Hi all, In my personal opinion, the term "emerging communities" is much more healthy and acceptable than Global South, which always sounded patronizing and diminshing.
And I also like and celebrate the initiative to create our own definition :) Cheers! P.S.: The map in the link needs a thorough review ;) El sept. 28, 2017 7:09 AM, "Gerard Meijssen" <[email protected]> escribió: > Hoi, > For me this initiative raises more questions then it answers. As I > understand it, it is a change in vocabulary and it defines when a > Wikipedia community is big enough to get "official" attention. > > My problem is that it is very much standalone; it does not connect with > other practices. It does mention "incubating languages" but it does not > mention the incubator. In the language committee we have had organisations, > educational organisations who want to champion a language in their school. > This makes them bigger than the limit of 10 editors. At this time we do not > have a way to accomodate such requests. In my opinion for all the wrong > reasons. The wrong reasons because we know how effective schools are in > providing basic facts in a Wikipedia.. > > Once the Wikimedia Foundation had a group of technical people who worked on > language technology. Most of these people are still working at the WMF but > they are no longer involved in language tech. This became obvious when a > really worthy improvement for the Bashkir language, collation, was > implemented by a volunteer and Amir blogged that he had supported it as a > *volunteer*.. (he made a point of this). Particularly in the smaller > languages issues like collation are areas where the Wikimedia could make a > big difference. It is quite obvious that when we advertise the quality of > our language support (and because of our existing font support it is > already quite good) we can gain a lot of adventurous people. > > In the current approach to languages and support it is imho very much > Wikipedia as we know it. We do not leverage the content in Wikidata as much > as we could. There has a lot of acrimoniousness regarding the Cebuano > Wikipedia. Millions of articles were generated as fixed text and > consequently it is currently impossible to maintain it. The root cause is > our inability to cooperate. When this information was imported in Wikidata > (and cooperate with the original source) we could generate the text and > serve it as cached content. When the data is improved, the cached text gets > changed. The fact that such things are not considered is proof perfect of > opportunities wasted. Opportunities open to any language. > > So it would be really cool when we consider how we can "share in the sum of > all our available knowledge". This is attainable if we dare to think > through what we can achieve and how we can make the most out of our > communities and the knowledge they hold. > Thanks, > GerardM > > On 27 September 2017 at 19:28, Asaf Bartov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Dear Wikimedians, > > > > Years ago, as part of the first Strategy process of 2009-2010, a > > distinction entered our lives, between Global North and Global South > > countries. That distinction was borrowed from a United Nations agency > > named ITU, and it was used as shorthand to refer to communities the > > Foundation considered to need additional resources and help to achieve > > impact on our mission of creating and sharing free knowledge. > > > > However, the distinction was never a very good fit for us. It was based > on > > UN notions like the Human Development Index, and gave much weight to > > nation-wide economic conditions. Its binary nature did not allow for > > distinguishing between countries where Wikimedia work is possible and > > happening, albeit with difficulty, and ones where no Wikimedia work, or > > next to none, is happening, or possible. It also looked only at > geography, > > whereas much of our work is defined by language communities and not by > > geographies. And it was political and alienating to many people. > > > > In short, it was both not as useful as we needed it to be as well as > > unloved and rejected by many. > > > > The Community Resources team at the Wikimedia Foundation has been > thinking > > about replacing that distinction with a more nuanced one, that would be a > > much better fit with our needs, would take into account the actual state > of > > editing communities, would consider multiple axes beyond geography, and > > would be less controversial. > > > > We began using the term "emerging communities" two years ago, first as a > > replacement for the term Global South, but it has always been our > intention > > to define Emerging Communities ourselves. Finishing the proposed > > definition took a back seat for a while due to other priorities, but we > are > > ready to share the proposed definition today: > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement/ > > Defining_Emerging_Communities > > > > > > We welcome your thoughts, on the talk page (ideally) or on this thread. > > The definition is already our working definition, but we are open to > > incorporating changes to both wording and substance through October 31st. > > > > Be sure to take a look at the FAQ supplied at the bottom of the page, > too. > > :) > > > > Cheers, > > > > Asaf > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: [email protected] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
