Wikipedia talk:Wikimedia DC

Please visit the main page on Meta at m:Wikimedia DC

Issues and Concerns

Geographical scope

The DC metro area is big, one of the biggest in the US. So the question is, how far out do we extend it? It would be simplest to extend it to all of Virginia, Maryland, DC, and West Virginia. Problem is, there are people in the southern areas of Virginia and West Virginia, who aren't really DC accessible. So, should we attempt to include them under the scope? Or can we specifically target parts of northern virginia, and northeast West Virginia? The benefit of specific targetting is that it allows for the eventual creation of a Virginia chapter, or for example in the north, a Pennsylvania or Delaware chapter that wouldn't be competing with the DC area chapter. On the other hand, there's no guarantee such chapters will exist, or that they couldn't be better served by being part of the DC area chapter anyway. It's significantly easier to just say "the entire state". So what to do?⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 16:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I suggest the Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan Area - this includes much more of Northern Virginia, and even a bit of West Virginia; essentially it covers suburbs within 90 minutes or so driving time to D.C. It's well-defined, and selecting it let's us move on to more important matters - such as what the chapter would actually do. If we should, in the future, run into issues with the scope being too big or too small, or overlapping with other chapters, I think that then would be the time to address that. Right now, I think a quick decision would be best, and using an official standard seems a good way to do that. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 17:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

That's basically where I was going. I'll go ahead and make that change now, since I agree a quick decision is best, and an official standard is even better. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

BosWash Chapter?

Rather then trying to form a New York and a DC Chapter, why not form one for the BosWash Megaopolis? The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 17:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Goes wayyy too far north for people to be able to effectively attend meetings. Boston is an all day trip, NYC is a half-days transit. Plus, NYC is big enough that it should merit its own chapter, that would cover the NJ area as well. Likewise for Boston, probably doing a Mass. area chapter. Part of the goal here is to make sure we're small enough to be manageable, as well as not taking away from other chapters, which can more effectively benefit their own members. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict)That might be too large to be feasible - meetings would have to be somewhere in northern PA to minimize driving time for everyone, and that's still several hours for those of us in Baltimore and those in Boston. I think each of these areas should be large enough to support their own chapters. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Bylaws writing

I'm pretty sure that I can find an attorney to write the bylaws pro bono either at my work (I intern at a major international law firm's pro bono department), or at my law school (my IP professor specifically is a huge fan of Wikimedia). ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

As another note, Newyorkbrad attended at least one of the DC meetings, (maybe 2? I can't remember) and is signed up for the next one. He's an attorney and might be willing to help out.⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe NYB will be available to help out with such matters. Kirill ^(prof) 18:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

If I may be so bold as to make a suggestion, I would like to recommend that whatever elections that are held by the group be conducted using instant-runoff voting. I do not recommend proportional representation because it's more of a hassle than it's worth for small groups.
--NBahn (talk) 18:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Move to meta?

Love the idea of a DC chapter. One suggestion, though: could you maybe move this to meta? I think you'd get better participation from non-Wikipedians there. - Jredmond (talk) 17:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

No objections whatsoever, I just wasn't sure if it should be userfied at first, in case it got deleted at meta. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd just as soon keep it here or there. Just let everyone know if it gets moved :-). I'd personally say keep it here until we've got a stronger proposal to put on Meta. ^demon^{[omg plz]} 19:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

That's kind of my thoughts, and as well it lets people spend some time setting up meta accounts. If anyone wants to take it out of user space here though, into wikipedia space, I'm ok with that as well. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 19:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd say let's keep it here for now, and only move it once we have to. Meanwhile, we really should move this to project namespace. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Logo

Note that this discussion was originally started on the Meta talk page.

Might be slightly premature, but I was tinkering in Inkscape just now trying to put together the Chapter logo. I've almost got it, but I'm not sure what to put for the subline. "WIKIMEDIA" is required, of course, but under that in smaller print goes the name of the chapter. This page is titled "Wikimedia DC" but "DC" looks somewhat silly on the logo being so short. Alternatives could be "District of Columbia" (would necessitate two lines, breaking after "of"), "Washington, DC", "Washington DC" (no comma), just "Washington" (although that could get confused with Washington State). My personal favorite of these is "Washington, DC" because that just happens to be the same length as "Wikimedia" when formatted according to the guidelines and so looks nice and neat, but it's up to the working group as a whole. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[[Image:Wikimedia DC Composite.jpg|thumb|800px|center|Some possible logos to choose from. Note that we are required to use the standard logo - what's up for debate is the particular subline we want to use. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)]]

Wikimedia Washington, DC looks the best, but at the same time, I think Wikimedia DC is the better name. Perhaps the two are not incompatible. If I'm correct (I may not be), Wikimedia DE is, fully written, actually Wikimedia Deutschland. So, the two are not necessarily incompatible with each other. PS amazing work!⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 06:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Germany's chapter is written out in full, but then there's others that only have two letters. I like the longer title, because only two letters seems a tad silly, and is also less descriptive of where we're located. Not many people outside of the US are going to know where "DC" is, and I'm sure there are many even within the US who would be confused (sadly). Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Can we also create a Wikipedia logo variation? I think Wikimedia best represents the group's goals and purpose, but the sad fact is that the Wikipedia logo is more recognizable. Zidel333 (talk) 23:32, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately no, not without the permission of the foundation, which is not likely. The chapter represents all Wikimedia projects, not specifically Wikipedia. Also, the guidelines adopted by the chapter committee require that it be the Wikimedia logo. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 23:51, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

So.... which subline are we using then? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 12:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, just so we have something to show the world that yes, we are actually doing this, I've uploaded the logo shown on the main page to Commons. Should we wish to change the byline later on, that can be done fairly easily. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Expectations

From the m:Local chapter FAQ:

Chapters exist to further the goals of Wikimedia. They do so by engaging in a wide range of activities, which includes but is not limited to the following:

1. Promoting the Wikimedia projects so that new and different people join them or use them (academics, scientists, college students, schools, libraries etc.)
2. Investigating and negotiating partnerships on a moral or financial basis to support the Wikimedia projects.
3. Helping outside organisations use Wikimedia content, possibly for their own benefit (eg. help publishers of local history Wikireaders, of a Wikipedia DVD in a given language)
4. Organizing local and national events and initiatives (eg. participate in trade shows, set up Wikipedia parties, give lectures etc.)
5. Taking care of PR and lobbying in a given country, give the press an interlocutor in their own language and culture.
6. Enabling (where applicable) tax-deductible donations in the country they are based in.
7. Promoting Free Content and wiki culture in their respective territory.

I'm a bit concerned that we're going to look at the above items and get grand ideas that aren't really practical. The FAQ really is written for national chapters - organizations that have some leverage with a particular language version of Wikipedia (say, German or French) because they represent that community, to the extent anyone does. A local chapter in the U.S. has no such charter - we're not ever going to be the "go-to" guys for press quotes, or working with New York publishers to put out an English-language Wikipedia on DVD.

What I'd personally like to see is our trying to find things that will work for other local chapters in the U.S. - partnering with local academics that want to teach a course that involves improving Wikipedia articles, holding our own classes at local libraries, booths at county fairs - whatever takes only a relatively few people, and is replicable for other chapters. Fundraising - I really think not; the Wikimedia Foundation is now hiring three full-time people for fundraising. Testifying before Congress - I don't think so; we're just a chapter, not the Foundation itself. Working with other local chapters to create a sharing network - yes, definitely. In short, let's be realistic, and start with some goals that we're likely to be successful with. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 18:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Potential starting areas

This is in response to the above items posted by John Broughton. One of the benefits of the DC area is we can do much of this on a local level. For instance:

1. Promoting the Wikimedia projects: the DC/Baltimore area is home to dozens of universities, including, American University, Georgetown, GWU, George Mason, Catholic, Northeastern, Marymount, U of Maryland, Gaulledet (sic), Johns Hopkins, and is close proximity to UVA, Virginia Tech, VMI, and several more. We can do a lot to promote the Wikimedia projects on a local level.

   DC is one of the fundraising capitals of America, especially given it being the seat of government. There are governmental partnerships, library of congress partnerships, university partnerships, philanthropist partnerships, etc.

   Similarly, we can help these other organizations use Wikimedia content as well.

2. . Organizing events and initiatives is something that we can do locally, especially in common with the university, governmental, and educational programs available in DC.
3. . Taking care of PR: not an issue for us, WMF can do that. Lobbying, however, is something that we are able to do in DC. I have some lobbying experience, and finding other lobbyists to work on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation via the DC chapter is certainly doable (especially given that DC is the lobbying center of the US). Interlocutors are unnecessary in America; however DC and Baltimore do have their own "culture". There is a Baltimore culture, an inside the beltway culture, and it's something that we can identify with more easily than San Francisco can (which has its own culture).
4. . Enabling tax deductible donations: not an issue for us, however, we can expand the WMF's donation base by doing our own fundraising within the DC area.
5. . This goes along with lobbying. There is no better place to efficiently promote free content and wiki culture than in DC -- the center of the nation's government and an example of collaborative politics in action.

Along with this, I suggest some important places for us to start off and focus.

1. .: Building membership and outreach. This enables us to perform all other tasks. This can be performed on-wiki (by identifying and recruiting Wikimedians to join the chapter) and off wiki (by outreach to people in the DC/Baltimore area to learn more about Wikipedia, and to join the chapter).
2. . Develop relationships with educational institutions. Educational institutions are all over DC (as mentioned above) and much of our work and their work synergies well together. This also helps us develop a pool of experts in academia from which we can assist the foundation as a whole.
3. . Develop relationships with governmental institutions. Governmental institutions, specifically the ones that can most benefit the foundation, are heavily centralized in DC, and as such we are in the best situation of all the US chapters to help benefit the foundation. In this task, we would work with the Foundation towards achieving their goals with government, as well as developing our own relationships with governmental institutions. This can help with fundraising, outreach, PR, partnerships, exposure to the Wiki culture and free content, etc.
4. . Continue to hold meetups and other events for our membership. The DC wikimedians have been pretty active in having meetups and we want to continue to support and nurture that activity.

These 4 activities are a good place to start. They are tasks that will never be "completed" and we will continue to work on them as long as we exist as a chapter. They are tasks that not only support the WMF, but support the chapter. They are tasks that make our other activities easier (greater membership, more partnerships, etc. all make work easier). And they are tasks that we can begin working on as soon as we become a recognized chapter (and in the case of the 1st and 4th tasks, even before that time.). ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 00:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm mildly put off that you left UMBC off that list. :P Anyway, the suggestions listed on the Meta page are just that - suggestions. What we actually do is, like everything else, guided by common sense. It doesn't make sense for us to do some things, so we won't. Other ideas that weren't mentioned are also possibilities. That will have to be something we discuss in the time to come (I'm about to go to bed for the night, so don't have any brilliant ideas to share at the moment). Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

UMBC is in there, it's lumped in with all the other University of Maryland campuses. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 04:37, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I beg your pardon. My mascot is not some silly turtle. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 12:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I thought all of the U of Maryland campuses had the same mascot? UMBC is U of Maryland Baltimore Campus, no? ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 12:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

(noting that we're wildly off-topic, but...) No, it's University of Maryland Baltimore County - it's all part of the same system, but a different school with different programs and different teams and so on. For example, our basketball team got to the NCAA tournament this year, whereas UMD didn't. Sorry, it's just a peeve of mine; since most of my family isn't in the area, I have to constantly remind them of the difference. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Knock, knock

Anyone home? I'm on vacation, so sort of have an excuse for being silent, but is anyone else active on this? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm still around. I had to take a little break due to the board elections, but rest assured we're still in business. I'm thinking that at the August Wikimeeting, we should have an official sit down with people and hash all the details out, however long it takes.⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 04:05, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

South Florida Wikipedia editors Meetup

I proposed a new meeting day, time and place here [1] under the section "New Suggestion" NancyHeise ^talk 07:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)