Hi, everyone.
It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons (at least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP addresses located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related with Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone company [1] that allows reading and editing at free cost.
One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was just set on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being done in a way that volunteers can't handle.
That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit Commons [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be controled or just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that seemss to be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end by being undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages of files about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified actually confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero.
Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it is time for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other than blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I tend to believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users should be made out.
The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice that (as I am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they will try to solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage.
I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by using any off-wiki strategy.
Kind regards.
Teles
[1] - http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11... [2] - https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&... [3] - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case [4] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835... [5] - https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which are really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont expect people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them but they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day published by the press or broadcast - Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section b - reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither way Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as permitted to reproduce - article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into Portuguese after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the pt.wikis are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the implication of local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are this outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero could provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights request process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles teleswiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, everyone.
It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons (at least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP addresses located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related with Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone company [1] that allows reading and editing at free cost.
One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was just set on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being done in a way that volunteers can't handle.
That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit Commons [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be controled or just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that seemss to be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end by being undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages of files about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified actually confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero.
Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it is time for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other than blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I tend to believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users should be made out.
The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice that (as I am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they will try to solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage.
I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by using any off-wiki strategy.
Kind regards.
Teles
[1] -
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11... [2] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&... [3] - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case [4] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835... [5] -
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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 Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond and provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by requiring HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly impacted the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed editing (and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access from just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do not reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the upload of copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other concern regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new good faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular challenge of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers of a Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates upload copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed form (like huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook or a similar public forum for others to download. When partners become aware of this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to Community Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and we would prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright (without significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall, we had internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this problem. However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic from zero rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this issue. As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach to resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are eager to examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update you and the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to increase readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber counts) and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships. There’s not enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship, but it is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. So if that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing editing community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to be a crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to have. I hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which are really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont expect people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them but they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day published
by the press or broadcast
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section b -
reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither way Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as permitted to reproduce
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into Portuguese
after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the pt.wikis are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the implication of local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are this outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero could provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights request process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles teleswiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, everyone.
It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons (at least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP
addresses
located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related with Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone company [1] that allows reading and editing at free cost.
One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was just
set
on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being done
in a
way that volunteers can't handle.
That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit Commons [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be controled
or
just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that seemss
to
be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end by being undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages of
files
about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified actually confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero.
Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it is time for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other than blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I tend to believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users should be
made
out.
The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice that (as I am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they will try
to
solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage.
I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by using
any
off-wiki strategy.
Kind regards.
Teles
[1] -
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
[2] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
[3] - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case [4] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
[5] -
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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 Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these accounts.
David
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana avrana@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond and provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by requiring HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly impacted the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed editing (and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access from just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do not reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the upload of copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other concern regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new good faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular challenge of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers of a Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates upload copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed form (like huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook or a similar public forum for others to download. When partners become aware of this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to Community Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and we would prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright (without significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall, we had internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this problem. However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic from zero rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this issue. As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach to resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are eager to examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update you and the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to increase readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber counts) and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships. There’s not enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship, but it is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. So if that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing editing community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to be a crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to have. I hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which are really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont expect people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them but they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day published
by the press or broadcast
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section b -
reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither way Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as permitted to reproduce
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into Portuguese
after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the pt.wikis are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the implication of local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are this outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero could provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights request process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles teleswiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, everyone.
It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons (at least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP
addresses
located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related with Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone company [1] that allows reading and editing at free cost.
One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was just
set
on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being done
in a
way that volunteers can't handle.
That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit Commons [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be controled
or
just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that seemss
to
be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end by being undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages of
files
about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified actually confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero.
Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it is time for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other than blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I tend to believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users should be
made
out.
The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice that (as I am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they will try
to
solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage.
I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by using
any
off-wiki strategy.
Kind regards.
Teles
[1] -
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
[2] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
[3] - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case [4] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
[5] -
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate. Nobody would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time as a movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While you may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest as it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it but throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany david.emrany@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these accounts.
David
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana avrana@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond and provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by requiring HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly impacted the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed editing (and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access from just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do not reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the upload
of
copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other concern regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new good faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular
challenge
of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers of a Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates upload copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed form
(like
huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook or a similar public forum for others to download. When partners become aware
of
this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to
Community
Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and we
would
prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright (without significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall, we had internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this problem. However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic from
zero
rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this
issue.
As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach to resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are eager to examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update you
and
the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to increase readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber
counts)
and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships. There’s
not
enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship, but it is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. So if that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing editing community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to be a crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to have. I hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which are really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont
expect
people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them but they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
by the press or broadcast
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section b -
reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither way Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as permitted to reproduce
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into Portuguese
after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the pt.wikis are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the implication of local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are this outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero could provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights
request
process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles teleswiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, everyone.
It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons (at least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP
addresses
located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related with Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone company
[1]
that allows reading and editing at free cost.
One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was
just
set
on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being done
in a
way that volunteers can't handle.
That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit Commons [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be
controled
or
just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that
seemss
to
be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end by being undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages of
files
about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified actually confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero.
Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it is time for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other than blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I tend to believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users should be
made
out.
The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice that
(as
I am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they will
try
to
solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage.
I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by using
any
off-wiki strategy.
Kind regards.
Teles
[1] -
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
[2] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
[3] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case
[4] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
[5] -
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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 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
Hoi Gerard Meijssen et all.,
If there are issue with mobile edits we must take the necessary action to protect the wiki and re-users, this might include the aforementioned measures. I am sure we won't wast volunteers time.
If there are more problems than benefit... It is speaking for itself.
--Steinsplitter
From: gerard.meijssen@gmail.com Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2016 12:51:07 +0100 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia Zero mass effect on Wikimedia projects
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate. Nobody would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time as a movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While you may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest as it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it but throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany david.emrany@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these accounts.
David
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana avrana@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond and provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by requiring HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly impacted the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed editing (and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access from just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do not reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the upload
of
copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other concern regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new good faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular
challenge
of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers of a Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates upload copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed form
(like
huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook or a similar public forum for others to download. When partners become aware
of
this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to
Community
Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and we
would
prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright (without significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall, we had internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this problem. However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic from
zero
rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this
issue.
As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach to resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are eager to examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update you
and
the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to increase readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber
counts)
and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships. There’s
not
enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship, but it is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. So if that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing editing community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to be a crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to have. I hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which are really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont
expect
people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them but they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
by the press or broadcast
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section b -
reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither way Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as permitted to reproduce
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into Portuguese
after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the pt.wikis are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the implication of local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are this outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero could provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights
request
process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles teleswiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, everyone.
It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons (at least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP
addresses
located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related with Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone company
[1]
that allows reading and editing at free cost.
One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was
just
set
on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being done
in a
way that volunteers can't handle.
That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit Commons [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be
controled
or
just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that
seemss
to
be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end by being undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages of
files
about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified actually confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero.
Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it is time for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other than blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I tend to believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users should be
made
out.
The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice that
(as
I am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they will
try
to
solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage.
I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by using
any
off-wiki strategy.
Kind regards.
Teles
[1] -
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
[2] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
[3] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case
[4] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
[5] -
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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 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 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
In a way, it is great to hear that Wikipedia zero is attracting new editors! That is what I hoped for more than increasing readership.
The general question on how to stimulate positive edits while discouraging negative contributions is the tricky part. What we always tell outsiders on why we can cope with vandalism or simply bad edits is that we made it easier to identify and revert it than to make them.
Maybe a superfluous question, but can we still differentiate individual devices from each other somehow? I can imagine this is a tricky part if not...
Besides the obvious downside, are the positive sides also visible? Do we see more edits on Angola relayed topics? Do you see more positive active users from Angola?
Lodewijk
Op zondag 20 maart 2016 heeft Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com het volgende geschreven:
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate. Nobody would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time as a movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While you may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest as it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it but throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany <david.emrany@gmail.com javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these accounts.
David
[1]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond and provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by
requiring
HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly
impacted
the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed
editing
(and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access from just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do not reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on
Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the
upload
of
copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other concern regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new
good
faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular
challenge
of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers of
a
Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates
upload
copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed form
(like
huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook or a similar public forum for others to download. When partners become aware
of
this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to
Community
Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's
removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and we
would
prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright (without significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall, we
had
internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this problem. However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic from
zero
rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this
issue.
As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach to resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are eager
to
examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update you
and
the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to increase readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber
counts)
and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships. There’s
not
enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship, but
it
is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. So if that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing editing community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to be a crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to have. I hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which are really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont
expect
people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them but they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
by the press or broadcast
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section
b -
reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither way Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as permitted
to
reproduce
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into
Portuguese
after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the
pt.wikis
are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the implication
of
local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are
this
outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero could provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights
request
process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles <teleswiki@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
Hi, everyone.
It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons
(at
least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP
addresses
located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related with Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone company
[1]
that allows reading and editing at free cost.
One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was
just
set
on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being
done
in a
way that volunteers can't handle.
That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit Commons [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be
controled
or
just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that
seemss
to
be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end by being undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages of
files
about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified actually confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero.
Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it is time for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other than blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I tend
to
believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users should
be
made
out.
The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice that
(as
I am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they will
try
to
solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage.
I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by
using
any
off-wiki strategy.
Kind regards.
Teles
[1] -
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
[2] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
[3] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case
[4] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
[5] -
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>
Anytime a new linguistic group joins Wiki* we should expect a looooooong September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September which will sooner or later end. Meanwhile what might become *so* problematic (and then must be stopped asap) is the usage of Commons as a file sharing platform. There's a series of technical countermeasures (stopping truncated files, setting requirements for upload of videos...) which don't imply blocking editing from Zero.
Vito
2016-03-20 17:05 GMT+01:00 Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org:
In a way, it is great to hear that Wikipedia zero is attracting new editors! That is what I hoped for more than increasing readership.
The general question on how to stimulate positive edits while discouraging negative contributions is the tricky part. What we always tell outsiders on why we can cope with vandalism or simply bad edits is that we made it easier to identify and revert it than to make them.
Maybe a superfluous question, but can we still differentiate individual devices from each other somehow? I can imagine this is a tricky part if not...
Besides the obvious downside, are the positive sides also visible? Do we see more edits on Angola relayed topics? Do you see more positive active users from Angola?
Lodewijk
Op zondag 20 maart 2016 heeft Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com het volgende geschreven:
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate. Nobody would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time as a movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While you may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest
as
it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it
but
throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany <david.emrany@gmail.com javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these accounts.
David
[1]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond
and
provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by
requiring
HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly
impacted
the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed
editing
(and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access
from
just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do not reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on
Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the
upload
of
copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other concern regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new
good
faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular
challenge
of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers
of
a
Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates
upload
copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed form
(like
huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook
or a
similar public forum for others to download. When partners become
aware
of
this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to
Community
Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's
removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and we
would
prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright
(without
significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall, we
had
internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this problem. However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic from
zero
rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this
issue.
As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach to resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are eager
to
examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update
you
and
the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to
increase
readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber
counts)
and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships.
There’s
not
enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship,
but
it
is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. So
if
that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing editing community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to be
a
crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to
have. I
hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which are really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont
expect
people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them
but
they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
by the press or broadcast
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section
b -
reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither
way
Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as
permitted
to
reproduce
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into
Portuguese
after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the
pt.wikis
are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the implication
of
local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are
this
outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero could provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights
request
process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles <teleswiki@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
Hi, everyone.
It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons
(at
least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP
addresses
located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related
with
Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone
company
[1]
that allows reading and editing at free cost.
One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was
just
set
on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being
done
in a
way that volunteers can't handle.
That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit Commons [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be
controled
or
just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that
seemss
to
be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end
by
being undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages
of
files
about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified actually confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero.
Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it
is
time for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other
than
blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I
tend
to
believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users
should
be
made
out.
The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice
that
(as
I am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they
will
try
to
solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage.
I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by
using
any
off-wiki strategy.
Kind regards.
Teles
[1] -
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
[2] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
[3] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case
[4] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
[5] -
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation.
Administrator *
*at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share
in
the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
Aye, what Vito said.
For some context the WP0 team reached out to me when the partners started flagging some of this as well. We've been considering a couple different options which I think should be wider discussed. Part of that was also a realization that we needed a way to actually tell if something was coming from WP0 compared to a non-WP0 user and they implemented technical changes with ops so that a header is passed through flagging that early this year allowing for more targeted actions to be taken. Completely figuring out the extent of the problem has also been though since it seems that even when Wikipedia Zero is blocked the users most set at getting around restrictions (which are, of course, the most dangerous in many ways) also use other options such as Facebook's Internet Basics/FB0 which also apparently gives free access to our sites.
Some of the options considered (not yet implemented though I'd be interested in peoples thoughts on them):
- Edit filters (targeted specifically to WP0 or otherwise) flagging abnormally large files when compared to the stated file type or files coming in through WP0 in general. - File upload blocks or other filtering (such as file sizes over X or videos https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T126696) specifically on WP0 ranges. - More technical measures to try and detect abnormal images or PDFs that hold hidden files (apparently this is actually very difficult).
We've been talking with multiple groups within Engineering and given the new information and options are going to continue to do so. I do think that it is overall a "good" thing that people are trying to edit (originally all we saw was the bad uploads and organized copyright violations which was much less of a good thing...) but it's definitely true that we don't want to overwhelm the current community in such a way that we not only lose those new editors but old ones as well (or push them back so hard given the necessity of protecting the wiki that they never come back). I think it would be really good to think about ways to help deal with that.
James Alexander Manager Trust & Safety Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Anytime a new linguistic group joins Wiki* we should expect a looooooong September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September which will sooner or later end. Meanwhile what might become *so* problematic (and then must be stopped asap) is the usage of Commons as a file sharing platform. There's a series of technical countermeasures (stopping truncated files, setting requirements for upload of videos...) which don't imply blocking editing from Zero.
Vito
2016-03-20 17:05 GMT+01:00 Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org:
In a way, it is great to hear that Wikipedia zero is attracting new editors! That is what I hoped for more than increasing readership.
The general question on how to stimulate positive edits while
discouraging
negative contributions is the tricky part. What we always tell outsiders
on
why we can cope with vandalism or simply bad edits is that we made it easier to identify and revert it than to make them.
Maybe a superfluous question, but can we still differentiate individual devices from each other somehow? I can imagine this is a tricky part if not...
Besides the obvious downside, are the positive sides also visible? Do we see more edits on Angola relayed topics? Do you see more positive active users from Angola?
Lodewijk
Op zondag 20 maart 2016 heeft Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com
het volgende geschreven:
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate.
Nobody
would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time
as a
movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While
you
may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest
as
it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it
but
throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany <david.emrany@gmail.com javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these
accounts.
David
[1]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond
and
provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing
up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by
requiring
HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly
impacted
the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed
editing
(and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access
from
just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do
not
reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on
Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the
upload
of
copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other
concern
regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new
good
faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular
challenge
of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers
of
a
Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates
upload
copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed
form
(like
huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook
or a
similar public forum for others to download. When partners become
aware
of
this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to
Community
Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's
removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and
we
would
prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright
(without
significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall,
we
had
internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this
problem.
However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic
from
zero
rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this
issue.
As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach
to
resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are
eager
to
examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update
you
and
the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to
increase
readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber
counts)
and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships.
There’s
not
enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship,
but
it
is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access.
So
if
that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing
editing
community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to
be
a
crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to
have. I
hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which
are
really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I
dont
expect
people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them
but
they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
by the press or broadcast
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29
section
b -
reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither
way
Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as
permitted
to
reproduce
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into
Portuguese
after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the
pt.wikis
are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the
implication
of
local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are
this
outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero
could
provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights
request
process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles <teleswiki@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
> Hi, everyone. > > It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and
Commons
(at
> least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP addresses > located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related
with
> Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone
company
[1]
> that allows reading and editing at free cost. > > One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that
was
just
set > on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are
being
done
in a > way that volunteers can't handle. > > That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that
hit
> Commons > [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be
controled
or > just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that
seemss
to > be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end
by
> being > undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being
pages
of
files > about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified > actually > confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero. > > Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think
it
is
> time > for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other
than
> blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I
tend
to
> believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users
should
be
made > out. > > The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice
that
(as
> I > am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they
will
try
to > solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage. > > I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by
using
any > off-wiki strategy. > > Kind regards. > > Teles > > [1] - > >
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
> [2] - > >
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
> [3] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case
> [4] - > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
> [5] - > >
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
> > > *Lucas Teles* > > *+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation.
Administrator *
> *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*-
wikipedista.com
> _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share
in
the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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 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
I am with all of those who see this as a positive thing. But perhaps a bit of gentle curation of their initial experience could be the "fix" that is needed rather than just cutting any fledgeling editors off altogether. How about the following ...
reader decides to edit
clicks on edit button directed to registration then to a step by step introduction to initial editing with links
(simplified pillars, neutrality, info about media)
at end of steps put in touch with a member from either the a) language
community (in this case, Wikipedia Portuguese) to access initial editing resources, OR b) put in touch with Wikimedia Chapter or Usergroups (where possible) to request a notification on the next editing/community event. If they still want to edit after that, then all power to them ... but at least we have supported their effort and not cut them off entirely or confused them into wrong actions or trolling.
Of course, you will always get people who are trying to be inappropriate, but that can be taken care of on an individual and not a national basis.
warmest Isla
On 21 March 2016 at 06:10, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
Aye, what Vito said.
For some context the WP0 team reached out to me when the partners started flagging some of this as well. We've been considering a couple different options which I think should be wider discussed. Part of that was also a realization that we needed a way to actually tell if something was coming from WP0 compared to a non-WP0 user and they implemented technical changes with ops so that a header is passed through flagging that early this year allowing for more targeted actions to be taken. Completely figuring out the extent of the problem has also been though since it seems that even when Wikipedia Zero is blocked the users most set at getting around restrictions (which are, of course, the most dangerous in many ways) also use other options such as Facebook's Internet Basics/FB0 which also apparently gives free access to our sites.
Some of the options considered (not yet implemented though I'd be interested in peoples thoughts on them):
- Edit filters (targeted specifically to WP0 or otherwise) flagging
abnormally large files when compared to the stated file type or files coming in through WP0 in general.
- File upload blocks or other filtering (such as file sizes over X or
videos https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T126696) specifically on WP0 ranges.
- More technical measures to try and detect abnormal images or PDFs that
hold hidden files (apparently this is actually very difficult).
We've been talking with multiple groups within Engineering and given the new information and options are going to continue to do so. I do think that it is overall a "good" thing that people are trying to edit (originally all we saw was the bad uploads and organized copyright violations which was much less of a good thing...) but it's definitely true that we don't want to overwhelm the current community in such a way that we not only lose those new editors but old ones as well (or push them back so hard given the necessity of protecting the wiki that they never come back). I think it would be really good to think about ways to help deal with that.
James Alexander Manager Trust & Safety Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Vi to vituzzu.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Anytime a new linguistic group joins Wiki* we should expect a looooooong September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September which will sooner or later end. Meanwhile what might become *so* problematic (and
then
must be stopped asap) is the usage of Commons as a file sharing platform. There's a series of technical countermeasures (stopping truncated files, setting requirements for upload of videos...) which don't imply blocking editing from Zero.
Vito
2016-03-20 17:05 GMT+01:00 Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org:
In a way, it is great to hear that Wikipedia zero is attracting new editors! That is what I hoped for more than increasing readership.
The general question on how to stimulate positive edits while
discouraging
negative contributions is the tricky part. What we always tell
outsiders
on
why we can cope with vandalism or simply bad edits is that we made it easier to identify and revert it than to make them.
Maybe a superfluous question, but can we still differentiate individual devices from each other somehow? I can imagine this is a tricky part if not...
Besides the obvious downside, are the positive sides also visible? Do
we
see more edits on Angola relayed topics? Do you see more positive
active
users from Angola?
Lodewijk
Op zondag 20 maart 2016 heeft Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijssen@gmail.com
het volgende geschreven:
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I
find
appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate.
Nobody
would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time
as a
movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While
you
may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you
suggest
as
it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with
it
but
throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany <david.emrany@gmail.com javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’
relationship
with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these
accounts.
David
[1]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;>
wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to
respond
and
provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing
up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by
requiring
HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly
impacted
the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed
editing
(and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated
access
from
just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do
not
reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on
Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the
upload
of
copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other
concern
regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of
new
good
faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular
challenge
of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few
subscribers
of
a
Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the
pirates
upload
copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed
form
(like
huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on
or a
similar public forum for others to download. When partners become
aware
of
this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to
Community
Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's
removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem,
and
we
would
prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright
(without
significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last
fall,
we
had
internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this
problem.
However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic
from
zero
rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address
this
issue.
As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with
community
engagement and engineering is working on finding the best
approach
to
resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are
eager
to
examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also
update
you
and
the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to
increase
readership. This is measured in potential reach (through
subscriber
counts)
and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships.
There’s
not
enough information to show that Zero can also increase
editorship,
but
it
is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access.
So
if
that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great
thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing
editing
community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to
be
a
crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to
have. I
hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into
an
opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
> some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which
are
> really > interesting to read -- read them in english -- > https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I
dont
expect
> people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read
them
but
> they > do know the principles of it and what they can do > > some points of interest > > - Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
> by the press or broadcast > - Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29
section
b -
> reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to > photographic > process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching > organisations > ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but
wither
way
> Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as
permitted
to
> reproduce > - article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into
Portuguese
> after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the
pt.wikis
> are > having so much of an issue and by extension commons where
they
> encourage > uploading of media > > > Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the
implication
of
> local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws
are
this
> outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero
could
> provide > a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a
rights
request
> process on commons > > On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles <teleswiki@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
> > > Hi, everyone. > > > > It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and
Commons
(at
> > least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from
IP
> addresses > > located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related
with
> > Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone
company
[1]
> > that allows reading and editing at free cost. > > > > One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that
was
just
> set > > on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are
being
done
> in a > > way that volunteers can't handle. > > > > That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that
hit
> > Commons > > [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be
controled
> or > > just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing
that
seemss
> to > > be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they
end
by
> > being > > undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being
pages
of
> files > > about themselves or just test edits. One of the users
identified
> > actually > > confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero. > > > > Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think
it
is
> > time > > for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other
than
> > blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I
tend
to
> > believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users
should
be
> made > > out. > > > > The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice
that
(as
> > I > > am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they
will
try
> to > > solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage. > > > > I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem,
by
using
> any > > off-wiki strategy. > > > > Kind regards. > > > > Teles > > > > [1] - > > > > >
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
> > [2] - > > > > >
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
> > [3] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case
> > [4] - > > > > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
> > [5] - > > > > >
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
> > > > > > *Lucas Teles* > > > > *+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation.
Administrator *
> > *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*-
wikipedista.com
> > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > 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>
> > > > > -- > GN. > President Wikimedia Australia > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
>
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely
share
in
the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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 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 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
Dear Gerard
Correspondingly, what I find unconscionable for us is that a small group of Commons editors /admins congregated on the talk page of 'Teles' and discussed how to secretly spy on these new Zeropaid enabled editors and monitor their Facebook-basic pages [1], [2].
IMO had this been more widely discussed at Commons seeking solutions, we would not be seeing unfortunate news articles like the one Andreas Kolbe has linked to
Regards
Dave
[1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATeles&type=r...
[2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_C...
On 3/20/16, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate. Nobody would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time as a movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While you may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest as it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it but throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany david.emrany@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these accounts.
David
[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana avrana@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond and provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by requiring HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly impacted the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed editing (and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access from just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do not reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the upload
of
copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other concern regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new good faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular
challenge
of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers of a Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates upload copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed form
(like
huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook or a similar public forum for others to download. When partners become aware
of
this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to
Community
Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and we
would
prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright (without significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall, we had internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this problem. However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic from
zero
rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this
issue.
As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach to resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are eager to examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update you
and
the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to increase readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber
counts)
and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships. There’s
not
enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship, but it is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. So if that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing editing community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to be a crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to have. I hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which are really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont
expect
people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them but they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
by the press or broadcast
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section b
- reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to
photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither way Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as permitted to reproduce
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into
Portuguese after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the pt.wikis are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the implication of local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are this outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero could provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights
request
process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles teleswiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, everyone.
It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons (at least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP
addresses
located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related with Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone company
[1]
that allows reading and editing at free cost.
One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was
just
set
on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being done
in a
way that volunteers can't handle.
That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit Commons [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be
controled
or
just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that
seemss
to
be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end by being undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages of
files
about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified actually confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero.
Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it is time for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other than blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I tend to believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users should be
made
out.
The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice that
(as
I am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they will
try
to
solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage.
I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by using
any
off-wiki strategy.
Kind regards.
Teles
[1] -
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
[2] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
[3] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case
[4] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
[5] -
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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 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 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
It's ordinary countervandalism, honestly I cannot find anything questionable but maybe a missed something.
Vito
2016-03-24 9:04 GMT+01:00 David Emrany david.emrany@gmail.com:
Dear Gerard
Correspondingly, what I find unconscionable for us is that a small group of Commons editors /admins congregated on the talk page of 'Teles' and discussed how to secretly spy on these new Zeropaid enabled editors and monitor their Facebook-basic pages [1], [2].
IMO had this been more widely discussed at Commons seeking solutions, we would not be seeing unfortunate news articles like the one Andreas Kolbe has linked to
Regards
Dave
[1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATeles&type=r...
[2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_C...
On 3/20/16, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate. Nobody would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time as a movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While you may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest
as
it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it
but
throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany david.emrany@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these accounts.
David
[1]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana avrana@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond and provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by requiring HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly
impacted
the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed editing (and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access
from
just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do not reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on
Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the
upload
of
copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other concern regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new
good
faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular
challenge
of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers
of a
Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates upload copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed form
(like
huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook or
a
similar public forum for others to download. When partners become
aware
of
this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to
Community
Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and we
would
prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright (without significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall, we had internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this problem. However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic from
zero
rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this
issue.
As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach to resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are eager
to
examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update
you
and
the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to
increase
readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber
counts)
and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships.
There’s
not
enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship, but it is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. So
if
that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing editing community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to be a crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to have.
I
hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com
wrote:
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which are really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont
expect
people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them
but
they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
by the press or broadcast
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section
b
- reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to
photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither way Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as permitted to reproduce
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into
Portuguese after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the
pt.wikis
are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the implication
of
local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are
this
outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero could provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights
request
process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles teleswiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, everyone.
It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons
(at
least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP
addresses
located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related with Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone
company
[1]
that allows reading and editing at free cost.
One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was
just
set
on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being done
in a
way that volunteers can't handle.
That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit Commons [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be
controled
or
just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that
seemss
to
be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end by being undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages
of
files
about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified actually confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero.
Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it
is
time for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other than blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I tend to believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users should be
made
out.
The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice that
(as
I am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they will
try
to
solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage.
I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by using
any
off-wiki strategy.
Kind regards.
Teles
[1] -
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
[2] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
[3] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case
[4] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
[5] -
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator
*at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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>
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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 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 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 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
Hoi, So what are you saying? It is ok for people to do dastardly things and abuse Commons and it is even worse when people at Commons use the environment they know, the Internet, to do some research and expose what they find?
Really? And I must be impressed when Mr Kolbe asks attention for it?? Because what! It a Dutch proverb the best sailors are ashore. The same can be said by Mr Kolbe who is proficient in telling other people what to do and why he objects. That is his prerogative as it is mine to be underwhelmed.
Be serious. When issues arise, we may work towards an understanding and a solution and sometimes hands get dirty. I will always support people who actually make a meaningful difference over people who cannot be faulted. Mistakes are made and when that is a problem go elsewhere. When there is a meaningful discussion anything is on the cards. So far this is not one. Thanks, GerarddM
On 24 March 2016 at 09:04, David Emrany david.emrany@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Gerard
Correspondingly, what I find unconscionable for us is that a small group of Commons editors /admins congregated on the talk page of 'Teles' and discussed how to secretly spy on these new Zeropaid enabled editors and monitor their Facebook-basic pages [1], [2].
IMO had this been more widely discussed at Commons seeking solutions, we would not be seeing unfortunate news articles like the one Andreas Kolbe has linked to
Regards
Dave
[1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATeles&type=r...
[2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_C...
On 3/20/16, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate. Nobody would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time as a movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While you may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest
as
it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it
but
throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany david.emrany@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these accounts.
David
[1]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana avrana@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond and provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by requiring HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly
impacted
the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed editing (and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access
from
just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do not reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on
Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the
upload
of
copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other concern regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new
good
faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular
challenge
of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers
of a
Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates upload copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed form
(like
huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook or
a
similar public forum for others to download. When partners become
aware
of
this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to
Community
Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and we
would
prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright (without significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall, we had internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this problem. However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic from
zero
rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this
issue.
As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach to resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are eager
to
examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update
you
and
the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to
increase
readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber
counts)
and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships.
There’s
not
enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship, but it is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. So
if
that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing editing community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to be a crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to have.
I
hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com
wrote:
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which are really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont
expect
people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them
but
they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
by the press or broadcast
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section
b
- reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to
photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither way Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as permitted to reproduce
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into
Portuguese after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the
pt.wikis
are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the implication
of
local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are
this
outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero could provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights
request
process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles teleswiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, everyone.
It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons
(at
least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP
addresses
located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related with Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone
company
[1]
that allows reading and editing at free cost.
One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was
just
set
on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being done
in a
way that volunteers can't handle.
That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit Commons [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be
controled
or
just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that
seemss
to
be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end by being undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages
of
files
about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified actually confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero.
Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it
is
time for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other than blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I tend to believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users should be
made
out.
The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice that
(as
I am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they will
try
to
solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage.
I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by using
any
off-wiki strategy.
Kind regards.
Teles
[1] -
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
[2] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
[3] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case
[4] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
[5] -
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
*Lucas Teles*
*+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator
*at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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>
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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 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 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 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
Yeah, I am definitely watching users that violate any Wikimedia project and I talk about it with other users publicly. What should be done different? Should we let this users go and ignore they are violating important rules? I will be paying atention to suggestions. And trying to do something different is the reason I created this thread. I am pretty sure that the regular measures won't be enough. I would never blame regular editors though. That would be too much easy and counterproductive.
Yeah, Wikipedia Zero is a good thing. That goes without saying. And I am not saying that because I expect something in return from the users of Wikipedia Zero. I actually don't think many of them will improve wiki as they use cellphones to edit and there is not yet an app for easily editing. Other than reading, doing anything else on cellphone is too much painful. The best thing of WP Zero is that it *provides* information for too many people in need.
Teles
Em quinta-feira, 24 de março de 2016, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> escreveu:
Hoi, So what are you saying? It is ok for people to do dastardly things and abuse Commons and it is even worse when people at Commons use the environment they know, the Internet, to do some research and expose what they find?
Really? And I must be impressed when Mr Kolbe asks attention for it?? Because what! It a Dutch proverb the best sailors are ashore. The same can be said by Mr Kolbe who is proficient in telling other people what to do and why he objects. That is his prerogative as it is mine to be underwhelmed.
Be serious. When issues arise, we may work towards an understanding and a solution and sometimes hands get dirty. I will always support people who actually make a meaningful difference over people who cannot be faulted. Mistakes are made and when that is a problem go elsewhere. When there is a meaningful discussion anything is on the cards. So far this is not one. Thanks, GerarddM
On 24 March 2016 at 09:04, David Emrany <david.emrany@gmail.com javascript:;> wrote:
Dear Gerard
Correspondingly, what I find unconscionable for us is that a small group of Commons editors /admins congregated on the talk page of 'Teles' and discussed how to secretly spy on these new Zeropaid enabled editors and monitor their Facebook-basic pages [1], [2].
IMO had this been more widely discussed at Commons seeking solutions, we would not be seeing unfortunate news articles like the one Andreas Kolbe has linked to
Regards
Dave
[1]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATeles&type=r...
[2]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_C...
On 3/20/16, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com javascript:;>
wrote:
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate.
Nobody
would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time
as a
movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While
you
may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest
as
it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it
but
throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany <david.emrany@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these accounts.
David
[1]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond
and
provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing
up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by requiring HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly
impacted
the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed editing (and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access
from
just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do
not
reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on
Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the
upload
of
copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other
concern
regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new
good
faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular
challenge
of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers
of a
Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates upload copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed form
(like
huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook
or
a
similar public forum for others to download. When partners become
aware
of
this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to
Community
Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and
we
would
prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright
(without
significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall,
we
had internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this
problem.
However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic
from
zero
rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this
issue.
As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach
to
resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are
eager
to
examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update
you
and
the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to
increase
readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber
counts)
and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships.
There’s
not
enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship,
but
it is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. So
if
that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing
editing
community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to
be a
crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to
have.
I
hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com
wrote:
some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which
are
really interesting to read -- read them in english -- https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont
expect
people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them
but
they do know the principles of it and what they can do
some points of interest
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
by the press or broadcast
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29
section
b
- reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to
photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither
way
Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as
permitted
to reproduce
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into
Portuguese after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the
pt.wikis
are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the
implication
of
local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are
this
outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero could provide a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights
request
process on commons
On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles <teleswiki@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
> Hi, everyone. > > It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and Commons
(at
> least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP addresses > located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related
with
> Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone
company
[1]
> that allows reading and editing at free cost. > > One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that
was
just
set > on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are being > done in a > way that volunteers can't handle. > > That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that hit > Commons > [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be
controled
or > just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that
seemss
to > be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end
by
> being > undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages
of
files > about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified > actually > confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero. > > Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think it
is
> time > for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other
than
> blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I
tend
> to > believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users
should
> be made > out. > > The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice
that
(as
> I > am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they
will
try
to > solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage. > > I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by > using any > off-wiki strategy. > > Kind regards. > > Teles > > [1] - > >
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
> [2] - > >
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
> [3] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case
> [4] - > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
> [5] - > >
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
> > > *Lucas Teles* > > *+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation.
Administrator
> *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*-
wikipedista.com
> _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share
in
the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>
Dear Teles
I am exercising my right of reply, anticipating that.a list mod may censor it or delay it till it is infructuous
You are imposing "modern" 1st world standards on these poor people. Many I remind you to remember how many 1st world Commons bureaucrats and admins were doing something similar / identical [1] only a few years ago at Commons.Do we collectively recall how many years.it took to ban them and delete their files ?
So give these Angolans time and respectfully equitably treat them as unequals when you deal with them.
Dave
[1] http://www.britannica.com/topic/Wikipedia " .. in 2010 it was revealed that there was a cache of pornographic images, including illegal depictions of sexual acts involving children, on Wikimedia Commons, a site maintained by the Wikimedia Foundation that served as a repository of media files for use in all Wikimedia products."
On 3/26/16, Lucas Teles teleswiki@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, I am definitely watching users that violate any Wikimedia project and I talk about it with other users publicly. What should be done different? Should we let this users go and ignore they are violating important rules? I will be paying atention to suggestions. And trying to do something different is the reason I created this thread. I am pretty sure that the regular measures won't be enough. I would never blame regular editors though. That would be too much easy and counterproductive.
Yeah, Wikipedia Zero is a good thing. That goes without saying. And I am not saying that because I expect something in return from the users of Wikipedia Zero. I actually don't think many of them will improve wiki as they use cellphones to edit and there is not yet an app for easily editing. Other than reading, doing anything else on cellphone is too much painful. The best thing of WP Zero is that it *provides* information for too many people in need.
Teles
Em quinta-feira, 24 de março de 2016, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> escreveu:
Hoi, So what are you saying? It is ok for people to do dastardly things and abuse Commons and it is even worse when people at Commons use the environment they know, the Internet, to do some research and expose what they find?
Really? And I must be impressed when Mr Kolbe asks attention for it?? Because what! It a Dutch proverb the best sailors are ashore. The same can be said by Mr Kolbe who is proficient in telling other people what to do and why he objects. That is his prerogative as it is mine to be underwhelmed.
Be serious. When issues arise, we may work towards an understanding and a solution and sometimes hands get dirty. I will always support people who actually make a meaningful difference over people who cannot be faulted. Mistakes are made and when that is a problem go elsewhere. When there is a meaningful discussion anything is on the cards. So far this is not one. Thanks, GerarddM
On 24 March 2016 at 09:04, David Emrany <david.emrany@gmail.com javascript:;> wrote:
Dear Gerard
Correspondingly, what I find unconscionable for us is that a small group of Commons editors /admins congregated on the talk page of 'Teles' and discussed how to secretly spy on these new Zeropaid enabled editors and monitor their Facebook-basic pages [1], [2].
IMO had this been more widely discussed at Commons seeking solutions, we would not be seeing unfortunate news articles like the one Andreas Kolbe has linked to
Regards
Dave
[1]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATeles&type=r...
[2]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_C...
On 3/20/16, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com javascript:;>
wrote:
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate.
Nobody
would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time
as a
movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement. While
you
may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest
as
it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it
but
throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany <david.emrany@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’ relationship with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these accounts.
David
[1]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Teles,
As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to respond
and
provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing
up.
Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by requiring HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly
impacted
the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed editing (and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated access
from
just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do
not
reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on
Wikipedia.
In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the
upload
of
copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other
concern
regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of new
good
faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular
challenge
of the extra work this causes for existing community members.
Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few subscribers
of a
Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the pirates upload copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed form
(like
huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on Facebook
or
a
similar public forum for others to download. When partners become
aware
of
this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to
Community
Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's removed.
We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem, and
we
would
prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright
(without
significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall,
we
had internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this
problem.
However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic
from
zero
rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this
issue.
As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work.
With this task completed, our team, in coordination with community engagement and engineering is working on finding the best approach
to
resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are
eager
to
examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also update
you
and
the list here.
On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to
increase
readership. This is measured in potential reach (through subscriber
counts)
and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships.
There’s
not
enough information to show that Zero can also increase editorship,
but
it is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. So
if
that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great thing.
However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing
editing
community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to
be a
crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to
have.
I
hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into an opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors.
Best regards, Adele
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com
wrote:
> some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which
are
> really > interesting to read -- read them in english -- > https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I dont
expect
> people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them
but
> they > do know the principles of it and what they can do > > some points of interest > > - Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
> by the press or broadcast > - Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29
section
b
> - > reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to > photographic > process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching > organisations > ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither
way
> Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as
permitted
> to > reproduce > - article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into > Portuguese > after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the
pt.wikis
> are > having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they > encourage > uploading of media > > > Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the
implication
of
> local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are
this
> outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero > could > provide > a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a rights
request
> process on commons > > On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles <teleswiki@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
> > > Hi, everyone. > > > > It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and > > Commons
(at
> > least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from IP > addresses > > located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related
with
> > Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone
company
[1]
> > that allows reading and editing at free cost. > > > > One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that
was
just
> set > > on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are > > being > > done > in a > > way that volunteers can't handle. > > > > That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that > > hit > > Commons > > [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be
controled
> or > > just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that
seemss
> to > > be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they end
by
> > being > > undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being > > pages
of
> files > > about themselves or just test edits. One of the users identified > > actually > > confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero. > > > > Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think > > it
is
> > time > > for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other
than
> > blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I
tend
> > to > > believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users
should
> > be > made > > out. > > > > The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice
that
(as
> > I > > am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they
will
try
> to > > solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage. > > > > I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem, by > > using > any > > off-wiki strategy. > > > > Kind regards. > > > > Teles > > > > [1] - > > > > >
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
> > [2] - > > > > >
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
> > [3] -
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case
> > [4] - > > > > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
> > [5] - > > > > >
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
> > > > > > *Lucas Teles* > > > > *+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation.
Administrator
> > *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*-
wikipedista.com
> > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; > > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > -- > GN. > President Wikimedia Australia > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
>
-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;
*Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share
in
the
sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. https://donate.wikimedia.org/* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>
-- Steward for Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. Sent from mobile. Please, excuse my brevity.
+55 (71) 98290-7553 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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,
Angola is not alone. Bangladesh also started the practice. :-P Now there is a good number of Facebook groups and pages to do this kind of piracy related works through Commons. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:NahidSultan/Bangladesh_Facebook_Case
They are even creating manuals in different Facebook groups on how to download movies even if get blocked by admins. * https://www.facebook.com/groups/1683585148563391/permalink/1695000264088546/ * https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1173773462655208&id=10...
Phabricator link to deal with this - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T129845
Regards, Bodhisattwa
On 28 March 2016 at 03:30, David Emrany david.emrany@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Teles
I am exercising my right of reply, anticipating that.a list mod may censor it or delay it till it is infructuous
You are imposing "modern" 1st world standards on these poor people. Many I remind you to remember how many 1st world Commons bureaucrats and admins were doing something similar / identical [1] only a few years ago at Commons.Do we collectively recall how many years.it took to ban them and delete their files ?
So give these Angolans time and respectfully equitably treat them as unequals when you deal with them.
Dave
[1] http://www.britannica.com/topic/Wikipedia " .. in 2010 it was revealed that there was a cache of pornographic images, including illegal depictions of sexual acts involving children, on Wikimedia Commons, a site maintained by the Wikimedia Foundation that served as a repository of media files for use in all Wikimedia products."
On 3/26/16, Lucas Teles teleswiki@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, I am definitely watching users that violate any Wikimedia project
and
I talk about it with other users publicly. What should be done different? Should we let this users go and ignore they are violating important
rules?
I will be paying atention to suggestions. And trying to do something different is the reason I created this thread. I am pretty sure that the regular measures won't be enough. I would never blame regular editors though. That would be too much easy and counterproductive.
Yeah, Wikipedia Zero is a good thing. That goes without saying. And I am not saying that because I expect something in return from the users of Wikipedia Zero. I actually don't think many of them will improve wiki as they use cellphones to edit and there is not yet an app for easily
editing.
Other than reading, doing anything else on cellphone is too much painful. The best thing of WP Zero is that it *provides* information for too many people in need.
Teles
Em quinta-feira, 24 de março de 2016, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> escreveu:
Hoi, So what are you saying? It is ok for people to do dastardly things and abuse Commons and it is even worse when people at Commons use the environment they know, the Internet, to do some research and expose what they find?
Really? And I must be impressed when Mr Kolbe asks attention for it?? Because what! It a Dutch proverb the best sailors are ashore. The same
can
be said by Mr Kolbe who is proficient in telling other people what to do and why he objects. That is his prerogative as it is mine to be underwhelmed.
Be serious. When issues arise, we may work towards an understanding and
a
solution and sometimes hands get dirty. I will always support people who actually make a meaningful difference over people who cannot be faulted. Mistakes are made and when that is a problem go elsewhere. When there
is a
meaningful discussion anything is on the cards. So far this is not one. Thanks, GerarddM
On 24 March 2016 at 09:04, David Emrany <david.emrany@gmail.com javascript:;> wrote:
Dear Gerard
Correspondingly, what I find unconscionable for us is that a small group of Commons editors /admins congregated on the talk page of 'Teles' and discussed how to secretly spy on these new Zeropaid enabled editors and monitor their Facebook-basic pages [1], [2].
IMO had this been more widely discussed at Commons seeking solutions, we would not be seeing unfortunate news articles like the one Andreas Kolbe has linked to
Regards
Dave
[1]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATeles&type=r...
[2]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_C...
On 3/20/16, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi, Realistically. Wikipedia is very much an enabler.
Your ease to consider "simply" disabling mobile edits or uploads I find appalling. People in countries like USA or UK are very fortunate.
Nobody
would ever argue to disable their edits or uploads. At the same time
as a
movement we desperately need more and more diverse involvement.
While
you
may say what you want, it is unconscionable for us to do as you suggest
as
it is fully contrary to what we aim to achieve.
What we are experiencing is a bump in the road. We have to deal with it
but
throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! Thanks, GerardM
On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany <david.emrany@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
Hi Adele
Can we have a clear picture of Wikimedia's ‘complicated’
relationship
with net neutrality - 1year on from the Washington Post story [1]
Can we also have specific figures on how much of WMF's traffic has been lost / gained from key markets in Latin America and Asia after regulators have blocked zeropaid schemes due to local concerns.
WMF's "complicated" stance has also turned off many like-minded support groups who stand for pure net neutrality - and not WMF's or Facebook's ersatz versions [2]
Lastly, if the primary aim of Wikipedia Zero is to gain readership, why not simply disable all mobile edits / uploads from these accounts.
David
[1]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-comp...
[2]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-prot...
On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:;>
wrote:
> Hi Teles, > > As the head of the Wikipedia Zero program, I would like to
respond
and
> provide more context to the important challenges you are bringing
up.
> > Last year, the Foundation increased our security and privacy by > requiring > HTTPS to access all Wikimedia projects. That change has greatly
impacted
> the Wikipedia Zero program, and most importantly has also allowed > editing > (and not only reading) and extended the scope of zero-rated
access
from
> just Wikipedia to all Wikimedia projects. However, our banners do
not
> reflect this additional zero-rating, but still only appear on
Wikipedia.
> > In your message you highlight two main concerns. One would be the
upload
of > copyrighted materials and overall abuse on Commons. The other
concern
> regards how the editing community should deal with an influx of
new
good
> faith edits and potential editors in Portuguese, with particular challenge > of the extra work this causes for existing community members. > > Regarding Commons, we have experienced abuse from a few
subscribers
of a
> Zero partner in Angola. Typically what happens is that the
pirates
> upload > copyrighted movies to Commons either directly or in a concealed > form (like > huge/split PDFs or JPEGs). Then they promote the links on
or
a
> similar public forum for others to download. When partners become
aware
of > this they have flagged it to us and we've, in turn, flagged it to Community > Engagement who has worked with editors to try and make sure it's > removed. > > We agree that this is not an ideal way to handle this problem,
and
we
would > prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright
(without
> significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last
fall,
we
> had > internal discussions on finding technical solutions for this
problem.
> However, we discovered that we could not widely identify traffic
from
zero > rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address
this
issue. > As of December 2015, the Ops team was able to complete that work. > > With this task completed, our team, in coordination with
community
> engagement and engineering is working on finding the best
approach
to
> resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are
eager
to
> examine multiple approaches and this is a great time to open the > discussion. As we evaluate different approaches, we can also
update
you
and > the list here. > > On the editing topic, the primary goal of Wikipedia Zero is to
increase
> readership. This is measured in potential reach (through
subscriber
counts) > and pageviews within regions with Wikipedia Zero partnerships.
There’s
not > enough information to show that Zero can also increase
editorship,
but
> it > is something we believe is furthered by expanding reading access. > So
if
> that is what is happening in Angola, we see that is a great
thing.
> > However, we understand that it’s challenging for our existing
editing
> community to handle a sudden influx of new editors. This seems to
be a
> crucial and important conversation for the movement at large to
have.
I
> hope we can figure out a way to turn this moment in Angola into
an
> opportunity to learn how to deal with new readers and editors. > > Best regards, > Adele > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com
wrote:
> >> some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which
are
>> really >> interesting to read -- read them in english -- >> https://www.copyright-watch.org/files/Angola.pdf of course I
dont
expect >> people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read
them
but
>> they >> do know the principles of it and what they can do >> >> some points of interest >> >> - Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day published >> by the press or broadcast >> - Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29
section
b
>> - >> reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to >> photographic >> process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching >> organisations >> ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but
wither
way
>> Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as
permitted
>> to >> reproduce >> - article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into >> Portuguese >> after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the
pt.wikis
>> are >> having so much of an issue and by extension commons where
they
>> encourage >> uploading of media >> >> >> Wikipedia zero implementation needs to also consider the
implication
of
>> local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws
are
this
>> outdated and effectively enable copyright issues then WP Zero >> could >> provide >> a read only option for IP's or a no upload option, with a
rights
request >> process on commons >> >> On 19 March 2016 at 00:45, Lucas Teles <teleswiki@gmail.com
javascript:;> wrote:
>> >> > Hi, everyone. >> > >> > It is being recently reported on Portuguese Wikipedia and >> > Commons
(at
>> > least) the increasing ammount of improper editing coming from
IP
>> addresses >> > located in Angola. Some users believe that this may be related
with
>> > Wikipedia Zero and a partnership between WMF and a cellphone
company
[1] >> > that allows reading and editing at free cost. >> > >> > One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that
was
just >> set >> > on Commons in order to prevent these edits [2], as they are >> > being >> > done >> in a >> > way that volunteers can't handle. >> > >> > That seems to be some kind of "second wave" as the first that >> > hit >> > Commons >> > [3] had been already reported months ago [4] and seemed to be controled >> or >> > just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing
that
seemss >> to >> > be clear is that edits are done in good faith. However, they
end
by
>> > being >> > undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being >> > pages
of
>> files >> > about themselves or just test edits. One of the users
identified
>> > actually >> > confirm [5] that he is editing through Wikipedia Zero. >> > >> > Concerning that more partnerships may occur in future, I think >> > it
is
>> > time >> > for us to start talking about ways of dealing with that, other
than
>> > blocking. Sadly, I don't have an answer to that problem, but I
tend
>> > to >> > believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users
should
>> > be >> made >> > out. >> > >> > The current process is that editors will be the ones to notice
that
(as >> > I >> > am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they
will
try >> to >> > solve their way, which may cause too many collateral damage. >> > >> > I wonder if there is any kind of way to diminish the problem,
by
>> > using >> any >> > off-wiki strategy. >> > >> > Kind regards. >> > >> > Teles >> > >> > [1] - >> > >> > >>
http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--11...
>> > [2] - >> > >> > >>
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steinsplitter&...
>> > [3] - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_Case >> > [4] - >> > >> > >>
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=12835...
>> > [5] - >> > >> > >>
https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darwi...
>> > >> > >> > *Lucas Teles* >> > >> > *+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation.
Administrator
>> > *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*-
wikipedista.com
>> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >> > 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>
>> >> >> >> >> -- >> GN. >> President Wikimedia Australia >> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra >> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; >> Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
>> > > > > -- > *Adele Vrana* > *Strategic Partnerships* > Wikimedia Foundation > +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 > avrana@wikimedia.org javascript:; > > *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely
share
in
the > sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate. > https://donate.wikimedia.org/* > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
?subject=unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe>
-- Steward for Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator at Portuguese Wikipedia
and
Wikimedia Commons. Sent from mobile. Please, excuse my brevity.
+55 (71) 98290-7553 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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 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
On 27 March 2016 at 23:00, David Emrany david.emrany@gmail.com wrote:
You are imposing "modern" 1st world standards on these poor people. Many I remind you to remember how many 1st world Commons bureaucrats and admins were doing something similar / identical [1] only a few years ago at Commons.Do we collectively recall how many years.it took to ban them and delete their files ?
Actually illegal stuff is vaporised as soon as it is found. Images adult depicting nudity are not per se illegal are where they are freely licensed and withing project scope they have not been deleted and remain to this day. By the same token films under a free license such as Tears of Steel are also not going to be removed from commons.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tears_of_Steel_in_4k_-_Official_Blen...
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
of course I dont expect people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them but they do know the principles of it and what they can do
Are you sure? In the US, at least, industry groups go to a lot of trouble to "remind" people of the things they're not supposed to do. :)
But I'm not sure the provisions you point to are actually so unusual.
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day published
by the press or broadcast
This is in the Berne Convention (article 2, section 8).
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section b -
reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to photographic process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching organisations ..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither way Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as permitted to reproduce
I don't know if Wikipedia would actually be covered by this: those terms are probably pretty narrow (and this is just a translation of the law, anyway). In any event, it's pretty standard for copyright laws to make allowances for limited educational use.
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into Portuguese
after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the pt.wikis are having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they encourage uploading of media
This appears to implement article 2 of the Berne Convention's "special provisions regarding developing countries" (Angola isn't a signatory, but it has signed the TRIPS Agreement, which incorporates those provisions). It actually looks quite restrictive (the license has to be granted by the "State Secretariat for Culture", you have to try to get permission first, there are limitations on export, and you still have to pay the copyright holder).
I don't think problematic uploads from mobile are a new or regional phenomenon—I seem to recall an earlier "selfiepocalypse".
On 19 March 2016 at 19:30, Benjamin Lees emufarmers@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
of course I dont expect people to know their copyright laws in detail or to have read them but
they
do know the principles of it and what they can do
Are you sure? In the US, at least, industry groups go to a lot of trouble to "remind" people of the things they're not supposed to do. :)
outside the US things like copyright isnt respected, enforced or even part of a person education especially in third world countries, there is no specific mention of digital work provisions in the Angola law
But I'm not sure the provisions you point to are actually so unusual.
- Non protected works Article 9 section c -- news of the day
published
by the press or broadcast
This is in the Berne Convention (article 2, section 8).
international conventions and agreements dont reach the end users knowledge even in first world countries I sure very few people in the US would know the changes being introduced in the TPP , I'd guess that alot of the people on this list are living in countries that didnt even exist when the Berne Convention was signed. We also have the URAA which even Commons has struggled with swings in interpretation over the last few years
- Chapter IV Uses lawful without Authorisation article 29 section b -
reproduction by photographic process or process analogous to
photographic
process by <snip> documentation centres <snip> or teaching
organisations
..... refers to minimum amount of copies necessary, but wither way Wikipedia would fall into either of these definitions as permitted to reproduce
I don't know if Wikipedia would actually be covered by this: those terms are probably pretty narrow (and this is just a translation of the law, anyway). In any event, it's pretty standard for copyright laws to make allowances for limited educational use.
This isnt limited reproduction of parts its the whole of the item can be reproduced,
- article 30 - is the key here it enables translation into Portuguese
after 3 years without any real restrictions - hence why the pt.wikis
are
having so much of an issue and by extension commons where they
encourage
uploading of media
This appears to implement article 2 of the Berne Convention's "special provisions regarding developing countries" (Angola isn't a signatory, but it has signed the TRIPS Agreement, which incorporates those provisions). It actually looks quite restrictive (the license has to be granted by the "State Secretariat for Culture", you have to try to get permission first, there are limitations on export, and you still have to pay the copyright holder).
I don't think problematic uploads from mobile are a new or regional phenomenon—I seem to recall an earlier "selfiepocalypse".
the problem coincided with Wikipedia Zero introduction, currently volunteers spend thousands of hours every year dealing with copyright violations from 1st world countries , the issue how do we stop the inundation when its related to WP Zero activation, one is looking at the copyright in each region and taking steps to avoid the creation of work for the current volunteers, we know any two lawyers can read the same law and come to differing interpretations
What could solve an immediate burden on current volunteers when introducing WP Zero one possibility is a read only access period, another is media upload restrictions, but also incorporating some copyright education to end users as well as the identifying which of our volunteer communities are likely to impacted and provide clarity or least a WMF interpretation on FOP, reuse, fair use , moral rights etc to those communities so they can be prepared to address the impact. Maube ot be possible toput something like pending revisions on uploads from the ip range of the country so at least its not generally available in the initial period. This has been an on going issue for Commons and pt.wp for 12 months, its an issue that should be addressed prior to startup not left to community to stumble around to resolve leaving good faith editors impacted unfairly because there was no preparation or support in managing the issue in the first instance. (yes acknowledging that experience & hindsight are good teachers)
Gn.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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
Il 19/03/2016 13:57, Gnangarra ha scritto:
outside the US things like copyright isnt respected, enforced or even part of a person education
Not really.
We also have the URAA which even Commons has struggled with swings in interpretation over the last few years
Definitely a fail of common law ;) Seriously I think Wikimedia should somehow escape from being *so* affected by USA law.
Vito
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org