[Wikimedia-l] Re: Tool for 5/10/15/20 year anniversary

[DerHexer via Wikimedia-l]

 For the similar German Wikiläum (wiki jubilee), we have such a tool. Right 
now, it only works for dewiki but as the source code is available on github, 
you can likely adapt it for 
nlwiki:https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiläum
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tool:Wikilaeum
https://wikilaeum.toolforge.org/
https://github.com/MisterSynergy/wikilaeum

Best,Martin/DerHexer


Am Samstag, 6. Januar 2024 um 18:56:02 MEZ hat Romaine Wiki 
 Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
 On the Dutch Wikipedia we give users a barnster with their 5th, 10th, 15th, 
and 20th anniversary. Is there a tool or query to get a list of active users 
that did their first edits 5/10/15/20 years ago?
I searched for a tool/etc, but did not find one.
Thanks!
Romaine ___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/UJLTOYIDQ7MLCQXIALF2B5QRVTBU56LS/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org  ___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/Q6ZGCF7JJQ6GOZQZL6RM2Z6RLKFPZM4G/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Stewards User Group annual report

[DerHexer via Wikimedia-l]

Hi everyone,
A happy new year to everyone who celebrates it today from the Wikimedia 
Stewards User Group.
Please find our annual report 
here:https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Stewards_User_Group/Reports/2023

As the number of stewards, the global group of users with complete access to 
the wiki interface on all public Wikimedia wikis, is constantly decreasing, we 
invite all qualified users to nominate themselves in the upcoming annual 
stewards elections in February. The international team is looking for 
candidates interested in crosswiki and admin activities, functionary and tech 
work and/or multiple languages, in particular from unterrepresented regions or 
the world. More information will be shared soon.
If you have any further questions about the stewards, the user group or the 
upcoming elections, please do not hesitate to contact me, the future Election 
Committee or any other steward.
Best,DerHexer___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WIQJZQ4BG7QOZKFSG46NNGNBLPJ4BUPL/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Osama and Ziyad

[DerHexer via Wikimedia-l]

 I do think that posting any kind of response to these questions on a public 
mailing list would do more harm than good. Thank you.

Best,DerHexerWikimedia Steward
Am Montag, 25. September 2023 um 21:20:21 MESZ hat Andreas Kolbe 
 Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
 Dear all,
As there was a recent press mention of Osama and Ziyad[1] (see "In the Media" 
in the current Signpost issue) – does the WMF's Human Rights Team (cc'ed) have 
any update on their situation? 
Has anyone else heard any news? If I recall correctly, Osama had married not 
long before being jailed in 2020 – has anyone been in touch with his wife?
Is there anything the community can do?
Andreas

[1] 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_imprisoned_for_editing_Wikipedia___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/CSBF3UGYR7BDU5XPYZFYQAABPXXY5PDG/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org  ___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/XMEMSGXX7XH3R7MSYZFGKR6PMRCWDDKB/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: The Wikimedia Enterprise API project

[DerHexer via Wikimedia-l]

 Thanks too for the German translation of the very detailed and transparent 
report!
Best,DerHexer
Am Dienstag, 7. Februar 2023 um 16:16:31 MEZ hat Chris Keating 
 Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
 Thanks Liam! That looks admirably clear and very thorough - would be great to 
see this level of detail and transparency in other aspects of the WMF's work
Chris/ The Land
On Tue, 7 Feb 2023, 14:35 Liam Wyatt,  wrote:


Dear all,


Following the initial announcement and project launch in 2021, and press 
release about first customers in 2022, the Wikimedia Enterprise team has today 
published the first financial report and a summary of a forthcoming product 
update.


This has been published today on the Diff blog, here:
https://diff.wikimedia.org/2023/02/07/wikimedia-enterprise-financial-report-product-update/
[also available in German]

One of the principles of the Wikimedia Enterprise project has been “the 
publication of overall revenue and expenses, differentiated from those of the 
Wikimedia Foundation in general, at least annually”. We are therefore proud to 
present the inaugural edition of the Wikimedia Enterprise financial report – 
covering the calendar-year 2022, its first year of operations.


The update also includes a description of some of the API features that have 
been under development. While the primary use-case is companies which 
consistently require very high-speed updates of very large amounts of Wikimedia 
content, it is important to note that there are several free-access methods.

If you have written questions or comments about the update, please share them 
on the project’s talkpage on Meta. As described in the blogpost, we consider 
this report covering the 2022 calendar year to be a “beta” version. We are 
actively seeking feedback about how its structure, content, and explanations 
can be improved for the next edition in late 2023, which will cover the 2022-23 
fiscal year.


If you prefer real-time conversation: A public meeting will be hosted by the 
Enterprise team this Friday, February 10 @1900 UTC to discuss this announcement 
- details on the project homepage.

If you have any other questions please consult the FAQ.

Sincerely,

| 

 | 
 Liam Wyatt [Wittylama]

| 
Senior Program Manager 
for Enterprise, Campaigns, & WikiCite

Wikimedia Foundation |


 |

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/DVYUXJMRGYUKRZI6VRUVW2JKPU27QDF3/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/MDW4LVJFKC2KVHTMMNMUN6ZV3FKRM6H7/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org  ___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/PTLRHZVK4SSU7N46OLNZGIWQZE7K7DUX/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Stewards User Group 2022 report

[DerHexer via Wikimedia-l]

Hi all,
Please find the WMSUG 2022 report here.
Highlights have been the creation of an mailinglist for the group (beyond the 
stewards internal lists), a test phase for a decision process among stewards 
and the first participation of the group at a Wikimedia Summit. All of these 
are signs for an increase of internal governance and communications, but there 
are still many steps to be taken. The group, remains unique in its setup as the 
only user group which represents an onwiki user group. 
Best,Martin/DerHexer, co-contact___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/OUMJDBPSW2K2UI3GJFS3DFTQVTJSIRI5/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[DerHexer via Wikimedia-l]

 Hi,

Thanks for raising the topic. Being a steward for 14+ years, I've followed 
closely the evolution of that problem.

“When I noticed that range blocks caused more harm than good (countless mails 
to stewards), I started to reduce the length of any such block (if necessary at 
all; I check every single range intensively if a block would case more harm 
than good). The situation with OPs is a bit different because they obfuscate 
the original IP address which is pretty often needed by checkusers and stewards 
to stop harm against the projects. For that reason, I agree that we cannot give 
up on OP blocking. The only way to get out of these problems are (much!) easier 
reporting ways, more people who can give out exceptions (locally and globally) 
and check outdated OPs and IPBEs. Maybe it would also make sense to give 
long-term users an option to self-assign an IPBE (e.g.) once per week for x 
hours for such cases like edit-a-thons. Most of their IP addresses used would 
still be reported (in order to prevent abuse) but most problems for that one 
moment would be solved (and users could look for long-term solutions).”
Why the quotation marks? Because I've posted that very same message to the 
metawiki page and understand it as one step towards a solution. In my opinion, 
it makes way more sense to talk publicly about the issue and possible solutions 
than losing good ideas (and there have been some already in this thread!) in 
the wide world of this mailing list. Let's have that conversation onwiki—and I 
also encourage the WMF tech departments to join in that conversation. Because 
we as stewards have reported our problems with the current situation multiple 
times, sought for technical solutions (e.g., better reporting tools), indeed 
did get a better rapport with the WMF teams but still are not where we need to 
be in order to serve both interests (openness and protection). Unsurprisingly, 
also stewards are individuals with different opinions and (possible) solutions 
to that one problem. As Vito said, we will once again discuss it and will share 
our thoughts and solutions.
Best,DerHexer (Martin)
Am Mittwoch, 20. April 2022, 20:19:48 MESZ hat Florence Devouard 
 Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
   
Hello friends
 
Short version : We need to find solutions to avoid so many africans being 
globally IP blocked due to our No Open Proxies policy.
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking
 

 
 
Long version : 
 
 
I'd like to raise attention on an issue, which has been getting worse in the 
past couple of weeks/months. 
 
 
Increasing number of editors getting blocked due to the No Open Proxies policy 
[1]
 In particular africans.
 
 
In February 2004, the decision was made to block open proxies on Meta and all 
other Wikimedia projects. 
 
According to the no open proxies policy : Publicly available proxies (including 
paid proxies) may be blocked for any period at any time. While this may affect 
legitimate users, they are not the intended targets and may freely use proxies 
until those are blocked [...]
 
Non-static IP addresses or hosts that are otherwise not permanent proxies 
should typically be blocked for a shorter period of time, as it is likely the 
IP address will eventually be transferred or dynamically reassigned, or the 
open proxy closed. Once closed, the IP address should be unblocked.
 
According to the policy page, « the Editors can be permitted to edit by way of 
an open proxy with the IP block exempt flag. This is granted on local projects 
by administrators and globally by stewards. »
 

 
 
I repeat -> ... legitimate users... may freely use proxies until those are 
blocked. the Editors can be permitted to edit by way of an open proxy with the 
IP block exempt flag <-- it is not illegal to edit using an open proxy
 
 

 Most editors though... have no idea whatsoever what an open proxy is. They do 
not understand well what to do when they are blocked.
 
 
 
In the past few weeks, the number of African editors reporting being blocked 
due to open proxy has been VERY significantly increasing. 
 New editors just as old timers.
 Unexperienced editors but also staff members, president of usergroups, 
organizers of edit-a-thons and various wikimedia initiatives. 
 At home, but also during events organized with usergroup members or trainees, 
during edit-a-thons, photo uploads sessions etc. 
 
 
 
It is NOT the occasional highly unlikely situation. This has become a regular 
occurence. 
 There are cases and complains every week. Not one complaint per week. Several 
complaints per week. 
 This is irritating. This is offending. This is stressful. This is disrupting 
activities organized in good faith by good people, activities set-up with our 
donors funds. And the disruption is primarlly taking place in a geographical 
region supposingly to be nurtured (per our strategy for diversity, equity, 
inclusion blahblahblah). 
 
 

 
 
The open proxy policy page 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Stewards User Group 2021 report

[DerHexer via Wikimedia-l]

Hi Wikimedia folks!
Please find the Wikimedia Stewards User Group 2021 report here.
Best,DerHexer___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/PECOQTYZVV5WZYJAWLXYPK7SMQE66KXT/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

[DerHexer via Wikimedia-l]

 I have to agree with Gnangarra: Why should keeping one of our major projects 
running require a global popularity vote? The way how the various problems on 
Commons are (not!) handled by WMF and others is not acceptable anymore. We 
don't need a poll to detect that! It's not a wish we have, it's a demand we 
make: Get Commons fixed now, as soon as possible! And I don't care who does: 
WMF, WMDE, anybody else.
It's nice to have additional ressources for popular community wishes but clean 
up your own backyard first!
Best,DerHexer (Top 10 contributor on Commons, Commons administrator, Steward)

Am Mittwoch, 29. Dezember 2021, 10:32:22 MEZ hat Amir Sarabadani 
 Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
 The wishlist survey is defined as:> The Community Wishlist Survey is an annual 
survey that allows contributors to the Wikimedia projects to propose and vote 
for tools and platform improvements
That doesn't necessarily translate into just "new tools". The community can 
wish for better support of multimedia stack and improvements on the multimedia 
platform and If it gets enough votes, I'm hopeful it'll be picked up.

On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:02 AM Željko Blaće  wrote:

Nice. This looks much better than before. Previously it felt so many people had 
high hopes for projects that are outside of capacities that are committed to 
this project. I feel this needs to be a super clear fact from the start and not 
ask for the global community to commit XYZ number of hours in the actions of 
promoting, translating, proposing and decision making processes when developers 
can commit far less back to the same community. Otherwise it feels like 
unbalanced work from a more holistic perspective, but this is also 
non-exceptional...no? ___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org


-- 
Amir (he/him)

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZSZM4BRNWV3NIQ6RH66QBFFINLKMOIKG/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org  ___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/M4ZAVS2VROWFAY2G5SMHEHPKLYLDXMO6/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Report of Wikimedia Stewards User Group

[DerHexer via Wikimedia-l]

Dear all,

In case you are curious about last year's activities of Wikimedia Stewards
 and their user group
, please
find our 2019/20 report here
.
;-) We look forward to the next year and the upcoming elections in early
2021. In case any questions are left about Stewards and their work, don't
hesitate to ask.

Stay safe and best regards,
Martin (DerHexer)
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Trust and safety on Wikimedia projects

[DerHexer via Wikimedia-l]

That's a tricky topic, especially when local dispute resolution bodies
(which should in most cases be approached first, I agree here) cannot solve
the dispute or when multiple projects are involved. At the moment, there is
in fact a lack of such body and of course it should be transparent,
composed of multi-diverse community members who are trained and supported
by professional mediation, etc. as pointed out. Currently, stewards like me
are quite often approached with such topics but this user group is more
focused on technical stuff like userrights. A former steward fellow and I
discussed this topic at the Safety Space at Wikimania. Due to the nature of
the space, the discussion have not been documented but you can find the
presentation with backgrounds of the situation and open questions on Commons
.
Maybe it can give some ideas how to proceed with this.

Best,
Martin/DerHexer


Am So., 24. Mai 2020 um 06:19 Uhr schrieb Aron Demian <
aronmanni...@gmail.com>:

> On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 04:25, AntiCompositeNumber <
> anticompositenum...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Would it be fair to say that:
> >  - Enforcement of a universal code of conduct would happen though a
> > fair, clearly-defined process without significant bias and with
> > significant community oversight and input
> > - Universal code of conduct enforcement actions would be appealable
> > through a fair, clearly-defined process with significant community
> > oversight that allowed statements from involved parties and uninvolved
> > community members
> > - To ensure proper community oversight, code of conduct enforcement
> > actions and appeals would be made as public as possible as often as
> > possible (excepting issues where public disclosure would harm privacy
> > or safety)
> >
> > AntiComposite
> >
>
> Yes! These are fundamental requirements that need to be met by the process
> that will be implemented in the second phase (Aug - end of 2020).
> It seems there will be an opportunity to incorporate these requirements:
>
> The second phase, outlining clear enforcement pathways, and
> > *refined with** broad input from the Wikimedia communities*, will be
> > presented to the Board
> > for ratification by the end of 2020;
>
>
> I'd add a few more points:
> - To handle workload and different languages, local boards should be
> selected as the first step of the process, with possible escalation to a
> global board if necessary (eg. for conflict-of-interest reason).
> - To minimize bias the boards should consist of people from different
> areas. As long as the local DR processes remain operational (ANI and the
> likes), there should be a clear separation of powers: CoC board members
> should not be involved with local DR to avoid concentration of power. Being
> an admin should not be a requirement, in fact adminship and dispute
> resolution should be separate roles, as the latter requires specific
> training or experience, which is not part of the requirements to be admin.
> - There should be at least 2 independent global boards so one can review
> the other's decisions and handle appeals. Cases should be evaluated by the
> board that has more members unrelated to the involved parties.
> - Functionaries and board members should be regularly reviewed and terms
> limited to a few years.
>
> About the DR process:
> - Most of our communication is publicly visible on-wiki, therefore the
> cases should be resolved in public. Transparency is crucial for community
> review and a great learning opportunity about dispute resolution.
> - Privately handled cases should only happen when all parties agree to
> it, so one party can't use "privacy" as a means to avoid the burden of
> proof. Non-public evidence should only be taken into account if there is a
> very strong justification, proportional to the sanction that comes from it.
> - Reports, however, should be created privately and published only when the
> case opens. Before the case opens the reporter might seek advice and help
> to create the report from people they trust. I've outlined a process draft
> for this in the context of the User Reporting System
> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_health_initiative/User_reporting_system_consultation_2019#Factual,_evidence_based_reporting_tool_-_draft,_proposal
> >
> .
> - Reports should be treated with respect, as the personal experience of a
> person. Nobody should be sanctioned for what a report contains, whether the
> boards, or the community finds that true or false, as that would be a
> deterrent to reporting influential users, who made a mistake or lost their
> way.
> - The focus should be on dispute *resolution. *Disputes and the resulting
> reports often start with disagreements, not bad intent towards each other.
> Mediation is an effective approach to finding a mutually agreeable
> resolution in these situations. Such