Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024 Special Election/Candidates/Iwuala Lucy
| Account | Iwuala Lucy (talk • meta edits • global user summary • CA) |
|---|---|
| Candidate details |
|
| Selected home wiki | Igbo Wikipedia |
| Type of seat (regional; community-at-large; or both) (division of regional seats) | Both ( SSA seat and Community-at-large seat) |
| Introductory statement / Application summary (maximum 500 words): Tell us who you are, why you are applying, and your relevant experience. | I go by the name Iwuala Lucy - which is also my Wiki username. I am a language professional with a degree in Language Studies. An advocate for indigenous language revitalization and free knowledge dissemination. Having been attuned to the intricacies of online spaces like the Wikimedia community, I've come to understand the importance of ensuring a safe and inclusive space for everyone - irrespective of status or worldview. I believe that ensuring and safeguarding a respectful and welcoming environment for individuals (notwithstanding the differences) will go a long way to ensure that everyone - even newbies - is free to express themselves without fear. Also, in terms of what I can offer, the past 2 years of exploring the Wikimedia space and taking part in various roles and capacities have equipped me with skills ranging from analytical approach to tasks/situations, conflict resolution, communications and project management skills, imbuing in me the spirit of camaraderie which I have come to appreciate and enjoy - working with diverse groups of people both within and outside the Wikimedia movement to develop and implement policies and procedures that has individuals at the core of its activities is a responsibility that I am keened with. I am also experienced in delivering trainings and facilitating sessions for newbies and experienced wikimedians within and outside the Wikimedia ecosystem (onsite & online). I am committed and dedicated in ensuring that the UCoC is well understood, upheld and enforced consistently without any bias while at same time ready and willing to give ear to issues that concerns members of the community so as to ensure the sustainability of an environment (online and offline) that fosters a progressive and accommodative community. |
The following section is transcluded. You can add comments and questions on this page: Universal Code of Conduct/Coordinating Committee/Election/2024 Special Election/Questions.
Questions
edit- You ran earlier this year in the first U4C election, with a resulting 44% support ratio, which was insufficient to elect you. Why do you think the result will be different this time? Izno (talk) 19:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Judging by the fact that there was still no single representative from the SSA on any of the seat in the just concluded election, I still feel that there's need for that regional representation to ensure equal representation of all the regions including the SSA, hence my bid again. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Iwuala Lucy (talk)
- Hi! I found myself confused with your answer to Q1. Could you give a couple examples to show what you mean? For example, how would you guarantee voters vote for candidates they might not know? Or how one would show contributions on different pages more than already done? I would also be interested in a mock up of what you mean by the equity distribution. Soni (talk) 13:57, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, By voters voting for candidates they might not know, I'm referring to an individual voting for a candidate who shares no regional or specific working relationship in particular but has in one way or other come across the various vital activities such a candidate has been part of or engaged in in the Wikimedia community, hence, the candidates active participation and contribution will help guaranteed for being considered when casting a vote. Secondly, there should be section specifically allotted for candidates to list their 'worthy contributions' on the nomination page so that interested voters can access and decide their inclination to vote for or against. Thirdly, I'll first share the difference between equity and equality - 'Equality means individual(s)or groups are given the same resources or opportunities while Equity recognizes that each person has different circumstances and allocates the exact resources and opportunities needed to reach an equal outcome.' Simply put, just as I stated above, their should be different yard stick for eligibility and nominating candidates at their various levels of experience (e.g. in terms of visibility and notability in the Wikimedia space). That is to say, there should be different categories of candidates selection. Same also applies in terms of regional representation - there are regions that are still finding their feet and doesn't have the large number in terms of eligible voters and otherwise and when same yardstick is used for larger regions with high number of eligible voters, they do not stand a cahnce. I hope this will help clear your confusion. Iwuala Lucy (talk) 04:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- If you don't mind a follow up, could you give some specific examples? What regions will you consider in the third point? Or for the first or second points, how a mock up of your worthy contributions will look? Soni (talk) 06:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- A typical example of is the SSA which I would refer to as not having the vast number of Wikimedians who meet the eligibility criteria - there are quite a good number of individuals that have no idea of a community like the Wikimedia community. I believe with time a wider audience would be reached in the SSA. With regards to the third question, same way the questions are segmented, there should be a section designated for this - I guess I've been able to draw the picture in my previous response. Iwuala Lucy (talk) 04:41, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- If you don't mind a follow up, could you give some specific examples? What regions will you consider in the third point? Or for the first or second points, how a mock up of your worthy contributions will look? Soni (talk) 06:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, By voters voting for candidates they might not know, I'm referring to an individual voting for a candidate who shares no regional or specific working relationship in particular but has in one way or other come across the various vital activities such a candidate has been part of or engaged in in the Wikimedia community, hence, the candidates active participation and contribution will help guaranteed for being considered when casting a vote. Secondly, there should be section specifically allotted for candidates to list their 'worthy contributions' on the nomination page so that interested voters can access and decide their inclination to vote for or against. Thirdly, I'll first share the difference between equity and equality - 'Equality means individual(s)or groups are given the same resources or opportunities while Equity recognizes that each person has different circumstances and allocates the exact resources and opportunities needed to reach an equal outcome.' Simply put, just as I stated above, their should be different yard stick for eligibility and nominating candidates at their various levels of experience (e.g. in terms of visibility and notability in the Wikimedia space). That is to say, there should be different categories of candidates selection. Same also applies in terms of regional representation - there are regions that are still finding their feet and doesn't have the large number in terms of eligible voters and otherwise and when same yardstick is used for larger regions with high number of eligible voters, they do not stand a cahnce. I hope this will help clear your confusion. Iwuala Lucy (talk) 04:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)