[Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of structured data on Commons

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
27 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of structured data on Commons

Joseph Seddon-6
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Development

Of any use?

Seddon

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Dear Wes
>
> Thank you for yet another prompt response.  It seems almost churlish to say
> that unfortunately that is not what I have been asking for -- I must be
> very bad at expressing myself to have given so many different people so
> many different mistaken impressions of my request.  To me a product roadmap
> would be a quite high-level view of the new products and major deveopments
> and their linkages looking out on a time scale significantly in excess of a
> single year, and at a level of detail significantly less than the
> aggregation of all the teams' quarterly plans.  The roadmap would have the
> level of abstraction, interconnection and timscale that allows you to say
> that a three-year project such as the one you have just announced will
> expedite features on your roadmap and that the grant enabled accelerating
> the already started work on Structured Commons into a quicker three-year
> time frame: so a roadmap on which you can locate a project with a time
> frame that was previously beyond three years let alone one.  It is also
> known that there are long-term projects such as parser unification, new
> editors and discussion systems which look out well beyond the current
> year.  Are there others -- we do not (yet) know.
>
> So again, my request is that you share this higher-level, longer-term, if
> not completely definitve roadmap with the community in the interests of
> transparency not only as an abstract  objective but in order to maximise
> the benefits of early engagement, discussion and co-creation.
>
> Yours
> "Rogol"
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Wes Moran <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hello Rogol,
> >
> > Thanks for the question.  The Annual Plan we follow and share with the
> > community for review before we begin our work is available on Meta [1].
> We
> > update specific plans on a quarterly basis on our goals pages [2] as they
> > may evolve over the year. We also provide a number of links for the
> > specific teams on our Product page and welcome participation, discussion
> or
> > connection through those pathways and directly with the feature teams
> [3].
> >
> > Specifically the Wikidata, Community Tech, Editing and Discovery teams
> have
> > specific objectives and goals in this years annual plan.
> >
> > Hope this answers your question and certainly engage in the ongoing
> > discussion around the work on the Commons page [4].
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Wes
> >
> > Wes Moran
> > Vice President of Product
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> >
> > [1]
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > Annual_Plan/2016-2017/Final#Product
> > [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2016-17_Goals
> > [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Product
> > [4] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Overview
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks to both Lydia and Denny for these further replies.  I assume
> that
> > > the WMF has a clear stable and unified view of where it is taking its
> > > various products and the dependencies, which is what I understand by
> the
> > > phrase product roadmap.  "A single document" would be nice, but
> whatever
> > it
> > > is, I am asking for it to be shared with the community.
> > >
> > > "Rogol"
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Denny Vrandečić <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Rogol,
> > > >
> > > > that is why I pointed you to the links in that document, which go all
> > the
> > > > way back to 2004 discussions of such a project, and further
> discussions
> > > > over the years. These pretty much establish for me that this item has
> > > been
> > > > a topic for commons for more than a decade now. But it seems I am
> > > > misunderstanding you, and you are not looking for a documentation of
> > the
> > > > shared understanding of the roadmap for Commons and other Wikimedia
> > > > products, but for a singular Foundation-written document that fixes
> the
> > > > Wikimedia product roadmap over several years instead?
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Denny
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:00 AM Rogol Domedonfors <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Denny
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you but the link you provide appears to be to be "Our
> > high-level
> > > > > roadmap for developing the project", namely the Structured Data in
> > > > Commons
> > > > > project.  Since Lisa wrote "Structured Data on Commons was in our
> > > product
> > > > > roadmap" I was referring to the product roadmap on which the
> > Structured
> > > > > Data in Commons project is included -- that is, I was asking for a
> > > > pointer
> > > > > to the roadmap for "features both on the Wikidata development
> > roadmap,
> > > > and
> > > > > in other products supported by the Wikimedia Foundation" referred
> to
> > in
> > > > Wes
> > > > > Moran's initial post on this topic:
> > > > >
> > > > > But I appreciate the speed of your reply.
> > > > >
> > > > > "Rogol"
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Denny Vrandečić <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Rogol,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > this was the link previously provided on this project:
> > > > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
> > Overview
> > > > > > including
> > > > > > links to previous documents.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Denny
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:32 AM Rogol Domedonfors <
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Lisa
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You say that "Structured Data on Commons was in our product
> > > roadmap,
> > > > so
> > > > > > > this grant is not diverting our attention.  The grant simply
> > > enables
> > > > us
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > accelerate the work we were planning to do".  Please would you
> > > > publish,
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > point to, a version of that product roadmap that can inform the
> > > > > > community's
> > > > > > > participation in such planning exercises as the 2017 Wikimedia
> > > > Movement
> > > > > > > Strategy and other more tactical product planning processes.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks in advance
> > > > > > > "Rogol"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Lisa Gruwell <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Pete and Gerard-
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I just wanted to give my thoughts on restricted gifts.  Like
> > most
> > > > > > things,
> > > > > > > > there are both good and bad restricted gifts.  They can be
> bad
> > > if a
> > > > > > > funder
> > > > > > > > is making a well-intentioned gift that none-the-less pulls
> the
> > > > > > > organization
> > > > > > > > in direction that they were not planning to go.  Or even
> worse,
> > > > when
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > > funder pays for something outside of an org's plans that has
> > > > ongoing
> > > > > > > > maintenance cost that are not covered in the grant.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This is why the WMF board reviews all restricted grants per
> our
> > > > gift
> > > > > > > policy
> > > > > > > > <https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Gift_policy>.  Those
> are
> > > the
> > > > > > types
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > dynamics that the board considers when they review a
> restricted
> > > > > grant.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Structured Data on Commons was in our product roadmap, so
> this
> > > > grant
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > diverting our attention.  The grant simply enables us to
> > > accelerate
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > work we were planning to do.  In terms of restrictions, we
> have
> > > to
> > > > > > follow
> > > > > > > > through with the plan we submitted.  In other words, do what
> we
> > > > said
> > > > > we
> > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > going to do.  I think that accountability is a good thing.
> And
> > > the
> > > > > > Sloan
> > > > > > > > Foundation is a great long-term funder of WMF.  If something
> > > > changes
> > > > > as
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > work progress, I have no doubt we could have a reasonable
> > > > > conversation
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > them about adjusting the plan.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > Lisa
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Gerard Meijssen <
> > > > > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > > > > > Maybe restricted but the subject matter is exactly what we
> > want
> > > > > > anyway.
> > > > > > > > > Where I have my reservations is that Wikidata will be set
> in
> > > > stone
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > stuff that just is not right will be with us for forever.
> > With
> > > > more
> > > > > > > money
> > > > > > > > > it does not need to be a huge problem because it makes it
> > more
> > > > > > > > manageable.
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > >       GerardM
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 9 January 2017 at 21:52, Pete Forsyth <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Structured data on Commons is a huge and important area
> --
> > > for
> > > > > one
> > > > > > > > thing,
> > > > > > > > > > the whole Media Viewer project would have gone much more
> > > > smoothly
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > there
> > > > > > > > > > were underlying structured data to rely on. Kudos to WMF
> > and
> > > > > Sloan
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > focus on this issue!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If I'm not mistaken, this is by far the most extravagant
> > > > > restricted
> > > > > > > > grant
> > > > > > > > > > in the history of the WMF. I believe the Stanton
> > Foundation's
> > > > > > > usability
> > > > > > > > > > grant ($890k in 2008)[1] and Public Policy Initiative
> grant
> > > > ($1.2
> > > > > > > > million
> > > > > > > > > > in 2010)[2] are the only ones that comes close. In the
> > past,
> > > > WMF
> > > > > > > board
> > > > > > > > > > members have expressed great skepticism about --
> > specifically
> > > > --
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Sloan
> > > > > > > > > > Foundation's influence, when it sought to place an
> observer
> > > in
> > > > > WMF
> > > > > > > > board
> > > > > > > > > > meetings. A former WMF Executive Director has written at
> > > length
> > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > dangers of restricted grants.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > It appears there is a new theory in play around
> restricted
> > > > > grants.
> > > > > > > Will
> > > > > > > > > > somebody be expressing it publicly? Will the past
> practice
> > of
> > > > > > > > publishing
> > > > > > > > > > the details of the grant expectations be followed?[3]
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -Pete
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://blog.wikimedia.org/
> > > 2008/12/03/improved-usability-
> > > > > > > > > > in-our-future/
> > > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > > > > https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/May_
> > > > > > > > > > 2010_Wikimedia_Foundation_will_engage_academic_experts_
> > > > > > > > > > and_students_to_improve_public_policy_information
> > > > > > > > > > [3]
> > > > > > > > > > https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Public_Policy_
> > > > > > > > > > Initiative_project_details
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Wes Moran <
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello Wikimedia community,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It’s our delight to inform you that we received a
> > > > US$3,015,000
> > > > > > > grant
> > > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > > > the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
> > > > > > > > > > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_P._Sloan_
> > Foundation>
> > > > [1]
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > expedite
> > > > > > > > > > > development of structured data on Commons. The grant
> will
> > > be
> > > > > > given
> > > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > course of three years, and will allow us to develop a
> > team,
> > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > collaboration with the Wikidata team at Wikimedia
> > > > Deutschland,
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > > > focus on integrating the structured data features of
> > > Wikidata
> > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > > > > describing the media files on Commons.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > This work will allow us to expedite features both on
> the
> > > > > Wikidata
> > > > > > > > > > > development roadmap, and in other products supported by
> > the
> > > > > > > Wikimedia
> > > > > > > > > > > Foundation. The grant also provides funding to ensure
> > that
> > > > > > movement
> > > > > > > > > > > stakeholders, like Wiki Loves Monuments and GLAM-Wiki
> > > program
> > > > > > > > leaders,
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > external partners who contribute heavily to Commons,
> such
> > > as
> > > > > > GLAMs,
> > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > > > involved in the development.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We have drafted a high level overview of the grant and
> > its
> > > > > scope,
> > > > > > > > > > available
> > > > > > > > > > > on Commons
> > > > > > > > > > > <https://commons.wikimedia.
> org/wiki/Commons:Structured_
> > > > > > > > > data/Sloan_Grant>
> > > > > > > > > > > [2]. A blog post about the grant is also available on
> the
> > > > > > Wikimedia
> > > > > > > > > blog
> > > > > > > > > > > <https://blog.wikimedia.org/
> 2017/01/09/sloan-foundation-
> > > > > > > > > structured-data>
> > > > > > > > > > > [3].
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We are currently in the process of identifying the
> > > technical
> > > > > lead
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > project. If you have questions, Alex Stinson, the
> > > > Foundation’s
> > > > > > > > > GLAM-Wiki
> > > > > > > > > > > strategist, will be leading the community engagement
> and
> > > > > > > > communications
> > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > the project until we hire a community liaison as part
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > grant.
> > > > > > > > > Stay
> > > > > > > > > > > tuned for more details about the project in the coming
> > > > months.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We’re excited to be able to support this project, and
> > look
> > > > > > forward
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > your
> > > > > > > > > > > participation in its development.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thank you,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Wes Moran and Maggie Dennis
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > *Wes Moran, Vice President of Product*
> > > > > > > > > > > *Maggie Dennis, Interim Chief of Community Engagement *
> > > > > > > > > > > *Wikimedia Foundation*
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> > > Alfred_P._Sloan_Foundation
> > > > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
> > > > > > > > > > Sloan_Grant
> > > > > > > > > > > [3] https://blog.wikimedia.org/
> > > 2017/01/09/sloan-foundation-
> > > > > > > > > > structured-data
> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> > > > > > unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> > > > unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> > > unsubscribe>
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> > unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> unsubscribe>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>



--
Seddon

*Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
*Wikimedia Foundation*
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of structured data on Commons

Alex Stinson-4
In reply to this post by Wes Moran
Specifically in response to Pete's questions about documents:

We have posted the Grant application materials on Foundation Wiki, with a
section linking to them on the Commons Grant Information page.[1]

Cheers,

Alex Stinson


[1]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Sloan_Grant#What_did_the_grant_application_look_like.3F



> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 12:52:57 -0800
> From: Pete Forsyth <[hidden email]>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of
>         structured data on Commons
> Message-ID:
>         <CAGWts0GK8VErKG7tuPN3hQDHHXvq2_1RbYqh_xJp0+6W03=inQ@mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Structured data on Commons is a huge and important area -- for one thing,
> the whole Media Viewer project would have gone much more smoothly if there
> were underlying structured data to rely on. Kudos to WMF and Sloan for the
> focus on this issue!
>
> If I'm not mistaken, this is by far the most extravagant restricted grant
> in the history of the WMF. I believe the Stanton Foundation's usability
> grant ($890k in 2008)[1] and Public Policy Initiative grant ($1.2 million
> in 2010)[2] are the only ones that comes close. In the past, WMF board
> members have expressed great skepticism about -- specifically -- the Sloan
> Foundation's influence, when it sought to place an observer in WMF board
> meetings. A former WMF Executive Director has written at length about the
> dangers of restricted grants.
>
> It appears there is a new theory in play around restricted grants. Will
> somebody be expressing it publicly? Will the past practice of publishing
> the details of the grant expectations be followed?[3]
>
> -Pete
> --
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> [1] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2008/12/03/improved-usability-
> in-our-future/
> [2]
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/May_
> 2010_Wikimedia_Foundation_will_engage_academic_experts_
> and_students_to_improve_public_policy_information
> [3]
> https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Public_Policy_
> Initiative_project_details
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Wes Moran <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hello Wikimedia community,
> >
> > It’s our delight to inform you that we received a US$3,015,000 grant from
> > the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
> > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_P._Sloan_Foundation> [1] to
> expedite
> > development of structured data on Commons. The grant will be given over
> the
> > course of three years, and will allow us to develop a team, in
> > collaboration with the Wikidata team at Wikimedia Deutschland, that can
> > focus on integrating the structured data features of Wikidata into
> > describing the media files on Commons.
> >
> > This work will allow us to expedite features both on the Wikidata
> > development roadmap, and in other products supported by the Wikimedia
> > Foundation. The grant also provides funding to ensure that movement
> > stakeholders, like Wiki Loves Monuments and GLAM-Wiki program leaders,
> and
> > external partners who contribute heavily to Commons, such as GLAMs, can
> be
> > involved in the development.
> >
> > We have drafted a high level overview of the grant and its scope,
> available
> > on Commons
> > <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Sloan_Grant>
> > [2]. A blog post about the grant is also available on the Wikimedia blog
> > <https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/01/09/sloan-foundation-structured-data>
> > [3].
> >
> > We are currently in the process of identifying the technical lead for the
> > project. If you have questions, Alex Stinson, the Foundation’s GLAM-Wiki
> > strategist, will be leading the community engagement and communications
> for
> > the project until we hire a community liaison as part of the grant. Stay
> > tuned for more details about the project in the coming months.
> >
> > We’re excited to be able to support this project, and look forward to
> your
> > participation in its development.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Wes Moran and Maggie Dennis
> >
> > *Wes Moran, Vice President of Product*
> > *Maggie Dennis, Interim Chief of Community Engagement *
> > *Wikimedia Foundation*
> >
> > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_P._Sloan_Foundation
> > [2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
> Sloan_Grant
> > [3] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/01/09/sloan-foundation-
> structured-data
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list,  guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 154, Issue 19
> ********************************************
>



--
Alex Stinson
GLAM-Wiki Strategist
Wikimedia Foundation
Twitter:@glamwiki/@sadads

Learn more about how the communities behind Wikipedia, Wikidata and other
Wikimedia projects partner with cultural heritage organizations:
http://glamwiki.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of structured data on Commons

Saroj Dhakal-2
Great news indeed!

Thanks,
Saroj

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Alex Stinson <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Specifically in response to Pete's questions about documents:
>
> We have posted the Grant application materials on Foundation Wiki, with a
> section linking to them on the Commons Grant Information page.[1]
>
> Cheers,
>
> Alex Stinson
>
>
> [1]
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
> Sloan_Grant#What_did_the_grant_application_look_like.3F
>
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 12:52:57 -0800
> > From: Pete Forsyth <[hidden email]>
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of
> >         structured data on Commons
> > Message-ID:
> >         <CAGWts0GK8VErKG7tuPN3hQDHHXvq2_1RbYqh_xJp0+6W03=inQ@mail.
> > gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> >
> > Structured data on Commons is a huge and important area -- for one thing,
> > the whole Media Viewer project would have gone much more smoothly if
> there
> > were underlying structured data to rely on. Kudos to WMF and Sloan for
> the
> > focus on this issue!
> >
> > If I'm not mistaken, this is by far the most extravagant restricted grant
> > in the history of the WMF. I believe the Stanton Foundation's usability
> > grant ($890k in 2008)[1] and Public Policy Initiative grant ($1.2 million
> > in 2010)[2] are the only ones that comes close. In the past, WMF board
> > members have expressed great skepticism about -- specifically -- the
> Sloan
> > Foundation's influence, when it sought to place an observer in WMF board
> > meetings. A former WMF Executive Director has written at length about the
> > dangers of restricted grants.
> >
> > It appears there is a new theory in play around restricted grants. Will
> > somebody be expressing it publicly? Will the past practice of publishing
> > the details of the grant expectations be followed?[3]
> >
> > -Pete
> > --
> > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> >
> > [1] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2008/12/03/improved-usability-
> > in-our-future/
> > [2]
> > https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/May_
> > 2010_Wikimedia_Foundation_will_engage_academic_experts_
> > and_students_to_improve_public_policy_information
> > [3]
> > https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Public_Policy_
> > Initiative_project_details
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Wes Moran <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Wikimedia community,
> > >
> > > It’s our delight to inform you that we received a US$3,015,000 grant
> from
> > > the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
> > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_P._Sloan_Foundation> [1] to
> > expedite
> > > development of structured data on Commons. The grant will be given over
> > the
> > > course of three years, and will allow us to develop a team, in
> > > collaboration with the Wikidata team at Wikimedia Deutschland, that can
> > > focus on integrating the structured data features of Wikidata into
> > > describing the media files on Commons.
> > >
> > > This work will allow us to expedite features both on the Wikidata
> > > development roadmap, and in other products supported by the Wikimedia
> > > Foundation. The grant also provides funding to ensure that movement
> > > stakeholders, like Wiki Loves Monuments and GLAM-Wiki program leaders,
> > and
> > > external partners who contribute heavily to Commons, such as GLAMs, can
> > be
> > > involved in the development.
> > >
> > > We have drafted a high level overview of the grant and its scope,
> > available
> > > on Commons
> > > <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_
> data/Sloan_Grant>
> > > [2]. A blog post about the grant is also available on the Wikimedia
> blog
> > > <https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/01/09/sloan-foundation-
> structured-data>
> > > [3].
> > >
> > > We are currently in the process of identifying the technical lead for
> the
> > > project. If you have questions, Alex Stinson, the Foundation’s
> GLAM-Wiki
> > > strategist, will be leading the community engagement and communications
> > for
> > > the project until we hire a community liaison as part of the grant.
> Stay
> > > tuned for more details about the project in the coming months.
> > >
> > > We’re excited to be able to support this project, and look forward to
> > your
> > > participation in its development.
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > >
> > > Wes Moran and Maggie Dennis
> > >
> > > *Wes Moran, Vice President of Product*
> > > *Maggie Dennis, Interim Chief of Community Engagement *
> > > *Wikimedia Foundation*
> > >
> > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_P._Sloan_Foundation
> > > [2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
> > Sloan_Grant
> > > [3] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/01/09/sloan-foundation-
> > structured-data
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Digest Footer
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list,  guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > End of Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 154, Issue 19
> > ********************************************
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Alex Stinson
> GLAM-Wiki Strategist
> Wikimedia Foundation
> Twitter:@glamwiki/@sadads
>
> Learn more about how the communities behind Wikipedia, Wikidata and other
> Wikimedia projects partner with cultural heritage organizations:
> http://glamwiki.org
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of structured data on Commons

rupert THURNER-2
In reply to this post by Rogol Domedonfors
Rogol, a good start into 2017! I have difficulties understanding your
question, especially why you are asking it now. This topic was discussed
quite often and for a long time to justify putting money behind talking at
least imo.

you are unhappy a restricted grant was received without community consensus
on commons to have such a technology included? Or you are unhappy that WMF
builds up a Wikidata team when wikimedia Deutschland has already one? You
are unhappy that WMF cuts the money for WMDE and at the same time increases
spending in the same area of technology? Or you are unhappy that there will
be another technical lead while at WMDE there is a lot of experience which
you consider waste and unnecessary bureaucracy? Or you want to discuss how
it will be implemented? Or, to put it in other words, what input would you
give or expect if a document like you are requesting would exist?

Best Rupert



On Jan 10, 2017 11:28 PM, "Rogol Domedonfors" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dear Wes

Thank you for yet another prompt response.  It seems almost churlish to say
that unfortunately that is not what I have been asking for -- I must be
very bad at expressing myself to have given so many different people so
many different mistaken impressions of my request.  To me a product roadmap
would be a quite high-level view of the new products and major deveopments
and their linkages looking out on a time scale significantly in excess of a
single year, and at a level of detail significantly less than the
aggregation of all the teams' quarterly plans.  The roadmap would have the
level of abstraction, interconnection and timscale that allows you to say
that a three-year project such as the one you have just announced will
expedite features on your roadmap and that the grant enabled accelerating
the already started work on Structured Commons into a quicker three-year
time frame: so a roadmap on which you can locate a project with a time
frame that was previously beyond three years let alone one.  It is also
known that there are long-term projects such as parser unification, new
editors and discussion systems which look out well beyond the current
year.  Are there others -- we do not (yet) know.

So again, my request is that you share this higher-level, longer-term, if
not completely definitve roadmap with the community in the interests of
transparency not only as an abstract  objective but in order to maximise
the benefits of early engagement, discussion and co-creation.

Yours
"Rogol"

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Wes Moran <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello Rogol,
>
> Thanks for the question.  The Annual Plan we follow and share with the
> community for review before we begin our work is available on Meta [1]. We
> update specific plans on a quarterly basis on our goals pages [2] as they
> may evolve over the year. We also provide a number of links for the
> specific teams on our Product page and welcome participation, discussion
or
> connection through those pathways and directly with the feature teams [3].
>
> Specifically the Wikidata, Community Tech, Editing and Discovery teams
have

> specific objectives and goals in this years annual plan.
>
> Hope this answers your question and certainly engage in the ongoing
> discussion around the work on the Commons page [4].
>
> Thanks,
> Wes
>
> Wes Moran
> Vice President of Product
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> Annual_Plan/2016-2017/Final#Product
> [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2016-17_Goals
> [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Product
> [4] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Overview
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <[hidden email]
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks to both Lydia and Denny for these further replies.  I assume that
> > the WMF has a clear stable and unified view of where it is taking its
> > various products and the dependencies, which is what I understand by the
> > phrase product roadmap.  "A single document" would be nice, but whatever
> it
> > is, I am asking for it to be shared with the community.
> >
> > "Rogol"
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Denny Vrandečić <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Rogol,
> > >
> > > that is why I pointed you to the links in that document, which go all
> the
> > > way back to 2004 discussions of such a project, and further
discussions
> > > over the years. These pretty much establish for me that this item has
> > been
> > > a topic for commons for more than a decade now. But it seems I am
> > > misunderstanding you, and you are not looking for a documentation of
> the
> > > shared understanding of the roadmap for Commons and other Wikimedia
> > > products, but for a singular Foundation-written document that fixes
the

> > > Wikimedia product roadmap over several years instead?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Denny
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:00 AM Rogol Domedonfors <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Denny
> > > >
> > > > Thank you but the link you provide appears to be to be "Our
> high-level
> > > > roadmap for developing the project", namely the Structured Data in
> > > Commons
> > > > project.  Since Lisa wrote "Structured Data on Commons was in our
> > product
> > > > roadmap" I was referring to the product roadmap on which the
> Structured
> > > > Data in Commons project is included -- that is, I was asking for a
> > > pointer
> > > > to the roadmap for "features both on the Wikidata development
> roadmap,
> > > and
> > > > in other products supported by the Wikimedia Foundation" referred to
> in
> > > Wes
> > > > Moran's initial post on this topic:
> > > >
> > > > But I appreciate the speed of your reply.
> > > >
> > > > "Rogol"
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Denny Vrandečić <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Rogol,
> > > > >
> > > > > this was the link previously provided on this project:
> > > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
> Overview
> > > > > including
> > > > > links to previous documents.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Denny
> > > > >
> > > > >>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of structured data on Commons

Rogol Domedonfors
Rupert,

A Happy New Year to you too.  I don't see why my personal motivation for
asking this question would come into it.  The request is to publish the
overall product roadmap to the community, for the community to collaborate
with the WMF on planning the future products.  That does not sound to me
like any kind of complaint about past actions – why would you assume that?

In answer to Joseph's posting: this response was about current planning for
the one product, while my request is about medium-to-long term planning for
the whole product range.

"Rogol"

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 6:47 AM, rupert THURNER <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Rogol, a good start into 2017! I have difficulties understanding your
> question, especially why you are asking it now. This topic was discussed
> quite often and for a long time to justify putting money behind talking at
> least imo.
>
> you are unhappy a restricted grant was received without community consensus
> on commons to have such a technology included? Or you are unhappy that WMF
> builds up a Wikidata team when wikimedia Deutschland has already one? You
> are unhappy that WMF cuts the money for WMDE and at the same time increases
> spending in the same area of technology? Or you are unhappy that there will
> be another technical lead while at WMDE there is a lot of experience which
> you consider waste and unnecessary bureaucracy? Or you want to discuss how
> it will be implemented? Or, to put it in other words, what input would you
> give or expect if a document like you are requesting would exist?
>
> Best Rupert
>
>
>
> On Jan 10, 2017 11:28 PM, "Rogol Domedonfors" <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> Dear Wes
>
> Thank you for yet another prompt response.  It seems almost churlish to say
> that unfortunately that is not what I have been asking for -- I must be
> very bad at expressing myself to have given so many different people so
> many different mistaken impressions of my request.  To me a product roadmap
> would be a quite high-level view of the new products and major deveopments
> and their linkages looking out on a time scale significantly in excess of a
> single year, and at a level of detail significantly less than the
> aggregation of all the teams' quarterly plans.  The roadmap would have the
> level of abstraction, interconnection and timscale that allows you to say
> that a three-year project such as the one you have just announced will
> expedite features on your roadmap and that the grant enabled accelerating
> the already started work on Structured Commons into a quicker three-year
> time frame: so a roadmap on which you can locate a project with a time
> frame that was previously beyond three years let alone one.  It is also
> known that there are long-term projects such as parser unification, new
> editors and discussion systems which look out well beyond the current
> year.  Are there others -- we do not (yet) know.
>
> So again, my request is that you share this higher-level, longer-term, if
> not completely definitve roadmap with the community in the interests of
> transparency not only as an abstract  objective but in order to maximise
> the benefits of early engagement, discussion and co-creation.
>
> Yours
> "Rogol"
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Wes Moran <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hello Rogol,
> >
> > Thanks for the question.  The Annual Plan we follow and share with the
> > community for review before we begin our work is available on Meta [1].
> We
> > update specific plans on a quarterly basis on our goals pages [2] as they
> > may evolve over the year. We also provide a number of links for the
> > specific teams on our Product page and welcome participation, discussion
> or
> > connection through those pathways and directly with the feature teams
> [3].
> >
> > Specifically the Wikidata, Community Tech, Editing and Discovery teams
> have
> > specific objectives and goals in this years annual plan.
> >
> > Hope this answers your question and certainly engage in the ongoing
> > discussion around the work on the Commons page [4].
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Wes
> >
> > Wes Moran
> > Vice President of Product
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> >
> > [1]
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > Annual_Plan/2016-2017/Final#Product
> > [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2016-17_Goals
> > [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Product
> > [4] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Overview
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks to both Lydia and Denny for these further replies.  I assume
> that
> > > the WMF has a clear stable and unified view of where it is taking its
> > > various products and the dependencies, which is what I understand by
> the
> > > phrase product roadmap.  "A single document" would be nice, but
> whatever
> > it
> > > is, I am asking for it to be shared with the community.
> > >
> > > "Rogol"
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Denny Vrandečić <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Rogol,
> > > >
> > > > that is why I pointed you to the links in that document, which go all
> > the
> > > > way back to 2004 discussions of such a project, and further
> discussions
> > > > over the years. These pretty much establish for me that this item has
> > > been
> > > > a topic for commons for more than a decade now. But it seems I am
> > > > misunderstanding you, and you are not looking for a documentation of
> > the
> > > > shared understanding of the roadmap for Commons and other Wikimedia
> > > > products, but for a singular Foundation-written document that fixes
> the
> > > > Wikimedia product roadmap over several years instead?
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Denny
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:00 AM Rogol Domedonfors <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Denny
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you but the link you provide appears to be to be "Our
> > high-level
> > > > > roadmap for developing the project", namely the Structured Data in
> > > > Commons
> > > > > project.  Since Lisa wrote "Structured Data on Commons was in our
> > > product
> > > > > roadmap" I was referring to the product roadmap on which the
> > Structured
> > > > > Data in Commons project is included -- that is, I was asking for a
> > > > pointer
> > > > > to the roadmap for "features both on the Wikidata development
> > roadmap,
> > > > and
> > > > > in other products supported by the Wikimedia Foundation" referred
> to
> > in
> > > > Wes
> > > > > Moran's initial post on this topic:
> > > > >
> > > > > But I appreciate the speed of your reply.
> > > > >
> > > > > "Rogol"
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Denny Vrandečić <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Rogol,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > this was the link previously provided on this project:
> > > > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
> > Overview
> > > > > > including
> > > > > > links to previous documents.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Denny
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of structured data on Commons

Nabin K. Sapkota
That's a great news!!

Thanks,
Nabin
Wikimedians of Nepal


On Jan 11, 2017 11:33 PM, "Rogol Domedonfors" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Rupert,
>
> A Happy New Year to you too.  I don't see why my personal motivation for
> asking this question would come into it.  The request is to publish the
> overall product roadmap to the community, for the community to collaborate
> with the WMF on planning the future products.  That does not sound to me
> like any kind of complaint about past actions – why would you assume that?
>
> In answer to Joseph's posting: this response was about current planning for
> the one product, while my request is about medium-to-long term planning for
> the whole product range.
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 6:47 AM, rupert THURNER <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Rogol, a good start into 2017! I have difficulties understanding your
> > question, especially why you are asking it now. This topic was discussed
> > quite often and for a long time to justify putting money behind talking
> at
> > least imo.
> >
> > you are unhappy a restricted grant was received without community
> consensus
> > on commons to have such a technology included? Or you are unhappy that
> WMF
> > builds up a Wikidata team when wikimedia Deutschland has already one? You
> > are unhappy that WMF cuts the money for WMDE and at the same time
> increases
> > spending in the same area of technology? Or you are unhappy that there
> will
> > be another technical lead while at WMDE there is a lot of experience
> which
> > you consider waste and unnecessary bureaucracy? Or you want to discuss
> how
> > it will be implemented? Or, to put it in other words, what input would
> you
> > give or expect if a document like you are requesting would exist?
> >
> > Best Rupert
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jan 10, 2017 11:28 PM, "Rogol Domedonfors" <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Dear Wes
> >
> > Thank you for yet another prompt response.  It seems almost churlish to
> say
> > that unfortunately that is not what I have been asking for -- I must be
> > very bad at expressing myself to have given so many different people so
> > many different mistaken impressions of my request.  To me a product
> roadmap
> > would be a quite high-level view of the new products and major
> deveopments
> > and their linkages looking out on a time scale significantly in excess
> of a
> > single year, and at a level of detail significantly less than the
> > aggregation of all the teams' quarterly plans.  The roadmap would have
> the
> > level of abstraction, interconnection and timscale that allows you to say
> > that a three-year project such as the one you have just announced will
> > expedite features on your roadmap and that the grant enabled accelerating
> > the already started work on Structured Commons into a quicker three-year
> > time frame: so a roadmap on which you can locate a project with a time
> > frame that was previously beyond three years let alone one.  It is also
> > known that there are long-term projects such as parser unification, new
> > editors and discussion systems which look out well beyond the current
> > year.  Are there others -- we do not (yet) know.
> >
> > So again, my request is that you share this higher-level, longer-term, if
> > not completely definitve roadmap with the community in the interests of
> > transparency not only as an abstract  objective but in order to maximise
> > the benefits of early engagement, discussion and co-creation.
> >
> > Yours
> > "Rogol"
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Wes Moran <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Rogol,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the question.  The Annual Plan we follow and share with the
> > > community for review before we begin our work is available on Meta [1].
> > We
> > > update specific plans on a quarterly basis on our goals pages [2] as
> they
> > > may evolve over the year. We also provide a number of links for the
> > > specific teams on our Product page and welcome participation,
> discussion
> > or
> > > connection through those pathways and directly with the feature teams
> > [3].
> > >
> > > Specifically the Wikidata, Community Tech, Editing and Discovery teams
> > have
> > > specific objectives and goals in this years annual plan.
> > >
> > > Hope this answers your question and certainly engage in the ongoing
> > > discussion around the work on the Commons page [4].
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Wes
> > >
> > > Wes Moran
> > > Vice President of Product
> > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > > Annual_Plan/2016-2017/Final#Product
> > > [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2016-17_Goals
> > > [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Product
> > > [4] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
> Overview
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> > [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks to both Lydia and Denny for these further replies.  I assume
> > that
> > > > the WMF has a clear stable and unified view of where it is taking its
> > > > various products and the dependencies, which is what I understand by
> > the
> > > > phrase product roadmap.  "A single document" would be nice, but
> > whatever
> > > it
> > > > is, I am asking for it to be shared with the community.
> > > >
> > > > "Rogol"
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Denny Vrandečić <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Rogol,
> > > > >
> > > > > that is why I pointed you to the links in that document, which go
> all
> > > the
> > > > > way back to 2004 discussions of such a project, and further
> > discussions
> > > > > over the years. These pretty much establish for me that this item
> has
> > > > been
> > > > > a topic for commons for more than a decade now. But it seems I am
> > > > > misunderstanding you, and you are not looking for a documentation
> of
> > > the
> > > > > shared understanding of the roadmap for Commons and other Wikimedia
> > > > > products, but for a singular Foundation-written document that fixes
> > the
> > > > > Wikimedia product roadmap over several years instead?
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Denny
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:00 AM Rogol Domedonfors <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Denny
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you but the link you provide appears to be to be "Our
> > > high-level
> > > > > > roadmap for developing the project", namely the Structured Data
> in
> > > > > Commons
> > > > > > project.  Since Lisa wrote "Structured Data on Commons was in our
> > > > product
> > > > > > roadmap" I was referring to the product roadmap on which the
> > > Structured
> > > > > > Data in Commons project is included -- that is, I was asking for
> a
> > > > > pointer
> > > > > > to the roadmap for "features both on the Wikidata development
> > > roadmap,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > in other products supported by the Wikimedia Foundation" referred
> > to
> > > in
> > > > > Wes
> > > > > > Moran's initial post on this topic:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But I appreciate the speed of your reply.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Rogol"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Denny Vrandečić <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Rogol,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > this was the link previously provided on this project:
> > > > > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
> > > Overview
> > > > > > > including
> > > > > > > links to previous documents.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > Denny
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of structured data on Commons

Pete Forsyth-2
In reply to this post by Rogol Domedonfors
Replying to Alex and Lisa (and Rogol) in one message:

Alex, thank you for linking the 32 page public version of the grant to the
Sloan Foundation. It is indeed an impressive quantity of information, and
I'm glad that this kind of transparency was built into the process --
having written grant proposals on behalf of WMF, I'm keenly aware of how
much of an additional challenge that creates, and applaud the team. That
said, it's a lot of info to look over, so if I have any more substantive
comments, it will take a little time.

Lisa, I also appreciate your timely response about restricted grants. It's
good to have a little insight into your thinking, which resonates. I do
hope for more, in time. In the past, I felt all of us associated with
Wikimedia could take legitimate pride in our connection to an organization
that took a leadership role in the thinking on philanthropic giving. (As
you may recall, I wrote up an overview about it last year:
https://wikistrategies.net/grant-transparency/ ) It was especially
distressing to see this issue play a central role in last year's crises, in
the sense that the Knowledge Engine was rooted in a strategy of restricted
grant opacity. I am still hoping the organization will take decisive steps
toward reclaiming its position as a significant thought leader on the topic.

Perhaps the strategic planning process will offer an opportunity to do so?

In general, my questions are strongly aligned with those Rogol Domedonfors
is asking, both in this thread and in the one about historical documents.
Restricted grants can be one of the more visible artifacts that reflect the
large-scale thinking of the organization; it's broadly important to the
movement that the large-scale thinking be visible.

It has not been very long since a broadcast video led by Lila Tretikov and
Jimmy Wales ended with a bit of open mockery of the value of long-term
strategic planning. That was in jest, I understand, but in the absence of a
more serious followup, not a great thing for Wikimedia stakeholders to
hear.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2016-12-22/News_and_notes
We have a new executive director, new faces on the board, many things are
running very smoothly, and many good things are happening. But we still
lack a foundation for insight into how the rapidly expanding organization
is thinking. Billions of people have a stake in those questions.

If there are no readily-available answers that can be shared, I hope at
least that the strategic planning process will begin to flesh out some of
what has been driving the WMF, and what will drive it in the years to come.

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Dear Wes
>
> Thank you for yet another prompt response.  It seems almost churlish to say
> that unfortunately that is not what I have been asking for -- I must be
> very bad at expressing myself to have given so many different people so
> many different mistaken impressions of my request.  To me a product roadmap
> would be a quite high-level view of the new products and major deveopments
> and their linkages looking out on a time scale significantly in excess of a
> single year, and at a level of detail significantly less than the
> aggregation of all the teams' quarterly plans.  The roadmap would have the
> level of abstraction, interconnection and timscale that allows you to say
> that a three-year project such as the one you have just announced will
> expedite features on your roadmap and that the grant enabled accelerating
> the already started work on Structured Commons into a quicker three-year
> time frame: so a roadmap on which you can locate a project with a time
> frame that was previously beyond three years let alone one.  It is also
> known that there are long-term projects such as parser unification, new
> editors and discussion systems which look out well beyond the current
> year.  Are there others -- we do not (yet) know.
>
> So again, my request is that you share this higher-level, longer-term, if
> not completely definitve roadmap with the community in the interests of
> transparency not only as an abstract  objective but in order to maximise
> the benefits of early engagement, discussion and co-creation.
>
> Yours
> "Rogol"
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:29 PM, Wes Moran <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hello Rogol,
> >
> > Thanks for the question.  The Annual Plan we follow and share with the
> > community for review before we begin our work is available on Meta [1].
> We
> > update specific plans on a quarterly basis on our goals pages [2] as they
> > may evolve over the year. We also provide a number of links for the
> > specific teams on our Product page and welcome participation, discussion
> or
> > connection through those pathways and directly with the feature teams
> [3].
> >
> > Specifically the Wikidata, Community Tech, Editing and Discovery teams
> have
> > specific objectives and goals in this years annual plan.
> >
> > Hope this answers your question and certainly engage in the ongoing
> > discussion around the work on the Commons page [4].
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Wes
> >
> > Wes Moran
> > Vice President of Product
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> >
> > [1]
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_
> > Annual_Plan/2016-2017/Final#Product
> > [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2016-17_Goals
> > [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Product
> > [4] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Overview
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks to both Lydia and Denny for these further replies.  I assume
> that
> > > the WMF has a clear stable and unified view of where it is taking its
> > > various products and the dependencies, which is what I understand by
> the
> > > phrase product roadmap.  "A single document" would be nice, but
> whatever
> > it
> > > is, I am asking for it to be shared with the community.
> > >
> > > "Rogol"
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Denny Vrandečić <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Rogol,
> > > >
> > > > that is why I pointed you to the links in that document, which go all
> > the
> > > > way back to 2004 discussions of such a project, and further
> discussions
> > > > over the years. These pretty much establish for me that this item has
> > > been
> > > > a topic for commons for more than a decade now. But it seems I am
> > > > misunderstanding you, and you are not looking for a documentation of
> > the
> > > > shared understanding of the roadmap for Commons and other Wikimedia
> > > > products, but for a singular Foundation-written document that fixes
> the
> > > > Wikimedia product roadmap over several years instead?
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Denny
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:00 AM Rogol Domedonfors <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Denny
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you but the link you provide appears to be to be "Our
> > high-level
> > > > > roadmap for developing the project", namely the Structured Data in
> > > > Commons
> > > > > project.  Since Lisa wrote "Structured Data on Commons was in our
> > > product
> > > > > roadmap" I was referring to the product roadmap on which the
> > Structured
> > > > > Data in Commons project is included -- that is, I was asking for a
> > > > pointer
> > > > > to the roadmap for "features both on the Wikidata development
> > roadmap,
> > > > and
> > > > > in other products supported by the Wikimedia Foundation" referred
> to
> > in
> > > > Wes
> > > > > Moran's initial post on this topic:
> > > > >
> > > > > But I appreciate the speed of your reply.
> > > > >
> > > > > "Rogol"
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Denny Vrandečić <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Rogol,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > this was the link previously provided on this project:
> > > > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
> > Overview
> > > > > > including
> > > > > > links to previous documents.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Denny
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:32 AM Rogol Domedonfors <
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Lisa
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You say that "Structured Data on Commons was in our product
> > > roadmap,
> > > > so
> > > > > > > this grant is not diverting our attention.  The grant simply
> > > enables
> > > > us
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > accelerate the work we were planning to do".  Please would you
> > > > publish,
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > point to, a version of that product roadmap that can inform the
> > > > > > community's
> > > > > > > participation in such planning exercises as the 2017 Wikimedia
> > > > Movement
> > > > > > > Strategy and other more tactical product planning processes.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks in advance
> > > > > > > "Rogol"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Lisa Gruwell <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Pete and Gerard-
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I just wanted to give my thoughts on restricted gifts.  Like
> > most
> > > > > > things,
> > > > > > > > there are both good and bad restricted gifts.  They can be
> bad
> > > if a
> > > > > > > funder
> > > > > > > > is making a well-intentioned gift that none-the-less pulls
> the
> > > > > > > organization
> > > > > > > > in direction that they were not planning to go.  Or even
> worse,
> > > > when
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > > funder pays for something outside of an org's plans that has
> > > > ongoing
> > > > > > > > maintenance cost that are not covered in the grant.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This is why the WMF board reviews all restricted grants per
> our
> > > > gift
> > > > > > > policy
> > > > > > > > <https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Gift_policy>.  Those
> are
> > > the
> > > > > > types
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > dynamics that the board considers when they review a
> restricted
> > > > > grant.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Structured Data on Commons was in our product roadmap, so
> this
> > > > grant
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > diverting our attention.  The grant simply enables us to
> > > accelerate
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > work we were planning to do.  In terms of restrictions, we
> have
> > > to
> > > > > > follow
> > > > > > > > through with the plan we submitted.  In other words, do what
> we
> > > > said
> > > > > we
> > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > going to do.  I think that accountability is a good thing.
> And
> > > the
> > > > > > Sloan
> > > > > > > > Foundation is a great long-term funder of WMF.  If something
> > > > changes
> > > > > as
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > work progress, I have no doubt we could have a reasonable
> > > > > conversation
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > them about adjusting the plan.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > Lisa
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Gerard Meijssen <
> > > > > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > > > > > Maybe restricted but the subject matter is exactly what we
> > want
> > > > > > anyway.
> > > > > > > > > Where I have my reservations is that Wikidata will be set
> in
> > > > stone
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > stuff that just is not right will be with us for forever.
> > With
> > > > more
> > > > > > > money
> > > > > > > > > it does not need to be a huge problem because it makes it
> > more
> > > > > > > > manageable.
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > >       GerardM
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 9 January 2017 at 21:52, Pete Forsyth <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Structured data on Commons is a huge and important area
> --
> > > for
> > > > > one
> > > > > > > > thing,
> > > > > > > > > > the whole Media Viewer project would have gone much more
> > > > smoothly
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > there
> > > > > > > > > > were underlying structured data to rely on. Kudos to WMF
> > and
> > > > > Sloan
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > focus on this issue!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If I'm not mistaken, this is by far the most extravagant
> > > > > restricted
> > > > > > > > grant
> > > > > > > > > > in the history of the WMF. I believe the Stanton
> > Foundation's
> > > > > > > usability
> > > > > > > > > > grant ($890k in 2008)[1] and Public Policy Initiative
> grant
> > > > ($1.2
> > > > > > > > million
> > > > > > > > > > in 2010)[2] are the only ones that comes close. In the
> > past,
> > > > WMF
> > > > > > > board
> > > > > > > > > > members have expressed great skepticism about --
> > specifically
> > > > --
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Sloan
> > > > > > > > > > Foundation's influence, when it sought to place an
> observer
> > > in
> > > > > WMF
> > > > > > > > board
> > > > > > > > > > meetings. A former WMF Executive Director has written at
> > > length
> > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > dangers of restricted grants.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > It appears there is a new theory in play around
> restricted
> > > > > grants.
> > > > > > > Will
> > > > > > > > > > somebody be expressing it publicly? Will the past
> practice
> > of
> > > > > > > > publishing
> > > > > > > > > > the details of the grant expectations be followed?[3]
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -Pete
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://blog.wikimedia.org/
> > > 2008/12/03/improved-usability-
> > > > > > > > > > in-our-future/
> > > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > > > > https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/May_
> > > > > > > > > > 2010_Wikimedia_Foundation_will_engage_academic_experts_
> > > > > > > > > > and_students_to_improve_public_policy_information
> > > > > > > > > > [3]
> > > > > > > > > > https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Public_Policy_
> > > > > > > > > > Initiative_project_details
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Wes Moran <
> > > > [hidden email]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hello Wikimedia community,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It’s our delight to inform you that we received a
> > > > US$3,015,000
> > > > > > > grant
> > > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > > > the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
> > > > > > > > > > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_P._Sloan_
> > Foundation>
> > > > [1]
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > expedite
> > > > > > > > > > > development of structured data on Commons. The grant
> will
> > > be
> > > > > > given
> > > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > course of three years, and will allow us to develop a
> > team,
> > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > collaboration with the Wikidata team at Wikimedia
> > > > Deutschland,
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > > > focus on integrating the structured data features of
> > > Wikidata
> > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > > > > describing the media files on Commons.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > This work will allow us to expedite features both on
> the
> > > > > Wikidata
> > > > > > > > > > > development roadmap, and in other products supported by
> > the
> > > > > > > Wikimedia
> > > > > > > > > > > Foundation. The grant also provides funding to ensure
> > that
> > > > > > movement
> > > > > > > > > > > stakeholders, like Wiki Loves Monuments and GLAM-Wiki
> > > program
> > > > > > > > leaders,
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > external partners who contribute heavily to Commons,
> such
> > > as
> > > > > > GLAMs,
> > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > > > involved in the development.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We have drafted a high level overview of the grant and
> > its
> > > > > scope,
> > > > > > > > > > available
> > > > > > > > > > > on Commons
> > > > > > > > > > > <https://commons.wikimedia.
> org/wiki/Commons:Structured_
> > > > > > > > > data/Sloan_Grant>
> > > > > > > > > > > [2]. A blog post about the grant is also available on
> the
> > > > > > Wikimedia
> > > > > > > > > blog
> > > > > > > > > > > <https://blog.wikimedia.org/
> 2017/01/09/sloan-foundation-
> > > > > > > > > structured-data>
> > > > > > > > > > > [3].
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We are currently in the process of identifying the
> > > technical
> > > > > lead
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > project. If you have questions, Alex Stinson, the
> > > > Foundation’s
> > > > > > > > > GLAM-Wiki
> > > > > > > > > > > strategist, will be leading the community engagement
> and
> > > > > > > > communications
> > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > the project until we hire a community liaison as part
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > grant.
> > > > > > > > > Stay
> > > > > > > > > > > tuned for more details about the project in the coming
> > > > months.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We’re excited to be able to support this project, and
> > look
> > > > > > forward
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > your
> > > > > > > > > > > participation in its development.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thank you,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Wes Moran and Maggie Dennis
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > *Wes Moran, Vice President of Product*
> > > > > > > > > > > *Maggie Dennis, Interim Chief of Community Engagement *
> > > > > > > > > > > *Wikimedia Foundation*
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> > > Alfred_P._Sloan_Foundation
> > > > > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/
> > > > > > > > > > Sloan_Grant
> > > > > > > > > > > [3] https://blog.wikimedia.org/
> > > 2017/01/09/sloan-foundation-
> > > > > > > > > > structured-data
> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> > > > > > unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> > > > unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> > > unsubscribe>
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> > unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=
> unsubscribe>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
12