User talk:Philippe (WMF)/Archive 1

Active discussions

ArchivesEdit

User talk:Philippe (WMF)/Archive 1

Leave messages hereEdit

Index SaladEdit

Philippe, I wish to point out another of those new editor things. I believe that this one deserves special attention, and you may already have heard of it. Or maybe not. There's no way to tell if it's been addressed, and that is why I am writing this. I recently clicked through to the proposals of Strategic Planning, and found a list that I could browse for so long to find if my topic was already addressed that I might forget what I was thinking about in the first place. The same problem exists on virtually every discussion page, more so the older they are. I think that making these topics findable is a vital step in centralizing and unifying important discussions so that ideas can go somewhere instead of being scattered all over and dying out. I can offer no easy solution to this problem, and decided to bring it to WMF's attention. I don't know if you are already aware of this problem, but if it wasn't a problem, I would know.l Bronsonboy 01:05, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

P.S.: It would be a first step to create something prominent (like a sticky on a forum) to discuss this problem.
P.P.S.: Another thought, how about condensing user pages on all of the umpteen projects into one userpage, so I don't have to spend 5-10 minutes looking for the right "New Messages" page? Maybe a Wikiuser site?

Hey Philippe, I saw your post on my talk page. Just my thoughts on some of those technical difficulties. One way to condense the userpages would be to have them moved onto a different domain (like http://users.wikimedia.org, for instance). For existing users, the various sections on each page could be matched by title and merged (a lot of work, I know) or, optionally, left to the users. My reasoning here is that anyone who has created >1 userpage on various sites evidently knows at least enough about editing to rearrange their new, combined userpage to their liking. New users (like me) may not even have a userpage. Merging their talk pages will simply help them find their discussions easier. As mentioned above, there is little order to the indexing system on user talk pages, and most people will not care that their discussions are now in one place. If a new indexing method is developed, it will be a lot easier to index the combined discussion than 6-8 individual discussion pages.
If there is a problem with knowing what discussions are about, (or even perhaps as an intermediate step), I recommend a tab system (so it would say at the top, for instance: Userpage|Discussion (Wikipedia)|Discussion (Wiktionary)|Discussion(Wikiquote)|Discussion (Wikibooks)|etc., etc.)

Little bit lateEdit

Hi Philippe,

I guessed I missed the email but I am not to late yet to say I want to help right?


Best regards, Huib talkAbigor 18:33, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

strategic booksEdit

Hey Philippe,

I was fooling around on the strategy wiki and made this: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Phoebe/Books/strategic_plan

It's nice! Gives me something to print & read on the bus. It might be nice to do over again when the strategic plan is "final." -- phoebe 22:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Oooooh, sweet! Philippe (WMF) 17:15, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

fundraising mailing listEdit

Philippe, can you please add me in fundraising mailling list? (or tell where i have to go to have access). No one member of Wikimedia Portugal have access to it, and i liked to participate. (my mail is beria[dot]lima[at]wikimedia[dot]pt)

Best regards, Béria Lima msg 18:57, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

You will still need approval but you can sign up here James (T C) 23:00, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Fundraising-related questionEdit

You seem to have missed this question. --MZMcBride 07:56, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

There's unresolved follow-up there. --MZMcBride 04:50, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Fundraising suggestion ...New topic or just place it somewhere...Edit

Is it necessary to start a new topic for suggestion and link it with the Fundraising 2010 page or should suggestions be placed under talk page? Or is it necessary to create new page for proposals? Anyway, are we using the same donation landing page as last year or a new page will be created? --Diagramma Della Verita 16:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I think the talk page would be fine... We're studying the landing page now, but I think it's likely it will be new. Philippe (WMF) 19:44, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Quick question about fundraisingEdit

Just wondering, is there a place where anyone can see the breakdown of how donations are used (how much goes to things like staff salaries, maintaining the servers, utilities, organizing events, outreach, etc.)? I don't know if this would be in a quarterly report, or a special fundraising report, or whatever, but if it isn't available now, could a report be compiled? I'm thinking of follow-up banners saying "look how we spent your money", which would show people that might be cautious about donating to various organizations at first. (If you could, drop a talkback note at w:User talk:Fetchcomms, as I don't check Meta much). Thanks,  fetchcomms 19:43, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

There is... it's at the Foundation wiki, in the 2010-2011 Annual plan, around page 21 I think. :) Philippe (WMF) 19:46, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks!  fetchcomms 20:02, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Question regarding accountsEdit

Will the new temporary fundraising-related hires be getting staff accounts? --MZMcBride 04:26, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

They are all being issued "work" accounts to clearly separate their work edits from their home edits. However, the default state for those accounts is to NOT have the "staff" right added on. If someone has a demonstrated need, we'll take a look, but we're not handing out the rights until there's a need. Answer your question? :) Philippe (WMF) 07:45, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes, awesome. Thanks! --MZMcBride 20:51, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Adserver spamEdit

Back from floatabout, and have plenty of spam from OpenX and other advertising-related stuph... so as I was cleaning mailboxes I thought I'd drop a bug in your ear. Need any suggestions or is WMF going to do the "yeah, yeah, we'll think about that for next year..." again? - Amgine/meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news 02:54, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Linkage between social media and conventional bannersEdit

I do understand the banner test has been recently conducted. Is it possible to place links for certain words or small icons to be directed to social media sites like Youtube or Facebook on the banner? Can each of these links and icons be tracked? This is in addition to the link directed to the donation landing page on the banner.

I don't think social media outreach alone will be able to work effectively. It needs to be integrated with conventional banners. The Foundation has a channel on Youtube and cause page on Facebook, yet the audience is still small because nobody is aware about it and the content is not shared between users. --Diagramma Della Verita 07:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I would be very unlikely to want to take traffic offsite during the fundraiser. Remember, the primary purpose of the banners is to move traffic to the donation pages, only, and doing anything that moves it offsite would have to be a highly convincing case. :) My understanding of our facebook pages is that they are HUGE... I'd rather use those to push people towards donations funnels, rather than the other way round. Philippe (WMF) 17:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I second Philippe here, we want to draw traffic to our donation page, not off-site. Many of the social media sites are easy to get lost in, once someone has been redirected to Facebook or YouTube from our on-site banners, they're likely not going to go back. Our Facebook presence is fairly large, we need to better engage with our followers there to drive donations. The donations landing page should be the 'end' of each link chain, I'd be wary of complicating the transaction, even if it would draw more people to our SM handles. However, engaging donors in the conversation is important, adding Facebook and Twitter buttons to the bottom of the the post-donation thank you page, FAQ or even the donation landing page, rather than leading them off-site before they get a chance to donate could be something worth looking into. --Dgultekin 17:34, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Testing banners with Typos...Edit

The great banner including: "If you make one gift this year, make it the gift ofknowledge. -- Nelson Mandela" has a missing space between of and knowledge. If you know how, or who can, please fix it so that we are testing proper messages. Thanks! Ocaasi 22:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

It appears to be some sort of weird system glitch... the space is showing for some and not for others, but James hacked up a workaround, so it's fixed. Thanks! Philippe (WMF) 22:17, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Great, thanks for doing that! Ocaasi 23:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Questions about the All messages pageEdit

Two quick things.

One, I think the funny and community jokes section was double pasted. I'll delete it, but I wanted to check.

Two, Should comments be made on the All-messages page or on the subpages... (getting complicated, right?!) In other words, is All messages just for messages or is it for the whole conversation? I assume it's not transcluded which would be one solution. Or, maybe I could just delete all of the comments and leave it as a banner-only summary-space. Thoughts? Ocaasi 10:03, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

It is entirely possible that I transcluded those sections twice. I will check later today, in case you don't get to it first. All messages is a transclusion of the full content - including discussion - of the banners. If you were to delete from there, you are deleting from EVERYWHERE. Thanks! Philippe (WMF) 11:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Some of the 'all messages' banners have subsections (Level 3). Some don't. Can I add them, or is there a more complicated organization going on?
  • The ones without just predate a template change. You should feel free to add them.
  • The new banners list is getting a little long and the top is not so new any more (~2weeks old). How to refactor?
  • Yeah, we're going to look at that after tomorrow's test.
  • I have about 60 banner ideas on my talk page. Some are variations, but a good number are unique. Any thoughts on how to put them out in an orderly fashion? Ocaasi 10:08, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
  • I'll take a look, but the most important thing is to get them on the new messages page, so that people can see them. :) Philippe (WMF) 10:11, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

IRC logsEdit

Hi Philippe, just in case you don't know, you can avoid adding bunches of <br /> and : if you use <poem>, which is active on Meta:

bla
bla
bla

Hope this helps, Nemo 07:01, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Nice! I didn't! Philippe (WMF) 07:13, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
:-) Nemo 20:26, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Word cloudsEdit

Because you love word clouds, you inspired me to create this:

What do you think? (I suggest you to download the bigger version and watch it with an image viewer.) --Nemo 20:26, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Seriously cool! I'm going to print it and put it on my desk. Philippe (WMF) 05:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Localization of Fundraising 2010 articles in languages other than EnglishEdit

Dear Philippe: I've traslated two pages (Fundraising 2010/Messages & Fundraising 2010/Committee) from English into Belarusian.

However, it cannot be opened from the 'In other languages' drop-down list. On 17 October I described this problem in the | Fundraising Committee Signup section, item 61, and you answered on 7 November that it is fixed. Sorry, it is not.

How can we get to Messages or Committee sections into the Belarusian languages? A visitor can only be linked to Introduction section. There's no opportunity to open other sections. And by the way how can http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2010/Tabs/be be localized? --Da voli 05:20, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Da voli, Sorry about the confusions. The links should now work and bring you to the right page/language. There was a problem with the template and I had to add to it. Regarding the Tabs template I've added it to each of your translated paged and adjusted it so that the links go to the Belarusian pages that I know exist. You should be able to see what I did so that you can repeat it for other pages that are trasnlated. Thank you very much for your work it is great to see that much translated and if you have any other questions please feel free to let me know on my talk page. If you are willing we also have a few translation requests at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2010/Translation including our payments forms and this years first Jimmy Letter. Jalexander 09:08, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, James! Da voli, I asked James to look into it, because he's much better at this stuff than I am. Let me add my thanks to his, though, for your work translating. Philippe (WMF) 21:33, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

That's true, everything functions nicely now. Thank you for your efforts and such an affirmative answer. It is a real pleasure to see fruit of labour not to be neglected.--Da voli 06:01, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Slogan dump?Edit

Hey Phillipe. I wanted to post a list of my remaining slogan ideas on the new banner ideas page, but there are still about 70 of them. I was thinking of just leaving it as a bulleted entry and offering for other editors to pick ones they liked or post them as individual entries. I'll post what I'm talking about here, but please feel free to delete them once you see what I mean.

Slogan ideas

The Fundraiser's approaching, and I haven't been sure how to transfer these. So, here's the whole list. If you like one, please bold it or make it an individual entry delete it!

  • It's a good day to donate to Wikipedia.
  • Show some WikiLove. Donate today.
  • Wikipedia is awesome. Donate today.
  • Wikipedia is awesome. Wikipedia is supported by you.
  • Wikipedia. Supported by you.
  • We are Wikipedia.
  • We are Wikipedia. Donate today.
  • Wiki wants to ask you for a favor. Can you help?
  • Wiki like. Wiki love.
  • Build the world's largest encyclopedia. Check. Keep it growing?
  • Wiki = fast. Donate = today.
  • Wiki Wiki ... Wiki!!!
  • Love the Wiki. Donate today.
  • WikiLove. Donate today.
  • Lookin' good Wiki, lookin' good.
  • Build the Wiki. Donate today.
  • Grow the Wiki. Donate today.
  • Feed the Wiki.
  • Feed the Wiki. Donate today.
  • Feed me.
  • Illjustlookitupapedia. Nonprofitapedia.
  • Didyouknowthatapedia. Nonprofitapedia.
  • Youwontbelievethisapedia. Nonprofitapedia.
  • Every Wikimedia site in every country is run by 51 employees. More bang for your buck.
  • The 7th most visited website in the world is run by 51 people. Cheap date.
  • With only 51 total employees, your gift will go to one of the leanest, meanest non-profits on the planet. Donate today.
  • Before Wikipedia, I never knew where to look something up. Not anymore. Thanks, Wikipedia.
  • Before Wikipedia, I had so many questions. Now I have even more. Thanks, Wikipedia.
  • Before Wikipedia, I used to wonder about some things. Now I just look them up. Thanks, Wikipedia.
  • You're a great user of Wikipedia. A nice user. A smart user. A generous user.
  • You're feeling very generous right now...
  • Wikipedia. Making you smart since 2001.
  • Truth or Dare.
  • I CAN HAZ WIKIPEDIA. DON8 2DAY.
  • ALL YOUR WIKI ARE BELONG TO US. DON8 2DAY.
  • Any gift is a big gift. Donate today.
  • Donate for your kids. Donate for their kids.
  • Entertainment + Education. How awesome is that?
  • Convenience + Reliability. How great is that?
  • Knowledge for free. How great is that?
  • We need your help. Donate today.
  • The gift of knowledge. Donate today.
  • Donate here.
  • Link to annual fundraiser.
  • Place a brick in the road of knowledge. Donate today.
  • The greatest encyclopedia ever written. Put your name on it.
  • The internet is a better place because of Wikipedia. Help it grow.
  • The world is a better place because of Wikipedia. Help it grow.
  • Think of all the people who haven't even discovered this site yet. Let's reach them.
  • Think of all the people who haven't even discovered this site yet. Help us reach them.
  • This site is currently under construction. By you.
  • Wikipedia turns 10 next year. Want to buy it an early birthday present?
  • Wikipedia turns 10 next year. Slip a little fun-money in the birthday card.
  • It's like a bakesale. Want a cookie?
  • It's like a bakesale. Want to buy a brownie?
  • Wiki needs a new pair of shoes. Can you help?
new backpack. new laptop. new server farm. new data center. new calculator. new coat of paint. new dishwasher. new shower curtain...
  • What if a website written by volunteers around the world became the largest encyclopedia in history? What if?
  • What if a website written by volunteers became the largest encyclopedia in the world? What if?
  • Tip jar.
  • Independent. Non-Profit. Ad-free. Did we mention ad-free?
  • Community-made. Community-supported.
  • The same Wikipedia you have grown to love, now available to more human beings.
  • The Wikipedia you have always loved, now accessible to the whole planet.

--Ocaasi 15:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

secure-infoEdit

Hi Philippe,

I was told to email secure-info at wikimedia dot org so that I could be set as a checkuser on the French Wikipedia (per ArbCom appointment). I sent a message to that address one week ago, but as far as I can see, it still hasn't been received. Could you please confirm if you didn't get anything before I send again the message? Or tell me if I did anything wrong? Thanks! Elfix 18:11, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Oops! Totally my fault. I marked on my list that you were identified, and failed to list it on the noticeboard. That is now corrected. Philippe (WMF) 20:08, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
No problem... Thanks again :) Elfix 22:11, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem with File:A personal appeal.tiffEdit

Thank you for uploading File:A personal appeal.tiff. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at this page. Thanks again for your cooperation. mickit 22:03, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

NoteEdit

Hello Philippe. Maybe you could have a look at this?. Thank you, --dferg ☎ talk 23:02, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

From Tarandìne WikipediaEdit

Hi Philippe, apologize me for my later response. Thank you for your quickly answer. Have a nice day --Joetaras 20:49, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

FundraisingEdit

Hi. We (WMPL) use simply a link in the Sitenotice, but put more info on the appeal page. WMF Fundraising uses big banners but poor target pages with texts only (without images, without the WMF plans, supported projects, etc.). We (WMPL) collect 50-80k $ a year in tax deducible donations where people can donate 1% of their income tax to public benefit organisations (in fact the link in the Sitenotice "works" 3 months each yesr). WMF collects <30k PLN by for a month, <10k $. So, I suggest to use more info (about WMF successes and plans) and images on pages with appeals. Sorry for my weak en. Be bold ;) Przykuta 14:30, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Corrected some stuff, explained some other stuff; Cheers! Wojciech Pędzich Talk 14:57, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, and thanks for the comments. :) I want to explain a couple of things, but I'm also unclear about part of what you're saying, so I'll ask you to clarify. The WMF has tested a number of things - in fact, the landing page and banners that we are running are the results of tests of literally hundreds of banners and all sorts of lengths for the landing page (and all sorts of content, as well). We've found this particular combination to yield the best results.
Now, the second part of your comment, I'm confused about. It looks like you're saying that WMF collects less than $10,000 per month. This is incorrect, if that's what you're saying. A look at the page you linked will show that so far in December we've collected $1,285,000 and in November it was about $6,500,000. That's noticeably more than 10,000 :) In fact, our lowest month - when we did no fundraising - we brought in nearly $45,000. So I'm not sure what you're asking in the second part of your statement.
But I do thank you for your comments, and ask that you keep sending them my way. I keep hoping someone's going to have a stroke of brilliance and we'll all be able to pull down the banners. :) Philippe (WMF) 15:06, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
I know the stats. "less than $10,000 per month" - yes, from Poland (in PLN - Polish złoty) WMF collects only $10,000 per month. WMPL collects 20k per month - from Poland too. So, did you/we test landing pages with images, diagrams and other "eye-friendly" elements, with links to plans and reports? I see only this page: Fundraising 2010/Landing pages and similar ones, like Lilaroja Appeal. If you click on the "wow-looking" banner, you are directed to a not-so-wow-looking page with text only. It could be over-boring to readers. I hope that my explanation is sufficient. Przykuta 15:52, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
And I hope my corrections have been helpful :) Wojciech Pędzich Talk 15:57, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Ah, I see what you're saying! Remember, the currency totals there do not actually reflect the residence of the donor. Many people donate in Dollars or Euros who live in countries where there's another currency (even one that we accept!). But as it is, I'm not too surprised to see the donations split between the chapter and the Foundation, with the lions' share going to the chapter. Some people prefer to give to their local organization. Others prefer to give to an international NGO. Could our landing pages be better in Poland? Probably. But we've asked the chapters (and the community) to take the lead on designing those, since there's no way my limited staff can do unique ones for each area. We've tried to strike a happy medium that worked "pretty well" overall.
Here's the good news though: We're happy to run any landing page that the chapter suggests. Or any group of Wikimedians suggests. Almost without fail, we're willing to test them against what we've got. So if you think your way will speak better to the Polish people - and you would know better than I! - I encourage you to design a landing page and let us know about it so that we can try to test it. :) We want to maximize the gain from every geography.
A very little thing that we can do is to customize the amounts that we're asking for and make sure that they make sense for the areas. Right now it's 100 50 35 20 for Poland, and I'm almost certain that's not an optimized amount. Can you suggest a better string that we can substitute? Philippe (WMF) 16:02, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
20 30 50 100. I'm not a designer but this is (+/-) my idea: User:Przykuta/App. Przykuta 22:24, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Fundraising Feedback.Edit

Thanks for your responses. I responded again, briefly Talk:Fundraising_2010#Response. At your leisure... Ocaasi 00:33, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

TechCrunch articleEdit

Thought you might want to leave a comment http://techcrunch.com/2010/12/31/wikipedia-still-1m-short-of-fundraising-goal-for-2010-and-why-i-donated/ or just check out the article. The banners are going crazy this week, and at just the right time. I wonder if there's a need for spinning the exact fundraiser totals in context of the 2010 timeframe... I wouldn't want to see articles saying 'the goal wasn't met...' Ocaasi 13:22, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Press room pageEdit

Hi Philippe. Sorry, but my phone number is still there. :S You have just deleted my reference as the Catalan language contact. Could you please restore that and just remove my phone number? It was repeated twice, since I'm both the Spanish and the Catalan contact. I will be happy if you only leave my e-mail address. Thanks. --Góngora (TES) 16:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, don't worry. PeterSymonds fixed it. Thank you anyway. :) --Góngora (TES) 16:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Quite right, my apologies! Philippe (WMF) 16:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Your note...Edit

Thanks.

p.s Where's all the celebration. This place went quiet like there had been a power outage or something. Ocaasi 16:29, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

(Broken) redirectsEdit

I'm sorry, according to this I was too fast this time. I saw both redirects here and was impatient. Thanks for correcting me. :-) Trijnstel 15:04, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

No harm done. :) Philippe (WMF) 15:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Your userpage on other projectsEdit

Hi Philippe. I took the liberty of fixing a couple links on your user page at en.Wikiquote – it appears from context that the intent was inter-project links rather than inter-language links. (See Help:Interwiki linking for details about how these links work.) You may wish to review your pages on any other wikis that may have been updated today on your behalf by Jalexander. ~ Ningauble 14:13, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


Need help with Candidates pageEdit

Hello, You informed me by email that my identification was posted on the Identification Noticeboard. Thank you.

Now, I need to know what to do next on the Candidates page. My entry still says 'Not yet identified." Am I to change that myself, or will someone else do it? And how about approval for the nomination? How does that take place. Thank you. Bdubay 17:41, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Responding on user talk. Philippe (WMF) 17:50, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Leave messages hereEdit

Philippe I hope you do not mind me contacting you personally. I have noticed that you contribute often to Wiki and I hope I can learn a few steps to get me going on a couple of the projects that are posted and another project that deals with the overall state of affairs the world is in. Yesterday I read some material that topics like world affairs, economies, judicial or legal systems, ect are not wiki topic material due to the subjectivness. Am I right by that assessment. Thank you for your time, any help is appreciated.

Note: responded on users talk page Jalexander 23:48, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Strategic PlanningEdit

Hi, do you still want someone to look at doing thisthis? Jamietw 16:06, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

QuestionEdit

Hello Philippe. In re [1] I'd like to know if the information I've posted is actually accurate or not. Regards, -- Dferg ☎ talk 10:53, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Done Philippe (WMF) 11:17, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Identification noticeboardEdit

Hey, I saw recently you added users on Identification noticeboard from you volunteer account, which is not listed on that page, but I think your office account is the best and proper choice. Regards, — Tanvir | Talk ] 07:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Quite right, thank you. Philippe (WMF) 07:33, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi Philippe, re the protection of this page, "authorized users only, please." - does this include admins who are helping add the diffs? Also, there are some users who have been added for only one wiki, such as The Rambling Man@enwiki, even if they have a global account - could you update this for all the users on the page? Thanks, The Helpful One 16:02, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Admins who are adding diffs are authorized. :) I'm mostly concerned about people adding new entries to the page. Feel free to do the cleanup you request. :) Philippe (WMF) 16:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Interactive TutorialEdit

Hey Philippe. I've been working on a neat project and would love your input. Difficult help documentation is a known issue, especially for new editors. A few of us put together a proposal for a guided tutorial/game that introduces new users to the site, the community, basic policy, and editing mechanics. It's called The Wikipedia Adventure, and we're looking to get it made and see how we could get it into the hands of new editors. If you get a chance, let me know what you think or if you have any ideas.

The Wikipedia Adventure: An interactive tutorial for new editors - Project proposal, script, and workpage

Cheers, Ocaasi 20:07, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Have you spoken with Ironholds at all? I know he's doing some work on the help pages as well... I'm traveling today but will look ASAP. :) Philippe (WMF) 18:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes, Ironholds has some great ideas. He's more working on improving the help documentation itself (and virtualizing some of it). This idea is a bit different and more along the lines of gamifying what is already out there, or to use polite language, making the help documentation more entertaining and accessible, especially for those with little familiarity or patience. I think they are both neat ideas and I'm giving him feedback as well.
The main task nowadays for is finding people who have interest and ability to code such a tutorial/game, and then rolling it out to editors in an effective and scalable way. Familiarity with Flash or Mediawiki/Javascript is needed on the coding end. I'm thinking it might be well suited for a university summer project, or, if the foundation has any coders lying around... Look forward to hearing what you think! Ocaasi 04:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Image filter referendumEdit

Can you explain, in explicit detail, why you protected this page? --MZMcBride 22:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

It seems that someone wanted to adjust the announcement without telling the people who signed it. That seems sort of rude... when people say something, you shouldn't change it without telling them. :) So to prevent there being any misunderstanding about exactly what it was we're doing here (there's already going to be some, I'd hate to introduce more vagaries to it), I protected the page. The talk page is unprotected, you should feel free to suggest clarifications there, but when we're dealing with referendum questions and announcements, the language is pretty specific, so it's protected to be sure it doesn't get altered. Philippe (WMF) 22:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
I think you rather clearly saw me remove any signatures on the page, Philippe.
This is a wiki. Unless there has been vandalism or some other outstanding issue with the page, it should not be protected. I don't know what "specific language" refers to or where how you've found it appropriate to take ownership of pages here in Meta-Wiki's mainspace. --MZMcBride 22:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
This debate about how to handle pages describing official processes comes up from time to time. We preemptively protect some pages involved with Board elections, for instance. MZM - no need to be prissy. I agree that there's probably no need for protection, and vandalism would normally be reacted to with just semi-protection, but there's also no need to be unkind. Better to focus energy on the more important discussion here. SJ talk | translate   03:14, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Image filter referendum/Committee/enEdit

You [well anyone from the committee] have got messages there! :) Hope this helps, The Helpful One 01:39, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Harvard bannerEdit

Hi Philippe, just a quick note, even though you're probably aware of it, there is a problem with the harvard banner: on small screens (i.e. small window width), the text overlaps with the image.

Also, I'm not sure whether we should emphasize a possible financial benefit. Editors are spend their free time to work on Wikipedia, if they were driven by money, they probably wouldn't be here. But maybe that's just me ;-) --Church of emacs talk · contrib 21:30, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi COE... Yeah, I'm aware of the overlapping issue. James is working on it. :) As for the rest, well... i'm just the flunky who put the thing in, but I'll pass the comment along to Steven, who's hand-holding that one. :) Philippe (WMF) 21:32, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

from your other account...Edit

I left a message for you, reflexively, at User talk:Philippe. FYI :) SJ talk | translate   03:14, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Reposting below since other image-filter discussion is happening here. SJ talk | translate  

Personal image filterEdit

Hello Philippe! Is there active discussion somewhere about how this is conceived / would be implemented? I recall the older page on mw.org, which seems sparse in detail in some areas and highly (over?) specified in others. It would be good to see some of the proposed implementations, and a list of concerns or issues and their responses so far.

Where in the timeline is there room for meaningful feedback - is that before or after a referendum?

Finally, we should get translators and ambassadors on board now to spread the discussion: this is one topic where it would be particularly unfortunate to have an English-only discussion.

Rock on, SJ talk | translate   04:07, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sj,
The concept for the referendum is that we actually don't want to focus too much on the finer details of the implementation, but just gauge the "mind of the community" on the concept (because, for instance, people may vote against the filter because they don't like the color of the font, or whatever - trying to take lessons from electoral politics here). But yes, the one at mw.org is the current spec. The idea is that after the referendum, we'll do a period for public input on the actual design of the thing, and then begin the build-out. We're having a FAQ written right now to address those. As to translators and ambassadors, I couldn't agree more. We have a list of translators from the previous fundraiser, plus we have Casey from transcom on the committee, in an attempt to ensure that we get things out as widely as possible. It's absolutely crucial that we get the word out in as many languages as possible, I agree totally. Sorry for the delayed response. Philippe (WMF) 03:24, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. The one issue that I see coming up already is "do we use existing categories, or do we create a small number of new ones?". The answer will affect many people's views of whether this could be done neutrally. I sympathize with the view that there's no 'good' way to pick a limited set of categories or filter names, and hope this gets discussed now rather than later.
For instance, Dcoetzee's proposal is fairly detailed and has been discussed positively on Commons in the past. And his views on this subject are measured and tend to have common sense. I would find it incredibly helpful to see a discussion about the differences between his proposal and the current spec, and which are seen as policy decisions and which are seen as technical problems. Policy decisions could be addressed in a future public design session [and could be called out as open to change], technical problems clearly separate (as they could be solved by someone with a better implementation idea). SJ talk | translate   03:55, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello Philippe, just got the message on the OC:WP "Tavèrna" and added a short explanation in Occitan. Just one concern: at least in France, it is quite difficult to get people involved during the Summer vacation period. Is it too late to postpone and hold it say at the very beginning of September? Regards, --Jfblanc 09:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

An oversight of mine re AbigorEdit

See [2]. I invited Abigor to contact me if he needed assistance, on Wikiversity, and he mentioned the issue of Delay and his admission about that. I thought you should know. Thanks. --Abd 20:11, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Quite right, and I absolutely did not notice it either. I've posted a comment at the RFC. Philippe (WMF) 08:56, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

IRCEdit

Do you have few minutes for wikimedia-stewards? --WizardOfOz talk 18:53, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Image filter discussionEdit

Philipe, I have asked you to clarify that the image filters will be implemented regardless of the outcome of the "referendum" (and with or without community support), but you have not replied. Instead, you have collapsed down a discussion I started about implementation, which will provide input to the developers and the WMF. You stated that the discussion was confusing people, but I believe people are confused because you have been less than clear about the plans for implementing image filters.

I am certain that you would not want me to start collapsing any of the many off-topic discussions on that talk page - please leave my on-topic proposal to run its course. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle 01:52, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

My objection is not to your proposal, it's to the location. Locating it on the talk page of a referendum ON ANOTHER ISSUE that's currently running is confusing. I've got emails and chats from people to back that up. I'd strongly request that you move it.
This referendum is not about WHETHER we implement the filter - we've been directed by the Board to do so. It's about the feature set and design requirements. Philippe (WMF) 01:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, this referendum is for a feature that is specifically opt-in only be design. That's one of the major principles of the feature — it's something people decide for themselves and isn't forced upon them. A opt-out filter is a completely different ball game, and would be a lot harder to actually find support for, even from pretty liberal people. Don't get me wrong though — I'm really happy you support the image filter. I just think that going default is a little too far for now, isn't what we're going for, and would confuse people. Cbrown1023 talk 02:04, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Philippe, feel free to forward any emails that you have received complaining about the discussion. Why is opt-in versus opt-out not a discussion that is relevant if the purpose of the referendum is to gather input? Surely that is something that needs to be considered in the design process (although Erik Möller's statements on the talk page suggest that already underway). Opt-out is not in any way preventing people from deciding for themselves - it simply shifts the burden of who needs to take action after making the decision. In the opt-in scenario, it is the user who wishes to filter images. In the opt-out scenario, it is the user who does not wish to filter images. The feature itself is being forced upon people either way. I am certain that it will be easier to sell this to people if it is opt-in. I am also certain that an opt-in filter is a half-measure that will please no one. The fact that an opt-out filter is a harder sell should not be reason not to do it. Philippe, I understand that you would rather not deal with the proposal I made on the talk page - to repeat a talk page suggestion made about offensive images, "just look away". Thanks. Delicious carbuncle 02:22, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request for Wikimedia nomail listEdit

Can you add AnmaFinotera to the Wikimedia nomail list. I do longer have anything to do with any wiki, and scrambled my passwords to do a complete walk away, but then got an email today on some image discussion. Thanks in advance. 165.91.106.99 16:29, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Sure, done. Philippe (WMF) 16:33, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Image_filter_referendum/en/Process#Last_page_protection_rationaleEdit

You're probably the person who can most easily reply. Thanks, Nemo 22:36, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Promoting usersEdit

Hello! If you promote someone to admin here, then please also add the people to this list or just make a subpage like an RfA and add it to the RfA page and let a crat do this work, otherwise it is hard to keep track on stuff. They are usually quick and set the flag within shortest time. Thanks, -Barras 06:28, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, you're quite correct and my apologies. Philippe (WMF) 06:43, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Jimmy AppealEdit

Hi Philippe! Perhaps you can help me. I've been aked by some Wikipedians about fundraising messages. Why, in his letters, Jimmy Wales is signed as a founder of Wikipedia, not as a co-founder, which would be more precise? The question seems to be reasonable. Do you know what are the reasons for that? Kind regards, --Mikołka 15:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

I thought you might know this, since you were involved in the Fundraiser in the past years. Thanks, --Mikołka 18:57, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
I understand. I'm just not the right person to talk about fundraising stuff anymore. :) Philippe (WMF) 19:42, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

MailEdit

Hi Philippe. Recently I sent you an email. Did you receive it? Kind regards, Trijnstel 14:13, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I did... my apologies for the delayed response. I just answered it. Philippe (WMF) 14:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Zeit.de article about the referendum and also about youEdit

Dear Philippe, the famous liberal German newspaper "Die Zeit" wrote an article about the referendum on image filters and sums up the discussion quite well, including a lot of insider knowledge about the Wikipedia. They even mention you! Maybe you want to read it.

Here is the original in German language: Wikipedia-Autoren stimmen über Filter ab

And here is the automated translation using Google Translator (which produces quite a fair and readable result): Wikipedia writers to vote on filter

Best greetings. --El bes 12:55, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I talked to Torsten last week but hadn't seen the article yet. Philippe (WMF) 12:58, 4 September 2011 (UTC)


WikiNewsEdit

Re: the recent comment about WN editorial standards, two notes:

  1. I talked to Sasha Constanza-Chock recently -- a veteran IndyMedia participant now at Berkman & the Center for Civic Media. He wanted an update on WN, and would like to help start something of value there. Our network of many active-if-small language communities who know a lot about editing and wiki publishing would mesh well with groups of on the ground reporters who are looking for more visibility for their work; in his world there is a glut of the latter. [in ours, a glut of people who are interested in the idea of WN but don't see a compelling reason to get involved.]
  2. Wikizine is considering moving its working space over to en.wn, which is a nice concept, and would drive more in-depth coverage of wiki items across the projects.

Cheers, SJ talk | translate   21:13, 5 September 2011 (UTC)


And thank you!Edit

For handling the recent vote with such attention. I am really pleased to see us moving towards being able to run regular polls and referenda; that will make a tremendous difference in how we communicate. Of course starting to do this opens up all of the related feature requests... a better way to track an influx of discussion, a process for reviewing and analyzing poll format and delivery and results, visualization and raw data pipelines, &c. This is a Good Thing. SJ talk | translate   23:40, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. I'm very pleased with the gaps that are being identified - the more we identify, the more we can know how to do it next time. Philippe (WMF) 23:41, 5 September 2011 (UTC)


Future involvement with the Controversial Content processEdit

Are you going to oversee how that discussion and any implementation develops? How do you see that playing out? I'll ask Phoebe too of course but she's largely offline for the week on holiday. SJ talk | translate   05:28, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

That's a very good question. My suspicion is "no", that will likely not be me, although I'll have some limited involvement as the staff member detailed specifically to support our readers. My team is pretty busy right now, and I've had large project after large project, so I'll likely try to scale back slightly to do some revitalizing - this last one really sort of took it out of me. But as always, I serve at the discretion of the Executive Director and if she tells me to, of course I'll do it and work my hardest. :) I think the topic area is fascinating, though, and it will take someone with a very steady hand - probably steadier than mine - to see us through it. This is one of those areas where "all the king's horses" could cause a pretty big... well, omelette. Philippe (WMF) 05:42, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Office Actions in Japanese WikipediaEdit

Hi, Philippe. I would like to draw your attention to ja:Wikipedia:事務局行動 in Japanese Wikipedia. The page is translated from en:Wikipedia:OFFICE, and presented as an “official policy of all Wikimedia projects.” Just as in the original English page, your name is mentioned in the Japanese page, along with those of Zack Exley, Christine Moellenberndt, etc. as the office action initiator.

Here, I would like to ask you a question: Are you really willing to take office actions in Japanese Wikipedia and willing to be contacted (in Japanese language) by readers who seek assistance in the matters in Japanese Wikipedia?

If not, instead of posting the full translation of English policy, maybe we can just say something like:

The Foundation retains the power to take “Office Actions” to prevent legal trouble or personal harm. However, the Foundation has yet to establish the detailed procedures for such actions in Japanese Wikipedia. When an office action must be taken in Japanese Wikipedia, the Foundation (or its duly authorized representative) will make necesarry notices(most likely in ja:Wikipedia:事務局行動) as to the relevant procedures so that the office actions will be clearly recognized by everyone.

What do you think?--Dwy 11:51, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the question. I am not empowered to change Foundation policy, which is currently that the Office may, in rare cases, take office actions, including the requisite follow up. I'll provide this question to the General Counsel and see if he has any input on it and then determine where to go from there. Thanks! Philippe (WMF) 11:53, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Message sentEdit

I am just leaving you a message to see if you have receive a message from me. Thank you, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 16:25, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I did, thank you. I'll try to take a look this morning. :) Philippe (WMF) 17:02, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 17:06, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Bylaws out of dateEdit

Hi Philippe, the wmf:Bylaws havent been updated to reflect the amendment at wmf:Resolution:Bylaws amendment - founder term. John Vandenberg 05:40, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, John - I'll make sure that Phoebe is aware. :) Philippe (WMF) 05:46, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
I've raised this and another issue at Foundation_wiki_feedback#Board_of_Trustees_term_ends_and_bylaws, where I should have taken this in the first instance.
I've made a fairly large change to Template:BoardChart, but if you check old vs new you should see that the only actual change is to add '+' to Jimmy, Jan-Bart, Stu and Matt at Jan 2011, which I think is correct per wmf:Vote:Board appointments December 2010, and slightly adjust the term ends for the chapter and community seats. --John Vandenberg 06:32, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

About HannibalEdit

Hello Philippe,

You requested on 22 July 2011 that Hannibal should lost his staff permissions, and it was done with the comment contract expired. But he kept global editinterface rights : is it still needed ? Thanks -- Quentinv57 (talk) 12:42, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Quentinv, yes, it was. I'll check to see if it's still required, however. Philippe (WMF) 23:41, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

WMFOfficeEdit

Hello, I'm not understanding why User:WMFOffice is again and again deleting this File on commons. It is a legal german stamp like all the other german stamps uploaded to commons, which are according to [3] in public domain.--Sinuhe20 22:28, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi - have you done as I suggested and written to the WMF's legal department? Their address is legal wikimedia.org. Philippe (WMF) 22:33, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

re : EmailEdit

Jagwar, I sent you an email through wikimail. It's very important that you contact me as soon as possible. You may email me at philippe(at)wikimedia.org. Philippe (WMF) 9 Novambra 2011 à 20:35 (UTC)

I have replied you by email. Thnanks. --Jagwar 交談 homewiki 20:58, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

quality sectionEdit

Hi Philippe:

I'm skimming through the old talk sections of the Quality task force right now. Will come back with questions later, in the interests of being efficient with your time. It does seem like there were at least some efforts to grapple with the major hard issues. Although a little short on numbers...

Am a little interested in how the final language was crafted (how the rubber hit the road, what things were left out, and in particular how the numeric goal was determined). Also, maybe a little bit on translation of some of the supporting aspects (e.g. what is a "hot button issue"). It's actually kind of minor to what I am interested in which is the extent of success/failure of Wiki to deliver high quality content on the most read articles.

One quick one, how much were you driving Quality task force as opposed to others? Were you running all task forces or was there some sort of breakout (and if you ran all, how much attention on this one of (five?). Sorry, I guess I could research this. :( 71.246.144.154 21:21, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

P.s. How come you don't have smilies enabled on this forum? ;)

So, a couple of things... first, be sure that you're hitting both quality sections... there's the quality overview and the work of the task force on quality. It's important to understand the process. First, we took submissions of proposals from around the world - more than 900 of them. Those were sorted by subject area and each task force reviewed the proposals in their area. They also were provided with some suggested questions to guide them but were encourage to diverge from those. That can be found in the Mandate section of the task force's page. After doing some extensive research into those areas, they were asked to provide us with a series of strategic recommendations as their output. The task forces wrote these entirely by themselves. From those recommendations, the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees made final strategic priority choices, which lead to the strategic plan.
As to the question of my involvement: honestly, minimal. We had several task forces, and I had an overarching responsibility as well, to facilitate the project as a whole. We very much intended (and were pleased to see that it happened) for the task forces to be self-guided. They were. I didn't in any way drive the Quality task force. The credit for that goes to those people who volunteered to sit on it. I would safely estimate that each task force got perhaps 3 hours of my time per week.
The Quality task force had some initial hiccups, so it got a bit more of my time upfront, but when things settled, I was not longer as involved. Philippe (WMF) 02:07, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
PS - you probably also want to check out this page and this page. Philippe (WMF) 02:15, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, have looked at all this. Dug into the fact base and the featured proposals also. Will shoot you some thoughts, later (more on quality at Wiki itself, not on the strat document).71.246.144.154 06:25, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

How much content is in the Wiki?Edit

How much readable prose is in the en-wiki? Any idea on how it compares to the size of a county, university library, or to the Library of Congress? Just looking for some soundbite about size that gives a feel for relative amounts. the more I think about it...there is way more content on the stacks than in Wiki. but I want to know order of magntitude. Also, versus Britannica?

Just thinking about a sort of relative size graphic that shows we are bigger than the largest encyclopedia...but smaller than the sum of all knowledge.

71.246.144.154 02:09, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I think that this might be what you are after. Philippe (WMF) 02:18, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
That nails it. Thanks.96.238.184.111 13:30, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

New policyEdit

[4] I'm quite concerned about this, and I believe it is a few people really, really overstepping their authority. Especially Ruslik, who violated the Steward policy in a very major way in establishing this "test" group of a global permission and then giving them the go ahead to declare something a policy when it didn't follow proper standards nor had consensus. Ottava Rima (talk) 06:05, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Without investigating, I will say that this sounds like a community issue to me, and not one that the WMF should be involved with. Am I wrong in that? Philippe (WMF) 06:11, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
It is the establishment of a new global group that has deleting ability without any community consensus or control pushed in through on poorly followed pages and implemented by a Steward as a "test" while declared as "official policy". It is a cross-Wiki issue and a violation of the Steward policy. It also has a lot of implications since it deals with importing and that can cause all sorts of problems. Ottava Rima (talk) 06:14, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

IdentificationEdit

You know, I identified to the Foundation quite a long time ago but I was never added to that list. I find that a little amusing. It doesn't matter too much to me, but yeah. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 19:24, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

It was done via fax and it was during the Cary Bass years. I did it before attending a meet-up. ;/ Ottava Rima (talk) 21:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
I'll send any data you guys want. It doesn't matter to me. :P I wont be made a CU, OS, or anything like that (unlike at the time where there was something). Ottava Rima (talk) 23:10, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

IdentificationEdit

I am proving my identification to the foundation with my health card. Is it okay to remove unauthorized ID numbers and keep the DOB thing to knoe that I proved. --Mohamed Aden Ighe 17:47, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I will do so when I apply for permission that needs identification. Thanks --Mohamed Aden Ighe 17:50, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, that is fine. :) Philippe (WMF) 14:31, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

page views by quality ratingEdit

Philippe:

Do you know of a study that calculates what percent of total traffic* encounters given quality? I have seen the statistics by number of articles, but obviously there is a correlation of quality and popularity (I would like it even higher, but it is a positive correlation), so going off of article counts understates how many eyeball hit better articles. Would think someone has done this. If not, they should...

Something like a time series for last 5 years with all the rankings (stub-FA) would be good. But even just having a single number (like current percent of eyeballs hitting FA articles) would be worthwhile. And yeah...there are issues with unranked articles, but one can make them another category (or just apportion them to start/stubs).

  • en-wiki only would be fine to keep it simple and probably more relevant than looking at startup languages and the like)

71.246.144.154 18:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

P.s.Edit

I need to change the math and the message a bit in one slide that I sent you (one criticizing the metric as too easy). Need to normalize for article production itself over the five years. It makes it a bit less easy. Also a little harder to evaluate as both quality percent and total article change are unknowns changing over the period. Can work something out though.96.238.184.111 18:41, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

P.s.s.Edit

Really like this background page here: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Content_quality

Has a lot of info, combined helpfully. Steps backs and looks at the landscape as well. Whoever did it (you, Ty, some consultant) deserves an attaboy. I hope it informed the working group. (Didn't really see a lot of hard core analysis going on, afterwards, just talk page comments, but I may not have looked at the whole shebang). 96.238.184.111 19:12, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

This all looks great. I'm traveling for a few days so won't have the chance to look closely, but it's targeted for my return. Thanks for keeping me informed! Philippe (WMF) 14:32, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
I posted presentation in Commons. [5]. (Not sure why it is so wide, Commons display issue. But if you left click "full resolution", it will open in a full screen browser. Of you can right click "full resolution" and save. The slide on the WMF metric is revised (incorporates changes in article number over time, little less negative.) Also one slide added to background, showing FA/GA % differing trends, but you've seen that sort of thing before. GOOD TRAVELS!69.255.27.249 18:06, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Added a few slides. The one analysis on page views by quality is interesting. This is the lens we need to use for thinking about quality: What is the actual reader experience--not number of articles.69.255.27.249 18:12, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

IdenficationEdit

I have proved my ID to the foundation. When you have done, please put my name up to the noticeboard. Regards

Also, I removed unauthorized ID numbers and keep the age thing to know that I proved to the WMF. --Mohamed Aden Ighe 02:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

And please notify me at the talk page if more quality is needed. I did all my best efforts to prove them. --Mohamed Aden Ighe 02:33, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I have replied to e-mail due to the quality. Regards. --Mohamed Aden Ighe 23:45, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

"reviewer" rights on german wikipediaEdit

Hello Philippe, did you need the "reviewer" user rights of your account at german wikipedia? It is possible to remove that user rights from your account on german wikipedia? It is better to use the labs wikis for testing this feature, which is unused on the german wikipedia. Thanks. Der Umherirrende 18:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi - I did need them at one point, but don't see that I do anymore. Please feel free to remove them, and link here if you need documentation or anything that I don't object. Thanks! Philippe (WMF) 18:45, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Ok, thank you for your answer. You can do it yourself on de:Special:UserRights, but I can also ask a local bureaucrat, if you have not time to do it. Der Umherirrende 20:28, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Apologies, I assumed you were a crat. :) I've removed them myself. Philippe (WMF) 22:52, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
No, I am a "normal" user ;-) Thank you. Der Umherirrende 23:22, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
No, thank you. :) Appreciate your vigilance. Philippe (WMF) 23:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
You have also grant that user right to de:User:Christine (WMF). I have ask the user (User talk:Christine (WMF)#"reviewer" rights on german wikipedia), but get no answer yet. Needs the user that user right anymore? Can you remove it also? Thanks. Der Umherirrende 10:43, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Done. :) Philippe (WMF) 20:24, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks ;-) Der Umherirrende 20:40, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

replyEdit

Thanks for the kind words. I won't trouble you with unceasing the minutia of why reader A is mad at reader B, etc. I know you just well enough to have great respect for the work you've done for us and to know your time's too valuable to be spent listening to a semi-old man ramble on about kids these days... lol. My problems belong on a psychiatrist's couch, not in your inbox. I've whined to enough arbcom members that they can sort it out if it merits their time.

Besides, I wouldn't know what to tell you anyway. I got 99 criticisms, but our staff ain't one. You're all badass, hardcore pros, from the very top all the way through the teams, as best as I can tell from your work.

He's something happy I can tell you. To get off the ground in a big way, we needed three different systems-- the board had to ignite it, community had to provide life, the donors had to fuel the beast, and the staff had to keep the thing flying in the air, going where no one had gone before, at speeds no one had ever traveled before.

Everyone I spoke with in that era just KNEW where the problem was going to crop up-- the staff, right? What would a Canadian Broadcaster know about running a.... something there never was before. What would people trained for businesses know about running a virtual religion?

It was so clear to me, to everyone in my circle, that if problems ever cropped up with the system, it would be in getting the staff to fit with the rest of the contraption.

2011, I don't think there's any doubt-- the staff is the clear fan favorite as our most functional and exemplary. I recently viewed the film "The Men who Stare at Goats" and its "jedi" reminded me so much of our staff-- this bizarre mixture of "Marine Corp professionalism" mixed with, well, cyberhippie culture for lack of a better term. (and in complimenting staff, I don't mean to slight the other also-excellent parts of the organization).

I'm not sure if english wikipedia will "make it" beyond maturity-- it's been a killer app for some time now, and the whole world is already positioning to improve beyond it. Semantic Web, Meshes, Distributed wikis, cloud wikis, personal wikis and mobile phone wikis-- it's hard to teach old cultures new tricks, maybe 2011-style English Wikipedia is going to be the pinnacle of our achievement.

But, even if the foundation and the existing communities don't maintain their coherence, there's no doubt that whatever improves upon us will do so because of the work we did here. Their data will be our data, their software will derive from our software, and "they" may only be a year away, or less. Best of all, perhaps the foundation will strike gold twice, stewarding both Wikipedia and the next big 'whatever is better than wikipedia'. If any organization can do it, it's WMF.

thanks again for the kind words. --Randomcommenter 09:42, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Colliding Tori Fusion Reactor - (CTFR)Edit

Dear Philippe,

I see that my contribution (both article and photo of CTFR) on wikipedia was removed. Let me first apologize to you (and wiki) for getting you involed in this game of shadows. Unfortunately, I am not presently in a position to contest the removal of the photograph without suffering severe retaliatiion by the company involved. However, the brief overview of Dr. Michael G. Anderson's invention is without question within the public domain since the references included are readily available to anyone. Therefore, whether or not the article is restored to its rightful place on wikipedia is up to you (wiki).

Thank you for your efforts, Fusion4everyone

Hi Fusion4everyone, thanks for getting in touch with me. As I understand it, the issue isn't public domain, it's protected trade secrets, which are an entirely different classification under US law. Our legal team made a determination on that one, but you certainly have a right of appeal, though I understand your position and fear of retaliation. I'll pass your note along to our legal team, though, and ask them to take a second look. I know they engaged with a specialist physicist before making the determination, though. Philippe (WMF) 06:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Godaddy, SOPA, otrs & redditEdit

Hi Philippe,

just thought I'd point to you (I know it's not exactly your area, but I dunno who to point it out to and got little time today, sorry), reddit has a thread about Wikipedia using known pro-SOPA registra GoDaddy, from what I understand, OTRS has had an influx on mail asking to switch to some other registrar, just wanted to make sure somebody at the foundation is aware of it. Regards and merry Christmas in advance, Snowolf How can I help? 14:40, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, Snowolf. Not that I'm Philippe or anything, but we've gotten a few of those at wmf:Answers as well. :) WMF is definitely aware of it. Tech and legal are looking into the situation. --Mdennis (WMF) 20:00, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
It is nice to see that they have nothing better to do, like figuring out a better way to develop technology that spots copyvio text and images or dealing with those people. :P Ottava Rima (talk) 20:17, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry, Ottava, but that's crap, and you know it. These things can happen in parallel. Our legal department isn't writing code, and our tech team isn't reviewing legal documents. Don't play that game, okay? Philippe (WMF) 20:18, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Did you miss the tongue at the end? :P And you know the tech and legal guys can work together, right? :P Ottava Rima (talk) 20:55, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Identification email templateEdit

Hi Philippe,

I made a minor change to the email template, adding a mailto: link to the email address. I don't know if this wasn't added originally to reduce spam, in which case feel free to revert.

Best,

The Helpful One 23:39, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi there. Thanks! But I did revert you for exactly the reason you speculated about... spam harvesting. That email address has managed to stay pretty low spam and I'd like to keep it that way. Thanks, though. :) Philippe (WMF) 23:45, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Sure, no problem. :) The Helpful One 23:52, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Philippe (WMF)/Archive 1".