Useful link: Special:Global user manager

User:Risker/FDC Useful

Grants:APG/Proposals/2015-2016 round1

Board elections template


Hi Risker - just to let you know I've left a response at User talk:Thehelpfulone#Board elections template re the election template. I've made a bunch of tweaks to Template:Board elections 2013 to see how it's going to work with the Translate extension. Now that I've done my tweaks I've removed the <translate> tags from the Board elections/2013 and unmarked it for translation so that you (the Committee) can write up that page. Please let me know when you're ready for things to get translated and I'll help sort it all out. :-) Thehelpfulone 18:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Thehelpfulone. As I noted in my revisions, the majority of what had been added has not yet been determined yet, and it is likely that much of it will be rewritten significantly so it would be inconsiderate of us to ask for translations at this point. I note that there are some "blue" links in the template that lead to sections of the main page that have now been removed, but it's probably not critical at this point. I confess I am curious as to where you got those dates from, since the Committee hasn't even started discussing dates. Risker (talk) 18:51, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
Indeed, my apologies for that, I did a lot of work for the steward elections last year and some work on this year so I think I got a little too used to just copying the previous year's content and changing the year which I forgot isn't appropriate for these elections! I've also hidden the blue vote link for now and the one to Board elections/2013/Translation until more pages are ready for translation. Thehelpfulone 23:06, 5 February 2013 (UTC)Reply



Hi Risker. Hope that you're fine. As Board ElectCom member and user that raised concerns regarding the Shultze method for voting I wish to tell you that I've opened Talk:Board elections/2013 now that everything is being set up and nothing seems to be definitive so this can be discussed. Best regards. -- MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:58, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

FDC Submissions.


Thank you for your notification - I knew I was logged out but I tried to submit what I could with a connection I was trying to reanimate; I confirmed my identity afterwards.

I am sorry that I have caused some trouble for you and your committee, you(?) will need to decide whether to keep the submission or flush it. For me it is a lesson "not to get persuaded on the last day" - but who would've thought I will have an Internet connection "like in 1999". ;) Or worse.

Trembling while thinking what I must have written in this turmoil,
aegis maelstrom δ 02:30, 18 May 2013 (UTC)Reply



Hi Risker

I've emailed you on a Signpost matter. Just procedural stuff. Tony (talk) 06:36, 18 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Re:My candidate statement request


Hi Risker, should be fixed now. May you confirm? Thanks -- CristianCantoro (talk) 14:05, 18 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, Cristian. This meets the length limit. Risker (talk) 14:07, 18 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Re: identification


Hi Risker,   Done. To be honest, I haven't submitted my documents before because I was thinking that I was going to be contacted by someone from WMF before sending it. You may also want to state again that the deadline to send a proof of identity is the same as the one for the candidacy in the instructions. -- CristianCantoro (talk) 09:09, 19 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thank you!


Thank you and sorry for causing the trouble. --Millosh (talk) 15:13, 7 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

RE: Email


Alright. I understand. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 16:00, 7 June 2013 (UTC)Reply



Risker, I wasn't aware there was a deadline on answering the questions for the Board elections--is there? I can't edit the sections: "Section is deleted" or something like that. I can edit the page as a whole, but that text is full of scary coding...your help is appreciated. (BTW, this happened to me a few days ago already, before voting started.) Also, I'm PayPalling you my bribe--is $10 enough? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:02, 8 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yeah :( sadly that's a side effect of the translation software when it got used there (one that I know has frustrated me many times as well). It doesn't end up letting you use section editing at all. The easiest way for you to find where to go is likely going to be searching for username on the page (if you want an empty/unanswered question you can search for |Drmies = <translate></translate> and put the answer between the two translates). Templates and translation can help a lot but they also, sadly, cause issues like this. I'm not totally sure where the balance is. I don't think there is a question deadline but I'll leave that for risker. Jalexander (talk) 05:48, 9 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Help voter please


Hi Risker. Thanks very much for all your help with the elections. And since I'm here, thanks also for your work on ArbCom. It's a very difficult task to take on and has little rewards, so I'm thankful that you and others are willing to help in this area. Anyhoo, a voter from fi:wp is having difficulty voting. Could you please provide some advice at Talk:Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013#I Can't vote when you get a chance. Thanks much. 06:01, 15 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

 Thank you very much! 02:57, 16 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for serving on the committee


Hi Risker, I just wanted to thank you for serving on the elections committee. I know a number of people thanked you already, but I wanted to specifically thank you for keeping the election running smoothly. It's an awful big job to take on and you're already busy with AC, so I think it was very generous of you to help out in this important election. I am sure there are many people that appreciate the time and effort you've put in. Thanks. 01:18, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your work making the elections possible this year. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:43, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for sharing your comments on the name change


Hi Risker, I wanted to let you know I appreciated your sharing your thoughts on the Annual Plan Grants program (formerly known as the FDC process). It is helpful for me to understand how others interpret the names, and I was glad to know your take on the change. Thanks for sharing it. Warm regards, KLove (WMF) (talk) 22:34, 30 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Your steward candidacy


It's too late to change my vote.... but I noticed something on Wikipedia that has led me to be much friendlier to the idea of your becoming a steward, if you wish to run again in teh future. Your comments in this case show that you saw some of what I confronted, so long ago. The Scibaby sock farm was created by abusive administration.

Obviously, Wikimedians were looking for more cross-wiki experience. Good luck. --Abd (talk) 19:38, 2 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I too would love to see you run again next year - I think you could bring a lot of good experience to the role. If you wanted to get more experience cross-wiki, the SWMT is a good place to start, or you could look at getting involved more with projects like Wikidata and Commons. Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:40, 2 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
  • Thank you both for your kind comments. Many people whose opinions I generally respect strongly encouraged me to leave the candidacy open even when it was clear that it would not succeed, with the suggestion that it would leave me in better standing should I run for steward again in the future. Unfortunately, some who disagreed with some of my positions on English Wikipedia took advantage of that and posted blatantly untrue comments about me. As a result, if I run again in the future, this will no doubt rear its ugly head again. I'm not really into self-flaggelation, so it would take a lot of persuasion for me to consider a run again in the future. In particular, I'm not really a vandal-fighter or hat collector, and SWMT is pretty much the antithesis of what I've done over the years on Wikimedia projects. I don't object to the perspective that more multi-project experience is desirable; while I don't agree with it (and there are many stewards who did not have much multi-wiki experience when they were first elected), there is nothing inherently wrong with it. I have experience I thought would be useful, but others don't agree with me. That's okay; there are plenty of other ways that I can contribute to WMF projects. Thanks again for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. Risker (talk) 19:56, 2 March 2014 (UTC)Reply
    • Well, I had similar issues in terms of the lies, and I still passed, so it certainly is possible. Anyway, [1] may be of interest to you.
    • You know my thoughts on the whole thing already, but I'm sure that your bigger picture experience could be helpful in the development of projects who are still finding their way (and if you look hard enough, there are plenty of well-meaning projects who just need a bit of assistance). Anyway, I'm sure I'll see you around. --Rschen7754 21:17, 2 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

2014 FDC self-nomination


Hello Risker! Thank you very much for submitting your nomination to join the Funds Dissemination Committee. I am working with the Board representatives to the FDC on the FDC nominations process. As you know, the public question and answer period is now underway. Please do review the questions and respond to them as you are able. If you are selected for an interview, kindly note that interviews will be held the week of the 23rd June and the 30th, if necessary. If the Board appoints you to the FDC, we will be holding orientation for members prior to Wikimania on August 6 and 7 in London. If you have any questions at all, don't hesitate to reach out to me on my Talk page or at Once again, thank you very much for putting yourself forward as a candidate for the FDC! KLove (WMF) (talk) 00:07, 20 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, KLove (WMF), so noted. I'm starting to work on the questions tonight. Incidentally, that email address returns an "out of office" notice, so I hope that someone other than Anasuya is monitoring it. Risker (talk) 01:04, 20 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
Hi Risker, thanks for the note. The FDCsupport email address goes to the three WMF staff that work on the FDC most closely: Winifred Olliff, Anasuya Sengupta, and me. Unfortunately, when one of us has an out of office notice up, it is triggered by the FDCsupport email. But worry not, our team is always actively monitoring that inbox and responding as quickly as we can. :) KLove (WMF) (talk) 18:25, 20 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Request for Comment: Evaluation portal redesign preview


Dear Risker - The Learning & Evaluation team at the WMF is currently redesigning the Evaluation portal! Before we take the next steps in the redesign process, we'd really like to hear your thoughts and feedback about the new design. You have been involved in evaluation portal over the last year and can help us design an improved site.

When you have a moment, please visit the link below for screenshots and more information. We'd really like to hear your feedback by July 21 07:00 UTC so we can incorporate your ideas or comments into the design process.

Thank you so much! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 20:16, 8 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hey Risker! Just wanted to remind you that we'd really appreciate any feedback on this by Monday July 21 7:00UTC. Thanks so much! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 23:05, 17 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Please fill out our Inspire campaign survey


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

Please fill out our Inspire campaign survey


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.

00:35, 14 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

How can we improve Wikimedia grants to support you better?


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

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

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

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

With thanks,

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

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 01:24, 19 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Last call for WMF grants feedback!


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

With thanks,

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

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was sent by I JethroBT (WMF) (talk · contribs) through MediaWiki message delivery. 19:09, 4 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Meek STV for Persian Wikipedia


Hey Risker. I was delving deeply into the past discussions of the Board elections. I really appreciate all the great work you have done in the past election committees, especiall 2013 election committee. Your report, which I read thoroughly and eagerly, was really insightful. I want to know the story behind the voting system switch from Schulze to S/N/O system, which is highly vulnerable in my opinion. I noticed that a huge amount of load was carried by you in 2013 election committee. I'd like to know how the committee decided to switch to the enwiki system? Was it a personal choice or a genuine joint one? I wonder how the German user who could barely speak English (en-0) was able to participate in the discussions! Did the members of the committee discuss in a private mailing list? If so, what's wrong with the wiki itself which is available to the public?

Let's do a better work; Let's concentrate on the future (I mean short answers for the above-mentioned questions will suffice). I know that Schulze method is a single-winner system, but what about other alternatives such as en:Meek STV (complex) or Scottish STV (simple)? Take a look at I have raised a discussion about this issue at Denny's talk page and would be more than glad to see you there. Sincerely 4nn1l2 (talk) 11:48, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

The discussion was carried out on a private mailing list, and it was pretty much the first discussion that the 2013 Committee had shortly after it was appointed. (We were appointed in February 2013 for the May/June election.) There was universal support for moving away from Schulze, but two months' lead time was not enough to have a good community consultation on a different voting method and then to have software written and tested on SecurePoll if a system other than one already verified was chosen, so we were more or less stuck with S/N/O. We knew this was a weakness, and it is one of the reasons for recommending a standing Election Committee; such a discussion would take 6-8 months of researching options, discussing it with the community, and then writing and testing software. I'm actually not a big fan of S/N/O (although I do prefer it to Schulze), but the options were pretty limited at that point.

It is my understanding that a standing Election Committee is or is close to being approved, which I'm very happy to see, because I think a discussion on voting systems is overdue, and because I think it would be great to re-examine quite a few elements of the current process which are "legacy" but the rationales that existed 10 years ago may no longer be valid. The 2015 committee was even more time-constrained from the 2013 one, and they relied quite a bit on the structure that we had designed for the 2013 election just to make sure that critical functions were carried out; they certainly didn't have time to do very much tweaking, especially given the focus on driving up diversity and having documents translated into multiple languages. I'm extremely impressed by the work the 2015 committee did in such short time, and I hope some of their members may join the standing committee. Risker (talk) 12:35, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I am glad to see a former Election Commissioner has supported my proposal on 2015 Community Wishlist Survey. I'm asking you because the current Board members didn't even bother to respond my query on the noticeboard. Based on what criteria the Board members appoint the Election Committee members?

I'd like to submit my candidacy because I think that I would make a good commissioner. I've done a decent job on our local Election Committee at Persian Wikipedia along with my fellow commissioners. We have created a table of potential voting systems with pros and cons and their users both in the real world and on the net. For example, I have found out that the following organizations use Meek STV for their elections: Stack Exchange, Apache Board of Directors, LOPSA (2015), Document Foundation, Zope Foundation, and London Hackspace. Meek STV is also used in local elections in New Zealand. I have also found four free and open-source software that can be used to tally votes using Meek STV method, namely Voting systems toolbox, OpenSTV (when it was free), Droop, and Apache. I have also filed a bug in Phabricator (another one by a fellow commissioner) regarding SecurePoll and elections on WMF projects. I have also studied some academic books and journal articles about social choice theory. I also tried to involve myself in the current ArbCom elections at English Wikipedia and even notified User:Mdann52 about the possible repercussions of MassMessage which seems to have come true according to this tread. I also tried to come up with a solution for gender gap and civility problems at English Wikipedia.

I am from Iran in the Middle East and would make the committee more diverse, given the concerns about diversity in the last Board Elections. I would gladly represent Persian, Arabic, Turkish, Hebrew, and other Middle Eastern Wikimedia communities and would be more than glad to give all Global South communities a voice. I can communicate decently in English and have a passive understanding of Arabic (i.e. I can read and mostly understand but cannot write), as well as my native Persian. I have also some technical backgrounds which I can develop rapidly if I find the motivation and if need be. 4nn1l2 (talk) 17:46, 2 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

What future IdeaLab campaigns would you like to see?


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)Reply

Future IdeaLab Campaigns results


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

With great thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, Wikimedia Foundation. 23:55, 26 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Inspire Campaign on content curation & review


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)Reply

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

Open Call for Individual Engagement Grants


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)Reply

Plagiarism detection


Hi! You voted for improving plagiarism detection as an important suggestions in the community wishlist survey last year. I'm pinging people who showed interest in that task to tell them we have some suggestions for how things could look, if you'd like to glance at them and give us some feedback. They're available here: phab:T120435#2266283. It's easiest if comments are left in Phabricator, since that's where much of the development is happening, but they can be left on Meta too, of course. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 17:18, 13 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Cross-wiki watchlist


Hi again! You also voted for the cross-wiki watchlist as an important suggestions in the community wishlist survey last year. I'm pinging editors who showed interest in that task to tell them we have some suggestions for how things could look, if you'd like to glance at them and give us some feedback. You can find them on the project page on Meta. If you'd like to share any comments, you're very welcome to do so on the talk page. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 00:59, 21 May 2016 (UTC)Reply


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

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

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



On the FDC appointment. I know it must be a lot of work.

Thanks for your contributions

Smallbones (talk) 01:34, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks very much, Smallbones. While it is a lot of work, I've found it to be quite rewarding over the last two years. It's been very educational as well: I've learned a lot about various parts of the movement and some of the brilliant contributions made by our volunteers. I'm looking forward to learning even more as I settle in for the next round. Risker (talk) 01:44, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Survey on Inspire Campaign for addressing harassment


Thanks for your participation during the Inspire Campaign focused on addressing harassment from June 2016. I'm interested in hearing your experience during the campaign, so if you're able, I invite you to complete this brief survey to describe how you contributed to the campaign and how you felt about participating.

Please feel free to let me know on my talk page if you have any questions about the campaign or the survey. Thanks! I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 03:23, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

(Opt-out instructions)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey



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)Reply

Your revert


So you reverted to ignorant writing that I had bothered to correct. I don't give my time for free to face that kind of bloody-mindedness. Tony (talk) 12:09, 17 May 2017 (UTC)Reply


Unblock on enwiki


{{unblock|I'm not a sock. Please help}}. We have time to go now and we should be there right now so we could still go there go (talk) 05:43, 11 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Inactivating template as unblock request as user is not blocked at Meta. @We have time to go now and we should be there right now so we could still go there go: please use process explained at w:Wikipedia:UTRS  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:55, 11 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Re-enable TPA


I'd like to edit my talk page again. Please help me. We have time to go now and we should be there right now so we could still go there go (talk) 07:39, 11 June 2019 (UTC)Reply



your name over the Wikimania stuff about the ongoing Strategy-Working_Group_Recommendations, which is already attracting quite much criticism. And, on a first glance, you seemed to be the only recognizable (and respected) name from ~en.

A lot many of the recommendations seem to be woefully written and some are outright problematic. I believe that there is a legitimate fear of WMF guiding the project into some kind of social activism through a systematic plan and from the looks of FRAMBAN et al, it seems that the pieces are falling in places.

So, can you kindly share some thoughts about the broader process? Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 14:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hello Winged Blades of Godric. There are several other working group members who participate at enwiki, including but not limited to Rosiestep, The Land, Islahaddow, and Kirill Lokshin; these four come to mind immediately mostly because I knew both user and RL names. The draft recommendations are just that, drafts - proposals for broader discussion, if you want to put it another way. And the very best thing that everyone could do right now is discuss them with the working groups. There are some really good ideas in these drafts, and there are also ideas that are pretty far out. For example, the notion of monetizing merchandise (e.g., selling t-shirts and buttons) is probably acceptable to most parts of our broader community, while others, such as pressuring Wikimedians to provide a large amount of personal information on their user pages, are a lot more controversial, and it would be worthwhile to flesh out why those ideas raise concerns. I'd suggest reading each recommendation and giving specific feedback - not just the ones that people don't like, but also the ones that people think are a good idea.

In late August and early September, the working groups will be modifying their recommendations to reflect feedback from a lot of sources, including the community and those who attend Wikimania. Then in late September, representatives from all of the working groups will meet to "harmonize" and "consolidate" the final recommendations. It's my expectation that between these two exercises, there will be significant modifications and accommodations made; some of these draft recommendations will be dropped, others will be changed and still others will be considered high priority. It's really important to point out that NONE of them are final. So please, jump in and start talking about this. It's not been an easy exercise for anyone who has participated - we've all had to do some "give and take" even within our own small working groups, and we are seeing quite a few of the recommendations from the other working groups at more or less the same time as you are.

I'd really love to hear some suggestions on how to get more of our enwiki users involved in reviewing or discussing these recommendations - any thoughts? Risker (talk) 16:40, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! You add some much-needed clarity, as usual. I have tried leaving feedback on all of those recommendations, that I managed to understand well enough and some of them seemed indeed good. Needless to say that quite many (at the same time) are absolutely poor/radical(??) and some are way too vague.

I tried to attract a few heads from en-wiki to comment over the feedback-t/p(s) but most of them rejected it as yet another of the usual resource-wasting-expenditures of WMF, that will near-certainly lead to nowhere and hence, did not deserve much attention. This is a huge problem - most people don't care enough unless it affects them in the very short run. Only when did I mention the trifecta of NC-ND/user-page-data-collection/universal-knowledge, they landed up over here and at other places.

As to methods of solicitation; leaving notes at AN, VPP et al is the first step. I don't think that central-banners work well enough with their one/two-liners and participation metrics in the t/p consultation seems to confirm my stand. Watch-list notices/CENT ought not be much different, either. IMHO, leaving a personalized note on the t/p(s) of randomly selected admins, all functionaries and a random but large chunk of active editors (wherein activity is determined by featured content production/net edit count/articles created/...) ought to work well-enough. We can also selectively target certain projects like WiR, LGBT+, India et al who have been the focus of many recommendations, in particular. But that dropped message needs to be straight to the point w/o giving any feel that this is yet another of those thousand and a thirteen consultations done by WMF; contain something like a statement of intent about how the recommendations curated after this feedback phase will shape the future of the broader movement and undeniably, en-wiki. And, it must contain a glimpse into the recommendations summarizing some of the more radical proposals but w/o coming across in a threatening/imposing manner.

The previous stages were very ill-publicized which has been reflected in the near complete lack of non-organised volunteers from the two largest wikis in the working_groups. Even the form for surveys were published at the very fag end, in en-wiki, after Opabinia came across them. I think, the recommendation_feedback_phase merits much larger audience and it will be a pleasure to hear your own takes on publicising this phase over en_wiki:-) Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 18:52, 13 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Well, I understand where you're coming from on the "non-organized volunteer" end of things: I'm one of the few enwiki volunteers who work at a "meta" or global level without any link at all to any affiliations - no chapters, no user groups, only enwiki- or WMF-based committees/groups. To be honest, a lot of that is because it's hard to find people who are both interested in this area and working only on the projects; and a lot of the project-specific "leaders" aren't really all that interested in spending their volunteer hours this way. Perhaps it's because my "national" chapter is centered a six-hour drive away from me, and I come from a (comparatively) sparsely populated country, but I've never really felt the urge to "join". Ah well. I'm in the process of preparing for Wikimania, where I have the great honour (?) of presenting my working group's recommendations, so doing more outreach to enwiki will have to wait a little bit, but I'm definitely going to take advantage of some of your suggestions. Thanks for the ideas. Risker (talk) 19:17, 13 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Agree about the scarcity of people willing to work in both the domains:-(
For my own curiosity, were the presentations (your's/others') video-graphed? [Heard that many events of this year's Wikimania was liverstreamed(??)] Will like to watch, if available ....
Also, did you arrive at any plan for more outreach to en-wiki? And, any place where the feedback received during Wikimania is collated? Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 15:52, 25 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
P.S:- Quite to my dismay, many of the WGs are yet to engage anyone, even trivially, despite editing their main wikis abundantly. Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 15:56, 25 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Hello Winged Blades of Godric. I do not believe that there are any videos of any of the working group presentations, although I understand that all of the presentations were very well attended; certainly the R&R group one was, as were the other ones that I attended. I don't know if there is any *public* place where the feedback was collated - each group received written notes of the feedback received at their presentations. Whether or not the groups are getting into debates on the talk pages of their recommendations, I am certain they are reviewing the feedback and the core team is undoubtedly ensuring that it is brought to their attention. I think the slide shows for the various presentations are all on Meta, but be aware that in most cases they served as introductions, and most of the groups spent a lot of time in breakaways getting feedback on what they identified as key parts of their recommendations, so they couldn't really be seen as complete. The Roles & Responsibilities group also rolled out its suggested models (see near the top of the page, labeled "models", here), and I'd encourage you to read them over and give feedback. We look at them as three possible ways that our recommendations could play out between now and 2030. There was some complaint about these having been released "so late", but the reality is that we were working on them and setting up the feedback channels until the night before our presentation. They've also been mentioned on Jimmy's talk page on English Wikipedia, so at least there's been some engagement there. Risker (talk) 16:16, 25 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Misogyny on English Wikipedia


Thank you for reading the report filed a few minutes ago. You say the wording is unclear - could you point to areas where it could be improved? Best, 17:05, 6 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Community Wishlist Survey 2019 - Section Name in Diff



The Community Tech team (WMF) has officially started the project for Section Name in Diff, the #9 wish from the 2019 Community Wishlist Survey!

You previously voted for this wish, so we are now contacting you. We invite you to visit the project page, where you can read a project analysis and share your feedback.

We hope to see you on the project talk page, and thank you in advance!

-- IFried (WMF), 14:14, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Council origins


You were on the Roles and Responsibilities WG, right? So, quick question: Was the "Global Council" idea a revival of the 2005 proposal, or did the WG think it up independently? --Yair rand (talk) 19:43, 26 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hello Yair rand. This is a somewhat difficult question to answer. If I recall correctly, only one or two members of our working group were participating at any level in a WMF project in 2005, and I don't recall any specific references to a proposal from 2005. On the other hand, most of us have been involved at what might be called the "movement" or "meta" level for many years, and I'm pretty sure most if not all of us have heard of some sort of proposal for some sort of movement wide council or parliament or decision-making body over the course of our individual journeys through the Wikimedia world. So perhaps the best answer to your question is that the recommendation was not based on that or any other specific proposal, although past discussions may have informed the development of this specific recommendation. I should note there was pretty divergent opinion within the working group on exactly what role the "global council" or global governing body would play, which is why the original proposals were rather non-specific. Hope that helps. Risker (talk) 21:20, 26 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thank you. --Yair rand (talk) 21:44, 26 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Community Tech Launches Wikisource Improvement Initiative



We hope you are all healthy and safe in these difficult times.

The Community Tech team has just launched a new initiative to improve Wikisource. We have created the first project (Improve ebook exports), which came out of the 2020 Community Wishlist Survey. We now invite you to share your feedback on the project talk page. Please let us know what you think of our project analysis; we want to hear from you! Furthermore, we hope that you will participate in the other Wikisource improvement projects, which we’ll address in the future. Thank you in advance and we look forward to reading your feedback on the project talk page!

-- IFried (WMF) (Product Manager, Community Tech)

Sent by Satdeep Gill (WMF) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:51, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for helping to create the Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy Recommendations

  Wikimedia 2030
Thank you very much for everything you did to help create the Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy Recommendations! I am especially grateful for the enormous amount of work you did in the Roles & Responsibilities working group and all the care and commitment you brought to the process. --Nicole Ebber (WMDE) (talk) 15:29, 25 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

"Vitriolic language"


Hi Risker, can anything be done to reopen this? I disagree with the closing as the use of "vitriolic language" has continued. Can this be opened again?

examples ː

..that they couldn't give a fuck about what the Community thinks of a change

....sends a clear message to all of us: the finger, with both hands. They took us for a bunch of patsies and they really belive we are. I've never seen such a contemptuous attitude. This is nauseating. Indeed, #NotMyFoundation.

I could use less vitriolic language there, but I kindof feel like communicating vitriol is a bit of the point.

I am apalled by the language (although I did sign the RFC and the community open letter, I do think the "F" word and terms such as "vitriolic language is needed" should not ne allowed. Especially since they are typical of a "gamer gate" rhetoric. Nattes à chat (talk) 10:22, 9 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Wikisource Pagelist Widget - First Iteration Feedback


Hello everyone,

I am pleased to announce that Wikisource Pagelist Widget is now available on Beta Wikisource. We need your help in testing the widget and providing feedback.

You can test the widget by editing the following Index page on Beta Wikisource:

There is a new ‘Preview pagelist’ button under the pagelist field. Click it to get a preview, and then click on any page number in the preview to open the widget.

You can also create a fresh Index Page for any other PDF or DjVu from Wikimedia Commons and test it.

We need your feedback on the following questions:

  • What is your general opinion about the Pagelist Widget?
  • Is it obvious how to use the widget? If not, what is difficult to understand?
  • What other changes would you like to suggest in order to improve the widget further?

Please provide your feedback on the Project Talk Page on Meta-Wiki.

P.S. - The widget doesn’t work on Local Uploads in Beta Wikisource as of now (due to phab:T257807).


SGill (WMF) (talk)

Sent using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:51, 17 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

SGrabarczuk (WMF)

18:26, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

SGrabarczuk (WMF)

16:08, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Share your feedback on the OCR improvements!


SGrabarczuk (WMF) 17:48, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Reply



Nothing special, just a wave, and hope that all is well with you and yours.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:39, 20 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Great to see you running


Hi Risker,

Really fantastic to see you as a candidate in the Movement Charter elections - best of luck! Nosebagbear (talk) 01:45, 5 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, the same to you. Who knows how this will all wind up, this seems to be a much less predictable outcome than the Board elections, and I wouldn't be surprised to see current Board candidates move to this if they are not successful in their election. Risker (talk) 01:49, 5 September 2021 (UTC)Reply



Belated congrats on your election to the Drafting Committee. Among all the candidates, I couldn't think of anyone more qualified. Your experience will be a huge asset to the task. Kudpung (talk) 01:45, 25 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks so much for your kind words, Kudpung. I really appreciate this. Risker (talk) 03:20, 25 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Leadership Development Working Group: Reminder to apply by 10 April 2022


Hey Risker, great to see you again =] I was hoping to share this message to you and your talk page guests, as the call for applications for this working group ends soon.

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

The Community Development team at the Wikimedia Foundation is supporting the creation of a global, community-driven Leadership Development Working Group. The purpose of the working group is to advise leadership development work. Feedback was collected in February 2022 and a summary of the feedback is on Meta-wiki. The application period to join the Working Group is now open and is closing soon on April 10, 2022. Please review the information about the working group, share with community members who might be interested, and apply if you are interested.

Thank you in advance for your consideration =) Xeno (WMF) (talk) 17:20, 7 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Moved comment


My teammate moved your comment to Talk:IP Editing: Privacy Enhancement and Abuse Mitigation#What should it look like? Thanks for taking the time to suggest your favorites. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:07, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Reminder to vote now to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously voted in the 2021 Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) election.

This is a reminder that if you have not voted yet on the ratification of the final Wikimedia Movement Charter draft, please do so by July 9, 2024 at 23:59 UTC.

You can read the final text of the Wikimedia Movement Charter in your language. Following that, check on whether you are eligible to vote. If you are eligible, cast your vote on SecurePoll.

On behalf of the Charter Electoral Commission,

RamzyM (WMF) 15:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply