User talk:MJL
Welcome
Hello, MJL, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for joining the project. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- Help pages, especially for proofreading
- Help:Beginner's guide to Wikisource
- Style guide
- Inclusion policy
- Wikisource:For Wikipedians
You may be interested in participating in
Add the code {{active projects}}, {{PotM}} or {{Collaboration/MC}} to your page for current wikisource projects.
You can put a brief description of your interests on your user page and contributions to another Wikimedia project, such as Wikipedia and Commons.
Have questions? Then please ask them at either
I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikisource, the library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please "sign" your comments using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click edit) and place {{helpme}} before your question.
Again, welcome! — billinghurst sDrewth 02:03, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Do feel free to have a WikiProject[edit]
Hi. Welcome. Do feel that anything that you are doing in that coordination space is able to be in the Wikisource:WikiProjects space. It has a broad scope to cover any sort of coordinated transcription or organisational aspects. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:05, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
- Alright I'll move it. I was sorta worried that it wasn't ready in some way. Thank you for the help.MJL (talk) 02:09, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Category:Politics of the United States/Carl Schurz[edit]
We don't create category subdirectories like that. Nor do we categorize by author.
Author pages are used to list works according to author. Or, if a set of pages are about that author, we have a section of the Author page set aside for that. If the person who is a subject is not an author, and won't have an Author page, then we use a Portal.
Our policy is to delete categories that group by author, since they are not needed. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:21, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
- What are the alternatives to this category? Should it go in a portal? Without it, Category:Politics of the United States gets flooded with more than 150 articles that really should be grouped together. Any suggestions to alleviate that to help readers find more diverse articles? Thank you. MJL (talk) 22:27, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
- We don't worry about "flooding" categories. As I said, we list articles on Author pages and Portals as an organized way to present complex topics. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:05, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
[edit]
You moved this text out of the footer [1], which will cause the word to be duplicated. The word was in the footer because older texts would often duplicate the first word of the next page at the bottom of the preceding page, to make oral presentation easier.
That word should remain in the footer. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:09, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- @EncycloPetey: Thank you for fixing that embarrassing error on my part. I'm still trying to get the hang of a lot of things. I really appreciate the help a lot; I just have a lot to learn. MJL (talk) 03:11, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
US legislation...[edit]
I was sure English Wikisource had a set of templates for these to add "anchor"s and indentation for these. I would suggest asking on the Scriptorum. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:43, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
WS:WPV assitance[edit]
Would you mind helping to validate this work? The assistance of the WikiProject has been requested, and you are as of current the only other participant. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 11:08, 12 October 2018 (UTC).
- @TE(æ)A,ea.: My apologies for not helping before. I am not back to being active on the project! ―MJL -Talk-☖ 19:47, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Mistake[edit]
Hi,
I do apologize, I wanted to adjust letter spacing at Page:Bohemia An Historical Sketch.djvu/6 and by mistake I edited an old version of the page and thus the validation was removed. Can you validate it again, please?
Thank you very much!
--Jan Kameníček (talk) 08:52, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 February 2019[edit]
- From the editors: Help wanted (still)
- News and notes: Front-page issues for the community
- Discussion report: Talking about talk pages
- Featured content: Conquest, War, Famine, Death, and more!
- Arbitration report: A quiet month for Arbitration Committee
- Traffic report: Binge-watching
- Technology report: Tool labs casters-up
- Gallery: Signed with pride
- From the archives: New group aims to promote Wiki-Love
- Humour: Pesky Pronouns
1000th Edit[edit]
Nice! (link) –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 15:38, 18 March 2019 (UTC) 1,200 now... –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 15:02, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
User:MJL[edit]
Generated using XTools on 2019-03-21 15:04
General statistics[edit]
| User ID | 2795163 |
| Registration date | 2016-11-14 01:27 |
| User groups | autoconfirmed user |
| Is administrator? | 0 |
| First edit | 2017-06-11 23:07 |
| Latest edit | 2019-03-21 15:02 |
| Live edits | 1,192 (97.9%) |
| Deleted edits | 25 (2.1%) |
| Total edits | 1,217 |
| Edits in the past 24 hours | 134 |
| Edits in the past 7 days | 259 |
| Edits in the past 30 days | 266 |
| Edits in the past 365 days | 345 |
| Average edits per day | 1.9 (647 days) |
| Average edit size* | 499.4 bytes |
| Minor edits | 738 (61.9%) |
| Small edits (<20 bytes)* | 574 (48.2%) |
| Large edits (>1000 bytes)* | 107 (9%) |
Pages[edit]
| Pages edited (total) | 672 |
| Average edits per page | 1.811 |
| Pages created | 216 (16 since deleted) |
| Pages moved | 14 |
| Pages deleted | 0 |
Files[edit]
| Files uploaded | 0 |
| Files uploaded (Commons) | 38 |
Actions[edit]
| Thank | 27 |
| Approve | 0 |
| Patrol | 16 |
| Accounts created | 0 |
(Re)blocks[edit]
| Longest block | – |
| Current block | – |
Global edit counts (approximate)[edit]
* Data limited to the past 5,000 edits
Namespace Totals[edit]
| Rank | Namespace | Count |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Page | 595 (49.9%) |
| 2 | Main | 320 (26.8%) |
| 3 | Wikisource | 99 (8.3%) |
| 4 | User | 68 (5.7%) |
| 5 | Index | 34 (2.9%) |
| 6 | User talk | 28 (2.3%) |
| 7 | Portal | 14 (1.2%) |
| 8 | Category | 11 (0.9%) |
| 9 | Template | 10 (0.8%) |
| 10 | Talk | 6 (0.5%) |
| 11 | Author | 6 (0.5%) |
| 12 | Page talk | 1 (0.1%) |
| 12 namespaces | 1,192 |
Year counts[edit]
| Year | Count |
|---|---|
| 2017 | 560 |
| 2018 | 301 |
| 2019 | 331 |
Month counts[edit]
| Month | Count |
|---|---|
| 2017-06 | 3 |
| 2017-07 | 0 |
| 2017-08 | 0 |
| 2017-09 | 0 |
| 2017-10 | 1 |
| 2017-11 | 8 |
| 2017-12 | 548 |
| 2018-01 | 9 |
| 2018-02 | 278 |
| 2018-03 | 1 |
| 2018-04 | 4 |
| 2018-05 | 0 |
| 2018-06 | 0 |
| 2018-07 | 8 |
| 2018-08 | 0 |
| 2018-09 | 0 |
| 2018-10 | 0 |
| 2018-11 | 0 |
| 2018-12 | 1 |
| 2019-01 | 43 |
| 2019-02 | 29 |
| 2019-03 | 259 |
Time card[edit]
| 0:00 | 2:00 | 4:00 | 6:00 | 8:00 | 10:00 | 12:00 | 14:00 | 16:00 | 18:00 | 20:00 | 22:00 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sunday | 14 | 5 | 15 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 58 | 7 | 13 |
| Monday | 1 | 34 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 18 | 16 | 2 | 3 |
| Tuesday | 2 | 0 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 |
| Wednesday | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 50 | 21 |
| Thursday | 0 | 2 | 8 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 16 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 9 |
| Friday | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 21 | 27 | 18 |
| Saturday | 7 | 22 | 34 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 10 | 55 | 100 |
All times are in UTC.
Top edits per namespace[edit]
Main[edit]
Talk[edit]
User[edit]
User talk[edit]
| Edits | Page title | Links |
|---|---|---|
| 8 | User talk:MJL | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 2 | User talk:Mpaa | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 2 | User talk:GreenMeansGo | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 2 | User talk:Sir Joseph | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 2 | User talk:Nvnnvc | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 2 | User talk:Billinghurst | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 2 | User talk:Beeswaxcandle | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 1 | User talk:Firajul | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 1 | User talk:97.105.191.130 | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
Wikisource[edit]
Template[edit]
| Edits | Page title | Links |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Template:CaseCaption | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 3 | Template:Color/sandbox | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 1 | Template:M-larger | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 1 | Template:M-large | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 1 | Template:Yo | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
Category[edit]
Portal[edit]
Author[edit]
| Edits | Page title | Links |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Author:Roger Sherman | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 1 | Author:Joseph Stalin | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 1 | Author:J. V. Stalin | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
| 1 | Author:David Dalrymple | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
Page[edit]
Page talk[edit]
| Edits | Page title | Links |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Page talk:Henry V (1918) Yale.djvu/14 | Log · Page History · Top Edits |
Index[edit]
Rights changes[edit]
| Date | Rights | Performer | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016-11-18 01:27 | +autoconfirmed user | Automatic |
All times are in UTC. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 15:08, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Ligatures[edit]
Hi, we decided a few years back not to reproduce the typographical ligatures such as the "ct". They add no value and break searches. The other main two that people try to reproduce are "fi" and "fl". Which means that the only two still accepted are æ and œ. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 20:48, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Beeswaxcandle: Oh dang. That's certainly noted, so I will revert that edit now. THank you for informing me of this! Cheers, –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 21:06, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
User:MJL/UN header[edit]
While it's fine to create User space tools to make edits easier, links to user-space working materials should not be left in pages once they have been proofread. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:26, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- @EncycloPetey: Thank you for the notice. Is the solution to substitute it or move it to template-space? –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 22:28, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- Either solution would be fine. Subst'ing is preferred unless the same header construction is to be used across a large number of works. If the formatting is unique to only a few pages of a single document, then creating a permanent template would not be worthwhile. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:30, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Done –User link[edit]
My two cents is that it is better to leave {{ul}} pointing to {{underline}}, because the community has little need for Template:User link. We've functioned for more than a decade without it. Having a two-letter shortcut for a template that is practically unused in this community doesn't seem worthwhile. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:46, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- @EncycloPetey: I just would like an alternative to {{Reply to}} for pinging users in the middle of a sentence. I don't like the "@" and ":" appearing there, and there is no way to suppress it. I also think the one-letter {{u}} is more than sufficient for {{underline}}. I can't imagine why a shortcut only used 10 times on this platform ({{ul}}) is really needed in that regard. We have {{re}} and that's been used a total of 59 times. {{ping}} was used 873 times. I'm not even going to try and count how many total times {{Reply to}} was used. It's up there. In case you are concerned this, I will also assure you that this is not about making us more like Wikipedia. If that was the case, I'd be arguing to make {{u}} point to {{user link}} like it does there. I understand {{underline}} is more valuable than {{user link}} for our purposes (we use it a lot). I just don't think it should monopolize the secondary shortcut that it doesn't even list in it's own documentation. To each their own, I guess. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 21:51, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- If you feel otherwise, I will respect that
and nominate {{UL}} for deletion myself. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 21:52, 27 March 2019 (UTC)- I have no opinion about keeping or deleting the template; I merely see little point in having it. I see much less of a need to re-dedicate redirects for a template that has (thus far) been used by a single individual. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:56, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
The Signpost: 31 March 2019[edit]
- From the editors: Getting serious about humor
- News and notes: Blackouts fail to stop EU Copyright Directive
- In the media: Women's history month
- Discussion report: Portal debates continue, Prespa agreement aftermath, WMF seeks a rebranding
- Featured content: Out of this world
- Arbitration report: The Tides of March at ARBCOM
- Traffic report: Exultations and tribulations
- Technology report: New section suggestions and sitewide styles
- News from the WMF: The WMF's take on the new EU Copyright Directive
- Recent research: Barnstar-like awards increase new editor retention
- From the archives: Esperanza organization disbanded after deletion discussion
- Humour: The Epistolary of Arthur 37
- In focus: The Wikipedia SourceWatch
- Special report: Wiki Loves (50 Years of) Pride
- Community view: Wikipedia's response to the New Zealand mosque shootings
Wikisource:News: April 2019 Edition[edit]
Works categories aren't done here[edit]
Hi, Please stop the Caledonian poetry category. We don't do categories for works. See Help:Categorization for more. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 03:03, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Beeswaxcandle:, I swear everytime I think I understand the categorization system... Let me fix that. Just so I am clear, the right categories to add for these works are Category:Early modern poetry, Category:Scots poems, and Category:PD-old, correct? –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 03:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- You don't need to add Category:PD-old. That will be added automatically by the license template, and the license template should only be placed on the primary page of a work. "Scots poems" should be added only if the work is a poem written in the Scots language. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- A good rule of thumb for adding categories: add a category for the:
- (a) form (novel, poem, speech, play) or a form subcategory (historical novel, love poetry),
- (b) period (modern, renaissance) or form/period category (Renaissance poetry, Modern fiction)
- (c) language or language subcategory (Greek literature, English poetry, works originally in French)
- (d) topic of a non-fiction work, or genre of a fictional work
- Nearly all categories on Wikisource fall into one or more of these. Only a few categories do not (such as book awards). --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:25, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, so I just need to go back and remove all instances of the redlinked Category:The Merry Muses of Caledonia and replace it with Category:Early modern poetry and Category:Scots poems (the latter as applicable). I think I can do that! Let me know if I am being too much of a problem, Petey. I don't want to waste your (or anyone else's) time. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 03:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- A good rule of thumb for adding categories: add a category for the:
welcoming[edit]
On Wikisource, we usually do not subst the {{welcome}} template. That way, if changes made in the template, then the changes are propagated to all locations where the template was used. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:54, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- I was just following the documentation which allows for the use of {{subst:welcome}}. I personally prefer it, but if that is a rule then I will follow it. I just request you update the documentation, so other contributors aren't mistaken in the future. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 05:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- It's not a rule, but it is the norm. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:55, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Header templates[edit]
Category:Header templates is a subcategory of Category:Article templates, meaning that the category is only for templates used in articles, not other sorts of headers. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:17, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
- @EncycloPetey: shouldn't we remove Template:Process header then? –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 17:22, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
- Probably. There is likely quite a lot to be cleaned up in these categories. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:26, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Notes on Czech Politics[edit]
Hi. May I ask where you saw the book Notes on Czech Politics, which you have mentioned at Author:Karel Kramář? I would be happy to transcribe it but I failed to find it anywhere. --Jan Kameníček (talk) 22:06, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry, only now I noticed that you are suggesting to translate the Czech book... --Jan Kameníček (talk) 22:08, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
- Jan Kameníček, why certainly! I found it while viewing cs:Poznámky o české politice. Czech Wikisource had in turn found this copy. If you would like to translate it (which I sort of expected you would haha), you'll probably want to follow our these proposed translation guidelines. Hope that helps! (ec) –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 22:16, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
2001st edit[edit]
Yay! –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 13:20, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: March 2019[edit]
| ||||||
Wikisource:News (en): April 2019 edition[edit]
Noting that thus is one-off delivery to those listed at Wikisource Community User Group participants, and those wishing to receive further editions of the newsletter should subscribe as described in the above instructions.
Wikisource:News (en): April 2019 edition[edit]
- Thanks User:MJL for doing a wonderful job and bringing Wikisource:News back to life! Dovi (talk) 19:43, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
The Signpost: 30 April 2019[edit]
- News and notes: An Action Packed April
- In the media: Is Wikipedia just another social media site?
- Discussion report: English Wikipedia community's conclusions on talk pages
- Featured content: Anguish, accolades, animals, and art
- Arbitration report: An Active Arbitration Committee
- Traffic report: Mötley Crüe, Notre-Dame, a black hole, and Bonnie and Clyde
- Technology report: A new special page, and other news
- Gallery: Notre-Dame de Paris burns
- News from the WMF: Can machine learning uncover Wikipedia’s missing “citation needed” tags?
- Recent research: Female scholars underrepresented; whitepaper on Wikidata and libraries; undo patterns reveal editor hierarchy
- From the archives: Portals revisited
Wikisource:News (en): May 2019 Edition[edit]
Missing /div[edit]
There was a </div> missing from the end of this. I've fixed it on that page, but please look at any other places where you posted it (like this one!), and avoid that in future. Cheers, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:10, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: April 2019[edit]
| ||||||
The Signpost: 31 May 2019[edit]
- From the editors: Picture that
- News and notes: Wikimania and trustee elections
- In the media: Politics, lawsuits and baseball
- Discussion report: Admin abuse leads to mass-desysop proposal on Azerbaijani Wikipedia
- Arbitration report: ArbCom forges ahead
- News from the WMF: Wikimedia Foundation petitions the European Court of Human Rights to lift the block of Wikipedia in Turkey
- Technology report: Lots of Bots
- Essay: Paid editing
- From the archives: FORUM:Should Wikimedia modify its terms of use to require disclosure?
This Month in GLAM: May 2019[edit]
| ||||||
The file you've created is a duplicate[edit]
The file you've created is a duplicate of Index:Landon in The New Monthly 1837.pdf --kathleen wright5 (talk) 13:46, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Kathleen.wright5: Thank you for calling this to my attention. I can't remember creating this file, and I would like to point out that Special:Diff/7092393 and Special:Diff/7092240 show the same user created both index pages (maybe you already took care of this file? I'm not sure exactly because you didn't link to it, and I can't remember as said previously :/). I do see I created Page:New Monthly 1837.pdf/1, Page:New Monthly 1837.pdf/2, and Page:New Monthly 1837.pdf/3 while apparently not noticing the existence of Index:Landon in The New Monthly 1837.pdf. Would you be so kind as to redirect Index:New Monthly 1837.pdf to Index:Landon in The New Monthly 1837.pdf as well as its subpages? I'd also prefer Page:New Monthly 1837.pdf/3 have its history merged with Page:Landon in The New Monthly 1837.pdf/3 and be made the current revision, but we can discuss more about that later if you disagree. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 22:50, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, User:Esme Shepherd created both indexes. I've never done a merge of pages before, so instead I've asked her which index she would like deleted? Hoping of course that it will be Index:New Monthly 1837.pdf. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 11:18, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Kathleen.wright5: If that's the case, we could delete the frivolous index to Esme's choice, but I do want to repeat that I would prefer Page:New Monthly 1837.pdf/3 to be kept even as a redirect as my preference over Page:Landon in The New Monthly 1837.pdf/3. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 16:20, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, User:Esme Shepherd created both indexes. I've never done a merge of pages before, so instead I've asked her which index she would like deleted? Hoping of course that it will be Index:New Monthly 1837.pdf. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 11:18, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
The Signpost: 30 June 2019[edit]
- Discussion report: A constitutional crisis hits English Wikipedia
- News and notes: Mysterious ban, admin resignations, Wikimedia Thailand rising
- In the media: The disinformation age
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
- Special report: Did Fram harass other editors?
- Traffic report: Juneteenth, Beauty Revealed, and more nuclear disasters
- Technology report: Actors and Bots
- Recent research: What do editors do after being blocked?; the top mathematicians, universities and cancers according to Wikipedia
- From the archives: Women and Wikipedia: the world is watching
- In focus: WikiJournals: A sister project proposal
- Community view: A CEO biography, paid for with taxes
Wikisource:News (en): July 2019 Edition[edit]
- On that last one... Please don't import enwp drama here. The Signpost is in hot water because what Smallbones wrote was a tabloid hit piece based on anonymous allegations (and fairly uncritically too), and it is problematic completely irrespective of whether Fram is guilty of the things they've been accused of or not. Bri's discussion report was neutrally written and addressed the wider constitutional issue at conflict between WMF and the communities, and is relevant on other projects (i.e. here). But Smallbones' lack of perspective only seems important because you're involved in The Signpost on enwp; and Fram hasn't edited on enws since 2010 so their behaviour (or lack of such) is completely irrelevant here. --Xover (talk) 06:23, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Xover: I had no intention of bringing over the drama from there to here (I genuinely prefer the fact we don't have drama for the most part). As I said in my statement to arbcom after WS:News was published, I fully agree to what Headbomb had to say on the matter (and personally, I wouldn't publish the story). Since generally, WS:News relies on the Signpost for most of its coverage of WMF related matters, I kind of thought this would be the rare time it need to publish a piece related to enwiki.
Unlike how the Signpost is run, WS:News related pages aren't supposed to be treated different than any other project pages. Anything that needs to be changed in the article, should be changed without issue. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 06:36, 5 July 2019 (UTC)- My point was that the details of Fram's case or the drama surrounding that The Signpost article are mostly enwp-internal matters, or "inside baseball" for those working on such publications. The bit that has cross-project significance is the new policies and practices at the WMF; the conflict between the WMF and the wider community; and what that will mean for enWS going forward. But all that is contained in the single sentence
You can read more about this subject in the Signpost's Discussion report.
. The rest of it is squarely focussed on the parts of the issue that are not relevant to enWS and which run the risk of importing their drama.My suggestion would have actually been to import Bri's discussion report wholesale: it is focussed on the wider issue, and it presents an overview of it that is dispassionate and neutral. Prefix or suffix it with a para or so that puts it into an enWS context ("What does this mean for enWS?". It's possible enWS would welcome such intervention from WMF/T&S due to the differences between enWS and enwp), but on the whole it's a good summary of the state of play. Which reminds me, I need to hop on over and give Bri kudos for it. By the way, since I'm ragging on you so much for this one article; let me make sure I say that I really appreciate the effort you put in reanimating Wikisource:News. I see it as important community building, and I definitely appreciate the amount of effort it takes to keep it going more or less single-handedly! Please don't mistake my concerns about this one article for antipathy or lack of appreciation for the overall effort! --Xover (talk) 07:58, 5 July 2019 (UTC)- @Xover: No worries! I really welcome the feedback.
Between you and me (and whoever reads this, I guess), one of the major reasons I didn't put out a newsletter last month was the dispute at EncycloPetey's admin confirmation as well as me feeling conflicted on how best to cover Dmitrismirnov's then-upcoming confirmation. I really don't like seeing drama here (this is actually my safeplace away from enwiki stuff because incivility and harassment aren't as common here- just thinking about some of the stuff I deal with editing enwiki kinda makes me tear up... I'm almost numb to it now..)
If you look at the page history, I started it on 1 July 2019, the added content on a day later then went silent. I figured that someone (like yourself) would object to it before publication if it was objectionable. It still isn't too late to swap out the article if you want (I seriously wouldn't be hurt by it if you did since it's so barebones anyways-- It's goal mostly to inform that our sister publication was going through a mess right now which could impact WMF coverage).
Thank you for the kind words, though! If you really feel like it's a worthwhile effort, please consider adding yourself as a subscriber. If WP:News gets more, I'll be able to request global mass messenger rights for myself and take this to an international readerbase (which was Dovi's original intention for it). –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 18:03, 5 July 2019 (UTC)- Yeah, my increased participation here is most definitely due to being fed up with the dysfunction over there. Not so much typical incivility and harassment, but confrontational, underhanded, and arrogant behaviours that are incredibly demoralising and tiring over time. I see we have our share of dysfunction here too, but it's more of the avoidance and hoping it'll go away variety, which leads to much less intense and less sustained drama. Oh well… No community is perfect, and enws is practically paradise compared to the post-apocalyptic wasteland that enwp resembles at times.I don't think it would be appropriate to alter the newsletter like that after it's been published. I just wanted to give you the feedback for the future (and, it must be admitted, I am a little touchy on this after the Smallbones article). I'd be happy to advise where I can, of course, but as my inclinations are in completely different directions I'll read the newsletter once published rather than watch it in draft. I'll certainly subscribe if it matters: I haven't done so because I see it at WS:S anyway, not because I'm not interested.I'm not sure I think the community(-ies) is large enough and with enough common interest that a newsletter is sustainable. On enws there's not really enough happening to fill a monthly newsletter, and if we can't get more volunteers… well, it's not sustainable if we're dependent on a single person. But I hope I'm wrong because I need a newsletter to keep updated, and because it can help build community (which The Signpost does admirably when it's at its best), and recruit and onboard new contributors. enWS is particularly prone to contributors working off in their own little walled gardens with little or no innteraction with others. I was frankly shocked when I noticed the total number of edits and editors, compared to the five or so names that ever contribute to the noticeboards and Scriptorium. Anything that could bring those closer together would make us stronger as a community. --Xover (talk) 18:44, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Xover: Wait, how many active editors do we have outside of the noticeboards?? I thought we only have like 10 active editors. :? –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 21:38, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
- Nope. It depends on what your definition is, but using Mediawiki's definition, all 327 of these users have performed an action in the last 30 days. If you watch Special:RecentChanges you'll also see a lot of activity from editors that never or only rarely show up on the community pages. Meanwhile, I'm tearing my hair out over the lack of participation on the Scriptorium, Proposed deletions, etc.. I don't think I agree with Kaldari's curly quotes proposal (haven't had time to think through it yet), but I'm really glad they made it: it's something that should be discussed every now and again, and it seems to be drawing out some extra participation. Not least because a vibrant and active community is the best way to recruit more new contributors. --Xover (talk) 08:12, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Xover: Wait, how many active editors do we have outside of the noticeboards?? I thought we only have like 10 active editors. :? –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 21:38, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, my increased participation here is most definitely due to being fed up with the dysfunction over there. Not so much typical incivility and harassment, but confrontational, underhanded, and arrogant behaviours that are incredibly demoralising and tiring over time. I see we have our share of dysfunction here too, but it's more of the avoidance and hoping it'll go away variety, which leads to much less intense and less sustained drama. Oh well… No community is perfect, and enws is practically paradise compared to the post-apocalyptic wasteland that enwp resembles at times.I don't think it would be appropriate to alter the newsletter like that after it's been published. I just wanted to give you the feedback for the future (and, it must be admitted, I am a little touchy on this after the Smallbones article). I'd be happy to advise where I can, of course, but as my inclinations are in completely different directions I'll read the newsletter once published rather than watch it in draft. I'll certainly subscribe if it matters: I haven't done so because I see it at WS:S anyway, not because I'm not interested.I'm not sure I think the community(-ies) is large enough and with enough common interest that a newsletter is sustainable. On enws there's not really enough happening to fill a monthly newsletter, and if we can't get more volunteers… well, it's not sustainable if we're dependent on a single person. But I hope I'm wrong because I need a newsletter to keep updated, and because it can help build community (which The Signpost does admirably when it's at its best), and recruit and onboard new contributors. enWS is particularly prone to contributors working off in their own little walled gardens with little or no innteraction with others. I was frankly shocked when I noticed the total number of edits and editors, compared to the five or so names that ever contribute to the noticeboards and Scriptorium. Anything that could bring those closer together would make us stronger as a community. --Xover (talk) 18:44, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Xover: No worries! I really welcome the feedback.
- My point was that the details of Fram's case or the drama surrounding that The Signpost article are mostly enwp-internal matters, or "inside baseball" for those working on such publications. The bit that has cross-project significance is the new policies and practices at the WMF; the conflict between the WMF and the wider community; and what that will mean for enWS going forward. But all that is contained in the single sentence
- @Xover: I had no intention of bringing over the drama from there to here (I genuinely prefer the fact we don't have drama for the most part). As I said in my statement to arbcom after WS:News was published, I fully agree to what Headbomb had to say on the matter (and personally, I wouldn't publish the story). Since generally, WS:News relies on the Signpost for most of its coverage of WMF related matters, I kind of thought this would be the rare time it need to publish a piece related to enwiki.
- thanks for the newsletter. if you go by the metrics we have 140 active editors (>5 per month) [2] i should have some notes from wikisource track at wikimania, for next month. with some video links. Slowking4 ⚔ Rama's revenge 10:16, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Slowking4: Sorry for the late reply, I was deliberately holding off on doing so until some.. drama on enwiki subsided. Do let me know! I'm getting this edition's draft start for publication 1 September 2019. I'd love for you to write a story or something to be included!! :D –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 00:52, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
- ha, if you wait for drama to subside, you will not get anything done. here is the list of links User_talk:Slowking4#Wikisource_track , i could fill in more narrative, search commons, but i will be buried at national book festival tomorrow. may be next week. cheers. Slowking4 ⚔ Rama's revenge 01:09, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Slowking4: Sorry for the late reply, I was deliberately holding off on doing so until some.. drama on enwiki subsided. Do let me know! I'm getting this edition's draft start for publication 1 September 2019. I'd love for you to write a story or something to be included!! :D –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 00:52, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: June 2019[edit]
| ||||||
The Signpost: 31 July 2019[edit]
- In the media: Politics starts getting rough
- Discussion report: New proposals in aftermath of Fram ban
- Arbitration report: A month of reintegration
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
- Community view: Video based summaries of Wikipedia articles. How and why?
- News from the WMF: Designing ethically with AI: How Wikimedia can harness machine learning in a responsible and human-centered way
- Recent research: Most influential medical journals; detecting pages to protect
- Special report: Administrator cadre continues to contract
- Traffic report: World cups, presidential candidates, and stranger things
This Month in GLAM: July 2019[edit]
| ||||||
The Signpost: 30 August 2019[edit]
- News and notes: Documenting Wikimania and our beginnings
- In focus: Ryan Merkley joins WMF as Chief of Staff
- Discussion report: Meta proposals on partial bans and IP users
- Traffic report: Once upon a time in Greenland with Boris and cornflakes
- News from the WMF: Meet Emna Mizouni, the newly minted 2019 Wikimedian of the Year
- Recent research: Special issue on gender gap and gender bias research
- On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?
Wikisource:News (en): September 2019 Edition[edit]
Current · Archives · Discussion · Subscribe –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 23:03, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
- Hi, MJL! In the admin confirmations secton of the newsletter, you (?) write that Zhaladshar has had activity in the multilingual Wikisource this year. However, the diff points to an edit made by Zyephyrus, not Zhaladshar, and I can't see anything suggesting that the two are the same user. It seems Zhaladshar hasn't had any edits in the multilingual Wikisource for 10+ years. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 06:35, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Jon Harald Søby: Yikes! I should have double checked that one. Retracting that now. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 06:44, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: August 2019[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: September 2019[edit]
| ||||||
Wikisource News[edit]
Hi! In the next Wikisource News, you should mention something about the Neapolitan and Hindi Wikisources being created, in August and September respectively. I tried writing up something, but I'm not sure what more to add, so I'll leave it to you how it can be covered. :-) Jon Harald Søby (talk) 08:24, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: October 2019[edit]
| ||||||
"Jahrhundert" is a valid word, "Jahrkundert" is not; marking "Proofread" page as "Not proofread"[edit]
Hi, I saw your edit on Page:EB1911 - Volume 03.djvu/485, is there a reason why you substituted the valid German word "Jahrhundert" for the incorrect "Jahrkundert"? A simple Google search would reveal the former is the German word for a century (100 years). There are more than 67 million Google hits for "Jahrhundert" and less than 1200 for the incorrect "Jahrkundert" you used. You can see a high-resolution image of the page in question at [3] which clearly shows "Jahrhundert". I've now edited the page to fix it.
Also, why did you mark the previously Proofread Page:EB1911 - Volume 12.djvu/917 as Not proofread? Why did you remove line-breaks? Removing line-breaks makes proofing much more difficult, so can you please not remove them in future. It also makes it difficult to see what changes you made to that page. It appears you just changed a section tag on the page, why? — DivermanAU (talk) 21:24, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
- @DivermanAU: The page itself uses the incorrect "Jahrkundert" which is why I changed it. The image you link to is from another copy of the text without that typo, so it doesn't really carry any weight with what our text says. I suggest you change it back and simply use {{SIC}} to convey the intended meaning.
As for your second question, I have no honest clue why I made that specific edit 7 months ago. I was new and clueless.
I will say though, that the line breaks may be helpful for you; I find it rather irritating during the transclusion process and remove them for texts I'm transcluding. That's what I was trying to do with 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Hamilton (Scotland) at least. I still find line breaks to be annoying, and I don't plan on keeping them for texts I am personally proofreading. However, I will respect line breaks where they are already found in the future such as pages you may contribute to. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 04:49, 26 November 2019 (UTC)- Hi MJL, thanks for your response. I took another look at Page:EB1911 - Volume 03.djvu/485 — it definitely looks like there are two "h"s in "Jahrhundert" in the Wikisource scan to me. Both "h"s have a clear gap between the two uprights. Compare to a real italic "k" e.g. in "blockade" on Page:EB1911 - Volume 04.djvu/86 (2nd-last paragraph, left column) the italic "k" has a definite closed loop and 45° angled stroke down from the upright; compare to the italic "h" in "the" in the same paragraph which has a gap between the uprights. DivermanAU (talk) 06:41, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
- @DivermanAU: Alright, I took a second look at it by zooming in on this, and I guess my eyes were playing tricks on me.
My apologies about that. :/ –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 23:38, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
- @DivermanAU: Alright, I took a second look at it by zooming in on this, and I guess my eyes were playing tricks on me.
- Hi MJL, thanks for your response. I took another look at Page:EB1911 - Volume 03.djvu/485 — it definitely looks like there are two "h"s in "Jahrhundert" in the Wikisource scan to me. Both "h"s have a clear gap between the two uprights. Compare to a real italic "k" e.g. in "blockade" on Page:EB1911 - Volume 04.djvu/86 (2nd-last paragraph, left column) the italic "k" has a definite closed loop and 45° angled stroke down from the upright; compare to the italic "h" in "the" in the same paragraph which has a gap between the uprights. DivermanAU (talk) 06:41, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: November 2019[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: December 2019[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: January 2020[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: February 2020[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: March 2020[edit]
| ||||||
Page:The Laws and Acts of Parliament of Scotland.djvu/29[edit]
Thanks..
There are also a LOT of Scottish "chapbooks" that you might be interested in , Apparently the National Library of Scotland, decided to use Wikisource as means of getting some of them transcribed. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:47, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: April 2020[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: May 2020[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: June 2020[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: July 2020[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: August 2020[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: September 2020[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: October 2020[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: November 2020[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: December 2020[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: December 2020[edit]
| ||||||
A question about folksongs[edit]
hello, I left a message at what I thought was a Scots project but there has been no answer. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource_talk:WikiProject_Scots The question is also about adding entries to Scots Wiktionary. These seem like they would be fairly routine tasks that anyone could do once they understood the system, but I am not seeing how things are organized. Janni Rye (talk)— Preceding undated comment added 03:35, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Janni Rye: Hey! Sorry for not seeing your message sooner. For complicated reasons unrelated to the language status of Scots, English Wikisource is the home Scots language works. However, this is currently copyrighted material. Therefore, it could not be used on this exact project, but that does not mean it couldn't be sourced for Scots Wiktionar. Some folks are indeed working on it, and I would be happy to get you in touch with them if you are interested. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 03:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes, please do.
It seems odd to have Scots at English Wiktionary, or for that matter, English Wikisource. Maybe that is why I cannot seem to find it with search engines.
It also seems odd for folk lyrics to be copyrighted. yes I saw the ©1961 at the top of the page, but what is really being copyrighted here? Is it just the page, or the lyrics and music, or that particular arrangement or recording? I tried to find something about it here, which says copyright does not "protect traditional Indigenous music or lyrics" https://www.artslaw.com.au/information-sheet/copyright-in-music-and-lyrics-aitb/ (this is from Australia) and this one where it says it "must be an original work" which obviously a folk song is not. https://blog.reverbnation.com/2018/04/25/music-law-101-what-does-copyright-law-protect/ So according to this last one, maybe only the sound recording is protected. But I don't want to work on something and then find out later there was some snag.
I also found this from several years ago. https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wt/sco/Main_Page Cheers, Janni Rye (talk) 04:58, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Janni Rye: Actually, Scots Wiktionary is on Scots Wikipedia while Scots Wikisource is on English Wikisource.. I realise that is probably confusing, but it is the situation that currently exists.
Either way, the community of people I mentioned can be found on this Discord server.
As for the copyright concerns, I will have to inquire with some folks elsewhere about that. I'm not exactly sure in this case. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 05:08, 9 February 2021 (UTC)- I can't seem to download it, "local directory is corrupt". Doesn't sound good. This is odd, the incubator version has 424 pages https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wt/sco/Main_Page and the Scots Wikipedia version has 22 pages https://sco.wikipedia.org/wiki/Define:Main_Page. I wonder if they have a translation for https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Department_of_Redundancy_Department All joking aside, I wonder if it can be linked, as that user from seven years ago wanted to do. Janni Rye (talk) 05:54, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- I just peeked at a couple of entries, and none of them seem to be sourced. Not one, in either Wiktionary. And then there are entries like this that seem to have broken templates. https://sco.wikipedia.org/wiki/Define:Donde Surely there are sources for these, and etymologies too. Janni Rye (talk) 06:12, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Janni Rye: It's a work and progress on the dictionary front. As for Discord, you shouldn't need to download anything if you are on a personal computer. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 06:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry but it just gives me a poop emoji and says the invitation is no longer valid. I did see something that looked like avatars at first, and there was a banner at the top that recommended the desktop version. FWIW I do seem to have a clean download of the desktop version now, so maybe whatever was holding it back is fixed. Looking again at this Scots Wiktionary, the "22 entries" seem to be categories. Why does a Scots dictionary need a category for Maori, a New Zealand language? I cannot make out the organization at all. And yet this dictionary would seem to be a basic building block if you want to work with the language at all. There does seem to be quite a bit of sourcing available that is also in the public domain, so reliable sources should not be a problem for a basic glossary, but it looks to me like the Wiktionary has the same problem as the Scots Wikipedia, a huge amount of incorrect or undocumented information has been added, that needs to be cleaned up, or at least marked as unchecked, before anything else can be done. I was hoping to be able to add a few items, one at a time, whenever I had a few spare moments, but it seems like the problem of how the data is structured needs to be addressed first. Are you pretty much the only admin, or active member at this point? Janni Rye (talk) 03:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Janni Rye: It's a work and progress on the dictionary front. As for Discord, you shouldn't need to download anything if you are on a personal computer. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 06:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Janni Rye: Actually, Scots Wiktionary is on Scots Wikipedia while Scots Wikisource is on English Wikisource.. I realise that is probably confusing, but it is the situation that currently exists.
OK. Janni Rye (talk) 06:25, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: January 2021[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: February 2021[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: March 2021[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: April 2021[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: May 2021[edit]
| ||||||
Final Call for Candidates for AffCom - June 2021[edit]
This is an update from the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee. Translations are available.
This is a final Call for Candidates for the June 2021 Affiliations Committee election.
If you are interested in running, please post your application and follow all four steps on the nomination page by 30 June 2021 23:59 hours UTC.
If you know somebody you think may be interested, please share this with them and encourage them to consider it. If you have any questions about this process or the requirements, please email affcom@wikimedia.org before the application deadline or reach out to any of the current members.
On behalf of the AffCom elections committee,
--- FULBERT (talk) 14:37, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: June 2021[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: July 2021[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: August 2021[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: August 2021[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: September 2021[edit]
| ||||||
disambiguation[edit]
Hi. It is not appropriate to move an existing version of a document and to replace it with another different document. We disambiguate from the simplest form (it becomes the disambig page), and name appropriately after that per Constitution of Haïti. See Help:Disambiguation for detail. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:59, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Billinghurst: Understood. My apologies. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 19:32, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks. Apologies are not required, it is okay, I did need to say. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:05, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: October 2021[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: November 2021[edit]
| ||||||
Affiliations Committee (AffCom) Call for candidates - January 2022[edit]
Translations are available.
The Affiliations Committee – the committee responsible for guiding volunteers in establishing Wikimedia chapters, thematic organizations, and user groups – is looking for new members!
The main role of the AffCom is to guide groups of volunteers that are interested in forming Wikimedia affiliates. We review applications from new groups, answer questions and provide advice about the different Wikimedia affiliation models and processes, review affiliate bylaws for compliance with requirements and best practices, and update the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees as well as advise them on issues connected to chapters, thematic organizations and Wikimedia user groups.
The committee consists of five to fifteen members, selected at least once every year, to serve two-year terms.
Being a part of the AffCom requires communication with volunteers all over the world, negotiating skills, cultural sensitivity, and the ability to understand legal texts. We look for a mix of different skill sets in our members.
- Responsibilities
- Availability of up to 5-8 hours per month
- Participate in monthly one and two-hour voice/video meetings
- Commitment to carry out assigned tasks in a given time.
- Facilitate and support communications
- Affiliate Support and growth
- Required and Recommended Abilities, Skills, Knowledge for Affiliations Committee Members
Strong interpersonal relationship among members of the committee and also with the Wikimedia community members. Across all committee members, there are additional relevant skills as well as requirements which help to support the committee and its sustainability which include both required and relevant general skills
- Required
- Fluency in English
- Availability of up to 5 hours per week, and the time to participate in a monthly one and two-hour voice/video meetings.
- Willingness to use one's real name in committee activities (including contacts with current and potential affiliates) when appropriate.
- Strong track record of effective collaboration
- International orientation
- Relevant for all members
- Public Communications (English writing and speaking skills)
- Skills in other languages are a major plus.
- Understanding of the structure and work of affiliates and the Wikimedia Foundation.
- Documentation practices
- Interviewing experience
- Experience with, or in, an active affiliate is a major plus.
- Teamwork: Project and people management skills to coordinate and collaborate with different parties on a shared plan and see it through to completion.
- Problem-Solving: Ability to evaluate various solutions, consider multiple interests and points of view, revisit unresolved issues, seek compromise and work and communicate across languages and cultures.
Given the expectations for maintaining the course in 2022 and preparing for potential 2022 transitions as part of the Movement Strategy implementation process, it is important that we are also clear about two different skill sets critical to committee support at this time. The first skillset is oriented to understanding affiliate dynamics and organizational development patterns to successfully process affiliate applications for recognition; the other is oriented to conflict prevention and intervention support for affiliates in conflict.
- Relevant to Affiliate Recognitions
- Administration & Attention to detail
- Readiness to participate in political discussions on the role and future of affiliates, models of affiliation, and similar topics.
- Awareness of the affiliates ecosystem and models and understanding of community building, organizational development, and group dynamics
- Relevant to Conflict Prevention & Intervention
- Communication skills for active listening, clear instruction and turn-taking.
- Stress Management skills for maintaining patience and positivity
- Emotional intelligence to maintain awareness of emotions of oneself and others to practice empathy, impartiality, and mutual respect.
- Facilitation, negotiation, and mediation skills to guide diverse individuals and groups toward cooperation.
- Ability to work within a team
Do you have relevant skills and interest to support movement affiliates?
We are looking for people who are excited by the challenge of empowering volunteers to get organized and form communities that further our mission around the world. In exchange, committee members will gain the experience of supporting their world-wide colleagues to develop their communities as well as personal development in guiding organizational development, facilitating affiliate partnerships, and professional communications.
- Selection process
As a reflection of our commitment to openness, transparency, and bilateral engagement with the Wikimedia community, the 2022 member selection process will include a public review and comment period and a self-assessment survey for candidates to share their skills and their experience. This self-assessment information will help the committee to identify the skill sets relevant and supportive to our affiliate support processes. We invite you to apply for membership to the committee and join us in supporting the affiliates. The data shared in the self-assessment will only be made available to the committee and the relevant staff support. The nomination, candidate Q&A, and endorsements will still take place posted on Meta for public review at January 2022 page. Here the global community is welcome to provide comments and feedback about each candidate.
Once the nomination window closes 31 January 2022, the sitting members who are not candidates for re-election in this cycle will deliberate and then vote, taking into account all inputs from the meta page, self-assessment, advisors, Wikimedia Foundation staff and board liaisons, and committee member discussion.
A final decision will be made in late-February 2022, with new members to be notified for onboarding in February.
- How to apply
If you are interested in joining the committee, please:
Step 1. Post your application on the nomination page by 31 January 2022. Your application must include the following information:
- Your full name and Wikimedia username
- A statement describing your relevant education, experience, abilities, skills, knowledge, availability, and motivation for joining the committee.
Step 2. Complete the self-assessment survey between January 1, 2021 and January 31, 2021.
- The privacy statement that applies to the survey can be found here.
- NOTE: The survey will take 15 mins. Please do not close your browser. If you need a break, you are advised to keep the browser open. In case of losing the link, please reach out to mkaur-ctrTemplate:Atwikimedia.org
- This survey must be completed before Steps 3 & 4, as it will provide more background as to the type of work and expectations of members of AffCom.
Step 3. Answers the following questions:
- NOTE: Questions 1-3 are required for all candidates.
- Question 4 & 5 should be answered by those interested in joining the Recognitions subcommittee.
- Question 6 & 7 should be answered by those interested in joining the Conflicts Intervention subcommittee.
- If you are willing to nominate yourself for both subcommittees, answer all questions.
- What roles have you served across any Wikimedia projects and affiliates that you think have prepared you for this role?
- AffCom members need to manage time, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and diverse situations across the global movement. How do you envision managing these?
- Members of AffCom serve on one of two subcommittees: Recognitions OR Conflicts Intervention. Which one of these are you most interested in serving on?
- If you are interested in serving on the Recognitions subcommittee, what do you think makes a group of Wikimedians ready to function together as an affiliate?
- If you are interested in serving on the Recognitions subcommittee, what do you think are the benefits and responsibilities of functioning as formal affiliates?
- If you are interested in serving on the Conflicts Intervention subcommittee, please describe your experience working with conflicts resolution.
- If you are interested in serving on the Conflicts Intervention subcommittee, please describe how you have helped build consensus and support diversity.
Step 4. Once you have completed the above, send an email announcing your application to affcom
wikimedia.org before the application deadline.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me and/or the committee as a whole. We are happy to chat or have a webinar call with anyone about our work if this helps them decide to apply. Please distribute this call among your networks, and do apply if you are interested!
On behalf of the committee,
--FULBERT (talk) 13:18, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Affiliations Committee (AffCom) Call for advisors - January 2022[edit]
Translations are available.
The Affiliations Committee – the committee responsible for guiding volunteers in establishing Wikimedia chapters, thematic organizations, and user groups – is looking for advisors!
The main role of the Affiliations Committee is to guide groups of volunteers that are interested in forming Wikimedia affiliates. We review applications from new groups, answer questions and provide advice about the different Wikimedia affiliation models and processes, review affiliate bylaws for compliance with requirements and best practices, and advise the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees on issues connected to chapters, thematic organizations and Wikimedia user groups.
We are looking for advisors who are excited by the challenge of empowering volunteers to get organized and form communities that further our mission around the world. In exchange, committee advisors selected will gain the experience of supporting their world-wide colleagues to develop their communities as well as personal development in guiding organizational development, facilitating affiliate partnerships, and professional communications.
AffCom advisors can engage with the committee in a variety of capacities:
- Consultant
Individuals with extensive movement experience can be engaged as Consultants for specific cases or initiatives by AffCom.
- Trainer
Individuals with specific expertise may be engaged for short-term projects for training AffCom or Affiliates. They might also lead the Capacity Building initiatives for AffCom or affiliates.
- Observer
AffCom can request specific or all advisors to act as an observer in different cases to ensure neutrality & compliance with guidelines.
- AffCom Support
Development of Policies: While advisors cannot create legally binding policies for the committee, they can help create policies that provide direction and support for the committee.
Planning and Implementing Community Relations: The advisors are long-term wikimedians & also include influential community leaders who can be effective at spreading the word about initiatives and services.
Supporting Subcommittees: The advisors can support subcommittees that have assigned tasks in specific areas.
Other Tasks: Advisors can be engaged to address a specific need. Such engagements are usually short-lived and are disbanded as soon as their specific goals are met.
- Key skills
We look for a healthy mix of different skill sets in our advisors, including the following key skills and experience:
- Strong understanding of the structure and work of Wikimedia affiliates and the Wikimedia Foundation.
- Readiness to participate in political discussions on the role and future of affiliates, models of affiliation, and similar topics.
- Availability of up to 2 hours per week, and the time to participate in a monthly two-hour voice/video meeting
- International orientation and ability to work and communicate with other languages and cultures.
- Knowledge of different legal systems and experience in community building and organizing are a plus.
- Fluency in English is required; skills in other languages are a major plus.
- Experience with or in an active Wikimedia affiliate is a major plus.
- Strong track record of effective collaboration (such as evidenced skills at facilitation, mediation, negotiation, and so forth) is a major plus.
- Willingness to use one's real name in committee activities (including contacts with current and potential affiliates) when appropriate.
- Selection process
As a reflection of our commitment to openness, transparency, and bilateral engagement with the Wikimedia community, the 2022 advisors selection process will include a public review and comment period. All applications must be posted on Meta between January 01 and January 31, 2022 at the nomination page, and the community will be invited to provide comments and feedback about each candidate. At the end of the nomination period, the applications will be voted on by the members of the committee, taking into account comments put forward by the committee's members, advisors, Wikimedia Foundation staff and board liaisons, and the community. A final decision will be made in February 2022, with new advisors expected to begin later that month.
- How to apply
If you are interested in advising the committee, please submit your candidacy on the nomination page between January 01 to January 31, 2022. Your application must include the following information:
- Your full name and Wikimedia username
- A statement describing your relevant experience, skills, and motivation for joining the committee as an advisor.
- The advisor role you would like to serve
- Answers to the following three questions:
- How do you think affiliates work best together to partner on effective projects and initiatives?
- What do you see as the role of affiliates in the Wikimedia movement in the next three years?
- What do you feel you will bring as an advisor to the committee that makes you a uniquely qualified candidate?
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact the committee. We are happy to chat or have a phone call with anyone about our work if this helps them decide to apply. Please distribute this call among your networks, and do apply if you are interested!
On behalf of the committee,
--FULBERT (talk) 13:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: December 2021[edit]
| ||||||
This Month in GLAM: December 2021[edit]
| ||||||