User talk:Jimbo Wales: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 13:41, 25 August 2023 view sourceJimbo Wales (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Founder14,541 edits →American history and segregation ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 01:44, 19 January 2025 view source ArionStar (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users3,072 edits →Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/delist/Jimmy Wales: new sectionTag: New topic
Line 14:		Line 14:
	\| subject = talkpage		\| subject = talkpage
	\| author = Matthew Gault		\| author = Matthew Gault
	\| title = Misplaced Pages Editors Very Mad About Jimmy ~~Wales’~~ NFT of a Misplaced Pages Edit		\| title = Misplaced Pages Editors Very Mad About Jimmy Wales' NFT of a Misplaced Pages Edit
	\| org = ]		\| org = ]
	\| url = https://www.vice.com/en/article/qjbkvm/wikipedia-editors-very-mad-about-jimmy-waless-nft-of-a-wikipedia-edit		\| url = https://www.vice.com/en/article/qjbkvm/wikipedia-editors-very-mad-about-jimmy-waless-nft-of-a-wikipedia-edit
Line 21:		Line 21:
	}}		}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config		{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\| algo = old(2d)		\| algo = old(10d)
	\| archive = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d		\| archive = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d
	\| counter = ~~250~~		\| counter = 252
	\| maxarchivesize = 350K		\| maxarchivesize = 350K
	\| archiveheader = {{aan}}		\| archiveheader = {{aan}}
Line 33:		Line 33:
	{{-}}		{{-}}

			==]==
	== Endowment ==
			]
			]
			Happy New Year Jimbo!!! I hope all is well with you and your team.

			Could you or your page watchers help me with ]? The draft has been declined and tagged up. It was then deleted years ago. I had it restored today after I came across one of his photos. I think he and his photography are fascinating for capturing aspects of New Zealand's transportation and industrial history. His work is in museum and library collections. At least one of his photographs has been used in a book. He photographed Maori sites.
	Mr. Wales, do you know the current value of the Wikimedia Endowment? If so, can you share it? Why is it so secretive about its value and holdings? ] (]) 23:25, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
	:Secretive, {{u\|Sandizer}}? Not really. It took me less than one minute on Google to find . ] (]) 23:39, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
	::That's a year old, has a single digit of precision, and says nothing about holdings. What does it invest in? What has it invested in in the past? How often does it change investments? What are the criteria for how and how often to do so? These questions are important because as the next generation of AI billionaires attempt to launder their reputations through philanthropy, the Endowment is likely to benefit. ] (]) 23:44, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
	:Per its Forms 990N (available by searching "87-3024488" on https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/), it had "Gross receipts not greater than" $100,000 from 07/01/2021-06/30/2023, so I'm not sure where the $100 million number in the Foundation's annual report is coming from. — ] (] • ]) 00:12, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
	::I think that may be because the bulk of its funds were held for management by the ], presumably ](?) ] (]) 02:38, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
	:::I do not personally know the day to day valuation of the endowment - it fluctuates of course with market conditions. I think it highly unlikely, as a side note, that AI billionaires seeking to launder their reputations would start with the WMF Endowment fund, since the endowment clearly has no ability to impact that whatsoever. At the last board meeting, I advocated (with universal agreement from the rest of the board) that we should publish more information, more often, because the accustions of "secrecy" do give rise (unfairly) to strange ideas that are not true.--] (]) 08:30, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
	::::While I was being somewhat facetious, I am still very curious as to why there's never been a published comprehensive financial and investments statement. I understand "an update on the Endowment's activities" is expected by the end of the year. But, for example, do you think the total donations to date should be published on https://wikimediaendowment.org? Do you think the operational and investment update mentioned on ] should be published? ] (]) 08:40, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
	:::::I think the latest published financial information should be posted on https://wikimediaendowment.org/. I'm surprised that it isn't, if it isn't. I do think that the operational and investment update mentioned should be published - this was indeed the document we discussed at the board meeting as a good thing to share. Now that we have a separate 501(c)(3) rather than being a fund at Tides, I think that sort of thing will become routine. Such materials do take staff time to prepare, of course, and they need to be really carefully checked for accuracy by finance and legal folks I would imagine, and I suspect that's that "by the end of the year" was mentioned somewhere. (Not sure where you saw that, but it sounds to me like a desire not to overpromise on the timeline!)--] (]) 08:47, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
	{{outdent}} You say you {{tqq\|advocated (with universal agreement from the rest of the board) that we should publish more information, more often}}. I am surprised to see you say that. A couple of days ago I wrote a for the upcoming Signpost issue noting that you appeared to have decided to do the exact opposite at that meeting:
	{{hat\|Collapsed for readability}}
	===(Signpost draft) Wikimedia Endowment board minutes becoming ever more minimalist===
	]

			], standing beside a collection of Maori carvings, including two fire-screens, carved by her father Albert Percy Godber]]
	A couple of weeks ago, the Wikimedia Foundation's ] the approved minutes for the January 19, 2023 Endowment Board Meeting on Meta. The minutes are remarkable for not divulging any new information at all – apart from noting the approval of the Endowment grants that had already been back in April.
			I'm sorry I haven't been able to work the draft up enough to get it admitted to mainspace. It does make me wonder about what we do and don't include, our notability criteria, Articles for Creation (AfC) process, and collaborative ethos. Thanks so much for any help or guidance you can offer! Have a great 2025 and beyond. Thanks again. ] (]) 17:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
			:If Godber is not ], which is what the draft reviewers say, then Wikipedians can't fix that. ] (]) 09:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
			::] is he "notable" and should we have an entry on him? ] (]) 17:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::I dunno, but ] wrote that the draft did not show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject at that point. ] (]) 19:37, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
			]
			::::And this a request to revisit his finding. We have a photographer from more than 100 years ago who documented areas of New Zealand's North Island. We have his work in a National Library collection. We have his work discussed as iconic for one of his Maori related photographs. We have his work revisited in a 2018 exhibition. We have descriptions of him related to his photographs, his career, and we have the photos themselves documenting the areas industries, sites, infrastructure from more than 100 years ago. If I was satisfied with the previous conclusions I would not be here. So I ask again, should we have an entry on this subject? Should we just attribute his photos where we use them to an unlinked name with no explanation or discussion of who he was? I think the answer is clear, and I wanted to hear Jimbo's opinion. I am aware of what was previously stated. Years have passed and I believe it's time to reevaluate and consider. I also think it's worth reflecting on our article creations processes more generally and how we apply our conception of "notability". ] (]) 23:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
			*Godber's photographs include "views of the ] including large numbers of cars traveling to ], and the ]. Another group of images relate to a holiday at the ] Homestead in ] with scenes of farm life, including ], ] sheep, and farm buildings. During their stay in the South Island Godber also took photographs of Dunedin (including the ], ], ], the ], and the Hillside Railway Workshops); ] (including the Invercargill Railway Workshops); Stewart Island, ], ], ], ] and ]. Various railway stations in Canterbury and Otago, the ], and the Rosslyn Mills. Godber was a volunteer fireman with the Petone Fire Brigade with the album including views of the building, groups of firemen, fire engines and other fire fighting equipment, and a building in Petone damaged by fire. In his work with New Zealand Railways, mainly at the Petone Railway Workshops, he took interior photographs of various buildings, including the Machine Shop and finishing benches, the engine room, lathes, boilers, and fitting shops. He also took photographs of many of the steam engines that were built and worked on at the workshops. One scene shows a group of men watching a fight. Many images show his interest in logging railways, particularly in the ], ], ] area. Scenes of logging camps, various methods of transporting logs including bullock teams, logging trains, and dams created and then tripped to send logs down by river, and timber mills. Other topics covered in Godber's photographs are scenes at Maori ] and meeting houses, with some of the people identified; Maori carving and rafter designs; beekeeping, and gold mining." ] (]) 23:52, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
			*It's hard to choose which photos to share. Historic views areas, industries, bridges, natural features, railways and bridges, crafts. to his photos on Misplaced Pages Commons. Many already illustrate our entries on various subjects. ] (]) 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
			:: If you really want to help him, get a couple stories published about him in newspapers. Notability here will follow. ] (]) 01:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

			== ==
	For example, the meeting agenda posted back in February 2023 contained the following item:

			That doesn't sound good. From '']''. ] (]) 09:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
	{{talkquote
	\|1=6:25 - 6:55 pm UTC: Fundraising Update (Board Chair, Jimmy Wales and Endowment Director, Amy Parker)

			:Being discussed at ]. ] (]) 10:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
	*FY22-23 year to date update
			::Thanks! ] (]) 11:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
	*Campaign strategy}}
			::Also discussed at ] and ]. ] (]) 19:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

			Jimbo, could I ask you please to respond to from {{u\|Tryptofish}}?
	The Meeting Minutes now published cover this point as follows:
			:... it's not just if you've edited about Israel-Palestine. It could be if you've edited anything about climate and fossil fuels, gender, immigration, vaccines, and of course, American politics. I doubt that they have the bandwidth to actually identify and harass every editor who could possibly be seen as editing information that goes against a MAGA POV, but they will likely find some easily identified targets, whom they will use to "set an example", as a way of instilling fear in our editing community. I fully expect that, in the coming months, {{u\|Jimbo Wales}} will be hauled before a hostile and performative Congressional hearing, much in the manner of university presidents. I hope very much that he will be better prepared than ] was.
			:Yeah, I know this is grim. But I believe the first step in dealing with this is to go into it with our eyes open, to know what we are dealing with, what motivates it. And, more than harming individual editors, the real objective of Heritage ''et al.'' is to instill fear in the rest of us. If we become too fearful to revert POV edits, they win. In a very real sense, we have to keep doing what we have been doing, and continue to be a reliable resource for NPOV information. --] (]) 18:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
			] (]) 05:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

			:Well, I fully agree that developments in terms of arguments and actions aimed at destroying trust in knowledge (and of course our specific interest, trust in Misplaced Pages) are extremely worrisome, particularly as I agree that for many who are doing it, the motive does appears to be the undermining of civic norms and democracy. I also agree with Tryptofish in a part that you didn't quote: "In a narrow sense, it's technically true that if you "out" yourself, there's no point in anyone else doing it. But once your identity is known, you become vulnerable to all of the kinds of real-life harassment that doxed people find themselves subjected to. It doesn't matter, in that regard, how they found out your identity." That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.
	{{talkquote
			:As a side note, I don't think that the reliability of the Heritage Foundation as a source is particularly related to these despicable actions. Whether they should be considered a reliable source in some matters is really unrelated to whether they hate us or not.--] (]) 14:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
	\|1= '''Fundraising Update''' (Amy Parker)
			::Suddenly ] going to court to get user-data seems like the model of gentlemanly behavior. ] (]) 11:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
	* FY22-23 year to date update
			:::{{tq\|That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.}} Unfortunately, the scales have been inexorably slipping out from beneath the foundation's abilities or willingness to protect its volunteers for my entire wiki-career. There's no balancing force at work. The private equity community has made gadflies out of what we used to label reliable local news media; Alphabet and Meta are actively coopting precision, privacy, and the public domain, while attempting to minimize the effectiveness of good faith actors like Internet Archive. Now suddenly en.wikipedians are facing the sort of personal threats long experienced by volunteers at ru.wiki and zh.wiki. The forces now arrayed against free information don't need to be actively coordinating in order to rapidly bring us to 2+2=5 territory. Any established editor could reasonably see Western culture has been under relentless attack for a long time. Here comes the Heritage Foundation's leaks, hot off Heritage's bangup release of Project 2025, leaking articles through partisan outlets apparently intended to make it appear (in one case) the ADL's recent reliability downgrade at RSNP was anyone else's fault but the ADL's own writings and actions. The news of such activity appears to threaten the community members directly and personally. ] (]) 13:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
	* Presentation of campaign strategy}}

			== ] ==
	Contrast this to the ] Board Meeting. They were not exactly detailed either, but did at least contain a financial summary:

			Hey Mr. Wales, there's a discussion on ] about what image should be used on your Misplaced Pages entry. Figured you may want to chime in with personal opinion about the recent freely-licensed images of you that are presented, as there hasn't been much engagement there at the time of my post. <span style="background: cornsilk; padding: 3px;border:.5px solid salmon;">]]</span> 21:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
	{{talkquote
	\|1='''8) Fundraising update'''
	* Overview, lead by Caitlin Virtue
	* Review of Fundraising Report, lead by Amy Parker
	* Summary: As of December 31, 2021, the Endowment held $105.4 million. There is currently $99.33 million in the investment account and $6.07 million in cash. An additional $8 million raised in December will be transferred to the Endowment in January 2022.}}

			== ''The Signpost'': 15 January 2025 ==
	In fact, this summary marks the last time the Endowment Board Meeting Minutes contained a dollar figure for the Endowment's total value (cash plus investments). Requests for an updated figure .

			<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2025-01-15}} </div><!--Volume 21, Issue 1--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 07:54, 15 January 2025 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
	Unlike the Wikimedia Foundation, the Wikimedia Endowment has never to date published audited financial statements detailing its revenue and expenses.
			<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1269316164 -->
	------------------
	(End of draft piece).
	{{hab}}

			== A brownie for you! ==
	The Signpost would, I am sure, be happy to publish ...
	*the financial info contained in the fundraising report Amy Parker presented to you in January,
	*the info contained in the operational and investment update you received last month,
	*precise figures for the Endowment's annual revenue and expenses over the past 7.5 years,
	*a summary of all moneys the Wikimedia Foundation has paid to the Tides Foundation over the past 7.5 years,
	*a list of the Wikimedia Endowment's highest-paid contractors, if any, besides the Tides Foundation, over the past 7.5 years,
	*the value of the Endowment's cash and investment holdings as of July 2023,
	... if you could be so kind as to provide this information here on this page. I would then update the draft article copied above accordingly. Regards, --] <small>]]</small> 09:35, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
	::When you write "you appeared to have decided to do the exact opposite at that meeting", you are mistaken. At the meeting we discussed, to universal agreement, that we should publish more information and more often. I will check on each of the items that you mention - I'm on vacation at the moment and heading to Wikimania in Singapore tomorrow, so it will take a bit of time. I also don't know if the precise information you are asking for is what will be shared. I very much recommend that you not publish a story claiming that anything is becoming "more minimalist" since that's just not true. Be very careful and thoughtful with the timelines: at the summer endowment board meeting, the discussion about publishing more information and more often came about in no small part because the January minutes were something that I felt were not good enough in terms of being open and informative. (A financial report is forthccoming - I haven't seen it yet - but delayed because the relevant person creating it has taken a bit of family leave.) --] (]) 09:17, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
	:::Actions speak louder than words. Please allow us to report on the former as well as the latter. (If the January Meeting Minutes are duly expanded, giving a meaningful summary of Amy Parker's presentation, it would be my pleasure to report on this.)
	:::As you are no doubt aware, the information I have asked for is no more than what the Endowment would have been legally required to disclose for the past 7.5 years if the Wikimedia Foundation had fulfilled its repeated promises, made , that it would soon convert the Wikimedia Endowment into a transparent 501(c)(3) charity making annual IRS disclosures of these data.
	:::There is another thing I have noticed here. While the 501(c)(3) has now been operational for over a year, it appears that most of the money continues to be with Tides, and perhaps even to be sent to Tides. Is this true? At any rate, the most recent Form 990N (thanks for locating these, ]) shows {{tqq\|Gross receipts not greater than: $50,000}} on the {{tqq\|2022 Tax Year Form 990-N (e-Postcard) – Tax Period: 2022 (07/01/2022-06/30/2023)}}. The Endowment averaged over $20 million per annum during its first five years. So what happened to all the Endowment donations made since July 1 2022? It appears they were not declared as revenue for the 501(c)(3).
	:::Lastly, I second ]'s questions above about the nature of the Endowment's investments. More transparency in that area would be welcome as well. Regards, ] <small>]]</small> 11:29, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
	::::First, I don't have any ability or desire to "allow" or "disallow" you to write whatever you like. That's an odd way to phrase it. Second, as I said above, a financial report is forthcoming, although the relevant person has taken some family leave. You might find this document interesting: https://meta.wikimedia.org/Talk:Wikimedia_Endowment#/media/File:Tides-Transition.png --] (]) 16:45, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
	:::::According to the graphic, the Tides transfer has been "initialized", though it does not provide a completion date.
	:::::I note you say at ]: {{xt\|We ended the last fiscal year with $118 million in the WIkimedia Endowment and are projecting to grow the corpus by approximately $6.5 million depending on market performance and after expenses.}}
	:::::This is a start. Providing a figure for the year's revenue and expenses, and the split between investments and cash, would be further steps in the right direction. Regards, ] <small>]]</small> 19:20, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
	----
	This document may prove very helpful in terms of understanding the current state of play for the endowment:
	.

			{\| style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #fdffe7); border: 1px solid var(--border-color-success, #fceb92); color: var(--color-base, #202122);"
	A few other points which directly or indirectly answer some other questions:
			\|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" \| ]
			\|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" \| brownie :D ] 19:05, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
			\|}

			== ] ==
	1. The Wikimedia Endowment fund has always been audited every year - as a part of Tides. If anyone is concerned that this is a giant pile of money with no oversight, that's not true. We have no means of initiating a new separate audit of Tides.

			You're the subject on a delist FPC. Please, give us your feedback. ] (]) 01:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
	2. Most of the endowment is moved. One of the good things about Tides is that they employ very rigorous financial controls, and as a part of their due diligence on the move (they have a fiduciary responsibility to do all this the right way) they of course need to make sure that the move is consistent with the donor's intentions. We are waiting for 2 more major donors to sign releases, and then those will be moved. We will also keep the Tides account open for several more months because they are receiving some residual income from some investments. This is all normal practice. The overall point is that people (like me!) who would have preferred that we just initiate a bank transfer for $118 million may not have realized how much care and control there is in these institutions. Everything takes time and there are many signoffs and moments of due diligence on all sides. Tides has tight financial controls in place that do not allow us to easily pull money out of the endowment, which is a good thing.

	I'd like to add once again that a further financial report is delayed because the relevant person took some family leave.

	My understanding of the cadence of other information releases at the moment is this: an annual fundraising report in the fall which is retrospective of FY 2022-2023 and covers both the WMF and the Endowment will be relased in the autumn, at the usual time. And after that the Annual Report for both the WMF and the Endowment will be released and that includes financials for the previous fiscal year. (Some of that information (in preliminary form) is in the deck that l link above.)--] (]) 12:30, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

	:Thanks for the document. On your two points:
	:1. The ]'s most recent audited statements are . The Tides Foundation's most recent ] is . Could you please indicate to us where in these documents the community and the general public can see how much money the Wikimedia Endowment took in that year, how much money it spent, to whom it issued grants (or where it says that it did not do so), and who were the Endowment's highest-paid contractors?
	:2. You say {{tqq\|most of the Endowment is moved}}. When will the website at https://wikimediaendowment.org/ be updated to indicate that the funds are now mostly held by a 501(c)(3)? Regards, ] <small>]]</small> 16:24, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

	:I really appreciate being able to read that document. Is there anything you can share on investment holdings, strategy, and tactics (i.e., when and how to change investments)? ] (]) 00:55, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
	::You can't find that information in Tides audited financials - it isn't broken out that way and there's nothing that I can do about that. Again, Tides is a separate organization and we can't do anything about how they are audited or report their financials. As to the specifics of your questions, I can confidently answer that the endowment did not make any grants until the initial grants which have been disclosed. As to "highest-paid contractors" - I don't know the answer, other than that the Wikimedia Foundation is the highest paid by far (the Endowment contracts with the WMF for various fundraising, accounting, and legal services as you know), and that anything else is very low. (In the most recent year, in the presentation I answered, the total for all "Contractors, interns, and fellows" combined was just over $50k. Are you interested in more detail on that?). For last year, you can see all the expenses in the document that I shared. I'll be asking here in Singapore if we can get a simple breakdown of exact numbers on revenues, investment returns, and expenses for prior years in a single document.
	::A question I have for you: why do I keep hearing the expression "highest paid contractors"? Can you be more specific about what you're concerned about?
	::For the second question, I do not know when the website will be updated. That's a level of operational detail that isn't the sort of thing that the board gets involved with.
	::For Sandizer, leave that question with me for a bit, as I want to give you an accurate answer on investment policy - speaking off the cuff gives too much risk for error. Remember, as I have said, a financial report is forthcoming but has been delayed due to family leave by the relevant person.--] (]) 12:21, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
	:::* {{tqq\|You can't find that information in Tides audited financials}} – that is exactly the point. The information cannot be found there, or anywhere. This is a lack of transparency, don't you agree?
	:::* Transparency would have been all the more desirable given that the Head of the Tides Foundation during the life of the Endowment, creating the possibility of conflicts of interest – or at least the ''appearance'' of such a possibility.
	:::* Disclosure of the five highest-paid contractors in each fiscal year is one of the . If the Wikimedia Endowment had indeed been converted into a 501(c)(3) non-profit upon reaching $33 million, as we were would happen back in March 2017, the Wikimedia Endowment would have had to make annual disclosures of its {{tqq\|five highest compensated independent contractors that received more than $100,000 in compensation for services, whether professional or other services, from the organization. Independent contractors include organizations as well as individuals and can include professional fundraisers, law firms, accounting firms, publishing companies, management companies, and investment management companies.}} This has not happened.
	:::* The document you have now uploaded (thank you), for example, states on that the Endowment had about $1.8 million in expenses in 2022–2023, including over $400,000 for unspecified "professional services". The Endowment appears to have had a similar level of expenditure in the year prior, according to the ], which mention {{xt\|$1,803,622 of expenses for the Endowment}}. These are not trifling amounts. And we know nothing at all about the Endowment's expenditure in the five or six years prior to that; it may have been higher or lower.
	:::* Basically, I think the Endowment should be held to the same standards of transparency as any other Wikimedia affiliate. And I believe I am correct in saying that no other Wikimedia affiliate would be allowed to provide so little transparency over its spending. Regards,
	:::] <small>]]</small> 14:15, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
	:::"five highest compensated independent contractors that received more than $100,000 in compensation for services" - given that the total for all interns, contractors, and fellows was just over $50k, then the basic answer is that there were none to be disclosed. Does that settle this particular issue for you finally? And I fully agree with you that now that we have a separate 501(c)(3) it should be held to the exact same (or even more stringent, to set a good example in the movement) transparency and reporting requirements as all movement affiliates. In the past, we had (essentially) only 2 expenses: the WMF staff and the Tides fees. There a few other things which ramped up due to the move away from Tides of course (it's a big job with a lot of ins and outs).--] (]) 11:53, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
	::::The lists over $400,000 for "professional services" in addition to the $50k interns and contractors total. Could you say what those refer to?
	::::Professional services are expressly included in the IRS disclosure instructions. There are also over $150k in "other operating expenses", and $875k in "personnel expense" – which personnel does this refer to? (Note that non-profits are also required to disclose any individual earning more than $100,000, for example.) And of course at present we have no data at all for 2016–2021. ] <small>]]</small> 12:01, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
	:::::After Wikimania I'll have more time for this. ] (]) 13:09, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
	::::::Thanks, noted. ] <small>]]</small> 23:35, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
	:::::::Note further related discussion at ]. ] <small>]]</small> 15:15, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
	::::::Shall we pick this up again? You on Meta the information {{tqq\|will be easy enough to publish}} – have you had discussions with staff to this effect in Singapore?
	::::::It would be good to have a level of transparency for the Endowment that is at least equal to the legal 501(c)(3) disclosure requirements.
	::::::Also, if you could explain a little further what the individual expenditure items on of the document you uploaded relate to – it is not clear to me who the $0.9 million in personnel expenses, $0.4 million in professional services etc. were paid to, or who the "interns, contractors and fellows" are – are these Tides staffers, Foundation staffers or individuals unrelated to either, and if it is Foundation staffers, were these payments made to the Foundation or to the individuals concerned? The table is very welcome, but it raises more questions than it answers. Regards, ] <small>]]</small> 10:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

	== Protection on English Wikiquote ==

	Hi, Jimbo, due to excessive vandalism, we've indefinitely protected your talk page on English Wikiquote. We have left a redirect on that page to here if someone really wants to have a talk with you about that project. ] 08:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
	:That sounds wise, thank you.--] (]) 11:28, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
	== A belated welcome! ==

	]

	Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Misplaced Pages, Jimbo Wales! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for ]. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Misplaced Pages:

	{{Div col\|colwidth=18em}}
	* ]
	* ]
	* ]
	* ]
	* ]
	* ]
	* ] (newcomer help)
	* ]
	{{Div col end}}
	Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the ].

	I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Again, welcome! ] 02:20, 25 August 2023 (UTC)<!-- Template:Welcome-belated -->

	:Welcome jimbo
	:i hope this finds you well
	: keep up the good work lol
	:im sorry if this is annoying but i had too
	:(now i feel guilty)
	:but thank you for creating page ] ] 02:24, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

	==American history and segregation==
	Why do you think it's so hard to get ] included on Misplaced Pages? Do you think the history of segregation and discrimination in the U.S. is important? Should we cover the history of our African American communities? ] (]) 13:01, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

	:Why is it separate than just resorts? ] 13:09, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
	::These are culturally and historicaly interesting and I'm actually impressed that we have somewhat decent articles on many of them. I think the problem with the article that FloridaArmy linked is that it's just a very brief introduction and then a list. It might better be titled "List of" but I don't necessarily recommend that as (a) I don't know exactly what current standards are for list articles and (b) I think this is a much more interesting and useful potential article than that.
	::For expansion, I'd recommend a review of ] as a potential model. This article is about Jewish resorts that were created out of a similar need: racism and segregation made it impossible for African Americans to visit many whites-only facilities, just as "No Jews" rules meant that Jewish people had to create alternatives. Essentially, a good article would automatically answer cyberwolf424224's question: these are interesting and separate from just "resorts" because of what they tell us about those times and the people who lived then.--] (]) 13:32, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
	::'''Addendum''' - The "Borscht belt" article is about both the term and the phenomenon. I don't know that "African American resorts" is a standard term, not that that really matters per se, it's just that I wonder what the best title for the article is. I asked ChatGPT 4 and got this answer:

	::"Yes, there is a term that refers to resorts that catered mainly to Black Americans: the "Black Eden." This term specifically refers to Idlewild, Michigan. During the first half of the 20th century, Idlewild was a significant vacation destination for Black Americans, especially during the era of racial segregation when Black people were barred from many mainstream resorts. Idlewild attracted many Black professionals, entertainers, and families, offering them a place of leisure, entertainment, and relaxation.

	::Another term that might be relevant is the "Chitlin' Circuit." While not a resort term per se, the Chitlin' Circuit refers to a collection of performance venues throughout the eastern, southern, and upper Midwest areas of the United States that were safe and acceptable for African American musicians, comedians, and other entertainers to perform in during the age of racial segregation.

	::Both Idlewild and the Chitlin' Circuit played crucial roles in the history of Black entertainment and leisure in the U.S."

	::Now neither of those terms exactly captures the meaning. "Black Eden" ] is a reference to a specific place, not a type of place, and ] does refer to a type of place, but not to resorts per se. Still, I found this interesting enough to share as we think through this.--] (]) 13:39, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 01:44, 19 January 2025

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an open door policy.
He holds the founder's seat on the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees.
The current trustees occupying "community-selected" seats are Rosiestep, Laurentius, Victoria and Pundit.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is Jan Eissfeldt.

This page is semi-protected and you will not be able to leave a message here unless you are a registered editor. Instead,
you can leave a message here

This is Jimbo Wales's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, Index, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252Auto-archiving period: 10 days

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

This talkpage has been mentioned by a media organization:

Matthew Gault (8 December 2021). "Misplaced Pages Editors Very Mad About Jimmy Wales' NFT of a Misplaced Pages Edit". Vice Media. The trouble began when Wales posted an announcement about the auction on his user talk page—a kind of message board where users communicate directly with each other.

Centralized discussion

Village pumps: policy; tech; proposals; idea lab; WMF; misc

For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

Albert Percy Godber

Happy New Year Jimbo!!! I hope all is well with you and your team.

Could you or your page watchers help me with Draft:Albert Percy Godber? The draft has been declined and tagged up. It was then deleted years ago. I had it restored today after I came across one of his photos. I think he and his photography are fascinating for capturing aspects of New Zealand's transportation and industrial history. His work is in museum and library collections. At least one of his photographs has been used in a book. He photographed Maori sites.

I'm sorry I haven't been able to work the draft up enough to get it admitted to mainspace. It does make me wonder about what we do and don't include, our notability criteria, Articles for Creation (AfC) process, and collaborative ethos. Thanks so much for any help or guidance you can offer! Have a great 2025 and beyond. Thanks again. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

If Godber is not WP:NOTABLE, which is what the draft reviewers say, then Wikipedians can't fix that. Polygnotus (talk) 09:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

user:Polygnotus is he "notable" and should we have an entry on him? FloridaArmy (talk) 17:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I dunno, but User:Sulfurboy wrote that the draft did not show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject at that point. Polygnotus (talk) 19:37, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

And this a request to revisit his finding. We have a photographer from more than 100 years ago who documented areas of New Zealand's North Island. We have his work in a National Library collection. We have his work discussed as iconic for one of his Maori related photographs. We have his work revisited in a 2018 exhibition. We have descriptions of him related to his photographs, his career, and we have the photos themselves documenting the areas industries, sites, infrastructure from more than 100 years ago. If I was satisfied with the previous conclusions I would not be here. So I ask again, should we have an entry on this subject? Should we just attribute his photos where we use them to an unlinked name with no explanation or discussion of who he was? I think the answer is clear, and I wanted to hear Jimbo's opinion. I am aware of what was previously stated. Years have passed and I believe it's time to reevaluate and consider. I also think it's worth reflecting on our article creations processes more generally and how we apply our conception of "notability". FloridaArmy (talk) 23:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Godber's photographs include "views of the Hutt Valley including large numbers of cars traveling to Trentham Racecourse, and the Hutt River. Another group of images relate to a holiday at the Mendip Hills Homestead in Canterbury, New Zealand with scenes of farm life, including haymaking, merino sheep, and farm buildings. During their stay in the South Island Godber also took photographs of Dunedin (including the Ross Reservoir, Otago Boys' High School, Seacliff Mental Hospital, the 1926 Dunedin Exhibition, and the Hillside Railway Workshops); Invercargill (including the Invercargill Railway Workshops); Stewart Island, Moeraki, Tuatapere, Waiau River, Oamaru and Port Chalmers. Various railway stations in Canterbury and Otago, the Burnside Iron Mills, and the Rosslyn Mills. Godber was a volunteer fireman with the Petone Fire Brigade with the album including views of the building, groups of firemen, fire engines and other fire fighting equipment, and a building in Petone damaged by fire. In his work with New Zealand Railways, mainly at the Petone Railway Workshops, he took interior photographs of various buildings, including the Machine Shop and finishing benches, the engine room, lathes, boilers, and fitting shops. He also took photographs of many of the steam engines that were built and worked on at the workshops. One scene shows a group of men watching a fight. Many images show his interest in logging railways, particularly in the Piha, Karekare, Anawhata area. Scenes of logging camps, various methods of transporting logs including bullock teams, logging trains, and dams created and then tripped to send logs down by river, and timber mills. Other topics covered in Godber's photographs are scenes at Maori marae and meeting houses, with some of the people identified; Maori carving and rafter designs; beekeeping, and gold mining." FloridaArmy (talk) 23:52, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
It's hard to choose which photos to share. Historic views areas, industries, bridges, natural features, railways and bridges, crafts. Here's a link to his photos on Misplaced Pages Commons. Many already illustrate our entries on various subjects. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

If you really want to help him, get a couple stories published about him in newspapers. Notability here will follow. Carrite (talk) 01:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Scoop: Heritage Foundation plans to ‘identify and target’ Misplaced Pages editors

That doesn't sound good. From The Forward. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Being discussed at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (miscellaneous)#Heritage Foundation intending to "identify and target" editors. CMD (talk) 10:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Also discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel_articles_5/Evidence#Edit_request and Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Heritage_Foundation_planning_to_dox_Wikipedia_editors. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Jimbo, could I ask you please to respond to these concerns from Tryptofish?

... it's not just if you've edited about Israel-Palestine. It could be if you've edited anything about climate and fossil fuels, gender, immigration, vaccines, and of course, American politics. I doubt that they have the bandwidth to actually identify and harass every editor who could possibly be seen as editing information that goes against a MAGA POV, but they will likely find some easily identified targets, whom they will use to "set an example", as a way of instilling fear in our editing community. I fully expect that, in the coming months, Jimbo Wales will be hauled before a hostile and performative Congressional hearing, much in the manner of university presidents. I hope very much that he will be better prepared than Claudine Gay was.

Yeah, I know this is grim. But I believe the first step in dealing with this is to go into it with our eyes open, to know what we are dealing with, what motivates it. And, more than harming individual editors, the real objective of Heritage et al. is to instill fear in the rest of us. If we become too fearful to revert POV edits, they win. In a very real sense, we have to keep doing what we have been doing, and continue to be a reliable resource for NPOV information. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Sita Bose (talk) 05:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Well, I fully agree that developments in terms of arguments and actions aimed at destroying trust in knowledge (and of course our specific interest, trust in Misplaced Pages) are extremely worrisome, particularly as I agree that for many who are doing it, the motive does appears to be the undermining of civic norms and democracy. I also agree with Tryptofish in a part that you didn't quote: "In a narrow sense, it's technically true that if you "out" yourself, there's no point in anyone else doing it. But once your identity is known, you become vulnerable to all of the kinds of real-life harassment that doxed people find themselves subjected to. It doesn't matter, in that regard, how they found out your identity." That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.

As a side note, I don't think that the reliability of the Heritage Foundation as a source is particularly related to these despicable actions. Whether they should be considered a reliable source in some matters is really unrelated to whether they hate us or not.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Suddenly ANI going to court to get user-data seems like the model of gentlemanly behavior. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face. Unfortunately, the scales have been inexorably slipping out from beneath the foundation's abilities or willingness to protect its volunteers for my entire wiki-career. There's no balancing force at work. The private equity community has made gadflies out of what we used to label reliable local news media; Alphabet and Meta are actively coopting precision, privacy, and the public domain, while attempting to minimize the effectiveness of good faith actors like Internet Archive. Now suddenly en.wikipedians are facing the sort of personal threats long experienced by volunteers at ru.wiki and zh.wiki. The forces now arrayed against free information don't need to be actively coordinating in order to rapidly bring us to 2+2=5 territory. Any established editor could reasonably see Western culture has been under relentless attack for a long time. Here comes the Heritage Foundation's leaks, hot off Heritage's bangup release of Project 2025, leaking articles through partisan outlets apparently intended to make it appear (in one case) the ADL's recent reliability downgrade at RSNP was anyone else's fault but the ADL's own writings and actions. The news of such activity appears to threaten the community members directly and personally. BusterD (talk) 13:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Jimmy_Wales#Newer_2024_image?

Hey Mr. Wales, there's a discussion on Talk:Jimmy_Wales#Newer_2024_image? about what image should be used on your Misplaced Pages entry. Figured you may want to chime in with personal opinion about the recent freely-licensed images of you that are presented, as there hasn't been much engagement there at the time of my post. Barnt Toust 21:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)