Re: [Wikimedia-l] Category: French Jews on en.wp / GPDR

[L3X1 en]

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, 2018, at 3:21 PM, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
> 
> 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 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
>>> 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.wikipedia list of over 850 people (approximately half of them
>>> living) appears in the #2 position (Category: French Jews). In the first
>>> position is the English Wikipedia page "List of French Jews" containing
>>> the following text, originally added in 2010, showing that the
>>> en.wikipedia community is aware that they are breaking French law:
>>> 
>>> "The French nationality law itself, strongly secular, forbids any
>>> statistics or lists based on ethnic or religious membership."
>>> 
>>> A French person tagging biographies of living people in en.wp with the
>>> category "French Jews" is a violation of French privacy law which would
>>> expose the Wikipedian to a penalty of €300,000 and/or 5 years
>> imprisonment:
>>> 
>>> "Le fait, hors les cas prévus par la loi, de mettre ou de conserver en
>>> mémoire informatisée, sans le consentement exprès de l’intéressé, des
>>> données à caractère personnel qui, directement ou indirectement, font
>>> apparaître les origines raciales ou ethniques, les opinions politiques,
>>> philosophiques ou religieuses, ou les appartenances syndicales des
>>> personnes, ou qui sont relatives à la santé ou à l’orientation ou à
>>> l'identité sexuelle de celles-ci, est puni de cinq ans d’emprisonnement
>>> et de 300 000 € d’amende." (source:
>>> https://www.cnil.fr/fr/les-sanctions-penales )
>>> 
>>> There is, to the best of my knowledge, no such category on fr.wp, as
>>> people in France are well aware of the law.
>>> 
>>> See also "List of West European Jews" / Category: French People of
>>> Jewish descent / Category: French People of Arab descent / Category:
>>> French Freemasons (167), Category: French Atheists (93 including a
>>> recent president), etc.
>>> 
>>> I noticed in researching the question that the Category "French rapists"
>>> (2 BLP) is associated with the hidden category "No indexed", whereas the
>>> category "French Jews" (100s of BLP) is associated with the hidden
>>> category: "categories requiring diffusion".  As a temporary measure (to
>>> avoid actively feeding this info into search engines), perhaps
>>> categories related to racial/ethnic origins, religious & philosophical
>>> opinions could be tagged "No indexed" rather than "requiring diffusion"?
>>> 
>>> The WMF hosts their servers in the US, the Netherlands and will soon
>>> also be hosting off-shore in Singapore, which probably leads WMF legal
>>> to believe that this grants them immunity from French privacy laws.
>>> Nevertheless, I thought I would mention that this is a potentially
>>> significant problem going forward.  Discussion leading to action
>>> correcting this potential avenue of abuse might help the WMF to avoid
>>> litigation, given that the current policies on English Wikipedia
>>> actively facilitate violation of French laws.
>>> 
>>> (data from petscan.wmflabs.org): French Christians (21 members), French
>>> Hindus (17 members), French Buddhists (9 members), French Muslims (0
>>> members), French Jews (862 members).
>>> 
>>> Thank you for your time considering how best to address this problem.
>>> 
>>> sashi
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> 
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Invitation to the Wikimedia Foundation May 2018 Metrics & Activities Meeting: Thursday, May 31, 18:00 UTC

[L3X1 en]

What is the YouTube link, or is it not yet available? Thanks
> On May 24, 2018, at 6:15 PM, Lena Traer  wrote:
> 
> Hello everyone,
> 
> The next Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities meeting will take
> place on Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 6:00 PM UTC (11 AM PDT). The IRC channel
> is #wikimedia-office on https://webchat.freenode.net, and the meeting will
> be broadcast as a live YouTube stream.[1] We’ll post the video recording
> publicly after the meeting.
> 
> During the May 2018 meeting, we will hear about languages across the
> Wikimedia projects.
> 
> Meeting agenda:
> 
> * Welcome and introduction
> * Movement update
> * The Compact Language Links project
> * Executive update
> * Questions and discussion
> * Wikilove
> 
> Please review the meeting's Meta-Wiki page for further information about
> the meeting and how to participate:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_metrics_and_activities_meetings
> 
> You can also sign up to participate in future meetings on Meta-Wiki:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_metrics_and_activities_meetings/Future_meetings
> 
> June 2018 Metrics & Activities meeting will take place on Thursday, 28
> June, starting at 6:00 PM UTC (11 AM Pacific Daylight Time).
> 
> Thank you,
> Lena
> 
> [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOaiU-v7PbE
> 
> Lena Traer
> Project Coordinator // Communications // Advancement
> Wikimedia Foundation
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Airtasker adds for articles

[L3X1 en]

From discussions I have seen on the en.wiki Village pump and various ANs, I 
believe the WMF has no legal foothold to ask another website to respect our TOU.
> On May 24, 2018, at 5:28 AM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> 
> I find this rather disturbing that Airtasker accepts adds for people
> wanting to have articles written, on wikipedia.
> 
> The person writing the add is asking someone to violate WMF terms &
> Conditions as you can some of the respondents are indicating that they do
> this regularly
> 
> https://www.airtasker.com/tasks/copywriter-for-a-wikipedia-article-10031171/
> 
> Would it  be prudent for the WMF legal to contact Airtasker, highlight our
> T and have them block such requests from being posted.  Airtasker
> themselves also gets paid when people write Wikipedia articles
> 
> -- 
> GN.
> Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> Out now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman and P. Jennings (eds.), *Never Again:
> Reflections on Environmental Responsibility after Roe 8*, UWAP, 2017.  Order
> here
> 
> .
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

[L3X1 en]

I do feel Jane summed it up well: Because of our rules on RS, Wikipedia can 
only reflect society. As long as society continues to overlook women, it will 
be evident in Wikipedia. In my work with WomRed, enough references were the 
prevailing issue. We have a list of women who need articles, but without 
references we cannot prove notability enough to stave off AFD. 
Lex1
> On May 10, 2018, at 11:46 AM, Peter Southwood  
> wrote:
> 
> When Wikipedia was new and unknown there were not so many people wanting to 
> use it for purposes that conflict with our purposes. Times change. 
> Cheers,
> Peter
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf 
> Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 5:30 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> 
> If we where that septic at the beginning, we will never have started
> Wikipedia to begin with. Really, an encyclopedia written by anyone without
> any authority to double check before it is published? It is doomed to fail.
> Yes, in theory, but practice showed us otherwise. The question is not to
> remove notability and verifiability requirements, but to change those
> requirements to be more inclusive of different ways of sharing knowledge. I
> think practice can show us otherwise in that case too if we are ready to do
> that leap of faith, the same way we did at the beginning of Wikipedia when
> we opened editing to anybody.
> 
> JP
> 
> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 11:05 AM Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> 
>> One Jar'Edo Wens hoax is enough, and that lasted 10 years in spite of
>> notability and verifiability requirements, Without the verifiability
>> requirement  it would probably still be there. Leaps of faith are things
>> that I do not generally do, I am a natural sceptic and prefer evidence, and
>> where possible, reproducible results. When the evidence is intangible, the
>> authors must take responsibility for their work, and that means track
>> record and proof of identity.
>> This would be more easily fitted into a new project. I do not see it as
>> possible in Wikipedia. If the new project became recognised as a reliable
>> source then Wikipedia could use it as a source, without destroying the
>> credibility we have.
>> Cheers,
>> Peter
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
>> Behalf Of Gnangarra
>> Sent: 10 May 2018 15:50
>> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
>> 
>> notability and verifiability are important,  every culture and language
>> has this issue when it comes to sharing knowledge.  These culture manage
>> successfully to share knowledge many of them long before the western styles
>> were developed, I'd say they are robust alternatives.  The issue is how do
>> we bring these sources into the western system, how do we respect them,
>> how do we teach ourselves to understand that what we currently do is not
>> the only.
>> 
>> There are risks in potential abuses of every system, even our current
>> systems have their faults and we assume good faith in the citations from
>> books published but no digital.  Changing the way we consider and value
>> alternative knowledge streams will take a leap of faith, the question is do
>> we really want to take that leap, do we really want to share the sum of all
>> knowledge, do we want to address inherent bias in our current knowledge
>> networks or are we comfortable with just token efforts.
>> 
>> Maybe the solution isnt in incorporating directly into the wikipedia but
>> rather the creation of new project to bring forth these alternative
>> knowledge streams
>> 
>> 
>> On 10 May 2018 at 21:47, Eduardo Testart  wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I posted this a while ago, an investigation on gender bias where a member
>>> of Wikimedia Chile was involved, in his personal capacity though:
>>> https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.
>>> 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4
>>> 
>>> There are many things that can be addressed individually and as a
>> movement
>>> or collective, if we believe the conclusions are valid, which I
>> personally
>>> do, since they are supported with data and not on our personal
>> impressions.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Cheers!
>>> 
>>> El jue., may. 10, 2018 10:27, Peter Southwood <
>>> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
>>> escribió:
>>> 
 Notability and verifiability are important. They allow us to produce
 reasonably reliable work. Moving away from those constraints opens the
 doors to extremely unreliable material. If Wikipedia is to remain open
>> to
 anyone to edit, there do not appear to be any robust alternatives.
>> Other
 projects may work around this problem, but would then probably not be
>>> open
 for anyone to edit. Or can you suggest another