Foundation wiki feedback
I was trying to inquire about a particular article not found in the wikipedia. DoD (U.S. Dept. of Defense) Civilian Expeditionary Workforce can someone be of assistance? Related Dept. of Defense Document PDF http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/140410p.pdf
|
This talk page is only for discussing http://wikimediafoundation.org, the official Wikimedia Foundation website.
|
Wikimedia site feedback/header
Main
Archives of this page
Feedback on wikimediafoundation.org pages
Please note: This page is concerned with the website http://wikimediafoundation.org, the official website of Wikimedia Foundation, Inc, while it is running over 700 websites. For comments and feedback to those websites, it is preferred that you go to them directly.
Waste of time talking to you
I recently wrote what I thought was wrong with Wikipedia and why I will not dontate time or articles. What I wrote was deleted with no record of it ever existing. Wikipedia is a closed club. It may do a lot of good, but it's pretense of being edited by anyone is laughable. The lack of respect given to well meaning contributors is deplorable. Someone needs to tell you this but obviously you are not listening. So be it. Jerks.
- This is the page for discussing The foundation wiki. Your post was not related to the foundation wiki located at http://wikimediafoundation.org/ so I had removed the post (along with any other off topic posts). If you would like to repost your post I won't remove it for a few days, however, you might not get any help about that here. It is still available in the history at this entry. I assure you that no disrespect was intended, the header of this page states what this page is for. I apologize it it came across as disrespectful. Please also note that every other concluded or off topic post was also either removed or archived from this page as well as yours. Wikipedia is, and continues to be an encyclopedia anyone can edit. And, I am sure there are jerks out there, but I'm not one of them, I meant well when I archived the posting. Your free to repost it. NonvocalScream 03:03, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Amen.
You have your laughable administrators blocking decent editors while you have vandals removing requests for citations. I would never donate to you. 98.165.160.108 07:16, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Question and editorial comment
You have a misspelling at http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Values (subheading: Freedom): freely-licensed is misspelled. Question: does any of the money donated to the foundation make its way to political parties? I do not want my money to be used to fund either party.
- I've fixed the spelling error. Thank you for pointing it out to us. To answer your question simply, "no". Funds raised are not given to political parties. I invite you to review this link for further details about what the money raised is actually used for. Thank you again for informing us of the spelling error. - Rjd0060 15:48, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
The Donors Comment Page
The facility for small donors to leave a comment and have it posted on your web site is a great idea and very motivating for donors, like me. What would be even nicer if the page could be searchable so I could find my donation and my comment. This is a possible use of some of the site development money you are raising.
A further fund raising option would be a facility to enable the donor to email the record of his donation with his comment to selected friends with a request that they too donate. This further facility would I believe, (as a professional fund raiser) really increase you income.
- I can speak from experience that if you allow public posting of comments, even from the smallest of donations, there will be a flood of one-yen donations with comment of, "So, Jimbo, how was Rachel in front of the mirror?" We probably don't want that. -- Thekohser 05:35, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Information
The site is helpful but they dont give the publisher or the author of the article.
- Generally, the Wikimedia Foundation is the publisher (even though they are protected by Section 230 from the covenants that publishers are otherwise held to), and the author (or community of authors) of the various articles can be found on the article "history" tab at the top of the page window. -- Thekohser 05:38, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
- Normally it is authors. :-) Cbrown1023 talk 15:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Currency option
why dont i see the rupee as a currency to donate ,very dissapointing :(
- This is definitely a goal, it's just not easy to implement at the moment. Cbrown1023 talk 15:04, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Just one question
Dear Wikimedia,
I just saw your presentation for FY 08-09. As far as I could
see you reported $1.7m surplus from FY 07-08. Now, you are
predicting another surplus of $1.3m. Does it mean that at the
end of the FY 08-09 you will have total surplus of $3m?
What is the rationale for that? Why do you need so huge surplus
(compared to total revenues)?
I'm very sorry if I misunderstood your presented data. I just
asking for explanation.
Thank you in advance,
Uros Nedic, Serbia
urosn (at) beotel (dot) rs
- Thank you for your question. Yes, you are reading that we show an under-spending in 07-08 of $1.7MM and and 08-09, intend to spend $1.3MM less than revenue.
- There are several reasons that we would like to have surplus funds available such as:
- Current economic climate: Given the current economic climate, there is a lot of uncertainty. Naturally, many people (including past donors and would-be donors) are cutting back on expenses. While we were pleasantly surprised by the response to our online fundraising campaign, we don't know how the next campaign will fare. We always want to be conservative when depending on the generosity of others. If we have a shortfall in the future, we will be able to utilize these funds rather than cutting basic operating expenses which in turn could affect the site.
- Desire to expand and improve beyond basic operations: There are many areas where we wish to expand, improve etc. such as expanding reach and participation and improving accuracy and perceptions of accuracy. Right now, much of our expense budget is for basic operations. We want to take on more, but to do so, creates more expenses for us. We don't want to spend what we don't have.
- Development of an Endowment, etc.: Ultimately, we'd like to develop an Endowment or other investment vehicle from which we could fund part of our Operations annually. If we don't have to use this money for contingencies, we can think about using it for something like an Endowment.
- Maintaining site and operation despite unexpected expenses: Sometimes unexpected expenses arise. Having extra funds available ensures smooth and continuous operations.
- VeroniqueKessler 19:06, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Copyright template for PDF files.
The template at http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/File:WMF_2007_Form_990.pdf is for foundation logos. When used with PDFs it implies that the Adobe icon is a foundation logo, instead of saying that the document that icon links to is an all rights reserved copyrighted document. Please fix. -- Jeandré, 2009-01-07t06:17z
- I've removed the tag, it didn't really make sense in the situation. Cbrown1023 talk 21:41, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Wrong date on German "Lokale Sektionen"-page"
The date of registration for the Polish chapter on the German language page Lokale Sektionen is wrong. Instead of "18. November 2008" there has to be "15. November 2005" (see [1] resp. [2]). --92.72.141.29 16:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC) (Contact me in Wikipedia as User "Duschgeldrache2".)
- We have "18 November 2005" on the English page, changed it to that. Thanks for the fix. Cbrown1023 talk 22:21, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Awesome!
I simply adore wikipedia, and just wish that wikipedia would be the first to update the input of N.J. with its true identity, and not with that old hogwash that's currently violating such a nice website.
I can't this site — It does not cater for visually disabled people
I have to have a minimum text size set for my browser(s) as it is the only way I can view web pages since changing to a flat screen — previously with CRT screen I could change resolution on the fly without loosing detail - so much for technology improvements
The linked or coloured etc. text on Wiki pages like an increasing number of sites is simply not text but part of some java script or otherwise - All very clever but it looks a mess as the text size is increased to make it viewable - try it for yourself
Years ago the problem with simple HTML was compatibility with different browsers and screen resolutions (this site best viewed with ..... at nnn x nnnn etc.) now it appears that to achieve a certain "style" on a web page we have to accept even more rigid constraints on resolution and text size which is all very well if you are young enough and fit enough to be able to see the dots that todays programmers use as text but it is not a progressive move
Wikipedia Enterprise Applications?
Dear Sirs;
I work for Alcoa Inc. a world-wide aluminum manufacturing company. My specific area of responsibility is equipment maintenance and reliability. We have struggled for years trying to share information across the company for equipment issues and information.
I am curious whether Wikipedia has considered enterprise-level applications for companies like ours to share information easily and quickly?
Thank you, Tom
- Hello Tom. Our Mediawiki-software is free for download on www.mediawiki.org. There are a low of extensions that can help that users doing the same as you has added to help with enterprise-usage that Wikipedia (and it's sisterprojects) don't use, but that you should look at. Laaknor 14:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the fast reply. I have forwarded your response on to our IT group as a possible way to share information within our company.