Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2024-10-19/News and notes

Discuss this story

Admin elections trial

Regarding AELECT, a discussion on voter guides ended with consensus that neither prohibits nor encourages voter guides, as long as they're not linked from the AELECT pages. Editors who find them useful may find a handy list at User:Novem Linguae/Essays/2024 administrator election voter guide#See_Also, among other locations. Soni (talk) 16:51, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Soni and Novem Linguae: Thank you for the information! Oltrepier (talk) 07:07, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since publication there was one nomination withdrawn, and the discussion period ~~began~~ is proceeding with 34 candidates. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Technically we began the discussion period with 35 candidates, then 1 withdrew. There was also a withdrawal or two during the SecurePoll setup period. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another nomination withdrawn, now 33 candidates. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:00, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And another, now 32 candidates just a few minutes before voting may begin. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:47, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's another 24 hours of discussion phase, I think. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:34, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oof, you are right. Voting starts 25 October. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:46, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Knowledge Equity Fund

I oppose the Knoweledge equity fund with considerable passion. While these projects are admirable, they should not be getting money from the WMF. The Foundation's job is to keep the servers running, hire lawyers, and fix big bugs, not to be a philanthropist, especially given the community wasn't given input. I would point the WMF to the second resolution of Wikipedia:Village_pump (WMF)/Archive 6#Grants to organizations unrelated to supporting Wikimedia Projects. Is there somewhere central I can complain to the WMF about this? Cremastra (u — c) 01:43, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe meta:Talk:Knowledge Equity Fund? –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that seems like the central spot for whingeing. Cremastra (u — c) 13:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cremastra and Novem Linguae: The best place to share your views is in The Signpost. The Wikimedia community has many questions about the program. I am aware of these because we studied the program for previous Signpost coverage, but did not manage to produce the story we wanted. It would be helpful to have a full Signpost article on program outcomes to date. I can support a writer or journalists, but cannot take the lead on the whole story.

If you want to a story, then here are some suggestions: Submit a question to community calls on Wednesday, October 23 (ESEAP friendly time: 10am UTC, Pacific friendly time: 4pm UTC); bring the answer back to The Signpost, and draft a basic outline of the program which contains the news of the answer to the question you asked in the context of third-round funding.

Standing by to support! Bluerasberry (talk) 14:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]