Re: [Wikimedia-l] New collaboration with the World Health Organization

2020-10-23 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Great work to you all and great news from the WHO. I live and work in
Geneva not far from the WHO HQ, and am quite willing to help out in any way
I can.
Best regards
Gabe

On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 10:44 AM Joy Agyepong  wrote:

> Super excited about this collaboration the movement is indeed expanding!
> Congratulations to all who were involved.
>
>
> Cheers.
>
> On Thu, 22 Oct 2020, 19:40 Dr. Manavpreet Kaur, <
> dr.manavpreetk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This is amazing. This gives motivation to so many who have been working
>> tirelessly to provide Covid information on Wikipedia projects. Thank you
>> and Congratulations to all who made it possible.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Manav
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 9:36 PM Frederick Noronha <
>> fredericknoro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Is it possible to convince more international non-profits and government
>>> organisations (especially taxpayer-funded research organisations) that it
>>> would be in their interest as well to share the findings under some
>>> Creative Commons licenses? FN
>>>
>>> SEE:
>>> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/health/wikipedia-who-coronavirus-health.html
>>>
>>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 at 20:14, Samuel Klein  wrote:
>>>
 *fantastic*.  Thanks all for this, and thanks Jorge for the update.

 On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 9:32 AM Jorge Vargas 
 wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Following up on my earlier thread about this, we are excited to
> announce a new collaboration between the Wikimedia Foundation and the 
> World
> Health Organization (WHO). The collaboration will initially focus on
> releasing WHO content such as public-health related infographics, videos,
> and other COVID-19 resources under a free license (CC BY SA 3.0) to be
> shared on Wikimedia Commons. We are hopeful that these resources will be
> useful for volunteers writing about COVID-19 across language wikis and
> further expand access to knowledge about the pandemic to people around the
> world.
>
> You  can read more about the collaboration announcement in the press
> release we published earlier today [1], and see the first batch of content
> uploads from WHO on Wikimedia Commons [2]. If you want to help share the
> collaboration news on social media, please retweet the Foundation’s 
> account
> [3] or share your own post using this toolkit [4].
>
> I want to give a major thank you and shout out to the volunteers
> (including Doc James, Dr. Netha Hussain, John Cummings, and many others)
> who have been moving these conversations with WHO forward for years, as
> well as to the many Wikimedians providing accurate and relevant coverage 
> of
> COVID-19 on the projects that this collaboration hopes to support. We are
> so excited to finally reach this milestone with WHO.
>
> In the coming months, Alex Stinson, from our Community Programs team,
> will be working with volunteers to continue sharing details of the WHO
> content available on Commons and collaborating with volunteers to
> understand how WHO resources might help address information needs and gaps
> about COVID-19 on the projects. We need your help identifying the most
> useful content. Please join us on the project page on Commons to request
> WHO materials, and ask questions or give feedback on the project [5].
>
> We are excited to celebrate this important achievement in making more
> knowledge about COVID-19 freely available to everyone in such a critical
> time in the world. Thank you to all who made this possible!
>
> Feel free to reach out on this thread or to Alex and I directly in
> case you have further questions about this collaboration.
>
> Jorge Vargas
> Sr. Manager, Regional Partnerships
>
> [1]
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2020/10/22/world-health-organization-and-wikimedia-foundation-expand-access/
>
> [2]
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:World_Health_Organization_COVID-19_Disinformation_Infographics
>
> [3] https://twitter.com/Wikimedia/status/1319263874303037442
>
> [4]
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SCc0uXewzL5CUD2JPQYSYIDs3B63KxdLjprSBsn4kvA/edit?usp=sharing
>
> [5]
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:World_Health_Organization
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 11:41 AM Zana Strkovska <777.z...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The same video translated on Macedonian language is on national
>> television
>> in my country several days already.
>> Regards,
>> Zana
>>
>> On Thu, 12 Mar 2020, 19:30 James Heilman,  wrote:
>>
>> > I have been asking WHO to release COVID19 content (specially
>> videos) under
>> > open licenses since since Feb 2020.
>> >
>> > I have spoke with Aleksandra Kuzmanovic who has been involved in
>> their
>> > collaboration with Facebook and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research about the effects of its demise?

2019-12-01 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Top-down and Bottom-up:
Wikipedia relies on volunteers and can really be considered to be a
"bottom-up" encyclopedia project, where the readers can also add content
and become part of the project. I consider that the Kiwix offline Wikipedia
is also very democratic in that anyone can copy and share the files,
install them on their own devices and really feel like they own the
knowledge.

Wikipedia Zero is a top-down way of distributing the encyclopedia and users
of Wikipedia zero are just that: users. They will consume the knowledge and
will have no role in distributing it further except maybe by promoting one
particular cell phone operator instead of another.

I have been a few times to Senegal, visiting schools and sharing Kiwix and
off-line Wikipedia with the teachers and the educational community.  The
files that I brought on USB thumb drives have been copied and shared
hundreds and hundreds of times. But I am just one guy and that is really
not enough to reach the whole continent. But we can scale up...

Wikimedia Zero was never even present in Senegal, at least not when I was
there: in 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2019. I think that it never took off before
the whole project was abandoned.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_Reach/MEA#Wikipedia Zero in Senegal
with Tigo [Affordability] [Private Sector]

That been said, it would be interesting to measure the effectiveness of the
"Wikipedia Zero" project...

On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 1:13 PM Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Gerhard,
> I am also interested in what the impact of Wikipedia Zero was, but it is
> not obvious to me how it would be measured.
> The board members are unlikely to have personally researched this, but
> might know if there is or was a project and if so what they are or were
> trying to measure. Equally, someone from WMF might be able to report on
> what has been or is being done in this regard. It is also possible that
> nothing has been done, or someone who does not read this list is working on
> it.
> If anyone reads this and can enlighten us, either to whether it is an
> ongoing project, has been done and the information is available somewhere,
> or nobody is known to be working on it, please let us know.
> Anyone who has ideas on how it could be measured or why it can't is also
> welcome to comment.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Gerard Meijssen
> Sent: 01 December 2019 08:19
> To: Lodewijk Gelauf; Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Remember Wikipedia Zero.. Where is the research
> about the effects of its demise?
>
> Lodewijk,
> What I asked for is: do we understand what the impact was of the Wikipedia
> Zero project. In the answer of James, a board member of the WMF someone who
> could know, there is nothing that answers that question. All the answer
> does is deflect the question to something else. A notion that it is "not
> that bad because we have these other things". These things we had before
> Wikipedia Zero, they are not Wikipedia and they do not scale.
>
> What I have noticed is that once consensus has been reached, we do not want
> to be confronted with the consequences of our actions. Wikipedia Zero has
> damaged our outreach and what the BBC info reminds us of is that Internet,
> the cost of Internet, is not comparable in Africa with what we are used to.
> It means that we no longer reach the girls and boys in Soweto as we showed
> in our film clip at the Erasmus award.
>
> We do not cover Africa properly, we do not need to seek consensus about
> this, that is easily to be shown. Our focus on outreach is in America, then
> Europe, then the rest of the world and there is Africa. From the moment we
> stopped Wikipedia Zero, we have invested heavily in infrastructure in
> Africa, the organisational presence in the USA is now such that it rivals
> Wikimania and is used as an excuse by some to even dismantle Wikimania. As
> an organisation, a movement the "centre periphery" model is alive and well.
> We happily embrace Burke's peerage in Wikidata and we balk at the fact that
> covering science takes resources away from pet projects.
>
> You tell me to be constructive and here I lay out what the situation is.
> How can you be constructive as our movement does not support science, the
> people who need our information most are disenfranchised because we do not
> cover them, support them in an equal manner.
> Thanks,
>
>
> On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 04:31, effe iets anders 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Gerard,
> >
> > It would be great if you could keep a slightly more constructive tone in
> > your messages. On one hand, you seem genuinely interested to help access
> to
> > free knowledge in Africa, but in your second email, you seem to jump
> (after
> > one response) to conclusions already. If you like to get real responses
> to
> > your emails, you may want to try a more constructive attitude. For me, it
> > is at least 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation joins the global climate strike

2019-09-23 Thread Gabriel Thullen
t; >
> > That's "making time and space for both" while taking real measurable
> > action for climate change by reducing our entirely avoidable numbers
> > of international flights.
> >
> > The truth is, that despite discussing this since Wikimania events
> > started, and in that time technology making doing this is almost as
> > simple as an Affiliate hiring headsets for mobile phones, we have
> > never even trialled decent immersive virtual conferencing spaces for
> > productive conferencing.
> >
> > Fae
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 12:57, Rebecca O'Neill 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Is it, perhaps, that the value a lot of people derive from these events
> > is
> > > not just the conference itself, but the ability to meet fellow
> > Wikimedians
> > > face-to-face and make meaningful contacts and even friendships that may
> > > never otherwise have come about? I'm all about virtual, but there is
> > value
> > > in physical events, and I would say that we should make time and space
> > for
> > > both.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 12:54, Ilario Valdelli 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes
> > > >
> > > > We dont give all scholarships for that reason while for regional
> > Wikicon we
> > > > receive more requests and we fill the amount immediately.
> > > >
> > > > It's not an opinion that in our events people prefer to arrive by
> > train and
> > > > not by flight. We see it as soon we receive the expenses report and
> > when we
> > > > ask the reason the answer is the climate change.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019, 13:25 Gabriel Thullen, 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I am a Swiss member, and I did go to Wikimania (and did a small
> > > > > presentation).
> > > > >
> > > > > I think that you need to clarify you statement:
> > > > > "In Wikimedia CH we cannot give scholarships for Wikimania because
> > people
> > > > > would not do long trips."
> > > > >
> > > > > When looking up what was sais for Wikimania 2019 I read:
> > > > > "Wikimedia CH offers scholarships for active Wikimedians. They
> cover
> > > > > transportation, hotel (max 3 nights) from the 16th to the 18th, and
> > > > > registration fees. To check your eligibility, you can consult
> > conditions
> > > > of
> > > > > eligibility on this page
> > > > > <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_CH/Policies/Scholarships
> > >."
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards
> > > > > Gabe
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 1:14 PM Ilario Valdelli <
> valde...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Anyways this is perceived by the community.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In Wikimedia CH we cannot give scholarships for Wikimania because
> > > > people
> > > > > > would not do long trips.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IMHO the problem is these big events.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For this reason we prefer to give more scholarships for regional
> > > > wikicon
> > > > > > than to Wikimania.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is the reason why you dont see more Swiss people at
> Wikimania.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 21 Sep 2019, 00:51 Samuel Klein, 
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 4:00 PM Robert Fernandez <
> > > > > wikigamal...@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think we could drastically lower our carbon footprint by
> not
> > > > using
> > > > > > > > community digital resources to beat the same dead horse for a
> > > > > billionth
> > > > > > > > time.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I laughed out loud.
> > > > > > >
> >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation joins the global climate strike

2019-09-23 Thread Gabriel Thullen
I am a Swiss member, and I did go to Wikimania (and did a small
presentation).

I think that you need to clarify you statement:
"In Wikimedia CH we cannot give scholarships for Wikimania because people
would not do long trips."

When looking up what was sais for Wikimania 2019 I read:
"Wikimedia CH offers scholarships for active Wikimedians. They cover
transportation, hotel (max 3 nights) from the 16th to the 18th, and
registration fees. To check your eligibility, you can consult conditions of
eligibility on this page
."

Best regards
Gabe


On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 1:14 PM Ilario Valdelli  wrote:

> Anyways this is perceived by the community.
>
> In Wikimedia CH we cannot give scholarships for Wikimania because people
> would not do long trips.
>
> IMHO the problem is these big events.
>
> For this reason we prefer to give more scholarships for regional wikicon
> than to Wikimania.
>
> This is the reason why you dont see more Swiss people at Wikimania.
>
> Kind regards
>
> On Sat, 21 Sep 2019, 00:51 Samuel Klein,  wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 4:00 PM Robert Fernandez  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I think we could drastically lower our carbon footprint by not using
> > > community digital resources to beat the same dead horse for a billionth
> > > time.
> > >
> >
> > I laughed out loud.
> >
> > AND.   I love that the WMF joined the strike, and have some practical
> > thoughts.
> >
> > a) Reach out to Stripe
> > , which has a
> > through self-assessment and a negative-emissions program, and the Long
> Now,
> > to coordinate efforts.
> > b) Evaluate the community-wide carbon footprint, which is dominated by
> >   b.1) How we run conferences [*mostly in person*]
> >   b.2) How we choose partners, communicate climate imformation, and
> > prioritize related policies [*fairly ad-hoc*]
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> ___
> 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,
> 
___
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] Announcing the extension of funding by the Basque Government

2019-09-19 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Great news Galder!
Your fantastic education program should inspire other laguage communities
here in Europe. It is a really great way to help the encyclopedia grow.
Keep up the good work!

Gabe

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:47 PM Dennis Tobar 
wrote:

> Enhorabuena Galder. Muy buenas noticias para el desarrollo del idioma vasco
> :)
>
> El mié., 18 de septiembre de 2019 11:17, Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
> galder...@hotmail.com> escribió:
>
> > Dear wikimedians,
> > Three years have gone since we started with the Basque Wikimedians User
> > Group Education Program, funded by the Basque Government. After two years
> > and a half of great enhancing of Basque Wikipedia (more than 2.500
> students
> > adding more than 1.5 million words on fundamental topics) the Basque
> > Government has announce us today the extension of the funding for four
> more
> > years.
> >
> > In this four years we will try to strengthen our Educaton Program but
> also
> > open to new areas in order to make our knowledge equity vision possible.
> By
> > 2024 we will have taken sure steps towards creating a free knowledge
> > ecosystem centered at Wikimedia.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Galder
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> ___
> 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,
> 
___
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] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Thank you WMBE for your long report.
I was at Wikimania 2018 and I was deeply troubled by the actions taken by
the Trust & Safety team. I now have a much clearer understanding of what
went on, and I feel that there really needs to be some introspection done
by the Trust & Safety team.
I am also quite horrified by your quote about a comment "that Wikimedia
France and Wikimedia
Netherlands could take everything over in Belgium".
This is really so insesitive and displays such ignorance of the different
European cultures that I just cannot understand why the record has not been
set right. Belgium cannot be split up between France and the Netherlands,
just like Switzerland cannot be split up between France, Germany and Italy
(leaving just the little Romansh speaking  area to fend for itself).
Seriously, something is wrong at the Foundation, and this needs to be fixed.

Gabe
proud member of WMCH, a multi-lingual and multi-cultural chapter


On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:53 PM Ziko van Dijk  wrote:

> Hello,
> It seems to me the best that a (different) member of the WMBE board
> contacts a suitable person at WMF. A public list is not the best place
> for sorting these things out.
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
> Am Mo., 17. Juni 2019 um 16:48 Uhr schrieb Dariusz Jemielniak
> :
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:26 PM Michel Vuijlsteke  > wrote:
> > In other words, the best way to ban anyone from any event is to start a
> > rumour about them?
> >
> > My understanding is that noone was banned from an event.
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 4:28 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I've read and reread the WMBE message, and have not found anything near
> "pushing people who felt harassed or mistreated to step forward".
> >
> > I'm referring to message from Caroline.
> >
> >
> > I also do not understand why you're addressing WMBE as "Romaine"
> (begging the question?).
> >
> > Can you please clarify?
> >
> > The message was sent from romaine.w...@gmail.com romaine.w...@gmail.com> account and I assumed that addressing the sender
> as "Romaine" is appropriate.
> >
> > best,
> >
> > dj
> > ___
> > 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,
> 
>
> ___
> 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,
> 
___
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] Wikidata now officially has more total edits than English language Wikipedia

2019-03-20 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Sorry about this mail, I hate to rain on somebody's parade but:
Ever since Wikidata was set up, there have been more edit made by bots than
by humans (registered contributor + anonymous contributor), except for a
few periods in 2017 and 2018. On the other hand, the activity of the bots
on the English Wikipedia has almost always been lower than the activity of
anonymous contributors, and that activity has always been well below that
of registered contributors. There was one exception, in 2013 where there
was a spike of bot activity.
We could also talk about the average number of edits per contributor which
appears to be around 100 on the English Wikipedia and 1,200 on Wikidata
(these numbers are after removing the estimated edits done by bots). Quite
a difference.
The different Wikimedia projects rely on the community to police and curate
the content of these encyclopedias and data collections. I am therefore a
bit wary of what is happening with Wikidata where more edits are still
being done by bots than by real humans (by "real" I mean "real" not like
"real" as in the TV series "real humans")

Best regards
Gabe

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 9:25 AM Olushola Olaniyan 
wrote:

> This is a good news.
>
> Cheers!!!
>
> Olaniyan Olushola
> CEO DataAccess Systems Ltd
> President, Wikimedia Nigeria
> Member, Affcom ( Wikimedia Foundation)
> Co-director Wiki Women Radio
> www.wikimedia.org.ng
> sh...@wikimedia.org.ng
> olaniyanshol...@gmail.com
> +2348167352512
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 08:52 Ziko van Dijk 
> > Hello Ariel Glenn,
> > Thanks for the notification, very interesting. Well, we all know that
> > making a lot of edits on Wikidata is "easier" or happens quicker than on
> > Wikipedia, for various reasons. But still it is a nice milestone to
> > congratulate to Wikidata. Hereby. :-)
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> >
> > Am Mi., 20. März 2019 um 07:58 Uhr schrieb Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > So in stead of calling us all Wikipedia, let us be known as Wikidata...
> > > HU
> > > Thanks,
> > >   GerardM
> > >
> > > On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 at 07:48, Ariel Glenn WMF 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Wikidata surpassed the English language Wikipedia in the number of
> > > > revisions in the database, about 45 minutes ago today.I was tipped
> off
> > > by a
> > > > tweet [1] a few day ago and have been watching via a script that
> > displays
> > > > the largest revision id and its timestamp. Here's the point where
> > > Wikidata
> > > > overtakes English Wikipedia (times in UTC):
> > > >
> > > > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./get_revid_info.py -d
> > > > www.wikidata.org -r 888603998,888603999,888604000
> > > > revid 888603998 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > revid 888603999 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > revid 888604000 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./get_revid_info.py -d
> > > > en.wikipedia.org -r 888603998,888603999,888604000
> > > > revid 888603998 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > revid 888603999 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > revid 888604000 at 2019-03-20T06:01:00Z
> > > >
> > > > Only 45 minutes later, the gap is already over 2000 revsions:
> > > >
> > > > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./compare_sizes.py
> > > > Last enwiki revid is 888606979 and last wikidata revid is 888629401
> > > > 2019-03-20 06:46:03: diff is 22422
> > > >
> > > > Have a nice day!
> > > >
> > > > Ariel
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://twitter.com/MonsieurAZ/status/1106565116508729345
> > > > ___
> > > > 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,
> > > > 
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > > 
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anti-viruses [was Re: Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails]

2018-05-07 Thread Gabriel Thullen
The main reason we have virus outbreaks is the way a lot of users click on
email attachments and on programs they have just downloaded from the net.
Users are warned time and time again, but they do it anyway. Once we get a
large enough base of desktop linux users, we will have the same problems.

We are safe for now...

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Thyge <ltl.pri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Imagine a world, where all windows installations have turned off their
> antivirus protection"!
>
> Regards,
> Thyge
>
> Den man. 7. maj 2018 kl. 17.09 skrev Shlomi Fish <shlo...@shlomifish.org>:
>
> > Hi Gabriel,
> >
> > On Mon, 7 May 2018 14:02:44 +0100
> > Gabriel Thullen <gabr...@thullen.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I am also a Linux advocate, and have been so for years (decades?). That
> > > been said, I imagine that there are still more people using Windows XP
> > than
> > > there are people using Linux. Last time I checked (october 2017) it was
> > > something like 5% using XP and less than 1% using linux, all distros
> > > included. We can safely predict that virus outvreaks will be a problem
> > for
> > > linux once it reaches 5% or 10% market share...
> > >
> >
> > Most linux viruses have never outbroke and never caused much harm. Linux
> > can be
> > susceptible to other forms of malware such as worms or rootkits, but it
> > hasyet
> > to exhibit a large scale virus epidemic and it isnt because it wasn't
> > tried.
> > Linux is an attractive target because many servers run on it. See also
> > https://duckduckgo.com/?q=linux+viruses=web
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Shlomi
> >
> > > Gabe
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Shabab Mustafa <
> shabab.must...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have been a Linux advocate for almost a decade now and from 'my
> past
> > > > experience', I can tell you have opened a topic of a huge discussion
> > about
> > > > people should switch to Linux Desktops (which is off-topic here).
> But I
> > > > respectfully disagree with your statement, "anti-virus programs
> > usually do
> > > > more harm than good".
> > > >
> > > > From a conservative viewpoint, some protection is still better to
> have
> > than
> > > > no protection at all. And the example you gave here, an anti-virus
> > > > mistakenly classified your domain as a potential threat, makes a
> weaker
> > > > point. By a few mistakes, we cannot cancel out a million of other
> > > > successes. A false alarm is yet favourable than no alarm at all.
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > Shabab Mustafa
> > > > President
> > > > Wikimedia Bangladesh
> > > >
> > > > ​
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:56 PM Shlomi Fish <shlo...@shlomifish.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 3 May 2018 19:27:16 -0500
> > > > > John Bennett <jbenn...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours
> > > > > > warning
> > > > > you
> > > > > > of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I
> > wanted to
> > > > > let
> > > > > > you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is aware
> of
> > the
> > > > > > situation, and working with others in the organization on steps
> > to
> > > > > decrease
> > > > > > the success of attacks like these.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The exact source is not yet known, but it is not originating from
> > our
> > > > > > systems. That means it is an external effort to gain unauthorized
> > > > access
> > > > > to
> > > > > > random accounts. These types of efforts are increasingly common
> for
> > > > > > websites of our reach. A vast majority of these attempts have
> been
> > > > > > unsuccessful, and we are reaching out personally to the small
> > number of
> > > > > > accounts which we believe have been compromised.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > While we are constantly looking at improvements to our security
> > > > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anti-viruses [was Re: Information on "Multiple failed attempts to log in" emails]

2018-05-07 Thread Gabriel Thullen
I am also a Linux advocate, and have been so for years (decades?). That
been said, I imagine that there are still more people using Windows XP than
there are people using Linux. Last time I checked (october 2017) it was
something like 5% using XP and less than 1% using linux, all distros
included. We can safely predict that virus outvreaks will be a problem for
linux once it reaches 5% or 10% market share...

Gabe

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Shabab Mustafa 
wrote:

> I have been a Linux advocate for almost a decade now and from 'my past
> experience', I can tell you have opened a topic of a huge discussion about
> people should switch to Linux Desktops (which is off-topic here). But I
> respectfully disagree with your statement, "anti-virus programs usually do
> more harm than good".
>
> From a conservative viewpoint, some protection is still better to have than
> no protection at all. And the example you gave here, an anti-virus
> mistakenly classified your domain as a potential threat, makes a weaker
> point. By a few mistakes, we cannot cancel out a million of other
> successes. A false alarm is yet favourable than no alarm at all.
>
> ---
> Shabab Mustafa
> President
> Wikimedia Bangladesh
>
> ​
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:56 PM Shlomi Fish  wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 3 May 2018 19:27:16 -0500
> > John Bennett  wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Many of you may have been receiving emails in the last 24 hours warning
> > you
> > > of "Multiple failed attempts to log in" with your account. I wanted to
> > let
> > > you know that the Wikimedia Foundation's Security team is aware of the
> > > situation, and working with others in the organization on steps to
> > decrease
> > > the success of attacks like these.
> > >
> > > The exact source is not yet known, but it is not originating from our
> > > systems. That means it is an external effort to gain unauthorized
> access
> > to
> > > random accounts. These types of efforts are increasingly common for
> > > websites of our reach. A vast majority of these attempts have been
> > > unsuccessful, and we are reaching out personally to the small number of
> > > accounts which we believe have been compromised.
> > >
> > > While we are constantly looking at improvements to our security systems
> > and
> > > processes to offset the impact of malicious efforts such as these, the
> > best
> > > method of prevention continues to be the steps each of you take to
> > > safeguard your accounts. Because of this, we have taken steps in the
> past
> > > to support things like stronger password requirements,[1] and we
> continue
> > > to encourage everyone to take some routine steps to maintain a secure
> > > computer and account. That includes regularly changing your
> passwords,[2]
> > > actively running antivirus software on your systems, and keeping your
> > > system software up to date.
> > >
> >
> > From my experience, anti-virus programs usually do more harm than good.
> For
> > example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_AntiVirus recently blocked
> > my
> > entire shlomifish.org domain because it apparently misclassified an
> > executable
> > download as problematic (and it was built from source using
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMake and
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppVeyor
> > so it is unlikely that that is the case.). MS Windows' poor resistance to
> > malware and the fact that Windows Update is so dysfunctional (see
> > http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/bits/facts/Windows-Update/ ) are the
> > reasons
> > why I cannot recommend running it as a desktop, and instead one should
> use
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux#Desktop - desktop linux or similar.
> >
> > A little off topic perhaps, but needs to be said.
> >
> > > My team will continue to investigate this incident, and report back if
> we
> > > notice any concerning changes. If you have any questions, please
> contact
> > > the Support and Safety team (susa{{@}}wikimedia.org).
> > >
> > > John Bennett
> > > Director of Security, Wikimedia Foundation
> > >
> > > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Password_strength_requirements
> > > [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ChangePassword
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > > 
> >
> >
> > --
> > -
> > Shlomi Fish   http://www.shlomifish.org/
> > http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/projects/fortune-mod/
> >
> > If a tree falls down in the middle of the forest, and there’s no one
> there
> > to
> > hear it… what colour 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid translation

2018-02-25 Thread Gabriel Thullen
I should have joined in this discussion a little earlier. I work a lot with
the French Wikipedia, and we do not just translate articles from English (6
million articles) to French (only 2 million articles). The French community
is large and active, and provide a unique local perspective on the
different articles that are written. And when I say local, I mean that
things are seen differently in France than in the French speaking part of
Switzerland or Belgium.

I think that we are ignoring something very important here: putting it
simply, Wikipedia contributors do two things. They add information to the
encyclopedia by improving articles or writing new ones, and they curate or
check the existing articles. All this talk about machine translation does
not address the second aspect of what the volunteer contributors do.
This means that we could have hundreds of thousands of articles in a
language with  very few active contributors. Will that small community be
able to oversee so many articles ?

For example, have a look at the list of Wikipedias ordered by number of
articles:
1. English - 5,578,081 articles - 138,479 active users - 1,230 admins
2. Cebuano - 5,383,108 articles - 162 active users - 5 admins
3. Swedish - 3,784,331 articles - 2,929 active users - 65 admins
4. German - 2,157,495 articles - 20, 085 active users - 194 admins

When I have some time, I will look into different ratios like number or
articles/active users or number of articles/number of native language
speakers... Now I am not saying that our Swedish friends have abused
machine translation of articles, but I definetly that something is not
quite right about the Cebuano wiki...
Gabe


On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Anders Wennersten  wrote:

> I am very happy to follow this thread as I believe it is addressing a very
> relevant issue.
>
> In my mind we can divide up the different language version into 5
> categories:
>
> 1.Enwp,
>
> 2.the next 6-7 (de,fr, es,jp,pt,ru..)
>
> 3.the next 20 or so, where the basic workprocesses are applied
>
> 4.the next 40-50 which are struggling to generate more input then what is
> vandalised
>
> 5.the rest which in reality is no viable online encyclopedias
>
> And for me no 1 priority is to accept that there are these categories, and
> that what is applicable for cat 1 and 2 is not so for 4 and 5.
>
> I believe the grant model could easily make room for subsiding good
> initiatives addressing the problem for cat 4 and 5 (and perhaps 3).
>
> And I think it is very presumptuous to start talking of what technique to
> use and things like translation. If we open up for creative brainstorming
> (among the ones having the need) I think very many other ways can turn up.
> Myself I am deeply impressed what you can create using Wikidata as a base
> source of info, and being from a version of type 3 I see how much my
> homeversion improve content with wikidata created infoboxes
>
> Anders
>
>
>
>
> Den 2018-02-24 kl. 13:51, skrev John Erling Blad:
>
>> This discussion is going to be fun! =D
>>
>> A little more than seventy Wikipedia-projects has more than 65k articles,
>> the remaining two hundred or so are pretty small.
>>
>> What if a base set of articles were opened for paid translators? There are
>> several lists of such base sets. We have both the thousand articles from
>> "List of articles every Wikipedia should have"[1] and and the ten thousand
>> articles from the expanded list[2].
>>
>> Lets say verified good translators was paid about $0.01 per word (about $1
>> for a 1k-article) for translating one of those articles into another
>> language, with perhaps a higher pay for contributors in high-cost
>> countries. The pay would also have to be higher for languages that lacks
>> good translation tools.
>>
>> I believe this would be an _enabling_ activity for the communities, as
>> without a base set of articles it won't be possible to build a community
>> at
>> all. By not paying for new articles, and only translating well-referenced
>> articles, some of the disputes in the communities could be avoided.
>> Perhaps
>> we should also identify good source articles, that would be a help.
>> Translated articles should be above some minimum size, but they does not
>> have to be full translations of the source article.
>>
>> A real problem is that our existing lists of good articles other projects
>> should have is pretty much biased towards Western World, so they need a
>> lot
>> of adjustments. Perhaps such a project would identify our inherit bias?
>>
>> [1]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_articles_every_Wikip
>> edia_should_have
>> [2]
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_articles_every_Wikip
>> edia_should_have/Expanded
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

2017-11-23 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Dear Sylvain,

Thank you for your message and thank you for showing us that our Wikimedia
employees are white collar workers, and as such they also have the right to
be part of an organized labor movement. For those who do not know me well,
I am a board member of the Geneva public sector labor union association (11
different labor unions), so I strongly encourage initiatives like the
French one.

I am also a strong believer in settling disputes through negotiations and
discussions between the different parties involved. A local labor union
branch is a great way to ensure that the employees can voice their
grievances. This whole unfortunate situation might have been avoided if the
employees had been able to express their distress, and if they could have
received the support of a larger labor union used to dealing with this type
of management issues.

Once again, thank you Sylvain for telling us about this. I now hope that
you will all forgive me for preaching about labor unions...

Best regards
Gabe

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> On Nov 23, 2017 2:55 PM, "Emeric Vallespi" 
> wrote:
>
> 
>
> the Wikimedia community protect itself and its members by harassing and
> defaming people who question
>
>
> I cannot imagine why anyone would attempt to defame you, when they cannot
> hope to surpass the eloquence and thoroughness of your own writing.
>
> —Sam.
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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] Call for Wikimania '18 Program Committee Members

2017-11-20 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Hello Ellie,

You can count me in as well. I would like to help make this a great
Wikimania, I am looking forward to work with the African community.

I was planning on submitting a few proposals for the program as well, I
hope that this will not be a problem. The colleagues I am planning to do
these presentations with are from Senegal and other West African countries,
and once again I would like to avoid any suspicions of conflict of interest
or "it is always the same people who get the scholarships"...

Having said that, I would love to help out :)

Gabe

wikimania-prog...@lists.wikimedia.org

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 2:05 PM, J.  wrote:

> Count me in:
> Wayne Calhoon
> [[User:Checkingfax]]
> 925-391-0007
> j.blackm...@gmail.com
> (please notice the dot between the "j" and the "b")
>
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Ellie Young  wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > We are looking for members of the 2018 Wikimania program committee.
> > The committee will help put together the program and schedule for
> > Wikimania 2018, to be held on July 18-22  in Cape Town,  South Africa.
> > https://wikimania2018.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania
> ...
>


___
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] The other side of the crisis at WMFR

2017-10-20 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Thank you Katherine for your long and thoughtful message on this difficult
subject. I feel that the Foundation took the necessary steps to ensure that
all parties concerned were treated fairly. I also tend to trust the
Foundation board when they say that there was "no merit to the charges".

This appears to be a classic case of "claims and counter claims" which the
Foundation has settled. Now that the smoke screen has been cleared, we now
need to address the other issues that are plaguing Wikimedia France.

Once again, thank you for setting the record straight in such a calm and
measured fashion. I sincerely hope that we will now be able to answer our
member's grievances and get to the bottom of this mess, with the
Foundation's help, experience and guidance,

Best regards
Gabriel

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 3:56 AM, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> On Oct 19, 2017 7:41 PM, "Richard Farmbrough" 
> wrote:
>
> I think it very clear that these allegations were the last gasp of an
> ancient regime,
>
>
> Legal threats are surely the universal language of bad faith.  And I have
> complete trust in Pierre-Selim and Caroline.
>
> Thanks Katherine, for sharing details of what has been happening.
>
> Sam.
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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] Update on Wikimédia France

2017-08-08 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Thank you Natacha for the update on the French situation.
What would really make me happy this week would be to witness a goodwill or
wikilove gesture by the French board: let the members who were recently
expelled join up again so that we can hold some meaningful discussions.
Gabe

Le 8 août 2017 2:56 AM, "Natacha Rault" <n.ra...@me.com> a écrit :

> Dear All,
>
> More than a quarter of Wikimedia France’s members have requested that
> several topics be added and voted upon at he next general assembly to be
> held in september in order to reflect on the current governance issues.
>
> The board has just confirmed that the minimum of members requested to do
> this has now been reached, see here (in French) for more details
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikim%C3%A9dia_France/
> Assembl%C3%A9e_g%C3%A9n%C3%A9rale/septembre_2017/Points_%
> C3%A0_ajouter_%C3%A0_l%27ordre_du_jour <https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikim%C3%A9dia_France/Assembl%C3%A9e_g%C3%A9n%C3%
> A9rale/septembre_2017/Points_%C3%A0_ajouter_%C3%A0_l'ordre_du_jour>
>
> We hope that we will be able to achieve a sound democratic debate and
> start working towards a resolution of the problems recently encountered. I
> am personally really happy to see that a significant number of members have
> expressed ideas and worked collaboratively to express their point of view.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Nattes à chat
>
> #whatmakesmehappythisweek
>
> > Le 4 août 2017 à 21:46, Devouard (gmail) <fdevou...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> > Le 04/08/2017 à 18:17, Gabriel Thullen a écrit :
> >> What is important here is that trust has to be rebuilt between the
> chapter
> >> members on one hand and the board & senior staff on the other hand.
> >> The way I understand the situation is that the board has expelled a few
> >> vocal opponents, a few board members have resigned, one staffer was
> fired
> >> for refusing to censor a mailing list, some chapter members have had
> their
> >> membership renewal refused, some known contributors are not able to join
> >> the chapter, and there are now 25 new chapter members out of the blue. I
> >> may be incorrect on one or two minor details, but I think that sums it
> up.
> >
> > It far from sum-it-up.
> >
> > There is also *very* disrespectful behavior from staff and management,
> including
> > * non respect of "friendly space policy" and comments directed to a very
> involved member with autistic traits such as "it is you who should adapt
> and you need to grow up to become an adult"
> > * paternalistic behavior toward volunteers such as "you still have not
> understood what I was saying. Let's meet face to face and I will explain to
> you *again* so that you *really* get it"
> > * legal threats toward volunteers who ask questions
> > * referring to members in a very belittling way : "tartempion" or
> "pigiste"
> > * refusal to acknowledge authorship of action from volunteers (such as
> "no author name in wiki newsletter")
> > * emails sent to board by members to "report issues" are immediately
> forwarded to the management, making it impossible to safely and
> confidentially discuss issues
> > * there has been cases of doxing by the management, using member private
> data
> > * set up of a black list of members that should not receive support by
> staff in spite of being members.
> >
> > There is staff suffering, upon which it is difficult to comment
> publicly, but is made quite obvious by the fact several staff members
> joined and created a trade-union branch to be able to *defend* themselves.
> >
> > There are multiple rumors reported by members of quite "generous"
> expenses reimbursement. Yet unclear due to non access to financial data.
> >
> > There are questions related to management using the resources and image
> of the association, as well as WMF brand, to look for funding for a
> mysterious entity no one knows anything about. Yet unanswered.
> >
> > There are questions related to using resources of the association to
> gain a elected position.
> >
> > And a bunch of other things. Those would count as "one or two minor
> details".
> >
> >
> >> The board says it has had two audits already, but I believe that they
> are
> >> related to getting a certification - the IDEAS label - to help out with
> >> fund raising. This is not a governance audit and they will not help us
> find
> >> an issue to this crisis. (
> >> http://ideas.asso.fr/fr/label/label-ideas-associations-fondation

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimédia France

2017-08-04 Thread Gabriel Thullen
What is important here is that trust has to be rebuilt between the chapter
members on one hand and the board & senior staff on the other hand.

The way I understand the situation is that the board has expelled a few
vocal opponents, a few board members have resigned, one staffer was fired
for refusing to censor a mailing list, some chapter members have had their
membership renewal refused, some known contributors are not able to join
the chapter, and there are now 25 new chapter members out of the blue. I
may be incorrect on one or two minor details, but I think that sums it up.
The board says it has had two audits already, but I believe that they are
related to getting a certification - the IDEAS label - to help out with
fund raising. This is not a governance audit and they will not help us find
an issue to this crisis. (
http://ideas.asso.fr/fr/label/label-ideas-associations-fondations/)

I remain convinced that WMFR needs an independent governance audit, and the
results should be made available to the chapter members and to the staff.
Something drastic needs to be done so that this chapter can continue to
function. I also think that the members who have been expelled should be
allowed to rejoin the French chapter unconditionally. That is a goodwill
gesture that the current board can easily make and it will go a long way
towards finding a solution to this ridiculous situation.

The French press is starting to talk about what is going on at the French
Wikimedia chapter, are we all waiting for CNN to come in as well? For sure
that will get the WMF moving...

Best regards
Gabe

On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 5:45 PM, Ilario Valdelli  wrote:

> Interesting but: "The review, commissioned by Wikimedia UK..." exactly
> who? Board, community, general assembly, group of members?
>
> Kind regards
>
>
> On 04/08/2017 17:32, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
>
>> Ilario,
>>
>> A few years ago, WMUK was required to undergo an independent governance
>> review. The review was jointly commissioned by WMUK and WMF. The results
>> were public.[1] That option is available for WMFR today just as it was
>> available for WMUK a few years ago.
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>> [1]
>> http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/review-urges-major-overhaul-gov
>> ernance-wikimedia-uk/governance/article/1170282
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Ilario Valdelli 
>> wrote:
>>
>> In my opinion there is a little bit confusion.
>>>
>>> The audit is required by someone (in this case the board) and the audit
>>> reports to the entity requiring it (the board).
>>>
>>> To communicate or not depends on the board. If the board required it to
>>> have a clearer picture to take a decision, the board can keep it private
>>> mainly if there are some personal questions involved in the audit.
>>>
>>> In this specific case if there is a problem between the staff and the
>>> community (as I understand) the audit cannot be managed nor by the staff
>>> neither by the community, because are the two conflictual parties and to
>>> communicate the results to both parties may revamp this conflict.
>>>
>>> But at the same time I understand that also the board is considered
>>> untrusted by the community, so I agree that any audit will be considered
>>> invalid by every parties. In computer science this may be called
>>> "starvation condition" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
>>> /Starvation_(computer_science)).  A good governance, like a good
>>> algorithm, should avoid it.
>>>
>>> The biggest problem of starvation is not the condition itself, which can
>>> be blocked somehow, but the most strange solution that people would use
>>> to
>>> solve it. Someone would unplug the power and to reset the system, someone
>>> would burn the system and someone would simple wait that the system will
>>> solve the starvation by itself.
>>>
>>> At that point the FDC has taken the best decision, IMHO, like an external
>>> party, can unblock the starvation.
>>>
>>> Another solution is the General Assembly, but personally I think that the
>>> silent crowd will be the most representative party in this question and
>>> in
>>> general the silent crowd will take always the most moderate position. I
>>> don't see so much moderated position to attract more consent.
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04/08/2017 12:03, Gilles Chagnon wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the two audits the board refers to as those by IDEAS.

 However, except of the announcement of the final label, there was no
 report to the community. An audit usually comes with recommendations
 and a
 series of good points/concerns but as far as I know, no result was
 shared
 outside of the board/the direction. I can understand that some points
 may
 be confidential, but I also think that some conclusions could have been
 shared, provided the auditing organism had been told to write their
 conclusion in a suitable way.

  G. Chagnon

 Le 04/08/2017 à 11:45, Ilario 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimédia France

2017-08-03 Thread Gabriel Thullen
I will bi going to the September 9 GA, and for the moment I still am a
member of Wikimedia France.
I am posting here in spite of the risk, because I want to set a few things
straight.

25% of the French chapter asked for this GA knowing full well that the
annual GA was scheduled a month later in October. A few of the most vocal
opponents have been expelled from the chapter, some of them for failure to
pay their dues before the deadline. Other active French wikipedians have
had their admission refused. In spite of all that, a quarter of the members
asked to hold this extra GA. I my experience, this is a serious crisis and
the current French chapter leadership cannot ignore that fact.

We cannot immediately qualify any dissenting as "aggressive behavior" or
"harassment". It has become quite impossible for current members to express
their views for fear of being expelled from the chapter, or being accused
of harassing the chapter president or senior staff - I do make a
distinction between the ED and the staff who are having a hard time and who
work under the risk of being fired if they refuse to obey orders (like what
has just happened to Jules). We all are very appreciative and thankful for
the work done by the "employees", we are quite critical of the ED.

Florence is quite right about being concerned about the very sudden
increase in membership, and I fully suspect that these new members will be
at the GA in September. Before being involved in Wikimedia, I was quite
involved in labor unions (and still am), so I have seen this type of
maneuvering before. It makes me quite sad to see this happen to a Wikimedia
Chapter, but that is probably because I am much too much of an idealist.

I will quote Rémi Mathis:
"This is a few people, for various reasons, usualy very personal and very
bad ones. And those people refuse to acknowledge reality, even when the
board explains everything, even when lawyers explains what can and cannot
be done within a chapter.

I'm really worried about the behaviour of those people, and the future of
Wikimedia France - since the harassment could lead to prosecution from
employees."

For one, I think that Rémi should steer clear of this type of discussion,
because he has a very clear COI. Sorry Rémi, you are not an "ordinary
member".
Now what really disturbs me is that Rémi tries to discredit the members who
are asking for a GA by implying that they have an agenda, that they are
very few, and that they "refuse to acknowledge reality". As a labor union
leader, I have had exactly the same accusations leveled at me. And I hope
that Rémi knows what he is talking about when he speaks of harassment,
because I have never experienced a case where one of the labor unions I
worked with had to pay a company executive compensation for "harassment".

Best regards
Gabe

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Rémi Mathis  wrote:

> This is typically the kind agressive behaviour we don't need right now.
> Everybody in the chapter knows that Marie-Alice Mathis and Rémi Mathis are
> wife and husband, it has always been clearly stated and we always refused
> to be at the board at the same time to avoid conflicts of interest.
>
> Now what? Do you think I can't have opinions of my own because I'm not a
> member of the board, or she can't have because she's a manipulated woman?
> We are *two individuals* and we do have *two brains*. This kind of
> allegations are not acceptable and the smugness of "Nuff said" really
> hurtful!
>
> I am an ordinary member... but I think I have a certain experience of
> what's going on
> 1/ as a long-time member of the board (2009-2014) and chair (2011-2014),
> who hired most of the employees, managed them, organized a lot of what made
> Wikimedia France one of the biggest and most sucessful chapters... and a
> member still really involved in the life of the community
> 2/ as someone, yes, who sees her wife spending hours every night, trying to
> explain things to people who don't want to hear or understand. Like, you
> know, when you ask a question about a fact, I answer to you with a
> *checkable fact*. And you answer "I don't agree" (not even "it's not true",
> because everybody could check that, but "I don't agree")...
>
> I can't even understand why you post things like at all, but even less on
> an international list where people don't know what happens and, for most of
> them, can't read French.
> This really makes me sad and frustrated
>
> Rémi
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 3 August 2017 at 12:47, Devouard (gmail)  wrote:
>
> > And for the sake of proper understanding... Rémi Mathis is the husband of
> > the current vice-chair of Wikimedia France.
> >
> > Nuff said.
> >
> >
> > Florence
> >
> >
> >
> > Le 03/08/2017 à 12:17, Rémi Mathis a écrit :
> >
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> As a member - and former chair - of Wikimedia France, this kind of
> message
> >> really hurts my feelings and I still wonder why they can be posted on
> >> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] The Signpost – Volume 13, Issue 6 – 15 July 2017

2017-07-18 Thread Gabriel Thullen
I will add my voice to those saying thank you. I am so glad to see the
Signpost again !

Gabe


On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 9:50 AM, James Heilman  wrote:

> Definitely agree. Very happy to see the signpost up and running again.
>
> J
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 1:33 AM, Àlex Hinojo  wrote:
>
> > +1 it is a basic source of contextual and critical information on both
> > projects and movement.
> >
> > Keep on with the good work
> > El dt, 18 jul 2017 a les 9:21 Devouard (gmail)  va
> > escriure:
> >
> > > I second that.
> > >
> > > Thank you !
> > >
> > > Florence
> > >
> > > Le 18/07/2017 à 08:32, Pine W a écrit :
> > > > I'd like to say "thank you" to the folks who contribute to the
> > > *Signpost*,
> > > > especially those who are trying to revive it with a very small number
> > of
> > > > people filling multiple roles. I know that many hours of volunteer
> time
> > > go
> > > > into each issue, and I feel that the *Signpost *is a valuable
> community
> > > > institution.
> > > >
> > > > Pine
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Wikipedia Signpost <
> > > > wikipediasignp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> News and notes: French chapter woes, new affiliates and more WMF
> team
> > > >> changes
> > > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/
> > > >> 2017-07-15/News_and_notes
> > > >>
> > > >> Featured content: Spectacular animals, Pine Trees screens, and more
> > > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/
> > > >> 2017-07-15/Featured_content
> > > >>
> > > >> In the media: Concern about access and fairness, Foundation
> > > expenditures,
> > > >> and relationship to real-world politics and commerce
> > > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/
> > > >> 2017-07-15/In_the_media
> > > >>
> > > >> Recent research: The chilling effect of surveillance on Wikipedia
> > > readers
> > > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/
> > > >> 2017-07-15/Recent_research
> > > >>
> > > >> Op-ed: Why Task Forces are Dying in 2017
> > > >>
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/
> > 2017-07-15/Op-ed
> > > >>
> > > >> Gallery: A mix of patterns
> > > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/
> > > >> 2017-07-15/Gallery
> > > >>
> > > >> Humour: The Infobox Game
> > > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/
> > > >> 2017-07-15/Humour
> > > >>
> > > >> Traffic report: Film, television and Internet phenomena reign with
> > some
> > > >> room left over for America's birthday
> > > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/
> > > >> 2017-07-15/Traffic_report
> > > >>
> > > >> Technology report: New features in development; more breaking
> changes
> > > for
> > > >> scripts
> > > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/
> > > >> 2017-07-15/Technology_report
> > > >>
> > > >> Wikicup: 2017 WikiCup round 3 wrap-up
> > > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/
> > > >> 2017-07-15/Wikicup
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Single-page view
> > > >>
> > > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signpost/Single
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> https://facebook.com/wikisignpost
> > > >>
> > > >> https://twitter.com/wikisignpost
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Signpost team
> > > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signpost
> > > >>
> > > >> ___
> > > >> Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be
> immediately
> > > >> directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
> > > >> community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> > > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > >> ___
> > > >> WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
> > > >> wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > > ___
> > > > 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,
> > > 
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > > 
> >
> > --
> > Àlex Hinojo
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Deutschland: Annual Report 2016

2017-06-06 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Yes, that is a really great result.
Switzerland is like a next-door neighbor. If Germany can do it, we should
be able to do it as well !
Lets say that our goal for Switzerland should be 1'500 new members... :)


On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 1:42 PM, James Heilman  wrote:

> +1 agree amazing
>
> On Jun 6, 2017 03:32, "Natacha Rault"  wrote:
>
> > This is an incredibble result. Congratulation!
> > Natacha
> > Le 6 juin 2017 à 11:21, Cornelius Kibelka  de>
> > a écrit :
> >
> > No, it means 15,000 new (paying) members of the association Wikimedia
> > Deutschland.
> >
> > However, we also try to recruit new authors/editors via banner campaigns
> > and are running several of them throughout the year. If you are
> interested
> > in this, consider joining Verena's session at Wikimania about "On-Wiki
> > Campaigning to Engage New Editors"[1]
> >
> > Cheers
> > Cornelius
> >
> >
> > [1] https://wikimania2017.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/On-Wiki_
> > Campaigning_to_Engage_New_Editors
> >
> > On 6 June 2017 at 07:36, James Heilman  wrote:
> >
> > > Does "15,000 new members to the organization" mean that everyone who
> > edits
> > > DE WP is a member? If so that is amazing :-)
> > >
> > > James
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Anna Stillwell <
> astillw...@wikimedia.org
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Thank you. Well done. 15,000 new members to the organization?
> > >> I'd love to talk with you about this, Nicole.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 6:41 AM, Samuel Patton 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I agree, the report is great and the videos are inspiring. Thanks for
> > >>> sharing!
> > >>>
> > >>> sam
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 7:15 AM, NC Hasive  wrote:
> > >>>
> >  Really very impressive report. Like the way to present the annual
> > >> report.
> > 
> >  Hasive
> > 
> >  On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Erik Zachte 
> > >>> wrote:
> > 
> > > Wow, very impressive report overall!
> > >
> > > I particularly love the videos.
> > > They are quite informative, the ones with real people are a great
> > > introduction to what editing entails,
> > > the animated ones are entertaining and inspiring.
> > > These videos imo deserve to be used on many of our projects,
> > >> localized
> > >>> or
> > > subtitled in many languages.
> > >
> > > Erik
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: WikimediaAnnounce-l [mailto:wikimediaannounce-l-
> > > boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Nicole Ebber
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 6:23
> > > To: wikimediaannounce-l
> > > Subject: [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Deutschland: Annual
> > >> Report
> > > 2016
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > We have recently published our Annual Report 2016. If you would
> > > like
> > >> to
> > > learn more about examples of Wikimedia Deutschland's projects and
> > > programmes from last year, you might want to read about one or more
> > >> of
> >  the
> > > following:
> > >
> > > * our new editors campaign,
> > > * our successes with Wikidata,
> > > * our Technical Wishes project,
> > > * our achievements in the political and legal field,
> > > * our work for Open Education & Open Science
> > > * our growth in membership numbers
> > > * our regionalisation efforts
> > > * our work for the international movement
> > >
> > > Inspired by the WMF's recent Annual Reports, we have – for the
> > > first
> > >>> time
> > > – created a visually appealing, responsive online version that also
> > >>> works
> > > pretty well on mobile. https://2016.wikimedia.de/en
> > >
> > > If you rather prefer to print it, please be patient: We will
> > > publish
> > >>> the
> > > oldschool PDF version and link it on the meta [[Reports]] page next
> > >>> week.
> > >
> > > Happy reading,
> > > Nicole
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Nicole Ebber
> > > Adviser International Relations
> > > Movement Strategy Track Lead: Organized Groups
> > >
> > > Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens
> > > e.
> > > V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts
> > >>> Berlin-Charlottenburg
> > > unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das
> > >>> Finanzamt
> > > für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be
> > >> immediately
> > > directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
> > > community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's set up a Tor onion service for Wikipedia

2017-06-05 Thread Gabriel Thullen
I agree that sockpuppets are a real problem, but they manage fine right now
without going through Tor. There are quite a few ways to connect up using
different IPs as it is now, so the real problem remains: the sockpuppeteers
themselves.

Gabe

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Cristian Consonni 
wrote:

> On 05/06/2017 19:43, David Gerard wrote:
> > Editing may be a tricky one, particularly on en:wp, which has found
> > Tor exit points to overwhelmingly be fountains of garbage, and
> > automatically blocks them.
>
> On 05/06/2017 19:47, John wrote:
> > enabling read access via Tor shouldn't be an issue, however editing
> should
> > not be allowed due to high volume of known abuse from that vector.
>
> On 05/06/2017 21:01, John wrote:
> > Im not going to violate BEANS, but even allowing accounts to edit without
> > further hurdles isn't going to work. Because of the anonymity that tor
> > provides its fairly easy to cause widespread issues. When the vandals
> start
> > actually using tactics the flood gates of TOR will cause massive issues
> > cross wiki that requires steward level intervention on a regular basis.
>
> Allow me to reiterate that I am not proposing any change to the current
> policies regarding editing via Tor or other open proxies. Even with an
> onion service, anonymous editing will still be blocked and registered
> users will still need to apply for IP block exemption before being able
> to edit.
>
> I have read several discussions on the topic (going back to 2006) and
> what I have understood from those is that the biggest issue with editing
> via Tor is sockpuppeting. Vandals and spammer could be handled (and
> blocked), sockpuppets would be much harder to identify. The problem is
> hard because it solving it requires to have a way to identify that two
> accounts with different IPs are related to the same real person without
> at the same time destroying the anonymity provided by Tor. There has
> been research on the topic (see, for example, Nymble[1]) but at the very
> least it would require some additional technical setup and testing.
>
> With this proposal I am not trying to solve that problem.
>
> I am just pointing out that:
> 1. having an onion service would increase the privacy of our readers and
> the (very few) people who are already allowed to edit via Tor.
> 2. is harder to block access to an onion service than to wikipedia.org
> (you basically need to block all accesses to Tor, but there are ways to
> circumvent that, too[2]).
> 3. supporting privacy-enhancing technology is good and people may need
> it or maybe they will start using Tor more.
>
> As it stands now, the biggest impact of this project (if it is
> successful) would be on operations and analytics.
>
> Cristian
>
> [1]: https://cgi.soic.indiana.edu/~kapadia/nymble/overview.php
> [2]: https://www.torproject.org/docs/pluggable-transports
>
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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] Let's set up a Tor onion service for Wikipedia

2017-06-05 Thread Gabriel Thullen
I imagine registered users could edit through TOR. That is how it works
with my school IP: anonymous edits are blocked, account creation as well,
but you can sign in an edit.

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 7:47 PM, John  wrote:

> enabling read access via Tor shouldn't be an issue, however editing should
> not be allowed due to high volume of known abuse from that vector.
>
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:43 PM, David Gerard  wrote:
>
> > Editing may be a tricky one, particularly on en:wp, which has found
> > Tor exit points to overwhelmingly be fountains of garbage, and
> > automatically blocks them.
> >
> >
> > - d.
> >
> >
> > On 5 June 2017 at 18:30, David Cuenca Tudela  wrote:
> > > I think that's an excellent idea and very much aligned with our
> > commitment
> > > to provide free information also for those who are living under
> > unfavorable
> > > conditions.
> > >
> > > I personally endorse it.
> > >
> > > Thanks Cristian for suggesting it.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Micru
> > >
> > > On Jun 5, 2017 19:11, "Cristian Consonni"  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I have written a proposal about setting up an onion (hidden) service
> to
> > >> serve Wikipedia over Tor:
> > >>
> > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/A_Tor_
> > >> Onion_Service_for_Wikipedia
> > >>
> > >> I was thinking about this and I also discovered that the Internet
> > >> Archive is experimenting with a very similar idea:
> > >> www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/750-
> > >> Freedom-of-Information.html
> > >>
> > >> I would like to have some feedback on this, I am also in contact with
> > >> the author of the aforementioned proxy which could be able to give
> some
> > >> help in setting it up.
> > >>
> > >> Thank you.
> > >>
> > >> Cristian
> > >>
> > >> ___
> > >> 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
> ,
> > >> 
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > 
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> >
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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] May 5: Update on Wikimedia movement strategy process (#15)

2017-05-08 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Yes, we need to promote Kiwix. We need to ensure that people with no
internet access can get Kiwix and that means that we do need to "clone
Wikipedia content".
It is quite expensive to download Kiwix because of the huge data charge
that it implies, and it also takes for ever with a poor connection. We tend
to forget that when we live in countries where we have 24H 7/7 unlimited
internet...

Best regards
Gabe

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> We need to promote Kiwix - definitely, but should we promote Wikipedia
> zero? May be not, unless the issue of net neutrality is clearly addressed.
> We need to remember that some countries had to ban different zero services,
> as they clearly violated net neutrality and people were against them.
>
> Regards
> On May 8, 2017 1:23 PM, "Ilario Valdelli" <valde...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In these cases the big advantage is the capacity to be cloned. A
> > governement can block an ip or a domain but it would be hard to block
> > internet.
> >
> > The good approach is to invite the web to host kiwix and zim files for
> > downloading. That would be easier than cloning Wikipedia content.
> >
> > However that approach will save readers but not writers.
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > Il 07 Mag 2017 23:36, "Gabriel Thullen" <gabr...@thullen.com> ha
> scritto:
> >
> > > I agree with James that we need to encourage initiatives like Kiwix
> > > Wikipedia Zero. We need to be able to distribute Kiwix in countries
> that
> > > have blocked Wikipedia, because it is no big deal for a government to
> > block
> > > the Kiwix.org site as well, and phone operators providing Wikipedia
> Zero
> > > will have to obey government injunctions. Chances are that a block on
> > > kiwix.org will hardly be noticed by our community. Looks like the good
> > old
> > > sneakernet with USB flash drives is still a viable option...
> > >
> > > Gabe
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yup. It would be interesting to ponder if wiki app could channel
> > through
> > > > Tor by default - in the spirit of The Guardian project. Informing
> users
> > > > about Tor benefits has obvious disavantages related to the fact that
> > most
> > > > people will not be able to grasp it.
> > > >
> > > > Dariusz Jemielniak
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 9:26 PM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The issues occurring in Turkey highlight that we may also need to
> > keep
> > > in
> > > > > mind:
> > > > >
> > > > > * Access
> > > > >
> > > > > over the next 15 years. Where access is not only potentially
> hindered
> > > by
> > > > > governments but also technical and monetary realities in various
> > > country
> > > > > and region. We of course have already worked and continue to do
> work
> > in
> > > > > this area with initiatives like Wikipedia Zero and Offline
> Wikipedia
> > /
> > > > > Kiwix.
> > > > >
> > > > > James
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Katherine Maher <
> > kma...@wikimedia.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Summary: The report from cycle 1 discussion is online[1]. The
> > start
> > > of
> > > > > > cycle 2 is delayed until next week.*
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you for your contributions! We have been hard at work
> > reading,
> > > > > > sorting, and summarizing more than 1,800 community member
> > statements,
> > > > > from
> > > > > > more than 100 community discussions from across five continents.
> > Each
> > > > of
> > > > > > these statements was a response to the question: "What do we want
> > to
> > > > > build
> > > > > > or achieve together over the next 15 years?"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You can find the full report on the major themes, and more
> details
> > > > about
> > > > > > them, in a su

Re: [Wikimedia-l] May 5: Update on Wikimedia movement strategy process (#15)

2017-05-07 Thread Gabriel Thullen
I agree with James that we need to encourage initiatives like Kiwix
Wikipedia Zero. We need to be able to distribute Kiwix in countries that
have blocked Wikipedia, because it is no big deal for a government to block
the Kiwix.org site as well, and phone operators providing Wikipedia Zero
will have to obey government injunctions. Chances are that a block on
kiwix.org will hardly be noticed by our community. Looks like the good old
sneakernet with USB flash drives is still a viable option...

Gabe

On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
wrote:

> Yup. It would be interesting to ponder if wiki app could channel through
> Tor by default - in the spirit of The Guardian project. Informing users
> about Tor benefits has obvious disavantages related to the fact that most
> people will not be able to grasp it.
>
> Dariusz Jemielniak
>
> On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 9:26 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
>
> > The issues occurring in Turkey highlight that we may also need to keep in
> > mind:
> >
> > * Access
> >
> > over the next 15 years. Where access is not only potentially hindered by
> > governments but also technical and monetary realities in various country
> > and region. We of course have already worked and continue to do work in
> > this area with initiatives like Wikipedia Zero and Offline Wikipedia /
> > Kiwix.
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Katherine Maher 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > *Summary: The report from cycle 1 discussion is online[1]. The start of
> > > cycle 2 is delayed until next week.*
> > >
> > > Thank you for your contributions! We have been hard at work reading,
> > > sorting, and summarizing more than 1,800 community member statements,
> > from
> > > more than 100 community discussions from across five continents. Each
> of
> > > these statements was a response to the question: "What do we want to
> > build
> > > or achieve together over the next 15 years?"
> > >
> > > You can find the full report on the major themes, and more details
> about
> > > them, in a summarized report on Meta-Wiki.[1]
> > >
> > > Some common themes emerged from these conversations:
> > >
> > > * Reliable, neutral, high-quality content
> > > * Community health & support
> > > * Internal & external collaboration
> > > * Improved and new features
> > > * Users, editors, & contributors
> > > * Outreach, awareness, & promotion
> > > * Innovation and adaptation
> > > * Funding, staffing, and other organizational needs
> > > * Support for emerging communities
> > > * Advancing Wikipedia in education
> > > * Movement values
> > > * Sustainability & growth
> > >
> > > Each of these themes is described in more detail within the body of the
> > > report,[1] and the full data spreadsheet from this analysis will be
> > posted
> > > soon.
> > >
> > > The movement strategy team has been working to group these themes
> > together,
> > > so that we have a smaller number of concepts to consider in the next
> > cycle.
> > > Because this work is important, we want to make sure the grouping and
> > > analysis are comprehensive and thoughtful. In order to make sure we can
> > get
> > > it right, we’re delaying the start of cycle 2 discussions until next
> > week.
> > >
> > > As you probably know, the Turkish authorities blocked Wikipedia in
> Turkey
> > > this week.[2] We’ve been working around the clock to understand the
> > > circumstances and respond appropriately, including appealing in Turkish
> > > court. We’re grateful to everyone who has reached out to offer us your
> > > thoughts and perspective. Government limitations on free knowledge are
> > just
> > > one of the critical issues that have come up during the movement
> strategy
> > > process. As we confront these challenges in real time, it has been a
> > > reminder for me how important our work is, and how it has very real
> > > implications for people around the globe. Again, thank you.
> > >
> > > Kendine iyi bak (Turkish translation: “Take care of yourself”),
> > >
> > > Katherine
> > >
> > > PS. A version of this message is available for translation on
> > Meta-Wiki.[3]
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> > > movement/2017/Cycle_1/Report
> > > [2]
> > > https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/04/30/turkish-
> > authorities-block-wikipedia/
> > > [3]
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_
> > > movement/2017/Updates/5_May_2017_-_Update_15_on_Wikimedia_
> > > movement_strategy_process
> > >
> > > --
> > > Katherine Maher
> > >
> > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > > 149 New Montgomery Street
> > > San Francisco, CA 94105
> > >
> > > +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635
> > > +1 (415) 712 4873
> > > kma...@wikimedia.org
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing companies that offer paid editing services

2017-04-25 Thread Gabriel Thullen
I agree wholeheartedly with Vito. Thank you for bringing up this issue.
Wikidata is part of the umbrella group of Wikimedia projects. Wikipedia has
strict rules governing paid editing (at least in EN), and these rules are
not even the same across different language editions.
Most of the other projects do not have such rules. Wikimedia Commons, for
example. Most of us know what product placement is. Do certain contributors
earn their living from it? Why don't these "sister" projects have similar
restrictions on paid contributions?

Gabe

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

> We currently have some mean to fight paid editing, terms of services are
> "easy to violate" thus giving us a straightforward way to take action. But
> too often I see something like: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q16826370
> obvious paid editors left totally free to do their job without even
> attracting some attention on them.
>
> Vito
>
> 2017-04-23 13:58 GMT+02:00 Peter Southwood <peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>:
>
> > I would think this is up to the chapter/affilate organisation, but no
> harm
> > in getting a more universal collection of opinions.
> > Cheers,
> >  Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Gabriel Thullen
> > Sent: Sunday, 23 April 2017 10:50 AM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing
> companies
> > that offer paid editing services
> >
> > I suggest another question, right after your #5. Undisclosed paid editing
> > is one thing, dealing with disclosed paid editors within our community is
> > another. You could add the following question:
> > "Asking if we agree to let disclosed paid editors occupy key positions
> > within the Wikimedia movement such as chapter board, official chapter
> > spokesperson, affiliate organization board, etc."
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 6:16 AM, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I've proposed asking wikimedians at large what they think should be
> > > done about paid advocacy editing, as item number 5 on my periodic
> > > survey proposal composed of all the unresolved questions over the last
> > > quarter on this list at:
> > >
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:James_Salsman#
> > > Periodic_survey_prototype
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 2:50 PM Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Has there been a recent substantial discussion by the community
> > > > surrounding
> > > > > promotional/biased editting paid or otherwise, which had an
> > > > > outcome resulting in a specific request for assistance or
> > > > > increased action by
> > > the
> > > > > WMF?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Aside from the conversation on this list, I'm aware of the
> > > > discussion on Jimbo's talk page. If WMF Legal or the WMF Board wants
> > > > to take the
> > > position
> > > > that it would like to see a community RfC or some other such
> > > > discussion,
> > > I
> > > > imagine that such can be arranged, and I can see how that might be
> > > > beneficial. Of course, anyone is free to initiate such an on-wiki
> > > > discussion.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > If there hasn't, I do not see grounds for you to be expecting an
> > > official
> > > > > response from Legal to a list whose conversation has for the most
> > > > > part consisted of about 6 people?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure why you would be telling other people to whom they can
> > > > initiate requests and the conditions under which they can be made. I
> > > > already have a dim view of WMF's customer service; please don't dig
> > > > the hole any deeper.
> > > >
> > > > Many others, I am sure, would rightly complain if the Foundation
> > > > > unilaterally made decisions in this area.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That is possible if WMF were to do something particularly novel, so
> > > > your sense of caution here is well taken. I would hope that WMF
> > > > would discuss its plans with the community and have a conversation
> > > > before actually in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Chapter De-Recognition: Wikimedia Philippines

2017-04-23 Thread Gabriel Thullen
I also agree with Itzik and James. The chapters depend on the Wikimedia
Foundation for a large part of their finances, so when something like this
happens, the whole movement is concerned, not just Wikimedia Philippines.
When one chapter of affiliate looks bad, everybody will get part of the
backlash. Affcom has to make these tough decisions, but I also think they
are necessary in order to keep a certain credibility.

Gabe

On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 3:41 PM, James Heilman  wrote:

> I second Itzik's comments. We need some degree of accountability. Hopefully
> this will encourage groups in the Philippines to become more active again.
>
> James
>
> On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 2:14 AM, Itzik - Wikimedia Israel <
> it...@wikimedia.org.il> wrote:
>
> > Thank you Maor for the update.
> >
> > We usually love to see our movement expend and welcome recognition of new
> > organizations, but I strongly believe that we continuously need to check
> > and evaluate our current organizations.
> >
> > Our brand, name and reputation are part of our core assets - and while
> it's
> > not an easy step, I appreciate Affcom efforts not only to recognize new
> > ones but also to de-recognize organizations that are not longer active or
> > non-compliance with our movement requirements.
> >
> > Few weeks ago in Berlin we had a first meeting to start discuses what is
> a
> > "movement accountability" and how we evaluate organizations who operate
> > outside of the FDC process and I believe Affcom have a significant part
> in
> > it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *Regards,Itzik Edri*
> > Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel
> > +972-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il
> > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> > sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment!
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Maor Malul  wrote:
> >
> > > *
> > >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > *
> > >
> > > **
> > >
> > > *Recognition as a Wikimedia affiliate - a chapter, thematic
> organization,
> > > or user group - allows an independent group to officially use the
> > Wikimedia
> > > name to further the Wikimedia mission, with certain duties and
> > > responsibilities.  While most Wikimedia affiliates adhere to the basic
> > > compliance standards set forth in their agreements with the Wikimedia
> > > Foundation, a protocol has been developed to address the exceptional
> > cases
> > > when a Wikimedia affiliate does not meet minimum compliance standards
> and
> > > their continued recognition as a Wikimedia affiliate presents a risk to
> > the
> > > Wikimedia movement.*
> > >
> > > *
> > >
> > > On September 9, 2016, Wikimedia Philippines was notified of their
> > > suspension as a Wikimedia affiliate due to long standing and serious
> > > governance issues, as well as non-compliance with reporting
> requirements
> > > which go as back as 2014, has been sent multiple warnings regarding
> them,
> > > and on the date mentioned above,  was provided with an explicit list of
> > > tasks and deadlines in order to return to compliance with their chapter
> > > agreement. The chapter failed to complete these tasks by the deadline
> of
> > > November 28, 2016, and was consequently notified that they would no
> > longer
> > > be recognized as a Wikimedia chapter after the termination of their
> > Chapter
> > > Agreement on March 1, 2017.  It is important to make clear that the
> > > Affiliations Committee will continue to support other organized
> Wikimedia
> > > communities and their activities in the Philippines.
> > >
> > > If you have questions about what this means for the community members
> in
> > > their region or language areas, we have put together a very basic FAQ,
> > > which may be found at > > wiki/Wikimedia_movement_affiliate_de-recognition_FAQ>https:/
> > > /meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_movement_affiliates/
> > > Affiliate_derecognition_FAQ.*
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > "*Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee
> wayuukanairua
> > > junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya
> junain."
> > > Maor Malul
> > > Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 |
> > www.wikimedia.org.ve
> > > 
> > > Member, Wikimedia Israel | www.wikimedia.org.il <
> http://wikimedia.org.il
> > >
> > > Vice-Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee
> > > Phone: +972-52-4869915
> > > Twitter: @maor_x
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > > i/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,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing companies that offer paid editing services

2017-04-23 Thread Gabriel Thullen
I suggest another question, right after your #5. Undisclosed paid editing
is one thing, dealing with disclosed paid editors within our community is
another. You could add the following question:
"Asking if we agree to let disclosed paid editors occupy key positions
within the Wikimedia movement such as chapter board, official chapter
spokesperson, affiliate organization board, etc."


On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 6:16 AM, James Salsman  wrote:

> I've proposed asking wikimedians at large what they think should be done
> about paid advocacy editing, as item number 5 on my periodic survey
> proposal composed of all the unresolved questions over the last quarter on
> this list at:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:James_Salsman#
> Periodic_survey_prototype
>
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 2:50 PM Pine W  wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Has there been a recent substantial discussion by the community
> > surrounding
> > > promotional/biased editting paid or otherwise, which had an outcome
> > > resulting in a specific request for assistance or increased action by
> the
> > > WMF?
> > >
> >
> > Aside from the conversation on this list, I'm aware of the discussion on
> > Jimbo's talk page. If WMF Legal or the WMF Board wants to take the
> position
> > that it would like to see a community RfC or some other such discussion,
> I
> > imagine that such can be arranged, and I can see how that might be
> > beneficial. Of course, anyone is free to initiate such an on-wiki
> > discussion.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > If there hasn't, I do not see grounds for you to be expecting an
> official
> > > response from Legal to a list whose conversation has for the most part
> > > consisted of about 6 people?
> > >
> >
> > I'm not sure why you would be telling other people to whom they can
> > initiate requests and the conditions under which they can be made. I
> > already have a dim view of WMF's customer service; please don't dig the
> > hole any deeper.
> >
> > Many others, I am sure, would rightly complain if the Foundation
> > > unilaterally made decisions in this area.
> >
> >
> > That is possible if WMF were to do something particularly novel, so your
> > sense of caution here is well taken. I would hope that WMF would discuss
> > its plans with the community and have a conversation before actually
> > initiating novel actions.
> >
> >
> > > But please be realistic, this is
> > > a coffee table discussion.
> >
> >
> > I have mixed views on this. Wikimedia-l is not a quiet back room with
> only
> > a few people around, but it's true that a consensus here among a small
> > number of people who speak up in a particular discussion demonstrates a
> > lower level of consensus than an RfC with hundreds of participants. It's
> > not clear to me that there is consensus on which tools are appropriate
> for
> > which exact circumstances, and some discussions happen in multiple
> venues.
> >
> >
> > > The views expressed here are valid but the right
> > >
> > thing to do would be to further the conversation on wiki and have a
> proper
> > > community conversation.
> >
> >
> > I don't think that there is a single definition of a "proper" community
> > conversation.
> >
> > I have no objection to having an on-wiki RfC (and I can see how a
> > sophisticated and well-attended one might produce detailed guidance that
> > would be helpful), but neither do I want this thread to be trivialized.
> >
> > Pine
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing companies that offer paid editing services

2017-04-15 Thread Gabriel Thullen
Paid editors have been adding content to Wikipedia for a long time. Some of
them might even be doing so in accordance with the rules and guidelines,
but that is not what makes this case stand out.
The PR agency did a total of three edits, and the third one managed to pass
under the radar. They deliberately inserted text with minor grammatical
errors to bait an editor into fixing it up while at the same time leaving
it as an introductory sentence. The TV ad came out one week later.
What disturbs me is that Wikipedia is being instrumentalized by these big
corporations, and we do not need to debate whether the text is factually
exact, if it is sourced, or if it is too peacocky. Most of us are volunteer
editors, and we must make sure that we do not have to waste our time
rooting out these malicious edits.
The PR company wrote the text to make it look like it was put there by some
ordinary "grammatically challenged" fanboy. A contributor reverts the edit
the first time around, saying rightly that it was too promotional, then
fixes up the grammatical errors the second time around. Other contributors
would no longer touch the article seeing that a community member is already
watching over it.
We will have the check out the introductory sentences in hundreds of
articles. When somebody asks Google Home "what is xyz..." in their own
voice, Google will very obligingly spew out the Wikipedia article. IMHA,
that is the real issue here. These paid editors are quite willing to turn
Wikipedia into the worlds biggest high-tech distributor of junk mail.

Gabe

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 8:36 AM, Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> So the Americas favorite burger should have been "America's Favorite
> Burger(tm)". Agreed.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of FRED BAUDER
> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2017 8:21 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing companies
> that offer paid editing services
>
> "The Whopper, also known as America’s favorite burger, " is a problem as
> it implies that the Whopper is the favorite burger of the American public.
> Perhaps it is, but that is a trademark, not the result of a survey. The
> other stuff, "a flame-[[grilling|grilled]] patty made with 100% beef with
> no preservatives, no fillers and is topped with daily sliced tomatoes and
> onions, fresh lettuce, pickles, ketchup and mayo, served on a soft sesame
> seed bun." happens to be factually true and cannot be said of the products
> of, say, McDonalds where the "fixings"
> arrive in delivery trucks.
>
> Fred Bauder
>
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 08:06:50 +0200
>   "Peter Southwood"  wrote:
> > James,
> > Which parts of those statements to you consider factually inaccurate,
> >and which parts do you consider misleading in some other way?
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> >From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> >Behalf Of James Heilman
> > Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 5:32 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing
> >companies that offer paid editing services
> >
> > Wikipedia is not for sale. We are not simply another advertising venue
> >available to the corporations of the world. We have mechanisms for
> >corporations to suggest changes to our content and it is called the
> >talk page.
> >
> > Lets look at the changes likely made by Burger King staff in more
> >detail:
> >
> > In this edit this sentence "The Whopper is a burger, consisting of a
> >flame-grilled patty made with 100% beef with no preservatives, no
> >fillers and is topped with daily sliced tomatoes and onions, fresh
> >lettuce, pickles, ketchup and mayo, served on a soft sesame seed bun."
> >
> > >773836335=773833110>
> > was
> > added not once but twice. And than was added again following its first
> >removal.
> >
> > In this edit this sentence "The Whopper, also known as America’s
> >favorite burger, has a flame-[[grilling|grilled]] patty made with 100%
> >beef with no preservatives, no fillers and is topped with daily sliced
> >tomatoes and onions, fresh lettuce, pickles, ketchup and mayo, served
> >on a soft sesame seed bun. Whopper and America’s Favorite Burger are
> >trademarks of Burger King Corporation.
> >  773807497=773585358>"
> > was added.
> >
> > One of the accounts did not disclosed their relationship to the
> >company in question. And yes this is spam, so they did spam Wikipedia.
> >See [[WP:PEACOCK]]
> > >#Puffery>
> > and [[WP:NPOV]]
> >, the latter of
> >which is pillar number 2.
> >
> >
> > This is not the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing companies that offer paid editing services

2017-04-14 Thread Gabriel Thullen
This advertising campaign is particularly interesting, it appears that this
is the first time we can talk about an exploit (as is said in computer
security). It has been done once so it can be done again.

What worries me here is that an advertising campaign like this one, mixing
TV advertising and content editing on Wikipedia is not a last minute thing,
done on the spur of the moment. IMHA, the agency responsible for these ads
must have experienced wikipedians working for them. These guys know how the
community usually reacts. There is a lot of money involved and they know
that they will have to get it right the first time the ads are aired.

This looks like a bait and trick, and we were all fooled by it (by we, I
mean the wikipedia community of editors). The bait was the minor
grammatical errors in the new introductory sentence. An experienced editor
got tricked into correcting these missing spaces and such, and the text
itself gets a "stamp of approval", and the edit done by a new account will
no longer show up as the last modification done to the article.

These paid edits were made on April 4, the article started to be vandalized
one week later, on April 11. But it looks like the campaign did not create
the expected buzz because Google reacted quickly (just under 3 hours) and
Google Home stopped reading out the Whopper article at the end of the
advert.

The damage has been done. Theverge.com claims to have done such a
modification on Wikipedia, to quote them "as did we, in a test yesterday".
We will probably see more of this.

Gabe


On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 5:23 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> >
> > > but they didnt spam, nor did they introduce any false hoods, or remove
> > > controversial content, they just put a description of the Whopper for
> the
> > > opening sentence.
>
>
> I agree with James on this one. They "described" their product in a very
> flattering way, unnecessarily introducing marketing jargon ("known as
> America's favorite", "00% beef with no preservatives", "no fillers", "daily
> sliced" etc.). It is spam and in the future, near rather than far, we need
> to start seriously thinking how we can combat such content
> attacks/hijacking. There are some similarities to our work with
> anti-harassment, but I hope we'll be able to develop a more dedicated
> approach to this problem, that the Burger King manifestation is only a
> single example of.
>
> dj
> ___
> 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,
> 
>
___
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,