Mailing List Archive

On 5/23/06, Anthere <Anthere9@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello
>
> Will we keep one Serbia and Montenogro chapter or will the current
> chapter separate in two ?


They're probably going to have to be called Wikimedia Serbia and
change the name accordingly. There are legal procedures to go through
before this is effective, so it might take a little time.

As far as I know, the chapters is composed of Serbians only at this time.

Best


Delphine
Chair Chapters Committee
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Anthere wrote:
> Hello
>
> Will we keep one Serbia and Montenogro chapter or will the current
> chapter separate in two ?

Or, as I would advocate, have one chapter for Serbia, Montenegro,
Croatia, and Bosnia... if at all possible.


--
#######################################################################
# Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free Knowledge #
# http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free world #
#######################################################################

Very idealistic Jimbo.

Fred

On May 23, 2006, at 3:49 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:

> Anthere wrote:
>
>> Hello
>>
>> Will we keep one Serbia and Montenogro chapter or will the current
>> chapter separate in two ?
>>
>
> Or, as I would advocate, have one chapter for Serbia, Montenegro,
> Croatia, and Bosnia... if at all possible.
>
>
> --
> ######################################################################
> #
> # Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free
> Knowledge #
> # http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free
> world #
> ######################################################################
> #
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Fred Bauder wrote:
> Very idealistic Jimbo.

Well, remember, I have been there, and I have met Serbian and Croatian
Wikipedians. They are... like Wikipedians everywhere. Friendly people,
interested in sharing knowledge. :-)

--
#######################################################################
# Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free Knowledge #
# http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free world #
#######################################################################

Jimmy Wales wrote:
> Fred Bauder wrote:
>
>> Very idealistic Jimbo.
>>
>
> Well, remember, I have been there, and I have met Serbian and Croatian
> Wikipedians. They are... like Wikipedians everywhere. Friendly people,
> interested in sharing knowledge. :-)
And that's all there is. We're all interested in sharing knowledge, but
not the projects. People just don't wanna cooperate and you just can't
force them. I think ongoing flame/revert wars at English Wikipedia speak
for themselves.
Remember, being somewhere and living somewhere are two very different
things. :)
Filip
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 5/23/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales@wikia.com> wrote:
> Or, as I would advocate, have one chapter for Serbia, Montenegro,
> Croatia, and Bosnia... if at all possible.

Having a chapter for each country can have advantages in organization
and perception. Split chapters do not necessarily mean split efforts.
The question is, how do chapters cooperate best on an ad hoc basis?
Setting up meta-organization(s) tied to regions would be one way, but
I'm inclined to think that would be too much bureaucracy and too
static. Simply using a wiki and mailing lists for cross-chapter
cooperation probably works best.

Erik
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

I don't believe that the mass of the persons could decide of the fate of
the own nation, frequently (or all the time?) the decisions are in the hands
of little groups where the friendship has no weight.

Ilario

>
>Well, remember, I have been there, and I have met Serbian and Croatian
>Wikipedians. They are... like Wikipedians everywhere. Friendly people,
>interested in sharing knowledge. :-)
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

If you can pull that of I will personally send an email to the nobel
peace prize foundation and to the UN for a prize and for you to become
the secretary general.

Waerth/Walter

>Very idealistic Jimbo.
>
>Fred
>
>On May 23, 2006, at 3:49 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:
>
>
>
>>Anthere wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Hello
>>>
>>>Will we keep one Serbia and Montenogro chapter or will the current
>>>chapter separate in two ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Or, as I would advocate, have one chapter for Serbia, Montenegro,
>>Croatia, and Bosnia... if at all possible.
>>
>>
>>--
>>######################################################################
>>#
>># Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free
>>Knowledge #
>># http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free
>>world #
>>######################################################################
>>#
>>_______________________________________________
>>foundation-l mailing list
>>foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Am Mittwoch, 24. Mai 2006 03:37 schrieb Filip Maljkovic:
> And that's all there is. We're all interested in sharing knowledge, but
> not the projects. People just don't wanna cooperate and you just can't
> force them. I think ongoing flame/revert wars at English Wikipedia speak
> for themselves.

Well. Random Wikipedians coming from Serbia and Croatia or some other former
yugoslav republic and flaming against each other is no surprise but the
people that are active members in Wikimedia chapters should be way more
resonable.

As Wikipedia is a mutilingual open minded community it would be just very
anachronistic not working together across borders. And additionally there is
no real language barrier for example between Serbs and Croats. For example
the Serbian and Croatian language are much more similar than the various
German dialects (that have in fact a large variety).

So what does speak against a shared Wikimedia chapter in that region apart
barriers in mind and maybe some legal problems with establishing a
multinational chapter (I am sure there is a way how to solve it)?

So I want to say: Open mind does not start with being open minded towards
people that live in nations several thousands kilometers away but with being
open minded towards the direct neighbours.

Why not creating a Wikimedia chapter that is a community asociation of
croatian, serbian, serbo-croatian ... Wikipedias and which is thus trying to
care about all of them?

Arnomane
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Walter van Kalken napisał(a):
> If you can pull that of I will personally send an email to the nobel
> peace prize foundation and to the UN for a prize and for you to become
> the secretary general.
I thought somebody did that already... ;)

But seriously now... Why the irony, Walter? There is a saying (or is it
a quote?) which goes more or less like this: "A given thing cannot be
done until somebody who doesn't know it cannot be done comes along. And
that somebody does it." We're writing an on-line encyclopedia. And it
works, it grows. and... it was impossible. Or at least it was thought to be.

Now... Imagine we're a bunch of people who don't know the first thing
about anything. ;) World peace? Piece of cake. Wikipedia on Mars? Just
wait and see. Alpha Centauri by 2050? Well... That might be a problem.
But not because we can't. We can and we will if we want to, just not by
any set date. Because we don't (and can't) really keep dates. But if you
look at things in the long term (and I do mean long) you'll see it'll
all work out fine in the end. That is how wiki works, right? Eventually
every page will get better and better and better. Same goes for the real
world (at least for us optimists).

And we *will* have these different chapters mentioned up and running and
working together... someday.

--
Best regards,
Łukasz Garczewski
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 5/24/06, arnomane@gmx.de <arnomane@gmx.de> wrote:

> Why not creating a Wikimedia chapter that is a community asociation of
> croatian, serbian, serbo-croatian ... Wikipedias and which is thus trying to
> care about all of them?

Because, as stated in the Chapters FAQ, chapters have a country base,
on the contrary to projects. At some point, you need a legal form of
some kind, and as far as I know, there is no such thing as a legal
form that would allow the creation of a Germano-Swiss-Austrian
chapter, just because they all speak German, or a
Franco-Canadian-Blegian-Swiss chapter. It'd have to be legally based
somewhere.

I think the debate is drifting from a purely legal thing, ie. the
country is now called "Serbia" and not "Serbia and Montenegro" to a
trial of intention (that's a French word - procès d'intention) to the
Serbians for having to change their name.

It's not their fault, it doesn't mean that Montenegrans are not
welcome in the Serbian chapter, or Croats for that matter, until they
also have a legal frame to which they can attach. It does not mean
either that once all formed, those chapters will not work on common
projects such as "The Balkan Wikimedia project" or some such.

It's life. Wikimedia "Deutschland" is called Wikimedia "Deutschland"
and it operates in "Deutschland". The name does not prevent it from
working together with a future Austrian chapter or with the new born
Swiss chapter. On the contrary. Working towards a similar goal creates
bridges and ties across countries, languages and cultures that may be
very or slightly different and that learn from each other, from their
mistakes and their successes.

Imposing names or cooperation on chapters that form in different parts
of the world just because we think it's *nicer* is, in my opinion, not
the way to go.

Delphine
--
~notafish
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Some random musings:

It seems to me that supporting the creation a single chapter for these
independent countries and cultures, solely on the basis of them having once been
part of a single state, might be considered offensive to the people involved.
No one is proposing that Austria and Hungary merge their potential chapters,
nor is anyone suggesting that the UK, Canada, and Australia set up a single
chapter, though the cultural differences there may be even less distinct and
they still share a single crown, language, etc.

If Yugoslavia was a fiction that the constituent peoples rejected, let's
respect that, rather than suggesting that they "join together" again, for the
purposes of Wikimedia. I am sure that differing legal and tax requirements in
each country would support such a distinction. As for bringing the peoples of
different countries involved in Wikimedia together, that would be the role of
the Foundation umbrella. Right now, I think the Chapters Committee is doing
an excellent job at that.

Danny
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
> It seems to me that supporting the creation a single chapter for these
> independent countries and cultures, solely on the basis of them having once been
> part of a single state, might be considered offensive to the people involved.

It might be, to some, but to many others it would not be. Each location
around the globe will involve different circumstances.

> No one is proposing that Austria and Hungary merge their potential chapters,

Right, but Austria and Hungary do not even share the same language.

> nor is anyone suggesting that the UK, Canada, and Australia set up a single
> chapter, though the cultural differences there may be even less distinct and
> they still share a single crown, language, etc.

Right, but UK, Canada, and Australia do not even share the same
geographical location.

These matters are for the local people to decide, of course. But I
believe based on my experience in talking to people in this region,
there is a strong sentiment from a lot of people that the ideas of
radically different language, culture, etc., is hardly a settled matter
for most ordinary people.

--Jimbo

--
#######################################################################
# Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free Knowledge #
# http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free world #
#######################################################################

Delphine Ménard wrote:
> Imposing names or cooperation on chapters that form in different parts
> of the world just because we think it's *nicer* is, in my opinion, not
> the way to go.

I agree, just to be clear. I think that in this part of the world,
there are good reasons why many local people will want to try to have a
broad umbrella organization. Contrary to media stereotypes, Serbians
and Croatians do not all irrationally hate each other. Many Wikipedians
in the area have expressed a desire that Wikipedia be a neutral place to
rise above all that, and I think they are very interested in making sure
that whatever legal structure is adopted does not artificially create
divisions and conflicts.

As it stands at the moment, I think this is mostly an artificial
question, since in fact I think we don't currently have anything like a
critical mass of people in Montenegro to do anything at all.

--Jimbo



--
#######################################################################
# Office: 1-727-231-0101 | Free Culture and Free Knowledge #
# http://www.wikipedia.org | Building a free world #
#######################################################################

On 5/24/06, Delphine Ménard <notafishz@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/24/06, arnomane@gmx.de <arnomane@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> > Why not creating a Wikimedia chapter that is a community asociation of
> > croatian, serbian, serbo-croatian ... Wikipedias and which is thus trying to
> > care about all of them?
>
> Because, as stated in the Chapters FAQ, chapters have a country base,
> on the contrary to projects. At some point, you need a legal form of
> some kind, and as far as I know, there is no such thing as a legal
> form that would allow the creation of a Germano-Swiss-Austrian
> chapter, just because they all speak German, or a
> Franco-Canadian-Blegian-Swiss chapter. It'd have to be legally based
> somewhere.
>
[snip]


This is the crucial point - the legal existence of our local chapters.
We had this debate within Wikimedia UK, and whether it was desirable
to to create a Wikimedia British Isles (or whatever it would be
called) - a geographical region where we all speak the same language
(as well as others). I thought then (and still think) that it would be
nice to have such a thing - but the thing was that it would have been,
legally, very difficult, if not impossible to create it. Even more
obscurely, because of the UK's bizarre legal system, we are,
technically, actually bound by the laws of England and Wales - not
Scotland and/or Northern Ireland (if I have understood this
correctly). What I hope will happen, again echoing Delphine, is that a
Wikimedia Ireland chapter will be formed, which will work with
Wikimedia UK on issues of common interest, not least our cultural and
lingual heritage.

Cormac
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Let's shoot for a single Wikipedia and multiple chapters, not the
other way around.

Austin
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

--- Anthere <Anthere9@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hello
>
> Will we keep one Serbia and Montenogro chapter or will the current
> chapter separate in two ?


Chapters are supposed to be nation-based, no? So it would not make much sense to have two
different chapters until Serbia and Montenegro actually become two different nations with
different governments and laws, etc (the vote is just the first step). What would be neat,
however, would be the existence of a supra-national organization that could coordinate the
activities of different national chapters in the same region. Wikimedia Europa, for example,
and/or even smaller coordinating bodies such as Wikimedia Balkans.

-- mav


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 5/24/06, Daniel Mayer <maveric149@yahoo.com> wrote:
> What would be neat,
> however, would be the existence of a supra-national organization that could coordinate the
> activities of different national chapters in the same region. Wikimedia Europa, for example,
> and/or even smaller coordinating bodies such as Wikimedia Balkans.

That was my first thought, too, but I don't think this direction is
necessarily right. First of all, you end up with another legal body
with another to-be-(s)elected group of representatives: more
bureaucracy. More importantly, cooperations between chapters are
likely going to be an "ad hoc" thing:
- "Let's have an Eastern Europe meeting."
- "Let's cooperate between DE and AT for a media campaign."
- "Let's start a metadata project for digitized documents in Croatian
and Serbian."
- "Let's approach a Commonwealth organization for a grant."

They can be derived from languages, regions, political associations,
history, personal contacts, etc. Unless you want "meta-organizations"
that model all these potential points of contact between chapters, I
think what is really needed is simply efficient cross-chapter
communication. In cases where you would want to say "Organized by
Wikimedia Europe", you can instead say "Organized by the Wikimedia
chapters of Europe". Where you need a single central organization to
receive money, you can use the WMF.

Is there a real need for anything else?

Erik
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Jimmy Wales wrote:
> daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
>
>>It seems to me that supporting the creation a single chapter for these
>>independent countries and cultures, solely on the basis of them having once been
>>part of a single state, might be considered offensive to the people involved.
>
>
> It might be, to some, but to many others it would not be. Each location
> around the globe will involve different circumstances.


>>No one is proposing that Austria and Hungary merge their potential chapters,
>
>
> Right, but Austria and Hungary do not even share the same language.

France, Luxembourg, Swiss, Belgium, Monaco share the same language.

>>nor is anyone suggesting that the UK, Canada, and Australia set up a single
>>chapter, though the cultural differences there may be even less distinct and
>>they still share a single crown, language, etc.
>
>
> Right, but UK, Canada, and Australia do not even share the same
> geographical location.

France, Luxembourg, Swiss, Belgium, Monaco are located in the same area.

> These matters are for the local people to decide, of course. But I
> believe based on my experience in talking to people in this region,
> there is a strong sentiment from a lot of people that the ideas of
> radically different language, culture, etc., is hardly a settled matter
> for most ordinary people.
>
> --Jimbo

But France, Luxembourg, Swiss, Belgium, Monaco are independant
countries. With different laws. Different tax considerations.

And different chapters.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Yes, but Luxembourg, Swiss, Belgium, Monaco are so small that a coordination
among different chapters with the same language could be helpful.

Ilario

>
>But France, Luxembourg, Swiss, Belgium, Monaco are independant
>countries. With different laws. Different tax considerations.
>
>And different chapters.
>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

?
It would never have come to my mind to qualify Swiss and Belgium of
*small* countries :-)
(I would agree Luxembourg and Monaco are small though ;-))

Of course, coordination is very much necessary. I just could not figure
telling Swiss editors "you do not need a chapter, just join the France
one" :-)

In any cases, the question about Serbia and Montenegro has been answered...

ant

valdelli@bluemail.ch wrote:
> Yes, but Luxembourg, Swiss, Belgium, Monaco are so small that a coordination
> among different chapters with the same language could be helpful.
>
> Ilario
>
>
>>But France, Luxembourg, Swiss, Belgium, Monaco are independant
>>countries. With different laws. Different tax considerations.
>>
>>And different chapters.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>foundation-l mailing list
>>foundation-l@wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 5/25/06, valdelli@bluemail.ch <valdelli@bluemail.ch> wrote:
> Yes, but Luxembourg, Swiss, Belgium, Monaco are so small that a coordination
> among different chapters with the same language could be helpful.

Do explain why Dutch and French are suddenly the same language, or
Italian and Dutch?

Finne/henna

>
> Ilario
>
> >
> >But France, Luxembourg, Swiss, Belgium, Monaco are independant
> >countries. With different laws. Different tax considerations.
> >
> >And different chapters.
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >foundation-l mailing list
> >foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> >http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


--
"Maybe you knew early on that your track went from point A to B, but
unlike you I wasn't given a map at birth!" Alyssa, "Chasing Amy"
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 5/24/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/24/06, Daniel Mayer <maveric149@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > What would be neat,
> > however, would be the existence of a supra-national organization that could coordinate the
> > activities of different national chapters in the same region. Wikimedia Europa, for example,
> > and/or even smaller coordinating bodies such as Wikimedia Balkans.
>
> That was my first thought, too, but I don't think this direction is
> necessarily right. First of all, you end up with another legal body
> with another to-be-(s)elected group of representatives: more
> bureaucracy. More importantly, cooperations between chapters are
> likely going to be an "ad hoc" thing:
> - "Let's have an Eastern Europe meeting."
> - "Let's cooperate between DE and AT for a media campaign."
> - "Let's start a metadata project for digitized documents in Croatian
> and Serbian."
> - "Let's approach a Commonwealth organization for a grant."
>
> They can be derived from languages, regions, political associations,
> history, personal contacts, etc. Unless you want "meta-organizations"
> that model all these potential points of contact between chapters, I
> think what is really needed is simply efficient cross-chapter
> communication. In cases where you would want to say "Organized by
> Wikimedia Europe", you can instead say "Organized by the Wikimedia
> chapters of Europe". Where you need a single central organization to
> receive money, you can use the WMF.
>
> Is there a real need for anything else?

There might be at some point a need for a common european chapter if
we deal with eu institutions, but that would prolly be more a lobby
organisation

Finne/henna

--
"Maybe you knew early on that your track went from point A to B, but
unlike you I wasn't given a map at birth!" Alyssa, "Chasing Amy"
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Do you mean about Belgium? Because a chapter is nation-based and not language-based,
as you can see in Wikimedia CH (German, French, Italian, Romansh and Alemmanisch
former Wikipedians in same chapter).

Ilario


>-- Messaggio originale --
>Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 15:16:01 +0200
>From: "Finne Boonen" <finne@cassia.be>
>To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l@wikimedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Serbia and Montenegro
>Reply-To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l@wikimedia.org>
>
>
>On 5/25/06, valdelli@bluemail.ch <valdelli@bluemail.ch> wrote:
>> Yes, but Luxembourg, Swiss, Belgium, Monaco are so small that a coordination
>> among different chapters with the same language could be helpful.
>
>Do explain why Dutch and French are suddenly the same language, or
>Italian and Dutch?
>
>Finne/henna
>


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l