Re: [Wikimediauk-l] "Schoolchildren told to avoidWikipedia" - Telegraph
Brian McNeil wrote: > On Sun, 2010-01-10 at 18:34 +, Thomas Dalton wrote: > >> 2010/1/10 Charles Matthews : >> >>> Shrug. Admins are never "obliged" to enforce policy if it gives a stupid >>> result. ArbCom are "obliged" to make some sense out of what the policy >>> pages say, bearing in mind the good of the mission. Asking for 1500 >>> admins to come up with a consensus position is fairly futile. Asking an >>> Arbitrator is consulting an informed person. I know what I'd think of an >>> admin who blocked a school project on this technicality. i'll concede >>> that what is recommended should be well thought through, but my feeling >>> is that this could lead to second-best advice being given. >>> >> You have some really big problems with your understanding of how >> Wikipedia works... First, you claim that ArbCom should be deciding our >> policy on role accounts and now you claim that admins should. You are >> completely wrong on both counts. Policy is determined by THE >> COMMUNITY. >> > > Right. And policy is enforced by admins, bureaucrats, checkusers, > admins, stewards, and project arbcoms. > > The issue on role accounts is that anyone who can use them can change > the registered email address and password. So, shared accounts are out. > > Any admin or, more appropriately, checkuser will tell you that > generating a lot of similarly formed account names will raise suspicion. > It's a common troll modus operandi - and it has been done from school IP > addresses. I think Charles is speaking from the perspective of someone > with access to nonpublic data. My concern is that said data may require > accessed. On rare occasions a school's IT administrator may be contacted > if they're a persistent source of vandalism; most admins never see that > nonpublic information and may make blocking decisions they feel in line > with policy but absent that knowledge. > > > Come, now, save it for wikien-l. (Upper case is shouting, and I understand the operation of the enWP community perfectly well.) Admins personally decide how to apply their extra buttons. If no admin wants to block some account, it stays unblocked. That is how it is, and how it should be. User:Tottelwiki was an American college project, it was editing a page I started, I didn't block it. My discretionary call. This list is for WMUK, not soapboxing about enWP politics. Great job on the fundraising, by the way, Thomas, but why are you picking fights? It looks like this, then. "Wikipedia welcomes school projects. If, however, you set one up the wrong way, you may be blocked by one of the site's jobsworths, in which case you'll find it useful to know the address of the unblock mailing list. Be quick about it, though, because if one of your GCSE class lads sets up an alternate account, your school may suffer an IP range block and you'll have some explaining to do to other staff members who had the same idea." A tad too honest for a guide, perhaps, but if the community is infallible ... Charles ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] "Schoolchildren told to avoidWikipedia" - Telegraph
On Sun, 2010-01-10 at 18:34 +, Thomas Dalton wrote: > 2010/1/10 Charles Matthews : > > Shrug. Admins are never "obliged" to enforce policy if it gives a stupid > > result. ArbCom are "obliged" to make some sense out of what the policy > > pages say, bearing in mind the good of the mission. Asking for 1500 > > admins to come up with a consensus position is fairly futile. Asking an > > Arbitrator is consulting an informed person. I know what I'd think of an > > admin who blocked a school project on this technicality. i'll concede > > that what is recommended should be well thought through, but my feeling > > is that this could lead to second-best advice being given. > > You have some really big problems with your understanding of how > Wikipedia works... First, you claim that ArbCom should be deciding our > policy on role accounts and now you claim that admins should. You are > completely wrong on both counts. Policy is determined by THE > COMMUNITY. Right. And policy is enforced by admins, bureaucrats, checkusers, admins, stewards, and project arbcoms. The issue on role accounts is that anyone who can use them can change the registered email address and password. So, shared accounts are out. Any admin or, more appropriately, checkuser will tell you that generating a lot of similarly formed account names will raise suspicion. It's a common troll modus operandi - and it has been done from school IP addresses. I think Charles is speaking from the perspective of someone with access to nonpublic data. My concern is that said data may require accessed. On rare occasions a school's IT administrator may be contacted if they're a persistent source of vandalism; most admins never see that nonpublic information and may make blocking decisions they feel in line with policy but absent that knowledge. -- Brian McNeil Wikinewsie.org signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] "Schoolchildren told to avoidWikipedia" - Telegraph
2010/1/10 Charles Matthews : > Shrug. Admins are never "obliged" to enforce policy if it gives a stupid > result. ArbCom are "obliged" to make some sense out of what the policy > pages say, bearing in mind the good of the mission. Asking for 1500 > admins to come up with a consensus position is fairly futile. Asking an > Arbitrator is consulting an informed person. I know what I'd think of an > admin who blocked a school project on this technicality. i'll concede > that what is recommended should be well thought through, but my feeling > is that this could lead to second-best advice being given. You have some really big problems with your understanding of how Wikipedia works... First, you claim that ArbCom should be deciding our policy on role accounts and now you claim that admins should. You are completely wrong on both counts. Policy is determined by THE COMMUNITY. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] "Schoolchildren told to avoidWikipedia" - Telegraph
Thomas Dalton wrote: > 2010/1/10 geni : > >> 2010/1/10 Charles Matthews : >> >>> geni wrote: >>> Well so far everything you have described would risk getting you blocked from wikipedia. Probably the most important thing to do is to contact http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects first. >>> I don't want to pull rank on this (much), but I have been through ArbCom >>> discussions of "role accounts". There was some merit in what I was >>> suggesting, namely single account with email to someone responsible. If >>> you want, I can run some wording for the User page past ArbCom members, >>> and see if any suggested "protocols" are sensible. I would have thought >>> admins would have better things to do than close down such an account >>> for technical infractions - bad behaviour would be another matter. >>> >> Arbcom don't make policy. >> > > Precisely. The last time the community discussed role accounts the > consensus was against them. Until such time as a different community > consensus is established, that is the policy and ArbCom are obliged to > enforce it. > > Shrug. Admins are never "obliged" to enforce policy if it gives a stupid result. ArbCom are "obliged" to make some sense out of what the policy pages say, bearing in mind the good of the mission. Asking for 1500 admins to come up with a consensus position is fairly futile. Asking an Arbitrator is consulting an informed person. I know what I'd think of an admin who blocked a school project on this technicality. i'll concede that what is recommended should be well thought through, but my feeling is that this could lead to second-best advice being given. If anyone would like to point to pages on enWP that actually say the practical things teachers in a secondary school should know about this issue, rather than waffling on about how everyone one will benefit if American college students edit Wikipedia (which in my limited experience they do with a role account), be my guest. Charles Charles ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] "Schoolchildren told to avoidWikipedia" - Telegraph
2010/1/10 geni : > 2010/1/10 Charles Matthews : >> geni wrote: >>> Well so far everything you have described would risk getting you >>> blocked from wikipedia. >>> >>> Probably the most important thing to do is to contact >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects >>> first. >>> >> I don't want to pull rank on this (much), but I have been through ArbCom >> discussions of "role accounts". There was some merit in what I was >> suggesting, namely single account with email to someone responsible. If >> you want, I can run some wording for the User page past ArbCom members, >> and see if any suggested "protocols" are sensible. I would have thought >> admins would have better things to do than close down such an account >> for technical infractions - bad behaviour would be another matter. > > Arbcom don't make policy. Precisely. The last time the community discussed role accounts the consensus was against them. Until such time as a different community consensus is established, that is the policy and ArbCom are obliged to enforce it. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] "Schoolchildren told to avoidWikipedia" - Telegraph
2010/1/10 Charles Matthews : > geni wrote: >> Well so far everything you have described would risk getting you >> blocked from wikipedia. >> >> Probably the most important thing to do is to contact >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects >> first. >> > I don't want to pull rank on this (much), but I have been through ArbCom > discussions of "role accounts". There was some merit in what I was > suggesting, namely single account with email to someone responsible. If > you want, I can run some wording for the User page past ArbCom members, > and see if any suggested "protocols" are sensible. I would have thought > admins would have better things to do than close down such an account > for technical infractions - bad behaviour would be another matter. Arbcom don't make policy. Role accounts just look wrong to people who watch such things and a series of same name plus number accounts have been known to make admins paranoid. This is not an area I feel our general run of admins are very good at dealing with. For one example of things going wrong see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive574#University_of_Texas_at_Dallas_assignment > The supposed forum is [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classroom > coordination]], which doesn't appear that active. I think you should > take notice that projects involving minors (which covers most students > in secondary schools) are not necessarily in the same position as those > generally listed at [[Wikipedia:School and university projects]], which > seem almost entirely to be at college level. > > Charles > Wikipedia:School and university projects is active and at least means there is a fair chance projects can be given a once over and supported by people who understand wikipedia and such projects to at least some degree. -- geni ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] "Schoolchildren told to avoidWikipedia" - Telegraph
geni wrote: > Well so far everything you have described would risk getting you > blocked from wikipedia. > > Probably the most important thing to do is to contact > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects > first. > I don't want to pull rank on this (much), but I have been through ArbCom discussions of "role accounts". There was some merit in what I was suggesting, namely single account with email to someone responsible. If you want, I can run some wording for the User page past ArbCom members, and see if any suggested "protocols" are sensible. I would have thought admins would have better things to do than close down such an account for technical infractions - bad behaviour would be another matter. The supposed forum is [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classroom coordination]], which doesn't appear that active. I think you should take notice that projects involving minors (which covers most students in secondary schools) are not necessarily in the same position as those generally listed at [[Wikipedia:School and university projects]], which seem almost entirely to be at college level. Charles ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
