Do we have cross project policies to govern or limit local policies for the use of sysop tools? I would like to pass on policy advice, and any past cases folks here would like to highlight that set a precedent.
The case below is illustrative, though based on my recall of several complaints which went nowhere over the years, on email lists, and Jimmy's talk page, about apparently arbitrary blocks on different non-English Wikipedias, it seems reasonable to believe those complaints are the tip of the iceberg, and there are likely to be many historical cases of blocks that could have been appealed... had the user been confident to complain in English, and have the energy to pursue generic WMF policies on terms of use, or harassment/discrimination, to establish a meta-level case.
# Example case
An account block on the Amharic Wikipedia (am.wp) was flagged up yesterday on the WM LGBT+ Telegram discussion group.[3] The rationale for blocking the account was because the account name includes the word "Queer"[1]. The incident raises questions about process and accountability, particularly as the block gives the impression that this is the norm or an agreed interpretation of policy for sysops on am.wp, and because the user is well established using this account name across Wikimedia projects and has never edited am.wp so the block cannot be based on any prior action or dispute.
In this example there is no obvious process for appeal, if sysops on that project think that blocking any LGBT+ related account name represents local consensus. After off-wiki discussion, the WMF Trust and Safety team has been approached for advice,[2] as the rationale for the action appears hostile to any openly LGBT+ volunteers who might want to include something queer looking in their account name (such as my account name, should anyone want to read it as transgender related).
# Links
1. https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Contributions/QueerEcofemin...; the block log states "Names calling attention to your sexual behavior have never been allowed here in 15 years and aren't suddenly allowed in 2018" 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trust_and_Safety 3. https://telegram.me/wmlgbt
Thanks Fae
Additional notes: The user's regular page can be viewed on en wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QueerEcofeminist Queer may have to do with gender identity as opposed to being an indicator of 'sexual behavior', so the blockers didn't even get that right. Example: I am gender-nonconforming as to my gender identity and expression; this is the primary reason I use the label 'queer'.
I believe this should be reported... somewhere. But I don't know where. The WMF CoC only covers technical spaces. A little help here?
Ariel
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:26 PM Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Do we have cross project policies to govern or limit local policies for the use of sysop tools? I would like to pass on policy advice, and any past cases folks here would like to highlight that set a precedent.
The case below is illustrative, though based on my recall of several complaints which went nowhere over the years, on email lists, and Jimmy's talk page, about apparently arbitrary blocks on different non-English Wikipedias, it seems reasonable to believe those complaints are the tip of the iceberg, and there are likely to be many historical cases of blocks that could have been appealed... had the user been confident to complain in English, and have the energy to pursue generic WMF policies on terms of use, or harassment/discrimination, to establish a meta-level case.
# Example case
An account block on the Amharic Wikipedia (am.wp) was flagged up yesterday on the WM LGBT+ Telegram discussion group.[3] The rationale for blocking the account was because the account name includes the word "Queer"[1]. The incident raises questions about process and accountability, particularly as the block gives the impression that this is the norm or an agreed interpretation of policy for sysops on am.wp, and because the user is well established using this account name across Wikimedia projects and has never edited am.wp so the block cannot be based on any prior action or dispute.
In this example there is no obvious process for appeal, if sysops on that project think that blocking any LGBT+ related account name represents local consensus. After off-wiki discussion, the WMF Trust and Safety team has been approached for advice,[2] as the rationale for the action appears hostile to any openly LGBT+ volunteers who might want to include something queer looking in their account name (such as my account name, should anyone want to read it as transgender related).
# Links
https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Contributions/QueerEcofemin... ; the block log states "Names calling attention to your sexual behavior have never been allowed here in 15 years and aren't suddenly allowed in 2018" 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trust_and_Safety 3. https://telegram.me/wmlgbt
Thanks Fae -- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi,
My opinion is that the block should be lifted. However, to the best of my knowledge, an appeal of a local block to the larger Wikiverse has never been successful. I am guessing that there are at least four factors here: 1. a lack of consensus for a process for appealing a local block to the larger community, or whether such a process is desirable, 2. a lack of skilled community human resources capacity to review such appeals (I would guess that reviewers of appeals would get flooded with hundreds of low-value appeals, that the job would be emotionally and intellectually difficult, and that the queue for reviews would be many months long), 3. a lack of confidence among people who are not proficient in a language to review a dispute that happened in that language, and 4. a lack of volunteer capacity and financial resources for highly accurate translations of appeals and their related content.
Asking WMF to overturn a community block sets a precedent for them to substitute their judgement for the community's. There is a history of problems with WMF clashing with the community, and I have an ongoing objection to WMF's unilateral and opaque uses of global blocks. I would not want WMF to forcibly intervene in matters like this. Instead, What I recommend is diplomacy. The admin who made the block appears to have intermediate proficiency in English. I recommend first having a diplomatic discussion with that admin regarding the block. The admin could be persuaded to remove it. By "diplomatic discussion" I do not mean telling the admin bluntly that "you are wrong and I am right". An assumption of good faith, persuasion, and respect are likely to be valuable here. Try diplomacy first.
If the admin remains unpersuaded to unblock the user then, to the best of my knowledge, the only routes of appeal available are on that wiki. I am unfamiliar with the specific situation in Armenian Wikipedia, but I suggest looking for a local policy for appealing blocks and looking for a username policy. Intermediate proficiency in Armenian is likely to be highly desirable, and likely necessary, for productive conversations on that wiki regarding a block appeal and/or proposing a change in local username policy.
I realize that the concept of appealing a local block to the global community sounds like it is worth considering, but even if in principle there becomes a consensus that we should allow this, implementing such an option for appeals would likely be difficult and time consuming in practice, and without highly accurate translations which we do not appear to have sufficient volunteer or financial resources to support at this time, I think that the potential for mistakes due to misunderstandings is high.
Sorry, I meant to say Amharic, not Armenian.
Pine ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 9:45 PM Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
My opinion is that the block should be lifted. However, to the best of my knowledge, an appeal of a local block to the larger Wikiverse has never been successful. I am guessing that there are at least four factors here:
- a lack of consensus for a process for appealing a local block to the
larger community, or whether such a process is desirable, 2. a lack of skilled community human resources capacity to review such appeals (I would guess that reviewers of appeals would get flooded with hundreds of low-value appeals, that the job would be emotionally and intellectually difficult, and that the queue for reviews would be many months long), 3. a lack of confidence among people who are not proficient in a language to review a dispute that happened in that language, and 4. a lack of volunteer capacity and financial resources for highly accurate translations of appeals and their related content.
Asking WMF to overturn a community block sets a precedent for them to substitute their judgement for the community's. There is a history of problems with WMF clashing with the community, and I have an ongoing objection to WMF's unilateral and opaque uses of global blocks. I would not want WMF to forcibly intervene in matters like this. Instead, What I recommend is diplomacy. The admin who made the block appears to have intermediate proficiency in English. I recommend first having a diplomatic discussion with that admin regarding the block. The admin could be persuaded to remove it. By "diplomatic discussion" I do not mean telling the admin bluntly that "you are wrong and I am right". An assumption of good faith, persuasion, and respect are likely to be valuable here. Try diplomacy first.
If the admin remains unpersuaded to unblock the user then, to the best of my knowledge, the only routes of appeal available are on that wiki. I am unfamiliar with the specific situation in Armenian Wikipedia, but I suggest looking for a local policy for appealing blocks and looking for a username policy. Intermediate proficiency in Armenian is likely to be highly desirable, and likely necessary, for productive conversations on that wiki regarding a block appeal and/or proposing a change in local username policy.
I realize that the concept of appealing a local block to the global community sounds like it is worth considering, but even if in principle there becomes a consensus that we should allow this, implementing such an option for appeals would likely be difficult and time consuming in practice, and without highly accurate translations which we do not appear to have sufficient volunteer or financial resources to support at this time, I think that the potential for mistakes due to misunderstandings is high.
I note that we are talking about the block of one single user on one single project; this particular account has thousands of edits over about a dozen projects, but is "attached" to hundreds of Wikimedia projects. The majority of these "attached" accounts are likely because the editor "visited" the various projects while logged in, activating the automatic account creation algorithm. The account was created 8 years ago, and has actively edited a wide variety of projects, including several wikipedias, Commons, Wikidata, and Meta. While English Wikipedia is the account's "home" wiki, about 55% of the account's global edits have been made on Marathi Wikipedia. The Amharic Wikipedia account does not appear to have edited, which suggests that it was automatically created when the editor was "looking at" the project on 9 February 2018. The block for account name was made on 22 October 2018. I note that accounts were created on over a hundred projects over the course of a few days in February 2018.
The point being raised in this thread is that it appears this editor was blocked on one of the 381 wikis on which they have an account, explicitly because of the perception that their username calls attention to the sexual behaviour of the editor. What we do not know is (a) whether that is in fact a legitimate username block reason on Amharic Wikipedia, or (b) if it is a legitimate username block reason, *why* it would be a username block reason. We don't know why this block was applied so long after the account was created. We don't know the username policy on Amharic Wikipedia, nor do we know how it is applied; for example, we don't know if a username like "StraightGuy101" would be blocked. We do know that there are only 4 administrators on Amharic Wikipedia, and that there are fewer than 50 active users working on the project, which may be part of the reason for the delay between automatic account creation and the account block.
We also know that one of the challenges of single user login for all Wikimedia projects has highlighted the fact that certain usernames that are acceptable on some projects are blocked on other projects; we've known that for years. We know that each project establishes its own policies when it comes to usernames. There are legitimate reasons why a username that is acceptable in one language is not acceptable in another language, even in cases where the editor had no knowledge that the chosen username would be a problem in another language. We do know that there have been lots of cases where usernames have been blocked for "username policy violation" on all kinds of projects, despite the account operating productively on other projects.
I also note that there is nothing in this thread that confirms the editor themself has raised any concerns about this block, and I am always wary of turning an editor into a "martyr for a cause" without their direct agreement, as that can be as abusive as the original action. So the first step in this situation would be to confirm with the individual editor whether or not they want their "case" to be examined.
Should the editor be agreeable, I suggest that the next step is for someone who has the ability to converse in Amharic to contact the Amharic Wikipedia and find out why the block has been issued, how it is consistent with the username policy on Amharic Wikipedia, whether that policy is driven in part by external considerations (e.g., does the project risk heavy governmental scrutiny if it appears to "promote" locally unacceptable activities). I am personally curious as to why it took over six months to identify that this account did not meet the local username policy, and whether there was internal or external discussion about the username.
It is not clear to me what the desired outcome is in this case - at least in part because we have no idea of the opinion of the editor involved. I am hard-pressed to say that a project should be required to allow usernames that it has a long history of considering unacceptable, especially if it is applied evenly to all accounts; in this case, if it disallows usernames that imply sexual preference regardless of what that preference is.
It seems to me that the WMF Trust & Safety group would probably be the right group to examine this.
Risker/Anne
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 at 09:42, Ariel Glenn WMF ariel@wikimedia.org wrote:
Additional notes: The user's regular page can be viewed on en wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QueerEcofeminist Queer may have to do with gender identity as opposed to being an indicator of 'sexual behavior', so the blockers didn't even get that right. Example: I am gender-nonconforming as to my gender identity and expression; this is the primary reason I use the label 'queer'.
I believe this should be reported... somewhere. But I don't know where. The WMF CoC only covers technical spaces. A little help here?
Ariel
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:26 PM Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Do we have cross project policies to govern or limit local policies for the use of sysop tools? I would like to pass on policy advice, and any past cases folks here would like to highlight that set a precedent.
The case below is illustrative, though based on my recall of several complaints which went nowhere over the years, on email lists, and Jimmy's talk page, about apparently arbitrary blocks on different non-English Wikipedias, it seems reasonable to believe those complaints are the tip of the iceberg, and there are likely to be many historical cases of blocks that could have been appealed... had the user been confident to complain in English, and have the energy to pursue generic WMF policies on terms of use, or harassment/discrimination, to establish a meta-level case.
# Example case
An account block on the Amharic Wikipedia (am.wp) was flagged up yesterday on the WM LGBT+ Telegram discussion group.[3] The rationale for blocking the account was because the account name includes the word "Queer"[1]. The incident raises questions about process and accountability, particularly as the block gives the impression that this is the norm or an agreed interpretation of policy for sysops on am.wp, and because the user is well established using this account name across Wikimedia projects and has never edited am.wp so the block cannot be based on any prior action or dispute.
In this example there is no obvious process for appeal, if sysops on that project think that blocking any LGBT+ related account name represents local consensus. After off-wiki discussion, the WMF Trust and Safety team has been approached for advice,[2] as the rationale for the action appears hostile to any openly LGBT+ volunteers who might want to include something queer looking in their account name (such as my account name, should anyone want to read it as transgender related).
# Links
https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Contributions/QueerEcofemin...
; the block log states "Names calling attention to your sexual behavior have never been allowed here in 15 years and aren't suddenly allowed in 2018" 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trust_and_Safety 3. https://telegram.me/wmlgbt
Thanks Fae -- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Given the response on the talk page [1] I think it's clear violation of nondiscrimination policy [2]
[1] "promotion of homosexuality will not be tolerated here nor will it be forced down our throats to suit anyone's international political agenda if you expect Ethiopians to take part." [2] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Nondiscrimination
Best On Wed, Jan 2, 2019, 23:09 Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I note that we are talking about the block of one single user on one single project; this particular account has thousands of edits over about a dozen projects, but is "attached" to hundreds of Wikimedia projects. The majority of these "attached" accounts are likely because the editor "visited" the various projects while logged in, activating the automatic account creation algorithm. The account was created 8 years ago, and has actively edited a wide variety of projects, including several wikipedias, Commons, Wikidata, and Meta. While English Wikipedia is the account's "home" wiki, about 55% of the account's global edits have been made on Marathi Wikipedia. The Amharic Wikipedia account does not appear to have edited, which suggests that it was automatically created when the editor was "looking at" the project on 9 February 2018. The block for account name was made on 22 October 2018. I note that accounts were created on over a hundred projects over the course of a few days in February 2018.
The point being raised in this thread is that it appears this editor was blocked on one of the 381 wikis on which they have an account, explicitly because of the perception that their username calls attention to the sexual behaviour of the editor. What we do not know is (a) whether that is in fact a legitimate username block reason on Amharic Wikipedia, or (b) if it is a legitimate username block reason, *why* it would be a username block reason. We don't know why this block was applied so long after the account was created. We don't know the username policy on Amharic Wikipedia, nor do we know how it is applied; for example, we don't know if a username like "StraightGuy101" would be blocked. We do know that there are only 4 administrators on Amharic Wikipedia, and that there are fewer than 50 active users working on the project, which may be part of the reason for the delay between automatic account creation and the account block.
We also know that one of the challenges of single user login for all Wikimedia projects has highlighted the fact that certain usernames that are acceptable on some projects are blocked on other projects; we've known that for years. We know that each project establishes its own policies when it comes to usernames. There are legitimate reasons why a username that is acceptable in one language is not acceptable in another language, even in cases where the editor had no knowledge that the chosen username would be a problem in another language. We do know that there have been lots of cases where usernames have been blocked for "username policy violation" on all kinds of projects, despite the account operating productively on other projects.
I also note that there is nothing in this thread that confirms the editor themself has raised any concerns about this block, and I am always wary of turning an editor into a "martyr for a cause" without their direct agreement, as that can be as abusive as the original action. So the first step in this situation would be to confirm with the individual editor whether or not they want their "case" to be examined.
Should the editor be agreeable, I suggest that the next step is for someone who has the ability to converse in Amharic to contact the Amharic Wikipedia and find out why the block has been issued, how it is consistent with the username policy on Amharic Wikipedia, whether that policy is driven in part by external considerations (e.g., does the project risk heavy governmental scrutiny if it appears to "promote" locally unacceptable activities). I am personally curious as to why it took over six months to identify that this account did not meet the local username policy, and whether there was internal or external discussion about the username.
It is not clear to me what the desired outcome is in this case - at least in part because we have no idea of the opinion of the editor involved. I am hard-pressed to say that a project should be required to allow usernames that it has a long history of considering unacceptable, especially if it is applied evenly to all accounts; in this case, if it disallows usernames that imply sexual preference regardless of what that preference is.
It seems to me that the WMF Trust & Safety group would probably be the right group to examine this.
Risker/Anne
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 at 09:42, Ariel Glenn WMF ariel@wikimedia.org wrote:
Additional notes: The user's regular page can be viewed on en wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QueerEcofeminist Queer may have to do with gender identity as opposed to being an
indicator
of 'sexual behavior', so the blockers didn't even get that right.
Example:
I am gender-nonconforming as to my gender identity and expression; this
is
the primary reason I use the label 'queer'.
I believe this should be reported... somewhere. But I don't know where.
The
WMF CoC only covers technical spaces. A little help here?
Ariel
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:26 PM Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Do we have cross project policies to govern or limit local policies for the use of sysop tools? I would like to pass on policy advice, and any past cases folks here would like to highlight that set a precedent.
The case below is illustrative, though based on my recall of several complaints which went nowhere over the years, on email lists, and Jimmy's talk page, about apparently arbitrary blocks on different non-English Wikipedias, it seems reasonable to believe those complaints are the tip of the iceberg, and there are likely to be many historical cases of blocks that could have been appealed... had the user been confident to complain in English, and have the energy to pursue generic WMF policies on terms of use, or harassment/discrimination, to establish a meta-level case.
# Example case
An account block on the Amharic Wikipedia (am.wp) was flagged up yesterday on the WM LGBT+ Telegram discussion group.[3] The rationale for blocking the account was because the account name includes the word "Queer"[1]. The incident raises questions about process and accountability, particularly as the block gives the impression that this is the norm or an agreed interpretation of policy for sysops on am.wp, and because the user is well established using this account name across Wikimedia projects and has never edited am.wp so the block cannot be based on any prior action or dispute.
In this example there is no obvious process for appeal, if sysops on that project think that blocking any LGBT+ related account name represents local consensus. After off-wiki discussion, the WMF Trust and Safety team has been approached for advice,[2] as the rationale for the action appears hostile to any openly LGBT+ volunteers who might want to include something queer looking in their account name (such as my account name, should anyone want to read it as transgender related).
# Links
https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Contributions/QueerEcofemin...
; the block log states "Names calling attention to your sexual behavior have never been allowed here in 15 years and aren't suddenly allowed in 2018" 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trust_and_Safety 3. https://telegram.me/wmlgbt
Thanks Fae -- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Because of a truly great idea https://am.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Log/block&page=%E1%8A%A0%E1%89%A3%E1%88%8D%3ATeles the involved user's admin/bureaucrat access was revoked https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=rights&user=&page=Codex+Sinaiticus%40amwiki&wpdate=&tagfilter=&subtype= by Marco Aurelio.
Vito
Il giorno lun 7 gen 2019 alle ore 11:02 Amir Sarabadani ladsgroup@gmail.com ha scritto:
Given the response on the talk page [1] I think it's clear violation of nondiscrimination policy [2]
[1] "promotion of homosexuality will not be tolerated here nor will it be forced down our throats to suit anyone's international political agenda if you expect Ethiopians to take part." [2] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Nondiscrimination
Best On Wed, Jan 2, 2019, 23:09 Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I note that we are talking about the block of one single user on one single project; this particular account has thousands of edits over
about a
dozen projects, but is "attached" to hundreds of Wikimedia projects. The majority of these "attached" accounts are likely because the editor "visited" the various projects while logged in, activating the automatic account creation algorithm. The account was created 8 years ago, and has actively edited a wide variety of projects, including several
wikipedias,
Commons, Wikidata, and Meta. While English Wikipedia is the account's "home" wiki, about 55% of the account's global edits have been made on Marathi Wikipedia. The Amharic Wikipedia account does not appear to have edited, which suggests that it was automatically created when the editor was "looking at" the project on 9 February 2018. The block for account name was made on 22 October 2018. I note that accounts were created on over a hundred projects over the course of a few days in February 2018.
The point being raised in this thread is that it appears this editor was blocked on one of the 381 wikis on which they have an account, explicitly because of the perception that their username calls attention to the
sexual
behaviour of the editor. What we do not know is (a) whether that is in
fact
a legitimate username block reason on Amharic Wikipedia, or (b) if it is
a
legitimate username block reason, *why* it would be a username block reason. We don't know why this block was applied so long after the
account
was created. We don't know the username policy on Amharic Wikipedia, nor
do
we know how it is applied; for example, we don't know if a username like "StraightGuy101" would be blocked. We do know that there are only 4 administrators on Amharic Wikipedia, and that there are fewer than 50 active users working on the project, which may be part of the reason for the delay between automatic account creation and the account block.
We also know that one of the challenges of single user login for all Wikimedia projects has highlighted the fact that certain usernames that
are
acceptable on some projects are blocked on other projects; we've known
that
for years. We know that each project establishes its own policies when it comes to usernames. There are legitimate reasons why a username that is acceptable in one language is not acceptable in another language, even in cases where the editor had no knowledge that the chosen username would
be a
problem in another language. We do know that there have been lots of
cases
where usernames have been blocked for "username policy violation" on all kinds of projects, despite the account operating productively on other projects.
I also note that there is nothing in this thread that confirms the editor themself has raised any concerns about this block, and I am always wary
of
turning an editor into a "martyr for a cause" without their direct agreement, as that can be as abusive as the original action. So the first step in this situation would be to confirm with the individual editor whether or not they want their "case" to be examined.
Should the editor be agreeable, I suggest that the next step is for
someone
who has the ability to converse in Amharic to contact the Amharic
Wikipedia
and find out why the block has been issued, how it is consistent with the username policy on Amharic Wikipedia, whether that policy is driven in
part
by external considerations (e.g., does the project risk heavy
governmental
scrutiny if it appears to "promote" locally unacceptable activities). I
am
personally curious as to why it took over six months to identify that
this
account did not meet the local username policy, and whether there was internal or external discussion about the username.
It is not clear to me what the desired outcome is in this case - at least in part because we have no idea of the opinion of the editor involved. I am hard-pressed to say that a project should be required to allow
usernames
that it has a long history of considering unacceptable, especially if it
is
applied evenly to all accounts; in this case, if it disallows usernames that imply sexual preference regardless of what that preference is.
It seems to me that the WMF Trust & Safety group would probably be the right group to examine this.
Risker/Anne
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 at 09:42, Ariel Glenn WMF ariel@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Additional notes: The user's regular page can be viewed on en wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QueerEcofeminist Queer may have to do with gender identity as opposed to being an
indicator
of 'sexual behavior', so the blockers didn't even get that right.
Example:
I am gender-nonconforming as to my gender identity and expression; this
is
the primary reason I use the label 'queer'.
I believe this should be reported... somewhere. But I don't know where.
The
WMF CoC only covers technical spaces. A little help here?
Ariel
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:26 PM Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Do we have cross project policies to govern or limit local policies for the use of sysop tools? I would like to pass on policy advice,
and
any past cases folks here would like to highlight that set a precedent.
The case below is illustrative, though based on my recall of several complaints which went nowhere over the years, on email lists, and Jimmy's talk page, about apparently arbitrary blocks on different non-English Wikipedias, it seems reasonable to believe those complaints are the tip of the iceberg, and there are likely to be
many
historical cases of blocks that could have been appealed... had the user been confident to complain in English, and have the energy to pursue generic WMF policies on terms of use, or harassment/discrimination, to establish a meta-level case.
# Example case
An account block on the Amharic Wikipedia (am.wp) was flagged up yesterday on the WM LGBT+ Telegram discussion group.[3] The rationale for blocking the account was because the account name includes the word "Queer"[1]. The incident raises questions about process and accountability, particularly as the block gives the impression that this is the norm or an agreed interpretation of policy for sysops on am.wp, and because the user is well established using this account name across Wikimedia projects and has never edited am.wp so the
block
cannot be based on any prior action or dispute.
In this example there is no obvious process for appeal, if sysops on that project think that blocking any LGBT+ related account name represents local consensus. After off-wiki discussion, the WMF Trust and Safety team has been approached for advice,[2] as the rationale for the action appears hostile to any openly LGBT+ volunteers who might want to include something queer looking in their account name (such as my account name, should anyone want to read it as
transgender
related).
# Links
https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Contributions/QueerEcofemin...
; the block log states "Names calling attention to your sexual behavior have never been allowed here in 15 years and aren't suddenly allowed in 2018" 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trust_and_Safety 3. https://telegram.me/wmlgbt
Thanks Fae -- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
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,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Well, in 2019 people should already have come to the notion that blocking locally an acting steward is not really a good idea.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 11:21 AM Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Because of a truly great idea < https://am.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Log/block&...
the involved user's admin/bureaucrat access was revoked < https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=rights&user=&page=C...
by Marco Aurelio.
Vito
Il giorno lun 7 gen 2019 alle ore 11:02 Amir Sarabadani < ladsgroup@gmail.com> ha scritto:
Given the response on the talk page [1] I think it's clear violation of nondiscrimination policy [2]
[1] "promotion of homosexuality will not be tolerated here nor will it be forced down our throats to suit anyone's international political agenda
if
you expect Ethiopians to take part." [2] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Nondiscrimination
Best On Wed, Jan 2, 2019, 23:09 Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I note that we are talking about the block of one single user on one single project; this particular account has thousands of edits over
about a
dozen projects, but is "attached" to hundreds of Wikimedia projects.
The
majority of these "attached" accounts are likely because the editor "visited" the various projects while logged in, activating the
automatic
account creation algorithm. The account was created 8 years ago, and
has
actively edited a wide variety of projects, including several
wikipedias,
Commons, Wikidata, and Meta. While English Wikipedia is the account's "home" wiki, about 55% of the account's global edits have been made on Marathi Wikipedia. The Amharic Wikipedia account does not appear to
have
edited, which suggests that it was automatically created when the
editor
was "looking at" the project on 9 February 2018. The block for
account
name was made on 22 October 2018. I note that accounts were created on over a hundred projects over the course of a few days in February 2018.
The point being raised in this thread is that it appears this editor
was
blocked on one of the 381 wikis on which they have an account,
explicitly
because of the perception that their username calls attention to the
sexual
behaviour of the editor. What we do not know is (a) whether that is in
fact
a legitimate username block reason on Amharic Wikipedia, or (b) if it
is
a
legitimate username block reason, *why* it would be a username block reason. We don't know why this block was applied so long after the
account
was created. We don't know the username policy on Amharic Wikipedia,
nor
do
we know how it is applied; for example, we don't know if a username
like
"StraightGuy101" would be blocked. We do know that there are only 4 administrators on Amharic Wikipedia, and that there are fewer than 50 active users working on the project, which may be part of the reason
for
the delay between automatic account creation and the account block.
We also know that one of the challenges of single user login for all Wikimedia projects has highlighted the fact that certain usernames that
are
acceptable on some projects are blocked on other projects; we've known
that
for years. We know that each project establishes its own policies when
it
comes to usernames. There are legitimate reasons why a username that is acceptable in one language is not acceptable in another language, even
in
cases where the editor had no knowledge that the chosen username would
be a
problem in another language. We do know that there have been lots of
cases
where usernames have been blocked for "username policy violation" on
all
kinds of projects, despite the account operating productively on other projects.
I also note that there is nothing in this thread that confirms the
editor
themself has raised any concerns about this block, and I am always wary
of
turning an editor into a "martyr for a cause" without their direct agreement, as that can be as abusive as the original action. So the
first
step in this situation would be to confirm with the individual editor whether or not they want their "case" to be examined.
Should the editor be agreeable, I suggest that the next step is for
someone
who has the ability to converse in Amharic to contact the Amharic
Wikipedia
and find out why the block has been issued, how it is consistent with
the
username policy on Amharic Wikipedia, whether that policy is driven in
part
by external considerations (e.g., does the project risk heavy
governmental
scrutiny if it appears to "promote" locally unacceptable activities). I
am
personally curious as to why it took over six months to identify that
this
account did not meet the local username policy, and whether there was internal or external discussion about the username.
It is not clear to me what the desired outcome is in this case - at
least
in part because we have no idea of the opinion of the editor
involved. I
am hard-pressed to say that a project should be required to allow
usernames
that it has a long history of considering unacceptable, especially if
it
is
applied evenly to all accounts; in this case, if it disallows usernames that imply sexual preference regardless of what that preference is.
It seems to me that the WMF Trust & Safety group would probably be the right group to examine this.
Risker/Anne
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 at 09:42, Ariel Glenn WMF ariel@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Additional notes: The user's regular page can be viewed on en wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QueerEcofeminist Queer may have to do with gender identity as opposed to being an
indicator
of 'sexual behavior', so the blockers didn't even get that right.
Example:
I am gender-nonconforming as to my gender identity and expression;
this
is
the primary reason I use the label 'queer'.
I believe this should be reported... somewhere. But I don't know
where.
The
WMF CoC only covers technical spaces. A little help here?
Ariel
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:26 PM Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Do we have cross project policies to govern or limit local policies for the use of sysop tools? I would like to pass on policy advice,
and
any past cases folks here would like to highlight that set a precedent.
The case below is illustrative, though based on my recall of
several
complaints which went nowhere over the years, on email lists, and Jimmy's talk page, about apparently arbitrary blocks on different non-English Wikipedias, it seems reasonable to believe those complaints are the tip of the iceberg, and there are likely to be
many
historical cases of blocks that could have been appealed... had the user been confident to complain in English, and have the energy to pursue generic WMF policies on terms of use, or harassment/discrimination, to establish a meta-level case.
# Example case
An account block on the Amharic Wikipedia (am.wp) was flagged up yesterday on the WM LGBT+ Telegram discussion group.[3] The
rationale
for blocking the account was because the account name includes the word "Queer"[1]. The incident raises questions about process and accountability, particularly as the block gives the impression that this is the norm or an agreed interpretation of policy for sysops
on
am.wp, and because the user is well established using this account name across Wikimedia projects and has never edited am.wp so the
block
cannot be based on any prior action or dispute.
In this example there is no obvious process for appeal, if sysops
on
that project think that blocking any LGBT+ related account name represents local consensus. After off-wiki discussion, the WMF
Trust
and Safety team has been approached for advice,[2] as the rationale for the action appears hostile to any openly LGBT+ volunteers who might want to include something queer looking in their account name (such as my account name, should anyone want to read it as
transgender
related).
# Links
https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Contributions/QueerEcofemin...
; the block log states "Names calling attention to your sexual
behavior
have never been allowed here in 15 years and aren't suddenly
allowed
in 2018" 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trust_and_Safety 3. https://telegram.me/wmlgbt
Thanks Fae -- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
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,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
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,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
The lobby of high voltage warning signs disagrees.
Vito
Il giorno lun 7 gen 2019 alle ore 11:37 Yaroslav Blanter ymbalt@gmail.com ha scritto:
Well, in 2019 people should already have come to the notion that blocking locally an acting steward is not really a good idea.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 11:21 AM Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Because of a truly great idea <
https://am.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Log/block&...
the involved user's admin/bureaucrat access was revoked <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=rights&user=&page=C...
by Marco Aurelio.
Vito
Il giorno lun 7 gen 2019 alle ore 11:02 Amir Sarabadani < ladsgroup@gmail.com> ha scritto:
Given the response on the talk page [1] I think it's clear violation of nondiscrimination policy [2]
[1] "promotion of homosexuality will not be tolerated here nor will it
be
forced down our throats to suit anyone's international political agenda
if
you expect Ethiopians to take part." [2] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Nondiscrimination
Best On Wed, Jan 2, 2019, 23:09 Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I note that we are talking about the block of one single user on one single project; this particular account has thousands of edits over
about a
dozen projects, but is "attached" to hundreds of Wikimedia projects.
The
majority of these "attached" accounts are likely because the editor "visited" the various projects while logged in, activating the
automatic
account creation algorithm. The account was created 8 years ago, and
has
actively edited a wide variety of projects, including several
wikipedias,
Commons, Wikidata, and Meta. While English Wikipedia is the account's "home" wiki, about 55% of the account's global edits have been made
on
Marathi Wikipedia. The Amharic Wikipedia account does not appear to
have
edited, which suggests that it was automatically created when the
editor
was "looking at" the project on 9 February 2018. The block for
account
name was made on 22 October 2018. I note that accounts were created
on
over a hundred projects over the course of a few days in February
The point being raised in this thread is that it appears this editor
was
blocked on one of the 381 wikis on which they have an account,
explicitly
because of the perception that their username calls attention to the
sexual
behaviour of the editor. What we do not know is (a) whether that is
in
fact
a legitimate username block reason on Amharic Wikipedia, or (b) if it
is
a
legitimate username block reason, *why* it would be a username block reason. We don't know why this block was applied so long after the
account
was created. We don't know the username policy on Amharic Wikipedia,
nor
do
we know how it is applied; for example, we don't know if a username
like
"StraightGuy101" would be blocked. We do know that there are only 4 administrators on Amharic Wikipedia, and that there are fewer than 50 active users working on the project, which may be part of the reason
for
the delay between automatic account creation and the account block.
We also know that one of the challenges of single user login for all Wikimedia projects has highlighted the fact that certain usernames
that
are
acceptable on some projects are blocked on other projects; we've
known
that
for years. We know that each project establishes its own policies
when
it
comes to usernames. There are legitimate reasons why a username that
is
acceptable in one language is not acceptable in another language,
even
in
cases where the editor had no knowledge that the chosen username
would
be a
problem in another language. We do know that there have been lots of
cases
where usernames have been blocked for "username policy violation" on
all
kinds of projects, despite the account operating productively on
other
projects.
I also note that there is nothing in this thread that confirms the
editor
themself has raised any concerns about this block, and I am always
wary
of
turning an editor into a "martyr for a cause" without their direct agreement, as that can be as abusive as the original action. So the
first
step in this situation would be to confirm with the individual editor whether or not they want their "case" to be examined.
Should the editor be agreeable, I suggest that the next step is for
someone
who has the ability to converse in Amharic to contact the Amharic
Wikipedia
and find out why the block has been issued, how it is consistent with
the
username policy on Amharic Wikipedia, whether that policy is driven
in
part
by external considerations (e.g., does the project risk heavy
governmental
scrutiny if it appears to "promote" locally unacceptable
activities). I
am
personally curious as to why it took over six months to identify that
this
account did not meet the local username policy, and whether there was internal or external discussion about the username.
It is not clear to me what the desired outcome is in this case - at
least
in part because we have no idea of the opinion of the editor
involved. I
am hard-pressed to say that a project should be required to allow
usernames
that it has a long history of considering unacceptable, especially if
it
is
applied evenly to all accounts; in this case, if it disallows
usernames
that imply sexual preference regardless of what that preference is.
It seems to me that the WMF Trust & Safety group would probably be
the
right group to examine this.
Risker/Anne
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 at 09:42, Ariel Glenn WMF ariel@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Additional notes: The user's regular page can be viewed on en wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QueerEcofeminist Queer may have to do with gender identity as opposed to being an
indicator
of 'sexual behavior', so the blockers didn't even get that right.
Example:
I am gender-nonconforming as to my gender identity and expression;
this
is
the primary reason I use the label 'queer'.
I believe this should be reported... somewhere. But I don't know
where.
The
WMF CoC only covers technical spaces. A little help here?
Ariel
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:26 PM Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
Do we have cross project policies to govern or limit local
policies
for the use of sysop tools? I would like to pass on policy
advice,
and
any past cases folks here would like to highlight that set a precedent.
The case below is illustrative, though based on my recall of
several
complaints which went nowhere over the years, on email lists, and Jimmy's talk page, about apparently arbitrary blocks on different non-English Wikipedias, it seems reasonable to believe those complaints are the tip of the iceberg, and there are likely to be
many
historical cases of blocks that could have been appealed... had
the
user been confident to complain in English, and have the energy
to
pursue generic WMF policies on terms of use, or harassment/discrimination, to establish a meta-level case.
# Example case
An account block on the Amharic Wikipedia (am.wp) was flagged up yesterday on the WM LGBT+ Telegram discussion group.[3] The
rationale
for blocking the account was because the account name includes
the
word "Queer"[1]. The incident raises questions about process and accountability, particularly as the block gives the impression
that
this is the norm or an agreed interpretation of policy for sysops
on
am.wp, and because the user is well established using this
account
name across Wikimedia projects and has never edited am.wp so the
block
cannot be based on any prior action or dispute.
In this example there is no obvious process for appeal, if sysops
on
that project think that blocking any LGBT+ related account name represents local consensus. After off-wiki discussion, the WMF
Trust
and Safety team has been approached for advice,[2] as the
rationale
for the action appears hostile to any openly LGBT+ volunteers who might want to include something queer looking in their account
name
(such as my account name, should anyone want to read it as
transgender
related).
# Links
https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Contributions/QueerEcofemin...
; the block log states "Names calling attention to your sexual
behavior
have never been allowed here in 15 years and aren't suddenly
allowed
in 2018" 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trust_and_Safety 3. https://telegram.me/wmlgbt
Thanks Fae -- faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+
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,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
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,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
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,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hello from the Trust and Safety Team at the Wikimedia Foundation,
First of all, we want to thank the community members alerting us of the situation through several private notes on the matter that have reached us over the past few days. Special thanks also go out to Pine and Risker for their efforts in analysing the situation in this thread.
The situation outlined here appears to be both complex with several years of history and concerning, and is certainly one that Trust & Safety is looking at in exploring appropriate actions on our side. As always, please do keep in mind that we are not a team mandated for fast reaction (except for situations involving threats of harm, which are handled under a different protocol, as many of you probably know already). For that reason, we are inclined to review this thoroughly and act correctly, rather than quickly. Please understand that while our team is already working on understanding the intricacies of the situation itself while supporting the affected individual, we will not be able to publicly share information about the progress or outcome of our review for privacy reasons. Meanwhile, our review and any potential outcome deriving from it, should not prevent the community from continuing to take actions as they see fit and in accordance to project policies, of course.
Also, bear in mind that we do not systematically monitor the Wikimedia mailing lists, and may miss information shared about this on such moving forward. If anyone feels they are in possession of pertinent information that is worth considering in our review of this case, they are encouraged to reach out to us directly at our established team inbox: ca@wikimedia.org.
Once again, thank you all for being vigilant.
Warm regards and best wishes for 2019,
K.
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 1:04 PM Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
The lobby of high voltage warning signs disagrees.
Vito
Il giorno lun 7 gen 2019 alle ore 11:37 Yaroslav Blanter <ymbalt@gmail.com
ha scritto:
Well, in 2019 people should already have come to the notion that blocking locally an acting steward is not really a good idea.
Cheers Yaroslav
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 11:21 AM Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Because of a truly great idea <
https://am.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Log/block&...
the involved user's admin/bureaucrat access was revoked <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=rights&user=&page=C...
by Marco Aurelio.
Vito
Il giorno lun 7 gen 2019 alle ore 11:02 Amir Sarabadani < ladsgroup@gmail.com> ha scritto:
Given the response on the talk page [1] I think it's clear violation
of
nondiscrimination policy [2]
[1] "promotion of homosexuality will not be tolerated here nor will
it
be
forced down our throats to suit anyone's international political
agenda
if
you expect Ethiopians to take part." [2]
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Nondiscrimination
Best On Wed, Jan 2, 2019, 23:09 Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
I note that we are talking about the block of one single user on
one
single project; this particular account has thousands of edits over
about a
dozen projects, but is "attached" to hundreds of Wikimedia
projects.
The
majority of these "attached" accounts are likely because the editor "visited" the various projects while logged in, activating the
automatic
account creation algorithm. The account was created 8 years ago,
and
has
actively edited a wide variety of projects, including several
wikipedias,
Commons, Wikidata, and Meta. While English Wikipedia is the
account's
"home" wiki, about 55% of the account's global edits have been made
on
Marathi Wikipedia. The Amharic Wikipedia account does not appear to
have
edited, which suggests that it was automatically created when the
editor
was "looking at" the project on 9 February 2018. The block for
account
name was made on 22 October 2018. I note that accounts were
created
on
over a hundred projects over the course of a few days in February
The point being raised in this thread is that it appears this
editor
was
blocked on one of the 381 wikis on which they have an account,
explicitly
because of the perception that their username calls attention to
the
sexual
behaviour of the editor. What we do not know is (a) whether that is
in
fact
a legitimate username block reason on Amharic Wikipedia, or (b) if
it
is
a
legitimate username block reason, *why* it would be a username
block
reason. We don't know why this block was applied so long after the
account
was created. We don't know the username policy on Amharic
Wikipedia,
nor
do
we know how it is applied; for example, we don't know if a username
like
"StraightGuy101" would be blocked. We do know that there are only
4
administrators on Amharic Wikipedia, and that there are fewer than
50
active users working on the project, which may be part of the
reason
for
the delay between automatic account creation and the account block.
We also know that one of the challenges of single user login for
all
Wikimedia projects has highlighted the fact that certain usernames
that
are
acceptable on some projects are blocked on other projects; we've
known
that
for years. We know that each project establishes its own policies
when
it
comes to usernames. There are legitimate reasons why a username
that
is
acceptable in one language is not acceptable in another language,
even
in
cases where the editor had no knowledge that the chosen username
would
be a
problem in another language. We do know that there have been lots
of
cases
where usernames have been blocked for "username policy violation"
on
all
kinds of projects, despite the account operating productively on
other
projects.
I also note that there is nothing in this thread that confirms the
editor
themself has raised any concerns about this block, and I am always
wary
of
turning an editor into a "martyr for a cause" without their direct agreement, as that can be as abusive as the original action. So the
first
step in this situation would be to confirm with the individual
editor
whether or not they want their "case" to be examined.
Should the editor be agreeable, I suggest that the next step is for
someone
who has the ability to converse in Amharic to contact the Amharic
Wikipedia
and find out why the block has been issued, how it is consistent
with
the
username policy on Amharic Wikipedia, whether that policy is driven
in
part
by external considerations (e.g., does the project risk heavy
governmental
scrutiny if it appears to "promote" locally unacceptable
activities). I
am
personally curious as to why it took over six months to identify
that
this
account did not meet the local username policy, and whether there
was
internal or external discussion about the username.
It is not clear to me what the desired outcome is in this case - at
least
in part because we have no idea of the opinion of the editor
involved. I
am hard-pressed to say that a project should be required to allow
usernames
that it has a long history of considering unacceptable, especially
if
it
is
applied evenly to all accounts; in this case, if it disallows
usernames
that imply sexual preference regardless of what that preference is.
It seems to me that the WMF Trust & Safety group would probably be
the
right group to examine this.
Risker/Anne
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 at 09:42, Ariel Glenn WMF ariel@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Additional notes: The user's regular page can be viewed on en wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QueerEcofeminist Queer may have to do with gender identity as opposed to being an
indicator
of 'sexual behavior', so the blockers didn't even get that right.
Example:
I am gender-nonconforming as to my gender identity and
expression;
this
is
the primary reason I use the label 'queer'.
I believe this should be reported... somewhere. But I don't know
where.
The
WMF CoC only covers technical spaces. A little help here?
Ariel
On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:26 PM Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
> Do we have cross project policies to govern or limit local
policies
> for the use of sysop tools? I would like to pass on policy
advice,
and
> any past cases folks here would like to highlight that set a > precedent. > > The case below is illustrative, though based on my recall of
several
> complaints which went nowhere over the years, on email lists,
and
> Jimmy's talk page, about apparently arbitrary blocks on
different
> non-English Wikipedias, it seems reasonable to believe those > complaints are the tip of the iceberg, and there are likely to
be
many
> historical cases of blocks that could have been appealed... had
the
> user been confident to complain in English, and have the energy
to
> pursue generic WMF policies on terms of use, or > harassment/discrimination, to establish a meta-level case. > > # Example case > > An account block on the Amharic Wikipedia (am.wp) was flagged
up
> yesterday on the WM LGBT+ Telegram discussion group.[3] The
rationale
> for blocking the account was because the account name includes
the
> word "Queer"[1]. The incident raises questions about process
and
> accountability, particularly as the block gives the impression
that
> this is the norm or an agreed interpretation of policy for
sysops
on
> am.wp, and because the user is well established using this
account
> name across Wikimedia projects and has never edited am.wp so
the
block
> cannot be based on any prior action or dispute. > > In this example there is no obvious process for appeal, if
sysops
on
> that project think that blocking any LGBT+ related account name > represents local consensus. After off-wiki discussion, the WMF
Trust
> and Safety team has been approached for advice,[2] as the
rationale
> for the action appears hostile to any openly LGBT+ volunteers
who
> might want to include something queer looking in their account
name
> (such as my account name, should anyone want to read it as
transgender
> related). > > # Links > > 1. >
https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Contributions/QueerEcofemin...
> ; > the block log states "Names calling attention to your sexual
behavior
> have never been allowed here in 15 years and aren't suddenly
allowed
> in 2018" > 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trust_and_Safety > 3. https://telegram.me/wmlgbt > > Thanks > Fae > -- > faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT+ > > _______________________________________________ > 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
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,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
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,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
?subject=unsubscribe>
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,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Thanks T&S for making an initial statement. Hopefully this case sets a useful precedent to ensure everyone is a bit clearer on processes to follow and what is the best advice to offer complainants who suffer discriminatory sysop actions on Wikimedia projects. Certainly it has reinforced my view that Wikimedians need affiliates like the WM-LGBT+ user group to maintain off-wiki channels where members of minority groups can be confident of a safe space to ask questions, or just vent their frustration, and not feel alone when they encounter problems on our projects.[1]
In addition to investigating this case, I recommend that T&S review the WMF terms of use which fail to align with the 2006 WMF board resolution against discrimination.[2][3] Though the ToU do include "Harassing and Abusing Others", it does not explicitly spell out that using the projects in to create a hostile environment which actively promotes discrimination against minority groups is not allowed.
The Amharic Wikipedia (am.wp) case is one where sysop tools have been used to promote homophobic views, the evidence is unarguable, and those of us within the WM-LGBT+ community have no doubt that the (ex) sysop should be banned. On investigation it is clear that am.wp lacks any LGBT+ related articles, even simple neutral articles about homosexuality or the history of anti-LGBT+ law in Ethiopia are missing. It seems likely that the project has been dominated by the promotion of homophobic views, to the extent that this is such a expressly hostile environment, that nobody would attempt to improve LGBT+ related content, let alone expect to be treated as a colleague there if they are openly LGBT+ themselves.
Everyone should be aware that expressing views such these by the previously trusted administrator Codex_Sinaiticus (aka Til Eulenspiegel) below which are used to attack and dehumanise other contributors, are so extreme and blatantly against our shared values to provide a non-hostile collegiate environment for Wikimedia volunteers, that they should fully expect blocks and site bans to be supported by the wider community, no matter what language project they are contributing to: * "Don't force your sick values on Ethiopia - you will regret it! Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 01:31, 7 ጃንዩዌሪ 2019 (UTC)" * "No, actually homosexuals are considered subhuman by the vast majority of Ethiopians. Removing my management with no warning or appeal is typical hamfistedness, like Ethiopia dealt with in 1936.! . Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 01:45, 7 ጃንዩዌሪ 2019 (UTC)"
Summary of events: # QueerEcofeminist is a long term contributor on other projects who discovers they are blocked by Codex_Sinaiticus on am.wp without warning, a Wikipedia project they have never edited. The block rationale is that their account name is unacceptable against policy, no policy is ever provided in later discussion.[5] # QueerEcofeminist asks the administrator about the block on their am.wp user talk page, in reply their user talk page is deleted (@16:16, 6 January 2019), making it clear that the block cannot be discussed. 4 minutes later their block is amended to deny user talk page access.[5] # QueerEcofeminist asks for views on the WM-LGBT+ Telegram group, as a result with QueerEcofeminist's permission this public thread requesting more views is raised on Wikipedia-l and WMF T & S is emailed asking to examine the case as one of using the projects for discrimination. # Meta steward Teles is part of the Telegram group, and offers to engage with the blocking administrator. After a brief discussion their am.wp account is locally blocked by Codex_Sinaiticus.[7] # Codex_Sinaiticus continues part of the discussion on their talk page as Til_Eulenspiegel, an alternate account. Later the accounts are cross linked which makes this clearer. # Meta steward MarcoAurelio intervenes and removes sysop and bureaucrat rights from Codex_Sinaiticus's account due to misuse while engaged in a dispute and removes the block of Teles. # Codex_Sinaiticus starts to remove discussion from their talk page, apparently attempting to censor views by calling it harassment.[8]
Links: 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_LGBT 2. https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use 3. https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Resolution:Nondiscrimination (2006) "The Wikimedia Foundation prohibits discrimination against current or prospective users and employees on the basis of race, color, gender, religion, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, or any other legally protected characteristics." 4. https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%8A%A0%E1%89%A3%E1%88%8D_%E1%8B%8D%E1%8B%AD... 5. Block log: https://am.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Log&page=U... 6. Attempted civil discussion: https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%8A%A0%E1%89%A3%E1%88%8D_%E1%8B%8D%E1%8B%AD... 7. Block log: https://am.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E1%88%8D%E1%8B%A9:Log&page=%... 8. https://am.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E1%8A%A0%E1%89%A3%E1%88%8D_%E1%8...
Thanks, Fae
A note that the user's talk page https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%8A%A0%E1%89%A3%E1%88%8D_%E1%8B%8D%E1%8B%AD... may or may not reflect all of the comments made at any given moment, since the user has been engaged in deleting large parts of the discussion. You'll want to double-check the history to see what's been written.
While we give individual languages / projects a great deal of autonomy, they are not completely autonomous and remain accountable to our global norms. We have a shared brand to uphold. Glad to see a strong position has been taken by the community against discrimination based on sexual orientation.
My 2 cents James
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 AM Ariel Glenn WMF ariel@wikimedia.org wrote:
A note that the user's talk page
https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%8A%A0%E1%89%A3%E1%88%8D_%E1%8B%8D%E1%8B%AD... may or may not reflect all of the comments made at any given moment, since the user has been engaged in deleting large parts of the discussion. You'll want to double-check the history to see what's been written. _______________________________________________ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
By the way, please do not intervene en masse. They (the user involved) have a strong tendency towards using "colonialism" as a general purpose excuse for their action, as I experienced myself a bunch of months ago, along with a series of references to Italian invasion of Ethiopia. This kind of excuse is easily is fed by this kind of intervention. Talkpage contents is a trivial matter compared to insults and abuse of administrative privileges. While the latter one is solved the first one is yet to be handled.
Vito
Il giorno lun 7 gen 2019 alle ore 15:56 James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com ha scritto:
While we give individual languages / projects a great deal of autonomy, they are not completely autonomous and remain accountable to our global norms. We have a shared brand to uphold. Glad to see a strong position has been taken by the community against discrimination based on sexual orientation.
My 2 cents James
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 AM Ariel Glenn WMF ariel@wikimedia.org wrote:
A note that the user's talk page
https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%8A%A0%E1%89%A3%E1%88%8D_%E1%8B%8D%E1%8B%AD...
may or may not reflect all of the comments made at any given moment,
since
the user has been engaged in deleting large parts of the discussion.
You'll
want to double-check the history to see what's been written. _______________________________________________ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian _______________________________________________ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Here's my 2c: Calling gay people "subhuman" is so vile that needs direct action from outside of the wiki but IMO this is a symptom of a larger issue.
The issue is that different wikis are disconnected and don't have proper oversight by a central (volunteer-based) authority. This sometimes lead to different languages having biases that are related to the culture and this is sorta okay-ish specially if the wiki is big enough to balance the differences. Let me give you several examples: * In Arabic Wikipedia name of the water body south of Iran/North of UAE is "Arabian gulf" but in Persian Wikipedia is "Persian gulf". This basically means different versioning of the same entity. I don't like this because what makes Wikipedia great is that you don't get personalized articles, like article of "Abortion" in English Wikipedia is the same regardless of what your stand on this matter is. This differentiates Wikipedia from facebook and twitter that put people in bubbles. * In smaller wikis the issue gets worse. What bothered me for a very long time was that article of "Mohammad" was "Mohammad peace be upon him" [1] until 27 March of 2018 [2]. When the title is so biased towards the religious point of view, how neutral the article itself is? * The issue can different shapes too. I can find lots of copyright-violating pictures in small wikis. Most of these pictures are copyright violation [3] We have global sysops and SWMT but it's more of a reactionary mentality. * Language barrier makes things even harder. Just imagine how harder it would be to react if the above discussion happened in Amharic instead of English.
Maybe it's more a feature than a bug. For example, in Persian Wikipedia several articles in controversial topics that are featured (homosexuality, and some articles about Baha'i's faith) are not being used in the main page to avoid controversy and blockade of Wikipedia in Iran. As the person who wrote most of one of those articles, I disagree but I understand and respect the community's decision.
I just want to point out to the issue and I have no solutions. Stewards seem like a good fit to apply fleet-side norms like no discrimination policy.
Also, I don't have anything against mzn and urwikis, these are happen to languages that I have basic understanding of. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_be_upon_him [2]: https://ur.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%AE%D8%A7%D8%B5:%D9%86%D9%88%D... [3]: https://mzn.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%B4%D8%A7:%D8%AA%D8%B5%D8%A7%D9%88%DB%8C%D...
Sorry for the long email.
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:53 PM Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
By the way, please do not intervene en masse. They (the user involved) have a strong tendency towards using "colonialism" as a general purpose excuse for their action, as I experienced myself a bunch of months ago, along with a series of references to Italian invasion of Ethiopia. This kind of excuse is easily is fed by this kind of intervention. Talkpage contents is a trivial matter compared to insults and abuse of administrative privileges. While the latter one is solved the first one is yet to be handled.
Vito
Il giorno lun 7 gen 2019 alle ore 15:56 James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com ha scritto:
While we give individual languages / projects a great deal of autonomy, they are not completely autonomous and remain accountable to our global norms. We have a shared brand to uphold. Glad to see a strong position
has
been taken by the community against discrimination based on sexual orientation.
My 2 cents James
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:39 AM Ariel Glenn WMF ariel@wikimedia.org wrote:
A note that the user's talk page
https://am.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%8A%A0%E1%89%A3%E1%88%8D_%E1%8B%8D%E1%8B%AD...
may or may not reflect all of the comments made at any given moment,
since
the user has been engaged in deleting large parts of the discussion.
You'll
want to double-check the history to see what's been written. _______________________________________________ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian _______________________________________________ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
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, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org