Agenda talk:2012-02
When talking about funds dissemination, it would be worth exploring why Grants:Laura Hale, Courcelles, Hawkeye7, Chzz/Outreach Oceania, Grants:Arvin Ello/RecentChangesCamp2012 and Grants:Wikitanvir/RecentChangesCamp 2012 rejected by a WMF fellow had acceptances for Grants:SarahStierch/GLAM WIKI Santiago attendance and two other participations grants. The ROI on the first three seems much more clear, whereas the ROI on Sarah's three trips while a WMF fellow and getting paid by the foundation seems less clear. The funding priorities appear to favour an ingroup at the expense of the Foundation's mission. --LauraHale 23:12, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- Comments on the agenda and suggestions are warmly welcome, but this is too specific and operational a topic to be discussed at a Board meeting. You might try developing a page for comparative grant review -- a peer review process separate from GAC might help some grants improve their reception. –SJ talk | translate 21:24, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Paid editing
When discussing paid editing (paid advocacy, really), will there be a representative from among the paid advocates? I think some sort of collaborative discussion is in order along the lines of what I'm seeing in the CREWE page on Facebook (146 members). This group includes leaders representing Wikipedia (Jimbo, Smartse, Fred Bauder), experienced editors (myself, King4057), along with notable public relations people (Arthur Yann, Phil Gomes, Shel Holtz). The general idea behind CREWE is that paid advocates have a lot to contribute to Wikipeida while acknowledging that these editors need training in order to do so appropriately. To that end, CREWE has undertaken several projects to include getting the word out to PR people regarding ethical editing as well as assessing the shortcomings of the Fortune and FTSE 100 corporations with the goal of demonstrating the value paid advocates can add by keeping non-controversial facts in corporate articles up to date. CREWE's concern is that Jimbo has repeatedly stated he doesn't believe editors with a conflict of interest should edit articles in which a COI exists under any circumstances. This position runs contrary to the COI guidelines and would further hinder timely updates to many articles. Rklawton 16:30, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Decision on Catalan Wikipedia about fundraising and fund dissemination.
As an important part of the agenda is devoted to fundraising and dissemination I would like to raise your attention to an ongoing decision on Catalan Wikipedia.
You also can find there the English translation.
There it is established the opinion with regard to projects in all languages and Catalan editor’s will regarding the Catalan Wikipedia.