Water cooler: Difference between revisions

From Wikimedia UK
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Reverted edits by 94.169.88.144 (talk) to last revision by KTC)
(Revert to revision 82259 dated 2020-09-22 02:51:05 by 86.21.206.209 using popups)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
{|style="float:right;border:solid silver 1px;margin-left:8px;margin-bottom:4px;"
{{divbox|blue|Welcome to the water cooler| This is a place to find out what is happening and to discuss our external projects and activities.  Feel free to suggest ideas that could help our charitable mission or ask questions about how you can help.  To discuss the inner workings of the charity, head over to the [[engine room]].}}
{{divbox|green|WMUK Grants programme - a piece of cake?[[file:Tile wmuk.jpeg|75px|left]]|<center>Applying for a grant is easy.<p>If Wikimedia UK can help you improve Wikimedia projects, check out our [[grants|grants page]].</center>}}
{| style="float:right;border:solid silver 1px;margin-left:8px;margin-bottom:4px;"
|-
|-
|[[File:Archives.png|x100px]]
|[[File:Archives.png|x100px]]
|-
|-
|align=center|{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2009|[[/2009|2009]]}}{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2010|<br>[[/2010|2010]]}}{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2011|<br>[[/2011|2011]]}}{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2012|<br>[[/2012|2012]]}}
| align="center" |{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2009|[[/2009|2009]]}}{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2010|<br>[[/2010|2010]]}}{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2011|<br>[[/2011|2011]]}}{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2012|<br>[[/2012|2012]]}}{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2013|<br>[[/2013|2013]]}}{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2014|<br>[[/2014|2014]]}}{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2015|<br>[[/2015|2015]]}}{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2016|<br>[[/2016|2016]]}}{{#ifexist:Water_cooler/2017|<br>[[/2017|2017]]}}
|}
|}
__TOC__


We need somewhere for random chatter, so here is somewhere! --[[User:Tango|Tango]] 22:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
== Kanban for editathons ==


__TOC__
[[File:WCCWiki4.jpg|thumb|A {{wp|kanban board}} at the Women in Classical Studies editathon at Senate House, London]]
I just saw the newsletter with a picture of the {{wp|kanban board}} used at the Women in Classical Studies editathon.  What a great idea!  It helps people share what they are working on.  Helps to avoid edit conflicts.  Enables organisers to list all the articles that have been improved.  It could possibly work well for a recap session at the end too, where people talk about the changes they made.


== Foundation listing ==
Who was involved with that editathon?  Who has used it elsewhere?  I would love to hear how it has been used in practice.


Could someone tweak http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Local_chapters to say that we are a charity? Not in my SUL for some reason. Thanks --[[User:|]] 22:04, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
[[User:Yaris678|Yaris678]] ([[User talk:Yaris678|talk]]) 15:09, 3 February 2017 (GMT)
: Done. The WMF wiki doesn't use SUL since it is closed for general editing - you need a separate login for it. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] 00:02, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


== Wikimania 2012 scholarships ==
: Hi [[User:Yaris678|Yaris678]], I was the lead trainer at the [[ wikipedia:Meetups/UK/Institute_of_Classical_Studies_Jan_2017 |Women in Classical Studies editathon]]. I saw the kanban in an [https://www.instagram.com/p/BClfaSjhVdG/ Instagram post] for an [[wikipedia:Meetup/ArtAndFeminism|Art+Feminism]] editathon. It worked much better than expected - a fantastic indicator of the [https://youtu.be/bAWxTPZZNrg?t=2m27s achievements of the day].[[User:Eartha78|Eartha78]] ([[User talk:Eartha78|talk]]) 19:02, 3 February 2017 (GMT)


The [http://wikimania2012.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships Wikimania 2012 scholarships page] is now online. I'm aware that last year Wikimedia UK helped fund some scholarships on top of those provided by the Foundation budget. [http://wikimania2012.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships/FAQ#Other_sponsored_scholarships According to the FAQ], this year chapter scholarships will universally use the same application system as Foundation scholarships, and that applicants will automatically be considered for chapter scholarships as well, where available. Is Wikimedia UK planning to participate in this? [[User:CT Cooper|CT Cooper]]<small><span style="font-weight:bold;">&nbsp;·</span>&#32;[[User talk:CT Cooper|talk]]</small> 21:29, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
::Cool. So how did you use it? Did you get people to brainstorm a load of post-its of articles to look at, at the beginning of the day?  Did you just say 'if you have an idea, stick it on the board'?  Did you come with the post-its filled out already?  [[User:Yaris678|Yaris678]] ([[User talk:Yaris678|talk]]) 10:25, 11 February 2017 (GMT)
: We have a budget that will support people's attendance at Wikimania 2012, but we haven't yet had chance to discuss the details (such as the number of scholarships, the criteria, and the application method). I'd personally love to see us participating in the main application system, but the timing of this may sadly mean that this isn't possible and we may have to make use of an independent application system. In particular, the board's attention is currently focused on the [[meta:Fundraising and Funds Dissemination|Fundraising and Funds Dissemination]] discussion, as well as UK-specific activities, that have prevented us from discussing Wikimania 2012 thus far. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] 21:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
:: I'm not to fussed about applying multiple times as necessary, and I understand the board has plenty of other things to think about. Thank you for your quick response. [[User:CT Cooper|CT Cooper]]<small><span style="font-weight:bold;">&nbsp;·</span>&#32;[[User talk:CT Cooper|talk]]</small> 22:22, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
:::Mike: If you want to do a separate application process, that's okay I guess. Or we can allow you to review UK applicants (after Feb 16) to the main scholarship system and select some. Either way, please let us know so we can plan accordingly. Cheers. [[User:Aude|Aude]] 21:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
:::: I'll see what we can do - but there's so much going on right now that this probably needs to wait at least a week or so before we can start to think about this in any detail. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] 00:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
::::: To wrap this up: we are offering scholarships via [http://wikimania2012.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships the main Wikimania scholarships program] - so please apply there. :-) Thanks. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] 20:18, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
:::::: Excellent, that should make things easier for applicants. [[User:CT Cooper|CT Cooper]]<small><span style="font-weight:bold;">&nbsp;·</span>&#32;[[User talk:CT Cooper|talk]]</small> 23:07, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


== Huge foot ==
::: The group were quite well prepared prior to the editathon. They had identified a number of articles to create - some had already done the research and started to writing in their sandbox. When we began the second part of the editathon they each committed to an article, wrote it on a sticky note and stuck it to the wall!  Moving the notes from left to right was surprisingly motivating and a good excuse to stretch ones legs. Also used the sticky notes for an evaluation exercise at the end of the session. [[User:Eartha78|Eartha78]] ([[User talk:Eartha78|talk]]) 18:27, 16 February 2017 (GMT)


Every page on WMUK includes 3 lines saying <small>''"Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited, a Charitable Company registered in England and Wales. Registered Company No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office: 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT"''</small> in the footer. Do we ''really'' need to do this, it seems unsightly? By the way, the Main page duplicates all this information in the body, which seems doubly unsightly. --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] 21:26, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
::::Thank you Eartha78. That is really interesting. I will use this next time I do an editathon. [[User:Yaris678|Yaris678]] ([[User talk:Yaris678|talk]]) 09:39, 19 February 2017 (GMT)
: Yes. Or at least: the information in that text needs to be on official pages (and correspondence). It doesn't need to be duplicated, though - so can probably be removed from the body of pages. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] 21:45, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
::I'm wondering if it can be shrunk down, I'm not sure the Co. no., C. no. and full postal address all need to be there as opposed to on a linked contact page. It might also just be shrunk to an even smaller font or just wrapped in a way that does not take up three separate lines. --[[User:|]] 22:57, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
:::I thought the address, charity number, and registered name had to be on all official pages and that seems to be the easiest way to put them there. I don't see the extra few lines at the bottom as a big deal&mdash;it's about the same as is taken up by <small>''This page was last modified on 16 January 2012 at 06:24. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of use for details. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.''</small> at the bottom of Wikipedia. [[User:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Teal" face="Tahoma">'''Harry&nbsp;Mitchell'''</font>]] &#124; [[User talk:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Navy" face= "Times New Roman">Penny for your thoughts? </font>]] 02:12, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


== Friendly Space policy ==
== Wikimedia UK's plans for 2018 - community consultation ==
[[File:Programmes Consultation Video - Wikimedia UK.webm|centre|thumb|800x800px|Watch our video about our plans for 2018]]


Does anyone have counter suggestions with regard to adopting the WMF policy for dealing with harassment at events ([[:wmf:Friendly_space_policy]])? A variation was recently created for DC [[m:GLAMcamp_DC/Friendly_space_policy]]. Unless we have a reason to create a UK variation, the WMF policy could be linked to from the Events page. --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] 08:27, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Wikimedia UK is in the process of writing our proposal to the Wikimedia Foundation for funding during 2018/19. The deadline for the bid is 1st October after which it is assessed by staff at the Foundation, there is an opportunity for community feedback and questions, and the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) meet to consider proposals and make recommendations about grants.  
: I think the need to create a UK-specific version is pretty clear - e.g. from a quick look it needs to say 'Wikimedia UK' rather that 'Wikimedia Foundation', give the appropriate contact details, and be generalised to include all events rather than just conferences. It also needs to have links to the relevant UK law. There's also a couple of general changes that we'd need to make to our event organisation if we adopt this policy - e.g. ensuring that all organisers are clearly identified (by a badge according to that policy - we may want to go for T-shirts instead or similar). So I'd suggest creating a copy of it here and pointing people towards it for discussion, with the aim of putting it forward for adoption at the [[Agenda 11Feb12|11 February board meeting]]. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] 14:11, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
::I've copied it over to [[Friendly space policy|here]] and adapted it a little for UK needs, although there is still more work to be done. Regards, [[User:Rock drum|Rock drum]] ([[User talk:Rock drum|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Rock drum|contribs]]) 15:24, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
:::Thanks, I suggest further discussion for improvement is at [[Talk:Friendly space policy]] rather than here. --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] 15:40, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


== 2012 election ==
As 2018/19 is the final year of our 2016 - 2019 strategy, our programme for next year is in many ways a continuation of our activities in 2017 and falls under three key strands:


Would anyone care to look at setting up the 2012 election pages for questions and candidate statements? The Board Interest day (11th February) is not that far away and having these pages to refer to would probably be a good idea when explaining our election process. If anyone has ideas of how to improve the way this works, now might be a good time to put these forward. --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] 11:12, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
# Diverse content and contributors
# Promoting open knowledge
# Education and Learning


==[[UK Wikimedian of the Year 2012]]==
These strands are directly related to our three strategic goals, which are to:
Thoughts? Corrections - Comments welcomed [[User:Victuallers|Victuallers]] 17:13, 8 February 2012 (UTC)


== Comparison of UK NDA with WMF NDA ==
* Increase the quality and quantity of coverage of subjects that are currently underrepresented on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects
* Contribute to the development of open knowledge in the UK, by increasing understanding and recognition of the value of open knowledge and advocating for change at an organisational, sectoral and public policy level
* Support the use of the Wikimedia projects as important tools for education and learning in the UK
We would welcome input from the UK community into our plans for next year - which we are still shaping - and have created a short video to highlight our programme strands which you can watch [https://youtu.be/56s3Ch7sHbQ here]. You can give us feedback on our programme anytime, but if you’d like your views to be taken into account in our submission to the Wikimedia Foundation for funding, please do comment below by Friday 29th September. If you’d prefer to get in touch by email, feel free to contact me on lucy.crompton-reid@wikimedia.org.uk.


According to [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2012-02-20/Special_report]], the WMF is in the habit of asking Wikimedians to sign a NDA for access to some data. Perhaps someone could track it down on-wiki (assuming it has been openly published) so that we can review [[Non Disclosure Agreement]] against their best practice? Thanks --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 11:09, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
There are several questions in particular that I’d like to ask:
:I signed their NDA when I was helping out with some fundraising stuff while visiting their office. I don't have an electronic copy, and I don't know where the paper copy is. I made them modify their standard one before I would sign it (to make it clearer than it referred onto to things related to what I was doing in the office). While the non-disclosure stuff in pretty much what you would expect, they also have a non-disparagement clause. I discussed it with Mike Godwin (who was general counsel at the time - Geoff might have changed the standard agreement after he took over), who explained that they idea was to stop people using their privileged information to attack the WMF (as Danny Wool once did, if your wiki-memory goes back that far). I can see the logic in that (which is why I did eventually sign it, once appropriately restricted). --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 14:33, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
:: I was talking to Geoff about this at the finance meeting last weekend. I've dropped him an email to follow up on that and to see what's available here. Thanks. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] ([[User talk:Mike Peel|talk]]) 18:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)


== House style ==
* Is there anything that Wikimedia UK should be doing more of, or new activities that we should consider, in 2018/19?
* What work would you like to see us continue?
* Is there anything you think we should do less of or stop doing?
* How would you like to be involved in Wikimedia UK’s programme next year?


For this website and WMUK reports (e.g. the next Annual Report in production) and documents it would be useful to define a local [[Manual of Style]] including topics such as colour, plain English, when to use logo variations and so forth. Obviously if it can piggy-back on existing WMF or Wikipedia guidelines then we can simply defer to those pages. Has any of this been mentioned on another page or would it be useful to start creating it from scratch? --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 11:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
With many thanks indeed for your input.  
:Perhaps the new comms person could prepare something? It would be good to have some community consultation, but most of it should be pretty uncontroversial. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 19:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 
[[User:LucyCrompton-Reid (WMUK)|LucyCrompton-Reid (WMUK)]] ([[User talk:LucyCrompton-Reid (WMUK)|talk]]) 13:39, 21 September 2017 (BST)


== Compliance with blocks and bans elsewhere ==
== ACTRIAL and new users creating new pages at events ==


At the moment blocks or bans on :wmuk would be considered on a case by case basis. Is there any reason for us to consider the status of long term blocks or bans on Wikimedia projects such as the English Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons? Considering that :en is so closely entwined with most of our events, it might be sensible to take the status of a contributor on that project into account when considering how an account should be handled on this wiki. In particular someone with a history of deliberately disrupting those main projects can be argued to be in a default status of failing to comply with the :wmuk defined mission and values. --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 10:37, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi All,
: As and when situations arise, then that information should be taken into consideration - but I don't think there's a need for us to take any sort of proactive approach here. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] ([[User talk:Mike Peel|talk]]) 10:53, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
:: No disagreement and should it arise, then I think we ought to take into account any long term disruptive history elsewhere to judge how accounts can be trusted for this wiki. In contrast, for Commons the community deliberately ignore the status of current blocks or bans on other projects as irrelevant unless there has been agreement on :meta for a global ban (which we ought to comply with). In general, our contributor community is likely to stay small, so I doubt this will become a significant policy matter. --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 12:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
:::Sounds good to me. We should consider each case on its own merits, but it makes sense to take conduct on other sites into account. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 19:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)


== Request for bot flag ==
Some thoughts on {{wp|WP:ACTRIAL}} and our events:
*It makes sense to encourage new users to work in {{wp|Wikipedia:Drafts|Draft: name space}}.
*This doesn't change the fact that it is worth asking people to create an account in advance (and to remember their password!)
*We have to expect that some people won't create an account and most of those who have won't be auto-confirmed - this is OK.
*If there are admins present at the event, they can make new users confirmed.... although I wouldn't stress over it - there is no harm in the Draft: name space.
*All the above is less of an issue if we take the approach of [[#Training from the back of the room]] described above.  If the group is split into teams that are deliberately set to have the full spread of ability, we can encourage people to help other team members, including the following:
**Middle-ability people to show the people with no account how to create an account.
**Experienced editors to help newer editors to find a page that might need editing.
**Experienced editors to create pages that other team members are interested in editing.
You could even get admins to confirm accounts of non-confirmed people in their team, but it might actually be better to not do that.  If the experienced people in the team have actually created the article then at least we know it is in their contributions and so they can steward the article towards improvement. e.g. 1. the day after the event, they might go back to the article and tidy it up, 2. if the article gets tagged for deletion, they are better able to discuss it and improve it, whereas a new user may feel bitten.


Hi all! Please may [[User:Thehelpfulbot]] have the bot flag, I can run a double redirect fixer to empty [[Special:DoubleRedirects]], this already runs without problems on the English Wikipedia and Meta-Wiki. On a site note, could an admin tweak [[MediaWiki:Sidebar|Sidebar]] from ''Membership|Join'' from '''Membership|Join us''? The latter sounds a bit more friendly. It may also be a good idea to add a link to the Board itself, so directly under "Organisation". [[User:Thehelpfulone|<font color="red">'''The'''</font>]][[User_talk:Thehelpfulone|<font color="black"> '''Helpful'''</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Thehelpfulone|<font color="red"> '''One'''</font>]] 23:47, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
[[User:Yaris678|Yaris678]] ([[User talk:Yaris678|talk]]) 14:44, 25 September 2017 (BST)
: Sure, sounds good, thanks for volunteering to fix these. :-) The only problem is that [[User:Thehelpfulbot]] is not currently registered on this wiki, though (the userpage exists, but not the user account). If you can create the account, then I'll set the bot flag for it.
: On the sidebar changes: I've changed it to read 'Join us'. I'm not sure about linking to [[Board]] since there's already rather a lot of links in the sidebar...
: Thanks. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] ([[User talk:Mike Peel|talk]]) 10:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
:: Huh! I was sure that I had logged in on this wiki. [[User:Thehelpfulbot|Thehelpfulbot]] ([[User talk:Thehelpfulbot|talk]]) 10:48, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
::: Done. [[User:Mike Peel|Mike Peel]] ([[User talk:Mike Peel|talk]]) 00:50, 10 April 2012 (UTC)


==Random ideas page==
:Obvious question, where do we find data on how many non-autoconfirmed users and IPs actually make pages that satisfy Wiki Criteria? [[Special:Contributions/82.132.237.141|82.132.237.141]] 15:31, 26 September 2017 (BST)
::[[:meta:Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Analysis and proposal|According to WMF research]], of the 1,180 articles created every day on the English Wikipedia, about 7% are by non-autoconfirmed editors. [[User:Richard Nevell (WMUK)|Richard Nevell (WMUK)]] ([[User talk:Richard Nevell (WMUK)|talk]]) 16:55, 2 October 2017 (BST)
:Thanks for your input Yaris678. Working in Draft: or User: space is probably going to be integral to dealing with this. I've not used Draft: much myself, but I'm keen on getting people to use their sandbox to prepare material and then copy it over. It does mean a chunk of the pages people work on aren't copied over the to the mainspace but that's a reasonable trade-off. [[User:Richard Nevell (WMUK)|Richard Nevell (WMUK)]] ([[User talk:Richard Nevell (WMUK)|talk]]) 16:59, 2 October 2017 (BST)


[[Random ideas]]<-- things we could consider.[[User:Geni|Geni]] ([[User talk:Geni|talk]]) 23:01, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
:The [[#Training from the back of the room]] sounds like a really interesting idea, I'm interested in this kind of collaborative/peer learning process.  Sadly for the bulk of editathons I manage, this wouldn't be applicable, as I'm generally working with a whole bundle new users, trying to advocated for further use in their organisations. [[User:Lirazelf|Lirazelf]] ([[User talk:Lirazelf|talk]]) 14:07, 3 October 2017 (BST)
::Thanks Lirazelf. I guess you'll have to rely on the first four bullets - especially the draft namespace. I think it would be useful to have a non-new user move the drafts across.  Preferably during the training session, so people can see their work "live" on Wikipedia, which will create excitement.  Ideally, well before the end of the training so that people can continue to edit their articles in main space - seeing that this is a normal thing to do is important.
::I fringe benefit of this approach is that each article edited will be in the contributions list of at least one non-new user. That way, they can "steward" the article to a certain extent.  This will be particularly important if the article is nominated for deletion - having someone who knows the ropes will help to get the article in a position to keep - and help to argue that it should be kept.  But more generally it will be useful, to keep the article quality up.
::[[User:Yaris678|Yaris678]] ([[User talk:Yaris678|talk]]) 12:59, 19 October 2017 (BST)


== Request for comment ==
==Wiki Loves Monuments UK 2017 awards announced==
[[File:The Derelict West Pier of Brighton.jpg|thumb|1st prize: The derelict West Pier in Brighton, by Matthew Hoser]]
I am very pleased to be able to announce the 2017 award winners for Wiki Loves Monuments in the UK.


I am drafting a proposal at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pine/drafts/ENWP_Board_of_Education and would like input from chapters. I would appreciate comments on the talk page. Thank you! [[User:Pine|Pine]] ([[User talk:Pine|talk]]) 10:52, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
First place goes to '''Matthew Hoser''' for his image of the derelict West Pier in Brighton.


== How do we reduce the creeping "legalese" of our constitution and policy documents? ==
In second place was '''Paul Stümke''', who captured the Glenfinnan Viaduct at Loch Shiel.
Hi, I have raised a question around how better to handle difficult wording on our key documents at [[Talk:Articles_of_Association#Difficult_legal_language]], though I'm thinking that this is a more general problem that could do with rather more plain English advocacy. Anyone have good ideas on how to make this guff a bit more digestible? Cheers --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 11:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)


== Does Navigation popups work for you on WMUK? ==
Third was '''Oliver Tookey''' for the De La Warr Pavilion in Bexhill on Sea.


I just tried out Navigation popups (check your preferences, gadgets) but it does not display correctly for me, in fact it leaves a nasty mess of un-wiped text for every internal link I hover over. Anyone have a fix? --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 13:46, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
The special prize for the best image taken in Scotland was awarded to '''Keith Proven''' for Smailholm Tower.
: I've had a look and they don't work for me either. Pretty nasty! --[[User:Stevie Benton|Stevie Benton]] ([[User talk:Stevie Benton|talk]]) 15:34, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
:::This is something I've noticed with the popups on some other wikis, too. Does some custom CSS need to be added to [[MediaWiki:Common.css]]? [[User:Rock drum|Rock drum]] ([[User talk:Rock drum|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Rock drum|contribs]]) 15:53, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


== How commonly is the water cooler used? ==
The special prize for the best image taken in Wales went to '''Sterim64''' for Craig-y-mor.


Hello everyone. As you may be aware I'm working on reviewing our communications and writing our comms strategy at the moment. One thing I wanted to take a look at in my examination of the WMUK wiki is the water cooler. I'd like to get a handle on how many people come here. So, if you're reading this before Friday 8 June, would you please pop a note here? Many thanks. --[[User:Stevie Benton|Stevie Benton]] ([[User talk:Stevie Benton|talk]]) 15:36, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
You can see all of these images, and the other stunning pictures that were awarded Highly Commended status [[Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2017_in_the_United_Kingdom/Winners|at Wikimedia Commons]].
:I'm afraid this test isn't going to work. A lot of us follow this wiki by keeping an eye on recent changes, so having lots of people posting here will attract more people. It's not the kind of page that you specifically go to to see if anything interesting has been posted. You come here when you notice it on recent changes or your watchlist. --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 15:58, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
:: That in itself will have some value for me actually. I want to see how something on here develops in real time and how many people will respond to something without being directly pointed there. Thanks for the heads-up though, I appreciate it :) --[[User:Stevie Benton|Stevie Benton]] ([[User talk:Stevie Benton|talk]]) 16:06, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
:::You might be better off looking through the page history and seeing how actual discussions here developed. Asking people to respond is very artificial, which will severely limit the usefulness of your results. (I'm an actuary in real life, so I have a thing about statistically well-designed studies!) --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 17:33, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
::::I have recent changes on my RSS feed and that led me here. If the wiki gets busier and this becomes the place to announce new stuff I might switch to just having this page on my RSS (every history page is an RSS feed). [[User:Filceolaire|Filceolaire]] ([[User talk:Filceolaire|talk]]) 20:30, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
::I agree, it's a matter of how long a piece of elastic might be. You start to get the [[w:en:Observer effect (physics)|Observer effect]]. I think you might find that what's most salient about your aim of trying to write a comms startegy is that you start developing relationships with different editors. These human interactions take place at a level somewhat distinct from the sort of formal assessment of what a strategy might be.[[User:Leutha|Leutha]] ([[User talk:Leutha|talk]]) 23:15, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
::I tried to adapt a metric from Wikiversity at [[Water cooler/metrics]] but I couldn't suss out the right code, so the first one (April 2011) gets us to the Ukrainian wikipedia. (I left the others unchanged so you end up at WV.) I tried looking at Meta, but they seem to have a way of jumping from UK.Wiki'''p'''edia to UK.wiki'''m'''edia. Anyway, I need a break so I thought someone else might like to have a crack at this. Basically it allows you to set up a metric on the page and keep track of viewings. [[User:Leutha|Leutha]] ([[User talk:Leutha|talk]]) 23:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
:It doesn't get that much use, but it's the most logical place to discuss things to do with the wiki itself (as opposed to the chapter). Stevie, it might interest you to know that the Wikipedia equivalent, the [[w:en:WP:VP|village pumps]], also tend not to get very much attention except when people are pointed there. [[User:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Teal" face="Tahoma">'''Harry&nbsp;Mitchell'''</font>]] &#124; [[User talk:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Navy" face= "Times New Roman">Penny for your thoughts? </font>]]  23:48, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


::: Thanks everyone for your comments, very much appreciated. --[[User:Stevie Benton|Stevie Benton]] ([[User talk:Stevie Benton|talk]]) 12:49, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Many congratulations to all of our prizewinners, and thanks to all who volunteered to help make the contest a success: contestants, judges, reviewers and Wikimedians in many roles.  Thanks also for the kind support we received from the International team, from our friendly staff at Wikimedia UK, and from our 2017 prize sponsors, Wikimedia UK and Archaeology Scotland. [[User:MichaelMaggs|MichaelMaggs]] ([[User talk:MichaelMaggs|talk]]) 07:43, 31 October 2017 (GMT)


== QRpedia coordination page ==
== Effects of broadband ==


I know that [[:outreach:GLAM/QR_codes]] exists, but I'm wondering if a page on :wmuk would be useful to point to for folks to understand the QRpedia agreement with WMUK, the status of the open source code, trademark agreement and where to report bugs in an emergency; or should we just point to the :outreach page and improve that? --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 09:45, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Looks like BT wants to push more people to faster internet where it has fiber: https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-bt-group-broadband/bt-incentivises-operators-to-move-customers-to-faster-broadband-idUKKBN1KE0LR


== How to attract an administrator's attention ==
Is someone monitoring the trend of average internet speed and the impact it has on user activity in the Wikimedia projects? [[User:Nemo bis|Nemo bis]] ([[User talk:Nemo bis|talk]]) 08:43, 24 July 2018 (BST)


We have a template for recommending the speedy deletion of a page ([[:Template:Delete]]), which does sometimes get used by non-administrators when they need a page deleted. This includes the page in [[:Category:Speedy deletions]] so an administrator can spot it and delete it. However, as an administrator, I never look at that category. I keep an eye on this wiki simply by looking at recent changes. I do sometimes spot and delete pages tagged with that template, but only because I saw it on recent changes, so the template didn't actually help. Do other administrators check that category on a regular basis? If not, should we come up with a better way to find an admin? Or is having admins looking at recent changes enough, in which case we don't really need the template? What are people's thoughts (admins and non-admins alike)? --[[User:Tango|Tango]] ([[User talk:Tango|talk]]) 13:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
::Hi [[User:Nemo bis|Nemo bis]], I'm not sure that our small charity has the capacity to do something like this, or how it might benefit us. You are welcome to expand on why you think this would be a good idea if you like. [[User:John Lubbock (WMUK)|John Lubbock (WMUK)]] ([[User talk:John Lubbock (WMUK)|talk]]) 12:29, 2 April 2019 (BST)
:I didn't even know that category existed. Whenever I delete something, it's always from the recent changes. I think the template is mostly used by people who do small wiki monitoring. With this being a fairly quiet wiki, there's probably no need for a dedicated system for reaching an admin (there are plenty of us compared to the amount of work for us to do), but the template does no harm and it might be useful if the wiki gets busier. [[User:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Teal" face="Tahoma">'''Harry&nbsp;Mitchell'''</font>]] &#124; [[User talk:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Navy" face= "Times New Roman">Penny for your thoughts? </font>]]  17:12, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
::Personally, I did know that template & category existed, but I do things from recent changes as well given that the wiki is small enough to do that and not miss anything. The template does no harm, and maybe useful for some. Any other potential methods for contacting admins would probably be more bureaucracy than is worth. [[User:KTC|KTC]] ([[User talk:KTC|talk]]) 19:31, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 19:35, 13 August 2022

Welcome to the water cooler
This is a place to find out what is happening and to discuss our external projects and activities. Feel free to suggest ideas that could help our charitable mission or ask questions about how you can help. To discuss the inner workings of the charity, head over to the engine room.
WMUK Grants programme - a piece of cake?
Tile wmuk.jpeg
Applying for a grant is easy.

If Wikimedia UK can help you improve Wikimedia projects, check out our grants page.

Archives.png
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017

Kanban for editathons

A kanban board at the Women in Classical Studies editathon at Senate House, London

I just saw the newsletter with a picture of the kanban board used at the Women in Classical Studies editathon. What a great idea! It helps people share what they are working on. Helps to avoid edit conflicts. Enables organisers to list all the articles that have been improved. It could possibly work well for a recap session at the end too, where people talk about the changes they made.

Who was involved with that editathon? Who has used it elsewhere? I would love to hear how it has been used in practice.

Yaris678 (talk) 15:09, 3 February 2017 (GMT)

Hi Yaris678, I was the lead trainer at the Women in Classical Studies editathon. I saw the kanban in an Instagram post for an Art+Feminism editathon. It worked much better than expected - a fantastic indicator of the achievements of the day.Eartha78 (talk) 19:02, 3 February 2017 (GMT)
Cool. So how did you use it? Did you get people to brainstorm a load of post-its of articles to look at, at the beginning of the day? Did you just say 'if you have an idea, stick it on the board'? Did you come with the post-its filled out already? Yaris678 (talk) 10:25, 11 February 2017 (GMT)
The group were quite well prepared prior to the editathon. They had identified a number of articles to create - some had already done the research and started to writing in their sandbox. When we began the second part of the editathon they each committed to an article, wrote it on a sticky note and stuck it to the wall! Moving the notes from left to right was surprisingly motivating and a good excuse to stretch ones legs. Also used the sticky notes for an evaluation exercise at the end of the session. Eartha78 (talk) 18:27, 16 February 2017 (GMT)
Thank you Eartha78. That is really interesting. I will use this next time I do an editathon. Yaris678 (talk) 09:39, 19 February 2017 (GMT)

Wikimedia UK's plans for 2018 - community consultation

Watch our video about our plans for 2018

Wikimedia UK is in the process of writing our proposal to the Wikimedia Foundation for funding during 2018/19. The deadline for the bid is 1st October after which it is assessed by staff at the Foundation, there is an opportunity for community feedback and questions, and the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) meet to consider proposals and make recommendations about grants.

As 2018/19 is the final year of our 2016 - 2019 strategy, our programme for next year is in many ways a continuation of our activities in 2017 and falls under three key strands:

  1. Diverse content and contributors
  2. Promoting open knowledge
  3. Education and Learning

These strands are directly related to our three strategic goals, which are to:

  • Increase the quality and quantity of coverage of subjects that are currently underrepresented on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects
  • Contribute to the development of open knowledge in the UK, by increasing understanding and recognition of the value of open knowledge and advocating for change at an organisational, sectoral and public policy level
  • Support the use of the Wikimedia projects as important tools for education and learning in the UK

We would welcome input from the UK community into our plans for next year - which we are still shaping - and have created a short video to highlight our programme strands which you can watch here. You can give us feedback on our programme anytime, but if you’d like your views to be taken into account in our submission to the Wikimedia Foundation for funding, please do comment below by Friday 29th September. If you’d prefer to get in touch by email, feel free to contact me on lucy.crompton-reid@wikimedia.org.uk.

There are several questions in particular that I’d like to ask:

  • Is there anything that Wikimedia UK should be doing more of, or new activities that we should consider, in 2018/19?
  • What work would you like to see us continue?
  • Is there anything you think we should do less of or stop doing?
  • How would you like to be involved in Wikimedia UK’s programme next year?

With many thanks indeed for your input.

LucyCrompton-Reid (WMUK) (talk) 13:39, 21 September 2017 (BST)

ACTRIAL and new users creating new pages at events

Hi All,

Some thoughts on WP:ACTRIAL and our events:

  • It makes sense to encourage new users to work in Draft: name space.
  • This doesn't change the fact that it is worth asking people to create an account in advance (and to remember their password!)
  • We have to expect that some people won't create an account and most of those who have won't be auto-confirmed - this is OK.
  • If there are admins present at the event, they can make new users confirmed.... although I wouldn't stress over it - there is no harm in the Draft: name space.
  • All the above is less of an issue if we take the approach of #Training from the back of the room described above. If the group is split into teams that are deliberately set to have the full spread of ability, we can encourage people to help other team members, including the following:
    • Middle-ability people to show the people with no account how to create an account.
    • Experienced editors to help newer editors to find a page that might need editing.
    • Experienced editors to create pages that other team members are interested in editing.

You could even get admins to confirm accounts of non-confirmed people in their team, but it might actually be better to not do that. If the experienced people in the team have actually created the article then at least we know it is in their contributions and so they can steward the article towards improvement. e.g. 1. the day after the event, they might go back to the article and tidy it up, 2. if the article gets tagged for deletion, they are better able to discuss it and improve it, whereas a new user may feel bitten.

Yaris678 (talk) 14:44, 25 September 2017 (BST)

Obvious question, where do we find data on how many non-autoconfirmed users and IPs actually make pages that satisfy Wiki Criteria? 82.132.237.141 15:31, 26 September 2017 (BST)
According to WMF research, of the 1,180 articles created every day on the English Wikipedia, about 7% are by non-autoconfirmed editors. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 16:55, 2 October 2017 (BST)
Thanks for your input Yaris678. Working in Draft: or User: space is probably going to be integral to dealing with this. I've not used Draft: much myself, but I'm keen on getting people to use their sandbox to prepare material and then copy it over. It does mean a chunk of the pages people work on aren't copied over the to the mainspace but that's a reasonable trade-off. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 16:59, 2 October 2017 (BST)
The #Training from the back of the room sounds like a really interesting idea, I'm interested in this kind of collaborative/peer learning process. Sadly for the bulk of editathons I manage, this wouldn't be applicable, as I'm generally working with a whole bundle new users, trying to advocated for further use in their organisations. Lirazelf (talk) 14:07, 3 October 2017 (BST)
Thanks Lirazelf. I guess you'll have to rely on the first four bullets - especially the draft namespace. I think it would be useful to have a non-new user move the drafts across. Preferably during the training session, so people can see their work "live" on Wikipedia, which will create excitement. Ideally, well before the end of the training so that people can continue to edit their articles in main space - seeing that this is a normal thing to do is important.
I fringe benefit of this approach is that each article edited will be in the contributions list of at least one non-new user. That way, they can "steward" the article to a certain extent. This will be particularly important if the article is nominated for deletion - having someone who knows the ropes will help to get the article in a position to keep - and help to argue that it should be kept. But more generally it will be useful, to keep the article quality up.
Yaris678 (talk) 12:59, 19 October 2017 (BST)

Wiki Loves Monuments UK 2017 awards announced

1st prize: The derelict West Pier in Brighton, by Matthew Hoser

I am very pleased to be able to announce the 2017 award winners for Wiki Loves Monuments in the UK.

First place goes to Matthew Hoser for his image of the derelict West Pier in Brighton.

In second place was Paul Stümke, who captured the Glenfinnan Viaduct at Loch Shiel.

Third was Oliver Tookey for the De La Warr Pavilion in Bexhill on Sea.

The special prize for the best image taken in Scotland was awarded to Keith Proven for Smailholm Tower.

The special prize for the best image taken in Wales went to Sterim64 for Craig-y-mor.

You can see all of these images, and the other stunning pictures that were awarded Highly Commended status at Wikimedia Commons.

Many congratulations to all of our prizewinners, and thanks to all who volunteered to help make the contest a success: contestants, judges, reviewers and Wikimedians in many roles. Thanks also for the kind support we received from the International team, from our friendly staff at Wikimedia UK, and from our 2017 prize sponsors, Wikimedia UK and Archaeology Scotland. MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:43, 31 October 2017 (GMT)

Effects of broadband

Looks like BT wants to push more people to faster internet where it has fiber: https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-bt-group-broadband/bt-incentivises-operators-to-move-customers-to-faster-broadband-idUKKBN1KE0LR

Is someone monitoring the trend of average internet speed and the impact it has on user activity in the Wikimedia projects? Nemo bis (talk) 08:43, 24 July 2018 (BST)

Hi Nemo bis, I'm not sure that our small charity has the capacity to do something like this, or how it might benefit us. You are welcome to expand on why you think this would be a good idea if you like. John Lubbock (WMUK) (talk) 12:29, 2 April 2019 (BST)