Talk:Requests for information

Examples please?

SarahSV, please provide some examples of what you imagine would be requested on this page that requires a special page with a name that presumes something is being deliberately withheld. I am particularly interested in how you believe that chapters would be obliged to respond to "requests", and what kinds of examples you'd include as being their responsiblity. Risker (talk) 03:29, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. A centralized noticeboard doesn't seem like a terrible idea to me. Wikimedia chapters certainly use Meta-Wiki. There's no obligation for any group—the Wikimedia Foundation, a Wikimedia chapter, or others—to reply to posts on this noticeboard. But this lack of obligation does not preclude having a forum for notices and a forum for discussion about information requests and transparency. Transparency is a core value of both the Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikimedia movement. Giving this value some increased visibility seems like a win to me.

As I just remembered when browsing around, I have some notes at legal docs that contain specific examples of documents that I would like to see published by default. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

I agree the legal docs should be published too. EllenCT (talk) 01:55, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Related discussion

See discussion related to this page and how WMF could support it at Talk:Transparency/Practices#Transparency_officer. Andreas JN466 12:34, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

It seems that the discussion at that page has not led to any changes. Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 21:32, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Counts of complaints of harassment against WMF staff

It is worth noting that a channel will exist when the WMF decides to promulgate the Code of Conduct, currently under discussion at mw: Talk:Code of Conduct/Draft. At present the proposal is to the Code of Conduct Committee via techconductwikimedia.org Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 21:38, 17 July 2016 (UTC)