Have you tried discussing this with the community? Let me tell you what their reaction will be: "we don't care who you are, we care what are your sources". Everywhere online, exposing your real life identity means a possibility of real life problems: stalking, harassment, attempts to get someone you have a content dispute with fired. And I'm not even theorizing: all the above things have happened on Wikipedia, multiple times. Social networks want to have people's confirmed identities so that they could sell them to the highest bidder. We at Wikimedia are different - we want to know as little about our users as possible, and a bit less than that.
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 7:14 PM, Adam Sobieski <adamsobie...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Chad, > > I’m working on a new Wikipedia article, Account Verification ( > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Account_verification). > Account verification can enhance the quality of online services, > mitigating sockpuppetry, bots, trolls, spam, vandalism, fake news, > disinformation and election interference. > > Account verification was initially a feature for public figures and > accounts of public interest, individuals in music, acting, fashion, > government, politics, religion, journalism, media, sports, business and > other key interest areas. Account verification was introduced to Twitter in > June 2009, Google+ in August 2011, Facebook in February 2012, Instagram in > December 2014, and Pinterest in June 2015. > > In July 2016, Twitter announced that, beyond public figures, any > individual could apply for account verification. In March 2018, during a > live-stream on Periscope, Jack Dorsey, co-founder and CEO of Twitter, > discussed the idea of allowing any individual to get a verified account ( > https://variety.com/2018/digital/news/twitter-verified- > account-open-everyone-1202722587/). > > In April 2018, Mark Zuckerberg, co-founder and CEO of Facebook, announced > that purchasers of political or issue-based advertisements would be > required to verify their identities and locations. He also indicated that > Facebook would require individuals who manage large pages to be verified ( > https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10104784125525891). > > These events of March and April of 2018 occurred just recently. These > issues are both important and contemporary. > > I’m looking at administrative functions such as page protection and > considering scenarios where one or more administrators would determine that > a page requires a verified account to edit. “Verified users” would be > another column in the table, Interaction of Wikipedia user groups and page > protection levels, at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Overview_of_types_of_protection . > > I would like to respond to your question both quickly and thoroughly. This > is part one (quickly) and I will work on part two (thoroughly) over the > weekend and respond early next week. > > > Best regards, > Adam > > From: Chad<mailto:innocentkil...@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 9:03 PM > To: Wikimedia developers<mailto:wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki and OpenID Connect > > On Fri, May 4, 2018, 1:21 PM Adam Sobieski <adamsobie...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > With such features, we can envision allowing groups of users or admins to > > determine that certain articles require a verified account to edit. > > > > Why would this be desirable? > > -Chad > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > -- Best regards, Max Semenik ([[User:MaxSem]]) _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
