[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

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

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

Jay Walsh
Posted to the WMF and WM UK blogs a few moments ago.

http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/09/28/joint-statement-from-wikimedia-foundation-and-wikimedia-uk/
http://blog.wikimedia.org.uk/2012/09/joint-statement-from-wikimedia-foundation-and-wikimedia-uk/

---

*Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK
*
Over the past six months, a Wikimedia UK trustee led two Wikipedia-related
projects, Monmouthpedia and Gibraltarpedia, in a way that seemed to some
observers to blur his roles as a Wikimedia UK trustee, a paid consultant
for the projects’ government partners, and an editor of the English
Wikipedia. This raised questions in the Wikimedia community about whether a
trustee was able to balance appropriately the interests of his clients with
his responsibilities to Wikimedia UK, the values and editorial policies of
Wikipedia, and whether any conflict of interest that arose as a result was
effectively managed.

To better understand the facts and details of these allegations and to
ensure that governance arrangements commensurate with the standing of the
Wikimedia Foundation, Wikimedia UK and the worldwide Wikimedia movement,
Wikimedia UK’s trustees and the Wikimedia Foundation will jointly appoint
an independent expert advisor to objectively review both Wikimedia UK’s
governance arrangements and its handling of the conflict of interest.

The review will consider Wikimedia UK’s current governance arrangements,
current internal policies, such as the Trustee Code of Conduct, the Nolan
Committee Requirements, the Conflicts of Interest policy, the Representing
Wikimedia UK policy, any other relevant policies of Wikimedia UK, and best
ethical practices.

Considering specifically the conflict of interest, we will ask the expert
advisor to identify any gaps between how the conflict of interest situation
within Wikimedia UK would ideally have been handled and how it actually was
handled, and to recommend how situations such as this should be managed in
the future. The review will also touch on any activities that may have
blurred work as a paid consultant with work as a Wikipedia editor, but
recommendations for changes to Wikipedia’s policies and practices will be
outside its scope: we leave the broader topic of reviewing Wikipedia’s
editorial policies to the community.

Once the review is completed, it will be reviewed by both the Wikimedia
Foundation and Wikimedia UK and then published.

At the same time, Wikimedia UK has agreed with the Wikimedia Foundation
that the Foundation shall process payments for the United Kingdom during
this year’s fundraiser.

Wikimedia UK has the benefit of legal and professional advice to assist in
understanding and handling conflicts of interests. The goal of both
organizations in carrying out this review, and Wikimedia UK’s in deciding
to absent itself from the 2012 fundraising campaign as a payment processor,
is to demonstrate that we mutually recognize the importance of handling
conflicts well beyond simple requirements of the law. We understand our
responsibilities to you: the members of Wikimedia UK and the Wikimedia
movement, its donors, editors, and readers.

_______________________________________________
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
_______________________________________________
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

David Gerard-2
On 28 September 2012 21:18, Jay Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:

> At the same time, Wikimedia UK has agreed with the Wikimedia Foundation that
> the Foundation shall process payments for the United Kingdom during this
> year’s fundraiser.


This being the meat.


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

Nathan Awrich
Wow. I honestly didn't think the conflict of interest issue was this
serious. What does giving up the next fundraiser due to the WM-UK
budget? Does this change reflect a lack of trust between the WMF and
the current WM-UK leadership?

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:20 PM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 28 September 2012 21:18, Jay Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> At the same time, Wikimedia UK has agreed with the Wikimedia Foundation that
>> the Foundation shall process payments for the United Kingdom during this
>> year’s fundraiser.
>
>
> This being the meat.
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

Risker
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
On 28 September 2012 16:20, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 28 September 2012 21:18, Jay Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > At the same time, Wikimedia UK has agreed with the Wikimedia Foundation
> that
> > the Foundation shall process payments for the United Kingdom during this
> > year’s fundraiser.
>
>
> This being the meat.
>
>
> - d.
>
>
> David, just a little technical issue.  The header of this message
indicates that the text by Jay Walsh was sent to this list, but it's not in
the archives, and I've not seen it on this list (it appears that it's only
on announce-L).  I will cut and paste the whole thing below.

Risker

Posted to the WMF and WM UK blogs a few moments ago.
http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/09/28/joint-statement-from-wikimedia-foundation-and-wikimedia-uk/http://blog.wikimedia.org.uk/2012/09/joint-statement-from-wikimedia-foundation-and-wikimedia-uk/

---

*Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK
*
Over the past six months, a Wikimedia UK trustee led two Wikipedia-related
projects, Monmouthpedia and Gibraltarpedia, in a way that seemed to some
observers to blur his roles as a Wikimedia UK trustee, a paid consultant
for the projects’ government partners, and an editor of the English
Wikipedia. This raised questions in the Wikimedia community about whether a
trustee was able to balance appropriately the interests of his clients with
his responsibilities to Wikimedia UK, the values and editorial policies of
Wikipedia, and whether any conflict of interest that arose as a result was
effectively managed.

To better understand the facts and details of these allegations and to
ensure that governance arrangements commensurate with the standing of the
Wikimedia Foundation, Wikimedia UK and the worldwide Wikimedia movement,
Wikimedia UK’s trustees and the Wikimedia Foundation will jointly appoint
an independent expert advisor to objectively review both Wikimedia UK’s
governance arrangements and its handling of the conflict of interest.

The review will consider Wikimedia UK’s current governance arrangements,
current internal policies, such as the Trustee Code of Conduct, the Nolan
Committee Requirements, the Conflicts of Interest policy, the Representing
Wikimedia UK policy, any other relevant policies of Wikimedia UK, and best
ethical practices.

Considering specifically the conflict of interest, we will ask the expert
advisor to identify any gaps between how the conflict of interest situation
within Wikimedia UK would ideally have been handled and how it actually was
handled, and to recommend how situations such as this should be managed in
the future. The review will also touch on any activities that may have
blurred work as a paid consultant with work as a Wikipedia editor, but
recommendations for changes to Wikipedia’s policies and practices will be
outside its scope: we leave the broader topic of reviewing Wikipedia’s
editorial policies to the community.

Once the review is completed, it will be reviewed by both the Wikimedia
Foundation and Wikimedia UK and then published.

At the same time, Wikimedia UK has agreed with the Wikimedia Foundation
that the Foundation shall process payments for the United Kingdom during
this year’s fundraiser.

Wikimedia UK has the benefit of legal and professional advice to assist in
understanding and handling conflicts of interests. The goal of both
organizations in carrying out this review, and Wikimedia UK’s in deciding
to absent itself from the 2012 fundraising campaign as a payment processor,
is to demonstrate that we mutually recognize the importance of handling
conflicts well beyond simple requirements of the law. We understand our
responsibilities to you: the members of Wikimedia UK and the Wikimedia
movement, its donors, editors, and readers.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaannounce-l/attachments/20120928/606f0739/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

Thomas Dalton
In reply to this post by Nathan Awrich
On Sep 28, 2012 9:45 PM, "Nathan" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Wow. I honestly didn't think the conflict of interest issue was this
> serious.

The conflict wasn't that bad, but the very poor handling of it casts
serious doubts on how well Wikimedia UK leadership understands its
responsibilities and its ability to carry them out. I suspect that is why
the wmf has insisted on this.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

Michael Peel-4
In reply to this post by Jay Walsh
Please note that I have been requesting an urgent correction to this statement since 21:17 today (it is now 23:00), without receiving any response from the WMF.

Thanks,
Mike

On 28 Sep 2012, at 21:18, Jay Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Posted to the WMF and WM UK blogs a few moments ago.
>
> http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/09/28/joint-statement-from-wikimedia-foundation-and-wikimedia-uk/
> http://blog.wikimedia.org.uk/2012/09/joint-statement-from-wikimedia-foundation-and-wikimedia-uk/
>
> ---
>
> Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK
>
> Over the past six months, a Wikimedia UK trustee led two Wikipedia-related projects, Monmouthpedia and Gibraltarpedia, in a way that seemed to some observers to blur his roles as a Wikimedia UK trustee, a paid consultant for the projects’ government partners, and an editor of the English Wikipedia. This raised questions in the Wikimedia community about whether a trustee was able to balance appropriately the interests of his clients with his responsibilities to Wikimedia UK, the values and editorial policies of Wikipedia, and whether any conflict of interest that arose as a result was effectively managed.
>
> To better understand the facts and details of these allegations and to ensure that governance arrangements commensurate with the standing of the Wikimedia Foundation, Wikimedia UK and the worldwide Wikimedia movement, Wikimedia UK’s trustees and the Wikimedia Foundation will jointly appoint an independent expert advisor to objectively review both Wikimedia UK’s governance arrangements and its handling of the conflict of interest.
>
> The review will consider Wikimedia UK’s current governance arrangements, current internal policies, such as the Trustee Code of Conduct, the Nolan Committee Requirements, the Conflicts of Interest policy, the Representing Wikimedia UK policy, any other relevant policies of Wikimedia UK, and best ethical practices.
>
> Considering specifically the conflict of interest, we will ask the expert advisor to identify any gaps between how the conflict of interest situation within Wikimedia UK would ideally have been handled and how it actually was handled, and to recommend how situations such as this should be managed in the future. The review will also touch on any activities that may have blurred work as a paid consultant with work as a Wikipedia editor, but recommendations for changes to Wikipedia’s policies and practices will be outside its scope: we leave the broader topic of reviewing Wikipedia’s editorial policies to the community.
>
> Once the review is completed, it will be reviewed by both the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK and then published.
>
> At the same time, Wikimedia UK has agreed with the Wikimedia Foundation that the Foundation shall process payments for the United Kingdom during this year’s fundraiser.
>
> Wikimedia UK has the benefit of legal and professional advice to assist in understanding and handling conflicts of interests. The goal of both organizations in carrying out this review, and Wikimedia UK’s in deciding to absent itself from the 2012 fundraising campaign as a payment processor, is to demonstrate that we mutually recognize the importance of handling conflicts well beyond simple requirements of the law. We understand our responsibilities to you: the members of Wikimedia UK and the Wikimedia movement, its donors, editors, and readers.
> _______________________________________________
> Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> _______________________________________________
> WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-Blog mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-blog

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

Deryck Chan-2
In reply to this post by Thomas Dalton
On 28 September 2012 22:39, Thomas Dalton <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sep 28, 2012 9:45 PM, "Nathan" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Wow. I honestly didn't think the conflict of interest issue was this
> > serious.
>
> The conflict wasn't that bad, but the very poor handling of it casts
> serious doubts on how well Wikimedia UK leadership understands its
> responsibilities and its ability to carry them out. I suspect that is why
> the wmf has insisted on this.
>

I respectfully disagree. As I see it, the crux of the problem comes not
from the WMUK leadership's handling of the situation, but the continuous
hounding by outsiders against the Wikimedians involved in the conflict,
which from my point of view made it largely impossible for the WMUK board
to navigate through the conflict unscathed.

Perhaps that means I do agree there's doubt on how much ability WMUK's
leadership can deal with the conflict; but I simply don't see how it
could've been better handled given the situation WMUK was in.

Over the last two years WMF has become increasingly conservative over how
payment-processing should work, so much as to cause constant decry from the
local chapters, though it still comes as a surprise that WMF is retracting
payment-processing from WMUK. I can but guess that WMF is now becoming so
overly conservative that they would rather stop supporting local groups
altogether than risk the local groups bringing WMF into any trouble, a move
which I understand but am very disappointed to see.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

Michael Snow-5
In reply to this post by Michael Peel-4
On 9/28/2012 3:00 PM, Michael Peel wrote:
> Please note that I have been requesting an urgent correction to this statement since 21:17 today (it is now 23:00), without receiving any response from the WMF.
I think it's only fair to point out that your request is not for a
"correction", at most it could be called a change or clarification. I
wasn't involved in preparing the statement, but in reviewing it there's
nothing that appears incorrect to me.

--Michael Snow

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

Andy Mabbett-2
In reply to this post by Michael Peel-4
On 28 September 2012 23:00, Michael Peel <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Please note that I have been requesting an urgent correction to this statement since 21:17 today (it is now 23:00), without receiving any response from the WMF.

Correcting what, exactly?

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

Michael Peel-4

On 28 Sep 2012, at 23:17, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 28 September 2012 23:00, Michael Peel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Please note that I have been requesting an urgent correction to this statement since 21:17 today (it is now 23:00), without receiving any response from the WMF.
>
> Correcting what, exactly?

The first sentence of the statement. Sadly, I have yet to receive a response regarding my request for the last 2 hours. :-(

Mike


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

Thomas Dalton
How about you shake your addiction to secrecy and tell us what the problem
is?
On Sep 28, 2012 11:20 PM, "Michael Peel" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>
> On 28 Sep 2012, at 23:17, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On 28 September 2012 23:00, Michael Peel <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Please note that I have been requesting an urgent correction to this
> statement since 21:17 today (it is now 23:00), without receiving any
> response from the WMF.
> >
> > Correcting what, exactly?
>
> The first sentence of the statement. Sadly, I have yet to receive a
> response regarding my request for the last 2 hours. :-(
>
> Mike
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

phoebe ayers-3
In reply to this post by Nathan Awrich
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Nathan <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Wow. I honestly didn't think the conflict of interest issue was this
> serious. What does giving up the next fundraiser due to the WM-UK
> budget? Does this change reflect a lack of trust between the WMF and
> the current WM-UK leadership?
>

Hi Nathan,

Just on the fundraiser point -- the idea of the new FDC (funds
dissemination committee) process is that chapter budget allocations
would be totally independent of how much they do or don't raise via
payment-processing -- on the principle that funds should be allocated
according to need/impact, rather than tied to or based on in-country
fundraising stats. So WMUK's budget planning process shouldn't be
changed, aside from maybe how they plan for the fundraiser, since they
would prepare a project budget for review either way.

-- Phoebe (not speaking for anyone!)

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

John Mark Vandenberg
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 3:20 AM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 28 September 2012 21:18, Jay Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> At the same time, Wikimedia UK has agreed with the Wikimedia Foundation that
>> the Foundation shall process payments for the United Kingdom during this
>> year’s fundraiser.
>
>
> This being the meat.

The selection criteria for payment processors should have been defined
and used to evaluate whether each chapter is 'fit' for the purpose.
e.g.

1. technical capability,
2. fundraising know-how,
3. dedication to the donor's bill of rights

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donor%27s_Bill_of_Rights

Note that the donor's bill of rights includes more than just privacy,
which is what is required by the fundraising agreement.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2012-13_Fundraising_Agreement_%28Master%29

Anyway, most chapters have decided to adopt the donor's bill of
rights, including WMUK.

https://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Donor_Privacy_Policy

--
John Vandenberg

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia-blog] [Wikimedia Announcements] Joint statement from Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia UK

Andrew Turvey
In reply to this post by phoebe ayers-3
Phoebe,

(please note I am no longer a board member of WMUK so speak with no
particular knowledge of the situation other than what is publicly known)

In practice I think the impact of this decision is more significant than
you make out. WMUK, as with all chapters, is established as a legally and
operationally independent organisation and as such has
significant fiduciary duties to its members and donors.  One of the key
risks that the chapter has had to manage for a number of years now relates
to the dependency on the Foundation as the sole source of funding. If you
look, for instance, at the draft five year plan that was written months
ago, it includes the following section:

http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/2012_Five_Year_Plan#Fundraising

<quote>

Fundraising

Wikimedia UK is a young and rapidly growing charity. At the moment, we are
reliant almost entirely on the WMF annual fundraiser for our operating
funds. We do not consider this to be a sustainable situation, since it
involves a significant concentration of risk. We therefore need to
diversify our revenue....

Three year target

   - ... To have no more than 70% of our revenue coming from the WMF annual
   fundraiser, or any other single source

Five year target

   - For our core committed expenditures to be financially independent of
   the annual fundraiser...

<quote/>

It was bad enough when it was the annual fundraiser that was the course of
concentration risk, which could, at any time, be withdrawn
by the Foundation, albeit within a multilateral framework.  To turn this
into an FDC grant would be to exacerbate this risk.

I hope, when the chapter comes to quantify the amount of their FDC grant
application they seriously consider scaling back the amount requested and
redoubling efforts to source alternative funding routes.

Regards,

On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 1:33 AM, phoebe ayers <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Nathan <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Wow. I honestly didn't think the conflict of interest issue was this
> > serious. What does giving up the next fundraiser due to the WM-UK
> > budget? Does this change reflect a lack of trust between the WMF and
> > the current WM-UK leadership?
> >
>
> Hi Nathan,
>
> Just on the fundraiser point -- the idea of the new FDC (funds
> dissemination committee) process is that chapter budget allocations
> would be totally independent of how much they do or don't raise via
> payment-processing -- on the principle that funds should be allocated
> according to need/impact, rather than tied to or based on in-country
> fundraising stats. So WMUK's budget planning process shouldn't be
> changed, aside from maybe how they plan for the fundraiser, since they
> would prepare a project budget for review either way.
>
> -- Phoebe (not speaking for anyone!)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>



--
Andrew Turvey
--
07403 216 991
@AndrewTurvey <https://twitter.com/#!/AndrewTurvey>
http://www.facebook.com/andrew.turvey
http://en.wikipedia.org/User:AndrewRT
http://englishwikipedian.blogspot.co.uk/
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l