Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement?

[Oona Castro]

That's been a very complex issue. Henrique will bring more context into
here.

For now, it's worth mentioning the Portuguese Wikipedia community has been
working on this antivandalism project
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia_Discuss%C3%A3o:Projetos/AntiVandalismoin
order to build alternative measures to deal with vandalism and
inappropriate edits with a very small portion of the community reverting
edits - considering the short and mid terms.

They are already aware that even the return of emergency CAPTCHA won't be a
definite measure (lasting no more than one year, as per what was agreed)
and are handling to create other ways of preventing inappropriate content
through new approaches.

I actually believe that's a good idea and am happy to see there has been a
lot of work on that - out of comfort zone, but also conscious of the
current limitations in place.

Oona




On 6 July 2013 20:22, Federico Leva (Nemo)  wrote:

> Asaf Bartov, 06/07/2013 23:51:
>
>  To be precise, the facts do not show that.  They show the CAPTCHA is
>> responsible for significantly fewer good-faith contributions from casual
>> editors.  That is is or is not a "bad idea", however, is a subjective
>> judgment, based on one's weighing of multiple factors.
>>
>> Evidently, large parts of the PTWP community remain convinced that the
>> downsides of not having the CAPTCHA (easier vandalism? admin workload? --
>> I'm not really following that debate) outweigh the upsides.
>>
>
> It's worth noting, among other things, that the vote in question ended
> just before the stats were released.
>
> Nemo
>
>
>  You (and I)
>> may well disagree, but let's recognize that this depends on our _judgment_
>> of priorities.
>>
>> Whether or not an editing community's mandate for self-governance should
>> extend to the right to make such a fundamentally anti-wiki measure as the
>> emergency CAPTCHA feature a permanent one is debatable, of course.
>>
>> Asaf
>>
>>
> __**_
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org 
> Unsubscribe: 
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>  ?subject=**unsubscribe>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Picturing Canada: historic Canadian photography now on Commons

[Andrew Gray]

On 1 July 2013 21:26, geni  wrote:

> Hmm are we going to need to include a dislaimer with regards to some of the
> captions? Eg:
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Scalp_dance,_Blackfoot_Indians_%28HS85-10-18743%29_original.tif

I went with using the "original caption" tag on all uploads. The
relative rarity of problematic captions meant that I thought a more
explicit disclaimer was probably overkill, compared to (say) the
Bundesarchiv caveats.

-- 
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement?

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Asaf Bartov, 06/07/2013 23:51:

To be precise, the facts do not show that.  They show the CAPTCHA is
responsible for significantly fewer good-faith contributions from casual
editors.  That is is or is not a "bad idea", however, is a subjective
judgment, based on one's weighing of multiple factors.

Evidently, large parts of the PTWP community remain convinced that the
downsides of not having the CAPTCHA (easier vandalism? admin workload? --
I'm not really following that debate) outweigh the upsides.


It's worth noting, among other things, that the vote in question ended 
just before the stats were released.


Nemo


You (and I)
may well disagree, but let's recognize that this depends on our _judgment_
of priorities.

Whether or not an editing community's mandate for self-governance should
extend to the right to make such a fundamentally anti-wiki measure as the
emergency CAPTCHA feature a permanent one is debatable, of course.

Asaf



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement?

[Asaf Bartov]

On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:

> Hoi Steven,
>
> When the facts show that having the CAPTCHA is a demonstrable BAD idea. It
> should be easy to prevent CAPTCHA from being implemented again.
>

To be precise, the facts do not show that.  They show the CAPTCHA is
responsible for significantly fewer good-faith contributions from casual
editors.  That is is or is not a "bad idea", however, is a subjective
judgment, based on one's weighing of multiple factors.

Evidently, large parts of the PTWP community remain convinced that the
downsides of not having the CAPTCHA (easier vandalism? admin workload? --
I'm not really following that debate) outweigh the upsides.  You (and I)
may well disagree, but let's recognize that this depends on our _judgment_
of priorities.

Whether or not an editing community's mandate for self-governance should
extend to the right to make such a fundamentally anti-wiki measure as the
emergency CAPTCHA feature a permanent one is debatable, of course.

   Asaf
-- 
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation 

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What community initiatives have made an impact on editor engagement?

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi Steven,

When the facts show that having the CAPTCHA is a demonstrable BAD idea. It
should be easy to prevent CAPTCHA from being implemented again.

I am sure you know who to speak to.

Thanks,
  GerardM


On 5 July 2013 21:02, Steven Walling  wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Denny Vrandečić <
> denny.vrande...@wikimedia.de> wrote:
>
> > Wait - removing the captchas lead to a decrease of reverted edits in
> terms
> > of absolute numbers? Woot? Anyone has an explanation for that?
>
>
> I think the explanation is pretty clear from the numbers Nemo shared. This
> CAPTCHA was annoying as hell, and was directed not just at people adding
> links or hitting some kind of AbuseFilter, but everyone who was editing
> anonymously or with a new account. It was literally throwing the baby out
> with the bath water.
>
> As someone who had to experience that CAPTCHA as a new user on ptwiki last
> year, I am not surprised at all that we attracted many more positive
> contributions just by removing it. Sadly, from looking at bug 49860 and
> gerrit change 69982, it seems that this deeply annoying feature is going to
> be put back in place.
>
> --
> Steven Walling
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,