Misplaced Pages

:Village pump (WMF): Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:37, 21 October 2024 editJimbo Wales (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Founder14,538 edits →Questions for the WMF: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit Latest revision as of 10:35, 26 December 2024 edit undoFrost (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers51,971 edits Undid revision 1265328234 by 49.229.131.166 (talk): restoreTag: Undo 
Line 23: Line 23:
</noinclude> </noinclude>
{{toclimit|3}} {{toclimit|3}}
== Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin November Issue 2 ==


<section begin="content" />
== Donation banners ==

Why are these banners so persistent? I've managed to get no less than 10 of these banners in the space of just a few minutes. ] (]) 19:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

:88, do you allow tracking cookies from wikipedia.org in your browser? If not, the site won't remember that you've dismissed the banner already. Another option is to ] (it's free and a single step; doesn't even require email confirmation), which will allow you to hide donation banners. ] (]) 11:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

== Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin September Issue 1 ==

<section begin="content" />
<div class="plainlinks"> <div class="plainlinks">
<!-- Intended publication date: August 29, 2024 // covering period from August 28 to September 11--> <!--Intended publication date: // covering period from Nov 7 to Nov 21 -->
] ]


<div style="margin-top:10px; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">'' Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation over the first half of September 2024. Please help ].''</div> <div style="margin-top:10px; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation from November 7 to November 21, 2024. Please help ].''</div>
<div style="clear:both"></div>
---- ----
'''Upcoming and current events and conversations'''
<small>''] continues''</small>
* The Voting period for the ] is open until September 17. Go to the ] voting page to vote.
* ] in Bali, Indonesia is open until September 20.
* ] will be held in Abuja, Nigeria from September 12–14.
* ] will take place in Istanbul, Türkiye on September 20–22.
* ] will take place in Waterford City, Ireland on September 25–27'''.'''
* ] will be held in Padua, Italy on September 27–29.
* Join ], a photo campaign dedicated to documenting the vibrant and colorful festival of Onam on Wikimedia Commons. The campaign runs until September 30.


'''Upcoming and current events and conversations'''<br /><small>''] continues''</small>
]
* '''Conversation with the trustees:''' Speak directly with the Wikimedia Foundation trustees about their work at the ] on 27 November from 12:00 – 13:30 UTC.
* '''Wikimedia Hackathon:''' ] for the 2025 Wikimedia Hackathon which will be held in Istanbul, Turkey, May 2–4, 2025.
* '''Language Community:''' ] will be held on November 29 at 16:00 UTC.
* '''Wikimania 2025:''' ] to attend Wikimania 2025 in Nairobi is open until the end of December 8.
* '''Central Asian WikiCon:''' ] will take place on April 19–20, 2025, in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. is open until November 30.


'''Annual Goals Progress on ]''' '''Annual Goals Progress on ]'''<br /><small>''See also newsletters: ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]''</small>
<small>''See also newsletters: ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]''</small>
* Users of all Wikis will have access to Wikimedia sites as read-only for a few minutes on September 25, starting at 15:00 UTC. ] is a planned ].
* The Alternative Text suggested edits feature has now been fully deployed to production on the iOS App for Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, and French Wikipedias! This feature, part of ], is designed to enhance how newcomers add alt text to images, aiming to improve accessibility and engagement. For more details, visit the ] and explore the new feature in the app!
* Editors and volunteer developers interested in data visualization can now test the new software for charts. Its early version is available on beta Commons and beta Misplaced Pages. This is an important milestone before making charts available on regular wikis. You can ] and help test the charts.
* A new draft text of a policy discussing the use of Wikimedia’s APIs ]. The draft text does not reflect a change in policy around the APIs; instead, it is an attempt to codify existing API rules. Comments, questions, and suggestions are welcome on ] until September 13 or until those discussions have concluded.
* More recent tech updates from ].
* The ] from Wikifunctions.
* ] or other online collaboration spaces!


* '''Tech News:''' Admins and users of the Wikimedia projects ] can now monitor and evaluate important metrics related to Automoderator's actions; Stewards can now make ] cause global ]. Learn about the latest tech updates from tech news ], ], and ].
* '''Wikifunctions''': ]: . They expand the ability to deal with numbers considerably, allowing us to work with fractions and decimals, and not just whole numbers anymore. ].
* '''Temporary accounts:''' We are rolling out ] for more wikis including Romanian, Serbian, Danish, and Norwegian Bokmål.


'''Annual Goals Progress on ]''' '''Annual Goals Progress on ]'''<br/><small>''See also a list of all movement events: ]''</small>
<small>''See also a list of all movement events: ]''</small>
* ] with Hub Focus.
* Watch the recordings of Let's Connect Grantee Partner Learning Conversation: and .


* '''Language & Internationalization:''' ] is available. Some ]: Mooré Misplaced Pages is live; Keyboard Layouts for Multiple Languages Added; New Projects Added to Translatewiki.net.
* '''Wikimedia Research Showcase''': Watch which looked at ].
* '''Misplaced Pages Library''': ] in the Misplaced Pages Library?
* '''Tulu Wikisource''': ] Tulu Wikisource.
* '''CEE Meeting 2024''': ] from Central Asian community members at the CEE Meeting 2024.
* '''Let's Connect:''' Let's Connect Learning clinic on ] was held on November 22.


'''Annual Goals Progress on ]''' '''Annual Goals Progress on ]'''<br /><small>''See also: ]''</small>
<small>''See also blogs: ] · · ''</small>
* Wikimedia Foundation defeats gambling magnate’s ].
* Wikimedia Indonesia and UNESCO Jakarta ].
* Child Rights Impact Assessment at EduWiki Knowledge Showcase and more: ] from the Global Advocacy team.
* Protecting the people: ] while contributing to Wikimedia projects.


* '''Audit reports 2023-24:''' ] from the fiscal year 2023–2024 Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia Endowment audit reports.
* '''Wikimedia Enterprise:''' ] of Wikimedia Enterprise for the fiscal year 2023–2024.


'''Board and Board committee updates'''<br/><small>''See ] · ]''</small>
'''Board and Board committee updates'''
<small>''See ] · ]''</small>
* The Movement Charter Drafting Committee published their ] and bid farewell.
* Read updates from the ].
* Learn more about 12 candidates running for 4 seats on the Board by ] and their ].
* See the new ] following the results of the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) special election, a new decision making group that will enforce the UCoC in specific circumstances.


* '''Board Updates''': The Board met in Katowice, Poland on August 5 and held its quarterly business meeting before Wikimania. Learn more about the ].
* '''AffCom''': The Affiliates Committee has ] after a pause to improve the User Group recognition process.


'''Other Movement curated newsletters & news'''<br/><small>''See also:'' ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· &nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]:</small>
'''Other Movement curated newsletters & news'''
<small>''See also:'' ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]:</small> * <small>'''Topics''': ] · ] · ]</small>
* <small>'''Topics''': ] · ] · ]</small>
* <small>'''Wikimedia Projects''': ] · ]</small> * <small>'''Wikimedia Projects''': ] · ]</small>
* <small>'''Regions''': ]</small> * <small>'''Regions''': ]</small>


<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">'''] · ]''' <div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
'''] · ]'''


Previous editions of this bulletin are on ]. Let askcac{{@}}wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement! Previous editions of this bulletin are on ]. Let askcac]wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!
</div> </div>
</div> </div>
<section end="content" /> <section end="content" />


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">]</bdi> 21:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC) <bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">]</bdi> 18:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:RAdimer-WMF@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=Global_message_delivery/Targets/Wikimedia_Foundation_Bulletin&oldid=27427202 --> <!-- Message sent by User:RAdimer-WMF@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=Global_message_delivery/Targets/Wikimedia_Foundation_Bulletin&oldid=27824573 -->


== Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin September Issue 2 == == Wikimedia Foundation banner fundraising campaign in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK, and the US starts next week ==


Dear all,
<section begin="content" />
<div class="plainlinks">
<!-- Intended publication date: August 29, 2024 // covering period from August 28 to September 11-->
]


As ], the WMF is running its annual banner fundraising campaign for non logged in users in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK, and the US from '''the 2nd to the 31st of December 2024.'''
<div style="margin-top:10px; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">'' Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation over the second half of September 2024. Please help ].''</div>
----


You can find more information around the campaign on the ].
'''Upcoming and current events and conversations'''
]
<small>''] continues''</small>
* "]" – a curated list of community and media coverage of Wikimania 2024. Over 100 pieces so far have been published about the event.
* ] will lead a conversation about the future of the campaign with ] on September 25 at 15:00 UTC.
* ]: will take place on September 26 at 15:00 UTC.
* ], the  has been extended to September 29.
* ] will be held in Brussels, Belgium from September 29–30'''.'''
* ] will be held in Indianapolis, USA from October 3–6.
* ] will be held in Johannesburg, South Africa from October 4–6.
* ]: will be held in Hyderabad, India from October 4–5.
* ] will be held on October 6 at 07:00 UTC.
* ] is accepting submissions until October 6.
* ] team is hosting two office hours to discuss this year's plans and gather feedback from event organizers. The first session is October 5 at 16:00 UTC (Europe-Africa-Americas friendly), and the second is on October 6 at 03:00 UTC (Asia-Pacific friendly).


Generally, before and during the campaign, you can contact us:
'''Annual Goals Progress on ]'''
<small>''See also newsletters: ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]''</small>
* '''MediaWiki Product Insights''': The ] includes details about: research about ] handlers to help simplify development, research about performance improvements, work to improve the REST API for end-users, and more.
* '''Tech News''': Find out about the new automated ] page, the latest Wishlist focus area, ], and more ].
* '''Wikidata Query Service''': ] will impact certain uses. The project will enter a transition period until the end of February 2025. For more details, visit the ].
* '''Wikimedia Enterprise''': : Recurring Credits and More Frequent Updates, , and .
* '''Wikifunctions''': from September 20.
* '''Misplaced Pages Mobile Apps:''' Over 20,000 images have been added via the "Add an Image" feature on both iOS and Android (])!
* '''Knowledge is Human:''' Read about ongoing work on the 2024 iteration of the ]
* '''Server Switch''': A ] was completed successfully on September 25 with a read-only time of only ].


* On the ] or on the ]
* If you need to report a bug or technical issue, please
* If you see a donor on a talk page, ] or social media having difficulties in donating, please refer them to donate at wikimedia.org


Thank you and regards, ] (]) 05:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
'''Annual Goals Progress on ]'''
:If it starts next week, then why have I been seeing it for several weeks already? ] (]) 17:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
<small>''See also a list of all movement events: ]''</small>
* '''Wikimedia Research Showcase''': Watch with the theme of ].
* '''Conference and Event Fund''': ] beginning in September 2024.


== The future of US government web sites as sources ==


I am posting this here because it has very broad implications for the project and may require foundation help in the coming weeks. Misplaced Pages articles on energy and the environment and other many other subjects rely on data from US government web sites, which are generally regarded as authoritative. There is a significant likelihood that many or all of these sites will be taken offline after January 20, 2025 when the US administration changes over. Is the foundation participating in any organized effort to back this material up? Can we just rely on the Internet Archive? What happens if the new administration puts up conflicting data? Will editors be free to "correct" articles based on what newer Government websites say, regardless of scientific backing? We do not have a lot of time to think this through.--] (]) 19:02, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
'''Annual Goals Progress on ]'''
<small>''See also blogs: ] · · ''</small>
* '''UN Summit of the Future Action Days:''' Watch the titled "]" at The Summit of the Future. This is expected to result in a negotiated Global Digital Compact, which represents the final phase of our movement-wide ].
* '''Misplaced Pages and the Digital Services Act''': .


:I understand (and share) your concern, but deciding which sources are reliable is an editorial decision which the WMF does not get involved in. Sources that were once considered reliable can have their reputation reevaluated if conditions warrant, and even sources that are generally considered reliable should always be examined with a critical eye to ensure that any particular statement holds up to the general reputation.
:This is an important issue, but it's just not one that the WMF has any input on. I would suggest asking this at ] or perhaps ]. ] ] 19:44, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
:As far as I know, whenever something is cited on Misplaced Pages, the Internet Archive automatically takes a snapshot of it. You can contact someone like {{noping|GreenC}} to confirm this.
:The rest of your post seems like it would be a good fit for ]. Reliable sources have become unreliable before, and RSN can handle reducing a source's ranking on the ] list when that situation comes to pass. A note will even be added to the entry stating that it used to be reliable, and after what date it became unreliable. However, it might be jumping the gun to post about this before it actually happens. There's not really anything to do yet. –] <small>(])</small> 00:27, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
:Do you have a specific source for the allegations that {{xt|many or all of these sites will be taken offline after January 20, 2025}}? Yes, the Dept. of Ed website's not going to be up anymore if that agency is axed, but this isn't the first post that I've seen here predicting that the administration change will be the end of America as we know it. Yes, if the energy/climate/public health sites go downhill we can/will revisit how we handle those sources. But all of this doom and gloom is overwrought, like when people I knew thought Obama was the antichrist or that Hillary was going to put Christians into death camps. This is Misplaced Pages, not Reddit. I thought we were a little more level-headed here. ] <sub> '']''</sub> 02:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
::We had a nice four years where the main agitators in AMPOL were right-wing nuts. These are pretty easy to take care of, since they have virtually zero social capital on Misplaced Pages. They can be overruled and the community is ready to ban them at the drop of a hat if they get frustrated and lash out. Now we can look forward to four years where the main agitators will be left-wing nuts and ]. This is harder to deal with because these people ''do'' have social capital on Misplaced Pages and have wikifriends (including several established editors and admins) to come back them up in disputes or tilt consensus. I suspect we can also look forward to more ] bigotry toward subjects and editors as well. ] (]) 19:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
::Just a note, since the new administration can make changes, this should have implications to the past of US government web sites as sources. ]] 08:05, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
:] ] (]) 22:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
:Goverment sources have always been of qualified reliability, I see no reason for that to change. ] (]) 22:52, 24 December 2024 (UTC)


== Recent WMF update on ANI case ==
'''Foundation statements'''
* ]


Noting that the WMF has posted an update on the ANI case ] on 2 December, for those interested. —] (]) 12:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)


== I can’t upload Auferstanden aus Ruinen ==
'''Other Movement curated newsletters & news'''
<small>''See also:'' ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]:</small>
* <small>'''Topics''': ] · ] · ]</small>
* <small>'''Wikimedia Projects''': ] · ]</small>
* <small>'''Regions''': ]</small>


You see, the East German anthem doesn’t have an audio file because when I tried to upload it, it doesn’t work. It keeps telling it is unconstructive, but there is no other file. Same thing for the Chechen anthem, even thought the file doesn’t work on mobile. ] (]) 11:27, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">'''] · ]'''


:Have you tried uploading it to https://commons.wikimedia.org? If that doesn't work, maybe post on their ]. –] <small>(])</small> 18:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
Previous editions of this bulletin are on ]. Let askcac{{@}}wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!
</div>
</div>
<section end="content" />


== Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin December Issue ==
<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">]</bdi> 17:10, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:RAdimer-WMF@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=Global_message_delivery/Targets/Wikimedia_Foundation_Bulletin&oldid=27522678 -->


<section begin="content" />
== Add A Fact malfunctioning ==

See ] where Add A Fact has recommended something that not only isn't a fact... It fails verification. Add A Fact doesn't appear to have pulled a fact from the source, Add A Fact appears to have made up a questionable fact. ] (]) 16:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

:Hi @], thanks for flagging this. To clarify, the way this tool works requires the user (must be logged in and autoconfirmed on English Misplaced Pages) to manually select a snippet of text in a source (in this case, a Reuters article) to check against Misplaced Pages. That text snipped itself is '''not modified in any way''' '''by the tool''' (it's not even possible for the user to modify it once they've elected to look it up on Misplaced Pages via this tool). So I suspect what happened here is actually that the source itself (i.e., the Reuters article) was edited by Reuters after this user found the claim and sent it as a suggestion to the talk page via the tool. There appears to be an "updated a day ago" message at the top of the article, indicating that this may be the case. So I think the user of this tool unintentionally caught some possibly-fishy information that Reuters itself was putting out there and then walking back... ] (]) 19:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you for the explanation of how the tool works. ] (]) 21:47, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

== Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin October Issue 1 ==

<section begin="content" />
<div class="plainlinks"> <div class="plainlinks">
<!-- Intended publication date: October 10, 2024 // covering period from September 26 to October 9-->
] ]
<div style="margin-top:10px; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation since our second November issue. This will be the final bulletin for 2024 and we'll be back in late January 2025 with the next issue. Please help ].''</div>


<div style="margin-top:10px; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation over the first half of October 2024. Please help ].''</div>
<div style="clear:both"></div> <div style="clear:both"></div>
---- ----


'''Upcoming and current events and conversations''' '''Upcoming and current events and conversations'''<br/><small>''] continues''</small>
]
* '''Wikimania:''' ] is open until end of January 27 anywhere on earth.


'''Annual Goals Progress on ]'''<br/><small>''See also newsletters: ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]''</small>
]


* '''Tech News''': ] is now available on Commons and Testwiki; a new version of the standard wikitext editor-mode ] will be available as a ]; ] will be relocated to a sidebar on desktop. More updates from tech news ], ] and ].
<small>''] continues''</small>
* '''Wikifunctions''': ], which is particularly useful for abstract descriptions for people in Wikidata. ].
* '''Misplaced Pages 2024 Year in Review:''' ] launched, showcasing the collective impact of Misplaced Pages and Misplaced Pages contributors in the last calendar year. The iOS App also released a ] to Italy and Mexico, with insights based on reading, editing, and donation history.
* '''Misplaced Pages Android App:''' The Android team has launched the Rabbit Holes feature in the final release of the year as part of ]. Currently being tested in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, this feature suggests a search term and a reading list based on the user's last two visited articles. For more details or to share feedback, visit the ].


'''Annual Goals Progress on ]'''<br /><small>''See also a list of all movement events: ]''</small>
* will be held in Muscat, Oman, from October 25 to 27.
* ] will be held in Québec, Canada, from November 2 to 3.
* ] are seeking new member applications from October 14.


* '''WikiCelebrate''': From Challenges to Change-Making: ], a passionate contributor from Zambia, whose journey through the Wikimedia movement embodies resilience, collaboration, and a commitment to representing underrepresented voices.
* '''Conference:''' Announcing ] which will be hosted at Diplomat International School on April 19–20, 2025, in Tashkent, Uzbekistan.
* '''Campaigns and topical collaboration:''' The Campaign Product and Programs teams ]
* '''Wikisource''': The journey so far and looking ahead with ]
* '''CEE Meeting''': ] by Central Asian Community Members.
* '''Partnership''': ] in Indonesia.
* '''Wikimedia Research Showcase''': Watch the which discussed AI for Misplaced Pages.


'''Annual Goals Progress on ]''' '''Annual Goals Progress on ]'''<br /><small>''See also blogs: ] · · ''</small>


* '''Ongoing litigation:''' Update on ]
<small>''See also newsletters: ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]''</small>


'''Board and Board committee updates'''<br /><small>''See ] · ]''</small>
* '''Tech News''': Updates on Dark Mode, Vector 2022 skin, CampaignEvents extension, and more on ].
* '''Translation suggestion:''' Sign up to participate in the test project, ], which will help organisers identify and add relevant content based on high-impact topics to their Misplaced Pages.
* '''Wikifunctions''': ] from September 26.
* '''Misplaced Pages Apps:''' Check out the latest issue of the ]!


* '''Board Elections''': The Board’s Executive Committee shared ].


'''External media releases & coverage'''
'''Annual Goals Progress on ]'''


* '''Most popular articles:''' ].
<small>''See also a list of all movement events: ]''</small>
* '''Interview:''' .


'''Other Movement curated newsletters & news'''<br /><small>''See also:'' ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· &nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]:</small>
* '''WikiWomen Summit''': ] at Wikimania 2024.
* <small>'''Topics''': ] · ] · ]</small>
* ''']''': Watch recordings of the session .
* '''WikiLearn''': ] created by Wikimedians for Wikimedians.
* '''Indonesia:''' ] to Safeguard Knowledge Integrity Ahead of the Regional Elections


'''Annual Goals Progress on ]'''

<small>''See also blogs: ] · · ''</small>

* '''Mexico:''' ] urging continued use of intermediary liability protections for user-generated content in Richter v. Google.
* '''Paraguay:''' ] Do not allow people to abuse the law to suppress legitimate information
* '''Global:''' Celebrating a legal victory in Germany against censorship, reflections on Open Culture strategic workshop, and ].


'''Board and Board committee updates'''

<small>''See ] · ]''</small>

* '''Board Governance''': ], a proposal to ask for help and co-creation in ].


'''Other Movement curated newsletters & news'''

<small>''See also:'' ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]&nbsp;· ]:</small>
* <small>'''Topics''': ] · ] · ]</small>
* <small>'''Wikimedia Projects''': ] · ]</small> * <small>'''Wikimedia Projects''': ] · ]</small>
* <small>'''Regions''': ]</small> * <small>'''Regions''': ]</small>


<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">'''] · ]''' <div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
'''] · ]'''


Previous editions of this bulletin are on ]. Let askcac]wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement! For information about the Bulletin and to read previous editions, see the ]. Let askcac]wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!
</div> </div>
</div> </div>
<section end="content" /> <section end="content" />

<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">]</bdi> 23:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Quiddity (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=Global_message_delivery/Targets/Wikimedia_Foundation_Bulletin&oldid=27564558 -->

== The '']'' situation ==

is becoming quite interesting:

Does the WMF have any input for the Wikipedians who edit in the general area? ] (]) 09:33, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

:Notably, Court Reporters also report that WMF's lawyer has been to provide the sought details in a "sealed cover" and that WMF to comply with the takedown order. ] (]) 13:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::{{tq|WMF's lawyer has been willing to provide the sought details in a "sealed cover"}}. Are you claiming that WMF has disclosed the identities of the ANI editors? That's a pretty ] claim. –] <small>(])</small> 13:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Multiple Court Reporting Portals — including Live Law and Bar&Bench — report that WMF's lawyer was willing to provide details about the "authors" of the ANI article but in a "sealed cover". But the Court didn't accede to such a compromise and wanted it to be filed in public.
:::The part about "sealed cover" is not reported in mainstream media widely but see Rohini's comments in , etc. ] (]) 13:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::: another not-so-established Court-Reporting portal:{{talkquote|'''Adv Sibal ''': I will {{em|disclose}} the name of the author in a {{em|sealed cover}}.{{pb}}'''Court''': {{em|why}} in a sealed cover?}} I doubt that the portal was making this conversation up ''given'' how low the bar for invoking contempt jurisdiction appears to be in India. ] (]) 13:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Raises a number of questions... Most importantly what is meant by subscriber information? Most of us edit pseudo-anonymously after all and the Foundation doesn't have our names, birth dates, etc and technical info like IP can tell you what device the edits are being made from but not who is making the edits. ] (]) 17:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::Huh — IP address is considered as ] (though it doesn't disclose device details; are you confusing with user-agent?)? For example, ''if'' the address is from an Indian ISP, the Court will compel it to give up the name of the person the IP address was assigned to, during the timeframe of the edits.
:::::Now, I do not know for how long Indian ISPs retain their IP assignment logs. For a comparison, in most European states, it's about 6-12 months. ] (]) 17:19, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::Yeah theres a few different bits of technical info, but none actually tell you the author unless I'm missing something. So how does WMF know who the author is? ] (]) 17:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::All major ISPs in India require their subscribers to produce personal details like ] at inception. All ISPs are "intermediaries" and are bound by Indian IT Act. So WMF's disclosure of IP addresses is all that the Indian authorities would need to personally identify editors if they are based in India. Read for further info. — ] (]) 17:53, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::The question isn't how the court could figure out the name from the technical details and a subsequent investigation... The question is how the WMF has a name. ] (]) 17:57, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::They don't. They have IP addresses though. — ] (]) 18:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::Then how can they "{{em|disclose}} the name of the author" ] (]) 18:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::They don't need to even if they wanted to. Disclosing IP would be as good as disclosing the name in India. How do you not get this? — ] (]) 18:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::I get that... But the lawyer said name not IP. ] (]) 18:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::::The lawyer probably misspoke because admins do not have the NDA requirement like checkuser/oversighters. The Indian judge/lawyer also seem to have misspoken when they said 3 admins. I think they meant editors. — ] (]) 18:19, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::::They could have, but at best it's ambiguous so best to continue to seek clarification from the WMF. ] (]) 18:22, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::"Names" is an imprecise substitute for "Identifying Information". How do you not get this?
:::::::::::These are fragments from an oral argumentation in a court before ~60 y. judges who, going by the literature on Indian Courts, are usually not very technically adept. ] (]) 18:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::How do you know that? ] (]) 18:16, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Common sense.
:::::::::::::I do not know where you are going ahead with this — conspiracy theory territory where WMF has somehow managed to access our IRL Identities / WMF's lawyer being either incompetent or taking the Court for a ride / .. — but this is my last comment on this topic. ] (]) 18:21, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::::I think you are blowing this out of proportion, there are a large number of scenarios in which the WMF might be privy to the IRL identity of an editor. I don't think that it hurts to get clarity on the issue. ] (]) 18:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::ANI had asked for details of three "administrators" — do note that their usage of administrator might be lax and not correspond to what we understand as admins; publicly available court records do not mention the names of these three entities — who supposedly inserted and restored defamatory content in the article, from Wikimedia. These are the "authors" referred to, by WMF's lawyer. ] (]) 17:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::Did we start make admins verify their identity at some point? ] (]) 17:33, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::No. But, because of a couple of roles I have filled over the years (OTRS and ARBCOM), I have had to provide WMF with identifying information. The WMF has at least the same access to editor information as do checkusers. If you put your mind to it, you can make it difficult for anyone to identify you, but most editors leave breadcrumbs, and some of us have left a lot. ] 20:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::Neither OTRS (VRTS) nor ArbCom required ID from me. Nor would I give it. ] (]) 11:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::@] pretty sure I had to provide it. That was before your time though. ] ] 13:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::@] and ], identifying to the WMF did used to require sending them a copy of some ID but that has since changed and you no longer do. I don't remember exactly when it changed but it was after December 2014 when I was elected to the Arbitration Committee, it's possible it coincided with the introduction of the current ] in November 2018. My recollection is that the copies of the ID were retained only long enough to verify you were who you claimed to be and were then destroyed. ] (]) 16:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Thanks. I would have been one of those presenting my ID then. ] ] 16:49, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::Those applying for Grants with the Foundation are required to disclose their identity. ] (]) 13:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::{{Ping|User:JSutherland (WMF)}} out of curiosity does the WMF attach an IRL identity which could be provided in court to either my or TrangaBellam's account? ] (]) 17:30, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Based on what I know of WMF and Wikimedia culture, I would not expect WMF to disclose any private information about an individual editor to a foreign court. WMF has a history of sticking to open source values in foreign courts even if it means ] by that nation's ]s. I think this would be a great opportunity for someone at WMF to clarify what exactly is being disclosed to the Indian courts about our editors. If nothing private like IP addresses were disclosed, this would be an excellent time to set the record straight. –] <small>(])</small> 21:56, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::@] I agree about the culture of WMF. But given that Wikimedia retains no private data except IP addresses and UAs (correct me if I am wrong on this point), I do not see what else their lawyer could have been willing to provide ''only'' under "sealed cover". And I support the call for WMF to clarify on these issues. ] (]) 02:49, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::: It also retains your email address if you set it, of course. Which is much closer to "identifying information" than anything else. ] ] 04:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Ah, true. Email adresses are stored as long as the user keeps it linked. ] (]) 04:47, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::@] was just noting at article talk that WMF ''did'' disclose US IPs at least once in 2007 per ]. Apparently only Comcast kept the claimant from being able to access personal details. ] (]) 12:17, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::Correct me if I am wrong, but twitter/X warns their users before disclosing their IPs on orders of a foreign/local court, when they receive and comply with takedown requests like some mentioned here . If the counsel for WMF has no qualms about throwing wikipedia editors under the bus should push come to shove, shouldn't wmf warn the specific users whose IPs they are willing to disclose? — ] (]) 14:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::. ] (]) 14:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::I imagine that WMF would have to disclose personally identifiable information (PII) in USA lawsuits since WMF is based in USA. My hypothesis is that WMF would not disclose PII to foreign courts. –] <small>(])</small> 20:20, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Yes, the first case at ] talks about WMF declining a British court order in 2011. -- ] (]) 20:30, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::
::: It's been more than 24 hours and the Wikimedia Foundation has not taken down the page. ] ] 16:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Next meeting in court is on monday, I think. Stay tuned. ] (]) 16:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Update: . ] (]) 14:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
* So, notwithstanding the fact that WMF's lawyer did broach a "sealed cover" approach, WMF — this time, being represented by a different lawyer — petitioning that the Court must find the accusation of defamation to be prima facie true before ordering disclosure. However, the appeal was not granted and additionally, WMF was asked to take down the page(s) on the litigation. ] (]) 06:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
*:I was just reading that article, it's quite interesting. ] (]) 06:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
*::: It is the same lawyer, Akhil Sibal, representing WMF in the main case as well as the appeal. The appeal was a bit pointless. See below. -- ] (]) 14:50, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
* My understanding of the case at this point is that it is at "ground 0", meaning it hasn't taken off. ANI wants to sue somebody for defamation, it doesn't know who. It can't sue WMF because, under the Indian law, WMF is just an "intermediary", equivalent to a television cable company that just trasmits signals. The people that can be sued are the ''authors'' of the content, of which there are probably many. Somehow or the other, ANI narrowed down to three editors who, it believes, can be held liable for defamation. So it is weighing in on WMF to reveal their identities. The court, quite reasonably, agrees that it needs to be done. Unless they appear in court and plead, the case doesn't even begin. So, when the WMF lawyer says, I will provide the information in a "sealed cover", I think he doesn't undrestand what is going on (in fact "clueless" would be more accurate). There are only two ways out. Either WMF reveals the identities of the editors so that they can appear in court and plead. Or, WMF waives its status as an "intermediary", and pleads on their behalf. -- ] (]) 15:05, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
:*, (can't find a treaty for civil matters) ]. You might be underestimating lawyers in general or WMF's in particular to say "only two ways out". ](]) 15:30, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
:*"There are only two ways out." the WMF can also just close their offices in India and tell the court to pound sand. There is no ''need'' to operate in India, its not like there are profits to be made. If they block wikipedia they block wikipedia, we get blocked all the time. ] (]) 15:36, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
::*WMF has told us the information is in the US, that they will only release under U.S. law, and told us what those laws are under which a foreign tribunal could get their hands on the information. I hope WMF thinks the court is ''already'' pounding sand. ](]) 16:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
::Your analysis is missing the WMF's argument that the court must first make a ] determination as to whether the content was defamatory ''before'' it orders the WMF to turn over identifying information they have on editors. That determination really can't be made, when the Misplaced Pages content is (1) true, and (2) simply a summary of public facts already published elsewhere. ] (]) 00:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
::: Judge Chawla did make some remarks in the initial stages, which sounded like he made that determination. But to contest that, WMF would have had to plead, which it has refused to do, claiming itself to be an "intermediary". Recall again an "intermediary" is like a cable company that just transmits signals. Twitter has tried to do something like that a year ago, to contest the blocks the government was ordering. It lost. The judge said that it had no locus standi because it was just an "intermediary". The only people that could contest the blocks would be the ''authors'' of the content. If I was WMF I would have filed a motion to dismiss, on the grounds that Misplaced Pages just summarises what the reliable sources say. So the people that can be held to be liable are the authors of those sources, not Misplaced Pages. But that point has not been brought up in front of the court yet. -- ] (]) 07:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
:::: @] Per , Sibal made the argument:{{talkquote|One of the articles hyperlinked to ANI’s page is of The Caravan. When Misplaced Pages argued that the publication had not been made party to the case, the Court called it a convenient answer:{{talkquote|An article published by say X magazine which is read by a hundred people, you don’t bother about it…it does not have the gravitas that it deserves a suit of defamation. If it comes to Misplaced Pages, it is not going to have a viewership of hundred, it may have it in millions and then it becomes a cause of disturbance.}}}} ] (]) 09:45, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
::::: Yeah, I noticed. This is probably part of what transpired in the 20th August hearing, which ]. It did not get reported in the press at that time. The WMF lawyer gives me the impression of trying to bargain with the judge(s) rather than to assert our rights forcefully on legal grounds. My disappointment continues. -- ] (]) 10:46, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
::::: It is part of our fundamental msision is to bring to the public, knowledge that might be known only to a select few. We cannot be faulted for doing this. We are ''not producing'' our own knowledge here, only collating it. -- ] (]) 10:51, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::Agreed, but at least for me, there is a '''difference''' between "knowledge that might be known only to a select few" and "pushing fringe sources, limited to a selected few ('''for good reasons'''), as authoritative to defame someone or something, thereby '''promoting''' the fringe source in the process." This issue is not just limited to ANI, but practically applies to all Indian media news channels that do not bash the incumbent government day and night, using motivated and third-class sources like Mohd Zubair's Alt News. Should self-proclaimed fact-checkers and rival news agencies be used to defame other news agencies? Please do a quick check regarding this if you don't believe me. It's not just about ANI. When someone starts using these sources as authoritative to defame something or someone, it becomes difficult to determine who is at fault—the source, the people pushing those sources, Misplaced Pages itself, the Misplaced Pages community that allows this, or the person who feels they are being defamed because they are trying to '''censor''' "free speech." The thing is, no discussion will result in anything unless all parties are determined that they are right and the other is wrong. Let's just leave this to the court. My comments on this issue '''end here'''. ] (]) 15:01, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::{{tq|Should self-proclaimed fact-checkers and rival news agencies be used to defame other news agencies?}} This would likely be a content-related discussion if it arises, and should be held on the article's talk page or at ] if it warrants an input from the wider community. ] (]) 15:40, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::{{tq|using motivated and third-class sources like Mohd Zubair's Alt News}} Misplaced Pages has ], where the editor community decides collectively whether a source is reliable or not. You can start a discussion on a source there, if you wish to. — ] (]) 15:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
::::{{tq|If I was WMF I would have filed a motion to dismiss, on the grounds that Misplaced Pages just summarises what the reliable sources say}} There's no motion to dismiss like the US, in India. Cause of action and merit is decided in the pre-admission stage. — ] (]) 15:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
* See the new related deletion discussion ]. ] (]) 16:31, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
* from ''Bar and Bench''. ] (]) 08:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
* by ] who is well-regarded in the legal academia and has ]:
{{talkquote|Quashing in a criminal defamation case is a difficult prospect. This is because – to simplify – under Section 499 of the IPC, a ''prima facie'' offence of defamation is made out with the existence of a defamatory imputation, which has been made with the intention or knowledge that it will cause harm. This is, evidently, a very low threshold.{{pb}}Section 499 also contains a set of exceptions to the rule (such as statements that are true and in the public interest, statements made in good faith about public questions, and so on) – but here’s the rub: these exceptions only kick in at the stage of trial, by which time the legal process has (in all likelihood) dragged on for years. What we essentially have, therefore, is one of those situations where the cost of censorship is low (instituting ''prima facie'' credible criminal proceedings), but the cost of speech is high (a tedious, time-consuming, and expensive trial, with the possibility of imprisonment).}}Interesting. ] (]) 18:34, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
*'''Statement from WMF (to community?):'''{{talkquote|Hi everyone,{{pb}}I, Kabir Darshan Singh Choudhary, am a Senior Counsel at the Wikimedia Foundation’s Legal Department. The Foundation is in receipt of your message(s) regarding the developments in India around a defamation suit filed by ANI.{{pb}}We are currently reviewing the recent order of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court and will take all necessary actions, in accordance with applicable laws, to ensure that the people of India continue to have the right to share and access free and reliable knowledge in an open and safe online environment. The Wikimedia Foundation is committed to safeguarding the rights of Wikimedia community members and preserving uninterrupted access to Misplaced Pages and other Wikimedia projects in India. '''As a standard practice, we do not share specific details of ongoing legal cases that are sub-judice'''.{{pb}} '''Additionally, since this is an active legal case, we recommend caution while sharing, discussing, or speculating on the topic'''. Please contact ca@wikimedia.org for any trust and safety concerns. Also, please direct any press inquiries you receive to pr@wikimedia.org.{{pb}}On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation{{pb}}Kabir Darshan Singh Choudhary{{pb}}Senior Counsel|source=https://www.mail-archive.com/wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/msg15179.html}}] (]) 20:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
*:@], and why share this now? Kinda belated, no?
*:# This was not addressed to the broader English Misplaced Pages community, but the Indian community, since this was sent to Wikimedia India mailing list.
*:# This was sent on 20 September 2024. https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/thread/DEKVYIS7ZT2SJKK63TDIHRSC72FUSOYD/
*:] (]) 02:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
*::My apologies; I read it as 20 October 2024. ] (]) 06:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

=== WMF action ===
And now WMFOffice has taken down the page '']''. Which is one of two occasions since 2020 in which the WMF has accepted a non-DMCA-related content request (the other being some edits to ]) ] ] 04:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:Do we have to rewrite ] now? Currently it reads "Content will be removed if it is judged to violate Misplaced Pages's policies (especially those on biographies of living persons and using a neutral point of view) or the law of the United States (where Misplaced Pages is hosted)." ] (]) 04:23, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::We may as well get rid of NOTCENSORED. ''''']''''' <sup>(] / ])</sup> 05:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::: English Misplaced Pages policies like ] describe the way the community conducts itself, and nothing more. ] survived ] being taken down for two entire years, for example. It can survive this. ] ] 05:34, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Even then, I think it's something to consider. Is it really not censored? ''''']''''' <sup>(] / ])</sup> 05:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::NOTCENSORED could ''mention'' OA somehow. ] (]) 05:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::: This is an instance NOTCENSORED being ignored via ]. And I say that as someone skeptical of that policy in general. I don't think it requires an kind of rewrite. ] ] 05:53, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Hm, I think IAR is about community conduct as well. OA goes beyond that, but can include stuff (like in this case) that can appear like censorship. So I think NOTCENSORED could include something like "For X actions, see ]." ''Or'' "or the law of the United States" could have the addition "... and in some cases, other countries." ] (]) 06:16, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::IAR does not apply, as this action does not improve or maintain Misplaced Pages (unless, arguably, it is a good-faith attempt to preemptively maintain India's access to Misplaced Pages). ] (]) 07:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::I'd say it is the opposite of improving Misplaced Pages, and it's a bad precedent. ''''']''''' <sup>(] / ])</sup> 07:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::The relevant meta-policy is not IAR but ]. NOTCENSORED exists as a matter of editorial consensus, and the WMF is exempt from that. Whether this was a good use of that exemption is something we'll probably only be able to say some time after the dust has settled. For now, histrionic responses (not like yours, GGS, but some others') help nothing and may risk making things harder for the WMF (and thus all of us), given that the court does not seem to recognize much distinction between the WMF and Misplaced Pages editors. <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">&#91;]&#93;</sup> <small>(])</small> 07:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::I think it's really unhelpful at this juncture to characterize matters in this way: this is part of a live legal dispute, and it's pretty clear to me that the WMF's strategy is in service of getting content back up. They're taking what they see to be the least obstructive means—the least censored means possible frankly. I'll put it like this: if all of Misplaced Pages got censored in the largest country in the world on the pretext of WMF violating this order at this stage—I would hold them partially but meaningfully responsible for that because they fell for easy bait and handed them that pretext. It would be a tremendous fuckup. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 09:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:I see the action on the French Misplaced Pages is also pretty recent. Is there coverage or discussion on it? ] (]) 04:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:: Not aware of any. I stumbled across it when I was checking the WMF's transparency reports to see how rare this kind of office action is. ] ] 05:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Going by ], not that common, at least not on en-WP. ] (]) 05:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Found this: ]. ] (]) 05:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::: Odd. The Italian/German action from 2021 is not reported at where I would have expected it. {{pb}} Looks like I failed to read the logs correctly, the transparency reports don't include all such actions, and the French Misplaced Pages action mentioned at https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/transparency/2024-1/content isn't that at all but the deletion of ] (especially since those edits are in October and thus would go in the not-yet-released 2024-2 report). ] ] 05:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:I guess they were lying about then? {{tq|The Misplaced Pages database is stored on servers in the United States of America, and is maintained in reference to the protections afforded under local and federal law.}} I thought i knew what those protections were, and must have misread some of the claims made about Misplaced Pages. ](]) 05:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:I'm not happy about this at all. Why should we bend over to censorship? ''''']''''' <sup>(] / ])</sup> 05:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::At a guess, some version of "our lawyers say we must." ] (]) 05:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::I guess. ''''']''''' <sup>(] / ])</sup> 05:34, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Can the WMF office engage with us here and provide additional details?
:::I would like to know what our options our. For example, we’ve accepted being blocked in various countries before - why isn’t that outcome acceptable here? ] (]) 05:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Probably because of what the court's requests entail. That, and the large amounts of editors and potential editors in India. ''''']''''' <sup>(] / ])</sup> 05:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::Perhaps, but it would be good if the WMF could be clear to the community about what penalties the court threatened, and which of those penalties the WMF believes the court could enforce.
:::::If the only realistically enforceable penalty is blocking, then I think that is a decision that should be devolved to the community and let us decide whether we want to go down the slope of deferring to censorship, or if we wish to continue rejecting it. ] (]) 06:03, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::In essence, Misplaced Pages is blocked ''right now'', not only in India but everywhere. ](]) 06:08, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::: Huh? Obviously it's not blocked everywhere, as I'm making this edit (from the United States) without applying any kind of anti-circumvention measures. Do you have some evidence to support that hyperbolic claim? ] ] 06:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::Maybe the real Misplaced Pages blocks are the friends we made along the way. (???) ''''']''''' <sup>(] / ])</sup> 06:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::I think they’re saying the because the WMF has removed the page in response to this lawsuit, there is a global partial block on Misplaced Pages.
::::::::It’s a reasonable perspective, in my view, and asks the question of how much are we willing to let Indian courts control the content that our global audience views. ] (]) 06:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::Well, no one is worried about ''you'' {{u|Pppery}}, except in a hope you are well and having a nice evening way. Now i see in the X thread below more talk of releasing info under sealed order. This is baffling unless employee(s) there are truly in danger. How many more of these will there be now that everyone knows it works? ](]) 06:53, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::Per , this happens from time to time. ] (]) 07:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::{{tq|not the first time the High Court has ordered '''an online platform'''...}}, as far as i am aware this is a first for WP, which they told us they wouldn't, but much more importantly told editors in India they would not. ](]) 07:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::By "this" I meant "WMF giving user-info per court-order." ] (]) 07:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::Sure, under . I do see those to Italy, Germany, and France in the article. Was not aware of those and they may be under US law, Terms of Use, or Privacy Policy. If not should have complained then. It's a shelter for editors at risk. ](]) 07:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::I'd think at least one part of it is the short deadline given (especially given Levivich's quote of the applicable policy). For something easily reversible like hiding the article, it's more practical to temporarily accept the legal orders and then arguing it's invalid after. ] (] • ]) 09:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:Applicable policy: {{slink|m:Legal/Legal Policies|Applicable Law Determination}}: {{tq2|If an applicable legal order requires changes to on-wiki content, we will only make direct changes via office action if there is a legal deadline and local process is unavailable or unable to respond in line with the legal requirement in time. In the event that we make a change via office action, we will provide an update to the local community after the change explaining the reason.}} ] (]) 05:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:''Which is one of two occasions since 2020 in which the WMF has accepted a non-DMCA-related content request (the other being some edits to fr:Dorcel)''
:I see several WMFOffice actions just on fr wiki: ], ]. ] (]) 12:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

- '']'' ] (]) 06:04, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

* can be followed here. '''tl;dr''' : WMF's lawyer is willing to disclose the sought details in a sealed cover but wants the Court to make a finding on defamation before that and is wary about precedent. ] (]) 06:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

* The final sentence in the court order uploaded by WMFOffice at ] gives me pause: "this Court directs Wikimedia Foundation Inc.– the appellant herein to take down/delete the said pages {{strong|and discussion with regard to the observations made by this Court}} within thirty six (36) hours" (emphasis mine). I do hope the "discussion" refers to the article's talk page, and not this and any other related discussions. ]<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 13:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
*:The court may not know exactly what it means, as they may be unfamiliar with how Misplaced Pages works. ] (]) 14:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

===Questions for the WMF===
I think it would be beneficial to have a clear list of questions for the WMF to provide answers to. As an initial draft:

: The Indian Courts are demanding that the WMF disclose the identity of three or four editors, and according to recent media reports to WMF is willing to do so.
:# Are these reports accurate?
:#: If they are accurate:
:#:# What types of PII would the WMF be disclosing?
:#:# Have the editors involved been informed that the Indian Courts are seeking their PII, and that the WMF is willing to disclose it?
:# What would be the consequences of not disclosing this PII, including:
:#* What sanctions have the Indian courts threatened to impose?
:#* How realistic is it that the Indian courts can enforce these sanctions?
: The Indian Courts have demanded the WMF take down '']'', which the WMF has now done
:# What would have been the consequences of not taking down this page, including:
:#* What sanctions have the Indian courts threatened to impose?
:#* How realistic is it that the Indian courts can enforce these sanctions?
:# Why did the WMF diverge from its standard policy of refusing to comply with these requests, such as in Turkey and France?

Are there any additional questions that the community wishes to get an answer to, or changes to these questions, before I start badgering the WMF to get answers to them? ] (]) 07:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:I would like as a community that we take time to make careful and thoughtful considerations about this, which may involve not badgering the WMF for immediate details on a live court case where they are already handling apparently quite serious contempt of court allegations. ] (]) 07:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::Right, this is very news-y and will take time. ] (]) 07:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::{{ec|2}} Without details we don’t have the information needed to make careful and thoughtful considerations. Once we have the details, we can consider them and decide if, as a community, we endorse or reject the WMF’s stance. In particular, I’m very concerned about the WMF being willing to disclose PII in cases like this, and I would like the community to have the chance to determine a position on that decision prior to the PII being disclosed. ] (]) 07:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:I think "Ongoing lawsuit, no comment for now" is likely to be the response if any ''for now'', but we'll see. A known Wikipedian said this regarding the ANI-case in early September. ] (]) 07:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:The questions about sanctions are not based in reality. No one knows what the outcome of a court case might entail until long after the verdict, and no one has any idea about enforcement apart from a few obvious platitudes about due process. Fortunately, the WMF lawyers are smart enough to not make a public statement about on ongoing case (apart, perhaps, from a few obvious platitudes). The WMF's actions might be a little late, but they look like the first step in protecting identities to me. ] (]) 07:34, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::{{tqb|The questions about sanctions are not based in reality. No one knows what the outcome of a court case might entail until long after the verdict, and no one has any idea about enforcement apart from a few obvious platitudes about due process.}}
::I think the WMF would at least have an idea of what sanctions would be imposed, as well as which sanctions can be enforced on an entity based in America, but I’m not an expert and could easily be wrong on this.
::{{tqb|The WMF's actions might be a little late, but they look like the first step in protecting identities to me.}}
::Given the WMF is willing to disclose those identities, I don’t see how this is the first step in doing so. Given past actions and focuses, I’m wondering if they are more concerned with protecting the WMF’s Indian revenue stream than editors identities or our core mission. ] (]) 07:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::We are unlikely to ever see a public statement from either side regarding this case except for something released by a public relations department with legal vetting. I doubt there is any reliable information about the WMF's intentions but we can see some action: the article and talk page have been deleted and all edits, edit summaries, and user names have been suppressed. ] (]) 07:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::That would be because the court ordered the page taken down - not because the WMF is trying to protect editor identities. ] (]) 07:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::The financial cui bono angle is not convincing. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 09:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Given our track record over a great many years, that's an odd thing to wonder. But for the avoidance of doubt: no one at the WMF, no board member, no one at all as far as I know, has brought up the question of "protecting the WMF's Indian revenue stream" - because it isn't in any way a concern that is motivating anyone. I think you already had all the information you needed in order to come to that conclusion, before you started the speculation. Please don't do that, it's not the right way to AGF, ok?--] (]) 11:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::In recent years, the WMF has behaved problematically in regards to its revenue stream and the use of that revenue, and one of the areas it is attempting to increase revenue from is India. Given this, and the unusual behavior we are seeing here, I think some "wondering" was appropriate at the time - the WMF needs to earn back trust in the area of revenue, it can't expect it. ] (]) 13:08, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::Literally none of that resonates with anyone who has been aware of the facts, so let me just repeat it - no one on staff or on the board has raised or mentioned or discussed in any way any question about revenue in the context of fighting for editor privacy and freedom of expression. It's literally not true, not even close to true. That's really about all there is to say about it. ] (]) 19:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:I feel like one of those questions is more important than the others, and so it might make sense to just focus on that: "is WMF going to divulge any personal information (emails, IPs, etc.) about the three editors accused of defamation, under sealed cover or otherwise?" –] <small>(])</small> 08:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
*I agree. It is unfortunate that WMF is being submissive a wannabe authoritarian regime that is known for jailing people even for the most trivial things. ] (]) 08:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::It raises a good question of whether the WMF is making some sort of determination that some court systems are legitimate and others not... I would note that almost all of the North Korea and China related editing I do could now in theory be undone by defamation orders from the courts in those countries. The very idea that ] isn't part of China is after all offensive to the "Chinese nation" same for the idea that Kim Jong-Un is a human rights abuser. ] (]) 15:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::It is of course true that in any situation, any rational and thoughtful defender of human rights will take into account various factors about the legitimacy of court systems and about the likely result of various courses of action. Again speaking only for myself, I think it should be fairly obvious to anyone who is thinking thoughtfully about how to fight would realize that doing anything in order to comply with courts in, per your example North Korea, would be pointless and hopeless. There would be no question of "we need to respect sub judice so that we can fight the real fight which is about user privacy and freedom of expression" because North Korean courts have zero chance of acting independently. If the WMF told me "we need to take down this page for now, so that we can preserve our ability to fight for the principles we believe in" in North Korea, I'd be totally unpersuaded. Nothing would change the outcome there, as it wouldn't be a real process.
:::If the WMF said "we need to take this page down because it offends the sensibilities of the 'Indian nation'" I'd be similarly unimpressed, as I'm sure you would be as well. So, again, don't worry - serious people, acting on top level advice from top people, are fighting the fight in a smart way for the principles that we believe in. ] (]) 19:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
*I suspect that WMF's legal team is advising they definitely ''not'' come in here and officially explain the action to us all. This is breaking news, and there's no particular reason Misplaced Pages itself needs to have this article live right now. No deadlines, we'll finish writing it after the case is settled. ] (]) 09:04, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

=== Comment from Jimbo Wales ===

Hi everyone, I spoke to the team at the WMF yesterday afternoon in a quick meeting of the board. Although I've been around Internet legal issues for a long time, it's important to note that I am not a lawyer and that I am not here speaking for the WMF nor the board as a whole. I'm speaking personally as a Wikipedian. As you might expect, it's pretty limited as to what people are able to say at this point, and unwise to give too many details. However, I can tell you that I went into the call initially very skeptical of the idea of even temporarily taking down this page and I was persuaded very quickly by a single fact that changed my mind: if we did not comply with this order, we would lose the possibility to appeal and the consequences would be dire in terms of achieving our ultimate goals here.
For those who are concerned that this is somehow the WMF giving in on the principles that we all hold so dear, don't worry. I heard from the WMF quite strong moral and legal support for doing the right thing here - and that includes going through the process in the right way.
Prior to the call, I thought that the consequence would just be a block of Misplaced Pages by the Indian government. While that's never a good thing, it's always been something we're prepared to accept in order to stand for freedom of expression. We were blocked in Turkey for 3 years or so, and fought all the way to the Supreme Court and won. Nothing has chnaged about our principles. The difference in this case is that the short term legal requirements in order to not wreck the long term chance of victory made this a necessary step.
My understanding is that the WMF has consulted with fellow traveler human rights and freedom of expression groups who have supported that we should do everything we can to win this battle for the long run, as opposed to petulantly refusing to do something today.
I hope these words are reassuring to those who may have had some concerns!--] (]) 09:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:<u>(Involved here, as I created the article)</u> Thanks, Jimbo. I support keeping our eyes on the prize. ] (]) 09:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:Thank you. ] (]) 09:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:While I agree on a top-line level with the sentiment in the penultimate sentence regarding long term benefit vs short term benefit, my concern would be: is this likely to happen again? We saw with the squabble with the Supreme Court only a few weeks ago regading a victim's name of a crime, now this in the same jurisdiction. Are we setting ourselves up for failure here by showing that we will repeatedly acquiesce to demands—that conflict with our values and mission—from Indian courts that we wouldn't accept from any other jurisdiction outside the US? ] (]) 09:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::I am not a lawyer either, but I'm fairly sure wisdom I've heard from lawyers talking about analogous disputes has some purchase here: one has to play ball to some degree. If the WMF throws up their hands, says the entire court is out of order, and declares they will not participate in this legal farce—<em>that</em> is what will make them look vulnerable, because it's handing every bad faith actor an automatic pretext to get the website they hate to shoot themselves in the foot. See also my comment above. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 10:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::I hear what you're saying, but the Indian courts are continually looking to expand their power, influence and jurisdiction. They are often seen as more powerful than the legislature and executive within that country; they share some alarmingly similar characteristics in their conduct and processes with the judiciaries of failed states and military juntas. I expect we will see this conduct continue over the coming months and years with more frequency until a line is drawn somewhere in the sand. ] (]) 10:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::], I think there is long-term reason for concern, certainly—I think one has to play ball to some degree, but determining when that degree has been exceeded is a big part of what you pay your shiny expensive counsel for. After that, who knows!<span id="Remsense:1729505902445:WikipediaFTTCLNVillage_pump_(WMF)" class="FTTCmt"> —&nbsp;<span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 10:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)</span>
:Thanks for that Jimbo. WMF Legal are in a hard place. Having {{NUMBEROFUSERS}} "clients" it's impossible for them to give confidential strategy briefings. ] (]) 10:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:Comforting in what you do not mention, the anonymity of editors in India is not at risk? If it's not a concern that is great, and i am sure you would have mentioned if it were. ](]) 10:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:Like, what? If India wants to block us like Turkey did, well, that's why people invented things like Tor, VPNs, etc. If India's threatening something else to WMF there, ''get out of India''. India can't do anything to someone who's ''not there''. (Unless, of course, the WMF is going to hand over data about editors who ''are'' there, in which case I hope no one would ever trust them regarding anything again.) ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 10:42, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::I agree, it's better for Misplaced Pages to cease all operations in India than for it to hand over personal information of editors to the Indian courts. <span style="font-family:'forte'">] <b>(])</b></span> 10:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::Sera, WMF pulled the article to keep the ability to appeal open. They aren't trying to make sure we aren't blocked in India. They're trying to make sure whatever decision is made can be appealed up the line. ] (]) 12:03, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::I entirely understand that. The answer to any such demand still ''must'' be "No". If that means they block us, they block us; that's all they ''can'' do if WMF pulls anything they may have there out of India. Unless, of course, they want to involve the ''community'' in the discussion about what's going on, and we agree that it's better to have it removed for some time so they can do what they're going to do. But otherwise, if having it up messes with their appeal, well&mdash;that sucks, but we should not be telling governments "Just make threats, and we'll remove whatever you don't like!". And now they even know ''how'' to make the threat&mdash;"Remove it right now or we won't let you appeal!". That cannot happen. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 12:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::I think they believe that, like in Turkey, if they appeal it high enough, WMF will win, and that will be not only a win for Misplaced Pages but for free speech in India in general. And having the community discuss isn't really practical when a court order expired two days ago and the hearing is about to open; we could spend three months discussing this. I think temporary blanking is worth it, myself. We can always open an RfC here to get input. ] (]) 12:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::That's probably what we should do, but I think we'll need some more information first. To start with (and {{u|Jimbo Wales}}, maybe you can answer this, or know who can), how temporary is "temporary"? If we're talking "Leave it down for a week or two until the appeal's filed", then I don't think people would object to that too much. If it's "We'll have an answer in five years, maybe, if we're lucky, and it might still be no"&mdash;I think that would be a very different conversation. Legal processes can be very lengthy indeed, so I think we need to have some time frame more specific than "temporary". ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 12:26, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::If it's 'no' once there's no ongoing litigation, then yes, that's a very different conversation. That would be actual censorship. This is just complying with the laws in a country where discussing ongoing court cases is considered an attempt to influence those cases and therefore contempt of court.
::::::But yes, it would be good to clarify what happens when the case is decided in Delhi High Court, but before an appeal is filed with the Supreme Court. ] (]) 12:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::''We shouldn't be complying with those laws''. Now, if we need to as a genuinely brief measure to achieve some goal&mdash;maybe we say "Okay, this is worth a one-time compromise"; ] after all. But we certainly shouldn't be making a habit of knuckling under to things like that, and I'm afraid we're setting a very, very bad example for other such governments to follow. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 12:35, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::''You or I'', as editors, shouldn't be complying. For WMF, as an intermediary trying to thread a legal needle, it's more nuanced. ] (]) 12:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::I'll add a plus one to what Valereee is saying here and additionally that in my view the Wikimedia Foundation legal team has earned some trust that it understands the principles that we are all collectively fighting for and that it is acting competently to advance those principles under difficult circumstances that call for hard tradeoffs. Say what you will about other parts of the WMF, but our Legal team is genuinely top-tier and alined on principles, and I am 100% sure that they ''detest'' complying with this order. Best, ''']''' (<small>aka</small> ] '''·''' ] '''·''' ]) 13:04, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::+1 - taking it down temporarily is acceptable, but if we're talking years then that becomes a different matter. ] (]) 13:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::The circumstances of which Misplaced Pages was blocked in Turkey are vastly different from this time round. At the very least, there is still a legal pathway for WMF and the other parties to resolve the matter. If ultimately Misplaced Pages has being blocked in India totally, we can argue for the Office action to be lifted. For what reason will we want to the article to be not being written by then?
::While English Misplaced Pages has its own rulebook, and one that is evolved largely within USA's set of laws, as an international encyclopedia, we have to be cognizant that the world is made up of different cultures, and accompanying them, different sets of customs, rules, regulations, and laws. What one may think as censorship or self-censorship for not covering an ongoing legal case, in other parts of the world, it may be more prudent to have the case covered only after the case has ended so that one does not prematurely receive an invitation for a coffee/tea session with the authorities.
::In the meantime, we can collect the relevant sources for referencing for the article when the Office action is lifted. At the same time, in recognition of the ongoing archive.org issue, please archive the sources on other archival sites such as archive.today or ghostarchive.org. I just realised that some links I had tried to retrieve from archive.org aren't archived in the last two weeks or so. ] (]) 12:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::I'm not going to worry about what's prudent when deciding to write an article. If a court orders WMF to take it down, and WMF decides that's in the best interest of long-term goals, fine. But to not write it in the first place because I'm ''worried'' a judge might take offense? No. ] (]) 12:42, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::I am not worried about the judge, but instead fellow editors who are in India. Ever stop and think what adverse effects it may bring to the local community/groups there? ] (]) 13:05, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::I already grabbed a copy from an archive site, and saved it offline as well. If anyone has an issue with getting it from archive sites, I'm happy to email them my copy. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 13:09, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::robertsky, that's an argument for not revealing identities, not an argument for not writing an article. ] (]) 13:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::Exactly what Valereee said. They can't go after them if they ''don't know who they are'', and it's clear they don't, or they wouldn't be doing all this to begin with. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 14:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::"but instead fellow editors who are in India" thats the hostage fallacy. Its the same problem with paying terrorists for hostages... You incentive hostage taking, not disincentive it. Ironically what would endanger editors in India the most is setting up a system where the Indian government can use editors in India as leverage against editors outside of India. ] (]) 16:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:Hi ], thank you for that update regarding the page takedown; that is reassuring to hear.
:However, of greater concern is the WMF's apparent willingness to share PII with the Indian Courts; in line with ]'s question above, is WMF going to divulge any personal information (emails, IPs, etc.) about the three editors accused of defamation, under sealed cover or otherwise, and if so what types of PII will be disclosed? ] (]) 13:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:Seems like an entirely reasonable decision, and I'm thankful that Misplaced Pages is prepared to be blocked in India for the sake of freedom of expression if it ultimately comes to that. ] (]) 14:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
*{{yo|Jimbo Wales}} An appeal on constitutional matters, although usually accepted, could perhaps take years for a final decision because of the seemingly endless pendency of cases in India's Supreme Court. But once the matter is no longer sub-judice in the Delhi HC, the page on ani vs wmf can be put right back up, afaik (correct me if I am wrong). If the appeal is on civil matter (i.e court finds wmf guilty of defamation), editors here won't be able to add the defamatory content (mouthpiece of BJP) back up until resolution in supreme court. Is this correct? — ] (]) 16:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
*:You or someone on legal team of wmf will need to explain this to editors here because, they will keep editing cluelessly about the matter and admins won't know what they are supposed to do. I can reproduce the content on the deleted page right now, to a section in ]. Will there be a staff action again? — ] (]) 16:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
*::I don't know. My preference, speaking personally, is that people mainly not do that sort of thing just to stir the stew. I don't see the point. ]. At the same time, I don't think it's necessary to step around on tip-toes nor for anyone to go wild ]ing anyone who talks about the case anywhere. We are all, or should be, reasonable people acting with kindness towards others. ] (]) 19:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

===Request journalistic help with ''The Signpost''===
''The Signpost'' is Misplaced Pages editors' own newsletter. Like everything else with Misplaced Pages, anyone can edit it, and it invites volunteer contributors. I am writing to request assistance from anyone who would like to draft the story about this legal issue. I have some notes started at ]. Here, a brief objective summary of the events is needed. If anyone would like to contribute other journalism, such as a personal opinion piece on the situation, then please express your interest at ]. Thanks! ]] 15:23, 21 October 2024 (UTC)


<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">]</bdi> 18:03, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
:This feels like a bad idea. If covering the court case is what got us in trouble the first time, I doubt the court would look kindly on us doing it again, even if in a different format. ] (] &#124; ]) 16:16, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:RAdimer-WMF@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/search/?title=Global_message_delivery/Targets/Wikimedia_Foundation_Bulletin&oldid=27929949 -->
::<small>Since when has Signpost cared about what's right or best for the project. ]'']'' 16:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)</small>
::Good comment. Don't you find it disturbing? ](]) 16:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::Yes, I am disturbed when free speech is under legal threat. That does not mean we should take a poor legal strategy, such as ignoring court orders while a case is ongoing. ] (] &#124; ]) 16:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Are you a WMF employee? Because if not the "us" there isn't under court order and has no legal strategy. We are not the WMF. Also note that you are currently ignoring such a court order if it does apply, you are literally discussing the court order right now on wikipedia. ] (]) 16:42, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::No, I'm not a WMF employee, but I do view us as in this fight together given that they're fighting for our rights here. Doing things on Misplaced Pages that are likely to interfere with their strategy and piss off the court is, in my view, a bad idea if you want the WMF to win this case. ] (] &#124; ]) 16:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::So why are you commenting in a discussion which will almost certainly piss off the court? If you're taking the court seriously you aren't supposed to be having this conversation... You aren't supposed to even mention the case on wiki. ] (]) 16:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::This doesn't refute anything I've said. An internal discussion vs something intentionally presented as a news report is ''very'' different and it's not unrealistic to think that the court would see it as such. And yes, I do think it would probably be better if we keep the discussion about the case itself to a minimum here, but since the discussion is already happening, it's not like my comments in particular are going to be the tipping point for the court being unhappy with us. Not interested in arguing about this with you. ] (] &#124; ]) 16:52, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::We have a long tradition of covering controversies which involve ourselves confidently, even handedly, and promplty, it is one of our best features and something that even our most ardent opponents will mention as a positive, its a peculiar badge of honor that anti-wikipedia people will refer to ] or ] for evidence of why Misplaced Pages sucks. I don't see a compelling reason to abandon that tradition, if you want to engage with me in that sense I would be very open to it. ] (]) 17:03, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::The principle shouldn't be abandoned; just put on pause until we get a final result in this court case. Unlike previous cases, the judge here doesn't seem to be able or willing to distinguish between actions of Misplaced Pages editors and of the Foundation (that's how this whole thing became a problem in the first place). Given that, us editors doing stuff that the judge wouldn't like has the potential to cause problems for the Foundation's legal strategy.
:::::::::After the court case is resolved, whatever the result, I expect that we will fully cover this, and that we will restore the page on this case (even if we lose the case and get blocked in India for it). However, doing so ''now'' would make it far more difficult for us to win the case. That's why we shouldn't. ] (] &#124; ]) 17:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::If the problem is that we aren't seen as separate wouldn't doing the same thing be the problematic one by that logic? And is an argument to do or not do something in order to seek advantage in a court case the foundation is involved in an ] argument or is there another policy or guideline basis for it? ] (]) 17:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::Yes, it's an IAR thing. In my opinion we should try to make the Foundation's job easier here, because doing so will benefit us in the long-run. (Of course, it wouldn't be IAR if they force us to shut this discussion down or removing coverage of the case elsewhere on the site... but I'd rather avoid things even getting to that point.) ] (] &#124; ]) 17:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::Would it be unfair to say that you think we should temporarily put aside NPOV in order to promote the Foundation for our own long term benefit? ] (]) 17:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Yes, that is unfair to say. This isn't setting aside NPOV at all and certainly not promoting the Foundation. ] (] &#124; ]) 17:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::::Promoting the Foundation's interests then? What is making their job easier if not promoting them or their interests? ] (]) 17:23, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::If you honestly cannot understand the difference between "violating NPOV to promote the Foundation" and "not posting things that will harm their chances in ongoing litigation" then I do not think there is any point to discussing this further. ] (] &#124; ]) 17:27, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::::::::Please don't fabricate quotes, thats just not what I said... I said temporarily put aside in the context of IAR, which unless I misunderstand is the only policy or guideline on which your argument is based. Doing something to help a group's chances in a court case is a ] problem, that doesn't change when the party in question is the Wikimedia Foundation and not the The Coca-Cola Company. ] (]) 17:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::::{{outdent|7}} The Signpost isn't part of the encyclopedia. Content policies don't apply to it. Not that any content policy requires us to write about a topic anyways. This is a very silly thread. <b style="font-family:Monospace">-- ] (])</b> 17:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::::Throwing a third layer of complexity in the picture? I really can see why this is so maddening for judges to figure out... ] (]) 17:59, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::Just as editors shouldn't ], I disagree with the notion we should adjust our behaviours to assist the WMF's active legal affairs, especially our own syntheses of what would help (with a clear distinction here in regards to settled policies, e.g. fair use). The Foundation has a legal team and contractors who are professionally poised to handle these situations. Once a hammer comes down, if it does at all, then those directions should be followed. ]<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 17:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::We are all fine here, our speech isn't under legal threat. {{u|Bluerasberry}} can write elsewhere and we'll all be able to read about things elsewhere. It is annoying and shocking to see happen is all. I'd like to hear from ] in the ''Signpost'' article. I thought that Misplaced Pages gave them the best protection they could to do so. From what i'm reading and how it appears that is not so strong a protection as I thought (but most importantly what they thought). Based on Jimbo's statement above and taking it as more reliable, it appears that this is not so great a concern in this case. ](]) 17:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::We're going it now in a different format. This current discussion will offend the court if that will. ] (]) 16:41, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::There's a big difference between a general discussion about how the community should react to the issue between the WMF and the Indian courts, and publishing an article in something which identifies as a newspaper, covering apparently the same sorts of things as the recently redacted article covered. I know that it's ultimately the WMF's decision what flies and what doesn't fly, and no doubt they'll take the Signpost article down themselves if they deem it appropriate to do so... but personally I do agree with Elli that it would be prudent and ] not to inflame this situation any further by publishing a Signpost article on it now, given the Office Action decision to redact the article itself. Once it all blows over, the Signpost can cover it at will. &nbsp;&mdash;&nbsp;] (]) 18:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::If the Signpost used its own web server instead of piggybacking a free ride on WMF's servers, this wouldn't be an issue. And they'd be closer to an actual independent newspaper instead of being this website's newsletter. I agree they shouldn't pour fuel on the fire by posting about the case on the WMF's servers. ] (]) 18:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::Based on the one example at hand, the process seemed to be: ANI lawyers notice whatever > They tell judges > Judges get annoyed > Judges order WMF. It won't ''necessarily'' become a habit, and the previous article ''was'' in mainspace + linked on the ANI WP-article, and so more visible to the lawyers involved.
::::It will be hard to convince all Wikipedians not to discuss this possibly first-time-ever issue on-WP, but prudent people can always join the discussion on Wikipediocracy instead. I don't think writing in ''The Signpost'' is more not prudent than this thread. We as a community don't handle gag-orders well. ] (]) 19:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::Some of us would rather have the discussion via messages left in gas station bathrooms than on Wikipediocracy. That aside, I think we handle gag orders ''well'', in that we refuse to shut up, which is a good way of handling them. We just don't handle them the way those who would hold the gags wish we would. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 19:07, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::''"Thieves respect property. They merely wish the property to become their property that they may more perfectly respect it."'' ] (]) 19:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Absolutely an appropriate quote, but not in the way you think. If someone's trying to keep me from speaking either my opinion, or any true fact, and I have not voluntarily agreed to that situation (e.g., an NDA in exchange for access to sensitive data in employment), they are trying to ''steal'' my right to speak. And I won't take too kindly to that. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 19:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::::::::My thinking was that the cadence of your comment reminded me of that quote, I'm not calling anyone in or mentioned in this discussion a thief. ] (]) 19:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
:I guess the editor-in-chief exists to post in situations like this.
:Well: I don't think it's possible for a thing to fit fit more clearly in the ''Signpost'' than this (what could possibly matter more? the crossword?) At the same time, I would personally prefer to do so in a way that avoids hosing the entire project and everybody on it for no clear benefit. The obvious journalistic response to open direct censorship is somewhere between "NUTS!" and "Aux armes citoyens", which is altogether good and proper.
:I would consider directly causing the death of the website we're hosted on something of an anathema to our ability to exercise journalistic integrity; I would consider e.g. having entire articles summarily oversighted with no appeal something of a pointless exercise in boneheadedness and organizational dysfunction for its own sake. Anything which results in these things happening, then, is no good. So what actions result in which outcomes? Well, I don't know. I don't think anybody really has a complete picture of what is going on, hence this vacuous if-by-whiskey post. All I can say for sure is that some emails are going to be sent. <b style="font-family:monospace;color:#E35BD8">]×]]</b> 18:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
::It might sound radical. But hear me out. Since signpost is a newspaper, you report 2 facts. 1) The article xyz was taken down. 2) Jimjams quote verbatim. That's it. No bylines. No explanation/analysis (not that most of the editors here are competent in legal analysis anyways). — ] (]) 18:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 10:35, 26 December 2024

Discussion page for matters concerning the Wikimedia Foundation
 Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous 
Shortcuts The WMF section of the village pump is a community-managed page. Editors or Wikimedia Foundation staff may post and discuss information, proposals, feedback requests, or other matters of significance to both the community and the Foundation. It is intended to aid communication, understanding, and coordination between the community and the foundation, though Wikimedia Foundation currently does not consider this page to be a communication venue.

Threads may be automatically archived after 14 days of inactivity.

Behaviour on this page: This page is for engaging with and discussing the Wikimedia Foundation. Editors commenting here are required to act with appropriate decorum. While grievances, complaints, or criticism of the foundation are frequently posted here, you are expected to present them without being rude or hostile. Comments that are uncivil may be removed without warning. Personal attacks against other users, including employees of the Wikimedia Foundation, will be met with sanctions.

« Archives, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Centralized discussion For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin November Issue 2

Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation from November 7 to November 21, 2024. Please help translate.

Upcoming and current events and conversations
Talking: 2024 continues

Wikimania logo
Scholarships open for Wikimania 2025

Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure
See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Research · Web · Wikifunctions & Abstract Misplaced Pages · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on MediaWiki.org

Annual Goals Progress on Equity
See also a list of all movement events: on Meta-Wiki

Annual Goals Progress on Effectiveness
See also: quarterly Metrics Reports

  • Audit reports 2023-24: Highlights from the fiscal year 2023–2024 Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia Endowment audit reports.
  • Wikimedia Enterprise: Financial report of Wikimedia Enterprise for the fiscal year 2023–2024.

Board and Board committee updates
See Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard · Affiliations Committee Newsletter

  • Board Updates: The Board met in Katowice, Poland on August 5 and held its quarterly business meeting before Wikimania. Learn more about the outcomes of the meeting.
  • AffCom: The Affiliates Committee has resumed User Group recognition work after a pause to improve the User Group recognition process.

Other Movement curated newsletters & news
See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Planet Wikimedia · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · Actualités du Wiktionnaire (fr) · Regards sur l’actualité de la Wikimedia (fr) · Wikimag (fr) · other newsletters:

Subscribe or unsubscribe · Help translate

Previous editions of this bulletin are on Meta-Wiki. Let askcac(_AT_)wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!


MediaWiki message delivery 18:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation banner fundraising campaign in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK, and the US starts next week

Dear all,

As mentioned previously, the WMF is running its annual banner fundraising campaign for non logged in users in Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK, and the US from the 2nd to the 31st of December 2024.

You can find more information around the campaign on the community collaboration page.

Generally, before and during the campaign, you can contact us:

Thank you and regards, JBrungs (WMF) (talk) 05:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

If it starts next week, then why have I been seeing it for several weeks already? 216.147.127.204 (talk) 17:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

The future of US government web sites as sources

I am posting this here because it has very broad implications for the project and may require foundation help in the coming weeks. Misplaced Pages articles on energy and the environment and other many other subjects rely on data from US government web sites, which are generally regarded as authoritative. There is a significant likelihood that many or all of these sites will be taken offline after January 20, 2025 when the US administration changes over. Is the foundation participating in any organized effort to back this material up? Can we just rely on the Internet Archive? What happens if the new administration puts up conflicting data? Will editors be free to "correct" articles based on what newer Government websites say, regardless of scientific backing? We do not have a lot of time to think this through.--agr (talk) 19:02, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I understand (and share) your concern, but deciding which sources are reliable is an editorial decision which the WMF does not get involved in. Sources that were once considered reliable can have their reputation reevaluated if conditions warrant, and even sources that are generally considered reliable should always be examined with a critical eye to ensure that any particular statement holds up to the general reputation.
This is an important issue, but it's just not one that the WMF has any input on. I would suggest asking this at WT:RS or perhaps WP:RSN. RoySmith (talk) 19:44, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
As far as I know, whenever something is cited on Misplaced Pages, the Internet Archive automatically takes a snapshot of it. You can contact someone like GreenC to confirm this.
The rest of your post seems like it would be a good fit for WP:RSN. Reliable sources have become unreliable before, and RSN can handle reducing a source's ranking on the WP:RSPSOURCES list when that situation comes to pass. A note will even be added to the entry stating that it used to be reliable, and after what date it became unreliable. However, it might be jumping the gun to post about this before it actually happens. There's not really anything to do yet. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:27, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Do you have a specific source for the allegations that many or all of these sites will be taken offline after January 20, 2025? Yes, the Dept. of Ed website's not going to be up anymore if that agency is axed, but this isn't the first post that I've seen here predicting that the administration change will be the end of America as we know it. Yes, if the energy/climate/public health sites go downhill we can/will revisit how we handle those sources. But all of this doom and gloom is overwrought, like when people I knew thought Obama was the antichrist or that Hillary was going to put Christians into death camps. This is Misplaced Pages, not Reddit. I thought we were a little more level-headed here. Hog Farm Talk 02:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
We had a nice four years where the main agitators in AMPOL were right-wing nuts. These are pretty easy to take care of, since they have virtually zero social capital on Misplaced Pages. They can be overruled and the community is ready to ban them at the drop of a hat if they get frustrated and lash out. Now we can look forward to four years where the main agitators will be left-wing nuts and #Resistance. This is harder to deal with because these people do have social capital on Misplaced Pages and have wikifriends (including several established editors and admins) to come back them up in disputes or tilt consensus. I suspect we can also look forward to more Anti-American bigotry toward subjects and editors as well. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Just a note, since the new administration can make changes, this should have implications to the past of US government web sites as sources. Cinadon36 08:05, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
WP:RSN 2001:8003:B16F:FE00:1D27:AD17:D63:4F28 (talk) 22:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Goverment sources have always been of qualified reliability, I see no reason for that to change. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:52, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Recent WMF update on ANI case

Noting that the WMF has posted an update on the ANI case here on 2 December, for those interested. —Ganesha811 (talk) 12:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

I can’t upload Auferstanden aus Ruinen

You see, the East German anthem doesn’t have an audio file because when I tried to upload it, it doesn’t work. It keeps telling it is unconstructive, but there is no other file. Same thing for the Chechen anthem, even thought the file doesn’t work on mobile. 197.167.245.218 (talk) 11:27, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Have you tried uploading it to https://commons.wikimedia.org? If that doesn't work, maybe post on their commons:Commons:Help desk. –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin December Issue

Here is a quick overview of highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation since our second November issue. This will be the final bulletin for 2024 and we'll be back in late January 2025 with the next issue. Please help translate.

Upcoming and current events and conversations
Talking: 2024 continues

Chabota Kanguya Isaac
Celebrating Chabota and his contributions to the movement.

Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure
See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Research · Web · Wikifunctions & Abstract Misplaced Pages · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on MediaWiki.org

  • Tech News: Chart extension is now available on Commons and Testwiki; a new version of the standard wikitext editor-mode syntax highlighter will be available as a beta feature; Edit Check will be relocated to a sidebar on desktop. More updates from tech news 50, 49, and 48.
  • Wikifunctions: WordGraph dataset is released, which is particularly useful for abstract descriptions for people in Wikidata. More status updates.
  • Misplaced Pages 2024 Year in Review: Misplaced Pages 2024 Year in Review launched, showcasing the collective impact of Misplaced Pages and Misplaced Pages contributors in the last calendar year. The iOS App also released a personalized Year in Review to Italy and Mexico, with insights based on reading, editing, and donation history.
  • Misplaced Pages Android App: The Android team has launched the Rabbit Holes feature in the final release of the year as part of Wiki Experiences 3.1. Currently being tested in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, this feature suggests a search term and a reading list based on the user's last two visited articles. For more details or to share feedback, visit the project page.

Annual Goals Progress on Equity
See also a list of all movement events: on Meta-Wiki

Annual Goals Progress on Safety & Integrity
See also blogs: Global Advocacy blog · Global Advocacy Newsletter · Policy blog

Board and Board committee updates
See Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard · Affiliations Committee Newsletter

External media releases & coverage

Other Movement curated newsletters & news
See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Planet Wikimedia · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · Actualités du Wiktionnaire (fr) · Regards sur l’actualité de la Wikimedia (fr) · Wikimag (fr) · other newsletters:

Subscribe or unsubscribe · Help translate

For information about the Bulletin and to read previous editions, see the project page on Meta-Wiki. Let askcac(_AT_)wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!


MediaWiki message delivery 18:03, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Category: