Chrono archives : 2004 | 2005 |2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2014
Topic archives : Quarto | Sister projects | Movement roles | AMA | Other

Older notes, 2005-2012Edit

Summarized commentsEdit

Separate simple... ratings scheme offense, IRC defense... black ants! Angela Uueh, Thanks! Sj Hi. improving interlingual ties : interesting and meaningful. I have some new ideas, too... Press Corps 17-yr cicada req. attracted en:User:Lupo, who added some photos. :-) User:Tomos hello :-) bad browser on meta? adding space between caracters. Anthere UTF-8 codes breaking! Please care about it. please. Suisui ugh! And sometimes it adds an "e" at the end of a block of text. And replaces certain international characters with a literal "?" [ :( ] Sj Multilingualism : Something has to be done on multlingual communication on wiki... one of its main powersouces I think. I contacted Arno Lagrange, Anthere. -- MattisManzel

wmf miscellany - jd , August 2006

Communitas and thoughts on Wikipedia interlanguage priorities - user:Quinobi, July 2006

ludism's WikiNode preview in late '06 (NTS)

Fantasy, June 2007, asking about iswiki flagging (for sitenotice editing in '06)

user:Guaka gets a laptop, June 2007

Craig Franklin on a Brisbane bid, February 2008.

KTC statement thanks, and privatemusings talk request, May-June 2008 (UTC)

Mikhailov Kusserow revising a speedydel of userpages, March 2009 (UTC)

What do you think about commons:Commons:Village pump#Russian Copyright Law issues concerning edits in Wikipedia made by Russian citizens?

Hello Sj, this edit is correct? Greetings, 21:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC) (both from someone logged in as me!)

Image license for Wp 4juillet-board.jpg (early 2007, jusjih, pathoschild)

You've got email. Dragons flight, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Quality Assessment tools for readers -AG

Managing translations --Nemo, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Software development transparency: see mw:Development process improvement and comments: 1, 2 which lead to this suggestion; and chat log starting at about 20:34. Cheers, Nemo 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Budget stuff (2005)Edit

Hey - nice work on organizing this. :) I consider the budget passed today as a second beta budget, the next one will be a full version and I'd like your help beforehand in putting it together (need to start work on this early in March).

Some notes: We did not have enough money for a reserve this time (other than just saying that anything we take in that is over $75K is the reserve), but all the board members present indicated that this is very important and should be a budget item in the next budget. Your idea of 3 months' operations expenses is the standard recommended amount by GAAP for non-profits, so that is what I'm going to push for but it will likely not be that large until the end of the year. My proposed budget had $20K for special projects (such as outreach, WikiReaders, yada yada, Mother Teresa-type stuff, etc), but that was tied to being half of the Lounsbery grant. In the meeting I found out that that money was marked for 'physical expenses during quarter 1 2005', which wiped the special projects item (the $0 item). Once again, great work and I look forward to working with you. --Daniel Mayer 06:22, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

PS - If you are interested, IRC is a good place for us to work together. #wikimedia is the logical choice so long as it stays fairly quite. I'd also like us to eventually form a real finance committee with at least one board member being an active participant (Anthere seems to be obvious choice). A way to logically coordinate what is put on meta and what goes on the foundation wiki also needs to be worked out. We also need to draft a contract for Brion and maybe for Chad. Sensitive stuff like contract development may need to happen on the grants wiki. --Daniel Mayer

Wikimedia budget/2005/Q4
Any help, esp on the detail pages, would be greatly appreciated. :) --Daniel Mayer 00:04, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikimedia QuartoEdit

Hi Sj, is Wikimedia Quarto still active? If not, I am thinking about a reviving, how do you think of it?--Wing 08:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I think you speak of two very critical points. The one is recruiting authors, the other is translating. How was these done in the past? On the authoring side I am thinking of invite people write articles, and I would also accept people write articles in their own language and try to find translators to do the translation for them. How do you think of this?--Wing 13:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
It has been dormant, but I think the need for something like it across the projects has only grown over time. I would love to spend some time recruiting new authors and translators, showing them how we produced that sort of visual newsletter without too much trouble. +sj | help with translation |+
Replies on your talk page . +sj | help with translation |+

Wikizine moveEdit

Sj, if you wish to move all Wikizine editons to Meta, many are there already, look at this, and all others are in a simmilar form at the wikizine wiki. All editions must be somewhere in the "construction-layout". --Walter 12:44, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Super, thanks. It's on my weekend plan while in Chicago :) I commented it out until I have time to work through the list. -- sj | help translate |+ 20:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


Translation offerEdit

You probably have enough people already, but if you ever need help here on Meta translating between English and German (in either direction), drop me a note on en.wikipedia. Cheers, --Goodmorningworld 19:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Just so you know, we're not ignoring you... Alex and I are just thinking about it. ;-) A quick question though, does it just have to be "technical improvements" (as in related to technology)? Cbrown1023 talk 22:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Not at all. most tech solutions have social equivalents and vice-versa. I think some of the most telling changes would be social. Simply stating there are core languages that should be considered equal for the purposes of a main jumping-off point for localization, or a canonical document about the Projects, would be a significant change for language issues. Or conversely, the proposed explicit statement that all strategic planning be done in English will define how groups are formed and discussions started. For outreach, wiki and social issues about where presentations (or conference papers) are shared and archived, where event calendars are posted and updated, & how requests to talk are shared are all relevant. -- sj | help translate |+ 23:11, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: New languagesEdit

At the very least, you could bring up the topic at the English Wikipedia's village pump. But before any change can take place, we need to involve a very broad swath of the Wikimedia community.

We could conduct a poll similar to the various logo selection processes. Each of the Wikipedia editions would have to carry a visible notice about the poll, because the portal is by far the most visible of Wikimedia's webpages, and every language (at least the 100+ languages) would be affected to some extent. And of course, we can add a little blurb on the portal itself, maybe just below the search bar. Ideally, we'd involve the translation community here; visitors from non-English projects may feel left out of the decision if we allow most of the discussion to take place in only English.

So far, the only serious proposals I know of are Catherine's current design and Forseti's. We should expect a good deal of support for the current design, so we'll have to make a good case for changing it (internationalization, expandability, newer is better, etc.). We also need to make clear the new design's requirements, based on our experience as admins having to maintain the portal regularly. For example, we can't just say that every language with over 100,000 articles gets to be at the top, unless we have some way of accommodating 15 or 20 languages up there, even on lower-resolution screens. (Because we should expect the new design to last awhile.) We also need to keep an eye on page size, load time, and accessibility. So although a clickable Flash map of the world would be a cool way to select a language, we really can't use it.

By involving the wider community in designing the portal, the portal will seem like less of a temporary hack (which it is currently), and maybe the developers will finally get around to fixing bugs like 4501, 1534, 15518, and 15758. We could really excite volunteer designers with a well-publicized poll.

 – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 06:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

It's certainly a long-term discussion. And strange that only those two proposals have been considered seriously -- this is a famous and highly visible page! Now that Jack and others are actively working on improving the page, it seems like a good time to get new designers involved. Thanks for highlighting those related bugs; I've been trying to gather important bugs for various long-term projects, since we don't have a unified set of priorities at the moment (or even a list of a hundred different clusters of priorities belonging to different groups).
Before any large poll is started, existing discussions about the portal should be consolidated -- they are hard to follow, especially for someone coming in fresh. The odd naming convention for the portal pages doesn't help. We need to convert something like Initiatives into a meta-equivalent of w:Wikipedia:Wikiprojects, and organize a discussion there - that is something that visitors from large wikipedias might be more comfortable with. -- sj | help translate |+ 06:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Actually, the poll that decided the current design was between Catherine's design and a temporary design that really no one liked. [1] (It looked something like the current "Wiki does not exist" error page.) Unfortunately, Forseti introduced his design just a bit too late for the majority of voters to take notice, and efforts to merge the two designs as a compromise never resulted in much change. Forseti's design did get reused for some Toolserver tools and the old server downtime message.
But none of these designs really did anything about the severe usability issue of choosing between hundreds of languages. Plenty of websites feature a language selection page upfront, but Wikipedia's the only site I know of that suffers from the issue to that extent. Even a clickable Flash world map wouldn't work for us, because of geopolitical issues and the sheer number of minority languages represented here. So not only do we need designers to step up, but we also need to engage usability experts. WikiProject Usability at the English Wikipedia might have some professional usability/HCI contacts who might be of help in creating a new proposal.
 – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 06:13, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Things of beautyEdit

Things of beauty or things that make you smile? Perfect. :-) What a wonderful question. I'm going to use that often. --Philippe 02:05, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Fundraising booklet: frdisc

I herd you like quotes! you should send that to comcom; v. useful.

Sent! SJ talk | translate   17:21, 19 January 2012 (UTC)


Strategy WikiEdit

Hi SJ,

I'm Serita Cox, a member of the strategy development project team, and project manager from Bridgespan. Tyler forwarded me your message as it expanded beyond her area of focus (Content stub) into process and I wanted to respond to the entirety of your posting.

First, thank you so much for your input, it is greatly appreciated. To answer your questions: 1- Process. Yes, the project team has now thought through the process sufficiently that we have identified activities, roles, timelines, and deliverables for the entire strategy development process and are looking to post them for Community input this coming week. We wanted the Community to have something logical to react to, but given your comment re: Content/Quality stub being "too polished" I worry we might get similar reactions to posting the process. It is a fine balance to strike between giving the Community some starting point and appearing too set/decided. Your feedback would be greatly appreciated on how to hit this right balance.

2- Your message around editing the Content/Quality stub couldn't have been more timely. I had that very day raised the concern that these stubs were not getting the kind of traction we were hoping in terms of views, edits, inputs, comments. Clearly, they are sub-optimal in engaging the Community. Their purpose is to provide a place to start collating and analyzing data around Content/Quality, Participation, Reach so that the Community Task Forces set-up in Phase II have a starting point to begin analyzing and defining potential strategic opportunities and priorities for expanding reach, expanding content, improving quality and expanding participation. It is true that the Bridgespan-side of the team is tasked with providing the first development and subsequent synthesis of these fact bases which is why you see large postings, but again, it would be very helpful to us to get your thoughts and input on how we can clarify the purpose of these fact bases, the continuous "work in progress" nature of these fact bases, and how best to frame/layout these fact bases for maximum Community engagement.

I would really appreciate any feedback you can give us regarding our transparency of process, clarity of purpose, and desired engagement with the Community. You can reach me via my User page

Thanks, Serita

Hi, Serita -- I responded on stratwiki. I'll get over my concerns about founding a new wiki one I have a process for synching it with meta... -- sj · translate · + 15:53, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Future of Wikimedia WorkshopEdit

Rich Farmbrough 21:01 14 July 2012 (GMT).

Policies, namespacesEdit

Would love to have your take on this: . Cheers, notafish }<';> 22:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Local uploads policyEdit

Hello, I'd like to hear your opinion here. I'm happy to see that the board is engaging in community discussion more (as in the proposals for new projects) and I think this issue is worth such an effort as well, with some sort of support from the board, as the board's licensing policy is completely ignored on most projects. Frankly, we've seen many resolutions with negligible impact (as with BLP and Openness), but this seems a good area for the board to start making its own resolutions effective. Thanks, Nemo 12:00, 18 August 2012 (UTC)


As you may be aware there have been significant governance issues on en: concerning Arbcom, checkusers and the Audit Subcommittee at least.

Only for the abuse of checkuser is there an offical path of escalation, in the form of the ombudsmen. It appears, however, that this group is moribund, therefore there are no apparent constraints on the abuse of power on en:.

See for more details.

All the best, Rich Farmbrough 15:23 16 December 2012 (GMT).

Thanks for the note. I'll look into it next week. Less moribund than in need of a public noticeboard that registers when new requests are made at least... so it seems to me.
Also, I could use some pointers on bot manipulation... I have a batch of 6000 pronunciation files I'd like to post to WikiData and add to appropriate en:wp articles, and I'd like to learn how to do it properly myself :) SJ talk  03:33, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
That would have to be very carefully done. For example editors are complaining about Arbcom releasing their personal information supplied in confidence, adding this to a public noticeboard would be to further publicise the leaked information. In this case the editor was completely open about his alternative accounts, and chose to post the complaint on his user page in the spirit of openness. Not all complaints will be so open. Moreover complaints can be made about abuse of process which involve third parties who have a right to privacy.
There are additional questions coming to the fore, concerning freedom of information and whistle-blowing - these might be worth having in the back of ones mind over the coming weeks and months.
Hit me up when you are ready to do some work with the pronunciation files.
Rich Farmbrough 11:24 17 December 2012 (GMT).
I think "registers when new requests are made" is sufficient. It doesn't need to say who made the request, or who received it, or what it was about. It's enough if every request gets a single public pip, and someone from the commission replies to each and says "being handled" or some such to ensure it hasn't fallen through the cracks. The noticeboard mechanism could add "noise" of a few days to avoid people correlating requests to some specific on-wiki event, if that matters. SJ talk  17:55, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes that sounds like a suitable idea. I think the details of each case should be as open as possible, but cannot be pre-judged. Entries like:
  • Case 1234 based on email received (MD5 checksum xxxx), responsible ombudsman Joe Blogss, opened 00:48, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
and also updates to status. Rich Farmbrough 00:48 19 December 2012 (GMT).

Purpose of wmf:HomeEdit

You may be interested: <>. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:19, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Request for an account on the Foundation wiki/header lists the current requirements for obtaining an account on Perhaps you could amend the rules appropriately? I think your edits will hold more weight than mine. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

+1, tell me what you think. Other specific suggestions? SJ talk 
Thank you. Your edits look good to me. Now it's just a matter of recruitment. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 17:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Links you may be interested in:

I'm seeing a lot of needless resistance lately. :-/ --MZMcBride (talk) 06:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

That's interesting, I see useful progress, particularly on publishing legal docs - much more than last year. Your being testy on wmfwiki isn't helping, I think. SJ talk  15:50, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Probably not. I'm annoyed at the mess (uncategorized, out-of-date, and obsolete pages), which I'm now working to clean up. The annoyance gets compounded when, while I'm in the middle of trying to clean up, someone comes along and tries to take ownership of the wiki (or just its main page, I suppose). It isn't Jay's wiki or the Wikimedia Foundation communications department's wiki, as Philippe and others seem to keep casually suggesting. (And frankly, I'm not sure why Jay or anyone else would want to claim ownership for a wiki that's been overrun by outdated, un-curated, and uncategorized content.)

Thank you for the edits to Legal docs. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 04:47, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm very happy you're cleaning up there; thank you. I think it's just questions about the main page that people are worried about. (This happens to all sites, community wikis and foundation wikis and grassroots org websites... it's one of those shed-painting issues: it's a question that affects many people's casual daily experience, everyone has an opinion, both about design and about who should determine it, and there's no obvious way to choose among conflicting opinions.) Though setting a reasonable admin and access poilcy is a broader question. Warmly, SJ talk  20:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia exit interview ← I'm trying to tread lightly. I asked Jan-Bart what he thought.

User talk:Jan-Bart is indefinitely semi-protected. :-/

I've created Legal protection, as I think the "word of caution" section in particular isn't well documented. --MZMcBride (talk) 14:20, 6 April 2013 (UTC)



Sj, did you see the email that I sent to you? I'm hoping that you can send a reply to Wikimedia-l. Thanks and happy new year. --Pine 07:12, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I did and glad you asked. I will respond soon; I'm still thinking about it. I am impatient in my own way, so on the one hand I always want us (as a board and movement) to do more; and on the other I have to actively take time with some responses to reflect on them. Warmly, SJ talk  22:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
I understand. Thank you. --Pine 23:04, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi SJ. Some time has passed. Are you still working on the email, or did you send one and I missed it? Thanks, --Pine 00:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
I wrote one, asked a friend for feedback, and life's little disasters got in the way. I will get back to it this week; it is a topic that was dear to aaronsw's heart too. SJ talk  02:38, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I was sad when I heard about Aaronsw. I'm glad to see that the Wikimedia community is remembering him in numerous ways. I look forward to your email, but maybe it would be best to have this conversation a few days from now after we've all had a chance to do some emotional processing. Could you send the email on Thursday or later this week? Thank you, --Pine 19:35, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi SJ. A month has passed since I first wrote to you. Are you still planning to respond? --Pine 02:04, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


Hi, I thought you might have useful perspective on this: Talk:Special Interest Groups -Pete F (talk) 20:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


Re: "I would love to see not just a FDC but a tech dissemination committee where people can apply for tech support for projects." -- this is a lovely idea. SJ talk 

Thanks SJ. Wondering how I should pursue it? I and many other I am sure need tech support for the work we do on Wikipedia / Wikimedia projects. And while I am even willing to pay someone I have no idea about hiring people who know how to edit Media Wiki software.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:20, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
I think you want a Tech version of the GAC, actually. Most tech needs are in the 1-2 developer range for a few months, for a fixed result. (The FDC equivalent would be a small dev-team for a year for an unrestricted variety of projects.) I suggest starting by proposing requests to the GAC, asking for tech time rather than $$, and see what they say. They may have good ideas. SJ talk 
Thanks will give it a try :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:03, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
This is a fantastic idea. -Pete F (talk) 15:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what sort of tech support you're talking of and coming from whom, but Sumana seems to see Lead our development process as a product adviser or manager as something somehow similar to this. --Nemo 07:22, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Tech support would come from the WMF. The WMF is an expert in hiring people who do tech work. Wikipedians are not. So even if we have money / get money through an IEG this may not be what people need.
For example I need this or some equivalent tool to work in more languages than English [2]. User who created it is to busy to adapt it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:08, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Community logo and derivativesEdit

Thank you, Sj. :) I've spoken to the legal team about this, and Michelle Paulson put some thoughts here that might be useful consideration. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 12:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Lovely, thanks Maggie. SJ



You might notice that there's a new page at Endowment here. In the links at the bottom is a question about your edit here. You may wish to comment as to where that discussion happened... or not. :) Philippe (WMF) (talk) 11:34, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Bureaucrat discussionEdit

Hello. A bureaucrat discussion has been opened to decide the outcome of this request for de-adminship. It is opened for more than three days now and it has only received one comment so far. If you could please pass by and leave your comments over there it would be really appreciated. Best regards.

— Delivered via Global message delivery on behalf of MarcoAurelio, 15:21, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Marco. I commented there... SJ talk  23:18, 21 March 2013 (UTC)


have you forgotten one purpose for Wikinews? to serve as a record of what was known at a given point in time? - Amgine/meta wikt wnews blog wmf-blog goog news 21:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that too. This is partly addressed by historical revisions. More detailed comparisons of the value of "record v. persistent context" would be useful. I'm sure there are examples where one of those uses dominates, and others where both matter.
The record/snapshot of the full set of things popularly discussed is likewise important to put in context. Right now we don't have any way of capturing that : we don't work well on wn with other data feeds; today there are a number of compatibly licensed news sources that don't generate entries of any sort on WN. So I think there are many useful conceptual updates that could be sorted. SJ talk  03:39, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Grantmaking BarnstarEdit

  Individual Engagement Grant Barnstar
SJ, thanks for the thoughtful participation in IEG discussions - hope to have your ideas and input again in round 2! Siko (WMF) (talk) 20:49, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

chocolate leftovers...Edit

... here notafish }<';> 00:53, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia loves the DPLAEdit

Hi SJ,

I have emailed Emily Gore and Pam Wright. Below is a copy. Love to hear your comments.

Emily and Pam – We are a group of Wikipedians who would like to be the DPLA’s “first customers”.
The group will download NARA metadata from the DPLA to Wikimedia Commons. To this end, digitized item-level materials from NARA’s ARC database that have corresponding empty categories in the NARA-Commons partnership have been identified. The categories will be filled, and the images will be made available for Wikipedia editors – as an example of the power of the DPLA and its partner agencies.
The initial download includes NARA Record Group 330: Records of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, 1921 – 2008; however, if there is another preference, please let us know.
This collaboration - between Wikipedians and the DPLA, and using NARA records - is an amazing first step: NARA data is used first, furthering the agency goal to bring materials to Commons in a structured way, the DPLA has a high profile “first customer”, and Wikipedians are first in the door of what is the future of records aggregation.
After the completion of the first download, NARA records can continue to flow on to Wikimedia Commons, using the templating, categorization, and naming structures already in place.
The DPLA Technical Development team has expressed support of the plan, and will let us know when the download can begin.
This effort brings together diverse groups for a common goal – your input is welcome.
Emily – When appropriate, we will tweet, blog, and FB during the live download. We can provide you with the url of the Commons page the data will flow to, so you can watch the progress as well. It should be exciting!
Pam – As mentioned above, Record Group 330 seems like a good choice – military images are popular on Wikipedia. If NARA has another preference, please let us know.

Best, User:Bdcousineau User:Michael Barera User: Sarah Stierch User:Smallman12q

cc: SJ Klein, via user page

Thanks. Bdcousineau (talk) 16:13, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Great start! One thing we should consider: becoming a DPLA hub (say, along with WikiTeam), for both existing Wikipedia data, and perhaps providing curation services for repositories and communities that don't know how to get their material into the proper format, but are happy to contribute it to the DPLA through us (as a community hub) . [think of the smaller collections of primary sources, or sites like that are busy gathering new data and may not have time/experience to scriptably massage the data into new formats. SJ talk  17:24, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Great idea of Wikipedia as a DPLA hub; I'd love to be involved any way that is appropriate. I've always thought Wikimedia is missing all the materials from so many small county and regional historical centers/museums.
Sadly, NARA is not so enthused about the DPLA/Commons/NARA collaboration. The team has decided/is discussing a different download, perhaps the 10k ARTStor images that are in DPLA. Research shows they are also PD. We will check in again. Thank you for your time and support. Bdcousineau (talk) 00:48, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Young Innovators Competition for Diversity of Digital ContentEdit

Hi Samuel,

I wanted to tell you about ITU Telecom Young Innovators Competition's new challenge on preserving diversity of digital content. We are calling for concept papers or start-ups from all around the world, started by young women and men (age 18-26) who work to inspire the creation of local content in a less frequently used on the Internet language. We recognize the dis-balance of digital content available and are devoted to help diversify the content by supporting talented young entrepreneurs who have projects in this field. We accept concept papers or start-ups (already up and running and in need of further help to scale up). We offer up to USD 10 000 of seed funding to the best 10 submissions, and we really hope that some of them will be for our challenge on digital content.

More information at our website .

Any questions, as well as applications, should go to

Thanks if you can spread the word for us in your networks.


Thanks, Dimitrina! I will definitely spread the word. This looks like an amazing effort. Are you asking them to release their work under a free license? SJ talk  23:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


Hi. Can you please fix Wikimedia user group? It redirects to itself. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:29, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Done. SJ talk 
Ha! So I'm not alone. :-)
I updated groups groups. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
P.S. Wikimedia exit interview/Sue Gardner is underway.

New option on interproject linksEdit

Hi, thanks for participating in the RFC for interproject links. There is a new option that might be interesting to explore. Please check Dropdown next to title 1 and Dropdown next to title 2. They are part of Option 5.--Micru (talk) 14:29, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

FDC round 2Edit

Dear Samuel,

If they had any trouble they should indeed talk about it. I am glad to help, the extent of my participation depends, however, on the content of their trouble in round 2. If they wish they can contact me at FDC portal/Appeals regarding FDC process/2012-2013 round2 or by e-mail

If they wish to complaint about the FDC recommendations to the board, it is better to discuss them directly with the board representatives on the FDC.

Regards from Lisboa! Lusitana (talk) 15:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Forced user renames coming soon for SULEdit

Hi, sorry for writing in English. I'm writing to ask you, as a bureaucrat of this wiki, to translate and review the notification that will be sent to all users, also on this wiki, who will be forced to change their user name on May 27 and will probably need your help with renames. You may also want to help with the pages m:Rename practices and m:Global rename policy. Thank you, Nemo 16:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Methinks your EdwardsBot is a bit trigger-happy... I thought the page in question says that renames will happen by August? Where is the May 27 deadline from ? SJ talk  18:45, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
It was actually supposed to be done in May, but James realised that it would cause huge problems for checking voter eligibility in the Board and FDC elections, see his email to Wikimedia-l. Thehelpfulone 18:48, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


"and" = "amd" in your statement. -- phoebe | talk 18:06, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

The irony is that there's one in your statement too, "foward-looking". :D Thehelpfulone 18:07, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Ha! See, if only someone helpful had told me about it... thanks MzM for the fix. To the below, I am aware things are editable; but a statement is a particularly personal piece of writing, not meant to be changed. It would be especially inappropriate I think for the candidates to start editing each other's statements, even something as minor as spelling. To SJ: apparently this is what happens when we don't proof for each other. :) -- phoebe | talk 00:30, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the catch! And fixes. I'm using... antiquated technology this week to edit. Definitely throws off the proofreading reflexes :) SJ talk  18:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Just a gentle reminder: this site is a wiki. ;-) Be bold, &c. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Now, now ..:) Someone other than me did fix the typos (thanks!). And it's reasonable for one candidate to avoid touching another's orthography, touching on how touchy some are about touching. What if I were using a statement generator based on the 'optimal # of typos in trusted communication'? SJ talk  18:44, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Making all Chapter Agreements publicEdit

Hey SJ, just following up from the discussion a couple of months ago about publicly publishing the chapter agreements that are currently only on the private (and soon to be closed down?) internal wiki. I see Geoff replied a few days ago to your message on his talk page. From a quick count I see that there are 12 links to internal on Chapter Agreements. Do you know who the best people to contact would be to get these chapter agreements published? Thehelpfulone 18:39, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Let me take a look. SJ talk  18:44, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I also just thought that it might be good to add columns for FR2012 and FR2013, and possibly FDC eligiblity. What do you think? Thehelpfulone 19:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Geoff suggests the WMF is fine publishing the custom versions, but the chapter has to agree. Most of the links to internal were to the stock template from 2007, which I've published here.

on WMHK's alternative optionEdit

Thanks for your creativity, SJ. But frankly, we DO NOT see such alternative fesible, as most of cost for chapter-survival (paid staff, audit cost) either lay in long term paid staff, or concurrent expenditure. Even your dear grant adiminstrator can block us on spending the previous remain fund on concurrent expenditure like audit cost. If we cannot finish the audit report, it is a criminal offence, and the whole board can be get sued & fined by the HK gov't [3] [4]. So what can we do? Yes, the FDC decision just force us to disband the chapter. -- ※ JéRRy ~ 雨雨  ※  Was?  ※  18:36, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

That sounds... like an alternate reality to me. If you need funds this year, grants are available. For next year and beyond, there are both grants and FDC. If you get (any) new grant, the previous funds can be applied to that. SJ talk  22:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Amical recognition updateEdit

Thanks for keeping us informed. We look forward to celebrate the resolution. Obviously you are invited to the party.--Gomà (talk) 07:31, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Very kind. :) SJ talk  20:09, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Board QuestionsEdit

Hi. We still wait for a lot of answers from you. You are one of the candidates I really would like to vote for, but I draw a line for myself some time ago: candidates who don't answer the questions (and it is possible to say "I don't know the answer!", this is [some times a good one ;)] an answer) will not get my vote. But time is running away... -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 23:46, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Marcus! I have answered the questions as best I can now. There are certainly some difficult questions where I don't really know the answer :-) but I have shared my best approximation in each case. SJ talk  18:52, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
I know it is hard - I would have problems to answer al lot of these questions ;). But I don't have to *g*. That's why I wrote, it's for me OK not to have an answer. It's better than to construct one. Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:54, 31 May 2013 (UTC)



But why are you manually adding T:x comments? They get added automatically when you mark a page for translation. PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:26, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, now I know what sorts of formatting the parser chokes on :-) Let's see if it minds my including the comments directly. SJ talk  18:29, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
Replied on my talk page. The rest of the discussion (if there is any) should happen on my talk page. I want to keep it in one place. PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:37, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
I left a question for you there relating to this SJ. :-) Thehelpfulone 20:02, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
As we don't yet have Echo on Meta, just a ping to let you know I've replied. Thehelpfulone 22:20, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot!Edit

I notice that you have understood exactly - like Phoebe and Maria - what kind of dilemma we are trying to solve. After almost 10 years, where we are working on this project, we simply see the need, working on new ideas, even apart from established structures.

BTW: Karl and I are Austrian citizen and although we consider ourself - of course - as part of the German language Wikipedia, on the other side, we see ourselves as representatives of regional interests too. --Hubertl (talk) 20:38, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Seen as an extreme voiceEdit

You write, «I have not always succeeded in part because I am seen as an extreme voice [in the WMF board] on these issues; even though within the spectrum of positions in the rest of the community I do not think my positions are particularly extreme.» This is something that worries me a lot, because I hear it constantly: WMF board members with different opinions or backgrounds get marginalised or ignored and are put in a corner. Maybe one day someone will be able to change this unfortunate situation, in the meanwhile my condolences for this hard job: I really do not wish anyone to be elected on the WMF board! I hope you know that many of us felt and shared your pain in these years. --Nemo 09:54, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, Nemo. Perhaps I should find a different phrasing: 'one end of the spectrum of voices on the Board'. I don't mean it to have a negative connotation there, or to suggest there is any marginalisation going on - we are a very consultative and consensus-focused board. But on a small number of issues we take up a broad spectrum of views, and one of them is how much the WMF should direct vs. support the projects. The context there is usually some difficult problem that has not yet been solved; so it is not clear how a solution will come about. Some people believe that the WMF, by being larger and older than many other institutions, naturally knows the best solution to thorny problems; I am not so sure. Sometimes I see the best solutions coming from individuals.
But even on issues where I am the odd Trustee out, I do not feel ignored. And usually, on every issue, we come to a compromise in between the extremes of the spectra of views. SJ talk  02:30, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Candidate questionsEdit


I have a couple of questions regarding your candidate submission:

  1. How the previous board fullfiled tasks, you would like to do in the future?
    The previous Board learned to work together quite well: reaching consensus quickly, and finding alternatives to consensus when needed. We never worked in factions. The Board has also become good at delegating work to committees and to staff groups, without confusion. This required building trust within the whole Foundation, and within the {ED+Board} team, that each part was working as it should. We started to open up the Board process, inviting a Board Visitor to sit in on some of our sessions. And I personally learned a lot through our movement roles process: about how to develop guidelines for the Foundation through community efforts.
  2. How you would evaluate your work in the previous Board?
    I feel good about my work to shift the WMF's definition of movement groups : so that it now pays attention to how much support is given to individuals and small groups; so that chapter successes are learned from, and so that there is also a well-defined place for thematic organizations and individual projects in the Foundation planning and analysis. I tried to bring consensus to the Board even when we had thorny discussions about whose work defines our mission, and how to accept healthy risks. I worked smoothly with the ED in the past two years; who is an important part of any well-functioning board.
    I was not able to get long-term financial planning underway, which is important to me; this took longer than I had hoped. This year, after joining the Audit Committee, I learned how to be more effective in contributing to those plans. And I feel that, despite best efforts, we still spent more time reacting to recent events than planning for the future. These are both things that the next Board should address. It should significantly improve the WMF's long-term plans, and spend much less time on short-term drama.
  3. What do you think about funds redistribution to the Chapters? Why chapters always grunt about it? What should be done in this area? And it something, why it wasnt already done?
    I think a chapter in every country or region is, when developed properly, an effective way to organize partnerships, funds, and other resources. The WMF initially encouraged all regions to develop chapters, to hire staff and 'professionalize', and to acquire funds. Then starting three years ago, this advice changed; I think chapters complain in part because of that shift in expectations. In community-drive projects, there are many alternatives to 'professionalizing' and many ways to distribute resources without a lot of staff. In the past few years, the movement has seen amazing organizations without staff, and amazing projects without organizations (such as WLM). The WMF wants to support this sort of work without prejudice -- based on its value to the projects. And wants to redistribute funds to supports each part of the world, not only proportional to how much that country donated. This required changing how fundraising and allocation worked. This has led to the FDC and more reporting; which is not as convenient as the early fundraisers. That's another source of complaint. Finally, both chapters and the WMF think that the other group isn't always making good use of funds. This is a failure in communication and shared metrics.
    I think we need to improve peer review among the {WMF, Chapters, and Thematic Orgs}, so that each of those groups trusts the work and progress of the others, and all feel that they are united in working towards our mission. We need to unify our metrics, and discuss the different goals in the strategies of different chapters. We need to prioritize translation for this level of planning and communication. And we need to describe more fully the work that only Chapters and that only the WMF can do: so that each can delegate work to the other when needed. Some of this has been done, slowly. But sharing internal planning across organizations is hard; and much of this sharing requires better multilingual communication. For instance, the detailed strategy work that WM-SE and WM-FR and WM-IT and the WMF do is, in each case, in a single language; with only summaries translated into some of the others.
    Certainly. I've mainly tried to move as much communication and documentation as possible to Meta. Including Board resolutions, so they can be more easily commented on and translated, reports and Chapter Agreements, and useful internal WMF documents whenever I run across them. I have refused to join any new private wikis (other than the board-wiki) myself; we switched having a separate movement roles wiki to publishing all materials on Meta. And most of the Board-level work that I have been part of, including drafts of many resolutions proposed to the Board, have in the past 2 years been developed on Meta.
  4. How "one" can change all organisation?
    Some changes require many people. But a single person can serve as an example; and remind others to do things they already want to do, but may forget. In our case, much of the conflicts on our projects, including debates about what software to write, and Foundation-Chapter-Partner tension, is self-inflicted and self-fulfilling. A bit of mediation, and remaining calm in the face of a momentary crisis, can help avoid blow-ups and distractions.

Thank you very much for answers.

Thank you for your questions. SJ talk 


--Juandev (talk) 10:10, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Best wishesEdit

Hi Samuel I just wanted to;

  1. thank you for all your effort on Wiki,
  2. wish you best for the election; it's good if people who get up the learning curve are able to contribute over a long period (ego declines, understanding increases, wisdom rises; value and effectiveness increases),
  3. say that if in future you see a need for someone like me (early retired senior investment banker, check my edits for areas of current interest particularly in mental health, serving on various boards) on one of the boards then give me a nudge, because I'm motivated to see Wiki thrive and develop. In particular I'm hungry that Wiki be perceived as having a higher standard of content than it now is by the general public; Wiki has enormous potential to help mankind even more in future, and this is a key issue in it doing so.

All the best, JCJC777

Thank you JCJC, for your kind words and your interest. I agree that we must reach a new level of perceived use -- including welcoming the legions of disaffected academics who would like to contribute to not-for-profit publications. Do you know other community members interested in that same goal? We may also need input from talented investment experts, as we are considering building an endowment and setting up a more aggressive long-term investment plan. Right now we have $30M+ of our reserve in conservative low-yield instruments. SJ talk  19:56, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations on another two yearsEdit

Congratulations on a job well done, Samuel. Your support of the foundation over the last two years and the two years before that has been exemplary. I'm very happy to have your continued support of the projects under the WMF umbrella. Congratulations and thanks for your efforts. 01:35, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Samuel, I hope you are doing fine. Thanks for your answers and the most important thing: Congratulations! I am really glad you made it again, you really deserved it. Take real care and keep on doing your good work! Claudi Balaguer/Capsot 19:48, 25 June 2013 (UTC) (So funny not to be blocked or reverted when using anonymous IPs... but I might be speaking too quickly...).
  • Congratulations on your win in WMF board Election. Best wishes --Arjunaraoc (talk) 07:02, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
   Auguri e in bocca al lupo, Sj  Klaas|Z4␟V
  08:06, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! Many hands make light work. :) SJ talk  11:04, 28 June 2013 (UTC)


Thanks Samuel! Right back at you. :-) The next two years promise to be interesting! Kind regards, Raystorm (talk) 10:29, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

input wantedEdit


I'll have a think and come back to you.

Initial thoughts;

Use the $30m to attack the core issue of Wiki content being seen as poor quality by some people; 1. Pay for analysis of which entries are seen as low quality (certain categories?), 2. Pay good editors to improve those articles. No point in money in bank (esp. when can turn on donations, as you say); let's use it aggressively to raise Wiki quality.

$30m is very small in investment terms. Easy to lose significant % in management and other fees. Nowhere near big enough for own fund.

Using first year students to edit seems bad idea to me; almost designed to produce sloppy editing, and thus to damage the Wiki franchise. How about paying leading academics to quality check articles in their area of competence; maybe have a badge (red triangle?) on those articles to indicate 'checked by an expert'.

If we have resources let's invest them right in our core activity, to build Wiki credibility, to attack weak articles, and thus raise the perceived value of all the other articles. Thinking e.g. like Bezos 'get big fast': let's focus all our resources on lifting Wiki quality. That's the best way to maximise how much value Wiki has and how much good it does.

Best wishes, JCJC

Internal wiki discussionEdit

Hi SJ, as previously discussed, I've started something at Talk:Wikimedia_wikis#Are we re-purposing Internal?, please add your thoughts there. :-) Thehelpfulone 00:02, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Re: Sending to wikimedia-announce: too much?Edit

I like your suggestion of a condensed monthly summary of tech–related news that you brought at Talk:Tech/News; would you mind expanding on the idea a bit? :-) odder (talk) 19:43, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Global Economic MapEdit

Hi SJ,

Would you be interested to give a comment on the Global Economic sister project proposal on Wikipedia?

Thank you, Mcnabber091 (talk) 02:39, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll have to take a closer look at it. This sort of map is clearly needed; though many such projects can be realized within an existing sister project - as a new type of page, to begin with. SJ talk  18:07, 19 August 2013 (UTC)


at meta isnt even matching the simplest rules of politeness: - how rude will it get here?--Angel54 5 (talk) 19:52, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


Hi Sj! Do you think this proposal has any chance of being revived in the near future? It had a lot of promise. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:02, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Sj. You have new messages at User talk:Programs:Share_Space/Questions.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SarahStierch (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for these two ideas: coming back into vogue in 2014. SJ talk 

Irregularities on Croatian WikipediaEdit

Sj, I'm setting up a new page format for info on problems with Croatian Wikipedia and I've moved your contributions from the old page to here. Please let me know if all looks ok. Also, we're planning to open the pages for submissions soon, so any feedback on the layout & instructions is very welcome. Thank you! Miranche (talk) 17:34, 27 September 2013 (UTC)


I have sent you an email, would you be so kind when you read it to send me an answer. Thank you! SpeedyGonsales (talk) 18:52, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the email. Replied! SJ talk  01:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Resolution:Media about living peopleEdit

Thanks. JKadavoor Jee 06:22, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

The Dutch version is not updated. I'd like to do it, but have no edit rights there. Can you give them to me, please? Thank you in advance,  Klaas|Z4␟V:  22:19, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
You mean the original resolution? The new resolution is posted in Dutch, and looks up to date. 22:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Same problem in French, not updated on the WMF site. Ideally the amended texts on the WMF site should be resubmitted for translating updates here in Meta, and further reviewed for updating on the WMF site. But it would be simpler to have these texts maintained only here, by locking translations once they are approved. The WMF site would then just host a local mirror of the last validated translations. verdy_p (talk) 22:56, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


dear Sj, I read you created a poster page here on meta quite a long time ago. I also read that posters where part of the submissions for Wikimania in different years. I think now is really a needed format since there is a multiplication of education projects, GLAMs experiences, Wikimedia chapters and affiliates and tools, which is difficult to track. Posters can provide simple and short overview, a link to get further documentation and the chance to cross experiences we didn't know about jet. I would like to prepare some posters for the GLAM exhibition and event in Lugano 2014 I'm working for (by Spring 2014) and i think the posters can also be great to reduce the number of panels at Wikimania (it is related to the bidding we are submitting for 2015). Still interested in it? can you provide some hints? can you maybe suggest people I should contact? can we resurrect the poster page? I think Wikimedia chapters and people promoting projects can be willing to help in making some of them but i wanted to see if i can get a graphic design to make the template to assure a nice level of visual satisfaction (sic). thanks, --iopensa (talk) 16:58, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Beautiful idea. I would contact the current Program Chair for Wikimania 2014, and the wikimania mailing list to discuss it for future years. SJ talk  17:23, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks,   Done. --iopensa (talk) 11:49, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Croatian Wikipedia evidence pagesEdit

Hello Sj! GregorB suggested I should contact you for advice. Back in September 2013 he & I have started the pages for gathering information about alleged irregularities on Croatian Wikipedia ("evidence pages", in short). The pages have benefited greatly from GregorB's experience & judgement but he has since semi-retired, and I'm left as the only fully committed Wikipedian managing the pages. While I am quite confident I can see the process through, another pair of experienced eyes that could spare even partial attention to it would be immensely helpful.

What remains to be done is unlikely to be very involved. After a sufficient period of time for comments and late submissions (currently being decided, likely 30 days), the evidence pages need to be closed for good and archived. I am not expecting much traffic during this time, in part because the saga has been going on since last autumn and fatigue has set in on many sides.

I'd very much appreciate any advice or assistance in managing the process in the remaining time it's active.

Many thanks! Miranche (talk) 04:19, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Miranche, I am still thinking about this. Clearly it is an important sort of problem to address. And something that the stewards may be in the best place to evaluate. I am trying to understand how current stewards feel about the issue, so that we can set expectations about how we can collectively respond to it and future issues like it. SJ talk  22:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)


At 07:53(I think UTC), 24 February 2014 you changed the Discussion page for the TOU Amendment and made a new subject "Rewording and revisions" One of my posts were moved along with a couple others. I initially thought it was deleted and was a little sad, but I found out what actually happened and I just wanted to thank you for making the page so much nicer. Thank you for your kindness.Peoplez1k (talk) 08:08, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

You are welcome :) SJ talk 

Proposal to create a genealogy wiki using WikidataEdit

I recently added some comments proposing to create a new genealogy-oriented wiki on top of Wikidata that I hope to get your input on if you have time. Thanks.--Dallan (talk) 00:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikimedia genealogy projectEdit

Please visit this page if you wish to contribute to a centralized discussion about a Wikimedia genealogy project. Thank you! --Another Believer (talk) 19:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Upcoming IdeaLab Events: IEG Proposal ClinicsEdit

Hello, Sj! 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

wmf:Resolution:FDC recognition for the Centre for the Internet and SocietyEdit

Hello Sj, I noticed this resolution today. I'm sure you've been fully transparent with(in) the WMF about your connection to the Centre for the Internet and Society (and many in Wikimedia have some, of course; we're close allies), but the public recording is not very clear/transparent. It would be better if wmf:Minutes/2013-11-24 contained one line, or footnote, like "Sam has declared $WHATEVER with CIS, including hosting service for a market value of 0.01 $/y". --Nemo 09:20, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello Nemo. These are two different Centers, related only in name... one of the things that happens when one's project name is not trademarked.
Harvard's Berkman Center for the Internet and Society, which hosted Wikimania in 2006 and where I am a Fellow this year, does also run services like the Harvard Law School blogs. I would definitely excuse myself from any discussion involving them.
There are sister centers at Stanford and Oxford, with no governance or project overlap, but also funded or founded in part by the same family. I would note the connection, though might not abstain from discussions involving them if the rest of the Board considered there was no conflict.
Then there are other centers also focused on the Internet and Society - 6-10 of them by now, including the Bangalore Centre - which share areas of interest, exchange ideas or coauthor research. Some of these were inspired by the Berkman Center, and most are called 'partner centers' and hold a joint meeting of like-minded centers every few years. However these have no governance, funding, or founding team connections. I don't know of a reason for there to be even a potential conflict here. Do you? Or was this just a matter of name confusion?
Thank you for your attention to such details. SJ talk  14:47, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Hah! What an embarrassment; thanks for the kind reply. I guess the first time (in January) I read it properly, only the second read was out of context and I confused myself. We have a CIS in Turin too and I know the Indian CIS of course, I'd normally know that it couldn't be anything else.
In a more formal board like my university's, ambiguity is not allowed and full addresses are always used; in WMF perhaps slightly more context for those arriving on a page out of nowhere could help. If not "CIS India" maybe "CIS (Bangalore)" or something, no idea. But really, just my fault not actually reading the resolution. --Nemo 10:22, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Belated note: you are right, we should fix the name of such resolutions so they are unambiguous. SJ talk 

Editor recruitment in sitenoticeEdit

Some "call to action" experiences, made by the community bottom-up, go well with little effort.[5] Any idea how to consolidate information on this sort of activity? I'm not even sure in what existing Meta page to place links/brief summaries. We discuss this regularly, e.g. [6] [7] [8] (recently, with an undue focus over the ill-designed Philippines banner [9] [10]) but such stuff only works if grassroot, so we need to collect past experiences. (My favourite approach is digging WikiStats tables and hunt for explanations of the biggest peaks in the various wikis; it's very time consuming though.) --Nemo 07:50, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I love the idea of capturing peaks in wikistats. Looking at both outside and internal referrals. Are referral logs public, in any form? SJ talk  17:46, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, we have stats:wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOrigins.htm. But it's such a mass of data that even massive aggregation results in long tables, it would need some true genius to come up with more detailed but still digestible visualisations. --Nemo 20:38, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Global checkuser policy and the boardEdit

Hello Sj,

As you might have known, ever since login.wikimedia was created, the stewards have been using it as a sort of global checkuser platform. After a discussion a few months back, some stewards even leave their checkuser bit on permanently there, compensating for this by logging every CU action that is done here. With this in mind, and the fact that when SUL finalization is completed there will be the potential for a global checkuser extension, I think it is about time that the 9 year old checkuser policy should reflect the current reality. Right now, it says that only Ombudsmen have global checkuser access, but it's talking about something completely different - at the advent of the policy, nobody was planning for the ability to be able to check from a centralized location (loginwiki now, meta if an extension is ever made), so to them "global" meant checkuser access individually on all wikis with no centralized accountability. We compensate for this with the above-mentioned loginwiki statistics page.

Given that the checkuser policy is something which derives its legitimacy from the board, I thought I'd come to you about this first. I imagine some sort of global vote might be necessary to update the policy, but I'd like to hear what the board has to say first, if you would be able to bring it up with them.

Thanks, Ajraddatz (talk) 17:07, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

A fine point. Yes, this is different from what was once imagined. Do you have a proposed revision to the CU policy in mind? I'd like to see the next update to that policy come from the community, with legal support from the group that works on the privacy policy (currently, that is staff w/ community input). SJ talk  07:15, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for the slow reply, been busy IRL. I do have an idea of what I'd like to see, but nothing in writing as of yet. I think that a global checkuser would be acceptable with a centralized log and published statistics, so that people could see who was doing what. I could get to work on a proposal I suppose. Ajraddatz (talk) 05:36, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
this would be a good step. You might ping the other stewards to work on it with you, and perhaps file a bug against it so developers are thinking about the problem as well.SJ talk  19:57, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
An actual global checkuser tool is something off in the future after SUL finalization. For now, the policy could consider a loginwiki check to be a global check, since essentially it is. I'll start writing one on a subpage of the checkuser policy. Ajraddatz (talk) 20:20, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Ajraddatz, what are your thoughts on this now? SJ talk  18:51, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

User group affiliation rulesEdit

Sj, concerning your email to the WM-l, yes, it looks like the "history of projects" was inappropriate. In the other temporal direction, did the board have in mind that a user group might be a temporary thing, perhaps created just for one large event? (That would be unfortunate, in my reckoning, but perhaps hard to legislate against.) Tony (talk) 03:50, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, the restriction needs to be removed. At the time there was probably a fear of a sudden flood of requests, but by now things got stable, better make things simpler. --Nemo 06:03, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Not for one event, no. But over time, just as wikiprojects come and go, it was expected that user groups would form and dissipate. A group focused on a single major project, like the importing of the 1 million images released by the British Library and related partnerships with Flickr and other importers, would make sense and might only last a couple of years. SJ talk  06:43, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Right, no need to concern the possibility of trivial temporariness; and AffCom would probably pick that up anyway and ask probing questions as to the need for affiliation in that case. Tony (talk) 08:39, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Sj, I've been taking a look at the affiliation models for user groups, thorgs, and chapters. They need a revamp, in my view; there's copy-edit stuff, to harmonise the three pages; there's probably uncontroversial harmonisation by inserting/removing whole points; and there might be a few issues that need higher-level discussion.

One thing troubles me for which I lack insights to form a view: "Minimum rights" include "Simplified access to grants", for chapters and user groups (strangely, not thorgs). But what does "simplified" mean in this context? Tony (talk) 05:00, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Simplified: grant reviews should be based on a few metrics: trust; capacity for work; and quality of proposal. Affiliation, by virtue of organizing metadata about an organization and providing a template for sharing its work, should reduce the time it takes to assess trust and capacity, simplifying the process. SJ talk  23:31, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Samuel, thanks for explaining. It's rather opaque, I think; perhaps it needs to be spelled out where used, or reframed? Tony (talk) 08:07, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


Strategy IIEdit

Thank for the invitation, sorry for the delay. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 17:29, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome Ad, hope to see your thinking there :) SJ talk  08:30, 13 June 2014 (UTC)


Good day, I have rewritten and completed the Wikilang proposal page. Could you give it a look and tell us what else does it need? Thanks, Amqui (talk) 04:44, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Clarification on new terms of use clause needed on CommonsEdit

Hello Sj, could you and perhaps other members of the Board of Trustees perhaps comment at c:Commons:Requests for comment/Alternative paid contribution disclosure policy, specifically to clarify the Board's intentions wrt my concern in c:Special:Diff/126802777? I'm sure many people on Commons would appreciate your input, thanks. darkweasel94 (talk) 19:04, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, there was further discussion there to clarify; I hope the result was clear. SJ talk  00:53, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Delphic imagesEdit

Lieber Samuel, danke für die Nachricht!

Das letzte Mal hat "User talk:Delphico" 21 October 2010 geschrieben: "The International Delphic Council granted the permission for the following files in wikimedia: Competition Baguio 2007.gif Parade jeju 2009.gif Castalia spring Delphi.jpg Delphico (talk)". Ich glaube er könnte das Gesagte bestätigen auch für alle andere "images uploaded by User:Delphico", weil viele davon stehen auch auf IDC-webseite und IDC-facebook.

Ich kann nur die Nachricht (für Delphico) weiterleiten an die officielle Adresse E-Mail: Und zusätzlich an: - siehe hier: Get in touch.

Deswegen bitte ich um Aufschub! Sonst kann ich nicht helfen. Danke im Voraus! --DarDar (talk) 09:45, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Vielen dank DarDar, fragen ist eine gute Idee. SJ talk  17:06, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Ein großes Dankeschön für die Hilfe hier ! Hoffentlich wird das alles bald völlig geklärt... --DarDar (talk) 17:30, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Leider sind noch viele images gelöscht. Gestern war 90, heute nur 62 in Category:International Delphic Council. Jemand ist sehr ungeduldig... --DarDar (talk) 08:07, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Hm. I regret I couldn't save them from deletion. I don't know how to prevent such bulk deletion other than having a better scratch space where well-categorized uploads are always welcome and this sort of behavior is not allowed. In this case, the archiveteam may be able to help (though it may be too small an effort for them) SJ talk  02:06, 24 October 2014 (UTC)


this is old clutter. But make u aware of my newest entry there. --Angel54 5 (talk) 12:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. SJ talk  05:32, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

I was gonna say that!Edit

I presume you are familiar with - Reasonably efficient interwiki transclusion. Rich Farmbrough 05:10 10 August 2014 (GMT).

Yes :)

An ugh momentEdit

Gday Sj. Had meant to catch you for more than that brief moment at WM2014 when the stewards were hanging out, however, out paths didn't seem to cross. Or that was actually, was how it seemed, then I am told recently that I was sitting near you after breakfast on the Monday morning. If you thought that I was being unsociable, then my apologies, but I didn't have my glasses on, and couldn't see [redacted]. So <ugh> and maybe at another time I will get that chance to chat.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:35, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

billinghurst Indeed! You were quite sociable; wikimania is often full of brief moments, and it was good to see you. Let's chat sometime, if only via the magic of the wiki. (belatedly) SJ talk  00:53, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

An important message about renaming usersEdit

Dear Sj,

Your help is greatly needed during this process and going forward in the future if, as a bureaucrat, renaming users is something that you do or have an interest in participating in. The Wikimedia Stewards have set up, and are in charge of, a new community usergroup on Meta in order to share knowledge and work together on renaming accounts globally, called Global renamers. Stewards are in the process of creating documentation to help global renamers to get used to and learn more about global accounts and tools and Meta in general as well as the application format. As transparency is a valuable thing in our movement, the Stewards would like to have at least a brief public application period. If you are an experienced renamer as a local bureaucrat, the process of becoming a part of this group could take as little as 24 hours to complete. You, as a bureaucrat, should be able to apply for the global renamer right on Meta by the requests for global permissions page on 1 September, a week from now.

In the meantime please update your local page where users request renames to reflect this move to global renaming, and if there is a rename request and the user has edited more than one wiki with the name, please send them to the request page for a global rename.

Stewards greatly appreciate the trust local communities have in you and want to make this transition as easy as possible so that the two groups can start working together to ensure everyone has a unique login identity across Wikimedia projects. Completing this project will allow for long-desired universal tools like a global watchlist, global notifications and many, many more features to make work easier.

If you have any questions, comments or concerns about the SUL finalisation, read over the Help:Unified login page on Meta and leave a note on the talk page there, or on the talk page for global renamers. You can also contact me on my talk page on meta if you would like. I'm working as a bridge between Wikimedia Foundation Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Stewards, and you to assure that SUL finalisation goes as smoothly as possible; this is a community-driven process and I encourage you to work with the Stewards for our communities.

Thank you for your time. -- Keegan (WMF) talk 18:24, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Keegan. SJ talk 

InterWiki Project file MoveEdit

When I was at Wikipedia, one of my entries entitled, "Phosphate reaction", was deleted among many. Most of the others are not difficult for me to regenerate at Wikiversity from my copies, but this particular one had a lot of work put into it and the regeneration at Wikiversity would be an enormous undertaking. Is there a way to move the deleted file to Wikiversity so that I can continue working on it? Marshallsumter (talk) 00:06, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Marshall, Sj is, among other things, an en.wp sysop and any en.wp sysop can provide you with a page. If he is not willing, you may ask any en.wp sysop, you have email enabled there, and this may be better done by email anyway.
Sj, Marshall, if you don't recall the case, was banned from en.wikipedia in 2011 for "massive copyright violations." He had done a great deal of work, and from what I saw, had made large numbers of small quotations, possibly legitimate under fair use. He was never warned. When he came to Wikiversity, and started creating similar content, he responded to warnings. He has never been disruptive on Wikiversity, and is now a probationary custodian there. If he is emailed an export of the page, he could import it there easily. I'd suggest exporting the entire page history, so that all edits are acknowledged in the import. --Abd (talk) 22:07, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Marshall, see your wv talk page. SJ talk  22:07, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks! --Marshallsumter (talk) 23:52, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to the CentralNotice-admins listEdit

Hi! This bulk email is to let you know about a mailing list used to communicate bug reports and new features in CentralNotice, and to facilitate conversations between the admins. This message is being sent to you because you have the privileges to use the CentralNotice admin interface.

If you use CentralNotice to post or modify notices, please consider joining the list by visiting this page and subscribing yourself:

Thanks, Adam Wight (talk) 00:23, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Fundraising Tech, Wikimedia Foundation

Nice. Thanks Awight (WMF). SJ talk 

Research:Measuring value-addedEdit

Made me think of what you said the other day about over-reliance on editcount. --Nemo 15:59, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, I'd heard about this but hadn't seen the page. Relevant indeed. SJ talk 

Happy new year 2015!Edit

  Happy New Year to you Dear Sj --Grind24 (talk) 23:26, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Grind~ SJ talk  09:38, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Board meetings (and findability on wiki)Edit

Hi SJ, thank you for the updates on the board meetings you posted last Friday. I have to say, I'm having a terrible time finding the agenda, minutes, resolutions, and even schedule of the board meetings on any wiki. Things seem to be spread out over meta, the Foundation wiki, and possibly the board wiki, and it's extremely difficult to find if things are just out of date, if they will still be added, etc. Is there anything I can do to help with keeping this updated? I would love to see WMF Board meetings extended with scheduled upcoming meetings, links to minutes and links to resolutions passed in the meeting, redlinked if they're not available yet, but I'm not sure how I should be going forward. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:59, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, @Martijn Hoekstra:. I agree this should be less spread out. Your help would be welcome. A few things off the top of my head:
  • The meetings page could perhaps use linking from other pages. The more people who add links where they expected to find one, the easier it will be to find. You could help with this.
  • We should keep redlinked lists of the coming year's meetings once they are known.
  • Once minutes are approved the secretary posts them to the Meetings page on the wmf wiki. At least a link to the minutes should be added here at the same time. That way it shows up in Meta's RC, and there is a version one can discuss or transclude.
  • A draft agenda should be posted here on Meta a week in advance of the meeting.
I'll see if our secretary can start doing the last three, but feel free to ping me if that isn't happening by our next monthly meeting (in March: we started short monthly online meetings last quarter).
SJ talk  10:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
If the last three are taken care of, I think the first one will be OK as well: I wasn't sure meetings was the right place for the things I was looking for, because the content wasn't there. Once it is, at least you know when you found it and can stop looking. From now on, I'll add links from places where I expect them to be, but since I now know where to find things, I'm not expecting them in the wrong places anymore. I might still stumble across a few of them though. Being a Wikipedian, I immediately think of navboxes. If everything works with a set format, I could make some navigation templates that would only take the date of that meeting, of the previous meeting and the next meeting as arguments. Would that be helpful at all? For example, a navbox for the minutes of the Feb 6 meeting would have links to the agenda, and to its resolutions, a back and forward link to the minutes of the previous meeting and next meeting, and an uplink to the meetings page. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 17:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I like that idea. A little set of navboxes for each quarter, one quarter per section? SJ talk  18:02, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I did a quick mockup here. Who should I reach out to for a convention on locations for resolutions by meeting (is that useful/needed) and minutes? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 19:48, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Let's define the convention as being two sections on one page: Agenda at the top, minutes at #Minutes. Still have to get them migrated... SJ talk  22:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I thought we would keep separate agenda and minutes pages, but this is fine too, keeping everything together - the downside being less visibility of minutes redlinks, which I'm still concerned about - the foundation wiki is hopelessly out of date too; is still missing the Jan and Feb meeting - but I'm not sure if the reminding effect of a redlink is strong enough to help with minutes being posted. So we'll have the convention board meetings/yyyy-mm-dd as we have now, and that page will hold agenda, minutes, and links to the approved resolutions plus like you said a navigational thingy for all meetings in the quarter (is this useful?) and an uplink to meetings. Is the Q3 A.K.A Q1 full meeting schedule known yet? Should we have redlinks for the meetings which have not yet been scheduled in the quarter, or should we wait with that until we actually know the dates of the meetings? Also pinging PeteForsyth Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Martijn Hoekstra, glad to know you are interested in working on this. I put some work into organizing these on the Foundation Wiki a while back. My focus was more on specific resolutions than on specific meetings, but both are important and closely related. See these categories I created and populated: wmf:Category:Resolutions by year and wmf:Category:Resolutions by type (obviously, lots left to do). It is time consuming work, but I think it's in the interests of all Wikimedia stakeholders to have this stuff well organized so that it can be found. It seems to me that we would be better off if the organizing activity were on Meta, rather than on the WMF wiki -- for a number of reasons, the main ones being that (1) there would be a lower bar to helping out (no need to apply for a WMF wiki account), and (2) there would be obvious talk pages to absorb any slowly evolving discussions on specific resolutions.

If you'd like, I'd be happy to help hash out a plan on how to establish needed infrastructure here on Meta to make this work smoothly. Let me know. -Pete F (talk) 23:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I would, thanks Pete. Should we re-convene elsewhere so we don't polute Sj's talkpage too much? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)


Thank you for using VisualEditor and sharing your ideas with the developers. My apologies if you're getting this message more than once, and/or not in your favorite language.

Hello, Sj,

I am contacting you because you have left feedback about VisualEditor at pages like mw:VisualEditor/Feedback in the past. The Editing team is now asking for your help with VisualEditor. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work well for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too. 

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translatable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:40, 3 April 2015 (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.

23:35, 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

WMF board resolution on user rights processEdit

Please urgently get this topic/resolution scheduled for a meeting, discussed and voted; and express your opinions on the noticeboard. Thanks for your work, Nemo 20:57, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Commented there. Thank you for wording your idea so that it's broadly useful many years into the future. SJ talk  18:10, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for looking into it, Nemo 18:50, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Signpost inquiryEdit

Hi, I've emailed you. Thanks. Tony (talk) 01:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC) Samuel, we need to finalise the responses before the end of today, US eastern time. Did you receive the email? Tony (talk) 03:44, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Tony. Good luck with your analysis. SJ talk  18:10, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees Elections 2015Edit

Dear candidate. My general opinion about administration of Wikimedia is negative. Many texts and images had been removed with pretext of protection of rights of the owners of the copyright owners. The special permissions by the copyright owners were just ignored, and removed together with the files. In particular, this refers to images of the Soviet dissidents and their texts.

Below I suggest only few examples in order to let you know what is happening:Софья_Васильевна_Каллистратова&oldid=93595Леонард_Борисович_Терновский&type=revision&diff=1312548&oldid=585736

I investigated the case and I revealed that many removals were performed by bureaucrat Lozman, who has absolutely no experience with obtaining permission from the copyright owners and does not even remember, who made him bureaucrat. However, this is only example.

Sorry for being late, but I just received the invitation to vote. You still have two days to change my opinion about at least one of the candidates suggested. One example of complain by the author is available at site TORI,,_permission I mention it because it has English version, although many Russian authors were offended in the similar way.

Now I formulate the question:

Do you think it is still possible to handle the cases mentioned?

Do you think that you can find time to deal with the cases mentioned?

Sincerely, Domitori (talk) 08:07, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Meta Collaboration of the Month for June 2015: Events!Edit

Events (discuss) has been selected as the first-ever Meta Collaboration of the Month for June 2015! Join the fun there and in the discussions.--Pharos (talk) 18:58, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Swahili wikipedia - restricted article creationEdit

Hi Sj, I cannot log into phabricator (not even register with different user name), so kindly have a look at and transfer my reply there. Possible? Asante! Kipala (talk) 16:47, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Did you ever attend Wikimania with your money? Talk to us!Edit

TL;DR: Fill a short Wikimania survey, it takes 5 min.

Hi, I'm writing you because you are listed in Wikimania/Frequent attendees. As you probably know by now, Wikimania 2016 Esino Lario wants to achieve a Wikimania format which allows people to "get things done" and leave the conference fully satisfied with the result of their investment of time and other resources (see pillars 2 and 4: ). For this purpose, we consider all audiences (see ).

Participants other than scholarship recipients and reimbursed representatives are one group we heard very little from, but we think they are important because: 1) they have financial resources and help make the Wikimania budget sustainable; 2) they have motivation to share and ideas on what makes Wikimania valuable.

We set up a form mainly to collect names of some such people and talk with them later: if you provide your contact, we may write you on this topic. We may release aggregate data from the resposes; data will be handled by us and the Wikimania 2016 fiscal sponsor "Ecomuseo delle Grigne" (under EU law). Please fill the whole form, it's short!

Feel free to forward this invite to anyone.

Federico Leva and Martin Rulsch
Wikimania 2016 team, scholarships subteam
08:30, 11 September 2015 (UTC)


Hello Sj, may I ask you for some advice? I created a draft for a sister project on my german user account. It's focussed on the needs of children and people, who have certain difficulties in perception. Now I would like to make this project big, but I cannot find an environment for this. The incubator would be perfect, but obviously they will not accept such a project being no new language version. Can you give me some advice what to do? Greetings --Liberipedia (talk) 17:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC) P.S.: I asked the same question here, but then I saw, that the last edit there was in 2013 and I decided to try something else;)

I wonder if @Liberipedia: this is still an idea you have :) WikiSpore exists for this now. –SJ talk  14:12, 14 April 2020 (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)

See notes A IdeaLabLab, Wikipedia_as_the_front_matter_to_all_research.


Have you any news? I am concerned that his plight continues to be eclipsed by the bigger issues in the area. Rich Farmbrough 17:33 10 January 2016 (GMT).

Unfortunately, nothing meaningful. The US Sec. of State mentioned him as an example of people the world should support; but it's very hard to communicate meaningfully with the country, since many diplomats and missions have been recalled. SJ talk  18:05, 10 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. 23:56, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia 15Edit

Hi! Thanks for the positive review! I'll share with the entire Communications team, along with our collaborators, Mule Design. We had an amazing time finding ways to appreciate the years of contributions by so many people, and celebrating it all together. Seeing the visual language used for years to come will be the best possible outcome. I'm having a little trouble understanding your shirt idea, can you say more? Heather Walls (WMF) (talk) 08:29, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Heather, my pleasure. As an example of knowledge-dense design, here is the Iliad printed in its entirety on a shirt, combining the fulltext (if you look closely), one or two colors, and a single icon. Something like this for WP concepts and icons, with full articles or sets of articles on a shirt, might be nice. These designers use an open source toolchain for their kerning and layout, and have thought about how to do something similar with WP article text (with Seth Woodworth). Most articles aren't long enough for exactly the same treatment, but possibly something similar could be done. Just a stray thought, as both the 15 designs and these text designs were on my mind the other day. SJ talk  23:12, 2 February 2016 (UTC)


Movement StrategyEdit

Re: Strategy/2016 and this: I love how fast you move, SJ. :-) --Eekim (talk) 06:54, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Likewise – I hadn't even gotten around to pinging you about it, Eugene! Ahh, the old thrill of wiki culture. SJ talk  07:01, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
:-) --Eekim (talk) 07:08, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

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)

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

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)

Fundraiser for an unexpected death for a very loved woman (Alice Soudelier )Edit

We are raising funds for a funeral of an unexpected death! Any and all donations are greatly appreciated!

What is this?


Do you know why DPLA uses CC-BY-NC-SA on their photos? Nemo 12:39, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Participate in the Inspire Campaign and help address harassment!Edit

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)

Survey on Inspire Campaign for addressing harassmentEdit

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)

(Opt-out instructions)

for (FDC)Edit

just see this page here and reply for improvements and suggestions!BOTFIGHTER (talk) 07:16, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello, SJ. I am ready and...1121HIH1121 (talk)Edit

Hello, SJ.

Please excuse my sudden approach to your page.

Also English is not my native language but I'm fluent. I'm good at Japanese.

I like to learn more so that I know that How I can contribute to our future good as beings.

I have personal experience and knowledge that I could contribute for future education for up commers and my strong determination/s once it fires up.

To be honest, I was strong believer of "Experience" rather than being taught. But I realize that I could share my personal experience and knowledge with you so you could advice me how I could utilize it for the future movement so that those up-commer will be educated. (Early age thinking Technique and exercise and so on).

Please write me. I will be waiting for you.

Very best 1121HIH1121 (talk)

Palmyra bookEdit

Soon out book: "Reviving Palmyra in Multiple Dimensions". About the project Bassel was involved in, too.


Wikimedia and Libraries User Group Steering Committee Election ResultsEdit

Hello everyone! The steering committee election for the Wikimedia and Libraries User Group is finally over and the results you were patiently awaiting for is here! We had many great candidates with awesome skillsets and experience, unfortunately not everyone could make it to the final eight. We are grateful to all the candidates for stepping up and boldly throwing their hat in the ring. It was a difficult choice and they made it. Now, the results. The candidates who made it to the final eight are,

hello Sj,

Regarding Stewards, how was the experience of it in the past? -- Ktsquare (talk) 23:20, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Definitely worth doing; and a block of time as well. I stopped because I was quite busy; not because it wasn't interesting and important. –SJ talk  19:54, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
I have sent you a question on an email regarding wikimania. I would also like to add another question about where I can find more about stweardship. -- Ktsquare (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Advisor to GlobalFactSyncEdit

Hi Sj, in order to become advisor, you need to click on "Join" in the proposal infobox. We submitted the proposal today. Cover letter on talk page. We will work through the list we sent you earlier to announce the proposal.

Also it would be nice if you could make a bridge to Wikicite somehow. We should discuss this matter on the talk page. It could be one of the 10 sync targets.

Still good to pursue the Wikicite connection! –SJ talk 

Wikimedia and Libraries User Group Steering Committee Election Voting PhaseEdit

Hello Sj! We are happy to announce that the steering committee election 2019 is now open for voting. Because you have joined the user group before 28 February 2019, you are eligible to vote. Not unlike last year, you can vote support for multiple candidates, at most one support for each candidate. Also, oppose votes are not allowed, but discussions are welcome on the talk page.

On behalf of the steering committee,


via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:43, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

WPMEDF membershipEdit

Thank you for voting in the election. Your membership however appears to have expired. Please renew via this [LINK]. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:22, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

原来你的User Page也在Meta,哈哈Edit

所以,你是否感觉到Meta Page应该有多语言支持,比如如果有个按钮可以为页面提供多个来源的翻译(Google / Yandex / Bing / Youdao) Xinbenlv (talk) 18:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

So wonderful to meet you!Edit

SJ - it was great to meet and chat at DPLA Fest this past week! I'd love to hear more about what you're up to and your thoughts about reaching out to the next generation of Wikidata contributors/users. Cheers! Will (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:54, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Likewise @Will (Wiki Ed):, great to see you in Chicago. Ideas: try some public-interest campaigns; matching datans + librarians + archivists; have a simple #Wikidating app; have a Wikidata track around credibility in November. –SJ talk  22:02, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Journal hosting sister project proposalEdit

Hello, I'm leaving a note on the talkpages of those on the old SPCom list to ensure that you have seen this proposal discussion for a journal hosting sister project. I realise that the process these days is slightly different, but I'm keen to make sure that we get as broad feedback as possible, so please consider to adding a note to comment/support/oppose. We hope to submit a cover letter to the WMF trustees in the coming month. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 03:47, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Wonderful, thanks TS and keep us updated :) –SJ talk 

Wikimania session follow-upEdit

I just saw your name in the interested attendees' list here and thought of sharing with you this message that you can now watch the Small Wiki Toolkits project page on Meta wiki for new announcements: You can also write on the talk page to discuss ideas for building technical capacity in a small wiki. SSethi (WMF) (talk) 21:10, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Cool! emufarmers may also be interested :) –SJ talk  00:08, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Re: copyrights on sporeEdit

Per your question at wikispore:Wiki talk:Copyrights, the problem with CC BY 4.0 is incorporating text in 3.0 together. It's easier to move forward than it is to move backward, so wikispore: could accept content from (e.g.) wikt:simple: but not vice versa. I think the danger is overblown but I guess everyone wants to be excessively cautious. That's my understanding. —Justin (koavf)TCM 02:58, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! No concerns on my end, just curious. –SJ talk  16:00, 9 June 2020 (UTC)


Did you mean to put this in your userspace? --Yair rand (talk) 03:02, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, thanks Yair rand - please delete the mainspace rdr! –SJ talk  03:05, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Done by a talk page stalker. – Ajraddatz (talk) 04:47, 3 September 2020 (UTC)