work and make tough decisions", but of shallowness and blatant incompetence to do that job, and absence of the public posture one would expect of a member of AffCom, let alone the person that has been chairing it. Kirill has shown not to have the least condition to be there. As can be seen on this page, there are many other excellent options, and the wish of the Wikimedia community for renovation in AffCom seems to be absolutely evident. So I hope the 8 members of AffCom who will be choosing whoever will be there do not go for the usual thing of ignoring the community, keeping who's already part of the group perpetually, and this time they would listen to the community here (or else this whole thing is kind of a sham, and we're all wasting our time here).- Darwin Ahoy! 16:42, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

BTW, for seven months I've been seeing AffCom behaving in "a bizarre and nonsensical way" - to use your words - which included, yes, AffCom asking us to do a General Assembly in a way of their choice that clearly violated our country law. All that seem to be past now, and though nobody would return us all that time and energy lost spent on that process, personally I have my eyes set on the present and future, and I'm certainly not seeking any kind of revenge. But letting this person who behaved that way serve yet another term in AffCom really would be asking too much. He may be great in Wikimedia DC - I've no idea if he is, or isn't - but in AffCom he simply has not done a good job. Nor with the Portuguese chapter, nor, as far as I know, with a number of other affiliates.
I also have serious doubts about the way AffCom has been engaged for years in what seems to be blind approvals of affiliates, sometimes made in absolute secrecy. I've not a concrete idea of what is the role of Kirill on that, but I don't recall him demonstrating any degree of discomfort or willingness to change that situation, so that kind of adds up to the pile. - Darwin Ahoy! 18:47, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Simply repeating your claim that AffCom somehow demanded that you violate Portuguese law won't convince me that it makes any sense. Gamaliel (talk) 22:27, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
I don't need to convince you, it's a fact that AffCom has asked that a "third neutral party" should convey the General Assembly, which is plainly against what is stated in the Portuguese law. All the people that was in that meeting can confirm it. And it's a fact that AffCom asked the board of the chapter to not act as a board, without limiting that prohibition in the way Kirill said. Either he was misinformed, or was talking about something he had not the least idea about. If you chose to not believe it, frankly, that's not my problem. I'm not trying to evangelize people into this, and it's merely a drop in the sea of AffCom absurdities, anyway. And, most important than all, even if it was not true, it would never grant Kirill any right to engage in the vicious personal attacks he has done. - Darwin Ahoy! 22:39, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
@DarwIn: These "vicious personal attacks." You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Can you please quote exactly what you consider the personal attacks, as I don't see it. - Fuzheado (talk) 20:57, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
@Fuzheado: I've no idea why you don't like my choice of words when I say that "the case of Brazil has been dealt with". I really have not the least idea why saying someone "deals with a case" is something as sinister and malevolent so that it "conjures up the worst possible motives imaginable and is almost the textbook definition of assuming bad faith, which goes against one of the Wikimedia community's core principles going back to 2001." I also fail to understand why you say the same about saying that Kirill apparently was not well informed about that. I'm not Kirill, I've no idea if he was informed or not, so I write: "Apparently". Those words seem to have offended you deeply, and I'm sorry for that, but I really have no idea what may be causing such offense.
Now about the rest. Kirill wrote "The request concerning "presenting oneself as representative of Wikimedia Portugal" was in reference to people stating that they were the official representatives of the chapter in meetings -- a fact of which you were doubtless well aware, seeing as it was your own complaint on the subject which prompted the committee's request in the first place." That request was never stated to be limited to "meetings". I and others asked if we could continue presenting ourselves as members of WMPT, and it was answered yes, as far as you don't present yourselves as being from the board. We were told to not present ourselves as the board, period. The limitation Kirill is referring to there does not exists, it never existed. As I told above, Kirill was either misinformed, or talking about something he had not the least idea about, when he wrote that. And, as I wrote already a number of times, it was not the only situation where the AffCom directed us to act against the law. After one meeting with the AffCom, I, on the quality of President of the General Assembly, was informed that AffCom had decided that a "neutral third part, agreed by all parts" would convey the General Assembly. This is against our country law, and consequently I immediately refused to accept that, and AffCom was informed that it couldn't be as they directed. Even if there was some misunderstanding on those situations, it would never grant Kirill the right to came there in a public mailing list with a personal attack against myself, with unfounded accusations of "somehow neglect to mention to anyone at the time", and claiming what I wrote was a "remarkable and brazen display of bad faith" from my part. I know perfectly what "vicious" is. When I saw this person, which I had never met before, coming out of the blue attacking myself, that was the impression I have had: Or something ferocious, directed against myself, when I was not speaking against anyone in particular. This is the kind of behavior that could grant a block in a Wikipedia, but it was let free in that mailing list, and is now being defended by you. I was deliberately accused by Kirill of being acting on a "remarkable and brazen" bad faith. Do you think this is a proper way to behave in a public space? Do you think it follows the Friendly Space rules and directives that can be expected in any civilized place? More than all, do you think this is a conduct one would expect from the chair of the AffCom? - Darwin Ahoy! 22:29, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
No need for the apology, as you have not offended me deeply but it's appreciated. I'm trying to understand your viewpoint as I believe your definition of personal attack is quite different from the one widely accepted in the community. The phrase "display of bad faith" is talking about a statement and action, and is a commentary on what was said and not an attack on a person. There's a big difference. If this was a case of calling a person "bad" (which Kirill did not) then such a personal attack would make it hard to have a constructive conversation. Might you consider rewording your critique in light of this? -- Fuzheado (talk) 23:51, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
@Fuzheado: Let me reword it like this: Saying that someone "somehow neglected to mention" something not only conjures up the worst possible motives imaginable, but "a remarkable and brazen display of bad faith" is the literal definition of assuming bad faith, which goes against one of the Wikimedia community's core principles going back to 2001. And it is, of course, a personal attack. It's amazing and puzzling why you keep defending this kind of behavior.- Darwin Ahoy! 02:19, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
We are talking in circles. None of the policies within the Wikimedia community that I have ever seen characterizes such a comment as a "personal attack." This is simple: a refutation or criticism of a statement or action, even if forceful, is not a personal attack. A rebuke or criticism of a person with no factual basis or because of what they are: that is a personal attack. The latter did not happen. -- Fuzheado (talk) 17:48, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Camelia Boban (Camelia.boban)Edit

I am a wikipedian since March 2007 and became a wikimedian on the same year, some month later. In August 2016 I started WikiDonne project in Wikipedia to take care about the gender gap and co-founded the omonimous User Group in November. I was elected in AffCom two years ago and in the last year I served as treasurer and member of the Mediation SubCommittee. I am also a member of WMIT, WMSE, WMAR and WMCH. From August I'm part of Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030 where I serve as Chairperson.

How do you think affiliates work best together to partner on effective projects and initiatives?

We have geographical and thematical orientation of our affiliates and a lot of projects or initiatives that can be interesting for everyone. Be transparent and honest is the best way to work and cooperate in a good way. But, before working with partners, affiliates should work better with each other, try to collaborate with other affiliates on the same territory despite the differences and misunderstanding.

What do you see as the role of affiliates in the Wikimedia movement in the next three years?

Affiliates are the core of our movement, the passionate and active part. For this is needed to be leading actors on the strategy process and is important to, in different measures, take part to decisions.

What do you feel you will bring to the committee that makes you a uniquely qualified candidate?

I think nobody is a unique candidate, fortunatelly we have so many great wikimedians, all the friends who preceded me are wonderful candidates. From my side I can bring the experience of the past two year of activity in AffCom, the Diversity and international experience and my human qualities. I care about affiliates, because I'm one of them, and trying to do my best.

EndorsementsEdit

  1.   Strong support You deserve :))) --Mehman 97 18:41, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  2. Support. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:58, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  3.   Strong support -J. Ansari Talk 20:45, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
  4.   Support -- Balajijagadesh (talk) 08:35, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  5.   Support VIGNERON * discut. 13:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  6.   Support--Jamie Tubers (talk) 22:01, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  7.   Support Pradigue (talk) 08:43, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  8.   Support I trust Camelia - Darwin Ahoy! 11:30, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  9.   Support--Owula kpakpo (talk) 14:56, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
  10.   Strong support --Rajeeb (talk) 19:08, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  11.   Support Mahveotm (talk) 10:12, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
  12.   Strong support The Living love (talk) 14:11, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
  13.   Support--Alexmar983 (talk) 18:58, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  14.   Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 11:38, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
  15.   Strong support Camelia is the best.--Ferdi2005 (Posta) 14:53, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Questions for the candidateEdit

  1. ...