Afrikaans | العربية | অসমীয়া | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Boarisch | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца) | български | বাংলা | བོད་ཡིག | bosanski | català | کوردی | corsu | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form) | Zazaki | ދިވެހިބަސް | Ελληνικά | emiliàn e rumagnòl | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | Nordfriisk | Frysk | galego | Alemannisch | ગુજરાતી | עברית | हिन्दी | Fiji Hindi | hrvatski | magyar | հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Ido | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | ភាសាខ្មែរ | 한국어 | kar | kurdî | Limburgs | lietuvių | Minangkabau | македонски | മലയാളം | молдовеняскэ | Bahasa Melayu | မြန်မာဘာသာ | مازِرونی | Napulitano | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | Kapampangan | Norfuk / Pitkern | polski | português | português do Brasil | پښتو | Runa Simi | română | русский | संस्कृतम् | sicilianu | سنڌي | Taclḥit | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | Soomaaliga | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ślůnski | தமிழ் | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkmençe | Tagalog | Türkçe | татарча / tatarça | ⵜⴰⵎⴰⵣⵉⵖⵜ  | українська | اردو | oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | 吴语 | 粵語 | 中文(简体) | 中文(繁體) | +/-

Welcome to Meta!Edit

Hello, HLHJ. Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum if you need help with something (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

-- Meta-Wiki Welcome (talk) 16:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please fill out our Inspire campaign surveyEdit

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

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

Many thanks,

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

23:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

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


Yes, in fact in one of my answers I suggested using some of the Teahouse project and IdeaLabs solutions as particularly effective in reducing this unfortunate effect. I also studied this phenomenon in my book. Pundit (talk) 20:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The problem with universal approach is that communities need to have autonomy. But I think you're right that it is a general problem. This is why I believe that the Teahouse project should be propagated to communities, who would like to have it (after all, there is no reason why not to allow implementation - at a fraction of a cost of designing it). Also, we could think of a more formal welcoming of newcomers (a separate role) as well as of mentoring (pairing more experienced editors with their less experienced padawans). If it worked on one larger project, it could be an idea to propose to others. Pundit (talk) 07:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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. 23:55, 26 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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) 11:24, 30 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your Community Wishlist Survey proposalsEdit

Thanks for participating! This is a friendly reminder that you have made three proposals, which is the limit. If you have anymore ideas for proposals, you should find other users to adopt them. Kind regards, MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 15:18, 2 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello there! It seems with Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Mobile and apps/Low-bandwidth editor app you have exceed your three-proposal limit. Please decide which three you would like to keep, and we'll Archive the others. From there, you can seek others to adopt your proposals, if you want. Sorry you weren't aware of this rule! Thanks for your understanding :) MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 17:32, 10 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Already done :). I've asked that Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Multimedia and Commons#Video player should allow playback at multiple speeds be withdrawn, as it met with no interest and I had a better idea. I wasn't sure what the protocol for that was, or even if it was allowed, so thank you for your clarifying message, MusikAnimal (WMF), and sorry to put you to the trouble of archiving it. HLHJ (talk) 17:39, 10 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem at all! I have archived that proposal. Thanks, MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 18:04, 10 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, MusikAnimal (WMF), but I can't find my first proposal, which was at Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Editing#Notifications should be able to display all cross-wiki notifications, whatever their status. It's not in the archive or on the wishlist. Do you know what happened? HLHJ (talk) 06:46, 16 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Each proposal has its own dedicated page. So your proposal was Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Editing/Notifications should be able to display all cross-wiki notifications, whatever their status, which was moved to the new "Notifications" category, at Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Notifications/Notifications should be able to display all cross-wiki notifications, whatever their status. Cheers, MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 16:04, 16 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Community Wishlist Survey 2020Edit


You are getting this message because you've previously participated in the Community Wishlist Survey, in either the Wikisource or Wiktionary categories. I wanted to let you know that this year's survey is now open for proposals. You can suggest technical changes until November 11. Unlike previous years, we are only accepting proposals for non-Wikipedia content projects with no dedicated teams (i.e., Wikibooks, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikisource, Wikiversity, Wikispecies, Wikivoyage, and Wikinews). You can learn more on the survey page.

You can vote on proposals from November 20 to December 2. To keep the number of messages at a reasonable level, I won't send out a separate reminder to you about that. We look forward to your participation. Thank you! IFried (WMF) (talk) 18:52, 22 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SGrabarczuk (WMF)

18:26, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

SGrabarczuk (WMF)

16:08, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation elections/2022/Candidates editsEdit

This edit: Why? "The total running time of the videos is 53:24; the total wordcount, just over 7300 words. If you can read at over 130 words per minute (~pre-teen-level), reading will be faster." What does pre-teen-level mean? Why did you inset this unrelated image? What was your intention here? Virtualpilotlight (talk) 09:40, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Virtualpilotlight. I've just realized the image is in German; I've expanded the English Commons caption to clarify. It shows the increase in reading speed with age. I included it because I don't know my reading speed in words-per-minute, but I do know that I can read faster than the average pre-teen, and I assume many Wikipedians could say the same. I think most literate people are familiar with the way reading speed increases with age. The image was intended as a citation for the unit conversion. Granted that it's a very rough, approximate measure, I think it will generally give a usefully accurate impression. My intention was to make casting an informed vote faster and more efficient for all voters. I gave my rationale in more detail in the consultation on the Board-of-Trustees election process, and hoped there would be official transcriptions of the videos, but there weren't, so I made some myself from the subtitles. HLHJ (talk) 13:26, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No. It shows uncited information that is also prejudice. There is no reason to state the information in this way other than to alienate people. "the total wordcount, just over 7300 words." is sufficient without being ableist. Where is reading speed words-per-minute measured in the way you are stating? There is no reason to bring up age or a persons reading ability in the article in this way unless you have ulterior motive & implicit bias. Videos are more than just "addition time" they are a way for community members to get to know the candidates & be more involved. How do I even know you're a real person and not some machine learning algorithm? Virtualpilotlight (talk) 17:12, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Virtualpilotlight, if I am a machine learning algorithm able to act exactly like a human on Wikipedia, going unchallenged in extensive social interactions for years, I'm a stunning breakthrough, and I think I've earned the right to be treated like a person.  Of course, if you are sure I'm an undisclosed bot, you can report me as one.
I don't dispute that videos contain extra information that a transcript does not, but they also have disadvantages. I personally prefer text partly just because it auto-pauses if I stop and think. I also seem to recall some evidence that video interviews, as opposed to telephone ones, increase discrimination based on irrelevant visible disabilities and ethnicity, and even a telephone interview or a real name makes gender, accent, and dialect more salient than a text application. It's up to each voter to choose how they inform themselves. I assume voters are mostly familiar with video and text as media, so they should be aware of the general trade-offs.
I don't think everyone will be able to say, off the top of their heads, how long it will take them to read 7300 words. How long it takes to read 7300 words will, by definition, depend on the reader's reading speed. People editing Wikipedia are more likely to be above-average readers, pre-teen or not, but there are undoubtedly editors who read more slowly, too. I think that most people are aware of whether they are comparatively fast or slow readers, even if they don't know how many words they read per minute. Age correlates loosely with reading ability in our society, so if I say "the reading speed of the average pre-teen", that means something, as the graph I cited clearly shows. I said "~pre-teen-level" for succinctness; would "~average pre-teen reading speed" be preferable? Or, while it's less precise, maybe we could say "average adult reading speed is X wpm", with a source? I don't want to alienate anyone; I just want them to be able to guess how long it will take them to read the transcripts. I'm open to other ways of giving this information. HLHJ (talk) 19:56, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]