[Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and UCoC Enforcement Guidelines

[Peter Southwood]

When someone is blocked for NOTHERE, it is judged on what they have done, we 
generally don’t care what they claim to have intended, as there is no way to 
prove or disprove such claims. Cheers, Peter

 

From: Stella Ng [mailto:s...@wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 25 April 2022 17:38
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and 
UCoC Enforcement Guidelines

 

Hello Everyone,

 

I appreciate the questions and concerns regarding intent - I’m going to 
reference Jan Eissfeldt here, the Global Head of Trust and Safety, and how he 
interpreted this concern during the last CAC conversation hour on April 21st 
(https://youtu.be/3cd2FxovdXE)

 

As mentioned previously, the UCoC was created to establish a minimum set of 
guidelines for expected and unacceptable behavior. The policy was written to 
take into account two main points: intent and context. It trusts people to 
exercise the reasonable person standard - which indicates that based on a 
reasonable person’s judgment of the scenario, the personalities behind it, and 
the context of the individuals involved in, as well as any extrapolating 
information, could make a call on an enforcement action.

 

This is not a new way of working for many of our communities. For instance, 
guidelines against “Gaming the system” exist in 26 projects, most if not all of 
which refer to deliberate intention or bad faith.

 

We do not believe that the crafters of the UCoC were looking for people to 
engage in any form of law interpretation or anything complex, but instead, to 
exercise their experience using the parameters of what a reasonable person 
would be expected to tolerate in a global, intercultural environment. 

 

Regards,

Stella

 

 

On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:14 AM Peter Southwood  
wrote:

This question has been asked before, and so far no workable answer has been 
suggested. Cheers, Peter.

 

From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 20 April 2022 19:44
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and 
UCoC Enforcement Guidelines

 

Stella, how are the community members who review situations supposed to 
establish the mens rea of the accused? Intent is one of the hardest things to 
prove in criminal cases, and we're going to rely on volunteers to get it right? 
We should not look at intent at all, consider only the actual harm that 
occurred and focus on remediation, harm reduction and rehabilitation in stead 
of punishing people. 

 

Vexations

 

Sent with ProtonMail   secure email. 

 

--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, April 19th, 2022 at 2:24 PM, Stella Ng  wrote:



Hello Andreas and Todd, 

 

I am not Rosie, but I believe I can field this. 

 

First, as a reminder to all, the UCoC was created to establish a minimum set of 
guidelines for expected and unacceptable behavior. However, it does not make 
existing community policies irrelevant. Currently, communities in our global 
movement may have different policies around the disclosure of private 
information (“doxxing”), specifically taking into context what is going on on a 
day-to-day basis, as well as relationship and political dynamics (such as the 
position of power or influence) that the individuals involved could have. 
Depending on the specific context of your examples, interpretation and action 
could differ widely under those doxxing policies. 

 

What would be contextually consistent across the communities, however, is the 
UCoC. If we look specifically at section 3.1, which is what doxxing is nested 
under, what is important to note is context - specifically that if the 
information is provided or the behavior is “intended primarily to intimidate, 
outrage or upset a person, or any behaviour where this would reasonably be 
considered the most likely main outcome” (emphasis added). The next sentence 
expands further that “Behaviour can be considered harassment if it is beyond 
what a reasonable person would be expected to tolerate in a global, 
intercultural environment.” (emphasis added) The policy as written is pretty 
clear that both intent and what is often called in law the “reasonable person 

 ” test applies. This is one of the reasons that the Enforcement Guidelines are 
built around human review since application of policy will always require 
judgment. The community members who review situations will hopefully read the 
text in context within the policy and will also have experience in 
understanding the parties involved, their unique dynamics within their 
respective communities, and their own project policies on doxxing as COI, as 
they will have the experience of dealing with the day to day. 

 

However, it is likely the standar

[Wikimedia-l] Re: WIKIMOVE Episode #2- Share news from your affiliate and ask questions to our guests in our next podcast

[Gergő Tisza]

Thank you for fostering conversations around movement strategy!

Are there any plans to make the content accessible to standard podcast
players (e.g. Google Podcasts)?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/L2V5Z6ETHSJF266PFVL53465ZX4CKBIX/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: WIKIMOVE Episode #2- Share news from your affiliate and ask questions to our guests in our next podcast

[Eva Martin]

Dear Gergo,
Thank you for your email. We are indeed discussing the possibility of
extending the distribution of our podcast to different platforms.
We will let you know once a final decision has been made.
Best,
Eva

On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 11:04 AM Gergő Tisza  wrote:

> Thank you for fostering conversations around movement strategy!
>
> Are there any plans to make the content accessible to standard podcast
> players (e.g. Google Podcasts)?
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/L2V5Z6ETHSJF266PFVL53465ZX4CKBIX/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org



-- 
Eva Martin
Project Assistant Movement Strategy and Global Relations

Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Phone: +49 30 219 158 26-0
https://wikimedia.de

Keep up to date! Current news and exciting stories about Wikimedia,
Wikipedia and Free Knowledge in our newsletter (in German):
https://www.wikimedia.de/newsletter/

Wikimedia Deutschland – Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/NPIU7EB4HM33MEZJGUDLRV26QVQGHG24/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[Mario Gómez]

On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:14 AM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> “the block message only shows up when I try to save the page”
>

Block messages generally appear when opening the editor. However, support
is lacking in some cases for mobile web and apps [1]. There may be other
issues depending on the editor, registered/unregistered, or type of block.
Also it is possible that the warning was displayed, but it was easily
ignored because of the lack of visibility in some scenarios.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mobile_communication_bugs

Best,

Mario
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/5LSGKOMVCAFR27TFEBET5MG53IHIAEUC/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] New collections now available via The Wikipedia Library

[Vipin]

Hi!

The Wikipedia Library has new collections now available to experienced
Wikimedia contributors at https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/:

* Wiley (journals, books, and research resources, covering life, health,
social, and physical sciences):
https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/partners/128/
* OECD (iLibrary, Data, and Multimedia published by the Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development):
https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/partners/125/
* SPIE Digital Library (journals and eBooks on optics and photonics applied
research): https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/partners/129/

Many other sources are already available, including collections which
recently became accessible to all eligible editors: Cambridge University
Press, BMJ, AAAS, Érudit and more. Do better research and help expand the
use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: log in today!

The Wikipedia Library Team
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Library
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/QQ2BQ7C4N4ZKYCVKBOLIVEJZIJYM3S4N/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[Florence Devouard]

Hello


Ok, so viewing the IP is necessary. I added the barebone proposition on 
the meta page for futher refining.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:No_open_proxies/Unfair_blocking#On-wiki_feature
If anyone can edit the description to make it clearer, it would be great

Since you indicated seeing the IP is necessary, I have been wondering on 
steward pool


1) how do you truely evaluate/know of each steward activity or lack 
there of (steward activity). Probably easy to see the fully inactive 
ones (might not be wiki active anymore), or the super active ones. But 
for all those in-between how do you know the level of activity of 
the 40 or so ? I have looked at the past situation and see there are 
only 1-2 people removed for inactivity for most of the past few years. 
It seems a bit surprising to me.


2) Number of stewards has been more or less stable since 2009... the 
highest seem to have been 36. The lowest was 29 stewards in 2011. I am 
not sure how much the job has evolved since inception given the many 
roles added over time. But has the job been easier or more complicated 
since 2009 ? Is the current number of steward sufficient ?


3) I see the number of candidates has been fairly limited over the year. 
With a third to half of candidates rejected. 7 candidates in 2018 (2 
no), 14 candidates in 2019 (7 no), 10 candidates in 2021 (5 no), 7 
candidates in 2022 (2 no). Is this figure considered satisfactory to 
you, or would you be hoping for more good candidates ? Has the 
recruitement process been rather passive (simply posting an announcement 
to call for new candidates) or rather active (actively approaching 
potential candidates).



Flo


Le 22/04/2022 à 15:20, Rae Adimer via Wikimedia-l a écrit :

Hi Flo.

Viewing the IP address involved is necessary. There's a reason why 
Stewards and CheckUsers are generally the ones involved in handling 
IPBE requests. There's differences between people trying to use open 
proxies to edit through the Great Firewall of China, people caught in 
IPv4 blocks from CGNAT-using ISPs, people whose residential ranges are 
blocked as p2p proxies, and people who just want to edit with a proxy. 
Often there are rangeblocks with specific circumstances behind it, 
such as usage by LTAs or being a specific type of proxy. Knowing this 
background is necessary.


It would be incredibly helpful if there was a way to send in IPBE 
requests on-wiki and for Stewards to be able to respond to it on-wiki, 
confidentially. Where those affected can input the affected IP address 
and reason, and Stewards can answer the queue there quickly and 
easily. We can handle the quantity of requests if the process is workable.


I'm also wondering who the people discussed with privately are. Your 
suggestion here is one of the most feasible I've seen, and as far as I 
can tell there are very few people asking Stewards directly for input 
on this. I've seen a lot of comments which are misinformed about what 
is happening, why, and what is a feasible fix.


My message on the Meta-Wiki page outlines my views on this. Optimally, 
the WMF would discuss with Stewards ways to create a better system for 
this, and implement it. New problems, old tech.


Best regards,
Rae



User:Vermont  on 
Wikimedia projects
they/them/theirs (why pronouns matter 
)



On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 8:43 AM Florence Devouard 
 wrote:


I have read all the comments and discussed privately with a few
people.

There are some elements of answers that are purely in the hands of
stewards, they have to discuss and find common grounds, in
particular to implementing blocks, so that they limit damage on
good people, whilst preserving the projects from vandals.

However, the general observation is that the current system to
report an unfair block to stewards and get unblocked by them is
largely broken.
1) process is not simple to understand by the user
2) complicated to implement on the steward side (requires back and
forth discussion, checking legitimacy of request, copy pasting
information etc.)
3) the steward pool of volunteers is limited, whilst the stewards
willing to do that job is even smaller (I heard the VRT queue is
overflowing)
4) the process reveals IP private info
All this creates a bottleneck.

There is one path we could explore, a feature to simplify the
process of "adding legitimate users" to the Global IPblock
exemptions list, in a process inspired from the Global renamers one.
* new functionary role (eg Global IPblock exempters) : populated
by stewards, or people appointed by steward
* interface directly on wiki (bypass of VRT, bypass of copy
pasting between tools)
* a process which would NOT require revealing the IP address to
the functionary (it is sufficient that the system recognise the
pers

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[Bence Damokos]

Thanks Mario - indeed it seems to be a bit random, maybe there was an
update recently- on Hungarian Wikipedia as an anon I today see an edit
button but then it tells me I am blocked (it doesn't give any real
explanations, but at least the link to contact the stewards goes directly
to the contact form) , on English Wikipedia when logged out I get the edit
button and block message, whereas if I am logged in I get a locked pencil
edit button and a nightmare of a block message: it is a wall of text that
asks me to put something on my talk page, and then instead of linking to my
talk page, it links to a help page that explains what talk pages are... Or
alternatively it leads to an unblock request system, but also asks for my
IP address that I should get by going to an other wikipedia page that
should load my IP address, but in fact doesn't neither logged in or out...

Anyways, long story short - whoever designed this blocking system and the
corresponding messages, should try to follow the path it sets to the users
with the eyes of a newbie (maybe ask an outsider in front of you to see if
they understand it) and see if they see an opportunity to streamline the
hell out of it.

Best regards,
Bence

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 at 12:32, Mario Gómez  wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:14 AM Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
>> “the block message only shows up when I try to save the page”
>>
>
> Block messages generally appear when opening the editor. However, support
> is lacking in some cases for mobile web and apps [1]. There may be other
> issues depending on the editor, registered/unregistered, or type of block.
> Also it is possible that the warning was displayed, but it was easily
> ignored because of the lack of visibility in some scenarios.
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mobile_communication_bugs
>
> Best,
>
> Mario
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/5LSGKOMVCAFR27TFEBET5MG53IHIAEUC/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/TXFD4O7EYSS46JPI2FXZ55SA5HTO3K6M/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) and UCoC Enforcement Guidelines

[Carla Toro]

Hi everyone,

I'm writing this on a personal note, but just to clarify, Doxing is under
the section of harassment, which is aligned with its definition of being
the act of revealing identifying information about someone online *with the
clear intention of harassing someone*. And I think I can use the examples
given by Andreas to throw light on what doxing is and what is not.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Congressional_staffer_edits
This reveals contributors' employer and address, very likely without their
consent, on a page in Wikipedia. It's in direct contravention of the above
bullet point. Should this page exist?
- This is not Doxing, this is just a mechanism of transparency with the
government.

2.
https://www.vox.com/2014/7/18/5916005/malaysian-crash-mh17-russia-ukraine-wikipedia-edit
This press article states that someone at a Russian TV network edited
Wikipedia to blame the MH17 plane crash on Ukraine. This therefore reveals
a contributor's employer and possibly also their work address. Is this
article harassment? Should any Wikipedians who may have tipped off the
journalist be punished?
- Not precisely Doxing. It may be harassment (maybe unintentionally) but
not from a Wikimedian. The article clearly states "Within an hour, someone
with an IP address that puts them at VGTRK's Moscow offices changed it to
say "The plane was shot down by Ukrainian soldiers."". So this was the
fault of the press by making the conection of the edit and the IP and the
disclousure of the information.

3.
https://www.dailydot.com/irl/wikipedia-sockpuppet-investigation-largest-network-history-wiki-pr/
This press article – which was instrumental in triggering a significant
change in the WMF terms of use, well before your time with the WMF of
course – comments on various contributors' employer, again in direct
contravention of the Doxing bullet point. Is this harassment? Should the
Wikipedians who "shared information concerning other contributors'
Wikimedia activity outside the projects", by speaking to the writer of this
article, be sanctioned under UCoC if they did the same today?
- They all used their users name and agree to that interview. They weren't
sharing information to harrass someone, they were talking about their own
investigation. If this was the case today, I think that they should not be
sanctioned but they should be carefull if it is an on going investigation.

4. https://www.vice.com/en/article/mgbqjb/is-wikipedia-for-sale
In this article the late Kevin Gorman – who died much too young! – as well
as James Hare and a WMF staffer again "share information concerning other
contributors' Wikimedia activity outside the projects", including
employment details. This is in direct contravention of the Doxing bullet
point, compliance with which you explained is a "minimum" standard that
participants will be held to.
-Same as 3.

5.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2011/09/hari-rose-wikipedia-admitted
In this article a journalist writes about a Wikipedia editor – a fellow
journalist, as it turned out – who had defamed multiple living people on
Wikipedia. He gives the name of his Wikipedia account and his real name.
(The culprit subsequently publicly apologised.) Is the linked article
harassment?
- Yes this is harrassment on both sides (the WP editor who defamed multiple
living people on WP and the journalist that wrote the article). The
Wikimedian should be sanctioned under the policies of WP.

6. https://archive.ph/NAsft
Here a Wikipedian claimed that a fellow Wikipedian was a government
employee. He "shared information concerning her activity outside the
project". He also claimed she had sysops tortured. The record shows that
the accused was subsequently globally banned from all Wikimedia projects.
How would the Wikipedian who made the report be judged under the UCoC if
they were to make the same report today?
- By doing the same report. This is not doxing, this is someone reporting
another user that used their sysop power for purposes that do not go with
the wikimedia movement.

A very unfortunate example of doxing (and harrassment) is the one here:
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/10/how-wikipedia-is-hostile-to-women/411619/
When some Wikipedians put the photos of another user (related to their
profile on WP) in pornographic sites.

I understand that everyone wants to make the UCoC better, and have their
issues regarding some of the guidelines, but please also give solutions.
This is not some easy thing to do because everyone lives in different
cultures and our different context matter, but maybe instead of viewing
this as "so now I can't say or do this" view this as "how can this
guidelines help the community -- especially the minorities -- to feel
safe?".
We -- women and minorities -- need the UCoC to feel safe in the Wikimedia
Community. So please, let's move towards a UCoC that ensures that.

Best,

Carla

El mar, 26 abr 2022 a la(s) 03:59, Peter Southwood (
peter.southw...@

[Wikimedia-l] Invitation to Wikimedia Research Office Hours May 3, 2022

[Emily Lescak]

Hi all,


Join the Research Team at the Wikimedia Foundation [1] for their monthly
Office hours Tuesday, 2022-05-03. Find your local time here
.

To participate, join the video-call via this link [2]. There is no set
agenda - feel free to add your item to the list of topics in the etherpad
[3]. You are welcome to add questions / items to the etherpad in advance,
or when you arrive at the session. Even if you are unable to attend the
session, you can leave a question that we can address asynchronously. If
you do not have a specific agenda item, you are welcome to hang out and
enjoy the conversation. More detailed information (e.g., about how to
attend) can be found here [4].

Through these office hours, we aim to make ourselves available to answer
research related questions that you as Wikimedia volunteer editors,
organizers, affiliates, staff, and researchers face in your projects and
initiatives. Here are some example cases we hope to be able to support you
with:

   -

   You have a specific research related question that you suspect you
   should be able to answer with the publicly available data and you don’t
   know how to find an answer for it, or you just need some more help with it.
   For example, how can I compute the ratio of anonymous to registered editors
   in my wiki?
   -

   You run into repetitive or very manual work as part of your Wikimedia
   contributions and you wish to find out if there are ways to use machines to
   improve your workflows. These types of conversations can sometimes be
   harder to find an answer for during an office hour. However, discussing
   them can help us understand your challenges better and we may find ways to
   work with each other to support you in addressing it in the future.
   -

   You want to learn what the Research team at the Wikimedia Foundation
   does and how we can potentially support you. Specifically for affiliates:
   if you are interested in building relationships with the academic
   institutions in your country, we would love to talk with you and learn
   more. We have a series of programs that aim to expand the network of
   Wikimedia researchers globally and we would love to collaborate with those
   of you interested more closely in this space.
   -

   You want to talk with us about one of our existing programs [5].


Hope to see many of you,

Emily, on behalf of the WMF Research Team

[1] https://research.wikimedia.org

[2] https://meet.jit.si/WMF-Research-Office-Hours

[3] https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Research-Analytics-Office-hours

[4] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Office_hours

[5] https://research.wikimedia.org/projects.html



-- 
Emily Lescak (she / her)
Senior Research Community Officer
The Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/4Z36WIDMBEAV7X4X3OO32BXY4RZX4DRW/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[Joris Darlington Quarshie]

Suggestions to resolve open proxies and IP block issues.

- Building bots/ tools or features, when a user logs in from an open proxy.
A notification pops up stating “ You have login from an open proxy. Kindly
click on this link to enter your username,password and IP address.
- If Username is verified. Access is granted to edit content.
- If username is not verified. Kindly state “ There’s no username as such.
Access denied.
- After editing, thanks for your contribution. Your edit will be reviewed
within (this duration) before its published.
- Username must match with user login entered.
- After reviewing, if there’s no form of vandalism. User receives a
notification “edit from IP address is published”. If there’s a form of
vandalism user receives a notification message “ edit from IP address
contains vandalism content. Therefore user is blocked”.


Kindly note: Please this just an idea that came in mind. If there are
stewards here who will like to go through this and share the feedback with
me I will Ben grateful.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 4:08 PM Bence Damokos  wrote:

> Thanks Mario - indeed it seems to be a bit random, maybe there was an
> update recently- on Hungarian Wikipedia as an anon I today see an edit
> button but then it tells me I am blocked (it doesn't give any real
> explanations, but at least the link to contact the stewards goes directly
> to the contact form) , on English Wikipedia when logged out I get the edit
> button and block message, whereas if I am logged in I get a locked pencil
> edit button and a nightmare of a block message: it is a wall of text that
> asks me to put something on my talk page, and then instead of linking to my
> talk page, it links to a help page that explains what talk pages are... Or
> alternatively it leads to an unblock request system, but also asks for my
> IP address that I should get by going to an other wikipedia page that
> should load my IP address, but in fact doesn't neither logged in or out...
>
> Anyways, long story short - whoever designed this blocking system and the
> corresponding messages, should try to follow the path it sets to the users
> with the eyes of a newbie (maybe ask an outsider in front of you to see if
> they understand it) and see if they see an opportunity to streamline the
> hell out of it.
>
> Best regards,
> Bence
>
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 at 12:32, Mario Gómez  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:14 AM Peter Southwood <
>> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>
>>> “the block message only shows up when I try to save the page”
>>>
>>
>> Block messages generally appear when opening the editor. However, support
>> is lacking in some cases for mobile web and apps [1]. There may be other
>> issues depending on the editor, registered/unregistered, or type of block.
>> Also it is possible that the warning was displayed, but it was easily
>> ignored because of the lack of visibility in some scenarios.
>>
>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mobile_communication_bugs
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Mario
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/5LSGKOMVCAFR27TFEBET5MG53IHIAEUC/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/TXFD4O7EYSS46JPI2FXZ55SA5HTO3K6M/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

-- 
Joris Darlington Quarshie
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/N25BR6TEJAE7XQDVNKAE2U7ABYGLSYLN/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org