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 | polski | português | português do Brasil | پښتو | Runa Simi | română | русский | संस्कृतम् | sicilianu | سنڌي | 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 Qgil-WMF, and 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 (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

-- 18:02, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Please fill out our brief Participation Support Program surveyEdit

Hello, the Wikimedia Foundation would like your feedback on the Participation Support Program! We have created a brief survey to help us better understand your experience participating in the program and how we can improve for the future. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you submitted or commented on Participation Support requests in the past.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback! And we hope to see you in the Participation Support Program again soon.

Happy editing,

Siko and Haitham, Grantmaking, Wikimedia Foundation.

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 21:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Question on Evaluation portal that it'd be great to have your feedback on.Edit

Hi Quim! There is a question on the Evaluation portal that you might be able to contribute to about hack-a-thon evaluation. We hope you can participate, and spread the word to anyone you might know who would be interested. Get involved, here. :D SarahStierch (talk) 19:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Upcoming IdeaLab Events: IEG Proposal ClinicsEdit

Hello, Qgil-WMF! We've added Events to IdeaLab, and you're invited :)

Upcoming events focus on turning ideas into Individual Engagement Grant proposals before the March 31 deadline. Need help or have questions about IEG? Join us at a Hangout:

  • Thursday, 13 March 2014, 1600 UTC
  • Wednesday, 19 March 2014, 1700 UTC
  • Saturday, 29 March 2014, 1700 UTC

Hope to see you there!

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

Mobile appsEdit

Hi Quim, carrying over from this discussion, I would be interested in working on this project myself in some capacity. Can we set up a time to talk in more detail on IRC? --Pine 06:42, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Sure, Pine. Just propose a day/time that works for you. I'm in Pacific timezone;the sooner in the morning the better.--Qgil (talk) 14:17, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Qgil I'll try to find you sometime Monday morning on IRC. --Pine 22:57, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

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

Framework to engage Open Data organizationsEdit

Hi @Qgil,

I would like to draw your attention to the StrepHit IEG proposal: I believe it can be of interest for the Wikimedia Engineering Community, due to a similar vision.
Can you please have a look at the proposal and consider an endorsement if you like the idea?

Looking forward to hearing back from you. Cheers,

--Hjfocs (talk) 14:03, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: October 2015Edit

L&E Newsletter / Volume 2 / Issue 6 / October 2015
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

Leave your mark on Meta!
Inspiring ideas and learning patterns
you can contribute to.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Re: A "Comments" section instead of using the Discussion page? :)Edit

The talk was occupied by Flow, which I don't use. Nemo 18:22, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:FLOSS-Exchange#Wikimedia Foundation contactEdit

Can you help, perhaps? Nemo 08:45, 10 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. 03:33, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Getting a message to Catalan Wikipedia with FlowEdit

Hi Quim, I'm trying to copy Grants:IEG/Motivational and educational video to introduce Wikimedia/January message to village pumps/ca to the Tavern on Catalan Wikipedia. However, the Tavern uses Flow, and when I try to copy the wikitext into Flow the formatting gets messed up. Do you know enough about how Flow works to copy the message with the formatting intact? I would appreciate it if you could do this as a favor, preferably with your volunteer Wikimedia account. Thank you, --Pine 22:08, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

@Pine: it seems that Flow cannot properly digest the Gallery format. See phab:T124876. QuimGil can help completing the Catalan translation at this test page. He wonders whether a table would work to obtain the same effect with the images.--Qgil-WMF (talk) 11:16, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for checking and filing the bug. I tried copying this code to the test page, minus the nowiki tags:

{| class="wikitable" ![[File:Ciak.jpg|200px]] ![[File:Wikipedia,_an_introduction_-_Erasmus_Prize_2015.webm|thumbtime=00:36.00|200px]] ![[File:WikipediaEducationProgramLogo.svg|200px]] ![[File:GLAM_logo_transparent.png|200px]] ![[File:VisualEditor-logo.svg|200px]] |}

and received the error "invalid token" when saving. --Pine 00:31, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

I did some additional testing:

  • Attempting to remove the images from the test page, without adding the new table, also results in an "invalid token" message
  • Attempting to save a new message to the Tavern, using the table-formatted images instead of the gallery, also results in an "invalid token" message
  • I would test creating a new page in Flow without the images if I knew where to do that. I tried creating a new page in my user space on Catalan Wikipedia but it uses wikitext instead of Flow. Can you point me to a place where I can test creating a new page using Flow?

Apologies that this has become a test of Flow capability instead of a straightforward translation. --Pine 00:42, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

@Pine: No worries, I like testing and I like to help improving Flow. :) w:ca:Viquipèdia_Discussió:Flow/proves is a page dedicated to Flow testing. Feel free to use it at will.--Qgil-WMF (talk) 07:28, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Qgil-WMF I tried adding a new subject to that page with plain text like "test message" in the title and the body, and I still got an "invalid token" error. However, I successfully added a test message at Any ideas why I would be getting "invalid token" errors on Catalan Wikipedia and not MediaWiki? --Pine 21:57, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
  • @Pine: I'm sorry, no idea. Works for me... :/ Maybe cache something, signout/signin...?--Qgil-WMF (talk) 22:12, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Good news and bad news. The good news is that after editing a non-Flow page, I was able to edit that Flow board. The bad news is that Flow is pasting wikimarkup text from my clipboard as objects onto the Flow board that aren't editable, and when I tried to replace one of the objects with wikimarkup the message got messed up. Flow seems to need some work. :( In the meantime, can you think of a way to get a message to the Catalan Village Pump? --Pine 22:23, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

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)

Learning Quarterly: January 2016Edit

If you are receiving this message for the second time, our apologies! On the first attempt, there was an error with the targets list and only a few users got the newsletter in their Talk Page.

L&E Newsletter / Volume 3 / Issue 7 / January 2016
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

Leave your mark on Meta!
Inspiring ideas and learning patterns you can contribute to.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:20, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Harassment workshopEdit

Greetings! You are receiving this message because, at some point in the past, you have participated in a discussion around the topic of harassment. The Support and Safety team is holding a series of consultations gathering feedback on the best potential solutions to the problem. The next stage is a workshop where we hope to narrow the focus to individual actionable ideas and explore how to bring some of these ideas to life.

Best regards, the Support and Safety team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

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 15:57, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: April 2016Edit

L&E Newsletter / Volume 3 / Issue 8 / April 2016
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

Leave your mark on Meta!
Inspiring ideas and learning patterns you can contribute to.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:51, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: July 2016Edit

L&E Newsletter / Volume 3 / Issue 9 / July 2016
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:21, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: October 2016Edit

L&E Newsletter / Volume 3 / Issue 10 / October 2016
Learning Quarterly


Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

Leave your mark on Meta!
Inspiring ideas and learning patterns you can contribute to.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:52, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist SurveyEdit


You’re getting this message because you participated in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey and we want to make sure you don't miss it this year – or at least can make the conscious choice to ignore if it you want to. The 2015 survey decided what the Community Tech team should work on during 2016. It was also the focus of Wikimedia hackathons and work by other developers. You can see the status of wishes from the 2015 wishlist at 2015 Community Wishlist Survey/Results.

The 2016 Community Wishlist Survey is now open for wishes. You can create proposals until November 20. You will be able to vote on which wishes you think are best or most important between November 28 and December 12. /Johan (WMF) (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Sobre tu pregunta en BabelEdit

Estimado Quim:

Antes que nada, me gustaría desearte un feliz año nuevo 2017.

Dicho lo cual he visto que has dejado unos comentarios dirigidos a mi en Babel. Me gustaría comentarte aquí, por varias razones, entre ellas la lengua y porque no deseo que se caliente más el debate sobre Flow. No creo que deba contribuir más en esa discusión si deseo preservar mi salud mental. Te pido disculpas por adelantado si no lo crees conveniente.

Mentiría si te dijese que cuando se anunció Flow no lo vi con entusiasmo y optimismo, pero experimentando y pasado un tiempo dicha sensación comenzó a hacer aguas por numerosísimas razones, las cuales pueden ser vistas en los igualmente numerosos tickets abiertos en Phabricator al respecto. Y es normal que cualquier artilugio experimental, por muy bien diseñado que esté siempre tenga que ser corregido y enmedado sobre la marcha pues no se puede prever todo. Lo mismo nos pasa a los que hemos realizado trabajos de investigación y/o una tesis doctoral. Uno se esfuerza, estudia mucho y procura que todo esté perfecto, pero cuando se lleva el capítulo al director, siempre toca algo que corregir: una coma, una referencia mal citada. Se arregla y punto, procurando tener todo preparado para el día de la defensa ante el Tribunal. El problema es cuando las cosas no se arreglan o no pueden arreglarse porque desde el propio diseño se concibieron mal y para enmendarlas habría que rehacer entera la extensión. Yo tengo esa sensación con Flow. Los bugs se amontonan, algunos se arreglan pero muchos otros no, porque hay cosas que desde el diseño se hicieron mal y no tienen facil arreglo como así se han expresado usuarios técnicamente expertos en la materia. Esta sensación es compartida por numerosas personas también y creo que ya se ha hecho mención a ello en dicha discusión, a la que me remito para no ser reiterativo.

Sé que has estado por aquí y por ello confío en que conozcas que todas las discusiones llevadas a cabo en Meta para activar el software de un modo u otro han terminado con resultado insatisfactorio. Reconozco que puede ser frustrante ver cómo los resultados, por lo menos aquí, no eran los esperados. Yo he pasado por esa situación. Para mi resulta frustrante ver cómo la comunidad se enzarza una y otra vez en discusiones Fundación vs. Usuarios por estos temas. Me sabe realmente mal, pues ambos estamos llamados a colaborar.

No he sido el único en opinar, han sido muchos y muy variados usuarios. Sin embargo, desconozco el porqué de insistir en la cuestión y llegar a imponernos un sistema de discusión (que puede comenzar en una página y luego ser propagado al resto del espacio de nombres, cuestión que se votó en contra hace relativamente poco) en el que la mayoría de los editores regulares no estamos de acuerdo por múltiples razones. La conversión de dicha página de discusión al formato Flow ha sido la gota que ha colmado el vaso para muchos usuarios. Una wiki entera no puede quedar sometida a lo que quieran unos pocos por muy nobles que sean sus intenciones. De hecho, en el ticket en el que se culminó su activación, la propia persona que lo cierra dice que la ha convertido porque existe consenso entre los usuarios del programa de investigación. La lógica pregunta es, ¿y qué pasa con el resto que opinaron y se manifestaron en contra? No me parece justo ignorarles porque no sean colaboradores habituales de dicho espacio de nombres o porque su opinión no haya sido favorable. Hubiese sido mucho más decoroso no preguntarnos directamente. Es como si en una candidatura a bibliotecario o administrador, a pesar de haber más votos en contra que a favor la persona es asignada los permisos porque el nominado, el nominador (de haberlo) y los que le votaron a favor sí están de acuerdo. Confío en que coincidirás que sería todo un espectáculo propio del día de los Santos Inocentes.

Durante un tiempo hemos asistido regularmente a ver cómo nuevas características beta se activaban en Meta sin previo aviso, sin discusión, sin pedir permiso. Características además que no resultaban esenciales para el funcionamiento del proyecto. Desde luego sería contraproducente pedir que desactivasen la extensión CentralAuth de Meta o que nos pidiesen permiso para actualizar a la nueva versión de MediaWiki; pero yo ni muchos otros creemos que sea el caso de Flow, ni tampoco el caso de LQT, su antecedente más directo y que resultó ser muy problemático.

Creo que pedirnos que busquemos "blockers" para desactivarlo no es lo correcto y es imponernos una carga desproporcionada. Los tickets, como digo, están allí en Phabricator y los análisis en MediaWiki. Creo que hubiese sido mucho más sencillo y constructivo haber preguntado antes de instalar el software, como se hace cada vez que se requiere realizar un cambio en la configuración del lugar. Yo no soy una persona técnicamente experta en desarrollo de software, como muchos otros de los que contribuímos en el lugar. Pedirnos que hagamos peritajes técnicos al respecto no resulta, en mi opinión, apropiado, máxime cuando no es nuestra labor.

Como bien dices, en esta wiki confluyen muchos usuarios y creo que esta comunidad ha sido comprensiva con las necesidades de aquellos que las han alegado. Pongo un par de ejemplos: hemos instalado la extensión de traducción para hacer que Meta sea poco a poco cada vez más multilingüe, con el considerable esfuerzo que ello conlleva y también hemos habilitado espacios de nombres para proyectos específicos como Iberocoop, entre otras cuestiones. El denominador común es que antes de hacerlo se propuso, se debatió, se probó y finalmente se aprobó. No percibo que ese haya sido el caso con Flow.

Me gustaría finalizar dándote las gracias por todo tu y vuestro trabajo. Estoy seguro que en la perseverancia reside la esencia del éxito y confío en que algún día se encuentre una solución agradable a la mayoría respecto a estos temas. No quisiera tampoco despedirme sin pedirte sinceramente disculpas si en algún momento he podido ofenderte con mis comentarios, bien sea aquí o en otro lugar.

Un cordial saludo, —MarcoAurelio 15:49, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

MarcoAurelio, muchas gracias por comentar aquí. Soy de los que piensan que casi todos tenemos buenas intenciones y casi nadie es perfecto. :) Yo simplemente intentaba tener una discusión más o menos racional sobre Flow, pero el bagaje que acarrea y las emociones colaterales lo hacen complicado. Si bien es cierto que varias personas han reportado múltiples problemas en múltiples lugares y momentos, también es cierto que de eso no se deduce ninguna lista concreta de blockers suscrita por una comunidad. Lo que para unos es un bug, para otros es una feature, lo que a unos no les deja casi ni dormir, a otros no les importa demasiado. Si bien es cierto que Flow tiene mil tareas abiertas (y dos mil resueltas también), no es menos cierto que un usuario avanzado como yo está usándo Flow a diario en, o, y para uso diario lo prefiero a wikitext Talk pages (aún sabiendo perfectamente cómo utilizarlas). En estos tres wikis hay muchos usuarios razonablemente felices con Flow, esperando que las funcionalidades que faltan sean implementadas algún día, que la herramienta sea pulida, etc. De hecho, pocos días antes de tu discusión para desinstalar Flow de Meta, voluntarios de me preguntaban qué hacer para continuar la expansión de Flow en ese wiki. Ya ves, opiniones de todos los colores, todas subjetivamente ciertas pero incompatibles entre sí. ¿Cómo hacer felices a todos?
Ya ves, ése soy yo. Y ese yo era el que intentaba participar en esa discusión, aún sabiendo que mi WMF rol también pesa y puede causar emociones colaterales. No ha funcionado, y tomo nota de la lección. Estoy pensando si responder a las alusiones directas en esa discusión, básicamente para dar las gracias y replegar velas. Aparte de eso, creo que mi mejor aportación será no aportar nada más. Gracias de nuevo por tomar la inicativa de escribir aquí, y no tengas duda que yo entiendo tu posición e intenciones, aunque no coincidamos en todo. Un saludo, nos vemos en otros lares wikimedistas, e igual en... ¿Berlín?--Qgil-WMF (talk) 08:01, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: February 2017Edit

L&E Newsletter / Volume 4 / Issue 11 / February 2017
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

Leave your mark on Meta!
Inspiring ideas and learning patterns you can contribute to.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: May 2017Edit

L&E Newsletter / Volume 4 / Issue 12 / May 2017
Learning Quarterly


Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

Leave your mark on Meta!
Inspiring ideas and learning patterns you can contribute to.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:52, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: August 2017Edit

L&E Newsletter / Volume 4 / Issue 13 / August 2017
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

Leave your mark on Meta!
Inspiring ideas and learning patterns you can contribute to.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:14, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Update regarding Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons tutorial videosEdit


I regret to inform you that the series of motivational and educational videos project, which had been planned introduce Wikipedia and some of its sister projects to new contributors, is being discontinued.

There are multiple factors that have led to this decision. The initial budget and time estimates were far too small for a project of this scale and complexity. Also, my simultaneous involvement in Cascadia Wikimedians User Group was problematic due to the shortage of human resources for the user group, which resulted in my spending far more time trying to help the user group than I had planned, so my time and attention were diverted from this video project to assisting the user group.

You can find more information in the final report for the grant.

I regret that this project did not fulfill the hopes that many of us had for it, and I hope that in the future someone with the necessary resources will choose to resume work on it or a similar project. If you are interested in working on this or a similar project then please contact the WMF grants team.

On a personal note, I am retiring from the Wikimedia community. Perhaps I will return someday.


--Pine 23:20, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Series director and screenwriter

Learning Quarterly: October 2017Edit

L&E Newsletter / Volume 4 / Issue 13 / August 2017
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:45, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: January 2018Edit

L&E Newsletter / Volume 5 / Issue 15 / January 2018
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:45, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: June 2018Edit

L&E Newsletter / Volume 5 / Issue 16 / June 2018
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:45, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Learning Quarterly: November 2018Edit

L&E Newsletter / Volume 5 / Issue 17 / November 2018
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:08, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Tatar UG votingEdit

Hello, did you seen this message?--Soul Train (talk) 23:32, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Soul Train, thank you for the ping. I hadn't seen that note, but the user had contacted me via email, and the problem is solved.--Qgil-WMF (talk) 08:07, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Response [Moved] Labor union?Edit

Hi Quim, I can't see whether you say prefer responses to your talk page comments where made or here, so I'm moving the discussion here: @Qgil-WMF: In your personal opinion, would rank-and-file Wikimedia Foundation employees benefit from a labor union so they would have recourse when ordered to take indefensible positions by C-suite management? If you feel uncomfortable answering this question, please let me know, and I will endeavor to contact you to discuss it off-wiki. EllenCT (talk) 00:28, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

(Moved from Talk:Communications/Wikimedia brands/2030 movement brand project -- see diff) Qgil-WMF (talk) 09:15, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
@EllenCT: since you ask about my personal opinion, I feel very comfortable telling you that I am a member of a union and I believe everyone of working age should be a member of one. After many years working at the Foundation, there hasn't been a single instance where I have felt I should discuss any situation with my union. Quite the opposite, I wish workers everywhere would be treated with the HR standards that the Foundation follows. Qgil-WMF (talk) 09:25, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
@Qgil-WMF: am I correct in interpreting your answer to mean you feel that the rank-and-file employees who are required by C-suite management to be the public faces of their unpopular decisions should have the same protection you do, but your feeling is not strong enough to ask your union to help organize those of your colleagues who lack such advantages? EllenCT (talk) 01:23, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
@EllenCT: No, you are not correct. Qgil-WMF (talk) 07:20, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
What is the extent of the moral obligation you feel to see that your colleagues on the rank-and-file attain the protections you enjoy? EllenCT (talk) 21:12, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Concerned by near silenceEdit


I thought I'd drop a line here since I'm being extremely concerned by the near-silence from the WMF team members regarding the branding project. The principal discussion page would be Talk:Communications/Wikimedia brands/2030 movement brand project, as well as a more focused page at Talk:Communications/Wikimedia brands/2030 movement brand project/Naming convention proposals. There was also the RfC on the matter, which has also had a surge in comments and queries post the survey announcements.

The number of open queries, as well as some quite resounding consensus on several concerns, are growing, daily, and with no replies and genuine engagement from WMF staff.

Given the shortness of the survey length, and the potential need to make changes, response can't wait.

I urge you to encourage every WMF employee (as well as the surprisingly expensive consultants, if still involved) to both discuss the community's concerns internally and then to start providing genuine engagement by the end of the 19th. Nosebagbear (talk) 23:33, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Nosebagbear, thank you for reaching out. Yes, there is a wave of feedback to be addressed in the pages you mention and several more that we are watching. Discuss the community's concerns internally is exactly what we are doing, intensively and extensively. Instead of trying to answer every single comment, we aim to address the common and underlying concerns in a clear and comprehensive way. This takes coordination and time. Today I expect us to get back to bringing answers and engaging genuinely, just as we have done regularly throughout this project. Qgil-WMF (talk) 07:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Your warnings to User:SängerEdit

I don't believe that the messages you're giving Sänger on his talk page are helpful to the movement. Members of the foundation staff might be finding his advice and criticisms (for example, that ZMcCune needs to communicate more on-wiki) hard to take. Being criticized for your work might be uncomfortable, but it's far from uncivil. I think it's fair to say that of all of us, Sänger best predicted the community reaction to the branding proposals. If ZMcCune had addressed these comments months ago, perhaps the branding project would have gone down a more productive path (one that didn't attempt to usurp the Wikipedia name).

I'd suggest next time that a member of the Foundation staff is made uncomfortable by a message from Sänger, you ask them if it's his behavior that makes them uncomfortable, or if it's simply because he is giving them advice they don't want to take. I'd also suggest considering if, by choosing to post on his talk page rather than working with staff members, you are enabling uncivil behavior by members of the WMF staff, and leading to the continued fracturing of trust between the community and Foundation. TomDotGov (talk) 14:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

@TomDotGov: My messages to Sänger on his Talk page are all about Meta:Civility and only about that. I am following the process indicated by the Meta policy when someone feels that someone else is incurring in incivility or personal attacks. This has nothing to do with being criticized about our work, something that e.g. you do regularly from this anonymous account and I have never reported as uncivil. I fail to see the logic according to which my reports about uncivil behavior of one volunteer would enable uncivil behavior by Foundation staff. If you see uncivil behavior from a Foundation staff member, please report it. I also fail to see the connection between reminding a reincident contributor about Meta:Civility and fracturing trust. I am not reporting indiscriminately volunteers criticising the Foundation. I am explaining to a single user why I think he is repeatedly breaching a Meta policy on civility, on his Talk page. Every time I come back with another comment I genuinely think that perhaps this time will be the last one. So far I have been wrong. I really don't enjoy doing this, but not doing anything feels wrong. I strongly believe incivility is not helpful to the movement. Qgil-WMF (talk) 10:08, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Das gesamte Vorgehen der UmbenennenwollerInnen ist das Gegenteil von Meta:Civility, indem andauernd die Community komplett ignoriert wird, deren eindeutige Willensbekundungen umgedeutet werden, um dem persönlichen POV zu genügen, und ohne Rücksicht auf die Community stur und unbeeindruckt das eigentlich lange schon abgelehnte Vorhaben einfach weiter durchgezogen wird. Da können die PDF und Beiträge noch so höflich formuliert sein, der Inhalt ist Aggression pur. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 10:33, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Survey Data DelayEdit

Hi there,

I just thought I'd repeat a query raised on the main brand project page, as to why the anonymised survey data isn't set to be released until after the Board has made a final decision?

Given the conceded misuse of statistical data earlier in the process, and repeat similar concerns from the August meeting, this feels like a terrible, terrible, idea. If a decision gets made and then interpretations of the data get contested it's going to going to be absolutely chaotic.

I implore you to release it at least 2 weeks ahead of the meeting, and further implore you to state what you feel the data shows, so that at least the basis over which people are disagreeing can be agreed.

Nosebagbear (talk) 08:27, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nosebagbear: Hi, just a note to say that the Brand team has seen this comment. This topic is being discussed at Talk:Communications/Wikimedia brands/2030 movement brand project. Qgil-WMF (talk) 07:51, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Sunday November 29 Strategic Wikimedia Affiliates Network meetingEdit

Take flight with us.

The Strategic Wikimedia Affiliates Network (SWAN) is a developing forum for all Wikimedia movement affiliates to share ideas on the Wikimedia 2030 strategy process. It expands on the model of the All-Affiliates Brand Meeting to help lay some of the groundwork for a future Global Council.

Following up on the August, September, and October SWAN meetings, and June's All-Affiliates Brand Meeting, as well as strategic and outreach topics of mutual concern to all affiliates including the recent proposed changes to the Wikimedia Foundation Bylaws, this month we are meeting on Sunday November 29, and you are all invited to RSVP here.

(Note that the UTC times of 03:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC are the same as before, although a number of places have had daylight savings time changes since our last meeting).--Pharos (talk) 01:30, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas & Let's see the year out!Edit

(Meta doesn't believe in Christmas templates, so please use your imagination to assume a suitably festive celebration!)

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! In this toughest of years, thank you for continuing to care about others - both in your editing, your words, and just in your being. Roll on 2021 and I'll see you there! Nosebagbear (talk)

Sunday January 10 Strategic Wikimedia Affiliates Network meetingEdit

Into the blue.

The Strategic Wikimedia Affiliates Network (SWAN) is a developing forum for all Wikimedia movement affiliates to share ideas on the Wikimedia 2030 strategy process. It expands on the model of the All-Affiliates Brand Meeting to help lay some of the groundwork for a future Global Council.

Following up on the August, September, October, and November SWAN meetings, and June's All-Affiliates Brand Meeting, as well as strategic and outreach topics of mutual concern to all affiliates including SWAN input on Interim Global Council and Movement Charter, this month we are meeting on Sunday January 10, and you are all invited to RSVP here.

To start the exchange of ideas on the IGC early, and to help prepare before the SWAN calls, we have set up and invite everyone to participate at this etherpad. If you like a more interactive way of discussing, we have also made a jamboard. Check here for more details.

--Pharos (talk) 15:07, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Sunday February 21 Strategic Wikimedia Affiliates Network meetingEdit

We are a mosiac.

The Strategic Wikimedia Affiliates Network (SWAN) is a developing forum for all Wikimedia movement affiliates to share ideas on the Wikimedia 2030 strategy process. It expands on the model of the All-Affiliates Brand Meeting to help lay some of the groundwork for a future Global Council.

Following up on the August, September, October, November, and January SWAN meetings and June's All-Affiliates Brand Meeting, as well as strategic and outreach topics of mutual concern to all affiliates, this month we are meeting on Sunday February 21, and you are all invited to RSVP here.

To help set priorities for the SWAN agenda, and also to help manage which global conversations should be a focus in general, we have set up and invite everyone to participate at this SWAN priorities form.

Possible topics include Community Board seats, Interim Global Council, Strategy prioritization follow-up events, Branding, Universal Code of Conduct, Grant strategy, and WMF CEO search. That is a lot of things, which are most important to cover in our upcoming SWAN meeting?

Following the regular call, in SWAN after hours: Wikimedia Meet Jitsi social event with brainstorming for possible Nano Charter ideas, plus any other topics.

--Pharos (talk) 17:59, 18 February 2021 (UTC)