2009/3/2 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
So what can we do? Here are the things I am thinking about. I would love
your input:
* Do we think the current complaints resolution systems are working? Is it
easy enough for article subjects to report problems? Are we courteous and
serious in
2009/3/2 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
Hi folks,
I've been increasingly concerned lately about Wikimedia's coverage of living
people, both within biographies of living people (BLPs) on Wikipedia, and in
coverage of living people in non-BLP text. I've asked the board to put this
issue
2009/3/2 Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com:
Two recent examples from Polish Wikipedia:
*A sportsmen had anitdoping case around 5 years ago, when he was 18.
There is good source of this information (his own interwiev in sport's
magazine in which he appologises for taking an illegal drug). Now
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
I would guess it's mostly (2), in my experience. People have no idea
who to contact. The Contact Wikipedia link on en:wp's sidebar
doesn't seem to catch their eye - though it gets you to the right
answer in three further clicks. Perhaps it should be on
This is the most prominent problem facing the English Wikipedia today in my
view. BLPs are easy to write and easy to get wrong, and there are always
newly famous people to write about - so this issue is only going to become
more important and more visible with time. Sue's point about the type of
Hoi
For the English Wikipedia there is an awareness and there are procedures in
place to deal with BLP problems.These procedures may get an update with an
implementation of Flagged Revisions. In her question, Sue did not limit BLP
issues to English Wikipedia only.
It seems to me that BLP issues
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/3/2 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
* Are there technical tools we could implement, that would support
greater
quality in BLPs? For example – easy problem reporting systems,
particular configurations of
Nathan writes:
I would like to see Mike's opinion, though, on how deeply the Foundation
can
be involved in establishing Wikimedia-wide policies on content like BLPs.
It
would seem to challenge the notion that the Foundation itself hosts but
does
not control project content.
My strong
Tomasz Ganicz wrote:
least in Poland at some legal risk. In Poland there is a law
that a person can always ask for removing his/her personal data
from any electronic database (except govermental ones).
There is a similar law in Sweden (Personuppgiftslagen, PUL), but
it has an exception for
They have no recourse. We are not subject to Polish law.
From: Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2009 6:24:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Request for your input:
2009/3/2 Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se:
What you could do is to ask Polish journalists how they operate
newspaper websites under this law, and how they (as guardians of
the freedom of the press) would react if the Polish Wikipedia was
censored in this way. Perhaps they should write a
I'm very pleased to see this discussed at the Foundation level, and
even more pleased that this discussion includes the use of technical
features to prevent BLP violations. The discussion that's taken place
so far surrounding improving the BLP reporting is good, but I'd rather
focus on the ounce
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com wrote:
They have no recourse. We are not subject to Polish law.
How do you know? And who is we?
Sebastian
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
My strong belief is that the Foundation can make *suggestions* to the
community about what content policy should be, but that *it must remain up to
the community whether to adopt such policies and how to enforce them*.
How is this reconcilable with Foundation issue #1:
I normally spend my wikitime on writing articles, and generally avoid
wikidrama. When I run into a BLP problem, if I'm uninvolved enough then I
can deal with it myself. Sometimes, I am sufficiently involved and cannot
be directly involved in resolving BLP problems and take admin actions
myself.
Would Polish police really expend the time to round up and charge every single
Polish editor? I don't think so. The Foundation would most likely reject any
demands for information, barring the successful prosecution of quite a few
Polish editors. Also, convincing a judge not to throw the cases
I have some experience with customer service and was willing to serve as OTRS
volunteer, but was rejected. The number of rejections I have witnessed is
really shooting OTRS in the foot.
From: Aude audeviv...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Hello,
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com wrote:
I have some experience with customer service and was willing to serve as OTRS
volunteer, but was rejected. The number of rejections I have witnessed is
really shooting OTRS in the foot.
I can understand your
I care not about my application being killed. I am pointing out that it appears
that you kill most of the applications, which may be the reason for a lack of
manpower. Have you considered using IRC for interviews as part of the
application package?
From:
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
I don't say that lightly, but I can't see any other way things could
be. I have a pile of special superpowers on en:wp, but if I were being
legally required to exercise them for reasons other than the good of
the encyclopedia, I'd be fervently hoping
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com wrote:
I care not about my application being killed. I am pointing out that it
appears that you kill most of the applications, which may be the reason for
a lack of manpower.
Access to OTRS implies a high trust into the user
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
Flagged Revs is an excellent way of dealing with vandalism to BLPs,
technical solutions to more subtle problems are a little trickier.
Flagged Revs could be used with addition levels - a free of
vandalism level and a well balanced, fact-checked and free of
Anthony wrote:
Sounds good, but how good is OTRS at handling these issues? Are there any
statistics available as to what percentage of OTRS complainers are satisfied
with the resolution? Does OTRS provide any escalation for people who aren't
satisfied with their initial results?
In general,
Not necessarily. You do them in bulk at a certain time each week or every two
weeks.
From: Michael Bimmler mbimm...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2009 9:22:19 AM
Subject: Re:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com wrote:
Not necessarily. You do them in bulk at a certain time each week or every two
weeks.
And of course all applicants will be available at the same time,
because they all live in the same timezones and have the same
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
Sounds good, but how good is OTRS at handling these issues? Are there
any
statistics available as to what percentage of OTRS complainers are
satisfied
with the resolution? Does OTRS provide any
There is lots I want to reply to here; this mail is just a start...
2009/3/2 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
From what I can tell, a lot of subjects of BLPs that have problems
with their articles don't complain at all. The accounts I've heard
(or, at least, my interpretation thereof) of
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
Flagged Revs is an excellent way of dealing with vandalism to BLPs,
technical solutions to more subtle problems are a little trickier.
Flagged Revs could be used with addition
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
What is the current OTRS process? When I contacted them a couple years
ago I was referred to arb com, and didn't hear from them again. I certainly
wasn't satisfied.
Pray tell, what was the actual substance of your dispute?
(Note that this is speaking
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Michael Bimmler mbimm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
My problem wasn't in regard to a biography, but it was a BLP issue
under
Sue's expanded definition (it was in regard to some things written about
me
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
Ah, so not only do you not ask for feedback, but you actively discourage it.
I think this is slightly misrepresenting what I said. For reference
purposes here the current footer, as attached to each outgoing
message:
---
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
No. In fact, a member of ArbCom had referred me to OTRS. However, I don't
want to get into the specifics of this on a public mailing list.
As a general rule: if you've been formally penalised on a wiki for
your behaviour thereon, and want that concealed,
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:16 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
No. In fact, a member of ArbCom had referred me to OTRS. However, I
don't
want to get into the specifics of this on a public mailing list.
As a general rule: if you've been
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:16 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
As a general rule: if you've been formally penalised on a wiki for
your behaviour thereon, and want that concealed, then that's really
not in the same class as *anything* this thread is
Ipatrol has just came on IRC claiming that he has been told that the WMF is
hiring people to validate articles, and that the foundation is doing it in
secret by using thousands of IPs and academics. He claims that the WMF has
contracted colleges all across the US have been recruiting academics to
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Chris Down
neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.com wrote:
Yes, this sounds like complete and utter nonsense to me too
Aye. But thanks for making my day. Seriously, sometimes I wonder
whether people have just too much time to think up these stories (and
this is not
2009/3/2 Chris Down neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.com:
Ipatrol has just came on IRC claiming that he has been told that the WMF is
hiring people to validate articles, and that the foundation is doing it in
secret by using thousands of IPs and academics. He claims that the WMF has
contracted
2009/3/2 Chris Down neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.com:
Ipatrol has just came on IRC claiming that he has been told that the WMF is
hiring people to validate articles, and that the foundation is doing it in
secret by using thousands of IPs and academics. He claims that the WMF has
contracted
2009/3/2 Chris Down neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.com:
Ipatrol has just came on IRC claiming that he has been told that the WMF is
hiring people to validate articles, and that the foundation is doing it in
secret by using thousands of IPs and academics. He claims that the WMF has
contracted
If we're being technical, the helicopters are no longer black. They're
invisible. And they have Illuminati logos written invisibly. If you
translate Wikimedia into Aramaic, write it backwards, translate that into
Latin, remove every other letter and translate that to Cyrillic... When
translated
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/3/2 Chris Down neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.com:
Ipatrol has just came on IRC claiming that he has been told that the WMF is
hiring people to validate articles, and that the foundation is doing it in
secret by using thousands of IPs and academics.
I thought Godwin might like to hear about it. I'll tell the user to forward
any information they have to him.
I mean, I didn't know JC Denton got his kicks on Wikipedia now.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
2009/3/2 Chris Down
2009/3/2 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
If we're being technical, the helicopters are no longer black. They're
invisible.
They're invisible and black. They tried invisible and pink but the
targets just laughed.
___
foundation-l mailing list
2009/3/2 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
If we're being technical, the helicopters are no longer black. They're
invisible. And they have Illuminati logos written invisibly. If you
translate Wikimedia into Aramaic, write it backwards, translate that into
Latin, remove every other letter and
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:52 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/2 Chris Down neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.com:
Ipatrol has just came on IRC claiming that he has been told that the WMF is
hiring people to validate articles, and that the foundation is doing it in
secret by using
Come on, lets be serious here. This is a serious accusation and should be
treated as such. They use perpetual motion machines.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/3/2 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
If we're being technical, the helicopters are no longer
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Chris Down
neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.comwrote:
I thought Godwin might like to hear about it. I'll tell the user to forward
any information they have to him.
What a strange, weird world it's come to that Mike Godwin is now The
Man...
--
-george william
2009/3/2 Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com:
As an easy start for BLPs to contact us for help, why not have the
global footer of all WMF sites include a prominent and very visible
link to a simple mail form they can use to mail OTRS or the Foundation
for help?
Because no-one reads the footer
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:17 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/2 Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com:
As an easy start for BLPs to contact us for help, why not have the
global footer of all WMF sites include a prominent and very visible
link to a simple mail form they can use to
Another alternate idea would be to make Flagged Revisions a Foundation
requirement for all WMF projects. That would put far more filtering
and control in place for helping to weed out BLP issues.
If any project contests this locally, the Magic Fork Option exists for
that reason.
Joe
2009/3/2 Para wikip...@gmail.com:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
I've just looked at a BLP and nowhere can I see an guidance on how to
complain. I suggest a Report a problem with this article link to
added to the sidebar of all articles as a mailto link to the
appropriate OTRS address.
I agree with
2009/3/2 Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com:
Since BLP is so important--and Sue is wrong, not because of the
coverage of Wikimedia over it, which is distantly secondary to the
negative effects of a bad BLP situation on a Wikimedia site--then
let's put a big prominent Report A Problem link on the
Is Cla68 on moderation or is the Judd Bagley keyword(s)?
Joe
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 6:04 AM, Foundation-l list admin
foundation-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Charles Ainsworth cl...@yahoo.com
Date: Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 9:04 AM
Subject:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:17 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
We could put an email link to i...@wikimedia.org in the footer. Shall
we do so? Superfluous?
I would say no, the English Wikipedia has a very specific queue
make-up so that questions are answered more quickly and are more
Personally, I'd like to see a prominent Report a problem with this article
link or box only on BLPs for starters. We don't want to overwhelm OTRS with
complaints about other sorts of less time sensitive errors, nor do we want
to discourage people who notice errors from figuring out how to actually
2009/3/2 Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com:
Since BLP is so important--and Sue is wrong, not because of the
coverage of Wikimedia over it, which is distantly secondary to the
negative effects of a bad BLP situation on a Wikimedia site--
Sue was clearly talking about the coverage inside Wikimedia
2009/3/2 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
I may be missing it due to not speaking Dutch, but it doesn't seem to
be linked to from anywhere... Does it include the details of the
article and revision in the default text? That's a key feature for
what I'm suggesting.
The code:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:26 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/2 Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com:
Since BLP is so important--and Sue is wrong, not because of the
coverage of Wikimedia over it, which is distantly secondary to the
negative effects of a bad BLP situation on a
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:26 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/2 Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com:
Since BLP is so important--and Sue is wrong, not because of the
coverage of Wikimedia over it, which is distantly secondary to the
negative effects of a bad BLP situation on a
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:36 PM, George Herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah - as useful as it would be to have a send email to OTRS link
everywhere, using that as the first line of response to quality problems
wiki-wide would crush OTRS. Talk pages and admins and noticeboards are
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/3/2 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
I may be missing it due to not speaking Dutch, but it doesn't seem to
be linked to from anywhere... Does it include the details of the
article and revision in the default text? That's a key feature for
George Herbert writes:
What a strange, weird world it's come to that Mike Godwin is now The
Man...
You may imagine how weird it is for me!
--Mike
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Michael Bimmler mbimm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com wrote:
If OTRS is understaffed, then there's an easy fix to that too. Make a
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:52 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/2 Chris Down neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.com:
Ipatrol has just came on IRC claiming that he has been told that the WMF is
hiring people to validate articles, and that the foundation is doing it in
secret by using
Thomas Dalton wrote:
I may be missing it due to not speaking Dutch, but it doesn't seem to
be linked to from anywhere... Does it include the details of the
article and revision in the default text? That's a key feature for
what I'm suggesting.
From any nlwiki page, click Hulp en contact (or
2009/3/2 j...@scrubnugget.com:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
I may be missing it due to not speaking Dutch, but it doesn't seem to
be linked to from anywhere... Does it include the details of the
article and revision in the default text? That's a key feature for
what I'm suggesting.
From any nlwiki
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/3/2 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
A drop down list of queues would be easy enough to implement, I can do
that. (I may need to abuse the interface system, a la
Mediawiki:Sidebar, though...)
Shirley that's incredibly easy to add to the
2009/3/2 Wily D wilydoppelgan...@gmail.com:
I am happy to take over control of articles for $1000/month. I can
suggest a list of ~500 or so. Who should I send the list to? Should
I also forward them my P.O. Box?
Send your money to me: David Gerard c/o Ayn Landers, Wikiality,
Florida. Make
I applaude that the foundation wants to do something about problems
with BLP. In several countries, the success of wikipedia is so great,
that it has become the number one source for information. This in turn
means that we as the wikimedia movement have a huge responsibility and
stepping up to
2009/3/2 P. Birken pbir...@gmail.com:
One of my reasons to develop Flagged Revs was an incident with blatant
vandalism in an article about a well known german politician that
persisted for several months until we got an email from his office.
That is plain unacceptable. Flagged revisions work
2009/3/2 Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com:
Steve Smith writes:
My strong belief is that the Foundation can make *suggestions* to the
community about what content policy should be, but that *it must remain up
to the community whether to adopt such policies and how to enforce them*.
How is
On Mar 2, 2009, at 2:21 PM, Joe Szilagyi wrote:
Since BLP is so important--and Sue is wrong, not because of the
coverage of Wikimedia over it, which is distantly secondary to the
negative effects of a bad BLP situation on a Wikimedia site--then
let's put a big prominent Report A Problem
I asked whether
raising the notability bar would improve the overall quality of BLPs. Do
we
have other ideas for preventative measures?
The start of a poor biography is good news coverage of some incident that
occurred to a person, their 15 minutes of fame, or infamy. Any other
information
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Chris Down
neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.comwrote:
Can anyone shed some light on whether this is even feasible?
No, it's not. Considering how much of the internal mailing lists
get leaked, I have a feeling we would've known about this a long
time ago, were it true.
my tuppence in amongst the many voices :-).
1) If we're imagining a continuum with smaller/higher-quality/restrictive
at one end, and larger/variable-in-quality/permissive at the other I
am
curious to know where the other language versions situate themselves. I am
assuming that
On Mar 2, 2009, at 5:48 PM, private musings wrote:
basically there's a sensible three stage plan to follow to help drive
quality and minimise 'BLP' harm;
1) Semi-protext all 'BLP' material
2) Allow an 'opt-out' for some subjects (eg. non public figures, or
those
not covered in 'dead
quick bit extra - flagged revisions for BLP material is also a bit of a
no-brainer, and should be recommended by the foundation immediately as a
valuable software improvement - it's really part of point 1) (Semi 'protext'
all BLP material - curse my typo!)
cheers,
Peter
PM.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009
2009/3/3 Birgitte SB birgitte...@yahoo.com:
I there is simpler way to solicit these reports this without all the false
positives that might come from a report a problem link. I imagine that
all these people who have issues must click on the Help link in the sidebar
while looking contact
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Flagged Revs is an excellent way of dealing with vandalism to BLPs,
technical solutions to more subtle problems are a little trickier.
Flagged Revs could be used with addition levels - a free of
vandalism level and a well balanced, fact-checked and free of
anything
Sue Gardner wrote:
1) If we're imagining a continuum with smaller/higher-quality/restrictive
at one end, and larger/variable-in-quality/permissive at the other I am
curious to know where the other language versions situate themselves. I am
assuming that (with some exceptions) they
80 matches
Mail list logo
