Re: [Wiki-research-l] Results from 2018 global Wikimedia survey are published!

[80hnhtv4agou]

 I believe administrators outside of the US, in en wikipedia and in wikidata 
etc., 
 
do not understand, our freedom of speech and our right to due process, and 

that there is  a cultural misunderstanding and a lack of patience on there 
part, 

which leads to an abuse  of power  and a breaking of the rules when it comes 

to blocking  IP’s and others for  just standing up for themselves.  and to that 
end, 

do not see the good faith edits made, that  were not reverted, and based on 

other’s intelligent  level not there's.  Everything starts out nice, on tea 
room’s, 

noticeboards, forums, and on there talk pages etc.,  and then all goes south, 

as in en wikipedia, and with a now “conflict of interest” just block you,
 
to end it.
 
In wikidata which is more technically challenging, editors that claim ownership 

of pages and coming  from outside of north America and europe, revert on 

misunderstanding’s, and can not express themselves  in english, so just rely on 

administrators noticeboard to complain against IP’s without warning,
 
not giving the chance for the ip to defend himself, and to explain that it was 

an edit war.  administrators that see these posts at 100’s an hour, just block 

the IP’s or the pages without any kind of  investigation, based on lies of the 

accusers. and these same  administrators that have participated on
 
there talk pages are now in a “conflict of interest”, being  directly involved.
 
and in ru wikipedia, ru wikidata, english speakers are not welcome, from 

there board down to there users. 


>Tuesday, September 25, 2018 10:08 PM -05:00 from Pine W :
>
>I'm appreciative that we're having this conversation - not in the sense
>that I'm happy with the status quo, but I'm glad that some of us are
>continuing to work on our persistent difficulties with contributor
>retention, civility, and diversity.
>
>I've spent several hours on ENWP recently, and I've been surprised by the
>willingness of people to revert good-faith edits, sometimes with blunt
>commentary or with no explanation. I can understand how a newbie who
>experienced even one of these incidents would find it to be unpleasant,
>intimidating, or discouraging. Based on these experiences, I've decided
>that I should coach newbies to avoid taking reversions personally if their
>original contributions were in good faith.
>
>I agree with Jonathan Morgan that WP:NOTSOCIAL can be overused.
>
>Kerry, I appreciate your suggestions about about cultural change. I can
>think of two ways to influence culture on English Wikipedia in large-scale
>ways.
>
>1. I think that there should be more and higher-quality training and
>continuing education for administrators in topics like policies, conflict
>resolution, communications skills, legal issues, and setting good examples.
>I think that these trainings would be one way through which cultural change
>could gradually happen over time. For what it's worth, I think that there
>are many excellent administrators who do a lot of good work (which can be
>tedious and/or stressful) with little appreciation. Also, my impression is
>that ENWP Arbcom has become more willing over the years to remove admin
>privileges from admins who misuse their tools. I recall having a discussion
>awhile back with Rosie on the topic of training for administrators, and I'm
>adding her to this email chain as an invitation for her to participate in
>this discussion. I think that offering training to administrators could be
>helpful in facilitating changes to ENWP culture.
>
>2. I think that I can encourage civil participation in ENWP in the context
>of my training project
>< 
>https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Rapid/Pine/Continuation_of_educational_video_and_website_project
> >
>that I'm hoping that WMF will continue to fund. ENWP is a complex and
>sometimes emotionally difficult environment, and I'm trying to set a tone
>in the online training materials that is encouraging. I hope to teach
>newbies about the goals of Wikipedia as well as policies, how to use tools,
>and Wikipedia culture. I am hopeful that the online training materials will
>improve the confidence of new contributors, improve the retention of new
>contributors, and help new editors to increase the quality and quantity of
>their contributions. I hope that early portions of the project will be well
>received and that, over time and if the project is successful as it
>incrementally increases in scale and reach, that it will influence the
>overall culture of ENWP to be more civil.
>
>Regards,
>
>Pine
>(  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>___
>Wiki-research-l mailing list
>Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l



___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Results from 2018 global Wikimedia survey are published!

[Pine W]

I'm appreciative that we're having this conversation - not in the sense
that I'm happy with the status quo, but I'm glad that some of us are
continuing to work on our persistent difficulties with contributor
retention, civility, and diversity.

I've spent several hours on ENWP recently, and I've been surprised by the
willingness of people to revert good-faith edits, sometimes with blunt
commentary or with no explanation. I can understand how a newbie who
experienced even one of these incidents would find it to be unpleasant,
intimidating, or discouraging. Based on these experiences, I've decided
that I should coach newbies to avoid taking reversions personally if their
original contributions were in good faith.

I agree with Jonathan Morgan that WP:NOTSOCIAL can be overused.

Kerry, I appreciate your suggestions about about cultural change. I can
think of two ways to influence culture on English Wikipedia in large-scale
ways.

1. I think that there should be more and higher-quality training and
continuing education for administrators in topics like policies, conflict
resolution, communications skills, legal issues, and setting good examples.
I think that these trainings would be one way through which cultural change
could gradually happen over time. For what it's worth, I think that there
are many excellent administrators who do a lot of good work (which can be
tedious and/or stressful) with little appreciation. Also, my impression is
that ENWP Arbcom has become more willing over the years to remove admin
privileges from admins who misuse their tools. I recall having a discussion
awhile back with Rosie on the topic of training for administrators, and I'm
adding her to this email chain as an invitation for her to participate in
this discussion. I think that offering training to administrators could be
helpful in facilitating changes to ENWP culture.

2. I think that I can encourage civil participation in ENWP in the context
of my training project

that I'm hoping that WMF will continue to fund. ENWP is a complex and
sometimes emotionally difficult environment, and I'm trying to set a tone
in the online training materials that is encouraging. I hope to teach
newbies about the goals of Wikipedia as well as policies, how to use tools,
and Wikipedia culture. I am hopeful that the online training materials will
improve the confidence of new contributors, improve the retention of new
contributors, and help new editors to increase the quality and quantity of
their contributions. I hope that early portions of the project will be well
received and that, over time and if the project is successful as it
incrementally increases in scale and reach, that it will influence the
overall culture of ENWP to be more civil.

Regards,

Pine
( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Results from 2018 global Wikimedia survey are published!

[Jonathan Morgan]

A recently published report which is relevant to this discussion:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_equity_report_2018/Barriers_to_equity

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 7:57 PM Kerry Raymond 
wrote:

> I agree there are some systemic factors that may prevent us achieving
> 50-50 male-female participation (or in these enlightened non-binary times
> 49-49-2). Studies continue to show that wives still spend more hours at
> domestic tasks than their husbands, even when both are in full-time
> employment, and clearly less free time is less time for Wikipedia. But
> still men now do more housework than they once did. (My husband would argue
> that I have never let housework take priority over Wikipedia, but maybe I'm
> not typical!). Similarly, we have not yet seen pay rates for women reach
> parity with men but they are moving closer. A gender balance of 90-10 that
> might once have been the norm in many occupations is now unusual. Wikipedia
> is a child of the 21st century; one might expect it to more closely reflect
> the societal norms of this century not the 19th century.
>
> Women use wikis like Confluence in workplaces without apparent difficulty.
> But I note that modern for-profit wikis have visual editing and tools that
> import/export from Word as normal modes of contribution.
>
> I agree entirely with you about outreach and off-wiki activities. I said
> when there was the big push to "solve the women problem" by such events
> that it wouldn't make the difference because the problem is on-wiki. The
> majority of people who attend my training class and come to the events I
> support are women. It's not women can't do it. It's not that they don't
> want to do. As you say, it's just that it's such an unpleasant environment
> to do it in and that's what women don't like. For that matter, a lot of men
> don't like it either.
>
> What shall we write on Wikipedia's tombstone? "Wikipedia: an encyclopedia
> written by the most unpleasant people"?
>
> Can one create cultural change? Yes, I've seen it done in organisations.
> You tell people what the new rules are, you illustrate with examples of
> acceptable and unacceptable behaviours. You offer a voluntary redundancy
> program for those who don't wish to stay and you make clear it that those
> who wish to stay and continue to engage in the unacceptable behaviours will
> be "managed out" through performance reviews. You run surveys that measure
> your culture throughout the whole process. Interestingly the cultural
> change almost always involved being less critical, more collaborative, less
> micromanaged, more goal-oriented, more self-starting, many of which I would
> say apply here (except perhaps for being more self-starting, I don't think
> that's our problem).
>
> En.WP can change but WMF will have to take a stand and state what the new
> culture is going to be. En.WP will not change of its own accord; we have
> years of evidence to demonstrate that.
>
> Kerry
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wiki-research-l [mailto:wiki-research-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org]
> On Behalf Of Jonathan Morgan
> Sent: Friday, 21 September 2018 10:44 AM
> To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities <
> wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] Results from 2018 global Wikimedia survey
> are published!
>
> (Re: Jonathan's 'Chilling Effect' theory and Kerry's call for experiments
> to increase gender diversity)
>
> Kerry: In a magic world, where I could experiment with anything I wanted
> to without having to get permission from communities, I would experiment
> with enforceable codes of conduct that covered a wider range of harassing
> and hostile behavior, coupled with robust & confidential incident reporting
> and review tools. But that's not really an 'experiment', that's a whole new
> social/software system.
>
> I actually think we're beyond 'experiments' when it comes to increasing
> gender diversity. There are too many systemic factors working against
> increasing non-male participation. In order to do that you would need to
> increase newcomer retention dramatically, and we can barely move the needle
> there on EnWiki, for both social and technical reasons. But one
> non-technical intervention might be carefully revising and re-scope
> policies like WP:NOTSOCIAL that are often used to arbitrarily and
> aggressively shut down modes of communication, self-expression, and
> collaboration that don't fit so-and-so's idea of what it means to be
> Wikipedian.
>
> Initiatives that start off wiki, like women-oriented edit-a-thons and
> outreach campaigns, are vitally important and could certainly be supported
> better in terms of maintaining a sense of community among participants once
> the event is over and they find they're now stuck alone in hostile
> wiki-territory. But I'm not sure what the best strategy is there, and these
> kind of initiatives are not large-scale enough to make a large overall
> impact on active editor numbers on

Re: [Wiki-research-l] [Wikidata] Semantic annotation of red links on Wikipedia

[80hnhtv4agou]

All that red makes the page look bad, and i would like to point out the abuse 
factor here, all those red links start edit wars,
 
and should be put there if any by people,

The creation of the wikidata page also creats a problem, because it does not 
establis a lable which should be mandatory
 
and in english, 
in the save proses.  

and this problem *  
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Labels_and_descriptions#List_of_items_without_labels_and/or_descriptions
  


>Tuesday, September 25, 2018 2:58 AM -05:00 from Sergey Leschina 
>:
>
>I want to draw your attention to the problem from the other side. On the newly 
>created page, which can be opened by the red link, there is no binding to the 
>Wikidata. This means that after the creation, the page will not automatically 
>be linked to the Wikidata. And if the project has templates that can use 
>information from the Wikidata, they will not fully work until the page will be 
>saved at least once and linked to an item. I already suggested to add the 
>parameter for this:  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T178249
>
>If something like this will be implemented, then it will be possible to make a 
>template for the red links (with Lua and TemplateStyles) that will be 
>connected to the Wikidata. Although I agree that it is better to have a syntax 
>that will allow to make links without such difficulties.
>пн, 24 сент. 2018 г. в 20:50, Maarten Dammers < maar...@mdammers.nl >:
>>Hi everyone,
>>
>>According to  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLuM4E6IE5U : "Semantic 
>>annotation is the process of attaching additional information to various 
>>concepts (e.g. people, things, places, organizations etc) in a given 
>>text or any other content. Unlike classic text annotations for reader's 
>>reference, semantic annotations are used by machines to refer to."
>>(more at 
>>https://ontotext.com/knowledgehub/fundamentals/semantic-annotation/ )
>>
>>On Wikipedia a red link is a link to an article that hasn't been created 
>>(yet) in that language. Often another language does have an article 
>>about the subject or at least we have a Wikidata item about the subject. 
>>Take for example 
>>https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Friedrich_Ris . It has over 
>>250 incoming links, but the person doesn't have an article in Dutch. We 
>>have a Wikidata item with links to 7 Wikipedia's at 
>>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q116510 , but no way to relate 
>>https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Friedrich_Ris with 
>>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q116510 .
>>
>>Wouldn't it be nice to be able to make a connection between the red link 
>>on Wikipedia and the Wikidata item?
>>
>>Let's assume we have this list somewhere. We would be able to offer all 
>>sorts of nice features to our users like:
>>* Hover of the link to get a hovercard in your favorite backup language
>>* Generate an article placeholder for the user with basic information in 
>>the local language
>>* Pre-populate the translate extension so you can translate the article 
>>from another language
>>(probably plenty of other good uses)
>>
>>Where to store this link? I'm not sure about that. On some Wikipedia's 
>>people have tested with local templates around the red links. That's not 
>>structured data, clutters up the Wikitext, it doesn't scale and the 
>>local communities generally don't seem to like the approach. That's not 
>>the way to go. Maybe a better option would be to create a new property 
>>on Wikidata to store the name of the future article. Something like 
>>Q116510: Pxxx -> (nl)"Friedrich Ris". Would be easiest because the 
>>infrastructure is there and you can just build tools on top of it, but 
>>I'm afraid this will cause a lot of noise on items. A couple of 
>>suggestions wouldn't be a problem, but what is keeping people from 
>>adding the suggestion in 100 languages? Or maybe restrict the usage that 
>>a Wikipedia must have at least 1 (or n) incoming links before people are 
>>allowed to add it?
>>We could create a new projects on the Wikimedia Cloud to store the 
>>links, but that would be quite the extra time investment setting up 
>>everything.
>>
>>What do you think?
>>
>>Maarten
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>___
>>Wikidata mailing list
>>wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
>-- 
>Sergey Leschina
>___
>Wikidata mailing list
>wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org
>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Re: [Wiki-research-l] Analytics Hadoop cluster full shutdown scheduled for Sept 25th

[Luca Toscano]

Hi everybody,

maintenance just completed, it took a bit more but no issue registered so
far. We weren't able to swap analytics1003 (where Oozie/Hive/etc..) in this
maintenance window, so I'll likely send another email next week to schedule
downtime (not for the entire cluster but mostly for Hive/Oozie only),
please don't hate me :)

If you see any issue please contact us (via
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T203635 or IRC Freenode
#wikimedia-analytics).

Thanks!

Luca

Il giorno lun 24 set 2018 alle ore 16:50 Luca Toscano <
ltosc...@wikimedia.org> ha scritto:

> Hi everybody,
>
> this is a reminder that the maintenance will happen tomorrow (Tue 25th, 10
> CEST).
>
> Luca
>
> Il giorno ven 14 set 2018 alle ore 12:13 Luca Toscano <
> ltosc...@wikimedia.org> ha scritto:
>
>> Hi everybody,
>>
>> the Analytics team needs to replace the Hadoop master node hosts
>> (analytics100[1,2]) and the Hive/Oozie host (analytics1003) as part of
>> regular hardware refresh (hosts getting out of warranty). In order to do
>> things safely we decided to proceed with a full cluster shutdown on Sept
>> 25th at 10 AM CEST. The maintenance should last a couple of hours and all
>> there shouldn't be any noticeable change for the Hadoop users.
>>
>> This means that during the maintenance:
>> - HDFS will not be available
>> - Yarn will not be available
>> - Hive/Spark (cluster mode)/Oozie/etc.. will not be available
>>
>> Please let us know if this impacts your work in
>> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T203635 or on the #wikimedia-analytics
>> Freenode IRC channel.
>>
>> Thanks a lot!
>>
>> Luca
>>
>
___
Wiki-research-l mailing list
Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l