> categories and lists related to ethnicity, religious views, and sexual
> orientation are often created and/or filled by POV pushers who usually do
> not care much about sourcing. On top of this, the inclusion criteria,
> especially for categories, are often not defined
Absolutely correct, Yarosl
It's also important to point out that Wikidata can be used to
semi-automatically replace the wikipedias' manual category trees:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Ontology
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Ontology/Classes
It looks like some of the Wikidata peopl
Hi David,
>It occurs to me: Has anyone gone through the cat and made sure every
>instance is cited to best BLP standards?
no, likely not (nobody has gone through the cat). In my experience,
categories and lists related to ethnicity, religious views, and sexual
orientation are often created and/or
I'm not 100% comfortable with the approach of doing it because we legally
can - we do a lot of stuff because it's the right thing, not just because
we're legally obliged to. The concern is a real one and worth giving
serious consideration.
(As I noted in my email about the GDPR, we do a lot of stu
"Privacy" is often censorship by another name. Seems so here too.
Of course, if the information is not sourced, or is not well sourced, it
can and should be removed as a potential BLP issue. But if it is sourced,
we're not making anything available to the public that wasn't already
publicly known-
On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 10:41 AM, sashi wrote:
> The fact that -- today on en.wp -- these religious categories are being
> overwhelmingly applied to Jews (and to a lesser degree to Freemasons) is
> certainly striking. (cf. the 862 members of Category:French Jews & the 21
> members of the Categor
Hello again,
Thanks for your input on this question! I'll add a few clarifications
here to respond to points raised in the discussion so far. (As I'm
subscribed in digest mode, I'll have to cut & paste.)
---
Nathan commented: "I'm not seeing an argument here for why Wikimedia
should a
Todd is correct, en.wiki and the WMF operate out of the US and are not subject
to other nation’s laws regarding content for the most part. Also, all entries
should be blue-linked, else they must be in compliance with LISTN and V. For
the rest, a inline citation is not required.
Lexi
> On May 25
Nathan, the Enwiki organic category system is not very good. For
example, there are no consistent ontological constraints placed on the
entire ontological tree (which should not be surprising because the
Library of Congress Card Number system, the Dewey decimal system, the
SIC ontology, and even Wo
I'm not seeing an argument here for why Wikimedia should adhere to this
law, if it is correctly stated by the OP. If France passed a law banning
Internet-published photos of living people, how would we approach that law?
If Germany barred publishing the place of birth, date of birth or religious
pr
Whereas I absolutely agree with Todd, let me note that in the list many
entries are unsourced or poorly sourced and can not be there according to
the policies.
Cheers
Yaroslav
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 8:55 PM, Todd Allen wrote:
> We should no more follow French censorship laws than we should fol
We should no more follow French censorship laws than we should follow
Turkish ones. All editors are responsible for compliance with the laws in
their jurisdiction.
Todd
On Fri, May 25, 2018, 12:53 PM sashi wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am writing to ask if there are any plans to render the English
> Wi
Hello,
I am writing to ask if there are any plans to render the English
Wikipedia compliant with French privacy laws. Currently, if a French
high school student goes to a French library, reserves a computer, and
types "List of French Jews" into Google, Duckduckgo, or Dogpile, an
adhoc en.wik
13 matches
Mail list logo
