Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2024-11-06/News and notes: Difference between revisions
Smallbones (talk | contribs) |
Smallbones (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
This issue of ''The Signpost'' includes multiple columns of coverage. Right here we report Wikimedia community news updates. This issue's "Technology report" describes how Wikipedia editors and technology interact in the context of this case. "In focus" is a different telling of this story, formatted as the common questions and answers which commentators are exchanging. "From the editor" clarifies that ''The Signpost'' is a newspaper, and that newspapers in countries where many ''Signpost'' editors live, usually cover important court cases as a public service. |
This issue of ''The Signpost'' includes multiple columns of coverage. Right here we report Wikimedia community news updates. This issue's "Technology report" describes how Wikipedia editors and technology interact in the context of this case. "In focus" is a different telling of this story, formatted as the common questions and answers which commentators are exchanging. "From the editor" clarifies that ''The Signpost'' is a newspaper, and that newspapers in countries where many ''Signpost'' editors live, usually cover important court cases as a public service. |
||
As always, ''The Signpost'' invites all Wikipedia editors to post in the comments section for any article, and to submit journalism and new perspectives to future issues. – {{small|[[User:Bluerasberry|BR]] [[User:Smallbones|S]]}} |
As always, ''The Signpost'' invites all Wikipedia editors to post in the comments section for any article, and to submit journalism and new perspectives to future issues. – {{small|[[User:Bluerasberry|BR]]}} – {{small|[[User:Smallbones|S]]}} |
||
== Admin Elections voting has concluded== |
== Admin Elections voting has concluded== |
||
Revision as of 17:24, 3 November 2024
 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!
| ||||
Wikimedia Foundation shares ASI lawsuit updates; Wiki community admin reform continues
Optional: write a lede — not necessarily a WP:LEAD. Interesting > encyclopedic.
Wikimedia Foundation removes access to article about lawsuit
In what The Hindu called "the first instance of an English Wikipedia article being taken down by the foundation in the encyclopedia's history", the Wikimedia Foundation has deleted the Wikipedia article Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation at the direction of an order from the Delhi High Court. This article deletion is the third major conflict of concern to Wikipedia editors in this story, with the first being Asian News International (ASI) suing the Wikimedia Foundation over defamation in the Wikipedia article about themselves, and the second being ASI demanding that the Wikimedia Foundation remove the privacy and reveal the identity of certain editors to that article. The Signpost previously reported this story's development in October, September, and July.
To consider what Wikipedia editors are saying and doing in response, check discussions at Talk:Asian_News_International, Village_pump (WMF), the Wikimediaindia-l mailing list, and in off-wiki communication channels which the Wikimedia community manages including Discord servers and Telegram channels.
On October 21, Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees member Jimbo Wales wrote
Hi everyone, I spoke to the team at the WMF yesterday afternoon in a quick meeting of the board. Although I've been around Internet legal issues for a long time, it's important to note that I am not a lawyer and that I am not here speaking for the WMF nor the board as a whole. I'm speaking personally as a Wikipedian. As you might expect, it's pretty limited as to what people are able to say at this point, and unwise to give too many details. However, I can tell you that I went into the call initially very skeptical of the idea of even temporarily taking down this page and I was persuaded very quickly by a single fact that changed my mind: if we did not comply with this order, we would lose the possibility to appeal and the consequences would be dire in terms of achieving our ultimate goals here. For those who are concerned that this is somehow the WMF giving in on the principles that we all hold so dear, don't worry. I heard from the WMF quite strong moral and legal support for doing the right thing here - and that includes going through the process in the right way. Prior to the call, I thought that the consequence would just be a block of Wikipedia by the Indian government. While that's never a good thing, it's always been something we're prepared to accept in order to stand for freedom of expression. We were blocked in Turkey for 3 years or so, and fought all the way to the Supreme Court and won. Nothing has changed about our principles. The difference in this case is that the short term legal requirements in order to not wreck the long term chance of victory made this a necessary step. My understanding is that the WMF has consulted with fellow traveler human rights and freedom of expression groups who have supported that we should do everything we can to win this battle for the long run, as opposed to petulantly refusing to do something today. I hope these words are reassuring to those who may have had some concerns!
— Jimbo Wales at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § The Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation situation (09:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC))
On October 31, the Wikimedia Foundation legal team gave an update that "We have not shared any user data".
This issue of The Signpost includes multiple columns of coverage. Right here we report Wikimedia community news updates. This issue's "Technology report" describes how Wikipedia editors and technology interact in the context of this case. "In focus" is a different telling of this story, formatted as the common questions and answers which commentators are exchanging. "From the editor" clarifies that The Signpost is a newspaper, and that newspapers in countries where many Signpost editors live, usually cover important court cases as a public service.
As always, The Signpost invites all Wikipedia editors to post in the comments section for any article, and to submit journalism and new perspectives to future issues. – BR – S
Admin Elections voting has concluded
32 candidates stood through the entire administrator elections trial that began this month. Voting concluded as of 2359 31 October (UTC), and scrutineering will take a few days or weeks
to remove invalid, sockpuppet, or duplicate votes. After this, the outcome will be posted at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Results.
– B
ArbCom elections are starting
You may now submit your self-nomination for the Arbitration Committee election until 23:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC). As of publication there have been no self-nominations, so yours might be the first! Eight vacant ArbCom seats may be filled. Questions for candidates from the community can be submitted at any time during the election. Voting will be held over 14 days, from 00:00 UTC, 19 November 2024 to 23:59 UTC, 02 December 2024.
For complete information see WP:ACE2024.
Admin Recall is now policy
The ability of the community to remove or "recall" administrator's privileges has been discussed for almost two decades. Some important way stations in the recent discussions are:
- Phase I - Proposal 16 and Proposal 16c
- Phase II - Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Administrator recall
- a request for comments - RFC to confirm Phase II consensus
- WP:RECALL - Recall as a policy page
A new administrator recall policy, part of the 2024 RfA Reform, was adopted by separate RfC on October 26. The new policy follows unsuccessful attempts to formulate a recall procedure in 2006 and 2019. Until this point, only the Arbitration Committee could remove admin privileges without the cooperation of the administrator;[adminrecall 1] now a community consensus can also result in removal of privileges (see prior Signpost coverage).
The first recall was initiated under the new policy soon after the RfC was marked as adopted (Special:Permalink/1253547916 / Special:Permalink/1253758891). As of our writing deadline, there is almost 100 kilobytes of text in the ongoing discussion (about the equivalent of 50 typewritten pages), which may reflect the participants hashing out process and procedure for this new venue. – B
- ^ Administrators can also be removed by banning by the WMF, but this was strongly contested by the community and the current state of affairs is unclear – see prior Signpost coverage.
News from WMF
In June 2024 the Wikimedia Foundation established the Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin as a channel for staff of the Wikimedia Foundation to share project updates with the volunteer Wikimedia community of editors. The bulletin is a flood of information of interest to Wikipedia enthusiasts. The late October issue describes Temporary Accounts, which is a project intended to give new privacy options to Wikipedia editors, and which may be of interest to anyone exploring how privacy works in the Wikimedia platform.
Temporary Accounts seems to be the new name for IP Masking, discussed previously in The Signpost here and here. – B, BR
Brief notes
Comment these items out if something happens.
- Milestones: The following Wikimedia projects have reached milestones: TKTK
- Articles for Improvement: This week's Article for Improvement is TKTK. Please be bold in helping improve this article!
Discuss this story