Talk:Wikimedia Foundation/Advancement/Community Growth/Partnerships

Global reach

@JVargas (WMF): This is the same as the Global Reach team but renamed, correct? Are the various subpages of Global Reach going to be moved here? --Yair rand (talk) 19:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Yair rand:! This is indeed the former "Global Reach" from WMF, now renamed to Partnerships. I'm doing some changes to update our Meta presence. The current and up-to-date- version is this one. I will be working on the redirects and archives on all of it along the day to make sure there's no confusion. Thanks!

Scope

The page should be clarified to make it clear that those four names are not representative of the Wikimedia movements' global pool of partners, which are overwhelmingly civil society organisations, cultural institutions, Commons partnerships etc. Please use a more specific terminology. Nemo 23:03, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment, Nemo. We made a point to clarify that these examples refer to specific WMF partnerships that have taken place. We are cognizant that there are larger representatives of partners in the movement, but these are specific to the ones that WMF Partnerships has worked on. --JVargas (WMF) (talk) 05:01, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Facebook?

Facebook's Incorrect Page or Wikipedia mapping page says "please reach out to your partnerships contact". Would that be the WFPT? --Guy Macon (talk) 23:54, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Is your question in jest? They mean "talk with your business contact at Facebook", which is an euphemism for "get lost (unless you pay us a lot of money and we can't ignore you altogether)".

As a reminder, the Wikipedia pages were added by Facebook in early 2010 without asking for our opinion (see [Foundation-l] Heads up: Wikipedia on Facebook). The Wikimedia Foundation never had anything to do with it and, in general, has sometimes begged for money but never in recent memory tried to ask Facebook to do something useful for Wikimedia projects. (We used some of their software from 2014 to 2017 but that happened independently.) Nemo 06:50, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Possibility of expanding cooperation with YouTube?

I noted that the Partnership team is already working with Google, including YouTube, in providing information to the billions of their users. However, despite YouTube's increasingly dominant role in providing information to users in the form of video and trapping its users within the platform when they seek for information by having a search engine in their websites and apps that will only provide result of video on their platform, and as increasing amount of users seek information from only such sort of in-app search engines, information from Wikipedia or other wikiprojects are not able to reach out to this group of users unless some youtubers cited relevant webpages when they produce their video. This current situation is against WMF's goal to let Wikiproject knowledge reach as much people as possible, and is also easy for YouTube user generating bias based on contents on the website that more often focus on engagement and entertainment more than factfulness, and have real world consequence to society of the entire humanity. To avert this, I think it is essential for information from Wikipedia and other Wikiprojects be more accessible when users are searching in YouTube, watching video, or when video creators are sharing their content in video form to their audience through the platform of YouTube. I hope there can be way for knowledge of Wikipedia and other wikiprojects be more readily accessible through YouTube, in order for knowledge on Wikiprojects to reach an even wider audience. C933103 (talk) 21:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback @C933103. The Wikimedia Partnerships team is working closely with the companies you mentioned, as well as others, to ensure they are able to access and reuse content from Wikimedia projects via our free APIs and other data services. Other teams at Wikimedia are currently working to make knowledge in Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects more machine-accessible and easily reused by external technology platforms. For example:

• Wikimedia Enterprise was created specifically to support the reuse of Wikimedia content at a larger scale for companies, researchers, and other institutions who choose to incorporate Wikimedia content into their products and workflows.  
• The Structured Data Across Wikimedia project is an effort by the Wikimedia Product team to enable access to smaller, more easily digestible pieces of content within our projects and make it easier to share those externally – e.g., in YouTube videos.

We’re definitely excited to brainstorm and pursue new content reuse partnership opportunities as these new technological capabilities mature! NPerry (WMF) (talk) 17:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Problematic content from Chinese Wikipedia keep by Google after correction.

I noticed that the partnership team is currently in partnership with Google. Recently, on Chinese Wikipedia, zh:w:Wikipedia:互助客栈/条目探讨#是否应该保留早期机翻译名 a discussion have started over the use of problematic Chinese Wikipedia and Chinese language Wikidata content on numerous websites, including Google's Google Map service. I hope that the partnership team can communicate the issue with Google and work out a solution on this.

According to the discussion, 2019, name of many places were being edited into Chinese Wikipedia and Wikidata Chinese entry, by using machine translations. Some of them have been cleaned up since then. However, Google Maps, among other services, have taken the original problematic article/entry name as Chinese name of those places, and did not update their translation, even after editors fixing their entries on Wikipedia and Wikidata as well as manually submitting relevant translations to Google Maps' feedback and correction form. Particularly Google Maps seems to have stopped making such updates since year 2019, causing some names that persist on the service, even if the problematic translation only lasted on Chinese Wikipedia for a few months before being fixed.

Would it be possible for the partnership team to request Google to either update or delete place names that are affected by such situation? C933103 (talk) 12:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for surfacing this, @C933103. We're looking into solutions and I'll follow up as soon as we know more. NPerry (WMF) (talk) 09:59, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @C933103 the Google team is looking into this. Could you please share some examples of where this is happening and/or link to the discussion so they can read more about the issue? NPerry (WMF) (talk) 12:31, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Link to archived version of the discussion: https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:互助客栈/条目探讨/存档/2022年8月#是否应该保留早期机翻译名

Pinging involved editors: @Bigbullfrog1996: @AirScott: C933103 (talk) 14:42, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

@NPerry (WMF) Riquewhir (Right: 里克维尔; Wrong: 里屈埃维), Bourges (Right: 布尔日; Wrong: 博格斯), Saint-Quentin-Fallavier (Right: 圣康坦-法拉维耶; Wrong: 圣屈昂坦法拉维耶) and 10k examples in France. The above problem has been encountered on maps of all countries in the world, not only in France, e.g. Schouwen-Duiveland (Right: 斯豪文-德伊弗兰; Wrong: 舒温-迪夫兰) in Netherlands, Higham (Right: 海厄姆; Wrong: 高漢姆) in UK, Heuvelland (Right: 赫弗兰; Wrong: 赫纲兰德) in Belgium, etc. My advice is to remove all Chinese translations from Wikidata or wikipedia article titles from Google Maps. --Bigbullfrog1996 (talk) 15:16, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Mobile sites being indexed by Google

@JBrungs (WMF): Hello! Recently Google is incorrectly indexing mobile site of Wikipedia (see details in phab:T307359). I think we may reach out to Google to solve this problem. Steven Sun (talk) 01:48, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Steven Sun, thank you for reaching out and sharing the Phabricator link. I suggest submitting feedback to Google via the mechanisms on the search result page. Our team will also flag this for them. NPerry (WMF) (talk) 12:11, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

@NPerry (WMF): Hello, any updates or further information about this issue? This issue is still existed. Thanks. --SCP-2000 06:32, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @SCP-2000, the Google team informed us that these pages are missing a certain type of meta tag that is required for Google to differentiate between mobile and desktop pages. WMF Product teams are investigating this further to determine if they can implement these tags without compromising user privacy or other user preferences. NPerry (WMF) (talk) 14:50, 8 December 2022 (UTC)