--- Comment #14 from Risker <> ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> Nonetheless, I strongly encourage an advance
> communication strategy (perhaps
> using the community liaisons) to all
> Wikimedia projects where there are
> oversighted edits. When the extension
> was in use, it was broadly and publicly
> advertised as "permanent removal"
> I feel that the burden for this communication should lie on the shoulders of
> the individuals who misled the community in this way.

Well, I guess that would have been whomever set up the Oversight-L mailing
list, which has always resulted in the following "TO" line:

"Requests to permanently remove personal information from the English Wikipedia

It certainly said that in early 2007 (when I first requested an edit be

There is a rather well-known case of oversight that occurred in 2007 where
developers were requested to restore certain oversighted edits and refused
(even though there was agreement the oversight was done in error), and thus the
enwiki community has had reason to believe that there was no foreseeable
circumstance under which an edit would be restored.  

This is a really good opportunity for the WMF to have a positive communication
interaction with the community - it's a net positive change, the responses to
questions are positive and reassuring, and it will demonstrate the WMF's
commitment to respecting user privacy (and telling them when something has
changed in some way with respect to that) can effectively work hand-in-hand
with software improvements. It's concerning that there's such vehement
objection to communication, especially communication that is very likely to
positively reflect good community/developer interaction.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Wikibugs-l mailing list

Reply via email to