Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:32, 12 November 2023

Please freely edit the draft RfC below. This was initially proposed with a statement and proposed structure, but several people felt that (i) being neutral with respect to our mission was not neutral in the sense of an RfC statement and that (ii) the structure was either (a) too complex or (b) not sufficiently prepared, given the complexity of the question and the aim of achieving consensus on concrete, actionable edits.

To avoid confusion, please do your edits, with edit descriptions, directly in the three second-level header sections below. Discussion should mainly go on the talk page.

Signatures should not normally go on this page - make useful edit descriptions and discuss on the talk page. Whoever posts the initial statement and the post-statement structure in the RfC itself will give his/her signature at that time, over at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals). This lead is not part of the RfC draft.

Hints for example formatting:

• Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Example formatting

RfC initial statement

Module:Find sources/templates/Find sources currently contains non-mainspace WP:ADVOCACY for Google/Alphabet Inc, one of the world's most powerful and monopolistic, highly criticised corporations that pays 10s of billions of dollars to try to maintain a monopoly with its criticised search engine. This advocacy is contrary to our mission. Moreover, this advocacy violates the spirit of the Universal Code of Conduct in the sense that it encourages Wikipedians to disclose their personal data, and in some cases puts us at risk of harm. What editorial changes should we make in the module to reduce the level of advocacy, without favouring one particular attempted monopoly and without harming Wikipedians' privacy rights, while helping readers find reliable, independent sources using notable search engines?

RfC Categories

{{rfc|policy|tech}}

• policy - not strictly policy, but fundamentally related to our mission, so people interested in policy are likely to be interested in this RfC
• tech - because tech knowledge and editing rights are needed for the Module and the Template

RfC initial post-statement proposed structure

• Proposed discussion structure: Please add Support or Oppose and arguments for or against the following specific proposals in the sections below, or add additional proposals, so that someone uninvolved can summarise the consensus after a reasonable period of debate.

1. tech step 1: Add missing engines to the list of available search engines at Module:Find_sources/links, for engines that catalogue high numbers of pages, according to Comparison of web search engines, or are notable scholarly search engines:
   1. Add Qwant
   2. Add Mojeek
   3. Add Semantic Scholar
2. tech step 2: Add some metasearch engines that respect privacy to the list of available search engines at Module:Find_sources/links
   1. Add Startpage.com
   2. Add 3-4 Searx instances such as https://opnxng.com or https://searx.be or https://priv.au
3. policy step 1: modify Module:Find sources/templates/Find sources that defines the list of search engines at Template:Find general sources
   1. Replace Find sources: by Use a ] (]) to find sources: (which renders as: Use a search engine (comparison) to find sources:)
   2. remove the general link to Google and replace it by Startpage, Qwant and/or Mojeek and/or
   3. keep Google Books unless someone can propose a similar equivalent
   4. replace Google News by a link to the Startpage or a Searx instance like Opnxng.com News link (&categories=news

is needed in the URL) and/or

1. 1. replace Google Scholar by Internet Archive Scholar and/or a Searx instance like the Openxng.com Science link (&categories=science) and/or Semantic Scholar and/or
   2. (Other modifications)
2. (Other)

tech step 1: Add missing engines

Add missing engines that catalogue high numbers of pages, according to Comparison of web search engines, or are notable scholarly search engines. The following should be added to the list of available search engines at Module:Find_sources/links (support/oppose NAME(s) or NUMBER(s) + evidence + reasons):

• 1.1 Qwant
• 1.2 Mojeek
• 1.3 Semantic Scholar
• 1.4 (other)

tech step 2: Add some metasearch engines that respect privacy

The following should be added to the list of available search engines at Module:Find_sources/links (support/oppose NAME(s) or NUMBER(s) + evidence + reasons):

• 2.1 Add Startpage.com to the list of available search engines at Module:Find_sources/links
• 2.2 Add a Searx instance such as https://Opnxng.com to the list of available search engines at Module:Find_sources/links
• 2.3 (other metasearch engines )

policy step: Modifications to Module:Find sources/templates/Find sources

Modify Module:Find sources/templates/Find sources that defines the list of search engines that is used in Template:Find general sources in the following ways (support/oppose + evidence + reasons).

3.1: Replace 'Find sources'

Replace Find sources: by Use a ] (]) to find sources: (which renders as: Use a search engine (comparison) to find sources:)

3.2: Replace the generic Google link

Remove the general link to Google and replace it by Startpage, Qwant and/or Mojeek and/or .

3.3: Keep Google Books or propose alternative

Keep Google Books unless someone can propose a similar equivalent.

3.4: Replace Google News

Replace Google News by a link to the Startpage or Opnxng.com news link and/or . Startpage and Searx may need extra tech work since they don't display direct URLs to their news sections.

3.5: Replace Google Scholar

Replace Google Scholar by Internet Archive Scholar and/or Semantic Scholar and/or .

3.6: Other modifications

Other changes to the current content of Module:Find sources/templates/Find sources and its template form at Template:Find general sources could be proposed. However, for NYT vs AP, please go to the orthogonal RfC at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)#RfC on Module:Find sources - replace New York Times with Associated Press.

4 Other related changes

As an open-ended component of this RfC, feel free to add other (preferably concrete) proposals or 'see also' links.

• See also: There is a recently opened, orthogonal discussion for advice on how to or whether to fix the AfD guideline page on the issue of WP:ADVOCACY.