User talk:Bluerasberry: Difference between revisions

 

Line 96: Line 96:

:In the case of Wiki Unseen, I think that if a wiki community editor had submitted this image, then it would have passed the Wikipedia community’s editorial review. I do not think the editorial objection was to the art, but rather, the community objection was to the Wikimedia Foundation being the agent that commissioned the art and ordered its use. [[User:Bluerasberry|<span style=”background:#cedff2;color:#11e”>”’ Bluerasberry ”'</span>]][[User talk:Bluerasberry|<span style=”background:#cedff2;color:#11e”>(talk)</span>]] 15:42, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

:In the case of Wiki Unseen, I think that if a wiki community editor had submitted this image, then it would have passed the Wikipedia community’s editorial review. I do not think the editorial objection was to the art, but rather, the community objection was to the Wikimedia Foundation being the agent that commissioned the art and ordered its use. [[User:Bluerasberry|<span style=”background:#cedff2;color:#11e”>”’ Bluerasberry ”'</span>]][[User talk:Bluerasberry|<span style=”background:#cedff2;color:#11e”>(talk)</span>]] 15:42, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

::My understanding is that the Richards pic is on Wikidata because it follows Commons rules, not en-WP rules, and as a consequence, several WP:s use it too since a: it’s automatic and b: it can be considered a better leadimage than no image, though opinions may differ. ”I” certainly don’t consider it “better” than the en-WP photo. Using a non-free photo when we can makes sense to me. [[User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|Gråbergs Gråa Sång]] ([[User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|talk]]) 16:14, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

::My understanding is that the Richards pic is on Wikidata because it follows Commons rules, not en-WP rules, and as a consequence, several WP:s use it too since a: it’s automatic and b: it can be considered a better leadimage than no image, though opinions may differ. ”I” certainly don’t consider it “better” than the en-WP photo. Using a non-free photo when we can makes sense to me. [[User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|Gråbergs Gråa Sång]] ([[User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|talk]]) 16:14, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

::Btw, found a photo (well, video) of [[Jashodaben Modi]] I added to the article, but I’m not going to argue for it as leadimage. But it is better than no photo at all. IMO. [[User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|Gråbergs Gråa Sång]] ([[User talk:Gråbergs Gråa Sång|talk]]) 16:19, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

So excited that you are running for trustee of Wikipedia! You have integrity, and you know quant things like me, and you know that LLM usage can (when misused) be pernicious, and you like blue as much as I do!

I watched your campaign video. It is very good! I really believe that you are the best choice for either of the two open positions. I wish I could campaign for you and convince all members of Wikiprojects Donald Trump 1.0 and 2.0 (if it they hadn’t been abolished) to vote for you, as well as propagating your thoughtful and carefully considered stance on Wikipedia LLM usage to my ~4650 Twitterverse followers in case any are registered eligible Wikipedia editors, but that would be considered CANVASSING and sadly, I am FULLY AWARE THAT CANVASSING IS NOT ALLOWED. I don’t want to get you in trouble for even having suggested it, even with a caveat here. NEVERTHELESS, I would if I could, although I know that I can’t.

Best of luck once the voting phase begins. You can count on my vote. Years of prior experiences on a variety of subjects have convinced me that YOU are the best man for the job.

P.S. If any of this is too cringe or whatever, feel free to delete some or all after reading. Be aware though that I want you to win. FeralOink (talk) 17:13, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/transcoded/7/7d/You_have_permission_to_do_Wikipedia_journalism%2C_community_conversation%2C_and_research_1.webm/You_have_permission_to_do_Wikipedia_journalism%2C_community_conversation%2C_and_research_1.webm.480p.vp9.webm

@FeralOink: I really appreciate and am encouraged by your message.

Election campaigning is allowed until 26 August, as noted at meta:Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2025#Timeline. I appreciate anything you can do to support my candidacy. Besides my candidacy, I appreciate anything you can do just to raise awareness of the election and get out the vote. I do not really see us candidates as competing against each other, but rather, we are competing against lack of awareness that the election is happening and lack of awareness that voting for particular candidates is a way to uplift community concerns. Wikipedia:Canvassing refers to influencing editorial discussions. Most past elections have selected European Wikipedia editors, and that probably is because the European meta:Wikimedia movement affiliates meet in person, have regional email and chat groups, and encourage each other to vote. Previous elections have often been decided by 100 votes, so I appreciate any additional vote you can give me.

Thanks for watching my 3 minute video. I posted here a 10-minute video that I just made. Frankly, I do not ask anyone to watch 10 minute videos but I still wanted to make it to say that if I were elected, then I want to clarify that Wikipedians are invited and encouraged to have conversations and make recommendations on big challenges. AI and tech definitely is a part of that, and we cannot expect the few staff at the Wikimedia Foundation to understand and represent all the perspectives we have in our global movement. If we want to be represented then we have to find ways to represent ourselves.

Thanks for your comments. I will take all the help you have to share. If you have any campaign advice for me then I would take it. Take care Bluerasberry (talk) 00:51, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where do we vote? Links above are so convoluted about the process for outsiders. Moxy🍁 00:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blue! Thank you for clarifying details. Will do what I can!–FeralOink (talk) 15:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Is that a campaign video or a hostage tape? Kidding of course, I like the video and it fits with your aesthetic. Very excited to see you running. In my opinion you’d make a solid trustee because you have a significant point of view which should be represented, a thoroughly honest demeanor, a confident quirkiness I find broadly representative of the community, and a knack for phrasing complicated ideas in easily understood terms. Horse Eye’s Back (talk) 16:59, 20 August 2025 (UTC) (This comment paid for by Friends of Bluerasberry PAC)[reply]

Is not a hostage tape! He wore a jacket and tie and was very articulate. Yes, yes, to everything else you said, sweet Horsie Eye Back! Long time, no see!–FeralOink (talk) 09:51, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• @Moxy, FeralOink, and Horse Eye’s Back: The Wikimedia Foundation has delayed the election until 8 October, and says that campaigning is extended. So instead of campaigning for about 3 weeks, the period is about 10 weeks. I am going to share some thoughts. I am in the election right now and have all kinds of feelings about it. I had mentally prepared to stop with a casual level of campaigning, but getting sudden news to campaign for two months more means that I need to plan for something next.

Thanks for visiting and talking to me about the election. It always has struck me as misplaced that volunteer elections with nearly no WMF money like Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2024 or Wikipedia:Administrator elections/July 2025/Discussion phase get more community engagement and participation than deciding who approves or rejects the plans to spend the $billion that the WMF goes through with most elected board members. Early in Wikipedia’s history, volunteers fought hard to get the right to elect half the board, and I do not want anyone to forget that right or trade it away for other things. Bluerasberry (talk) 18:35, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Bluerasberry! I came across the part of your userpage where you mentioned the “August 27, 2025 ― September 10, 2025 election” and then went to the voter FAQ and was confused for a few minutes as I tried to figure out how to vote. Then I came across the timeline part and realized the dates had been delayed. I thus request that you update that part of your user page. Thanks! Sumana Harihareswara 12:43, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That’s great news, Lane! Bluerasberry, that is, about the extension of the campaign period. Do you know how long it will be for? Also, I have a thought or two about canvassing or campaigning as it can be legitimately referred to. I am a shy Wikipedia editor (sort of like a Shy Trump Voters maybe?), so will express my thoughts to you off-Wiki. (I had a lively off-Wiki correspondence about Wikipedia with dearly departed editor DGG for several years, so I know that that is something allowed.)–FeralOink (talk) 06:47, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sumanah: Thanks, I corrected the dates. I hope to see you at WikiConference 2025 in NYC and am reminded that you helped the entire Wikimedia Movement establish its civility policies, Code of Conduct, and the Wikimedia Foundation Trust and Safety team at that conference. meta:Friendly space policies is from that 2014 conference. You gave a training on de-escalation and told people to be polite and encouraging when someone starts learning something thing late in their field.

@FeralOink: Thanks I emailed you, and I also posted a picture of DGG’s gravestone in Commons and on his user talk page. Bluerasberry (talk) 12:20, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 08:48, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:28, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

—Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:50, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is an argument that on en-WP, we could use those portraits a bit in other articles that mention those people. [1]. Since we can’t use the non-free photo. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:31, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Personally, I think by default we should identify one best picture for each biography, then use that one as the lead illustration in the article and everywhere else which needs one photo of a person. I do not like the practice of using one main photo in the article because of copyright restrictions, then using another photo elsewhere because of different copyright circumstances. It is my own controversial take, but I favor removing non-free/fair-use media from English Wikipedia because I do not think the Wikimedia platform should host non-free content.

For Mercedes Richards (Q26239535) we have the abstract painting identified as the best picture. I think it should be used everywhere by default unless there is an editorial reason to do differently.

In the case of Wiki Unseen, I think that if a wiki community editor had submitted this image, then it would have passed the Wikipedia community’s editorial review. I do not think the editorial objection was to the art, but rather, the community objection was to the Wikimedia Foundation being the agent that commissioned the art and ordered its use. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:42, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that the Richards pic is on Wikidata because it follows Commons rules, not en-WP rules, and as a consequence, several WP:s use it too since a: it’s automatic and b: it can be considered a better leadimage than no image, though opinions may differ. I certainly don’t consider it “better” than the en-WP photo. Using a non-free photo when we can makes sense to me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:14, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, found a photo (well, video) of Jashodaben Modi I added to the article, but I’m not going to argue for it as leadimage. But it is better than no photo at all. IMO. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:19, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]