Wikimedia Forum
| ← Discussion pages | Wikimedia Forums | Archives → |
 The Wikimedia Forum is a central place for questions, announcements and other discussions about the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. (For discussion about the Meta wiki, see Meta:Babel.) You can reply to a topic by clicking the "[edit]" link beside that section, or you can start a new discussion. |
- About Meta
- Discussion pages
- Request pages
- Policies and guidelines
- Information and statistics
- Categories
- Help pages
Participate:
 |
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.
|
New Project Proposal - Wikipragmatica[edit]
Hello everyone. Noob here. I've submitted a new project proposal that re-indexes Wikipedia, but also does a whole bunch of other nifty stuff. I look forward to our discussion. I've included the description below.
This proposal presents a paraphrase graph database extension to Wikidata. The intent is to create a directed graph of paraphrase nodes and retained context edges initially of Wikipedia content, but ultimately Internet wide. Initially focusing on unstructured data (text), the vision is to be media agnostic harvesting sentence equivalent information. This foundational construct is intended to support a wide range of uses from indexing to misinformation detection to knowledge representation to enterprise work management.
Is the usage of Wikimedia logos in community publication fine?[edit]
I seek to use File:Wikimedia logo white.svg in the PDF version of the Wikipedian, one of the zhwiki local Wikimedia community publication. Does the usage of the logo meet Trademark policy#policy-noncommercial? Or I have to apply for a license as Trademark policy#policy-publications says, since PDF is a sort of publication? —— Eric Liu（留言．百科用戶頁） 15:58, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
- It depends on how the logo is used in the Wikipedian. Ruslik (talk) 20:02, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Ruslik0:If it were solely used as a symbol on the back cover, to show that the Wikipedian is a Wikimedia community publication? —— Eric Liu（留言．百科用戶頁） 09:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Ericliu1912: See Trademark policy. --ZabeMath (talk) 17:40, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Ruslik0:If it were solely used as a symbol on the back cover, to show that the Wikipedian is a Wikimedia community publication? —— Eric Liu（留言．百科用戶頁） 09:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Please no Google Form or Google Meet or whatever proprietary :) ask us how![edit]
Hello :) Talking with User:Civvi (WMF) (for the Code of Conduct survey) and User:JHernandez (WMF) (for the WikiTech Annual Survey) and User:CKoerner (WMF) (for the Community Wishlist) and here and there, we were reasoning that it would be better if everyone would pay more attention to respect digital freedoms and the privacy of other people. Maybe with this rule of thumb: "in private you do what you want, but in public you give your best!" In short, Google Form and Google Meet are not our friends :D I don't want to repeat myself so here my latest thoughts: Talk:Wikimania 2021/Call for participation#Please no Google Form. Having said that. How can someone contribute to stop this trend as soon as possible and as broadly as possible at least for the Wikimedia Foundation staff? Feel free to include me in whatever discussion and I will do my best to find a good freedom-respectful solution! Thank you for your work! <3 --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 11:01, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- Hey @Valerio Bozzolan (Boz), I just saw your ping here. Since you've posted Greg replied on wm-l with an update on Foundation use of the tools you mention. I encourage you and others reading this to read and engage there if desired. CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 14:43, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
- You can't do everything yourself AND get work done. When it comes to WMF and google forms, don't look at the forms. Look at it like 'WMF buys a certified data silo with very capable apps, backups and uptime guarantees from Google at a ridiculously low price'. Taking any component out of that will only increase the overall price for WMF. It's economics. In my opinion, the only way to improve this is to make something better than the big companies can make and turn it into an independent non-profit organization from which the WMF can buy the resource. Because it's not just the software; it is the hosting, the integrations and the knowhow. This by definition is hard as the big companies are well funded and have the customer base to support it and anything else likely will not. It can be done of course WMF itself is such an example in another space, but it was 'first' and here you won't be first. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:20, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- I know my position on this is different than many (and at one time nearly all) of the rest of the movement, but I will just say that I applaud the foundation prioritizing security and functionality over FOSS. I'd feel differently if we were ever talking about moving away from mediawiki to something proprietary but outside our core expertise in FOSS (wiki software), I don't know that our mission (advancing the world's knowledge) needs to be advanced by using FOSS. Of course where the evaluation of security/functionality is close between FOSS and propiratary sofware, let's use FOSS but it should, in my opinion, be a secondary rather than primary consideration. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:51, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
- I think Microsoft Teams is more user friendly, for what it’s worth. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:13, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- @TheDJ and TonyBallioni: I understand that I'm a minority spending lot of time trying to free myself, incidentally creating a Free encyclopedia :^) I don't want to bother anyone with my contributions. @CKoerner (WMF): Thank you. I was very happy to be able to free the Wikimania 2021/Call for volunteers in the last hours. Please, if you see another Google Form, feel free to count on all my support! You are all welcome in this project: Wikimedia Italia/LimeSurvey. --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 10:37, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- I find Teams and Google Meet both very crash-heavy for those without good internet. Zoom is significantly more tolerant Nosebagbear (talk) 22:46, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- Hello! Today I received another Google Form from Wikimedia Foundation about the UCoC :( How can I contribute in stopping this trend? Feel free to try this powerful and libre solution: WMI-LimeSurvey. --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 09:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, they keep using this for privacy concsious people unusable junk despite knowing they exclude lots of people with this, but obviously they don't care about privacy. Google must not be used, otherwise the report has far less value because it excludes large swaths of the community. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) Hold the election 09:52, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Proprietary is not "bad" and free is not "good". It depends on the specifics of the product, its vendor, the license and the legal position. It is entirely possible for proprietary software to have high security standards and not allow the exploitation of the data by the owner of the product. E.g., on the wm-l thread "...our Enterprise agreement with Google prevents Google from accessing the data for their own uses and requires them to inform the Foundation of any requests for data that they receive prior to disclosure". This is a better outcome than a free product that is less secure and may result in data loss. It's a very simplistic argument to focus just on the licensing of a product and not on the full range of issues. I challenge the assertion that "large swaths" of the community won't use a Google product, but even if it is true, using a product that is non-intuitive (for example) will exclude a similarly large "swath" of the community. QuiteUnusual (talk) 11:20, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Well. Tomorrow we can also add Google Analytics and other proprietary trackers into all Wikipedia editions, just to see if people is happy to have "this very secure piece of code" executed on their computer. But I really suggest to do not try to promote this POV in this movement. --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 11:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Well, no one is proposing that. dwf² ✉ 12:00, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Google is Google Analytics, they use everything to gain private data to make profit, they are absolutely not trustworthy for anything, they are plain evil. Using Google (or any other of these big data privacy raping behemoths) for anything in a free software context is a strict no-go. And it's a huge difference to use proprietary software on your own servers, without the proprietor having access to it, and doing anything on a server at Google, as there is no such thing as privacy with Google, they don't know the concept of privacy, they live from destroying privacy. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) Hold the election 17:41, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
- Well. Tomorrow we can also add Google Analytics and other proprietary trackers into all Wikipedia editions, just to see if people is happy to have "this very secure piece of code" executed on their computer. But I really suggest to do not try to promote this POV in this movement. --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 11:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Proprietary is not "bad" and free is not "good". It depends on the specifics of the product, its vendor, the license and the legal position. It is entirely possible for proprietary software to have high security standards and not allow the exploitation of the data by the owner of the product. E.g., on the wm-l thread "...our Enterprise agreement with Google prevents Google from accessing the data for their own uses and requires them to inform the Foundation of any requests for data that they receive prior to disclosure". This is a better outcome than a free product that is less secure and may result in data loss. It's a very simplistic argument to focus just on the licensing of a product and not on the full range of issues. I challenge the assertion that "large swaths" of the community won't use a Google product, but even if it is true, using a product that is non-intuitive (for example) will exclude a similarly large "swath" of the community. QuiteUnusual (talk) 11:20, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, they keep using this for privacy concsious people unusable junk despite knowing they exclude lots of people with this, but obviously they don't care about privacy. Google must not be used, otherwise the report has far less value because it excludes large swaths of the community. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) Hold the election 09:52, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hello! Today I received another Google Form from Wikimedia Foundation about the UCoC :( How can I contribute in stopping this trend? Feel free to try this powerful and libre solution: WMI-LimeSurvey. --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 09:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- I find Teams and Google Meet both very crash-heavy for those without good internet. Zoom is significantly more tolerant Nosebagbear (talk) 22:46, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- @TheDJ and TonyBallioni: I understand that I'm a minority spending lot of time trying to free myself, incidentally creating a Free encyclopedia :^) I don't want to bother anyone with my contributions. @CKoerner (WMF): Thank you. I was very happy to be able to free the Wikimania 2021/Call for volunteers in the last hours. Please, if you see another Google Form, feel free to count on all my support! You are all welcome in this project: Wikimedia Italia/LimeSurvey. --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 10:37, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Second office hours - Call for Feedback: Community Board seats[edit]
Hi all, I want to announce the second office hours for the Call for Feedback: Community Board seats.
The Call for Feedback about Community Board seats selection processes is happening February 1 and March 14. With the help of a team of community facilitators, we are organizing conversations and gathering feedback. It is not too late to join the conversation! Talk to you all soon! Best, JKoerner (WMF) (talk) 23:05, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Wikivoyage Mobile App[edit]
I wrote this same article to Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) page but I share my ideas one more time to here. Wikivoyage is one of the best projects of Wikimedia. In last days, I'm so concentrated to develop the new opened Turkish Wikivoyage page. And I think, an official mobile app for Wikivoyage is a good idea. It can be perfect for the travelers around the world. The people mostly use their smart phones during traveling. This project will not make much sense if there is no app of WV. UcuncuUlus (talk) 13:25, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
- Strongly second this here, which has been discussed quite a bit on the English Wikivoyage. There is essentially no point to the project without a phone app. It is obligatory. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 08:17, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Call for Feedback: Community Board seats - Midpoint update[edit]
Hi all, I am writing here to let you know a few things:
- The third weekly report is now available for the Call for Feedback: Community Board seats.
- This is the middle of the Call for Feedback, which means we are halfway through! If you have not joined the conversation, please do so. The facilitation team does not want to miss hearing your feedback.
- For the second half of the Call for Feedback the plan is to promote further discussion around four topics that need disentanglement: regional quotas, candidates' skills, vetting of candidates, and the connection of Board elections with the Global Council and the Regional Hubs.
Do reach out if you have any questions or comments. Best, JKoerner (WMF) (talk) 16:50, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Requests for comment/Ombuds Commission inactivity[edit]
I have started a RFC about the persistent inactivity of several members of the OC. --Rschen7754 02:00, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikifunctions logo contest[edit]
01:45, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
New Project Proposal - Global Open Intiative Foundation/Time Project For Twi Community.[edit]
Hi, I would like to seek your support for a rapid grant proposal for the Twi Community in Ghana. The project among many other objectives seeks to engage existing users and recruit new volunteers. Kindly find a link to the proposal here. Thank you.--Mwintirew (talk) 09:16, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Logos of projects[edit]
How would we go about beginning discussions about revising/replacing a project's logo? The process of users participating in the creation of a Wikifunctions logo got me to take a closer look at the logos for other projects, and I have a few concerns with some of them. The biggest is the logo for WikiTech. Since the logo for Wikitech is based upon the logo for MediaWiki, shouldn't there be plans to change the Wikitech logo if the planned new logo for MediaWiki passes legal clearance? I'm not sure such a plan exists yet. SecretName101 (talk) 20:21, 5 March 2021 (UTC)