Wikipedia Zero mass effect on Wikimedia projects

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

Fwd: [Wikidata] Using Wikidata for...

help, how much money goes to...

Lucas Teles

18 Mar 2016 18 Mar '16

5:45 p.m.

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--1… [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=1283… [5] - https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw… *Lucas Teles* *+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*- wikipedista.com

Show replies by date

Gnangarra

19 Mar 19 Mar

12:50 a.m.

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(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com

Adele Vrana

7:39 a.m.

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(a)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

just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that seemss

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

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--1…

[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=1283…

[5] -

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

*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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

David Emrany

3:03 p.m.

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-com… [2] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-pro… On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana(a)wikimedia.org> 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

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

just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that seemss

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

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

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--1…

[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=1283…

[5] -

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Gerard Meijssen

20 Mar 20 Mar

12:51 p.m.

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(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

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

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(a)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(a)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--1…

> > [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=1283…

> > [5] - > > > > >

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

> > > > > > *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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Steinsplitter Wiki

4:58 p.m.

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(a)gmail.com Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2016 12:51:07 +0100 To: wikimedia-l(a)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(a)gmail.com> wrote:

challenge

(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

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

zero

rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this

issue.

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

expect

published

request

[1]

> > that allows reading and editing at free cost. > > > > One of the first reactions to that is a large range block that was

just

controled

> or > > just paused for a while. On Portuguese Wikipedia, one thing that

seemss

(as

> > I > > am not aware of any kind of follow up by WMF on that) and they will

try

http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--1…

> > [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=1283…

> > [5] - > > > > >

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

> <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(a)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(a)wikimedia.org *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in

the

Lodewijk

5:05 p.m.

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(a)gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:

...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-com…

[2]

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-pro…

On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana(a)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

> 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

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

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

> 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(a)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

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

>> 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

>> 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(a)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

>> > believe that some way of mass reaching these potential users should

> 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--1…

> > [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=1283…

> > [5] - >

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

>> > *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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;> ?subject=unsubscribe>

Vi to

7:06 p.m.

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(a)effeietsanders.org>rg>:

...

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(a)gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-com…

[2]

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-pro…

> > On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana(a)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

> 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

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

> > 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

> > 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(a)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

>> 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

>> 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(a)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

> >> > being > >> > undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages

> >> 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

> >> > 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--1…

> > [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=1283…

> > [5] - > > > > >

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

> >> > > >> > > >> > *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(a)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(a)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(a)wikimedia.org <javascript:;> > > > > *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share

> 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(a)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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;> ?subject=unsubscribe>

James Alexander

21 Mar 21 Mar

5:10 a.m.

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(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

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

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(a)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

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(a)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-com…

[2]

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-pro…

> > On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana(a)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

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

> would > > prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright

(without > > > significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall,

> 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

> > > 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.

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

> > 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(a)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

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(a)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

> >> > 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--1…

>> > [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=1283…

>> > [5] - >> > >> > >>

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

> >> > > >> > > >> > *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(a)lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;> >> > Unsubscribe:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

, >> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>

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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;> ?subject=unsubscribe>

Isla Haddow-Flood

7:32 a.m.

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(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

...

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(a)effeietsanders.org>rg>:

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

> 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(a)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

> but > > throwing the baby with the washing water? REALLY !! > > Thanks, > > GerardM > > > > On 19 March 2016 at 15:03, David Emrany <david.emrany(a)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-com…

> > [2] >

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-pro…

> > > > > > On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana(a)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

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,

> 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

> > > 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

> > > 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(a)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

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(a)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

> >> 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,

using > >> any > >> > off-wiki strategy. > >> > > >> > Kind regards. > >> > > >> > Teles > >> > > >> > [1] - > >> > > >> > > >> >

http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--1…

> >> > [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=1283…

> >> > [5] - > >> > > >> > > >> >

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

> >> > > >> > > >> > *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(a)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(a)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(a)wikimedia.org <javascript:;> > > > > > > > > *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely

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(a)lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;> > > Unsubscribe:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;> ?subject=unsubscribe>

-- Isla Haddow-Flood skype: islahaddow twitter: @havingaflood instgram: islig Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Islahaddow Linked in: http://za.linkedin.com/pub/isla-haddow-flood

David Emrany

24 Mar 24 Mar

9:04 a.m.

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=… [2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_… On 3/20/16, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

challenge

(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

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

zero

rated partners, and that ability was a prerequisite to address this

issue.

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

expect

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

[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--1…

> > [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=1283…

> > [5] - > > > > >

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

-- *Adele Vrana* *Strategic Partnerships* Wikimedia Foundation +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6773 avrana(a)wikimedia.org *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in

the

Vi to

1:31 p.m.

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(a)gmail.com>om>:

...

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(a)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-com…

> > [2] >

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-pro…

> > On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana(a)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

> > 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

> > 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

> > 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(a)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

> >> - > >> 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

> >> 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(a)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

> >> > 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--1…

> >> > [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=1283…

> >> > [5] - > >> > > >> > > >> >

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

> >> > > >> > > >> > *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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Gerard Meijssen

3:36 p.m.

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(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

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

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-com…

> > [2] >

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-pro…

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

of a

> > similar public forum for others to download. When partners become

aware

> > 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

wrote:

but

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

> >> local laws especially copyright on the projects where the laws are

this

(at

company

http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--1…

> >> > [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=1283…

> >> > [5] - > >> > > >> > > >> >

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

> >> > > >> > > >> > *Lucas Teles* > >> > > >> > *+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

> , > >> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org

?subject=unsubscribe>

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Lucas Teles

25 Mar 25 Mar

11:33 p.m.

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(a)gmail.com> escreveu:

...

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATeles&type=…

[2]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_…

On 3/20/16, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)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

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(a)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-com…

> [2] >

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-pro…

>> >> On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana(a)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

> > 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

>> would >> > prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright

(without

>> > significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall,

>> > 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

>> > resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are

eager

> > 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(a)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

> >> 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(a)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

> >> > being > >> > undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being pages

> >> 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--1…

> >> > [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=1283…

> >> > [5] - > >>

> >>

> >> >

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

>> >>

>> >> > *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(a)lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;> > >> > Unsubscribe:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

> , > >> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>

?subject=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(a)wikimedia.org <javascript:;> >>

>> > *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share

>> 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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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

David Emrany

28 Mar 28 Mar

midnight

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(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATeles&type=…

[2]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_…

On 3/20/16, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)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

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(a)gmail.com

<javascript:;>> wrote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/25/wikipedias-com…

> [2] >

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-pro…

>> >> On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana(a)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

> > 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

>> would >> > prefer to catch it much earlier or simply prevent it outright

(without

>> > significant limits being placed on good faith editors). Last fall,

>> > 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

>> > resolve this issue. Do you have suggestions or guidance? We are

eager

> > 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(a)gmail.com

<javascript:;>>

wrote: >>

>> >> some of the issue stems form the copyright laws of Angola, which

are

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

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

implication

> >> 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(a)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

> >> > being > >> > undone as they are incorrect for some reason, whether being > >> > pages

> >> 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--1…

> >> > [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=1283…

> >> > [5] - > >>

> >>

> >> >

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

>> >>

>> >> > *Lucas Teles* >> >>

>> >> > *+55 (71) 98290 7553Steward at Wikimedia Foundation.

Administrator

* >> >> > *at Portuguese Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons.*-

wikipedista.com

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

> , > >> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>

?subject=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(a)wikimedia.org <javascript:;> >>

>> > *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

, >> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>

?subject=unsubscribe>

>> <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(a)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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Bodhisattwa Mandal

14 Apr 14 Apr

4:32 p.m.

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=1… Phabricator link to deal with this - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T129845 Regards, Bodhisattwa On 28 March 2016 at 03:30, David Emrany <david.emrany(a)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(a)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

> 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(a)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=…

> > > > [2] > > >

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Teles/Angola_Facebook_…

> > > > On 3/20/16, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)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(a)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-com…

> > >> > > >> [2] > > >> > > >

https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/01/wikipedia-zero-and-net-neutrality-pro…

> > >> > > >> On 3/19/16, Adele Vrana <avrana(a)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

> > >> > 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(a)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(a)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

> > >> >> 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,

> > >> >> > using > > >> >> any > > >> >> > off-wiki strategy. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Kind regards. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Teles > > >> >> > > > >> >> > [1] - > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> > > >

http://www.telecompaper.com/news/movicel-offers-free-access-to-wikipedia--1…

> > >> >> > [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=1283…

> > >> >> > [5] - > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> > > >

https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:Darw…

> > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > *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(a)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(a)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(a)wikimedia.org <javascript:;> > > >> > > > >> > *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely

> 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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-- Bodhisattwa

geni

15 Apr 15 Apr

4:32 p.m.

On 27 March 2016 at 23:00, David Emrany <david.emrany(a)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_Ble… -- geni

Benjamin Lees

19 Mar 19 Mar

12:30 p.m.

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Gnangarra <gnangarra(a)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".

Gnangarra

1:57 p.m.

On 19 March 2016 at 19:30, Benjamin Lees <emufarmers(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Gnangarra <gnangarra(a)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

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

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.

...