Virtual office hours/Office hours 16-01-2013
Jump to navigation Jump to search
[17:30] <Stevie> So, we have a few people here [17:31] <RichardN> Evening all [17:31] <Stevie> Thanks KTC! [17:31] <ErrantX> Kbavage_: yes... ;P [17:31] <Leutha> Hi everyone [17:32] <Stevie> Thanks for dropping in, especially if you're here for the office hours chat [17:32] <Kbavage_> Sorry! Thanks for looking at it though :D [17:32] <Stevie> From Wikimedia UK's office, we have Jon Davies, our Chief Executive [17:32] <Jon___> ANy questions about the plans for next year? [17:32] <Stevie> Katherine Bavage, our Fuindraising Manager [17:33] <Stevie> Richard Nevell is here too, he's basically the guy that keeps us all sane [17:33] <Stevie> And there's me [17:33] <Kbavage_> *waves* [17:33] <Jon___> Exciting times with lots of new stuff starting especially the WIkimedians in Residence [17:34] <Leutha> I think things will really start moving in 2013. It will be interesting to see how tis effects the Wikimedia community! [17:34] <Kbavage_> https://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/2013_Activity_Plan [17:34] <Kbavage_> And how it effects the plan ;) [17:35] <Stevie> We're recruiting three members of staff at the moment to help deliver on our ambitious plans for 2013-14 that Katherine linked to [17:35] <Stevie> Volunteer Support Organiser, GLAM Organiser and Education Organiser [17:35] <RichardN> Dead line for applications is 8 Feb! [17:35] <Jon___> I hope it will encourage those already active , bring in those hovering on the edge and create a whole pile of new volunteers. [17:36] <Stevie> Full details on our wiki but we hope to get plenty of applications from people in this chatroom [17:36] <+Thehelpfulone> Kbavage_, can you link me to a little bit about the alternative funding that you're looking into as WMUK is no longer a payment processor? [17:37] <Kbavage_> Not exactly no - its not a formal plan yet :( [17:37] <Kbavage_> Its something I'm working on and happy to talk about? [17:38] <+Thehelpfulone> sure [17:38] <Leutha> I just checked the 2013 plan pages. At the moment there are lots of links to 2012 pages. So is the idea that we create a set of new pages, using them as model and/or for guidance. [17:40] <Kbavage_> Are those the background links? [17:40] <Jon___> Indeed - we only agreed it last week. I have to create a repoting model for the FDC and board that I have drafted and discussed with Staff. This will be top level but link to pages about what is going on. How much detail do you want? [17:41] <Jon___> PS The Education, GLAM, Technology and Events committees will paly a big role in this. [17:43] <Kbavage_> Does anyone want to talk about alternative sources of funding? [17:43] <ErrantX> Yes! :) [17:43] <+Thehelpfulone> yes please Kbavage_ [17:43] <Jon___> Selling and breeding kittens is a 'no' [17:43] <Kbavage_> Well that's me out of ideas :p [17:44] <Kbavage_> No [17:44] <Kbavage_> Well, sufficed to say there are lots of options [17:44] <+tommorris> hey people. [17:44] <Kbavage_> so we need to pick the ones that make the most sense in terms of time, effort, are values [17:44] <Kbavage_> He Tommorris [17:44] <Kbavage_> Anyway - of those options sponsorship should be supporting events [17:44] <Leutha> Did you get achance to look at the Heritage Lottery fund stuff? [17:45] <Kbavage_> Major donors and corporate sources of income are useful [17:45] <+tommorris> are there any plans for WMUK to sponsor any kind of outreach or projects around our newest lil sister, Wikivoyage? ;-) [17:45] <+Thehelpfulone> have you had any major donors yet Kbavage_? [17:46] <Kbavage_> Three questions [17:46] <Kbavage_> Leutha, I've not, and I've searched my inbox and can't see it... [17:46] <RexxS> I assume that converting UK donations to direct debit + gift aid will be high on the list? [17:47] <Kbavage_> tommorris - sadly this is just *too new* for me to have considered the exciting possibilites for wikimedian holidays... [17:47] <+Thehelpfulone> RexxS, that depends on whether WMUK is approved as a payment processor for this year [17:47] <RexxS> no it doesn't [17:47] <Jon___> Re Wikivoage - noticed that the pages on Barbados are pretty thin... [17:47] <+Thehelpfulone> RexxS, the ones through the Wikipedia banners do [17:47] <Kbavage_> Thehelpfulone - Yes, we've had some major donations, historical and recent [17:48] <RexxS> and the others don't [17:48] <Kbavage_> I'm in the process of seeking their permission to announce any gifts [17:48] <+Thehelpfulone> okay Kbavage_ [17:48] * tommorris attempts to not make any jokes about the Gibraltan government. [17:48] <Kbavage_> :D [17:48] <+Thehelpfulone> Jon___, I may have missed it, but is there a report about the work *staff* do per month? https://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reports/2012/November seems to be mostly community related, and 6 full time staff must be doing more than that! [17:49] <Kbavage_> Next - RexxS is right - we need a campaign to convert previous donors to direct debits [17:49] <Leutha> OK, I've just sent the HLF stuff again [17:49] <Kbavage_> and better gift aid uptake [17:49] <Kbavage_> Thanks Leutha [17:49] <Jon___> We do a weekly report to the Board but it sometimes contains items that are a bit sensitive. [17:50] <Kbavage_> And there are staff reports to the board [17:50] <+Thehelpfulone> Jon___, hmm, well I think it would be worth stripping out the sensitive stuff - I remember there was a discussion about this a while back and Richard gave us a whole itinerary of his day but then after that it seemed to die down pretty quickly [17:50] <Kbavage_> bear in mind me answering donor queries or writing thank you letters takes up time but doensn't make the reports [17:51] <+Thehelpfulone> WMF manages pretty reasonably well (engineering in particular) with the number of staff they have [17:51] <Kbavage_> I think we're looking at KPIs soon, which should help [17:51] <Kbavage_> As in solid stats on response times, or things acheived [17:51] <Kbavage_> which should cover this [17:52] <Kbavage_> Oh! and you can always come into the office and see what we get up to [17:52] <Kbavage_> (we like visitors) [17:52] <Stevie> I second that [17:52] <Leutha> Well, I've always found the office very welcoming [17:52] <+Thehelpfulone> heh maybe next time I'm in London :) [17:52] <Jon___> A key question is how you manage staff in any organiastion. We have a programme, Staff are allocated to deliver it. They report to me and I report to the board. It is not good practice to spend time listing what we do all say when we should be delivering the programme. If staff are slacking then it is down to me and the board hsould hammer me. What sort of job do you do and how do you report upwards? [17:54] <Leutha> I agree with Jon, what we need is progress reports rather than reporting too many details [17:55] <+tommorris> but for the few hiccups that have been widely reported, I'm broadly satisfied with the operation of the chapter. I'd like it if the board were to step back and delegate the job of executing to the staff. [17:55] == MatthewWilkes [~MatthewWi@2a02:40:10::2c70:ac10] has joined #wikimedia-uk [17:55] <RexxS> it's not an easy transition - but we're working on it [17:56] <RexxS> The problem is that WMUk has been volunteer-led and the trustees are mainly volunteers [17:56] <ErrantX> One idea that might be nice is for each staff member to write one or two sentences at the end of each month about what new or interesting thing they did during the month [17:56] <ErrantX> that might sate the desire for insider info :) [17:57] <ErrantX> without overloading staff [17:57] <+Thehelpfulone> ErrantX, yep that's better than nothing at the moment and would only take a minute or two [17:57] <+tommorris> ErrantX: sort of like Reddit's Today I Learned (TIL). [17:57] <geniice> more than that [17:57] <bodnotbod> I like that idea ErrantX . [17:57] <ErrantX> (e.g. this just took me two minutes: https://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reports/2012/December#Technology) [17:57] <Jon___> We are begining to use the blog posts to that end and news from the office [17:58] <RexxS> Stevie's blog posts often pick up interesting or innovative stuff that staff do [17:58] <RexxS> lol - snap, Jon [17:58] <+Thehelpfulone> ErrantX, going off-topic slightly, are you planning to move the public wiki to a chapter server? [17:58] <Kbavage_> Yes - we are [17:59] <ErrantX> depends on what you mean by "planning" [17:59] <Kbavage_> Tech committee shoudl discuss this next week [17:59] <ErrantX> as in "are you an Emmanuel discussing how to do such a thing", then yes [17:59] <Jon___> Facsinating stuff but any comments on the 2012-14 plan? [17:59] <ErrantX> in terms of deciding to move it that is, as Katherine note, for the tech committee & community :) [17:59] <Jon___> Meant 2013-14! [18:00] <ErrantX> time travel! :) [18:00] <Leutha> What's the thinking on the Schools conferenec? [18:00] <Kbavage_> Thehelpfulone - http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Technology_Committee is a good way to stay in touch with these sorts of things? [18:01] == Fluffernutter [~Fluffernu@wikipedia/Fluffernutter] has joined #wikimedia-uk [18:01] <+Thehelpfulone> ah thanks [18:01] <ErrantX> Jon___: the thing that confuses me about the 2013 activity plan is... [18:02] <ErrantX> It is really just an expanded budget [18:02] == Qcoder00 [~email@example.com] has joined #wikimedia-uk [18:02] <Jon___> Martin Plouter conviced there are enough people in the secondary and adult sector who would like to do wiki related work. I know the AE insttitue I teach at would love to do some evening classes in wiki editing. The conference would bring these people together to explore what s possible. Stevie is doing some good stuff already with Digital disruption [18:02] <ErrantX> with links to the 2012 plans [18:02] <Qcoder00> Hi. [18:02] <Qcoder00> Whose the chair here? [18:02] <ErrantX> will this be expanded on or worked up as we go? [18:03] <Stevie> Hi Qcoder [18:03] <Leutha> Yes, I just suggested that Digital disrupt goes on the Education Committee agenda [18:03] <Stevie> how do you mean? Of WMUK or this conversation? [18:03] <Kbavage_> ErrantX Yes! It will be expanded with goals and reporting to the FDC at regular intervals [18:03] <+Thehelpfulone> I agree with ErrantX - take https://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/2013_Activity_Plan#Train_the_Trainers_Programme for example, from what I can see in 2012 £20,000 [18:03] <+Thehelpfulone> was allocated, this year £19,420 [18:03] <+Thehelpfulone> has been allocated but we want to double the number of trainers? A break down like the one at https://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/2012_Activity_Plan/Train_the_Trainers would be good :-) [18:03] <Jon___> To some extent it is just 2012 write big. The reality is that 2012 was not completey delivered. We have added some things - budget for Wales, are tryong to repeat others - WiR Scotland and brought in more stff capacity to develop volunteering and projects. [18:03] <Qcoder00> Stevie: In this conversation [18:04] <Leutha> I Qcoder00 i did n't realise that there was one! [18:05] <Kbavage_> Wikimeidanarchy [18:05] <RexxS> we trained about 20 trainers in 2012, if we do the same in 2013, we'll double the number [18:05] == KTC [bc1da567@wikipedia/KTC] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] [18:05] <ErrantX> Jon___: (and everyone) Ok that makes sense [18:05] <+Thehelpfulone> ah that makes more sense RexxS, heh sorry [18:05] <Jon___> I would like to see enough trained trainers to accommodate any request from anywhere in the oucntry, a way to go on this ut getting there. The northern Train the Trainers will help but I'd like ones elsewhere as well. [18:05] <Qcoder00> Anyway I had a question which was basicly, will the UK chapter be asking the WMF for a clarifcation on where exactly the line on epxlicit content? [18:06] <Qcoder00> *line on explict content is [18:06] <+Thehelpfulone> ErrantX, on another side note after I just read about the WMUK mailing lists, http://lists.wikimedia.org.uk could do with a redirect to http://lists.wikimedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo and http://lists.wikimedia.org.uk/mailman/gives me a "Forbidden" error message [18:06] <Stevie> Hello Qcoder [18:06] <Leutha> Activity Plan 2013: Let's set up pages in the form 2012 Activity Plan/"topic" [18:06] <Stevie> Thanks for your question [18:07] <Stevie> I think it's an important question and it's an important discussion that we should have in the open. [18:07] <ErrantX> On a related note; take the WW1/2 project... money is for a WIR post, but little else is discussed in terms of activities & outreach [18:07] <Stevie> There are a variety of views within the community, there isn't just a single view [18:07] == legoktm [~legoktm@wikipedia/Legoktm] has joined #wikimedia-uk [18:07] <Stevie> I would really love to host a debate on this topic, either in the WMUK office or elsewhere [18:08] <ErrantX> so is the plan to get someone in place and have them drive the project? and if so where does the money come from for that? and how do we measure the impact/outcomes in terms of our activity plan? [18:08] <RexxS> it's important to emphasise that WMUK has no control over content, explicit or otherwise [18:08] <Qcoder00> Jon_: Before a chapter gets too involved in 'education' sector work, in my view it needs to make some clear policy choices on how it's going to handle controvsey [18:08] <Stevie> Qcoder, what is your view? [18:08] <Jon___> This is one in the pipeline. We are in negotiation with a major museum that conentrates on war studies and will have something to reprt soon I hope [18:08] <ErrantX> Qcoder00: Stevie Wikiconference 2013 breakout topic? [18:08] <RexxS> but WMUK is a good vehicle for Wikimedians in the UK to debate the issues [18:08] <Qcoder00> Stevie: It's my view that the chapter shouldn't be advocating for porn on Commons... [18:08] <Kbavage_> ErrantX?I like that idea! [18:09] <Leutha> But the World Wars were about so mush more than war . . . [18:09] <RexxS> I agree Qcoder [18:09] <+tommorris> It isn't porn, it's high quality educational material on penises, Qcoder00. ;-) [18:09] <Qcoder00> tommorris: That's the problem [18:09] <Kbavage_> Yes, don't forget there are outreach and comms budgets to support work done by WIRs and the like [18:09] <Jon___> I would like to see us working as an english language think-tnk for the movement BUT with some face t face stuff not the anonymity of the internet (am I in trouble guys for saying that?) [18:09] <RexxS> but I don't think the chapter should be advocating against it either [18:09] <Qcoder00> When does an image cease to be 'cultrually'approproate? [18:09] <+Thehelpfulone> Qcoder00, is the chapter advocating for that? [18:09] <Qcoder00> *appropriate [18:10] <Qcoder00> Thehelpfulone: It isn't, but it's not exactly being vocal on the issue [18:10] <+tommorris> I'd rather Wikimedia UK focussed on being productive working with partners than wasting time engaging in intellectual masturbation over issues that they can't actually do anything about, like Commons policy. [18:10] <RexxS> well it's not really the Chapter's place to be an advocate is it? [18:10] <Qcoder00> tommorris: I personally think chapters should have a say in trying to reform policy [18:10] <Leutha> I think that it is important to combine face-to-face with online. When I started to go to London meetups, I took wikipedia much more seriously. [18:10] <ErrantX> Kbavage_: sure, what I am trying to ask is what the activity plan is for - a more detailed budget for "roles" over the financial plan, or something to drive project & measure success by the end of the year [18:11] <+tommorris> Qcoder00: yes, but in reality, they don't have a say. editors have the say. so, it's basically a massive waste of time. [18:11] <Jon___> I see a pent up need to discuss quite a few issues and would like to relese the pressure a bit [18:11] <Kbavage_> ErrantX +1 its not there yet, but we know it needs to be [18:11] <RexxS> I disagree Qcoder, although I think it's the Chapter's job to facilitate discussion [18:12] <Qcoder00> tommorris: So you are syaing it would be wrong for a chapter to be vocal about 'porn' existing on Commons? Something that might cause problems for other Chapter objectives? [18:12] <Jon___> ANyone interested in an editathon at Bristol City? [18:12] <ErrantX> I think Qcoder00 has an point; I think WMUK can "host" discussions over these on-wiki issues in the hope that people can brainstorm solutions [18:12] <Kbavage_> I second that [18:12] <RexxS> I'd be happy to help facilitate discussion in any way I can [18:12] <Kbavage_> Party in Tipton? [18:13] <Stevie> Essentially, the position of the chapter on these issues really has to be one of neutrality / facilitation - we have to be lead by the community [18:13] <geniice> ErrantX brainstorm what you will. Commons not care [18:13] <Leutha> Qcoder: I feel that making the chapters a focus point for reforming policy would be a mistake, but I do think they could hold useful focus groups [18:13] <Stevie> Again, I'd like to raise the idea of a debate [18:13] <geniice> there have been loads [18:13] <geniice> commons still don't care [18:13] <geniice> Jon___ to do what? [18:13] <+tommorris> Qcoder00: the chapter should be there to do useful things like facilitate outreach, not to be a talking shop to talk about how many penises there are on Commons. [18:14] <+tommorris> and I mean how many penises there are in the File namespace not the User namespace. [18:14] <Stevie> geniice: that's no reason not to try and move forward [18:14] <Jon___> Get the Bristol CIty pages up to srcatch and get some new editors. SAy 11 o clock before a match day? [18:14] <ErrantX> geniice: that's easy to say "give up because it won't help" [18:14] <Qcoder00> tommorris: That Outreach can be undermined by the existence of controversial material (on Commons) [18:14] <geniice> Stevie actually it is. [18:14] <ErrantX> the thing is, clearly this is an issue of concern for our members, so the charity should help them express themselves (without trying itself to lean on Commons etc.) [18:15] <geniice> Jon___ hmm the problem is that there aren't many wikipedians who would want to attend a bristol city game [18:15] <Qcoder00> It's my view that some might see 'advocay by silence' when none exists [18:15] <Qcoder00> *advocacy [18:15] <ErrantX> tommorris: among the class of "useful" things IMO is "bringing community groups together to discuss issues", as that is also of benefit to the projects [18:15] <Kbavage_> http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mission [18:15] <Kbavage_> Just a quick reminder of what we're PRIMARILY meant to do [18:15] <Stevie> We can't lean on Commons, we don't have any authority to do so [18:15] <geniice> ErrantX then WMUK will simply be regarded as a hostile organisation by commons and nothing with change [18:15] <Kbavage_> Which I'm not sure this falls into [18:16] <Kbavage_> but, sure, the community can and should debate it [18:16] <Kbavage_> that's why having a debate at something like WikiCon makes sense to me [18:16] <geniice> Jon___ is our coverage of the club even that bad? [18:16] <Qcoder00> My inital question was that the Chapter should encourage development of 'objective' criteria I think [18:16] <ErrantX> Qcoder00: that feels like a stretch, the position of the chapters has always been clear - and it would only be "seen" that way if people tried to make it so (as they have attempted before). Which is unhelpful and pointless [18:16] <bodnotbod> Qcoder00 Have any would-be volunteers or donors explicitly said to you they will not involve themselves due to Commons content? [18:17] <Stevie> geniice: not as bad as the performance on the pitch [18:17] <Qcoder00> bodnotd: Not yet [18:17] <Qcoder00> but it could happen [18:17] <RichardN> I think improving the club's article might influence on-pitch performance in which case we may have issues regarding COI [18:17] <ErrantX> As a practical example though; at the Stamford training session the featured article was "Mr Hanky the Christmas Poo" [18:17] <Jon___> The club IS bad, the attendances are BAD I am saddled with them!!! [18:18] <Qcoder00> I don't have a problem with contextually valid anatomical images being on Commons ... [18:18] <geniice> Qcoder00 you can think that chapters should spend time spitting at thunderstorms but there is no practical reason to do so [18:18] <ErrantX> It didn't elict comment, but it feels quie purile when stuff like that crops up during such sessions [18:18] <bodnotbod> Qcoder00 then I think it would be wise to prioritise working on things that can and do happen than on things we're somewhat worried may happen. [18:18] <geniice> Jon___ to be honest you might be better off trying to organise something like that through the relivant wikiprojects [18:18] <Stevie> OK, let's move the discussion on [18:19] <Kbavage_> +1 [18:19] <Qcoder00> Of course something that would be good for the chapter to do is to try get anatomical imaging from UK Collections released to commons.... [18:19] <Qcoder00> .. As this would presumably have gone through the appropriate checks [18:19] <Stevie> How do you think we're doing in general? Do you have any views on our programming? Are there things we should perhaps be doing that we aren't? [18:20] <Qcoder00> BY obtaining hi-quality imaging from academic collections, theerewould be even less need for user created lo quality anatomical images [18:20] <Stevie> Qcoder00: I'm happy to continue this discussion off-IRC if it's helpful. Drop me a line at firstname.lastname@example.org [18:20] <+tommorris> I think the main problem the chapter faces is that there's still not enough volunteers. there's money, there's now staff/resources/infrastructure, but the lack of volunteers is a hard one. [18:20] <Kbavage_> I agree [18:20] <Qcoder00> OK I've said my bit [18:21] <geniice> Stevie not buying enough cool kit [18:21] <Kbavage_> what's a good incentive for people? [18:21] <Stevie> Tom, totally agree and I know everyone in the office realises this [18:21] <ErrantX> tommorris: agreed [18:21] <Leutha> I think we should be preparing for when the new staff come in post, and making sure that the sub-committees are clear about their briefs [18:21] <Kbavage_> Can we bribe them with promises of staff dancing on demand if they get involved? [18:21] <ErrantX> did anyone catch my comments vaguely around this on the Train the Trainers feb talk page btw? [18:22] <Qcoder00> I've thought of something... [18:22] <bodnotbod> When you say "volunteers" I guess you're not referring to people that edit Wikipedia that just happen to live in the UK? You mean volunteers for all the meatspace projects? [18:22] <ErrantX> (ref: http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Training_the_Trainers/February_2013_event) [18:22] <Qcoder00> Is it within the Chapters remit to lobby collections for open access? [18:22] <RexxS> oh yes [18:22] <Kbavage_> Yes, specificly helping deliver outreach and programme work [18:22] <RexxS> we're doing that now [18:22] <Kbavage_> editing is volunteering, but of a different type [18:23] <+Fae> Qcoder00: Yes, I was doing it today (gnomishly) with two different institutions. [18:23] <RexxS> expect a major announcement soon of around 250,000 images [18:23] <+tommorris> bodnotbod: I mean that there aren't enough Wikimedians who are actively involved with chapter activities such that they could be dragged in to help with some IRL event [18:23] <geniice> Stevie ROV, quadcopter, sod it a go-pro camera. Also small scale 3d laser scanner and a way to upload .blend files to commons [18:24] <Qcoder00> Fae: It's a shame that one of the collections I'dlike to get my hands on (which is old British Standards) isn't likely to be open access for a long time... [18:24] <Leutha> I think "volunteering" for Wikmedia UK activities is a bot different from the role of an "amateur" editor. I'm sorry I've been reading Yochai Benkler on the economic of all this [18:24] <Stevie> geniice, I have no idea what any of that means. It sounds expensive! [18:24] <bodnotbod> tommorris OK, I understand, thanks. I guess it is always tricky to find volunteers. Has WMUK advertised for volunteers on sites that try to match volunteers to projects? [18:24] <+Fae> You mean the BS texts that became ISO? [18:24] <Qcoder00> (And all I was trying to find out was rail-sizes used in 1914!") [18:24] == MatthewWilkes has changed nick to mwilkes|away [18:24] <Qcoder00> Fae: No, I mean very early historical standards... [18:24] <Qcoder00> which aren't current [18:24] <RexxS> problem is that BS sells the standards [18:25] <Kbavage_> Yochai Benkler? Link Leutha? [18:25] <Qcoder00> RexxS: Current ones yes [18:25] <+tommorris> Kbavage_: Google 'The Wealth of Networks' [18:25] <ErrantX> I think the VLC work and Train the Trainers is a big part of building a support structure for a bigger network of volunteers [18:25] <geniice> Stevie actualy the first 3 are sub 1K and the third is about 2K [18:25] <+Fae> Qcoder00: Ah, well, you'll just have to use the library for a few years yet. Ask for digital access. [18:25] <+tommorris> bodnotbod: it's more that we now have the finances to take on bigger and bigger projects but we're struggling to find the volunteers to make those viable. like, if five big GLAMs came to WMUK and said "we wanna work with Wikipedia and Commons to share all our valuable goodies on subject X", we'd not be able to say "ah, here's th editor for you" [18:25] <Qcoder00> Arguably , certain engineering standards are something that should be open access... [18:25] <Qcoder00> But which there isn't much action on [18:26] <+Fae> I think I can get all of these through my Uni access though. Let me know if I can dig something out for you. [18:26] <+Fae> (Research purposes only) [18:26] <Qcoder00> Fae: Contact me on wiki [18:26] == James_F has changed nick to James_F|Away [18:26] <Qcoder00> ;) [18:26] <RexxS> there's a process of converting readers to editors and then editors to volunteers [18:26] <RexxS> and it's interesting to find effective ways of doing that [18:26] <+Fae> QcUse my email - still banned on en.wp. :-/ [18:26] <geniice> tommorris so contact editors with relivant skillsets dirrectly [18:27] <RexxS> we have probably less than 90 regular volunteers in the UK [18:27] == Waithamai [~dragon@wikipedia/Waithamai] has joined #wikimedia-uk [18:27] <bodnotbod> tommorris In my own case my health limits me to online work and that's why I so value having Wikipedia where I can edit from home in line with my health capabilities. Can't say if that's something other UK Wikipedians would also say. [18:27] <Stevie> tommorris: that's exactly the kind of thing we're hoping that our volunteer support organiser will address. It really is a key post for us and it would be so, so good if someone with detailed knowledge and understanding of the Wikimedia community could fill that role. The three new posts, along with the committees, are going to give us a structure that will allow us to really expand programmatical activities [18:27] <Qcoder00> My main Wikipedia contribution is mainly in respect of images [18:27] <+tommorris> geniice: sure, but we need to build out that volunteer base. find more people who edit the projects and try harder to help them take a babystep towards doing IRL volunteering [18:28] <Qcoder00> Another area that the UK Chapter could work on is getting scans for works not yet in digital form... [18:28] <Qcoder00> *get to [18:28] <Qcoder00> (Like old laws...) [18:28] <RexxS> i believe the most likely source of new volunteers is the Wikimeets [18:28] <geniice> been tried [18:28] <+Fae> WMUK has funded a few digitization projects - always open to a grant proposal. [18:28] == ErrantX has changed nick to ErrantX|away [18:28] <ErrantX|away> gonna have to head out guys - have fun! [18:28] <Kbavage_> I agree with RexxS - events and wikimeets are the best place [18:29] <Kbavage_> See you ErrantX|away [18:29] <Qcoder00> Fae: The problem isn't so much digitization as it is finding the physcial documents... [18:29] <geniice> RexxS I think you are better of saying okey we access to cool thing X who on wiki might be interested [18:29] <Stevie> Bye ErrantX! [18:29] <Qcoder00> archive.org for example has old collections of statutes up to the middel fo George 3'rd reign... [18:29] <Stevie> geniice: there's no reason we can't do both [18:29] <Jon___> Wikimeets are a great first gentle intorduction. Then Rexx gets them and their lives change... [18:30] <bodnotbod> Is WMUK aware of this site that matches volunteers with organisations? http://www.do-it.org.uk/partners/postingopportunities/whoshouldpostwhere [18:30] <Qcoder00> but I've not found online digitizations of expired laws from the late Regency onward :( [18:30] == dirkfranke has changed nick to southpark [18:30] <RexxS> 2 new editors (female) from the Oxford meetup last Sunday [18:30] <Qcoder00> And trying to track down things like Board of Trade Rail Accident reports is even harder [18:31] == KTC [bc1f31a1@wikipedia/KTC] has joined #wikimedia-uk [18:31] <RexxS> just need to convert to volunteers now ... [18:31] <Kbavage_> :D [18:31] <+Fae> Qcoder00: Our relationships with legal deposits are very good. If there was an area with major open knowledge impact we can push the case for early digitization. The last 2 years has seen a major shift in approach to IP with the major institutions. The key problem for digitization is backlog, cost and prioritization. [18:31] <Leutha> I certainly found the wiki-meets help everything become more real [18:31] <Qcoder00> Does the WMUK have a contact in the UK National Archives for example? [18:31] <+Fae> Yes. [18:31] <Kbavage_> I think pursuing things like do-it.org is difficult because we expect volunteers to have editing experience [18:32] <Kbavage_> BUT this is something the new post can start to address [18:32] <+Fae> We are negotiating a major project this year and delivered on WWII poster digitization last year. [18:32] <Kbavage_> I still think face to face recruitment, training and peer support are the best ways [18:32] <Kbavage_> All the volunteering I;ve ever done has been through someone I've met asking me [18:32] <bodnotbod> I have to go now. Thanks for having an office hours, tis always good to keep a finger on the pulse. Wish all well with The Plan. G'bye. [18:32] <Kbavage_> (andI've done loooooads) [18:32] == bodnotbod [55d20dc7@gateway/web/freenode/ip.126.96.36.199] has quit  [18:32] <Qcoder00> Fae: It may seem like an odd item, but I'd be interested in seeing digitization of the HMRI archive... [18:32] <Kbavage_> Glad you enjoyed bodnotbod [18:33] <Qcoder00> HMRI beign Her Majesty Railway Inspectorate [18:33] <+Fae> :-D [18:33] <Kbavage_> Right all, [18:33] <Leutha> Volunteers: yes I agree it is more complex - we don't just want volunteers. What we are faced with is how we can better link up one of the world's top websites with what happens in the physical world [18:33] <+Fae> Where would it end up, Wikisource? [18:33] <Kbavage_> I have to away :( [18:33] <Qcoder00> Yep [18:33] <Kbavage_> But I really enjoyed this and lets do it again soon [18:33] <Leutha> Bye [18:33] <Kbavage_> it's a good way for all of us from all over the UK to chat in real time [18:34] <Kbavage_> *waves* [18:34] <KTC> bye [18:34] <+Fae> Qcoder00: You should approach them, fancy being an ambassador? [18:34] <Qcoder00> HMRI's main successor is RAIB [18:34] == Leutha [1f33de0d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.188.8.131.52] has quit [Quit: Page closed] [18:34] <Qcoder00> Fae: I don't have the time [18:34] == Kbavage_ [~Kbavage_@82-69-198-85.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk] has left #wikimedia-uk ["Leaving"] [18:34] <Qcoder00> or the confidence [18:34] <+Fae> Ah, then you need to pull on other keen volunteers. Raise it in the relevant wikiproject. It's an open door for these sorts of projects and we need to do a lot more with Wikisource. [18:34] <Qcoder00> but would be more than willing to do the proofreading on Wikisource, if someone found the scans... [18:35] <Stevie> Anything else anyone would like to ask the office staff? [18:35] <Jon___> OK we will schedule one again for not to longinthe future [18:35] <RexxS> yes [18:35] <Stevie> Finding this really useful, and based on this evening we'll do this more often [18:35] <Qcoder00> The other item that I'd like to see put on Wikisource is the Final report into Hillsborough... [18:35] <Qcoder00> (which is a KEY Historical document ) [18:35] <+Fae> I'm saying g'nite, need to sort out a light dinner for #1 :-) [18:35] <RexxS> can the staff help Qcoder approach the HMRI/RAIB ? seriously [18:36] <Qcoder00> RAIB reports are already online [18:36] <RexxS> but it's better to talk to these folks [18:36] <Qcoder00> It's the pre RAIB, HMRI reports (like those into Clapham, Hixon etc... ) [18:36] <RexxS> negotiate getting archives released [18:37] <Qcoder00> Some IIRC might come under the heading 'Command Papers' as they were multi-agency as opposed to just HMRI [18:37] == Robin [4e968b98@gateway/web/freenode/ip.184.108.40.206] has quit [Quit: Page closed] [18:37] <Jon___> Next time we need a bottle of wine to accopany this... [18:37] <+Fae> Hm, Crown copyright. [18:38] <Qcoder00> Fae: Open Government License [18:38] <+tommorris> Indeed. [18:38] <RexxS> I'll post a bottle to you [18:38] == Jon___ [2e41ffa1@gateway/web/freenode/ip.220.127.116.11] has quit [Quit: Page closed] [18:38] == KTC [bc1f31a1@wikipedia/KTC] has quit [Quit: Page closed] [18:38] <Stevie> OK, thanks everyone for coming. Our very helpful Richard N is going to take a record of this and we'll then share it on our wiki [18:38] <+Fae> Qcoder00: Yes, though if one were to mine their archive then archive.org might be better as the respository. [18:38] <RexxS> have fun all [18:39] <Qcoder00> Fae: They are UK publications, they really should be on the National Archives site... [18:39] <Qcoder00> Or in the case of HMRI , the RAIB's site [18:39] <+Fae> They probably already are. [18:39] == johnbod [4d64501e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.18.104.22.168] has joined #wikimedia-uk [18:39] <Qcoder00> Fae: In terms of the RAIB, they aren't [18:40] <Qcoder00> The RAIB Publications only go back to around 2005 when it was set up [18:40] <RichardN> I'll be heading off, it was nice joining in the conversation. Have a good evening everyone.