Re: [WikiEN-l] Blog post on FlaggedRevs
Very useful - thanks Couple of points: Only in a small percentage of cases, we would require changes to be patrolled before becoming the default view for readers. The proposal is to do so initially in the case of biographies of living people This is contradictory. BLP articles make up a significant proportion of all articles (something like 25% off the top of my head) so if you do it for all BLP articles you are not doing it in a small percentage of cases If the proposed model works as intended, it will actually allow us to open up many articles for editing which are currently protected from being edited. This has been mentioned before and although it seems like a good line, I'm not sure it holds water. Let me put it like this: At the moment we have ~3m articles of which, say, 700 are fully protected and about 1300 are semi protected. What do we expect this is going to look like in a couple of years' time? My guess is something like this: Fully protected - maybe 600? Semi protected - maybe 700? Page protection - maybe 100,000? There are plenty of editors who are pushing page protection for all ~700k BLP articles and some who want it, like WP-DE, on everything. Whatever happens, it will be significantly more than the current 2k that's protected. Hence although it might slightly reduce the number of protected articles, overall the impact will be a restriction on the openness of editing. So although the media have massively exaggerated the impact, the story they're reporting is essentially correct. Personally, I think a better line is to focus on minimising the risk of harm to living people and balancing this with the openness. Andrew - Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: From: Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wednesday, 26 August, 2009 04:01:21 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: [WikiEN-l] Blog post on FlaggedRevs http://blog.wikimedia.org/2009/08/26/a-quick-update-on-flagged-revisions/ Please reference if there's any further confusion about this. -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Blog post on FlaggedRevs
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Andrew Turveyandrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote: This is contradictory. BLP articles make up a significant proportion of all articles (something like 25% off the top of my head) so if you do it for all BLP articles you are not doing it in a small percentage of cases snip Off the top of your head? :-) I think (referring to the top of my head) that the 25% (more like somewhere between 20 and 25%) is for the number of biographical articles (i.e. both living and dead and long-dead people). The BLP figure is easily calculated though. 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Living_people 400,653 BLP articles (as of 26/08/2009) 2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics 3,012,053 content articles (as of 26/08/2009) Hence the BLP percentage is 13.3%. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Blog post on FlaggedRevs
2009/8/26 Sage Ross ragesoss+wikipe...@gmail.com: This post says that the Flagged protection and patrolled revisions trial will put biographies of living people under flagged protection. Eek, sorry for that. I've corrected the post and added a note to the bottom summarizing the correction. -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikimediauk-l] BBC Newsnight tonight! re: flagged revs
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:38 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote: snip And I got to call my fellow Wikipedians encyclopedia nerds on national television ;-p :-) They used the example of Ted Kennedy in the intro, didn't they? I'm wondering how close you both came to being asked about that and how real death reports get handled (I think the news broke a few hours later). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kennedy Currently has a big pp-semi-vandalism template on it, as well as the recent deaths one. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikimediauk-l] BBC Newsnight tonight! re: flaggedrevs
Don't know if this has been posted yet (apologies if yes) Recording available on iplayer: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/newsnight (intro at the very start and then from 38:50). Not sure if non-UK people can view . - Phil Nash pn007a2...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: From: Phil Nash pn007a2...@blueyonder.co.uk To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wednesday, 26 August, 2009 00:53:56 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikimediauk-l] BBC Newsnight tonight! re: flaggedrevs Carcharoth wrote: On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 8:57 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/8/25 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: 2009/8/25 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: Looks like it's a happener. Just waiting for call re: cab. Apparently on ~9:45pm (BST), but times may change at short notice. Hang on, Newsnight doesn't start until 10:30pm. Did you mean ~10:45pm? Evidently :-) And at the end of the program as well. After the interesting feature on the Spanish Civil War legacy 70 years on. And the daily news round up, it was time for Wikipedia! How do you think it went, David? I like the bit you said right at the end about how it was a surprise that Wikipedia became so popular, but though I've got it recorded on DVD, I haven't re-watched it yet. I got the impression the presenter (Paxman must be on holiday) and the Guardian guy were saying quite a bit, and you were wanting to correct them on some points, but didn't get much of a chance. Carcharoth The item seems to have been crammed in as a bit of an afterthought, and although the Spanish Civil War legacy is interesting, it's not particularly time-critical. It seems to have been rushed, and although the Guardian commentator seems to have been largely supportive, it would have meant very little to a previously uninformed viewer. Although it seems to have been vaunted as a major shift in emphasis on WP, it should have been pointed out more strongly as (a) a trial (b) based on previous experience at de:wp and (c) not that much different from what already happens. I'm sorry David didn't get the chance to put that forward, but then, that is journalism as opposed to analysis. It remains to be seen whether they'll follow it up, but of course, Parliament is on vacation and we are in the silly season. I suppose we should be grateful for some exposure, and not bad at that. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Blog post on FlaggedRevs
Thanks for the figure - not bad estimate, considering it was off the top of my head :) I would add not all living people are in that category, so this is probably an underestimate. I still wouldn't call 13% a small percentage. - Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote: From: Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wednesday, 26 August, 2009 11:10:43 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Blog post on FlaggedRevs On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Andrew Turveyandrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote: This is contradictory. BLP articles make up a significant proportion of all articles (something like 25% off the top of my head) so if you do it for all BLP articles you are not doing it in a small percentage of cases snip Off the top of your head? :-) I think (referring to the top of my head) that the 25% (more like somewhere between 20 and 25%) is for the number of biographical articles (i.e. both living and dead and long-dead people). The BLP figure is easily calculated though. 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Living_people 400,653 BLP articles (as of 26/08/2009) 2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics 3,012,053 content articles (as of 26/08/2009) Hence the BLP percentage is 13.3%. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikimediauk-l] BBC Newsnight tonight! re: flaggedrevs
It's also in snippet form at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8222397.stm I have no idea whether this works outside the UK, though... Mike On 26 Aug 2009, at 12:12, Andrew Turvey wrote: Don't know if this has been posted yet (apologies if yes) Recording available on iplayer: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/ newsnight (intro at the very start and then from 38:50). Not sure if non-UK people can view . - Phil Nash pn007a2...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: From: Phil Nash pn007a2...@blueyonder.co.uk To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wednesday, 26 August, 2009 00:53:56 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikimediauk-l] BBC Newsnight tonight! re: flaggedrevs Carcharoth wrote: On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 8:57 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/8/25 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: 2009/8/25 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: Looks like it's a happener. Just waiting for call re: cab. Apparently on ~9:45pm (BST), but times may change at short notice. Hang on, Newsnight doesn't start until 10:30pm. Did you mean ~10:45pm? Evidently :-) And at the end of the program as well. After the interesting feature on the Spanish Civil War legacy 70 years on. And the daily news round up, it was time for Wikipedia! How do you think it went, David? I like the bit you said right at the end about how it was a surprise that Wikipedia became so popular, but though I've got it recorded on DVD, I haven't re-watched it yet. I got the impression the presenter (Paxman must be on holiday) and the Guardian guy were saying quite a bit, and you were wanting to correct them on some points, but didn't get much of a chance. Carcharoth The item seems to have been crammed in as a bit of an afterthought, and although the Spanish Civil War legacy is interesting, it's not particularly time-critical. It seems to have been rushed, and although the Guardian commentator seems to have been largely supportive, it would have meant very little to a previously uninformed viewer. Although it seems to have been vaunted as a major shift in emphasis on WP, it should have been pointed out more strongly as (a) a trial (b) based on previous experience at de:wp and (c) not that much different from what already happens. I'm sorry David didn't get the chance to put that forward, but then, that is journalism as opposed to analysis. It remains to be seen whether they'll follow it up, but of course, Parliament is on vacation and we are in the silly season. I suppose we should be grateful for some exposure, and not bad at that. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Blog post on FlaggedRevs
Someone should calculate how many articles have BLP tags somewhere on them, and are not in the Living people category. I think that tool Magnus magicked up a few days ago could do that now. This would give an idea of how many articles outside of the living people category have enough problems for people to add a BLP tag. Whether people remove such tags after things have settled down again, I don't know. Carcharoth On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Andrew Turveyandrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote: Thanks for the figure - not bad estimate, considering it was off the top of my head :) I would add not all living people are in that category, so this is probably an underestimate. I still wouldn't call 13% a small percentage. - Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote: From: Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wednesday, 26 August, 2009 11:10:43 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Blog post on FlaggedRevs On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Andrew Turveyandrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote: This is contradictory. BLP articles make up a significant proportion of all articles (something like 25% off the top of my head) so if you do it for all BLP articles you are not doing it in a small percentage of cases snip Off the top of your head? :-) I think (referring to the top of my head) that the 25% (more like somewhere between 20 and 25%) is for the number of biographical articles (i.e. both living and dead and long-dead people). The BLP figure is easily calculated though. 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Living_people 400,653 BLP articles (as of 26/08/2009) 2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics 3,012,053 content articles (as of 26/08/2009) Hence the BLP percentage is 13.3%. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Daily Mail (England) on Flagged Revisions
Local english tabloid puts it's slant on the news. Unfortunately we didn't get any quote in there. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208941/Free-edit-Wikipedia-appoints-volunteer-editors-vet-changes-articles-living-people.html Wikipedia has been forced to abandon its policy of allowing anyone to edit its pages. An army of 20,000 unpaid 'expert editors' will be drafted in to check all changes to articles on living people before the pages go online. The move is a response to the hijacking of the site by those with political or personal motives. jimmy Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. logo Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales says that the change in the system is just a test Wikipedia Tory and Labour politicians, as well as 'web vandals', have falsified entries to discredit their enemies. Wikipedia was set up eight years ago as a free encyclopedia built on the work of volunteers. All contributors had the power to edit, improve and update the content and it has become one of the top ten internet sites with more than 13million entries. But well-publicised hoaxes have forced the Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit Californian body that runs the site, to curb its freewheeling ethos. They hope the switch to volunteer editors will curb malicious tampering and reduce the risk of lawsuits. Wikipedia tried to clamp down on the problem in 2005 by banning anonymous users from creating entries. Experts said the latest change was much more significant and 'crosses a psychological Rubicon'. The system of 'flagged revisions' will compromise the founding principle that everyone has an equal right to edit any Wikipedia page. But Michael Snow, who is the chairman of the Wikimedia board, said it was no longer acceptable 'to throw things at the wall and see what sticks'. Jimmy Wales, one of the site's founders, said: 'We have really become part of the infrastructure of how people get information. There is a serious responsibility.' With millions of changes made to entries every month, it is thought that 20,000 editors will be needed. Modified pages go live only with their approval. Wikipedia is the first reference point for many web inquiries - often because its pages head the search results on Google and Yahoo. More than 30million visits have been made to the Michael Jackson page since his death on June 25. 'Wikipedia now has the ability to alter the world that it attempts to document,' said New York University professor Joseph Reagle. A limited number of popular or controversial pages are already protected, including those for singer Britney Spears and U.S. president Barack Obama. Wikipedia's credibility took a dent when it emerged in 2005 that a biography of American journalist John Seigenthaler, once an assistant to US Attorney General Robert Kennedy, had been altered to accuse him of involvement in the assassinations of both his boss and JFK. In one notorious case David Cameron’s aides altered the page on the artist Titian to score a point over Gordon Brown. And in 2007 it emerged one of its main contributors had faked his qualifications. Ryan Jordan, who had edited more than 20,000 pages of information, had claimed to be a professor of theology but was exposed following a magazine article as a 24-year-old college dropout from Kentucky. Last year, the New York Times worked with Wikipedia to restrict information about the kidnapping of a correspondent in Afghanistan. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208941/Free-edit-Wikipedia-appoints-volunteer-editors-vet-changes-articles-living-people.html#ixzz0PI5pABLo ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Daily Mail (England) on Flagged Revisions
2009/8/26 Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com: They hope the switch to volunteer editors will curb malicious tampering and reduce the risk of lawsuits We're all volunteers anyway aren't we on Wikipedia? Nothing has changed there?! -- Regards, Isabell Long. isabell...@gmail.com [[User:Isabell121]] on all public Wikimedia projects. Freenode Community Co-Ordinator - issyl0 on irc.freenode.net PGP Key ID: 0xB6CA6840 ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] More UK media: Radio 2 5:30, Sky News 7:15
I'm on BBC Radio 2 Chris Evans for a three-minute segment around 5:30ish (plus or minus who knows what) and Sky News around 7:15pm. (Black shirt, no tie ;-) ) - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikimediauk-l] More UK media: Radio 2 5:30, Sky News 7:15
Just to explain: David's going to be on BBC radio 2, rather than me (as per my previous email), as he's based in London and hence can get to the BBC studio. The press like to geographically discriminate. ;-) Mike On 26 Aug 2009, at 16:19, David Gerard wrote: I'm on BBC Radio 2 Chris Evans for a three-minute segment around 5:30ish (plus or minus who knows what) and Sky News around 7:15pm. (Black shirt, no tie ;-) ) - d. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Future templates compared to spoiler templates
There has been a centralised discussion on deprecating future templates. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Centralized_discussion/Deprecating_%22Future%22_templates The templates were compared to the spoiler templates. Not to drag all that up again, but I found the comparison interesting. The same basic point seemed to be made there, though, that such templates patronised our readers, who can be expected to realise that the article they are reading is about a future event (and if they can't, then that is more likely to be due to bad writing in the article, than the reader's comprehension skills). Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] A sudden thought on the media coverage of flagged revisions
We've had a story in the New York Times. Meanwhile, judging by the way David Gerard and WMUK are dashing around, it's all over the UK media. Is this just observer bias, or is internal changes to Wikipedia for some reason a really interesting thing to the British press? I have no idea... -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] A sudden thought on the media coverage of flagged revisions
2009/8/26 Andrew Gray shimg...@gmail.com We've had a story in the New York Times. Meanwhile, judging by the way David Gerard and WMUK are dashing around, it's all over the UK media. Is this just observer bias, or is internal changes to Wikipedia for some reason a really interesting thing to the British press? I have no idea... -- No, I also heard a discussion about it last night on the Toronto CBC Radio program Here and Now during their technology report. They segued into the Wikipedia angle from a discussion on the challenges of anonymity online. The host asked how not being able to edit directly would change Wikipedia, and the technology specialist responded that maturity, and finding a balance between openness and responsibility to its subjects, was playing a role. He also pointed out that, in a few short years, Wikipedia has gone from the upstart nobody took seriously to an established reference source that was often the first stop for information. He even called us the new establishment. Unfortunately, this program isn't podcast, although I understand an abbreviated transcript may be available later this week. Risker ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikimediauk-l] BBC Newsnight tonight! re: flaggedrevs
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 6:32 AM, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote: It's also in snippet form at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8222397.stm I have no idea whether this works outside the UK, though... That link worked for me, the whole show link about did not. Props to David who did a good job of addressing the questions and sounding very cogent (even though the host seemed to want to portray it as THE END... Maybe? of Wikipedia). --Falcorian ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] More UK media: Radio 2 5:30, Sky News 7:15
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:19 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: I'm on BBC Radio 2 Chris Evans for a three-minute segment around 5:30ish (plus or minus who knows what) and Sky News around 7:15pm. (Black shirt, no tie ;-) ) - d. I enjoyed watching your interview on TV (via the internet). If there are links for the above interviews that work across the pound here I'd love to see/hear them too! --Falcorian ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] A sudden thought on the media coverage of flagged revisions
2009/8/26 Risker risker...@gmail.com: 2009/8/26 Andrew Gray shimg...@gmail.com We've had a story in the New York Times. Meanwhile, judging by the way David Gerard and WMUK are dashing around, it's all over the UK media. Is this just observer bias, or is internal changes to Wikipedia for some reason a really interesting thing to the British press? I have no idea... No, I also heard a discussion about it last night on the Toronto CBC Radio program Here and Now during their technology report. They segued into the Wikipedia angle from a discussion on the challenges of anonymity online. Yeah. It's difficult sometimes to get just how very mainstream Wikipedia is. We are the big time. Normal people know what we are, at least sort of. also pointed out that, in a few short years, Wikipedia has gone from the upstart nobody took seriously to an established reference source that was often the first stop for information. He even called us the new establishment. The hard part is that people have no idea how it works. So stories like this are an opportunity to explain ourselves to the world, which is actually important. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] A sudden thought on the media coverage of flagged revisions
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:51 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote: snip Yeah. It's difficult sometimes to get just how very mainstream Wikipedia is. We are the big time. Normal people know what we are, at least sort of. snip The hard part is that people have no idea how it works. So stories like this are an opportunity to explain ourselves to the world, which is actually important. I do hope some of the things being said in the papers are being corrected, or something said somewhere. When I read in the paper tonight (thelondonpaper - freebie that I like but has had the plug pulled by Murdoch) was a bit depressing in how wrong the tone it struck was: Experts sought Wikipedia to end open editing rule Wikipedia has been forced to ditch its policy of allowing anyone to edit its pages. The free encyclopedia will draft in 20,000 unpaid expert editors to check all changes to articles on living people before the pages go online. The move is an attempt to stop malicious entries which could lead to lawsuits. Tory and Labour politicians, as well as 'web vandals', have in the past falsified entries to discredit their enemies. And in 2007 it emerged one of Wikipedia's main contributors had faked his qualifications. Ryan Jordan edited more then 20,000 pages after falsely claiming to be a professor of theology. Wikipedia was set up in 2001, built on the work of volunteers. It was depressing to find that nearly every sentence was based on, or perpetuated, a misunderstanding. The only crumb of comfort was that it was buried at the bottom of page 6 and was short enough for me to type it all out. 1) Experts sought - yes, but that's always been the case, nothing to do with flagged revisions. 2) Wikipedia to end open editing rule - many people will interpret this as Wikipedia requiring people to register to edit. It might seem like splitting hairs to say that anyone *can* still edit, but the edit will only go live if one other person (a reviewer) agrees with you. It is an important point to make. It is moving from a system where each edit only needs one person (the original editor) to approve it, to a system where each edit now needs two people to approve it (the original editor and the reviewer). 3) Wikipedia has been forced to ditch its policy of allowing anyone to edit its pages - see above comment to point 2, but the addition here is the word forced. I've seen this word used quite a few times in the media - where did this idea come from that we were forced to do this? It was, surely, presented as the community of editors, based on current status of the project, and current standards, and past incidents, deciding to adopt a trial of a new system. Quite how journalists get from that to forced I don't know. Forced gives the impression that things were falling apart at the seams and failing, or, worse still, that some form of external influence forced the change (influenced maybe, but not forced). 4) The free encyclopedia will draft in 20,000 unpaid expert editors to check all changes to articles on living people before the pages go online - the impression given here is that these will be *new* editors, when presumably whatever source the journalist used was referring to the core of active *current* editors (and calling them experts as well). The use of unpaid in this way might suggest to some people that there are other, paid editors, who failed to keep the encyclopedia free of such things, and we are now needing to bring in (draft) an army of 20,000 extra editors to clean things up (actually, that wouldn't be such a bad idea). Going back to the start of the article, the phrase experts sought, in conjunction with the phrase expert editors here, suggests that Wikipedia is looking for 20,000 new expert editors to deal with BLP stuff, when in fact we want our core of active editors (presumably the recent change patrollers) to approve revisions, and there is no special expertise needed here, only the ability to spot vandalism and dodgy edits (though if things go wrong with flagged revisions (such as a journalist saying that he was unable to make a perfectly good edit stick), the papers will say far worse things, and with even more inaccuracies - this is why major companies have big public relations departments, to try and offset bad or inaccurate newspaper coverage, or to set the news agenda, rather than be responding to the news. 5) The move is an attempt to stop malicious entries which could lead to lawsuits - it's not *really* for that, or at least not just for that, but this might be the most accurate sentence in the article. On the other hand, you could argue it misses the point that preventing such edits is as much about doing the right thing and avoiding inaccuracies than it is about lawsuits, as it is the editor (and now, presumably the reviewer who lets the edit through) who gets sued, not Wikipedia (unless that's changed, recently). 6) Tory and Labour politicians, as well as 'web vandals',
Re: [WikiEN-l] A sudden thought on the media coverage of flagged revisions
2009/8/26 Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com: I do hope some of the things being said in the papers are being corrected, or something said somewhere. It's ongoing hard work. Basically they write something awful, you write a note thanking them for coverage, correcting their minor details wrong, thanking them again and maybe they remember next time. This does work eventually. When I read in the paper tonight (thelondonpaper - freebie that I like but has had the plug pulled by Murdoch) was a bit depressing in how wrong the tone it struck was: Experts sought Wikipedia to end open editing rule Wikipedia has been forced to ditch its policy of allowing anyone to edit its pages. There is a perennial media narrative that unmediated content production cannot possibly work, as it goes against everything media people understand. They have run pretty much THE SAME story about Wikipedia every year since it was created. This narrative is so strong that no mere facts or objective reality can kill it. I expect to see it next year and the year after too, and the year after that. Also, if you can find anyone at the London Paper who gives a hoot about what they're producing any more (apart from the Em cartoon, that's good), I'll give you a lollipop ;-) - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikimediauk-l] BBC Newsnight tonight! re: flaggedrevs
Just to mention, the whole show also had an introductory piece by newsnight explaining the changes, which was then followed by the interview which is linked below. - Falcorian alex.public.account+enwikimailingl...@gmail.com wrote: From: Falcorian alex.public.account+enwikimailingl...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wednesday, 26 August, 2009 19:22:55 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikimediauk-l] BBC Newsnight tonight! re: flaggedrevs On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 6:32 AM, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote: It's also in snippet form at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8222397.stm I have no idea whether this works outside the UK, though... That link worked for me, the whole show link about did not. Props to David who did a good job of addressing the questions and sounding very cogent (even though the host seemed to want to portray it as THE END... Maybe? of Wikipedia). --Falcorian ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] A sudden thought on the media coverage of flagged revisions
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:52 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote: snip Also, if you can find anyone at the London Paper who gives a hoot about what they're producing any more (apart from the Em cartoon, that's good), I'll give you a lollipop ;-) Em's good, but Nemi's better! :-) Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity
For what it's worth, we are getting a good amout of email asking about how to help the project because of the BBC and NYT. Here's to that. -- Sent from my Palm Pre ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity
Yes. We need all the help we can get! Emily On Aug 26, 2009, at 7:33 PM, kgnp...@gmail.com wrote: For what it's worth, we are getting a good amout of email asking about how to help the project because of the BBC and NYT. Here's to that. -- Sent from my Palm Pre ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:33 AM, kgnp...@gmail.comkgnp...@gmail.com wrote: For what it's worth, we are getting a good amout of email asking about how to help the project because of the BBC and NYT. Here's to that. Do we have a welcome mat rolled out and some magic pixie dust to tell people to please not be BITE-y? No, seriously. We don't want a large influx of editors arriving to help after reading about things in the news, only to run into someone unfriendly or rules-bound. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity
Do we have a welcome mat rolled out and some magic pixie dust to tell people to please not be BITE-y? *pixie dust pixie dust* ;-D We don't want a large influx of editors arriving to help after reading about things in the news, only to run into someone unfriendly or rules-bound. I agree. Maybe have a Signpost-like note to everyone subscribed to Signpost? Maybe have that actually in the Signpost? Something like Editors note: There's an influx of newbies, so please be patient. How will that work? Emily On Aug 26, 2009, at 7:53 PM, Carcharoth wrote: On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:33 AM, kgnp...@gmail.comkgnp...@gmail.com wrote: For what it's worth, we are getting a good amout of email asking about how to help the project because of the BBC and NYT. Here's to that. Do we have a welcome mat rolled out and some magic pixie dust to tell people to please not be BITE-y? No, seriously. We don't want a large influx of editors arriving to help after reading about things in the news, only to run into someone unfriendly or rules-bound. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity
Can't do anything but help as possible, from whatever forum. These are the folks interested enough to click contact us, so there's certainly more. -- Sent from my Palm Pre Emily Monroe wrote: Do we have a welcome mat rolled out and some magic pixie dust to tell people to please not be BITE-y? *pixie dust pixie dust* ;-D We don't want a large influx of editors arriving to help after reading about things in the news, only to run into someone unfriendly or rules-bound. I agree. Maybe have a Signpost-like note to everyone subscribed to Signpost? Maybe have that actually in the Signpost? Something like Editors note: There's an influx of newbies, so please be patient. How will that work? Emily On Aug 26, 2009, at 7:53 PM, Carcharoth wrote: On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:33 AM, kgnp...@gmail.comlt;kgnp...@gmail.com wrote: For what it's worth, we are getting a good amout of email asking about how to help the project because of the BBC and NYT. Here's to that. Do we have a welcome mat rolled out and some magic pixie dust to tell people to please not be BITE-y? No, seriously. We don't want a large influx of editors arriving to help after reading about things in the news, only to run into someone unfriendly or rules-bound. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity
Can't do anything but help as possible, from whatever forum. Perhaps I'm obsessing a bit, but clearly Signpost would at least run an article about the increase of new users after the news. I would assume you would be on Wikipedia longer, though, so yeah. These are the folks interested enough to click contact us, so there's certainly more. True, true. Emily On Aug 26, 2009, at 9:16 PM, kgnp...@gmail.com wrote: Can't do anything but help as possible, from whatever forum. These are the folks interested enough to click contact us, so there's certainly more. -- Sent from my Palm Pre Emily Monroe wrote: Do we have a welcome mat rolled out and some magic pixie dust to tell people to please not be BITE-y? *pixie dust pixie dust* ;-D We don't want a large influx of editors arriving to help after reading about things in the news, only to run into someone unfriendly or rules-bound. I agree. Maybe have a Signpost-like note to everyone subscribed to Signpost? Maybe have that actually in the Signpost? Something like Editors note: There's an influx of newbies, so please be patient. How will that work? Emily On Aug 26, 2009, at 7:53 PM, Carcharoth wrote: On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 1:33 AM, kgnp...@gmail.comlt;kgnp...@gmail.com wrote: For what it's worth, we are getting a good amout of email asking about how to help the project because of the BBC and NYT. Here's to that. Do we have a welcome mat rolled out and some magic pixie dust to tell people to please not be BITE-y? No, seriously. We don't want a large influx of editors arriving to help after reading about things in the news, only to run into someone unfriendly or rules-bound. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] New York Times: Wikipedia to Limit Changes to Articles on People
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote: I had an interesting conversation with a senior BBC exec on this the other day. Apparently, their lawyers aren't sufficiently comfortable with the copyright violation checking on Wikimedia Commons to be able to rely on free photographs, so they don't use them. Bizarrely they'd rather pay someone for an image, and hence be able to sue them if they had copyright problems, than get it for free. Same reason I'd rather pay a store for my furniture than get a great deal from the back of someone's truck, basically. Which brings to mind an interesting business proposition. :) Seriously...that'd probably work... Get independent confirmation of copyright status from the individual image contributors, buy a decent liability policy, and guarantee the copyright status of the images in exchange for a fee. Might make certain community members hate you though, a la Mr. MyWikiBiz. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Emily Monroebluecalioc...@me.com wrote: I agree. Maybe have a Signpost-like note to everyone subscribed to Signpost? Maybe have that actually in the Signpost? Something like Editors note: There's an influx of newbies, so please be patient. How will that work? Nah. We need permanent solutions. Wikipedia is a terrible place for a newcomer. Fortunately the Usability project amongst others is doing something about this. It would be interesting if someone did a study on initial interactions between newcomers and oldbies to see if anything can be improved. But IMHO the best way to avoid newbies getting bitten is to help them avoiding newbie mistakes in the first place - a good interface, the right help and a few safety checks would go a long way. (Whoa there newbie, you just wiped the whole page. Here's how not to do that...) Steve ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity
It would be interesting if someone did a study on initial interactions between newcomers and oldbies to see if anything can be improved. But IMHO the best way to avoid newbies getting bitten is to help them avoiding newbie mistakes in the first place - a good interface, the right help and a few safety checks would go a long way. (Whoa there newbie, you just wiped the whole page. Here's how not to do that...) Steve ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l Well, hm. Hard to explain there as an oldbie what it was like as a newbie. I happened to have good interactions based on concerns I had, as Newyorkbrad went over in a Wikipedia Weekly cast. I only registered an account because the History of Alaska was messed up and I thought it more appropriate to have an account to complain :) . I've seen thousands of editors come and go not only because of initial experience, but just passion and care. There's no real matrix for it. ~Keegan -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity
Correction, it was a blog. I just don't remember where. If'n anyone else does, please post. It was a good read. On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Keegan Paul kgnp...@gmail.com wrote: It would be interesting if someone did a study on initial interactions between newcomers and oldbies to see if anything can be improved. But IMHO the best way to avoid newbies getting bitten is to help them avoiding newbie mistakes in the first place - a good interface, the right help and a few safety checks would go a long way. (Whoa there newbie, you just wiped the whole page. Here's how not to do that...) Steve ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l Well, hm. Hard to explain there as an oldbie what it was like as a newbie. I happened to have good interactions based on concerns I had, as Newyorkbrad went over in a Wikipedia Weekly cast. I only registered an account because the History of Alaska was messed up and I thought it more appropriate to have an account to complain :) . I've seen thousands of editors come and go not only because of initial experience, but just passion and care. There's no real matrix for it. ~Keegan -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] So, what is the deal with flagged revisions?
So apparently all the press reporting is wrong. What's the real story? For some reason, I've never actually come across these flagged revisions, partly because they always seemed to be happening in the future some time. What's the policy going to be? So, quick questions: 1) Is this going to apply to every page? 2) Who gets to flag a revision? Can you flag your own reivsions? 3) What's the interface like? How many clicks? 4) Is there any automatic flagging? 5) Are you supposed to check an entire article prior to flagging it? How confident are you meant to be? 6) What will encourage flaggers to actually bother flagging articles? 7) What will encourage non-flaggers to actually bother editing articles when they don't have any instant gratification? 8) Which view will long time editors see by default? Stable (flagged) or non-flagged version? 9) Can non-logged in editors see non-flagged versions? 10) Will this destroy Wikipedia? 11) Will this improve Wikipedia? Steve ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] So, what is the deal with flagged revisions?
Ok, Erik's post answered some of these: So, quick questions: 1) Is this going to apply to every page? No, BLP's and some others. 9) Can non-logged in editors see non-flagged versions? Yes. Steve ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
