Sam Wilson's Website

T38: Wikimedia

Wikidata logo. Wikidata item Q3568028: Wikimedia movementsocial movement around Wikimedia including content publications, Wikimedia organizations, and independent editors
instance of
  • social movement
topic's main category
  • Category:Wikimedia movement
topic's main Wikimedia portal
  • Portal:Wikimedia
different from
  • Wikimedia
  • Wikimedia Foundation project
has part(s)
  • Wikimedia Foundation
  • Wikimedia Deutschland
  • Wikimedia France
  • Wikimedia UK
  • Wikimedia Sverige
  • Wikimedia CH
  • Wikimedia Austria
  • Wikimedia Netherlands
  • Wikimedia RU
  • Wikimedia Ukraine‎
  • Wikimedia Norge
  • Wikimedia Hong Kong
  • Wikimedia Polska
  • Wikimedia Brasil
  • Wikimedia Portugal
  • Wikimedia Taiwan‎
  • Wikimedia Eesti‎
  • Wikimedia Macedonia
  • Wikimedia Indonesia‎
  • Wikimedia Spain
  • Wikimedia Italia
  • Wikimedia Canada
  • Wikimedia Czech Republic
  • Wikimedia Macau
  • Wikimedia Israel
  • Wikimedia Belgium
  • Wikimedia Argentina
  • Wikimedia Australia
  • Wikimedia Bangladesh‎
  • Wikimedia Chile‎
  • Wikimedia District of Columbia
  • Wikimedia Denmark
  • Wikimedia India
  • Wikimedia Hungary‎
  • Wikimedia Mexico
  • Wiki Society of the Philippines
  • Wikimedia Serbia
  • Wikimedia South Africa
  • Wikimedia Finland
  • Wikimedia Uruguay‎
  • Wikimedia Venezuela
  • Wikimedia New York City‎
  • Wikimedia Armenia
  • Wikimedia Cuteness Association
Commons category
  • Wikimedia movement
practiced by
  • Wikimedian in residence
logo image
  • Property type 'commonsMedia' not supported yet.
  • Property type 'commonsMedia' not supported yet.
official website
notable work
  • The Wikimedia Movement
official color
  • Wikimedia red
  • Wikimedia green
  • Wikimedia blue
subclass of
  • open knowledge movement

RSS feed icon. RSS feed for the "Wikimedia" tag

Authority Control:
— Quora topic ID: Wikimedia-Movement — Google Knowledge Graph ID: /g/1226skrh — Matrix room:

  1. By .

    It’s Hackathon day 2, and I’ve nearly wrapped up my first draft of a pretty hacky system for editing documentation pages in ToolDocs. It’s fun learning the GitLab API, although that’s also making me question a bunch of assumptions I made about this project in the beginning! It’s seeming more like it’d be better to just build the whole thing as effectively a custom UI to GitLab. But we’ll see…

  2. By .

    I’ve been wondering for a while how it’d be setting up a package on Packagist from Wikimedia’s GitLab… turns out it’s incredibly simple, and we now have wikimedia/toolforge-skeleton added and working! There’s still more to be done on it, but hopefully it’ll make it super quick to bootstrap the development of new PHP tools.

  3. By .

    I was writing some user documentation for RedirectManager just now, and wrote this sentence-and-a-bit:

    If you provide a name of an existing page to create as a redirect, an error message will be shown and no redirect will be created. Similarly, if you

    I was going to say something about how it’s not possible to create a redirect to a page that doesn’t exist. This isn’t a limitation of MediaWiki, but when I was writing the RedirectManager API I thought it would be good to prevent these “dangling redirects”. It wasn’t until I came to write the documentation that I realised the most obvious use-case: creating a redirect to a page that you’re in the process of creating! As in, while writing a new page, you want to add a shortcut to it — hardly a rare thing, I think.

    This is why I really like “documentation-driven development”, where one writes the docs first and pretends that they’re describing features that already exist. It really does help focus the mind on what’s required of the code, and (as in today’s example) highlights things that might otherwise be overlooked.

    So I’ll now go and change the API error to a warning, and not show it at all in the UI (although it might be worth having some indication that the target page doesn’t exist).

  4. By .

    In a bit over three weeks’ time we’re going to have the first of what will hopefully become a series of Wikisource “triage meetings”, in which we’ll go through the backlog of Phabricator tickets relating to Wikisource tech. It’s basically an idea to get some clarity around what needs doing, what is being worked on, and probably what things are out of date and can be closed. Read more and sign up here:

    Wikisource technical contributors are not vast in number, but there are still quite a few of us! So hopefully through some judicious collaboration we can continue to slowly and steadily (and without too much disruption!) improve Wikisources’ software.

  5. By .

    I’m working from a new office now, and just uploaded a 1950 photo of it to Commons: (at some point I guess I’ll be able to embed photos in the text of my blog…).

  6. By Wikimedia Diff blog (SGrabarczuk).

    The Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is over! We would like to thank everyone who participated in this year’s edition and express our special gratitude to those who made outstanding contributions to the survey below the results. We could not have done it without all of you!

    Curious about what happens next? Learn about our prioritization process and check out the ranking of prioritized proposals for this year.

  7. By .
  8. By .

    We’re reaching out to invite you and your team to participate in the #1Lib1Ref campaign on from 15 May to 6 June!

    Each year librarians around the world (and anyone else with a passion for free knowledge) take a moment out of their day to add a missing reference to articles on Wikipedia or Wikidata to improve the quality of content of the Wikimedia platforms we all rely on.

    This year for the first time, Wikimedia Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand are joining forces to offer librarians online support to add a reference. We are holding online drop-in sessions on Tuesdays from 10AM–12PM and Thursdays from 12PM-2PM AEST during the campaign where you can learn to add a reference and find out a bit more about how Wikipedia works! There’s no need to sign up, just drop in. The full details are here:

    Hope you can join us!

  9. By Jan Gerlach, Lead Public Policy Manager, Wikimedia Foundation.

    Over the past couple of months, many who are interested in internet policy have been watching developments in Australia, where a proposed Mandatory Bargaining Code will force some internet platforms to pay for linking to content by news publishers and displaying snippets thereof. While it isn’t entirely clear yet what services will be covered by the Code, requiring payment for links from one website to another directly contradicts a fundamental principle of the open Web. This is not the first time lawmakers have proposed something like this: the European Copyright Directive for the Digital Single Market has introduced a new “publishers right” that would also require licenses for the use of links and snippets.

    Last week, the Australian Code came to the attention of a broader audience due to some of the largest internet companies’ vastly diverging responses to it: while Google has described the Code as “unworkable” and later struck a deal with News Corp anyway, Facebook has drawn the ire of many Australians by blocking links to news content from being shared in their network in Australia. Facebook’s sweeping blocks took down the pages of essential services and civil society groups as well. Whereas the former example shows that big internet companies are willing to bargain over the use of links and snippets, the latter demonstrates that platforms have become an indispensable channel for news consumption and sharing of vital information during a pandemic and global climate crisis. In return for last minute amendments to the Code, Facebook has reportedly agreed to permit news to be shared again in Australia — after what has been likened to a hostage situation.

    Leaving aside the question of why we, as a society, have let for-profit companies take over the space for public discourse, Wikimedia is concerned about these developments around the Code for various reasons that are directly linked to free knowledge and our ability to ensure everyone can participate in it.

    Wikipedia, which does not run ads, has just turned 20. One of its core principles is to only include information that can be verified through references to trusted sources. This essentially means two things: First, to continue to be reliable as an encyclopedia and to grow and include more information about the world we live in, Wikipedia relies both on journalism that investigates, reports, and documents the things that are going on around us. Second, to be truly collaborative and earn the trust of volunteers and readers, Wikipedia tries to link to the sources that it cites. Links allow everyone to verify for themselves whether information seems trustworthy and whether it is described accurately in a Wikipedia article. That is to say: Wikipedia needs both a vibrant and diverse landscape of news media, and also depends on the open Web, both to link to original sources and as a searchable space for information that is categorized and curated by people, organizations, and companies offering their services. When journalists stop reporting because they don’t get paid, or when people can no longer use search engines to find news on the Web to cite in Wikipedia, our online encyclopedia suffers.

    It is easy to understand the frustration faced by journalists, whose work is published in outlets with dropping ad revenue, while “big tech” companies are posting record profits year after year while stumbling from one scandal around ads to another. At the same time, it is troubling that the largest media companies in the EU and Australia (and likely elsewhere too) seem capable of pushing governments and lawmakers to adopt legislation that would siphon ad revenue from a new industry sector to legacy businesses. Unfortunately, the context and the parties involved in this dispute are distracting from the real challenge that we all face, whether in Australia, in the rural US, or in Sub-Saharan Africa: high quality journalism, especially at a local level, is suffering and with it our ability to make good, well-informed democratic decisions. Access to verifiable, well investigated news is already unequal as more and more reliable and well-researched information is “disappearing” behind paywalls. We are currently also experiencing a flood of misinformation, which will swiftly fill the gap that develops when platforms remove content from verified publishers.

    This is especially lamentable during a pandemic when trust in institutions is crucial.The world urgently needs to make progress around inclusion and participation in knowledge towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Wikimedians are working hard to counter misinformation around specific issues (e.g. around COVID-19 or elections) and work with broadcasters and other publishers to make their content easily accessible and re-usable via the Wikimedia projects, including Wikidata and Wikinews. However, these efforts will not bring back the ad revenue that news media has lost over the years, leaving local journalism wanting, or prevent “news deserts” where there hardly is an audience and a lack of infrastructure to build one. As it stands, small and independent media stand to lose out from most solutions and responses presented so far. Promising approaches like the Local Journalism Initiative in Canada address the issue of “news deserts’’ temporarily. But systemic change is needed to ensure sustainability and diversity in news media at every level.

    From Wikimedia’s perspective, laws like the Australian Code or the European “publishers right” are inadequate approaches to the problem of media sustainability and diversity. New offerings to showcase some news media on a platform or private funds to support technology and innovation in media are necessary but insufficient to tackle the larger challenges that we see around the world. To protect the public interest in verifiable and unbiased reporting that allows society to make informed decisions, we cannot leave this space entirely to for-profit technology companies or large media corporations. Given the media’s role as the fourth estate and much larger crises that we all need to tackle as democracies, new revenue models and support for journalism through independent and institutional funders will be required to develop global solutions — just like against the climate crisis — that also protect the open Web as a space to find truthful information. Wikipedia needs both sustainable journalism and a vibrant and healthy internet to flourish.

  10. By .

    There are currently 285 proposals in this year’s Wishlist Survey: This is more than ever before! Which is great, but there’s lots to get through (I’m reading all of them). Some are terrific, some are huge, some are simple, and they’re all a fascinating insight into how people work with Wikimedia wikis and what difficulties they feel. I’m really happy to be working on this.