[WikiEN-l] I love SEOs

[David Gerard]

and never think they're spamming feckwits who should be nuked from
orbit in short order.

http://www.wolf-howl.com/grayhat-seo/invalidate-wikipedia-articles/


(I'm sure JEHochman would love a large anvil to fall on people like this ;-)


- d.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] What sparked your interest in Wikipedia? (was Google thinks Wikipedia is a news source)

[AGK]

>
> And then I ask what sparked other people's interests in Wikipedia, and a
> really long thread results.


In searching for directions to my local railway station a few years ago, I
noticed the corresponding Wikipedia article was terribly lacking in
information. I expanded as best I could, and got involved from there. I knew
bits and pieces about the project, having browsed in the past and edited
occasionally as an IP to fix spelling and other minor errors, but I suppose
that was my first major editing experience with Wikipedia.

The project hasn't changed terribly much since the day I first edited, now
that I think about it.

AGK
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WikiEN-l] Ramifications to wikipedians of unmasking of police blogger?

[AGK]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8103132.stm

One wonders what ramifications the High Court's decision in the "Night Jack"
case has for UK wikipedians. Should we approach pseudonymous editing with a
different perspective, now that the court has confirmed itself as unwilling
to uphold the anonymity of online contributors?

AGK
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Ramifications to wikipedians of unmasking of police blogger?

[David Gerard]

2009/6/16 AGK :

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8103132.stm
> One wonders what ramifications the High Court's decision in the "Night Jack"
> case has for UK wikipedians. Should we approach pseudonymous editing with a
> different perspective, now that the court has confirmed itself as unwilling
> to uphold the anonymity of online contributors?


It's complicated. In this case, the Times worked out his identity and
the court said they couldn't be stopped from saying it, considering
the guy was a public commenter on matters of legitimate public
interest. Their "woohoo fuck you" article:

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article6509677.ece

That it's Justice Eady gives sufficient reason to start from the
assumption that it's bad, of course, but the details are trickier. I'm
not quite sure what to think yet.


- d.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Ramifications to wikipedians of unmasking of policeblogger?

[Phil Nash]

AGK wrote:
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8103132.stm
>>
>> One wonders what ramifications the High Court's decision in the
>> "Night Jack" case has for UK wikipedians. Should we approach
>> pseudonymous editing with a different perspective, now that the
>> court has confirmed itself as unwilling to uphold the anonymity of
>> online contributors?
>>
>> AGK

I would think not, since it seems a major influence on the judge's decision 
was consideration of the public interest; I would think it very rarely in 
the "public interest" for a Wikipedian's actual name to become public. There 
are also different considerations in that a serving police officer is liable 
for disciplinary sanctions, whereas I cannot necessarily see that applying 
to WP editors.



___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Ramifications to wikipedians of unmasking of police blogger?

[Nathan]

Was there an assumption in the past that screen name anonymity would be
protected by law enforcement and the court system? I don't agree with the
judge's conclusions that the public is "entitled" to the identity of a
blogger, but it seems obvious that the court is not going to provide
injunctive relief against the risk of being outed.

Nathan
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Ramifications to wikipedians of unmasking of police blogger?

[Sam Blacketer]

Whatever one thinks of the decision by The Times to run a story about him,
it is plainly right that he should not have been able to maintain his
anonymity through the courts. It would have been very surprising if the
court had found otherwise.

Attempting to find the real person behind a literary pseudonym has a long
heritage; one of the stories that Hitler Diaries journalist Gerd Heidemann
worked on for Stern magazine was about the identity of famed and mysterious
German thriller writer B. Traven, for instance. The real identity of 'Simon
Haxey', who wrote one very well-informed book about the internal workings of
the Conservative Party in the late 1930s, is still unknown.

As Oscar Wilde wrote, if one tells the truth, one is sure sooner or later to
be found out. Take it from one who knows.

-- 
Sam Blacketer
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Ramifications to wikipedians of unmasking of police blogger?

[Stephen Bain]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:03 AM, David Gerard wrote:
>
> It's complicated. In this case, the Times worked out his identity and
> the court said they couldn't be stopped from saying it, considering
> the guy was a public commenter on matters of legitimate public
> interest.

I think you're right in identifying that as the distinguishing feature
here. The blogger was the plaintiff in this action ("claimant" in UK
parlance), seeking to enjoin the Times from publishing information
they obtained on their own.

Contrast this with the more traditional situation concerning online
anonymity or pseudonymity, where the plaintiff is someone trying to
obtain information. In those situations anonymity or pseudonymity will
be more likely to be protected, although the position will be
different in different countries.

My first impression is that this seems to be consistent with current
UK "privacy" (ie, expanded breach of confidence) jurisprudence, though
I haven't read the whole case yet. Does anyone know where a copy of
the decision might be available? Looks like it will be another
important case in this developing area.

-- 
Stephen Bain
stephen.b...@gmail.com

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Ramifications to wikipedians of unmasking of police blogger?

[Sam Blacketer]

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Stephen Bain wrote:

>
> My first impression is that this seems to be consistent with current
> UK "privacy" (ie, expanded breach of confidence) jurisprudence, though
> I haven't read the whole case yet. Does anyone know where a copy of
> the decision might be available? Looks like it will be another
> important case in this developing area.
>

Best place for current UK court judgments is BAILII: http://www.bailii.org/

Not everything gets there but high-profile cases in the higher courts
normally do.

-- 
Sam Blacketer
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Ramifications to wikipedians of unmasking of police blogger?

[Sam Blacketer]

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Sam Blacketer  wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Stephen Bain wrote:
>
>>
>> My first impression is that this seems to be consistent with current
>> UK "privacy" (ie, expanded breach of confidence) jurisprudence, though
>> I haven't read the whole case yet. Does anyone know where a copy of
>> the decision might be available? Looks like it will be another
>> important case in this developing area.
>>
>
> Best place for current UK court judgments is BAILII:
> http://www.bailii.org/
>
> Not everything gets there but high-profile cases in the higher courts
> normally do.
>

Update: It's there already:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2009/1358.html

-- 
Sam Blacketer
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Ramifications to wikipedians of unmasking of police blogger?

[Stephen Bain]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Sam
Blacketer wrote:
>
> Update: It's there already:
> http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2009/1358.html

Cheers, I'd checked BAILII but didn't think to look under QB.

-- 
Stephen Bain
stephen.b...@gmail.com

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Ramifications to wikipedians of unmasking of police blogger?

[Unionhawk]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

I say people just sty behind their anonymity cloaks while they still
can. I can say from personal experience that if people know your real
name if you are a blogger, prepare for some hate mail. It filled my
inbox for a good month, and people are still talking about this
particular post (granted, all these people are idiots with nothing else
to talk about, but that's a different issue).

Stay anonymous peoples. If undercover police can do it, why not a police
blogger? Or Wikipedian for that matter?

AGK wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8103132.stm
> 
> One wonders what ramifications the High Court's decision in the "Night Jack"
> case has for UK wikipedians. Should we approach pseudonymous editing with a
> different perspective, now that the court has confirmed itself as unwilling
> to uphold the anonymity of online contributors?
> 
> AGK
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAko3zbwACgkQSPTq06lEuY/gQACfU5jJRC1doD9knRAFw3Qt9+5y
NfsAnR526JbaSGHvLOfjOjm5qqCd06GT
=Wdql
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] I love SEOs

[James Farrar]

David Gerard wrote:

> and never think they're spamming feckwits who should be nuked from
> orbit in short order.
> 
> http://www.wolf-howl.com/grayhat-seo/invalidate-wikipedia-articles/
> 
> 
> (I'm sure JEHochman would love a large anvil to fall on people like
> this ;-)

I like the way they say "Comments on this entry are closed." Are they scared
of something? ;)


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WikiEN-l] Q&A with Andrew Lih on NYTimes

[Nathan]

On the Freakonomics blog (the book is worth the read, if you haven't
already):

http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/by-a-bunch-of-nobodies-a-qa-with-the-author-of-the-wikipedia-revolution/

-- Nathan
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] I love SEOs

[Andrew Gray]

2009/6/16 David Gerard :
> and never think they're spamming feckwits who should be nuked from
> orbit in short order.
>
> http://www.wolf-howl.com/grayhat-seo/invalidate-wikipedia-articles/

"Search engine optimisation: we can't make anyone want to read your
content, but we can make everything else just as shitty."

I suppose it's touching they're trying, but I wish they'd realise it's
a waste of time for all of us...

-- 
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] I love SEOs

[Luna]

As the project gains popularity, it's inevitable that more people will try
to subvert our aims, but I did find one thing a bit amusing:

Top of post: "Personally I’m not a fan of Wikipedia..."

Later in post: "...in chess we call this [zugzwang]..." (note link to
Wikipedia)

Even our critics can't help but use our services.

-Luna
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] I love SEOs

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/6/16 Luna :
> As the project gains popularity, it's inevitable that more people will try
> to subvert our aims, but I did find one thing a bit amusing:
>
> Top of post: "Personally I’m not a fan of Wikipedia..."
>
> Later in post: "...in chess we call this [zugzwang]..." (note link to
> Wikipedia)
>
> Even our critics can't help but use our services.

Well spotted! That made my day.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] I love SEOs

[Sage Ross]

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/6/16 Luna :
>> As the project gains popularity, it's inevitable that more people will try
>> to subvert our aims, but I did find one thing a bit amusing:
>>
>> Top of post: "Personally I’m not a fan of Wikipedia..."
>>
>> Later in post: "...in chess we call this [zugzwang]..." (note link to
>> Wikipedia)
>>
>> Even our critics can't help but use our services.
>
> Well spotted! That made my day.

I guess he's still keeping true to his SEO principles though: it's a
nofollow link.

-Sage (User:Ragesoss)

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Ramifications to wikipedians of unmasking of police blogger?

[Tim Starling]

Phil Nash wrote:
> AGK wrote:
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8103132.stm
>>>
>>> One wonders what ramifications the High Court's decision in the
>>> "Night Jack" case has for UK wikipedians. Should we approach
>>> pseudonymous editing with a different perspective, now that the
>>> court has confirmed itself as unwilling to uphold the anonymity of
>>> online contributors?
>>>
>>> AGK
> 
> I would think not, since it seems a major influence on the judge's decision 
> was consideration of the public interest; I would think it very rarely in 
> the "public interest" for a Wikipedian's actual name to become public. There 
> are also different considerations in that a serving police officer is liable 
> for disciplinary sanctions, whereas I cannot necessarily see that applying 
> to WP editors.

The proceedings that Sam Blacketer linked to

make it clear that public interest is only relevant if the information
is given in confidence, and the claimant has a reasonable expectation
of privacy. The judge ruled on the grounds that there was no
expectation of privacy, and only speculated on what the balance of
public interest might be.

So if you reveal your real name to a journalist after making it clear
that it is confidential and "off the record", and the journalist
publishes it, then there will be a public interest question. But if
the journalist meets you at a local Wikipedia meetup under false
pretences, then follows you back to your house, then finds your name
from your address in public records, then there is no public interest
question since confidence is not breached.

-- Tim Starling


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l