I'm looking for EffeietsandersEdit

Hi, I would like to consult you in regards to a TV program we're producing. Please contact me at noya@ananey.com ASAP

Kazakh Wikimedia ChapterEdit

Hi, I'd like to ask you about the update regarding KKWM chapter recognition process? Thank you! --Ashina 13:53, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, we're currently still waiting for a reply to Delphine's question on Talk:Wikimedia_Kazakhstan regarding the number of active Wikimedia project editors in the candidate chapter group. I was planning on sending a reminder about that a while ago, but didn't get to it unfortunately. Effeietsanders 13:57, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, however could you please clearify what we need to provide? Do we need to provide list of wikipedians working on application or anything else? thank you for your assistance! --Ashina 11:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Ashina,
The question is basically who in your group supporting the request is an active Wikipedian indeed. You already provided a list of people supporting your proposal, it would be helpful if you could indicate who of those is an active Wikipedian (with a link to their userpage on the relevant Wikipedia). Thank you! Effeietsanders 06:57, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I'll put the usernames of all people who are supporting us with our application. --Ashina 13:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I am writing this message to get any update relating our application to be recognize as Wikimedia chapter. Is there any news? we have answered to all questions over month ago. Could you please give an update to us regarding this point? If we need any further action please contact me. Kind regards, --Ashina 05:43, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ashina,
I apologize for the delay. I am aware of your answers now, and will discuss within the committee first a bit before I get back to you - but I hope to be able to give you an update soon. Effeietsanders 14:45, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Stewards/elections_2011-2 questionsEdit

Hello, Effeietsanders! Thanks for the amazing "extreme situation" questions you made the candidates! --NaBUru38 10:37, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia VenezuelaEdit


I am writing to ask you a question regarding the status of our still pending request of Wikimedia Venezuela to become a local Wikimedia Chapter. We have started gathering people and ideas since October 2010, organised a series of lectures for Wikipedia TEN. Our proposed bylaws have been reviewed by members of the ChapCom as early as May 2011. We were informed that in June-July 2011, our proposal was scheduled to be submitted to voting and, as of October 2, 2011, we are yet to receive a notification, either approval, rejection, suggestions...we have received only silence. What is going on? What has delayed the ChapCom to close the voting on our case? Working groups in other countries have submitted their proposals/requests to form a local WikimediaChapter more or less at the same time that we did, and they have been approved already. Why not Wikimedia Venezuela? What is wrong with us? If we were told what is wrong with us, we could work it out and fix whatever is needed...but with no input, we are left sitting in the waiting room for months..

Could you please tell us what is delaying our approval? What do we have to do?

Our people (37) is anxious and wondering what is going on. We were more people, but we feel dissapointed and discouraged, and this doesn't help us at all. Could you please give us an update?

Many, many thanks in advance from Venezuela.

--Jewbask 01:29, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

(note for archive: message was sent to all chapcom members and several board members, and reply was given elsewhere by one of those already). Effeietsanders 15:52, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminshipEdit


In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2011. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before October 10, 2011. Kind regards, vvvt 17:03, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Removal of global sysop toolsEdit

Hello Effeietsanders. I'm about to remove your GS access due to inactivity. Do you have any objection ? Do you still plan to use it ? Thanks. -- Quentinv57 (talk) 15:03, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Quentin,
I do use the rights every now and then, but usually unlogged (viewing deleted pages etc). I realize this is not very clear from the policy - but I would at least prefer to remain global sysop for those reasons. I don't use the right very regularly, but I do every now and then. I could of course make an excuse action now, and make it clear policy-wise, but I guess that wouldn't be entirely fair either :) Effeietsanders 15:28, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
No, but becoming an active GS would. Don't want to do some countervandalism work this days ? ;-) -- Quentinv57 (talk) 15:50, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
The policy is about logged actions, sorry but I've removed GS from your account. fr33kman 23:51, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
The policy says no such thing, so that is your interpretation of it. Which is your good right of course, but it remains an interpretation and your choice to remove :) Effeietsanders 09:11, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
In his GRFA Effeietsanders specifically asked for GS access in order to be able to view deleted content. At that time it was not controversial. Ruslik 11:40, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
When did it become controversial? I don't recall that moment. Nemo 19:59, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Hey, just wanted to let you know that the global sysop policy on inactivity has been reworded per discussion, and you could request your tools back under it I suppose. Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:21, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Removal of global sysopEdit

I have removed your global sysop right due to inactivity in line with the policy. Regards, fr33kman 23:48, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Is it allowed in Wikipedia?Edit

To keep in the pages of wiki Administrator's personnel thesis? at http://sd.wikipedia.org ? Other problem is We call Computer as same in English, but admin forcibly used his word Ganpukar of Computer. I have proof that thousands of published books called it Computer not Ganpukar. If some one oppose him he started abusive language. That is the reason sd.wikipedia.org never got attraction to Sindhi community. Plz check record there. Other things are he locked CSS due to that on the same site there are lot of font styles appeared there. He is not able to set commonCSS or Monocss. We are in trouble to work in our local Sindhi language. I don't know where to say for this problem. Record history says all the situation there. I appeal plz warn him to follow en.wikipedia.org rules, other wise he will continue use his personnel details and personnel promoted articles there. Dear I am sorry If u r not right person to say all about this, Plz suggest me where I can raise this issue. My sd.wikipedia.org ID is same. His thesis is not a violetion? http://sd.wikipedia.org/wiki/ماحولياتي_انتظام_ڪاڻ_اُپُگِرَهِي_عَڪس_ضماءُ_۽_درجه_بنديءَ_جي_طريقن_جو_اَڀياس Alixafar 23:53, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


* Frohe Weihnacht und einen guten Start ins neue Jahr
* Prettige Kerstdagen en een gelukkig nieuw jaar
* Merry Christmas and a happy New Year
from --Neozoon 23:11, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Effeietsanders 23:19, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Editing on other people´s wiki-pages...Edit

... is much appreciated. Thanks for fixing the typos--Pavel Richter (WMDE) 22:06, 27 January 2012 (UTC) :-)

with the blessing of mariaEdit

mmmmm...You first prayed to her in the church, I suppose...LOL --Marctaltor 23:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Favorite meta-edit everEdit

On buying happiness SJ talk   14:48, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminshipEdit


In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/April 2012. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before April 08, 2012. Kind regards, —Marco Aurelio (Nihil Prius Fide) 12:49, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Budget Wikimania Naples 2013Edit

Hi Effeitsanders, I saw your note on the discussion page of our bid. Apologies, I claim the fact that it is our first time on bidding, and procedures are still unclear for us, so I ask for a minimum of indulgence. We have a working budget, as written in the bid, but it is difficult to give precise numbers before having the exact amount of participants. Furthermore, I saw that also other towns had not it in, so I erroneously presumed it could be left out for the moment while waiting the first discussions. However, no worries, I will make assumptions and give you guys an upside/downside assessment based on the quotations we have on hand. Looking forward to talk to you.--Ferdinando Scala (talk) 19:06, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ferdinando, very precise numbers would be way too much to expect of course. I am just looking for guesstimates, but based on the event you have in mind. You probably know how much the venue would cost, and the same for accommodation etc. Those amounts you could easily include. You probably also have an idea of the cost for the catering etc. I look forward to your additions! Effeietsanders (talk) 19:09, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Advice on affiliations?Edit

Hey Lodewijk. I've been reading with interest about the new affiliation models recently. I am a bit confused about whether this has actually gone into effect with the latest Board resolution, or whether that does not happen until the Board approves an AffCom plan in July (per wmf:Resolution:Affiliations Committee)? If I am interested in shepherding an organization through the affiliation process, is there anyone (ChapCom?) who I can talk to about it now? I saw mention of groups like Mozilla or EFF as possible Movement Partners, but I'm wondering about whether cultural institutions which have demonstrated support for Wikimedia and a history of cooperative projects (namely, the US National Archives, in my case) would also fit under this category. I wouldn't mind being a guinea pig, in fact, though I don't want to suggest an affiliation with the National Archives until I have a better idea about what I'd be suggesting. Any advice would be appreciated. :-) Dominic (talk) 07:00, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Dominic,
We're all trying to find our way still, so no surprise you're a bit confused. The Committee is currently still setting up all procedures etc, so the actual processes are not yet in place to start recognition - once those procedures are in place we could get really started. It probably will be closer to June than to today.
That being said, I should perhaps make clear that for the Movement Partners, the idea was mainly to think about international organizations - the national organizations would more logically align themselves with a specific chapter. Of course the US is as always a bit different than the rest of the world because the chapter structure is set up unaligned with national borders, so I'm not entirely sure if US National Archives would fall under this definition.
I think that the idea (but don't just take my word for it though and also ask others!) was to focus mainly on organizations with an international character which would not make sense to align themselves with one chapter - in the Cultural sector this would probably mostly be umbrella organizations. International doesn't have to be global though, but at least covering several countries. The definition is in no way set in stone, so there will always be border cases.
Hope that helps, Effeietsanders (talk) 07:41, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
What sort of umbrella organization are you referring to? Do you mean international cultural organizations which individual institutions may be part of (like IFLA or ICA), or are you thinking of a hypothetical organization formed by Wikimedians for GLAM projects? My understanding was actually that the affiliation is with the Wikimedia movement (it's in the name!), not with the Wikimedia Foundation or any of the individual chapters (which is why they, also, are types of affiliations).

I think it is far more powerful to say "So-and-So is a Wikimedia Movement Partner" than "So-and-So is a Movement Partner with the Canadian chapter of Wikimedia". It's also more powerful to be able to say the US National Archives (or the Rijksmuseum, or whomever) is a Wikimedia Movement Partner, rather than just being the member of an umbrella organization which is a Wikimedia Movement Partner, especially if an institution is willing to explicitly align itself. There are almost no cultural institutions which could actually fulfill a requirement of covering multiple countries, as most have single site, and I'm not sure what purpose that restriction would serve. I understand this isn't settled; I'm just thinking out loud. Dominic (talk) 08:17, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

For partner organizations, I'm thinking of external umbrella organizations. The reason why in my understanding this is limited to international organizations, is because for national organizations they cán affiliate themselves with the natinoal Wikimedia organization. Also the national Wikimedia organization would be the best to judge whether this would be a good idea, how best to communicate that etc - there is some downside to duplicating all that on an international level. So if the Rijksmuseum would like to affiliate themselves with Wikimedia, the most logical partner would be Wikimedia Nederland - not so much applying for 'Movement Partner'. But of the three new types - I think this one needs the most deliberation still. This is definitely not the first time this discussion takes place, and according to this discussion it is still an open question. So lets make sure we don't get their hopes up before we know for sure that it would be possible under this model. Effeietsanders (talk) 09:23, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Bristol Wikimania BidEdit

We have been looking up and down the Discussion page to see if we have missed anything with our answers. We believe we have answered everything but you can never be too sure, can you? Thought I'd drop you a line and let you know. If there is something else, let us know. Steve Virgin (talk) 21:07, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminshipEdit

Hello Effeietsanders. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2012. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before October 08, 2012. Kind regards, -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:39, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Effeietsanders, do you *really* need the rights? Since April 2010 you were warned for losing the admin rights here - six times in total, without missing an inactivity removal process. And as you hardly use the rights, I don't understand why you so desperately want to keep them each time. You're always the first one to sign... Trijnsteltalk 10:28, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
I don't think I would use the phrasing 'desperate' but yes, they definitely come in handy (but I wasn't aware that I had to specify the reason? I was under the impression that as long as you're active and trusted, it was no big deal). And the reason why I am amongst the first is probably because I happen to be online when the email comes in. Effeietsanders (talk) 10:39, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
All buttons are useful, but I would resign if I would hardly use them. Different opinions I guess. Trijnsteltalk 10:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
If it were privacy-related accesse, I would resign them as well (as I did with my steward access) because that kind of access should be on an as-need basis. Here we're however talking about administrator rights, which is a different category. Probably we do have different standards of what using means - I definitely don't use them every day, but as you can check from the logs I used the access at least once a year for Wiki Loves Monuments (CentralNotice) and I also edited the MediaWiki namespace a few times - alltogether more than 10 actions requiring privileges in the last month already by the way. My experience is that it is useful for other people if I have administrator rights here. I hope this explanation can sooth your worries a bit. Effeietsanders (talk) 10:52, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Effeietsanders. You have new messages at MarcoAurelio's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- MarcoAurelio (talk) 13:23, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


In this edit [1] you mention that you have lost contact. Feel free to drop me a note if you wish an up date or have further questions. I am available to contact. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:22, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Kazakh Wikimedia Chapter (2)Edit

Hi. You asked some questions here about the nature of the Kz chapter. There was a detailed reply here saying that "PM of the RoK Karim Massimov have conversation with Jimmy Wales concerning the development of KKWP during the last Davos summit", but Jimmy denies ever having had such a conversation (he has never met Massimov). I asked user Ashina, who appears to be behind the IP address but he has denied writing it. Can you clarify the rules on this please? A substantial part of the application appears to have been written by someone who cannot be identified. Peter Damian (talk) 09:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm unsure what you mean with 'clarify the rules'. I also am unaware of an explicit statement that Ashina would not be the person behind those replies - could you provide a link to that denial for some context? Thanks, Effeietsanders (talk) 10:38, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
The claim was made in a private email, are you contactable by email? Peter Damian (talk) 16:05, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm quite well contactable via email, but I don't think it would be fair to forward private communications without approval of the other person in that conversation. I guess the best way forward is to ask that other person (I assume Ashina?) to clarify it himself on the talkpage of the prospective WMKZ (or possibly by just emailing one of his contact persons at the Affiliations Committee). Effeietsanders (talk) 16:12, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Don't worry. He has now confirmed by email that they did make that statement. Apart from the puzzle of why they denied it in the first place, mystery solved. Peter Damian (talk) 17:27, 30 December 2012 (UTC)


Pas nadat ik het allemaal gedaan had, zag ik jouw commentaar hier. Maar ter info, op verzoek van SRientjes heb ik dit aangemaakt en ingesteld. Trijnsteltalk 21:15, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem :) Fijn dat ze iemand gevonden heeft. Effeietsanders (talk) 21:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminship (April 2013)Edit

Hello Effeietsanders. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/April 2013. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before April 08, 2013. Kind regards. -- MarcoAurelio 14:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Distributed via Global message delivery, 14:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Nope, still worried. This is number seven since April 2010... Trijnsteltalk 19:49, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
I guess still different opinions indeed. My explanation stands (except that this time I do indeed fall within the grey zone according to the rules - contrary to last time, which was a miscount) Effeietsanders (talk) 19:58, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
But why don't you give an explanation on that page? I know that's not prohibited, but it would be nice for others... Trijnsteltalk 20:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
You seem to have an objection to me being admin. I find the arguments you provided reasonable, although I don't agree with them - and I arrive at a different outcome. I explained you my reasoning and arguments on the same place where you placed your rather general objections to my specific case. I see use nor demand for putting the explanation I gave you on a different place. Effeietsanders (talk) 22:11, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
I also think that eia's position on the matter is clear without need of repetition (and also in compliance with policy). --Nemo 19:26, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Fundraising translation feedbackEdit

Hey Effeietsanders,

I wanted to ask for your help. As you may be aware we have been running banners on many language wikis. We have a lot of new content this year and I really want to conduct a thorough review of our translations. This is a combination of feedback from the community, readers, donors as well as those with professional translator experience. This will help us ensure the highest quality of translations used in our messaging.

To help us out with this I wonder if you would be willing to give us feedback for Dutch using This Link

Simply follow the simple instructions on that page and if you have any questions feel free to contact me on my talk page.

Many Thanks

Jseddon (WMF) (talk) 18:39, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Musical score transcription project proposalEdit

Maybe this project interests you: Requests for comment/Musical score transcription project proposal.--Micru (talk) 20:20, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing me to the RfC. I read about it, and I am very glad that people move it forward! I am busy with other projects at this point though, so I don't see a role for myself any longer. Effeietsanders (talk) 20:37, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Grants talk:WM NL/Wiki Loves Monuments international 2013Edit


I just asked several question regarding the grant proposal. Polimerek (talk) 06:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification. Effeietsanders (talk) 06:48, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Research on WM ChaptersEdit

Hello Lodewijk,

I am writing to you as a member of the Affiliation Com. I know you are pretty busy but your help and connections would be very helpful.

Presently I am running a research for Wikimania 2013 (partially for WCA, partially for myself) regarding Wikimedia Chapters and I am struggling to deliver on Wikimania 2013. You can see a snap description here.

My goal is to collect and present quantitative data about chapters and the local organizations in the global movement. I know the survey is pretty ugly and tiresome :) - but this is what you get with no feedback/assistance and a very limited time. Nevertheless, while there are some expectations already, it is a lot of work for one person and maybe just too much for one volunteer. This is why I am asking for help.

Do you know if members of the Aff Com or some dedicated WMF employees could help with filling the tables or pointing out / sending proper documents? Certainly I am looking for proper published data and I am asking particular chapters for answers - however there are already surveys collected by WMF and probably this should be the best initial source of the knowledge.

Any help: like directing me to a right person, pointing to good data sources or helping with filling the forms (maybe with Netherlands? ;] ) will be appreciated. :)

Best Regards, aegis maelstrom δ 16:43, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Aegis,
I'm afraid I'm currently too busy to help you significantly, but I could give you some feedback. I quickly read through the questions you asked, and it feels to me that you're being very detailed while the purpose and expected gain of this work is very unclear. Also the definitions aren't always clear enough to answer easily. I know you mean it well, but I have not seen any call for feedback on a public list - did I miss anything? You're saying that this is a WCA project, so I'm assuming that the WCA is supporting it, and that you can at least expect this information from each WCA member. That would be a great start. However, if this is not the case, you might want to consider cutting back a bit on the questions, and bringing some focus into it. Also, if you make clear what you're trying to uncover that would probably help a bit. The larger chapters should probably be able to uncover this information, but smaller chapters will have a lot of difficulty. Please note that it took me and Nicole a lot of effort, emailing and personal connections over the space of two months to get 33 chapters to answer a questionnaire about cool projects which was rather flexible. Don't expect a lot of input before Wikimania if you have to approach each chapter individually.
Also, the WMF requires all chapters to submit annual reports. I know that in the past they were usually not kept properly, but I am assuming this has changed in the past years. You could probably contact the grantmaking or legal department, and ask them to send you the file with the annual reports they have received over the years, as far as they have kept them. There would still be a significant amount of work to be done to sift through these though, not to be underestimated. Especially because every country uses different definitions. But at least you should be able to get the main financial data, number of board members etc. This will probably not be complete as not all chapters submit reports directly to WMF but rather publish them publicly, but there should be a significant number of reports there.
However, as a very first thing, I would suggest to ask a Wikimedia chapter with an office that can spend time on this (i.e. Wikimedia Deutschland that has indicated over and over again to support WCA etc.) to go through this questionnaire with you and make it clearer that way. They can give you valuable feedback early in the process, and remove confusion before others who are less experienced bump into it. Good luck with your work! Effeietsanders (talk) 17:20, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia BE - Dutch BylawsEdit

Hi, Effeietsanders, in antwoord op uw email, if you visit https://be.wikimedia.org/wiki/Statuten, you will see them. Lotje (talk) 15:03, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminshipEdit

Hello Effeietsanders. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2013. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before October 08, 2013. Kind regards, Barras talk 14:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

<insert Lodewijk's conclusions>Edit

See Wikimedia_Conference_2013/Documentation/Day_1#1-day outreach events. Are they somewhere? :) --Nemo 09:56, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Nope, sorry :) That was a hint to someone else to take notes while I was talking - unfortunately that doesn't seem to have happened. I could write something down of course, but that would be more making up than remembering. Effeietsanders (talk) 10:06, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Dead link on wm2013 wikiEdit

There's an etherpad dead link on wm2013:Transparency discussion. Fix it maybe? Deryck C. 03:54, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

FYI, correct link is [2]. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:58, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
The link is quite pointless I'm afraid, the number of minutes there is small. I thought we took them somewhere else but don't recall where. Maybe I only did on paper. Effeietsanders (talk) 08:16, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminshipEdit

Hello Effeietsanders. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/April 2014. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before April 08, 2014. Kind regards, Barras talk 09:58, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

2014 FDC self-nominationEdit

Hello, Effeietsanders! Thank you very much for submitting your nomination to join the Funds Dissemination Committee. I am working with the Board representatives to the FDC on the FDC nominations process. As you know, the public question and answer period is now underway. Please do review the questions and respond to them as you are able. If you are selected for an interview, kindly note that interviews will be held the week of the 23rd June and the 30th, if necessary. If the Board appoints you to the FDC, we will be holding orientation for members prior to Wikimania on August 6 and 7 in London. If you have any questions at all, don't hesitate to reach out to me on my Talk page or at FDCsupport@wikimedia.org. Once again, thank you very much for putting yourself forward as a candidate for the FDC! KLove (WMF) (talk) 23:55, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Klove. By the way, kudos on getting *exactly* 1000 characters into this message! Effeietsanders (talk) 13:16, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
:) KLove (WMF) (talk) 18:29, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


Please spellcheck! (Bad spelling in your http://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/10/22/wikimedia-affiliates-coolest-projects/ piece.) 'Isreal' is often used as a slur.--Elvey (talk) 20:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks :) However, as nobody noticed for almost a year, I'm guessing it is not such a terrible thing - or simply nobody reads it :D I guess it passed our attention as we were tired after the whole thing! I hope you forgive me for not correcting it any more. Effeietsanders (talk) 20:50, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Ah, a click or two and I went from current stuff to something old without realizing it. No biggie.--Elvey (talk) 03:05, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Global toolsEdit

Hallo, We were talking (very) early Monday morning about 3 global extensions for users, that are currently nearing-completion:

You had a concern about one of them (GlobalUserPage if I remember correctly), but I don't recall what the comment was, and was hoping you might? Thanks. Quiddity (talk) 23:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't think that could have been monday, as i only talked about next year's wikimania then, mostly with the mexicans. But maybe it was another breakfast? I do recall something about global userpages. I think it may have been about having a different userpage for wiktionary/wikipedia/wikisource etc, and basically allowing wikimedians to create a table to select which project should display which version of their userpage? I do recall talking about that, not sure if that was with you though, so maybe it was something else we discussed :) It was good to meet you! Effeietsanders (talk) 09:36, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Aha! That was it exactly. I've left a note at the talkpage there, suggesting it.
(It was very early on Monday morning, ~4am or so. I'm glad I was still up then, and got a chance to meet you, too! Hopefully we shall meet again, in Zurich or Mexico City. Regardless, I shall see you around on-wiki :) Quiddity (talk) 01:01, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Ah yes, in my head that was still Sunday evening :P Was a good conversation indeed. I'm confident we'll meet again :) Effeietsanders (talk) 07:22, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

A quick noteEdit

Just a quick note to say thanks for leaning a little onto this social introvert at WM2014 and pushing conversation. Enjoyed that quick dinner in Whitecross Lane(?) and thought that your contributions to WM2014 were useful and beneficial.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:26, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey Billinghurst, thanks for your note :) I enjoyed the dinner a lot, thanks to your company as well :). Glad you made it to Wikimania and gave your contributions. Did you get out of Wikimania what you hoped? Maybe see you again in Mexico! Effeietsanders (talk) 08:12, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Notice of review of adminshipEdit

Hello Effeietsanders. In accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and because you have made fewer than ten logged administrator actions over the past six months, your adminship is under review at Meta:Administrators/Removal/October 2014. If you would like to retain your adminship, please sign there before October 08, 2014. Kind regards, Barras talk 14:17, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to the CentralNotice-admins listEdit

Hi! This bulk email is to let you know about a mailing list used to communicate bug reports and new features in CentralNotice, and to facilitate conversations between the admins. This message is being sent to you because you have the privileges to use the CentralNotice admin interface.

If you use CentralNotice to post or modify notices, please consider joining the list by visiting this page and subscribing yourself:



Adam Wight (talk)

00:23, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Fundraising Tech,

Wikimedia Foundation

Hi Adam,
Another mailing list? And why a mailing list? No thanks, I prefer not to join - I don't see how such a list would actually help useful conversations. Effeietsanders (talk) 15:12, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Effeietsanders, I can understand. If you have any suggestions for other ways to improve communication among users of this important tool, please share! At this point, things feel very one-directional and isolated, the WMF Fundraising and Tech depts come up with features, implement them, and admins quietly build banners which shout at millions of people... Adamw (talk) 01:00, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Adam. When there is a social problem (lack of communication) it is quite rare that a technical solution (another mailing list) will actually solve the problem. Also, you assume that the centralnotice admins are the ones that should be communicated with - as I see it, the group is merely technical, and they implement only consensus or execute practicalities. I don't see an urgent need to keep them all aware of everything. Focusing on good documentation and timely communication through talkpages etc seems more helpful to me. I appreciate the effort though. Effeietsanders (talk) 00:01, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Notice of removal of adminshipEdit


I regret to inform you that, in accordance with Meta:Administrators/Removal and as a result of your inactivity, administrator rights have been removed from your account. Please see Meta:Administrators/Removal/April 2015 for details. Kind regards, Matanya (talk) 21:31, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Matanya, it is surprising to learn I had fewer than ten edits! If I may give you feedback on how you ran this process, I would suggest you give notice of the fact that you will remove rights /before/ you actually do it. With the way notification systems are set up nowadays, you get an email that your rights have changed. As removing rights are logged as steward action, and not as a local rights change (only on meta that makes little difference), this gets quite confusing to people. I saw the same happen on Wikimedia Commons, and it took me 15 minutes to figure out what even happened. The order of things matters in communications, and makes life easier :) Thanks for considering! Effeietsanders (talk) 06:34, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your feedback! In fact, according to policy there is no need for any notification, but i do see your point, and will suggest it to be included for next rounds of removals. Please become more active, and re-join the admin group :) Best Matanya (talk) 09:49, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Matanya. The notification I meant was btw not so much so that people can correct themselves, but rather that it becomes obvious what happened, and why. And I am active, just not by editing a lot ;-) Effeietsanders (talk) 16:31, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Requests for comments on Wikimedia user groups approval process and agreementsEdit

This is an update from the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee. Translations are available.

The Wikimedia Affiliations Committee is requesting comments on the approval process and agreements for Wikimedia user groups.

Wikimedia user groups are groups of Wikimedia users who support and promote the Wikimedia projects in the offline world by organizing meetups and other projects. The Wikimedia Affiliations Committee's responsibilities include approval of new Wikimedia user groups.

The committee will seek community input until Friday, May 1, 2015. The committee will then review the community's input, and publish the new process and agreements on Meta-Wiki. The committee will again seek community input approximately six months after any changes are adopted to gauge effectiveness and if any additional changes are necessary.

Please see the RFC page on Meta-Wiki for more information and to provide feedback.

Thank you - Wikimedia Affiliations Committee

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Affiliations Committee, 04:16, 24 April 2015 (UTC) • TranslateGet helpSubscribe or unsubscribe.

Wikimania discussion schedulingEdit

Hi again, I'm gearing up to propose another technical solution to a social problem ;) and was hoping to ask you for help. I'm trying to schedule a discussion at Wikimania, but I haven't figured out a polite way to... just add myself to the program or something. I'll hold forth in the hallway if I have to, but that seems silly. Please share any thoughts. Adamw (talk) 04:40, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Adam,
I'm not too involved with the programming myself - except for the specific Discussion Room topics, which is a limited set of sessions on a specific set of topics (focusing on community discussions). It's always too bad if not all topics can make it.
I don't think it is possible to get anything on the schedule any more, but you could use any of the meetup possibilities, schedule something during the hacking days if it is tech related or simply send an email and get in touch with the organisers if you can use a spare room. It is helpful if you have a core of 5-10 people who you know for sure will join you.
Good luck! Effeietsanders (talk) 12:56, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

How can we improve Wikimedia grants to support you better?Edit

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

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

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

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

With thanks,

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

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 01:23, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Last call for WMF grants feedback!Edit

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

With thanks,

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

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 19:08, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Did you ever attend Wikimania with your money? Talk to us!Edit

TL;DR: Fill a short Wikimania survey, it takes 5 min.

Hi, I'm writing you because you are listed in Wikimania/Frequent attendees. As you probably know by now, Wikimania 2016 Esino Lario wants to achieve a Wikimania format which allows people to "get things done" and leave the conference fully satisfied with the result of their investment of time and other resources (see pillars 2 and 4: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2016_bids/Esino_Lario/Pillars ). For this purpose, we consider all audiences (see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2016_bids/Esino_Lario/Program#Target ).

Participants other than scholarship recipients and reimbursed representatives are one group we heard very little from, but we think they are important because: 1) they have financial resources and help make the Wikimania budget sustainable; 2) they have motivation to share and ideas on what makes Wikimania valuable.

We set up a form mainly to collect names of some such people and talk with them later: if you provide your contact, we may write you on this topic. We may release aggregate data from the resposes; data will be handled by us and the Wikimania 2016 fiscal sponsor "Ecomuseo delle Grigne" (under EU law). Please fill the whole form, it's short!

Feel free to forward this invite to anyone.

Federico Leva and Martin Rulsch
Wikimania 2016 team, scholarships subteam
08:30, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Please sign new Wikimedia confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information by 31 DecemberEdit

This is a message from the Wikimedia Foundation. Translations are available.

As you may know, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees approved a new "Access to nonpublic information policy" on 25 April 2014 after a community consultation. The former policy has remained in place until the new policy could be implemented. That implementation work is now being done, and we are beginning the transition to the new policy.

An important part of that transition is helping volunteers like you sign the required confidentiality agreement. All Wikimedia volunteers with access to nonpublic information are required to sign this new agreement, and we have prepared some documentation to help you do so.

The Wikimedia Foundation is requiring that OTRS volunteers sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain their access. You are receiving this email because you have been identified as an OTRS volunteer and are required to sign the confidentiality agreement under the new policy. If you do not sign the new confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015, you will lose your OTRS access. OTRS volunteers have a specific agreement available, if you have recently signed the general confidentiality agreement for another role (such as CheckUser or Oversight), you do not need to sign the general agreement again, but you will still need to sign the OTRS agreement.

Signing the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information is conducted and tracked using Legalpad on Phabricator. We have prepared a guide on Meta-Wiki to help you create your Phabricator account and sign the new agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign

If you have any questions or experience any problems while signing the new agreement, please visit this talk page or email me (gvarnum wikimedia.org). Again, please sign this confidentiality agreement by 31 December 2015 to retain your OTRS access. If you do not wish to retain this access, please let me know and we will forward your request to the appropriate individuals.

Thank you,
Gregory Varnum (User:GVarnum-WMF), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery 21:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC) • TranslateGet help

Merchandise giveawayEdit

Hi <Effeietsanders>

You have been nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Please email us at merchandise wikimedia org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt.

Thanks! --SHust (WMF) (talk) 23:55, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Introducing the Wikimedia Affiliates mailing listEdit

This is an update from the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee. Translations are available.

The Wikimedia Affiliations Committee is pleased to introduce the launch of the Wikimedia Affiliates mailing list, which is basically a place for all the affiliates (chapters, thematic organizations, user groups) to discuss issues related to affiliates, make announcements to other affiliates, and collaborate on activities and community-wide events. The idea is to help facilitate the dialogue affiliates across our movement, plus collaborative discussions like community-wide activities, joint edit-a-thons, regional conferences, blog/report posts, or other communications from affiliates.

Each Wikimedia movement affiliate is allocated three spots on the mailing list. All affiliates may contact the Affiliations Committee to request additional spots if needed.

Please find a bit more information on Meta-Wiki and do not hesitate to contact the Affiliations Committee if you have further questions.

Thank you - Wikimedia Affiliations Committee

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Affiliations Committee, 07:51, 27 October 2015 (UTC) • TranslateGet helpSubscribe or unsubscribe.

Media tweetsEdit

By the way, in [3] and similar you may want to tag other accounts with many followers (related to the subjects of the photos) to "suggest" retweeting. [4] got over 4k impressions and 200 engagements this way, which is not too bad. Nemo 10:20, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I don't get it. The example from @wikimonuments you give, does exactly that (tag another account), and you say that your alternative from @WikimediaItalia which doesn't tag any account is a good example for tagging accounts? :S I know the theory behind trying to get more impressions, but it is imho more important to have a good message. Including the link and the image leaves little space for both. Effeietsanders (talk) 20:18, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
I think you are mixing tags and mentions. Tags are under the timestamp, mentions are in the text of the tweet. Nemo 09:00, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
OK, interesting feature, new to me. Browsing the web a bit suggests this is little used, and only available through the official twitter app/website. I use Tweetdeck to schedule the tweets, which means it is impossible to tag. Also, I never noticed anyone tagging @Wikimonuments , which apparently did happen. It might well be that more organisations don't receive such information. But if someone is real time tweeting, it might be nice to consider. Effeietsanders (talk) 19:38, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposal for MediaWiki User Group “WikiWerkers”Edit

Hi effeietsanders! Some weeks (months...) ago on a “wiki zaterdag” in Utrecht we’ve discussed the idea of a 'Dutch MediaWiki User Group’. We - Ilonka du Pree and Bart Mulckhuijse - have taken initiative and proposed for a new User Group, called “WikiWerkers”. Since then Monica Commandeur has joined us as well. We’ve drafted a charter for the user group and posted a proposal on MediaWik.org. November 28th we will launch/introduce our group on WMC-NL. We've already launched our website wikiwerkers.nl.

We would appreciate very much if you could give us feedback on our proposal and if you eventually would be willing to support our proposal as a Promotor. Thank you!

Bmulckhu (talk) 14:56, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

What future IdeaLab campaigns would you like to see?Edit

Hi there,

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

Here’s how to participate:

Take care,

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

2015 Affiliations Committee call for candidatesEdit

This is an update from the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee. Translations are available.

The Affiliations Committee – the committee responsible for guiding volunteers in establishing Wikimedia chapters, thematic organizations, and user groups – is looking for new members!

The main role of the Affiliations Committee is to guide groups of volunteers that are interested in forming Wikimedia affiliates. We review applications from new groups, answer questions and provide advice about the different Wikimedia affiliation models and processes, review affiliate bylaws for compliance with requirements and best practices, and advise the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees on issues connected to chapters, thematic organizations and Wikimedia user groups.

The committee consists of twelve members, six of whom are selected every twelve months for staggered two-year terms.

Key skills

Being a part of the Affiliations Committee requires communication with volunteers all over the world, negotiating skills, cultural sensitivity, and the ability to understand legal texts. We try to get a healthy mix of different skill sets in our members. The key skills and experience that we look for in candidates are:

  • Excitement by the challenge of helping to empower groups of volunteers worldwide.
  • Willingness to process applications through a set, perhaps bureaucratic process.
  • Readiness to participate in political discussions on the role and future of affiliates, models of affiliations, and similar questions.
  • Availability of up to 5 hours per week, and the time to participate in a monthly ~2 hour voice/video meeting.
  • International orientation.
  • Very good communication skills in English.
  • Ability to work and communicate with other languages and cultures.
  • Strong understanding of the structure and work of affiliates and the WMF.
  • Knowledge of different legal systems and experience in community building and organising are a plus.
  • Effective communication skills in other languages are a major plus.
  • Experience with or in an active affiliate is a major plus.
  • Willingness to use one's real name in committee activities (including contacts with current and potential affiliates) when appropriate.

We are looking for people who are not afraid of the workload and are motivated by helping other volunteers to get organized and form communities that further our mission around the world.

Selection process

As a reflection of our commitment to openness, transparency, and bilateral engagement with the Wikimedia community, the 2015 member selection process will include a public review and comment period. All applications received by the committee will be posted on Meta (at Affiliations Committee/Candidates/2015), and the community will be invited to provide comments and feedback about each candidate.

At the end of the public comment period, the applications will be voted on by the members of the committee who are not seeking re-election, taking into account comments put forward by the committee's members, advisors, WMF staff and board liaisons, and the community. A final decision will be made by mid-January 2016, with new members expected to join later that month.

How to apply

If you are interested in joining the committee, please send an application to affcom@lists.wikimedia.org by 31 December 2015. You will get a confirmation that your application was received.

Your application should include the following:

  • Your full name
  • Your contact information (including e-mail address and username)
  • A statement describing your relevant experience, skills, and motivation for joining the committee.

Your statement will be published for community review and feedback, so please do not include any information that you are not comfortable sharing.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to email me and/or the committee as a whole. We are happy to chat or have a phone call with anyone about our work if this helps them decide to apply. Please distribute this call among your networks, and do apply if you are interested!

Best regards,
Carlos Colina
Chair, Affiliations Committee

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the Affiliations Committee, 16:52, 9 December 2015 (UTC) • Please help translate to your languageGet helpSubscribe or unsubscribe.

Future IdeaLab Campaigns resultsEdit

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

With great thanks,

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

Inspire Campaign on content curation & reviewEdit

I've recently launched an Inspire Campaign to encourage new ideas focusing on content review and curation in Wikimedia projects. Wikimedia volunteers collaboratively manage vast repositories of knowledge, and we’re looking for your ideas about how to manage that knowledge to make it more meaningful and accessible. We invite you to participate and submit ideas, so please get involved today! The campaign runs until March 28th.

All proposals are welcome - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive feedback on ideas is welcome - your skills and experience can help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign to improve review and curation tasks so that we can make our content more meaningful and accessible! I JethroBT (WMF) 05:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery.

Open Call for Individual Engagement GrantsEdit

Greetings! The Individual Engagement Grants (IEG) program is accepting proposals until April 12th to fund new tools, research, outreach efforts, and other experiments that enhance the work of Wikimedia volunteers. Whether you need a small or large amount of funds (up to $30,000 USD), IEGs can support you and your team’s project development time in addition to project expenses such as materials, travel, and rental space.

With thanks, I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources 15:56, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

English translationEdit

I think a more accurate English translation for "Effeietsanders" might be the English idiom "a change of pace"? Your translation box lists "a change of spice", which doesn't mean anything to me as a native speaker. Cscott (talk) 19:43, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Affiliate-selected Board seatsEdit

Dear Effeietsanders, I am chair of Wikimedia Ukraine Board and writing to you on behalf of Wikimedia Ukraine. Is it possible for you to find an hour to talk via Skype (hangouts) during the next few days? Preferably before May 6, as we have to vote before May 7. I have written a letter to you, please check your email.

I apologize for such a short notice, but I thought I would have an opportunity to meet all candidates during Wikimedia Conference 2016. And we were really busy with Wiki Loves Earth contest last week --Ilya (talk) 22:57, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Ilya:,
Thanks for reaching out. Unfortunately I wasn't allowed to attend the Berlin conference (like most candidates), as there was a delegates-only policy. I'd be more than happy to schedule a call, and will reach out via email to schedule. Effeietsanders (talk) 23:24, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Participate in the Inspire Campaign and help address harassment!Edit

Through June, we’re organizing an Inspire Campaign to encourage and support new ideas focusing on addressing harassment toward Wikimedia contributors. The 2015 Harassment Survey has shown evidence that harassment in various forms - name calling, threats, discrimination, stalking, and impersonation, among others - is pervasive. Available methods and systems to deal with harassment are also considered to be ineffective. These behaviors are clearly harmful, and in addition, many individuals who experience or witness harassment participate less in Wikimedia projects or stop contributing entirely.

Proposals in any language are welcome during the campaign - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive feedback on ideas is appreciated, and collaboration is encouraged - your skills and experience may help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign so that we can work together to develop ideas around this important and difficult issue. With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 17:47, 31 May 2016 (UTC) (Opt-out instructions)

IRC office hour for Wikimedia Foundation copyright strategyEdit

Hi there - thank you for your participation in the copyright strategy discussion so far! In addition to contributing on-wiki, you may be interested in an upcoming IRC office hour the Wikimedia Foundation legal team is holding to discuss the copyright strategy. It will be on September 15 at 14:00 UTC. More information is available on Meta-Wiki. Thanks! Joe Sutherland (WMF) 00:48, 8 September 2016 (UTC)


I will work on the statistics in the next days, will give us a good perspective about Gender Gap. My question is now empiric but certainly based in evidence of my knowledge of the movement. Best, --ProtoplasmaKid (WM-MX) (talk) 17:53, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Hola, I was so busy last weeks. I have some advances about this, 38 chapters have just 2 female presidents according to public reports. I want to send also an e-mail to each affiliate to have more accurate information. Best, --ProtoplasmaKid (WM-MX) (talk) 23:31, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
THanks, ProtoplasmaKid! As a suggestion, maybe it makes most sense to organize these as a 'snapshot' on a specific date, so that it can be repeated? Otherwise it's very tempting to send the data that best suits the desired image... Effeietsanders (talk) 12:09, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Board of Trustees DiscussionEdit

Just for the record: what is it that you don't agree with? Less fundraising? Less technological gimmicks? Less desire to be "important"? More support for encyclopedic work? Or all of them? I only ask because I am interested in your opinion. Or is it that you don't like the word "political"? --Mautpreller (talk) 13:51, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

@Mautpreller: It's the general impression you left with your comment, that I disagree with. I don't agree with the suggestion that the WMF is mostly working on 'gimmicks' and have the impression that most of the technological projects they work on, are useful to our mission and leveraging the work of our communities. I don't think that we would be as effective with significantly less fundraising, so I don't think it's a realistic and effective course to take. I'm actually not sure what 'importance fishing' refers to. It also seemed that you suggested that the WMF should invest in 'encyclopedic work' - but this may be a misunderstanding.
We probably agree on a number of things, but I do think that the direction the WMF needs is a bit more complicated than just slimming down operations to the things popular with the community. Hope that clarifies! Effeietsanders (talk) 14:04, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
A little. I do have the impression that the WMF works too much on "gimmicks" that don't help at all (MediaViewer as a very good example), and I am convinced that less fundraising would be better. And most of all I am not a friend of the permanent self-presentation as Very Important Global Player. Slimming down would be a very good thing (which is, by the way, also true for the German chapter). I think that the WMF should invest in support of encyclopedic work and knowledge transfer, not do these things themselves. (Up to now, I more often see measures that prevent encyclopedic work than measures that are apt to support it.) --Mautpreller (talk) 14:33, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Effe iets andersEdit

Groetjes! De Duitse vertaling van effe iets anders, die jij op de voorkant presenteert, is imho en beetje formeel, ik denk, dat Malebenwasanderes of Malwasanderes beter is. Etwas heet informeel (en effe is informeel) allen maar was, de eben is voor en mogelijke relatie met tijd, als het alleen maar om iets anders gaat mag je het eben ook verwijderen. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 11:34, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Ha Sänger, dank je! Ik zet het er als alternatief bij, en denk er nog even over na. Maletwasanderes klinkt ook gewoon lekker :) Effeietsanders (talk) 17:50, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Strategy focus groupEdit

Thanks for proposing a summarisation test with 25 persons at mailarchive:wikimedia-l/2017-October/088953.html, it's an excellent idea. --Nemo 16:17, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

@Nemo bis: It seems that the people in charge don't agree (or see a good response fit) - or want to take the challenge. They opened the endorsement phase, which makes the proposal moot. Too bad. Effeietsanders (talk) 16:33, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikisongs IIEdit

What do you thing about this proposal? --Habitator terrae (talk) 17:58, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

The Community Wishlist SurveyEdit


You get this message because you’ve previously participated in the Community Wishlist Survey. I just wanted to let you know that this year’s survey is now open for proposals. You can suggest technical changes until 11 November: Community Wishlist Survey 2019.

You can vote from November 16 to November 30. To keep the number of messages at a reasonable level, I won’t send out a separate reminder to you about that. /Johan (WMF) 11:25, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Conflict of interestEdit

Hi Lodewijk,

Long time ...

Just a tip look this and this, this are the "winners" and top 20 photos, see the guy that they "supported" at this "expedition" how many times he appears in this "top" photos?

See ya. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 21:43, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Rodrigo,
I'm not sure who you're accusing of what exactly. And what you're asking. Could you make it more tangible? Thanks. Effeietsanders (talk) 22:28, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Lodewijk, look the top 20, how many times the winner appears, Diego Baravelli, is more than 3 times...
This winner have some activities "supported" by the group that organize the WLE commons:Category:Rio from above (2017), commons:Category:Brazilian Wikiexpeditions (2018),...
I do believe that this is a conflict of interesting, as the contributor who won the WLE (local stage) is totally connected with the organization.
The same organization that is claiming again the WLM.
It's quite obvious why they want so badly keep the WLM (and WLE) under their wing, commons:Category:Wiki Education Brazil they do not have any other impact activity under their name. And the results are quite variable and doubtful...
Just check this questions, for me is quite unethical this result. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 17:50, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

The Affiliate-selected Board seats process welcomes your supportEdit

Hello. You are receiving this message because you kindly helped with affiliates-related translations in the past. The movement needs you again! The Nominations phase has started for the ongoing selection process of two Board members, and the timeline is quite tight.

A Translation Central is available to help keen translators like you figure out what's been covered and what's left to do. Over the course of the next few weeks, your attention on candidates' profiles is particularly welcome. While there are four languages that are especially relevant for multiple affiliates (namely Arabic, French, Russian and Spanish), you can also add others. If you can't help: please see if you know anyone in your circle who could, and spread the word :)

Thank you! Elitre (WMF) and Facilitators of ASBS 2019, 13:19, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

croatian nationalism, this is best place to post, make sure this conversation stays if wikimedia is at least 1% impartialEdit

restore what was vandalized meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_comment/Hard_line_nationalism_on_the_Croatian_Wikipedia

i want to prove my point in order to improve croatian wikipedoia; you are to watch over it, as it is your duty, makes no sense starting new topic!

Dear anonymous colleague,
Thank you for caring about the Croatian Wikipedia. I'm aware that there are controversies with neutrality on the Croatian Wikipedia. I closed the RfC that you linked to, although I can't read what was written on the (Deleted) talkpage. I can explain why I closed the Request for Comments.
The request for comments was inactive for quite a while, and it was simply unlikely that any further comments would be made. At that point, there is no reason to keep the RfC open - and hence I closed it. If the situation requires another round of comments, I suggest you open a new Request, but logged in under your user name. You may also want to advertise it a bit more widely, and invite people on both sides of the conflict to comment. Another suggestion is to invite a neutral third party to run the RfC. Effeietsanders (talk) 01:23, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
  • To give context... There is currently an open RfC about the Croatian Wikipedia that is being heavily attacked by unregistered users (IP hopping). The pages were semi-protected accordingly, as such, other pages or persons relating to current and previous RfCs are being hit as the person behind these IP edits won't make an account. ~riley (talk) 02:36, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the context! Effeietsanders (talk) 18:15, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

WikiConference North America 2020 registrationEdit

Thank you for signing up to attend WikiConference North America 2020! If you haven't already, it would be much appreciated if you could also take a minute to register through our form at register.wcna.wiki. While not required, this will help us keep you informed via email, and will also help give us an idea of attendance numbers over the next three days. Thank you, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 19:07, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Final Call for Candidates for AffCom - June 2021Edit

Want to help translate? Translate the missing messages.

This is an update from the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee. Translations are available.

This is a final Call for Candidates for the June 2021 Affiliations Committee election.

If you are interested in running, please post your application and follow all four steps on the nomination page by 30 June 2021 23:59 hours UTC.

If you know somebody you think may be interested, please share this with them and encourage them to consider it. If you have any questions about this process or the requirements, please email affcom@wikimedia.org before the application deadline or reach out to any of the current members.

On behalf of the AffCom elections committee,

--- FULBERT (talk) 14:37, 22 June 2021 (UTC) [[Category:AffCom Elections June 2021|]]