Wikipedia:Education Program/Structure proposals/James Heilman

As I wish to refocus my efforts on medicine I am unable to dedicate sufficient time to this working group at this time. Thus wish to withdraw my application. Am always happy to provide my point of view and am still supportive of the concept in general. -- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

;Please list your name and/or Wikipedia username. James Heilman, MD, CCFP(EM), Clinical Assistant Professor,University of Saskatchewan, Clinical Instructor, University of British Columbia. User:Jmh649

The new structure needs to reflect the two main groups involved with this projects; the Wikipedia community and the universities. I support Franks proposal as one possibility with a "Board of Trustees, consisting of 7 members. Three of those members will be long-term Wikipedians, whereas three other members will be academics" I can think of three people who are both academics AND long term Wikipedians, one of which is myself. Getting people with experience on both sides is important. In addition involvement by national chapters will be needed. Might be better as a non member organization rather than a member organization though. But we should have further discussion on exactly what we hope this group is going to accomplish. And need to verify that breaking away from the WMF is a good idea in the first place before we settle on a give structure.
 * What idea(s) do you have for what the new structure for the U.S. and Canada Wikipedia Education Programs could look like?

We need to make sure most discussion takes place on Wikipedia rather than by phone/IRC/live meeting/email. This is where the main activity of the project will be taking place and this is where the community resides. We need to make sure that community consensus is heard, taken into account, and followed.
 * How would you ensure this new structure involves all key stakeholders, including academics and the Wikipedia community?

There is work needed to bring the Wikimedia community and academia together. Some within the Wikimedia community are unhappy with the results of the education program, some within academia are distrustful of Wikipedia. Much of this is going to require greater communication. This board is going to need some authority to requires classes to use the processes. And this authority will need to be requested through consensus.
 * What are potential pitfalls of this approach?

Eventually those who site on the board should be elected similar to ArbCom/WMF by the community. Thus keeping them accountable to the community.
 * Any other comments about your proposal?