You made some excellent points, but they will never truly be addressed. Also, you said that a lot of the process problems wouldn't have changed the result but don't be so sure. A lot of the process problems are indicative of the failed process as a whole, and the community (with the idea of consensus) takes a back seat to a few people who end up making arbitrary decisions. You point out what the community has failed to address - ArbCom has been a sort of court set up by people who want to be lawyers/judges but shouldn't be acting that way on wiki. Too often do the people let some really bad people get through (sock puppets, harassers, plagiarists, etc) while even condoning their actions while harming those unfairly who do try to help. The best part is that they hide behind AGF while never relying on it themselves except in the worst situations. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
- It was important that my comments on the process not be taken as "sore looser" talk. There are difficulties with the elections, of course, primarily that we don't get people who have been working in the DR arena, and even if we did, there is no community oversight of those processes. We are mostly too busy with the "actual work", important though these functions are. Rich Farmbrough 20:45 21 May 2012 (GMT).
- Let them take it as a sore loser - the most important people to listen to are those who are damaged as a result of such matters. There are only a few actions that should be banned: real life stalking, outing, plagiarism, and sock puppetry. It seems that ArbCom has given a lot of those people a pass (Jack Merridew and Rlevse, for example) while aggressively targeting those who don't do such thing. There are people that do actual harm to the encyclopedia and to others, and the system is ensuring that those are the people with the most authority and power. The "DR Arena," if it is to be credible, should probably be filled with outsiders that have professional background, with identities well-known, and disconnected from the "power structure" (i.e. popularity contest that leads to rights on site). Ottava Rima (talk) 20:51, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Flooding recent changesEdit
Hi Rich, I have blocked you because of flooding recent changes. Please apply for a flood or bot flag before doing this kind of stuffs. I appreciate your help in fixing this. Please let me know when you turned down this fixes (before applying for the flag of course) and I will quickly unblock. Thanks and sorry! — T. 05:19, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Wikimedia Travel Guide: Naming poll openEdit
You are receiving this message because you voiced your opinion at the Request for Comment on the Wikimedia Travel Guide.
The proposed naming poll opened a few days ago and you can vote for as many of the proposed names as you wish, if you are eligible. Please see Travel Guide/Naming Process for full details on voting eligibility and how the final name will be selected. Voting will last for 14 days, and will terminate on 16 October at 06:59:59 UTC.
Your comments are invited on four current FDC proposalsEdit
Hello! As you may know, we've opened the community review period for the current funding round in the Funds Dissemination Committee process. I noticed that in the past you expressed interest in the FDC, since you were a nominee for the committee. I'd like to invite you to review the 4 proposals (totaling $1.3 million USD) that were submitted to the FDC, and to ask questions and share comments about those proposals. You can help to ensure that they have high potential for impact regarding the movement's goals. The FDC especially values comments by community members and will take them into account when they prepare their recommendations. Let me know if you have any questions! --Katy Love, Senior Program Officer, Funds Dissemination Committee, Wikimedia Foundation, 22:36, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
The Stethoscope: A Wiki Project Med Foundation Review (Issue 1)Edit
Wiki Project Med Foundation (WPMEDF) was formally incorporated in New York as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. Our mission is bold like Wikipedia's: Imagine a world in which every single person is given free access to the sum of all medical knowledge." That's what we're doing.
In this newsletter:
- Designing our logos and name: How and why we made them
- Creating Our Board: Who's involved and what they're doing
- Adding 70+ Interested members: Participants from all over the globe
- Furthering ongoing projects: Expanding exciting in many directions at once
- Proposing Wikimania presentations: Sign up for the talks that interest you
- Taking on on social media: Up and running with outreach (plus business cards!)
- Charting pathways for how you can help right now: a great list easy and important areas to contribute
We aim to run The Stethoscope at least once per quarter and no more than once per month. We only send to people who already signed on as WikiProject Med or Wiki Project Medicine Foundation interested members/participants. If you do not want to receive the newsletter, please add your name here.
It's been a pleasure so far, and we have so much more to do. Wishing you happy Spring up North and pleasant Autumn down South.
File:Ar level1 area.pngEdit
File:Ar level1 total.pngEdit
Letter petitioning WMF to reverse recent decitionsEdit
The Wikimedia Foundation recently created a new feature, "superprotect" status. The purpose is to prevent pages from being edited by elected administrators -- but permitting WMF staff to edit them. It has been put to use in only one case: to protect the deployment of the Media Viewer software on German Wikipedia, in defiance of a clear decision of that community to disable the feature by default, unless users decide to enable it.
If you oppose these actions, please add your name to this letter. If you know non-Wikimedians who support our vision for the free sharing of knowledge, and would like to add their names to the list, please ask them to sign an identical version of the letter on change.org.
Superprotect letter updateEdit
Hi Rich Farmbrough,
Along with more hundreds of others, you recently signed Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer, which I wrote.
Today, we have 562 signatures here on Meta, and another 61 on change.org, for a total of 623 signatures. Volunteers have fully translated it into 16 languages, and begun other translations. This far exceeds my most optimistic hopes about how many might sign the letter -- I would have been pleased to gain 200 siguatures -- but new signatures continue to come.
I believe this is a significant moment for Wikimedia and Wikipedia. Very rarely have I seen large numbers of people from multiple language and project communities speak with a unified voice. As I understand it, we are unified in a desire for the Wikimedia Foundation to respect -- in actions, in addition to words -- the will of the community who has built the Wikimedia projects for the benefit of all humanity. I strongly believe it is possible to innovate and improve our software tools, together with the Wikimedia Foundation. But substantial changes are necessary in order for us to work together smoothly and productively. I believe this letter identifies important actions that will strongly support those changes.
Have you been discussing these issues in your local community? If so, I think we would all appreciate an update (on the letter's talk page) about how those discussions have gone, and what people are saying. If not, please be bold and start a discussoin on your Village Pump, or in any other venue your project uses -- and then leave a summary of what kind of response you get on the letter's talk page.
Finally, what do you think is the right time, and the right way, to deliver this letter? We could set a date, or establish a threshold of signatures. I have some ideas, but am open to suggestions.
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.
Hi Rich Farmbrough. I edited your global.js to update you to the latest version of TemplateScript. You were using a much older version called regex menu framework, so the main difference you'll see is an improved regex editor and cleaner custom scripts. Let me know if anything breaks. :) —Pathoschild 02:51, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
How can we improve Wikimedia grants to support you better?Edit
Hi! The Wikimedia Foundation would like your input on how we can reimagine Wikimedia Foundation grants to better support people and ideas in your Wikimedia project.
After reading the Reimagining WMF grants idea, we ask you to complete this survey to help us improve the idea and learn more about your experience. When you complete the survey, you can enter to win one of five Wikimedia globe sweatshirts!
In addition to taking the the survey, you are welcome to participate in these ways:
- Respond to questions on the discussion page of the idea.
- Join a small group conversation.
- Learn more about this consultation.
This survey is in English, but feedback on the discussion page is welcome in any language.
Last call for WMF grants feedback!Edit
Hi, this is a reminder that the consultation about Reimagining WMF grants is closing on 8 September (0:00 UTC). We encourage you to complete the survey now, if you haven't yet done so, so that we can include your ideas.
What future IdeaLab campaigns would you like to see?Edit
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:
- Learn more about this consultation
- Vote on and submit new campaign topics in the AllOurIdeas Survey
- Discuss campaign topics and ask questions on the IdeaLab talk page
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,
Inspire Campaign on content curation & reviewEdit
I've recently launched an Inspire Campaign to encourage new ideas focusing on content review and curation in Wikimedia projects. Wikimedia volunteers collaboratively manage vast repositories of knowledge, and we’re looking for your ideas about how to manage that knowledge to make it more meaningful and accessible. We invite you to participate and submit ideas, so please get involved today! The campaign runs until March 28th.
All proposals are welcome - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive feedback on ideas is welcome - your skills and experience can help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign to improve review and curation tasks so that we can make our content more meaningful and accessible! I JethroBT (WMF) 05:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
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.
- Submit a grant request or draft your proposal in IdeaLab
- Get help with your proposal in an upcoming Hangout session
- Learn from examples of completed Individual Engagement Grants
Tidying up, a detailEdit
Hi Rich, can you help with this detail? I'm trying to clear out category:Images with unknown license. I found two images you uploaded, as part of a report. They say the credits are listed in the image; but they are too low-resolution to view properly. Can you help get the full info in them? They are: File:Ar level1 area.png and File:Ar level1 total.png -Pete F (talk) 23:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
The first part of each says, respectively:
- Data obtained from Wikipedia in March 2011. Mark Graham, Bernie Hogan and Richard Farmbrough, Oxford Internet Institute. With assistance from Ilhem Allagui and Ali Frihida
- Data sourced from Wikipedia in March 2011. Mark Graham, Bernie Hogan and Richard Farmbrough, Oxford Internet Institute. With assistance from Ilhem Allagui and Ali Frihida
Copyright problem with File:Ar level1 total.pngEdit
Thank you for uploading File:Ar level1 total.png. 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. —MarcoAurelio 21:23, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Through June, we’re organizing an Inspire Campaign to encourage and support new ideas focusing on addressing harassment toward Wikimedia contributors. The 2015 Harassment Survey has shown evidence that harassment in various forms - name calling, threats, discrimination, stalking, and impersonation, among others - is pervasive. Available methods and systems to deal with harassment are also considered to be ineffective. These behaviors are clearly harmful, and in addition, many individuals who experience or witness harassment participate less in Wikimedia projects or stop contributing entirely.
Proposals in any language are welcome during the campaign - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive feedback on ideas is appreciated, and collaboration is encouraged - your skills and experience may help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign so that we can work together to develop ideas around this important and difficult issue. With thanks,
Can you message all the attendees listed on the etherpad on their talk page to leave them a link to this page? --Nemo 10:07, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
I trust you're fine. I was recently notified about the above contest. I am happy to see a contest like this. I have some thought and questions, but unfortunately, I can't edit en:wiki. My understanding of the contest is that it involves English Wikipedia and potentially French Wikipedia, Arabic Wikipedia, Swahili Wikipedia, Afrikaans Wikipedia, Ido Wikipedia, Yoruba Wikipedia and possibly any other language wikipedia. This a good idea. I think African Wikipedians should be notified through their mailing list since not everyone edit the English Wikipedia. Those who rarely edit English Wikipedia are unlikely to be aware of the contest. How do they plan to notify other language wikipedias about the contest?. We have not receive any notification at yo:wiki, I don't know if other language wiki have been notified. How do they plan to review the articles? How do they plan to select the reviewer? Why can't we host such an interlingual (cross-wiki) competition on meta instead of en:wiki? Pinging Dr. Blofeld but I am not sure he would get the ping. All the best. Wikicology (talk) 15:00, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Wiki Project Medicine Foundation MembershipEdit
Dear Wiki Project Med Supporter, you are receiving this message as you have shown interest in supporting Wiki Project Med in the past. As our organization grows and evolves, we want to be able to verify peoples ongoing interest in being involved. To that end, the board has decided to require renew of membership every two years. So -- whether you are a current member or not, please fill out our updated membership form, to ensure your membership till the end of 2020. Please note -- We ask that you fill out the form by Feb 3rd, as we are close to elections and only members can nominate themselves for the board and vote!
Dear WikiProject Medicine member, the election for 5 seats on the board is underway and voting is now open till March 24th. We encourage you to use your right to vote by supporting the candidates you prefer HERE. Please also note that on Monday, March 25, between 1900-2000 UTC we will be holding our open annual meeting online. A link will be sent via the mailing list / Facebook group so stay tuned. We hope you can join us! Best, James & Shani. 14:16, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
The TWUG on space.wmflabs.orgEdit
Hello Rich Farmbrough
A few months ago, WMF opened a new discussion space. Since our user group has some difficulties to communicate (not everyone sees the messages that are posted on Talk:Wiktionary/Tremendous_Wiktionary_User_Group), I asked for a dedicated forum for the TWUG to be opened. It's happening here (there is no topic so far).
Thanks for the assistEdit
"So rather than a loss of freedom this is an opportunity to know what that consensus is." - Do not let them gas-light you, the star chamber is boiling the frog. and management by watchlist is a losing strategy: it does not scale. i still think your style is better suited to wikidata. but some time away, experimenting checking out zoom meetups is fun. Slowking4 (talk) 21:09, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
- It's interesting, if consensus requires 10 non-canvassed !votes, according to a proposal that only attracted 5 (presumably) non-canvassed votes, is there consensus for the decision? It reminds me of Warwick Students Union voting a general meeting quorate by a show of hands, which, of course was only valid if the meeting was quorate. Rich Farmbrough 21:20 29 May 2020 (GMT).