Wikipedia talk:Meetup/NYC/June 2024

Library picture

Woodhaven library? Someone was saying it had an indoor pic and no outdoor but have i misremebered? commons:Category:Queens_Library,_Woodhaven Jim.henderson (talk) 01:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attendance

19 people online - Wil540 art (talk) 02:04, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia NYC movement charter vote

During the meeting, we decided to have a discussion leading up to the chapter's vote on the ratification of the movement charter. Our collective feedback is more important than a simple yes/no vote, though the latter will reflect the consensus of chapter members.

The deadline for all votes (the chapter's, but also individual votes) is July 9th, and Windblown29 will be casting a vote and leaving a comment on behalf of our chapter.

All thoughts are welcome. ^Complex/_Rational 23:54, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose I'll copy what I wrote over at WP:VPM:

I'm torn. I like the idea of a formalized body to move some decision-making powers from the WMF to the broader community and have no problem with the involvement of affiliates for the way doing so means the English Wikipedia doesn't simply decide everything for everyone every time. I also don't want perfection to be the enemy of good enough, with there being no guarantee of a serious follow-up proposal if this fails. But it's also hard to understand exactly what this would do, what the WMF would let it do, and how exactly it would work in relation to all of the other entities. We have affiliates, we have thematic organizations, we have user groups, we have hubs, we have various committees, we have the UCOC folks, we have the Wikimedia Foundation, and we have the body of users on each project; we have meetings just for the WMF, meetings about strategy, meetings about UCOC, meetings just for affiliates, meetings within affiliates, and extensive, splintered discussions about all of this on meta, enwiki, and every other project. Part of me says we don't need yet yet another formal entity thrown in the mix, creating yet more bureaucracy, but I also feel like there's the potential for this to be the organization that actually gets things done on behalf of regular volunteers. The big problem, here and as usual, is this is all simply way too much to fully understand for anyone with a full-time job outside of the wiki world -- especially for people who, you know, are here to write articles or take photos or link data or whatnot.

My thinking hasn't evolved much, despite having read more since leaving that message a few days ago. I'm leaning towards supporting myself as a WP:MEH case. Basically, while I don't have the highest hopes that it will be all that useful, some people do, and I don't mind giving those folks a shot at making a difference. We are already well past the point of having a deleterious level of process-and-committee bureaucracy within the movement and I find the other arguments to oppose unconvincing, so yeah, WP:MEH. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 20:59, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]