Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-08-01/News and notes: Difference between revisions
→Ruwiki founder banned from editing Wikimedia sites: Wikimedia Russia |
+mastodon |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Signpost-article-header-v2 |
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Signpost-article-header-v2 |
||
|{{{1|YOUR ARTICLE'S DESCRIPTIVE TITLE HERE<!-- REPLACE THIS-->}}} |
|{{{1|YOUR ARTICLE'S DESCRIPTIVE TITLE HERE<!-- REPLACE THIS-->}}} |
||
|By [[User:Red-tailed hawk|Red-tailed hawk]] |
|By [[User:Red-tailed hawk|Red-tailed hawk]], [[User:Jayen466|Andreas Kolbe]], and [[User:HaeB|HaeB]] |
||
|26 July 2023 |
|26 July 2023 |
||
}} |
}} |
||
Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
See also previous ''Signpost'' coverage [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2023-07-17/In_the_media|here]] and [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2023-06-05/News_and_notes|here]]. – {{small|AK}} |
See also previous ''Signpost'' coverage [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2023-07-17/In_the_media|here]] and [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2023-06-05/News_and_notes|here]]. – {{small|AK}} |
||
===Foundation launches its own Mastodon server=== |
|||
The Wikimedia Foundation has launched an instance on [[Mastodon (social network)|the federated social network Mastodon]], at https://wikimedia.social/ . According to a July 17 [https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/A2STMXTA3BKPO2VYWX6SEUWEJQOB477Y/ announcement on Wikimedia-l], |
|||
{{Signpost inline quote |
|||
|1=At the moment, sign-up is open for Wikimedia Foundation staff as we examine moderation and other areas. Product and technology staff will use it primarily for developer engagement. The goal is to create a space for people to connect and talk tech.}} |
|||
At the time of writing (July 30), the server lists 72 active users, although its [https://wikimedia.social/directory directory] of recently active local users only shows five who have made more than zero posts - led by the Foundation's [https://wikimedia.social/@wikimediafoundation own @wikimediafoundation account], which has already gained over 5000 followers, undoubtedly helped by |
|||
a [[Hacker News]] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36763357 post] that made it [https://web.archive.org/web/20230717205153/https://news.ycombinator.com/news (near) the top] of that site's front page. |
|||
The announcement comes amid continuing concerns about [[Twitter]] (where the corresponding [https://twitter.com/Wikimedia @wikimedia account] remains active, although viewing it currently requires registration, due to recent changes by Twitter/X). In late 2022, suggestions that the Foundation should mirror the official Wikipedia Twitter account (run by its Communications department) on Mastodon had fallen flat. This later motivated the creation of a community-run Wikipedia account on the [[m:Wikis World|Wikis World]] Mastodon server in April 2023 (see our coverage: [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2023-04-26/News_and_notes#Wikipedia_gains_an_official_presence_on_Mastodon_..._without_the_Wikimedia_Foundation.27s_involvement|"Wikipedia gains an official presence on Mastodon ... without the Wikimedia Foundation's involvement"]], [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2023-05-08/News_and_notes#Who_speaks_for_Wikipedia.3F_Mastodon_accreditation_reverted.|"Who speaks for Wikipedia? Mastodon accreditation reverted."]]). At the time of writing, it [https://wikis.world/@wikipedia continues to be active] with 16K followers and a verified checkmark, while [[m:Talk:@Wikipedia#Hi!_Available_to_chat?|requests by WMF staff]] "to change the name of the account [from @wikipedia] to 'Wikipedia movement,' 'Wikipedia volunteers,' 'Wikipedia worldwide,' or something similar" remain unheeded. – {{small|H}} |
|||
===Brief notes=== |
===Brief notes=== |
Revision as of 18:21, 30 July 2023
Article display preview: | This is a draft of a potential Signpost article, and should not be interpreted as a finished piece. Its content is subject to review by the editorial team and ultimately by JPxG, the editor in chief. Please do not link to this draft as it is unfinished and the URL will change upon publication. If you would like to contribute and are familiar with the requirements of a Signpost article, feel free to be bold in making improvements!
|
YOUR ARTICLE'S DESCRIPTIVE TITLE HERE
Amidst city council infighting, Durham, North Carolina city officials attempt to doxx Wikipedians
The city attorney of Durham, North Carolina attempted to coax the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) to reveal the identities of three editors and to prohibit the placement of certain verifiable and truthful content on Wikipedia pages of city officials, Indy Week and The News and Observer report.
The letter, dated June 29, outlined three complaints about content on Wikipedia. Two of the complaints related to text content, while the third related to an image depicting the signature of mayor of Durham.
The letter, signed by attorney Kimberly Rehberg, also states that she had removed the image of the signature from the Wikipedia article about Elaine M. O'Neal on June 28. This checks out; that article was edited on that day by a user named Kimlynn69, and Kimlynn69 left a message left on the user talk page of Johnson524 that identified herself as "Kimberly M. Rehberg" and as the city attorney of Durham.
Despite the elected officials' attempts to have the WMF censor Wikipedia and provide personal information of Wikipedians to the city government, the letter making the requests to do so may have never actually arrived at its intended destination. The Wikimedia Foundation told Indy Week that they had not received the letter and that the letter that had been made public contained an incorrect postal address for the Wikimedia Foundation's headquarters. Rehberg, meanwhile, told Indy Week that the letter had only been sent by U.S. mail. – R
(For further coverage of this story see this issue's In the media.)
Ruwiki founder banned from editing Wikimedia sites
Vladimir Medeyko (User:Drbug), the former head of Wikimedia Russia and founder of the Russian government-approved Ruwiki fork, has been "banned indefinitely by the Wikimedia Foundation from editing all Wikimedia sites". Medeyko had previously been blocked indefinitely on the Russian Wikipedia, following a discussion at the Russian Wikipedia's Administrators' Noticeboard, as well as on Commons, where the reason given was –
Long-term abuse: creating a Wikipedia fork which includes stolen content from Commons as well
See also previous Signpost coverage here and here. – AK
Foundation launches its own Mastodon server
The Wikimedia Foundation has launched an instance on the federated social network Mastodon, at https://wikimedia.social/ . According to a July 17 announcement on Wikimedia-l,
At the moment, sign-up is open for Wikimedia Foundation staff as we examine moderation and other areas. Product and technology staff will use it primarily for developer engagement. The goal is to create a space for people to connect and talk tech.
At the time of writing (July 30), the server lists 72 active users, although its directory of recently active local users only shows five who have made more than zero posts - led by the Foundation's own @wikimediafoundation account, which has already gained over 5000 followers, undoubtedly helped by a Hacker News post that made it (near) the top of that site's front page.
The announcement comes amid continuing concerns about Twitter (where the corresponding @wikimedia account remains active, although viewing it currently requires registration, due to recent changes by Twitter/X). In late 2022, suggestions that the Foundation should mirror the official Wikipedia Twitter account (run by its Communications department) on Mastodon had fallen flat. This later motivated the creation of a community-run Wikipedia account on the Wikis World Mastodon server in April 2023 (see our coverage: "Wikipedia gains an official presence on Mastodon ... without the Wikimedia Foundation's involvement", "Who speaks for Wikipedia? Mastodon accreditation reverted."). At the time of writing, it continues to be active with 16K followers and a verified checkmark, while requests by WMF staff "to change the name of the account [from @wikipedia] to 'Wikipedia movement,' 'Wikipedia volunteers,' 'Wikipedia worldwide,' or something similar" remain unheeded. – H
Brief notes
- Annual reports: Wikimedia Chile (financial statements); Kashmiri Wikimedians User Group; North Carolina Wikipedians.
- Global bans: 86sedan ([1]), Drbug (see report above).
- Articles for Improvement: This week's Article for Improvement (beginning 31 July) is Man. It will be followed the week after by Goalkeeper. Please be bold in helping improve these articles!
Discuss this story
Italy vs. the public domain
Should have noted that besides the links recommended in the EU Policy report, there is also a blog post by Wikimedia Italia that specifically discusses the impact on Wikimedia projects: https://diff.wikimedia.org/2023/06/05/open-access-to-heritage-images-is-becoming-increasingly-difficult-in-italy/ . Regards, HaeB (talk) 06:16, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Italy wants to be paid because somebody who happened to be born there drew something 500 years ago? Do they want to be paid every time someone eats pizza, too? AryKun (talk) 12:31, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Durham bull
Excellent reporting on the events in Durham. Threats to the independence and integrity of Wikipedia should always be brought to our attention. Smallchief (talk) 14:09, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Durham motive
This story was a tough read. Who, send what, why? The mayor requested, through a letter send by the city attorney, that her signature be taken down....but also content on pages of her political opponents of something she herself uncovered? This story left me with more questions then answers. What's her motive? Bart Terpstra (talk) 15:21, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Theft from Wikipedia
Why is it theft if Wikipedia is licensed under cc-by-sa-4.0? Bart Terpstra (talk) 15:27, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Elaine O'Neal (politician)
Her signature isn't on the page anymore. Any indication why? Therapyisgood (talk) 19:41, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given that Durham already had an illustrious history of electing complete lunatics with law degrees to positions of power (Mike Nifong and Tracey Cline come to mind, having a DA removed once is rare enough but who ever heard of it happening twice in 5 years?), I have to wonder what's going on with the civic culture down there. There are how many more important things to deal with while running a city of that size, none of which involve sending facially bumptious legal threats to Wikipedia editors. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 13:53, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Including the signature in this article
Clearly the City Attorney's letter was misguided in many ways and should not have been sent. The request to identify specific editors was especially inappropriate, as well as doomed to failure.
That being said, the letter's concern about reproducing the Mayor's signature on Wikipedia arguably has greater merit than its other aspects. Indeed, Wikipedia:Signatures of living persons, albeit an essay rather than a policy or guideline, observes that . This is reasonable guidance, especially where, as here, the signature is not of a highly prominent person and the signature itself lacks independent encyclopedic value. The fact that the mayor previously allowed her signature to be reproduced elsewhere is neither here nor there, as someone may come to perceive an identity theft risk belatedly, or may feel the risk is different in kind from an online posting rather than a paper one (and even more so now given the controversy).
Ordinarily we remove a moderately notable BLP subject's signature from Wikipedia at that person's request. Instead, this Signpost article chooses to further disseminate the signature in our internal online newspaper, with the foreseeable and presumably intended effort of further publicizing it. I have no qualms about publicizing the dispute regarding the signature; but there is no more news value than there is encyclopedic value to posting the signature itself over the subject's objection.
While posting the signature here is not legally actionable—let no one think I am suggesting otherwise—including it on this page can reasonably be interpreted as striking back at or even taunting a BLP subject out of (understandable) annoyance at her representative's unwarranted tactics in raising concern about the contents of her article. As such, I suggest that in the spirit of the BLP policy, the signature should be removed. @Red-tailed hawk, HaeB, Jayen466, and Bri: I'd welcome your comments. Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:05, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Of course we're keeping the signature image. The point of Wikipedia is the self-empowerment of over-educated under-employed dissenters who use free speech and privacy as a sort of lawfare against people with money and power. Wikipedia, as an institution, has traditionally stuck a thumb in the eye of decency when our mob of editors demanded it. Only a lawyer would attempt to make a farcical argument for the sake of propriety. It's as if you don't know who this community really is. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:44, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mastodon server
As I said on wikimedia-l, I'm very excited that the WMF is now (finally) running its own Mastodon server. More details have since emerged about wikimedia.social, namely "staff from the Product & Technology department will maintain the instance". This reaffirms the stated goal that the instance will be used to "talk tech", which previously received some good criticism from Erik about being too narrow of a view.
Regarding
Crediting it to Hacker News really misses the more obvious explanation: the post by @Wikipedia announcing the WMF account reached 900+ boosts, including one from Mastodon founder Eugen Rochko, who has some 330k+ followers. Surely people already on Mastodon are far more likely to become followers of new accounts versus people who read Hacker News :) Legoktm (talk) 08:09, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]