Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Erik Moeller
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine_w...@yahoo.com wrote: I still don't see a reflection in your mail that you take the feedback from local communities seriously. Romaine, we're not ignoring feedback. I'm asking James to weigh in with some details relative to the issues

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: change in article edits after visual editor roll-out (was Re: Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation)

2013-07-23 Thread James Salsman
Oliver Keyes wrote: active editors == editors with [5/10/depending on standard] edits a month. It's pretty impossible, at our end, for us to identify one person between multiple IPs or one person between multiple IPs. Why can't you use behavioral and expertise characteristics to measure the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: The most controversial topics in Wikipedia: A multilingual and geographical analysis

2013-07-23 Thread Balázs Viczián
When I started editing in 2006 it was already the norm; ever since people are encouraging each other to place their questions about a given article rather on the village pump or a project page, than on the actual article's talk page, reasoning that there is larger trafficwhat generates even

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread James Salsman
Erik Möller wrote: ... we need to collectively figure out what a discoverable, intuitive user experience should look like We're not going to solve these challenges if we lock away VisualEditor... Erik, I don't understand. Could you please explain how making the visual editor opt-in only

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Erik Moeller
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:06 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: This particular ongoing saga (refusing to provide an opt-out mechanism for VisualEditor) seems to largely echo past issues with treating Wikimedia editors as customers instead of colleagues. That's not the intent, and I'm

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: change in article edits after visual editor roll-out (was Re: Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation)

2013-07-23 Thread Robert Rohde
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:35 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote: Oliver Keyes wrote: active editors == editors with [5/10/depending on standard] edits a month. It's pretty impossible, at our end, for us to identify one person between multiple IPs or one person between multiple IPs.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: change in article edits after visual editor roll-out (was Re: Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation)

2013-07-23 Thread Peter Southwood
Say again? Peter - Original Message - From: Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 6:22 AM Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: change in article edits after visual editor roll-out (was Re: Feedback for the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Todd Allen
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 1:01 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:06 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: This particular ongoing saga (refusing to provide an opt-out mechanism for VisualEditor) seems to largely echo past issues with treating Wikimedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Romaine Wiki
You say you are not ignoring feedback. Then how did it happen that all the feedback we have been given on nl-wiki in the past month is still nothing done with, including some major bugs? Nothing is done with it, you can say you do not ignore feedback, but we would like to see the proof for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Romaine Wiki
In the most early stages WMF has told us via various way that the visual editor would have an opt-out. It appears that at the last moment before the the launch on the English Wikipedia this was removed. A lot of people are annoyed for years that developers of various software inside and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Rui Correia
I've have my setting on receive copy of own emails, but did not receive this email that I sent out. Can someone please confirm? Regards, On 22 July 2013 18:02, Rui Correia correia@gmail.com wrote: Dear All It is certainly not news that a lot of deliberately biased editing goes on on the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread David Gerard
On 23 July 2013 12:07, Rui Correia correia@gmail.com wrote: I've have my setting on receive copy of own emails, but did not receive this email that I sent out. Can someone please confirm? It went out. What you're seeing is that GMail refuses to show you messages you sent to a list, even

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Rui Correia
Thanks, David. Much appreciated. For what it is worth, I am part of two Yahoo! Groups mailing lists for translators, which I receive via GM - from the one I get back my own email, from the other not. Go figure. Regards, Rui On 23 July 2013 13:10, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 23

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
I just checked the archives. The original message was not received by the mailing list, for whatever reason, probably misaddressed. This message of inquiry is the first message in the tread. I think you should resend the original message if your mail program permits that. Sounds interesting...

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
I just checked the archives. The original message was not received by the mailing list, for whatever reason, probably misaddressed. This message of inquiry is the first message in the tread. I think you should resend the original message if your mail program permits that. Sounds interesting...

[Wikimedia-l] Resend: The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
Resent so I have an original copy to reply to. Dear All It is certainly not news that a lot of deliberately biased editing goes on on the Wikipedia. It is equally known that there are mechanims to address these issues. But that is where the problem lies - those intent on skewing information

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resend: The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
I use Flickr as an example, but is it not the firwst time that I have come across this type of behaviour. And so, tiny cliques and coteries flourish like fiefdoms in the blind spots of the mechanisms created to ensure that we all strive for the same principes. What is worse, there are big

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resend: The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
A case in point, the other day I was looking for images of mosquitos sucking blood and and came across blatant pornography on Flickr. I added a few lines about pornography on Flickr and because it was reverted Rui Correia. The Flickr images you linked to, if it was you, were the sort one

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resend: The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
It is this that is tarnishing the name of the Wikipedia and driving away good editors. Rui Correia. When the going gets tough the tough get going. They don't throw their hands up, vainly protest, then give up. Possible conflict of interest is a legitimate concern; however, it is not a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Nathan
We need to keep in mind that the people who are vocal on mailing lists, or who participate in on-wiki polls with 50 or 100 participants, represent only a tiny fraction of all Wikimedia users - even only a small fraction of those who are active and registered. Yet the constituency of the WMF must

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Craig Franklin
Hi Erik, On 23 July 2013 17:01, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: But as I've noted in [1], I do not think a compromise on the preference question is necessarily out of reach. I've asked James and team to deliberate on some of the possibilities here, and offered the same suggestion I

[Wikimedia-l] Communication plans for community engagement

2013-07-23 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Craig Franklin cfrank...@halonetwork.net wrote: As is usually the case, I'm not saying this to have a go at the developers or anyone else involved (who are obviously doing their best), but I think that some of the communication on this topic has been a bit

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Communication plans for community engagement

2013-07-23 Thread Katherine Casey
I think the Foundation is trying to make steps toward increased communication with its constituent communities with its blitz of hiring Community Liaisons. And that's a good idea, and liaisons can do a lot of good. But I don't think that program is running at 100% effectiveness yet, and back-end

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Communication plans for community engagement

2013-07-23 Thread Peter Southwood
How do you propose to get people to actally read the notices? Peter - Original Message - From: Nathan nawr...@gmail.com To: cfrank...@halonetwork.net; Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 3:32 PM Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Communication plans

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Erik Moeller
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Craig Franklin cfrank...@halonetwork.net wrote: I just want to basically endorse some of the other comments being made here, which I think are quite insightful. If the goal of this project was to get the Visual Editor deployed on time and on budget, then the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread Amir E. Aharoni
2013/7/23 Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org: Should that even be a concern? I mean, if lots of newbies and technophobes start using the Visual Editor and a bunch of us dorks who love writing markup don't, would that matter? I saw the following more than once on editing workshops and similar

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Rui, There are four answers I could give you. See whether you like any of them: *Answer the First* This problem has existed ever since Wikipedia became visible enough for agenda-driven editors to bother with it, and people have made complaints like yours ever since. Nothing has changed, and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Todd Allen
*Answer the Second* * * This sort of thing is handled much better in the German Wikipedia. In the German Wikipedia, companies can edit with verified company accounts: so that if Coca-Cola Germany edits the Coca-Cola article, it will actually say Coca Cola Germany in the edit history.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
On 07/23/2013 02:03 PM, Todd Allen wrote: I don't think such a proposal would be hopeless on en. How did dewiki circumvent the difficulties regarding attribution and role accounts? Last I checked, our terms of use prohibit password sharing, and IIRC Mike Godwin (legal counsel at the time)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: The most controversial topics in Wikipedia: A multilingual and geographical analysis

2013-07-23 Thread Taha Yasseri
On a different track and back to Tilman's concern, we managed to get the following sentence published in the Washington Post: Among the 3.2 million articles Yasseri’s group studied last year, fewer than 100 appeared to be on a definite trajectory toward perpetual disagreement. That’s an excellent

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Rui Correia
Thanks Andreas. I appreciate that you took the time to write such detailed scenarios. What you say about WP-DE is certainly very interesting. As for your comment about Flickr does a fairly good job of showing nudity and porn only to the people who – quite legitimately – want to view it, and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Marc, The page I linked to says in part: It goes without saying that using the process described we are also unable to verify the identity of the person(s) behind the user account. (Es versteht sich von selbst, dass wir mit dem beschriebenen Verfahren auch nicht die Identität der hinter dem

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Rui, The only NSFW results I am able to get in Google for such a search are cases where the Flickr uploader failed to categorise the image correctly. Flickr take a very dim view of such people. You can report them, and if they don't comply with site rules, it quickly results in account

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Rui Correia
Thanks Andreas Iit didn't cross my mind that you would actually go and check - at the time the search terms were in Portuguese, so you will probably find different results - If I find the original pic I will send it to you. But more importantly, the porn on Flickr is a secondary issue - the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Rui Correia
Found the pic - will mail you off-list - definite NSFW! Rui On 24 July 2013 03:21, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Rui, The only NSFW results I am able to get in Google for such a search are cases where the Flickr uploader failed to categorise the image correctly. Flickr take a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread James Forrester
On 23 July 2013 00:01, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: As I've noted in my response to wikitech-l just now, there's also the issue of what opt-out should mean as VE becomes increasingly more pervasive in the user experience. But as I've noted in [1], I do not think a compromise on the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
Thanks Andreas Iit didn't cross my mind that you would actually go and check - at the time the search terms were in Portuguese, so you will probably find different results - If I find the original pic I will send it to you. But more importantly, the porn on Flickr is a secondary issue -

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread MZMcBride
James Forrester wrote: Because I understand the level of concern that this matter is causing, I am changing my mind on this. For the duration of VisualEditor's beta period, there will be an opt-out user preference. This will be deployed tomorrow morning, San Francisco time. Thank you very much

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Feedback for the Wikimedia Foundation

2013-07-23 Thread David Cuenca
Thanks, James, for the flexibility that you are showing here. I think the Visual Editor is already great and it will become even better after polishing it.I am committed to test it as much as I can and to send some proposals. That haters can disable it completely will leave more room for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Rui Correia correia@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Andreas Iit didn't cross my mind that you would actually go and check - at the time the search terms were in Portuguese, so you will probably find different results - If I find the original pic I will send it to