The following is an automatically-generated compilation of all talk pages for the Signpost issue dated 2024-11-06. For general Signpost discussion, see Wikipedia talk:Signpost.
You got that right "Wikipedia is the only media platform where the users set the rules, write the content, moderate it, and make ourselves open and transparent to criticism and dialogue." Get too carried away with what you are writing, and there will be other editors who either suggest a correction, or will just correct what they believe you got wrong. That said, we who live in countries where freedom of expression is accepted, tend to forget that not all of the world agrees with that idea. — Maile (talk) 05:00, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia is meant to be a sphere of information and is seen from a neutral point of view, and these countries should just accept themshelves and un-ban Wikipedia. Spongebob796 (talk) 01:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Well, they're saying they'd rather more countries block Wikipedia than WMF censor certain articles or dox editors. Nardog (talk) 10:12, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Another aspect to consider when taking pictures of notable figures is that even if they're not notable yet (for example, a band that is just starting out), taking a picture now may be useful for the future if they do become notable - I took a photo of Wigwam in 2018, when they hadn't released any music and before I'd even thought about editing Wikipedia, and now six years later they're notable and that's the only freely-licensed picture of them! Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 08:35, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
You hooked me in with beautiful pictures of nature (The Nada Lake picture genuinely reminds me of Ansel Adams' works; gorgeous!), and then you gut-punched me with the glaciers. Thank you so much for putting this together. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:16, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
The very last picture I uploaded (ten minutes ago), I did not add it to any Wikimedia project, but I am sure it is good for something, and someone will use it at some point.
Thanks. A couple of comments. First, unfortunately many pictures on Commons are crap, so even decent quality pictures are in high demand. At some point, about five-six years ago, I discovered that I just do not have any useful images available to illustrate the Russian Wikivoyage article on Roskilde, a reasonably popular tourist destination, and I had to upload mine. Second, whereas the English Wikipedia articles often do not need new pictures, there are also other Wikimedia projects (including Wikivoyage, where tons of images are needed), and external reusers. I often see that users find my files on Commons, which I uploaded but did not add to any articles on any projects, and add themselves to the projects. I also find a lot of usage of my pictures at the external sites, including Forbes, USA Today, and Britannica.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:20, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
When I took photos of Chichibugahama, considered by some to be the best sunset spot in Japan, I assumed there would already be sunset photos of it, but there weren't any. It's surprising how many things have no photos. Photos of Japan (talk) 18:50, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Photos of Japan It may be that non English speaking countries are underrepresented on Commons, but as far as I can tell we have no photos of Sunrise, Washington at sunrise either. (And it's closed until next summer, grr!) Thanks for your contributions. (t · c) buidhe 02:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Besides places there are often surprisingly few pictures of mundane objects. Even many mobile phone models lack pictures. The problem is often worse for 1980s-early 2000s period. Museum imports can include older images and camera phones started to really become more commonplace later, but the period just before Wikipedia existed is often quite bare. Even if there are some pictures there could be more about different styles etc. Do you have a box of old junk in storage? Consider taking photos of it. Similarly while the really famous places may have a glut of images, a small stream near you or a bridge, park or similar you often go past may have none. Even if there is no article about the specific subject a photo might be welcome for larger "nature of ...", "economy of ..." or similar article. MKFI (talk) 12:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Some thoughts from my experience in Paris working with a Wiki-photographer:
Photographers like taking beautiful pictures, but most of our images will be displayed at 300px max, so "decent quality" (as Ymblanter (talk) notes) is often all I require as an article writer. The effort to get beautiful images often prevents getting any at all.
Like MKFI, I am often looking for mundane objects like buses, bus stops, railways stations etc. At one point I mentioned to my photographer that I had met a blind photographer in Rio. She encountered him in Paris and took a photo of him, which I used in the article on blind photography.
I often deliberately use a different image to one that has already been used elsewhere so the readers don't keep seeing the same images if the follow the links. So multiple images of the same thing are welcome.
Once the images are up on Commons, other editors will use them. In some cases they cropped group images to produce new ones of specific individuals.
Thank you for this article: it spurred me to upload some pictures of Mungo National Park. Although that already has some quite good pictures, I figured some more freely available, such the one to the right, couldn't hurt. Cremastra (u — c) 22:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Terrific article! I would also urge everyone to take pictures of the absolutely most mundane infrastructure and dull-normal stuff in your town. Like a functioning bridge would be too fancy. Stuff like:
the post office
the school(s)
the city hall
the records office
the hospital
the library
the store
the utility company
the bus station
the boarded-up derelict building
the bike path
the park
the produce market
the fish market
the community center
the public pool
the historic-site plaque that stands in front of an empty field
the cemetery
To you it's very very boring, but we have uses for all these kinds of images and your photo may be clutch. Thank you in advance! jengod (talk) 19:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
@Jengod: You are my kind of photographer! The last major photo project I worked on was to make sure that every municipality in Pennsylvania had at least one photo. (There are about 3,000 municipalities in PA - 3 or 4 of us worked on the project over a year or 2 and got about 90% of them) Your list is almost exactly the things I'd look for. But please add in churches. In a small town this is always the perfect place to park, except on Sundays. Libraries are very good places too - you can park, take a break (water, air conditioning, etc), and upload some pix. The stores at the corner of Main St. and State St. are usually especially good, as are courthouses. I suppose I've taken a few boarded up buildings, but never thought that was what I was looking for. There's one type of photo that I'd never place anywhere on Wikipedia. I call it the New Jersey standard photo, all you need for a NJSP is to make sure the center-line of the road is in the center of the photo. I'll add a small gallery in a minute, to show what (I think) are just the kind of photos that should be somewhere on-Wiki. Thanks for your list! Smallbones(smalltalk) 17:57, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
I used to think like that too. Except copyright paranoia on Commons made me loose interest; this days more of my (old) photos are deleted (due to no FoP) than what I am uploading, net-wise :( --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:53, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Do other big websites follow freedom of panorama? Is this something we should ignore aswell? We at nccommons.org would be happy to host this material. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
@Doc James AFAIK only Wikimedia sites care about FOP. But as you likely know, we do (see c:Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle). I have talked to many people who find this very annoying and who stopped or limited contributing images to Commons because of that (myself included). Thank you for telling me about nccommons org; it would be nice if there was a system to automatically copy images from Commons there (although even that it could only work as a niche archive, as images hosted there could not be used on Wikimedia projects). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:05, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Plan to get a tool built to move images from Commons to NC Commons. AF WP has consensus to use NC Commons and we have a statement supported by legal regarding this for NC images.[1]
Will look into openly licensed images that infringe upon FOP eventually. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:20, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
I learned this the hard way. At one point, I illustrated all the public art in a U.S. city by taking photographs over a period of time, then adding them to a new WP article in a carefully annotated table. It was only after doing all that, that I learned that Freedom of Panorama over public art is not a thing in the U.S., and I had to delete almost all of the images (one water fountain designed by a notable sculptor apparently was not copyrightable for arcane reasons). Kind of a painful lesson in IP law. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:14, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
@Doc James: I did not know about nccommons.org. I may make use of it in future. Hawkeye7(discuss) 00:22, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
Yes certainly. Use your WP account to log in over there via OAuth and I will grant you privileges. The current 8.6 million media files are mostly medical but we are open to all NC and ND licensed content and would also be happy to host open material regardless of freedom of panorama.[2]Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
I know copyright reform tends to get pushed down the agenda, but it would be great to campaign for freedom of panorama in more places. It's surprisingly inconsistent between countries—even within Europe, the UK and Poland (for example) are fairly permissive but France and Italy very much are not. Which limits opportunities for photos from Wikimania 2026, though interestingly Kenya seems to have very broad FoP. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
Who is forcing us to comply with FOP? Does facebook or twitter? I doubt the requirement is coming from the WMF.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:35, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Regards, HaeB (talk) 02:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
We normally require images to be "free" in both the country of origin and the United States, but there is no FOP for artworks and sculptures in the United States! The current policy on Commons is to accept photos of artwork and sculptures that are covered by freedom of panorama in their source country. This policy may change in the future, depending new case law. Hawkeye7(discuss) 02:47, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
The interested bit HaeB is that Sweden had Freedom of Panorama... But the courts ignored the existing laws. Was thinking we should be more laid back with respect to architecture than sculptures. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:51, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
I agree that the Sweden situation seems legally complicated (that's why I wrote a court didn't accept its FOP argument above). But my point was that there are indeed mechanisms that are forcing us to comply with legal regimes - we don't want to be in a situation where WMF or local chapters continue to lose court cases and have to pay heavy fines.
That said, I will grant there are websites that are deliberately flaunting what they see as unjust copyright restrictions (e.g. shadow libraries such as Sci-hub or Anna's Archive), and that many people view this as legitimate, useful activism. I'm just not convinced that this is a role that Wikimedia organizations should take on.
Regards, HaeB (talk) 20:14, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Wikimedians have definitely advocated for FOP before, see e.g. this study from 2017:
Wikimedian communities played an instrumental part in reshaping the debate from the users’ perspective and supporting the most adequate expression to this outlook ("Freedom" rather than “exception”) to reverse the rhetoric from a permission into a positive right. No stakeholder has taken a more vocal and influential call in favour of a European freedom of panorama, which materialised through the display of a banner seen by millions of Europeans.
IIRC this was successful in some countries but not in others (and also not in case of the EU-wide copyright reform).
Regards, HaeB (talk) 01:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
I just wanted to say that this brings me joy and I wish more people would upload photos like these. You don't need to be a great photographer to upload useful photos—a smartphone is perfectly adequate, and "useful" doesn't necessarily mean that it will be immediately used in a Wikipedia article. It can be surprising where photos end up, or how a photo of something from today becomes useful in a few years' time when that thing looks completely different. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:44, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
I agree with Jengod and others that often the most mundane pictures are the ones we need the most! Since we all work in different areas, I'm curious, which types of photos do you all find missing the most often? For me, it's either buildings or BLP portraits. I find that the best opportunity for adding the latter is typically author talks/panel events/the like. Sdkbtalk 17:23, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Sdkb In terms of articles, what I found is that there are rarely photos for lesser known, but notable biographies. Events are particularly difficult, especially notable one-off events. Buildings and streets are hit or miss, there are many Commons photographers who focus on these, significant geographical features usually not a problem to find something but even then many articles have a lower quality / out of date image and some have no image (for example, Nada Lake above). Subjects outside of the Western world are much less likely to have good photos. (t · c) buidhe 03:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
That pretty much tracks, @Buidhe. I recently discovered this tool that track the pageviews of all my Commons contributions. I wish it were possible to break it down to figure out what my most popular uploads have been (Does anyone know who created/maintains it? I'd love to ping them), but I'd suspect events photos like this one (used at 2020 United States presidential election) are probably up there. Sdkbtalk 03:34, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Looks like the maintainer is @Magnus Manske, so pinging. I also hope you'll make it a little easier to identify yourself as the creator/maintainer from the tool page. Sdkbtalk 05:55, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Photos that show details of notable objects, of the kind that can help readers' understanding. Most often illustrations of noteworthy architectural aspects of buildings. Or, to take one of my favorite examples: For the San Francisco cable car system, the internet and Commons are inundated with the typical tourist snapshots of cable cars running along San Francisco streets (to the point where Commons has well-populated categories for every single individual cable car - over 50 of them). But there are much fewer images helping to explain how it actually works, i.e. what makes it unique. (About a decade ago I added some crappy phone snapshots about that which are still serving their purpose at San Francisco cable car system#Operation, but those only cover some aspects.)
Regards, HaeB (talk) 20:33, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
That's a good point, HaeB. People often don't think to capture those sorts of things. I'm surprised some of our railway enthusiasts haven't uploaded those sorts of photos to Commons but it goes to show that a quick phone snap can be more useful than you might think. But if a building is notable for its architecture (for example), we probably have reasonable photos of the facade as a whole but probably not any of the details and very rarely the inside or the back or the grounds. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:50, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
I got a real belly laugh out of that. Almost broke a rib when I realised. Keep them coming. The names, pickenplace and fairchild. scope_creepTalk 09:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
I don't get it. Smallchief (talk) 09:08, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
The Onion and The Signpost are slowly converging over time, glad you noticed. We are hoping to be covered under their health plan soon. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Turbo encabulator, more properly. "Malleiplatz" means Fools Square (at least according to LMarena). Other nuggets of verismilitude I leave as an exercise for the reader. kencf0618 (talk) 11:16, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
This one got a laugh out of me. Great work! Waylon (was) (here) 15:54, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Just noting in passing that there is another reason that some people aren't participating in public discussion of this matter: we do not want to negatively impact the safety of the editors who've been dragged into this case, or any other Wikimedian in India for that matter. It is often difficult for people who have lived their lives in the relatively open and free societies of North America and Europe to understand how risky it is for people in many other parts of the world to take the leap in participating in the dissemination of free knowledge; they never know which edit can create a real-world problem for them. It is not a hypothetical for thousands of Wikimedians from non-Western countries; in fact, the article mentioned above illustrates that it can happen in our own societies. Risker (talk) 08:48, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Looks like a direct translation of the archived revision, and a bit more. 04:39, 7 November 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertsky (talk • contribs)
That linked story says per media reports, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry claimed in its notice that a small group exercises editorial control on Wikipedia’s pages which we saw repeated in several breaking stories the day we published. I dug into it a little bit and it seems possible that it all stems from an unnamed source reported by ANI, one of the parties to the case we're reporting on, which seems a little ... well, we're going to need corroboration before deciding what to write in the next issue. If anybody can find the supposed communication from Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, please let us know either here or through the confidential tips link at WP:POST/TIPS. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:09, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
This is really interesting. Thanks Bluerasberry for the insightful writeup. Do you have any sense of what kinds of things Indian editors would like to change in the movement strategy if they could? Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 06:13, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
The problem with getting the views of Indian editors is that they are the targets of the Indian government and ANI and might be sued or worse if they live in India, so I'd suggest they not reply on-Wiki. I suppose Indians living outside India might respond, so long as they don't have property in India and don't expect to return to India for a long time. They may, of course, send their views to Signpost editors with our promise that we won't reveal names, usernames, etc. about them. IF they are comfortable that their emails can't be hacked, I'd suggest that, but that's a big IF. The final way that we could get genuine Indian opinion here is through the regular Indian press. There are a few commentators who have supported Wikipedia in this case and most of them are saying about what we're saying, with a better understanding of how the Indian legal system works. They also do a bit of "both siding" giving at least a pro forma statement of the government's side of the argument (which is pretty hard for us to do). Why can some in the Indian press give the Wikipedia side of the case? Well, they are more experienced in dealing with the government and know how far they can go. There's also a hint of an argument that I don't quite understand, that if a small newspaper libels somebody it doesn't matter because they won't be heard, but if a big information source like Wikipedia repeats what they say it's a much more serious matter. Hope that helps. Smallbones(smalltalk) 15:59, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Sorry I wasn't clear - I understand the barriers for Indian editors when it comes to the current court case. I'm wondering more about the difficult relationship which the Wikipedia community in India has had with the Wikimedia Foundation and global Wikimedia community for more than 10 years. Common complaints include lack of representation in important Wikimedia community governance committees... and a persistent sense of not being heard in important movement decisions as a result of not having representation. I'm wondering how our overall movement strategy might be different if Indian representation over the past 10(!) years had been more substantial. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 16:15, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Thanks @Clayoquot: for clarifying. You want to know about the big picture, mostly about governance. I'll divide that into 2 parts, 1) why Indians don't have a strong enough say in Wiki governance? and 2) what to do about it? (the more useful part)
I believe that India is the fifth largest source of Wikipedia readers, and that Wiki editors would be a smaller proportion than that suggests on ENwiki. It's easier to read a foreign language than write a foreign langue adequately. ENwiki has a disproportionate effect on governance simply because of its size. Thus a proportionate representation is not going to change things as much as Indians might want. That's compounded by our slow moving ways and emphasis on consensus.
What to do? Certainly more travel grants, support of local Indian groups and individual project will help, if the Indian government allows it. Bringing money into a country is more difficult than you might think, e.g. Russia and China. My suggestions might be considered a bit radical. Institutions like the BoT, a global council, Aff Com, should all have serious observer positions for under-represented groups. For example, the board might include 4 non-voting observers in the month-to-month business that they do (but that would be at most 2 Indians!). That will ensure that when Indians and other groups have the organization and voting power to put their representatives on the board, there will be somebody prepared to take advantage of it and be known to other groups. When there are non-observer elections that reserve positions for regional seats, e.g. in the 4C group, only regional voters should vote for the regional representatives. Finding a South Asian who represents South Asian views should not depend on what North American and Europeans think (as it is now). I do wonder how much time this will take to have an effect and also whether North Americans and Europeans will be offended by this "affirmative action." But ultimately training for top positions and money is what will work.
@Smallbones: you said Certainly more travel grants speaking from my involvement with Wikimania scholarships people from the region have been prioritised within the limited budgets, and make a significant percentage of the inital offers. In offer scholarship the limitation is not in the WMF or the Wikimania COT decisions it stems from the visa process which are outside our control, Singapore is one of the easiest places to get visas yet many were rejected, Europe is obviously harder for both events the WMF, COT, and a local affiliate all provide the necessary supporting documents, the WMF start providing bursaries for scholars to ensure everyone meets the "financial capacity" to look after themselves while at Wikimania. From my role on the 2021 COT restrictions on cash support directly into India, government requirements mean UG cant be directly funded all money must go through a third part with additional handling fees being paid. There are significant barriers but every effort is done to support the community financially if anything compared to other countries there is a bais towards the community. For the rest WP:BEANS.
There is no comparison between Russia, North Korea, Iran, and some other countries is that UN sanctions current prevent money flowing there, its actions by Indian Governments has caused it to erect its own barriers the Indian Government can change that any day they like.
As for the whole issue of this report, sadly knowingly how it will impact many fine people I'd rather Wikipedia be blocked than the identity of contributors be compromised. Gnangarra 07:17, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
What a bunch of twits. Wikipedia should just let itself go dark in India if the HC can't get the stick out of its ass, setting a precedent that every article related to India can be torched by the fucking idiots in our government would make this whole site pointless. AryKun (talk) 08:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
I see few voices here from the region itself, so here's my "What I would like for Indian editing" from the movement -
The best thing any Indian community can get from the greater Wikimedia movement (and any similar free organisations) is direct engagement. The dozens of communities that exist are not well connected (and there are more that should exist but do not). Nearly all of them lack resources, with several not aware of what resources they lack.
Any engagement with outside organisations, or direct interactions with skilled veterans in the movement, is going to be a strict positive to the region going forward. The communities have plenty of competent contributors. What they require, above all, is an open ended mind to hear our concerns, and a forum to speak them.
Comments like Smallbones are certainly in the right direction imo. It sometimes is impossible to compete with a Global North contributor, simply because there's just a lot more chances for "committee experience", furthering chances for higher positions. Not to mention the benefits from exposure to different communities and conferences.
Fun story, last Wikimania, one editor unilaterally started helping other South Asian community members with polishing their scholarship applications; anecdotally, that improved the number of scholarships while also teaching editors. That is the kind of resources that the community could really use, more than just straight up money in my opinion.
ignoring the irony of a company known as ani getting into legal trouble with wikipedia, what would they even get out of demanding personal info of people who made edits they didn't like that they wouldn't lose getting into this hot water or gain more from not doing stuff worth reporting in the first place? seems like a waste of time or actively shooting yourself in the foot no matter how i look at it. then again, my perspectives are generally a little crooked, so maybe getting the personal info of 3 specific people out of however many editors would be a net gain for this massive media conglomerate with more to lose than they have to gain cogsan(nag me)(stalk me) 12:18, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
@Cogsan: The answer is that they are trying to sue the three editors. If they can successfully punish the editors who added/defended the information, that would create a chilling effect which would make other users less likely to add/defend negative information in the future. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:43, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
on one hand, fair. on the other, barbra streisand should know why suppressing info is as efficient for stopping its traffic as milk is spicy. it will at best only intimidate some people into probably not making legally accountable claims maybe, with no guarantee that they actually won't. even if that worked, it would provide ample reason for people in every other part of the internet to talk about it
...is what i would say, if people in social media cared about wikipedia outside of pointing out vandalism. oh well, they win this time cogsan(nag me)(stalk me) 20:22, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Is correcting typos on Signpost articles allowed?
Double-checking if random Wiki editors A) can fix typos and B) do so post-publication. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 22:22, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Yes, that's something we've been doing for 20 years. It would be better, of course, for more copy editors to show up before publication! But please don't make substantive edits, as in changing the meaning, these all have to be approved by the editor-in-chief. Smallbones(smalltalk) 00:57, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
The content ANI has issues with
This article mentions the exact content ANI has issues with. - Ratnahastin (talk) 01:59, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
ANI has objected to following descriptions on its Wikipedia page:
The news agency has been criticized for having served as a propaganda tool for the incumbent central government, distributing materials from a vast network of fake news websites, and misreporting events"
Under a new management, ANI has been accused of practicing an aggressive model of journalism focused at maximum revenue output, where journalists were easily dispensable with. Multiple employees have accused ANI of not having any human resource management system and ill-treating their ex-employees."
In 2020, an investigation by EU DisinfoLab concluded that ANI had on multiple occasions published mostly anti-Pakistan and sometimes anti-China opinion pieces and news content, including opinion pieces falsely attributed to European politicians and other instances of disinformation, and that this material was known to have been sourced from a vast network of pro-India fake news websites run by a certain "Srivasta Group". The report noted that mainstream Indian news media regularly relies on content provided by ANI, and that ANI had on several occasions provided legitimacy and coverage to the entire "influence operation" run by the fake news network, which relied "more on ANI than on any other distribution channel" [to give it] "both credibility and a wide reach to its content". A primary aim of this fake news coverage was to "discredit Pakistan" in international forums. ANI is also believed to have played significant roles as allies of the Research and Analysis Wing, India's external intelligence agency; many of its videos depicted protests by fringe lobby groups and activists, on the aspects of human rights abuse in Pakistan."
ANI has been also accused of misreporting events, by checkers certified by the Poynter Institute's International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN). The Caravan came across several video footages from ANI, wherein logos of random television channels from Pakistan along with Urdu tickers were superimposed on news showcasing India in a positive light; their video editors have admitted to forging clips.
On 20 July 2023, ANI falsely blamed Muslims for the sexual assault and rape of two Kuki women during the 2023 Manipur violence.
ANI has said that these edits are false and misleading.
"This malicious conduct of the Defendants ex-facie establishes their ulterior motives of defaming Plaintiff by publishing false and misleading content against Plaintiff," it has argued
I posted this because this signpost issue appears to be doing a guesswork of what ANI finds defamatory. - Ratnahastin (talk) 03:16, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
A typo?
"Wikimedia editors in India are particular stakeholders of this whole situation."
Shouldn't that first word be "Wikipedia"? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 00:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
There are other projects that may be impacted, like Wikinews. – robertsky (talk) 03:10, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
State Censorship
So what I get from this is that Indias Gov is hellbend on cencorsing anything that feels 'bad' for them. There are some striking similarities to the censorship[DE] during the Third Reich, or more recently the GDR. Every 'bad' Goverment tries to controll it's Media. History seems to repeat itself. --Adtonko (talk) 12:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Yip. Totally agree. Thats exactly it. They wants to control the media so they can shape the narrative around the Hindi nationalism schtick and anything doesn't fit that narrative or damages the machine is a target. They are ruthless. scope_creepTalk 12:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
And sadly nothing that can be done about it. Well there is a way, but we don't need another war Adtonko (talk) 11:50, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Hey, I finally (quasi) made it onto a Signpost! :) EF5 17:58, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
@EF5: - You sound like a wild and quasi guy. Please let us know which article you are referring to! Smallbones(smalltalk) 18:43, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
@Smallbones: The CBDTaF deletion discussion was initiated by me (albeit under a different username). It isn’t the prettiest of AfDs, but oh well. EF5 18:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
@EF5: - Ah, so you're responsible for that mess! If you're lucky, you might get the record for longest AFD. But I think it might be snow closed as no consensus. As I just looked at it, I was thinking I might !vote keep, because of all the reliable sources mentioned, but then I'd really have to read the article to make a final decision and figured "naw". They actually seem pretty well behaved for such a contentious AFD. Pleasure to make your acquaintance. Smallbones(smalltalk) 19:58, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
It's most likely going to be closed as "no consensus", I'm just sad I didn't get that million billion dollars from Elon (kidding, of course). It's my pleasure as well. :) EF5 20:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
For folks wondering about the outcome of the Portland mayoral election, the Oregonian called it (based on an incomplete vote tally and a new ranked voting system), for Keith Wilson 1st, Carmen Rubio 2nd, and Rene Gonzalez 3rd. Gonzalez early on had been the leading candidate. The likely cause for his loss was simply that he was too far to the right of Portland voters and that an organized "Don't rank Gonzalez" movement ran a tough campaign directly against him. Did the paid editing scandal have anything to do with his loss? Perhaps a bit, but he also had a couple other communication problems that together might have been more important (IMHO). Smallbones(smalltalk) 03:43, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
For the Australian place name, I'm very confused about the PDF. Page 2 says the work is licensed under CC-BY 4.0 and CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0. So which one is it? OhanaUnitedTalk page 04:28, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
Good catch - I can confirm that p.2 of the report lists the 2 different CC licenses. I'm looking into it further. Smallbones(smalltalk) 03:25, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
I've contacted the right people and am confident that the apparent contradiction will soon be corrected. Which license? I'm not sure yet. Jonatan Svensson Glad's comment is interesting though. It might not apply to CC licenses, but it might. In which case, it might seem that reusers would always pick the least restrictive CC-BY, but what if they chose CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0? It would seem to me that the next set of resusers would have to use CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0, if only because they didn't know that a CC-BY copy existed. The only thing I can see in the CC's explanation is that you can't impose additional restrictions, so it would matter which license applied first. In this case ... No, that's just too big a can of worms for me. I'll say that the least restrictive (CC-BY) must apply. Unless the author then released a copy CC-0, ... Smallbones(smalltalk) 16:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
As a Commons admin, I can sy it is not unusual. You may also license the same content different licenses on different sites - such as cc-by on Commons, but CC-BY-NC-ND on e.g. Flickr, but "All rights reserved" on their own website. There's nothing wrong with that. Ans as you say, he next set of resusers would have to use CC-BY-NC-ND unless they find the more free license option. Even on Commons some file may be licensed with both a "free" cc-by license, but also a nc-nd license as well (we even have some templates to support that). Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 14:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
@Josve05a: I've quickly looked around on Commons and couldn't find anything. Could you post a link here? Smallbones(smalltalk) 15:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
To clarify with a simpler example, take a look at c:Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0 on Commons, where reusers can choose any version of cc-by-sa they prefer. Similarly, File:US-power-strip-rotated.jpg is licensed under both cc-by-sa 3.0 and cc-by-nc-sa 2.0. Although we could remove the “non-free” license, due the share-alike requirement (-sa-) the secondary license (albeit more restrictive) makes it possible for reusers to work with the more restrictive license if they want to incorporate the media into a project that won’t be as freely licensed. It’s about flexibility for reusers while still respecting the licensing terms. However, the PDF above I believe might wither be a mistake or they meant to attribute the licenses to different part (such as the text being ccc-by, while the design or media might be -nc-nd or something. But since they have published this, their original intend do not matter as much...) Also, they are also using images from Adobestock, which are not freely licensed, so the licenses do not apply to those images making it even more complicated to determined what is freely licensed and what is not. Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 20:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
"The WMF has consulted with fellow traveler human rights and freedom of expression groups"—"fellow traveler" doesn't mean what Wales thinks it means. -- llywrch (talk) 08:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Jimbo Wales comment seems rational and is an important piece of information to understand this fiasco. Jason Quinn (talk) 13:51, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
Journalism is "the production and distribution of reports on the interaction of events, facts, ideas, and people that are the 'news of the day'". Although we do not carry out original research, we do qualify as journalists under that definition. And I have official accreditation from international sporting bodies to support that claim. Hawkeye7(discuss) 22:03, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
I just did exactly that, before reading your comment, for exactly the same reason 😅 — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 23:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
This is a really helpful summary of an issue I hadn't made the time to get my head round. Thank you. — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 23:13, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
Administrators do not have access at all due to the black lock A clarification is required here. (Not sure how I missed this in the drafting state, but oh well.) Administrators do not have access at all as the revisions are oversighted, not just being black locked. – robertsky (talk) 09:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
On "all you need to know is archive.is/ and a five letter code.", you can also just search the article url in "I want to search the archive for saved snapshots". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk • contribs) 19:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
It's ironical 😉 that the Wayback Machine managed not to crawl the Asian News ... vs. article until after it was taken down; archive.org contains only multiple snapshots of the page in its blacklocked state. ...Could be a perfect storm of coincidental timing, too, since the article's still-live-and-interesting state happened to coincide with the Internet Archive's own recent outage and service degradation. (They got pwned on 2024-10-08, and are still operating in a slightly-degraded capacity even now, though most services related to the Wayback Machine were back up and running by 2024-10-21. Still, the first capture of the article['s blacklock notice] occurred on 2024-11-04.) FeRDNYC (talk) 22:11, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
I read the deleted blacklocked page and it seems more like an defence outside court than a normal wikipidea article, I mean why was Judge mentioned by name so many time and at one place written "Chawla complied", you just making your case look worse by such actions. Imo wikimedia can get through this legal hurdle much more formally than people on wikipidea have any idea of. `~ᴀɴᴋʀᴀᴊ ɢɪʀɪ🎇✨( C • Talk ) 11:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Am I the only one who has trouble parsing this sentence? " . . . a reader should then wonder why the court feels that it is problematic for Wikipedia editors to summarize and that journalism, when the information in Wikipedia originates from external journalism." Ought there be another verb somewhere near "that journalism"? Jim.henderson (talk) 16:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
_-_11.jpg)
Barn built 1877, just south of East Berlin, PA
Gazebo in Allensville, Menno Township, Mifflin County, Pennsylvania. I think the steeple of the church across the street was repurposed
Crouse Pavilion in Littlestown, PA
Amish-area Municipal Building parking lot
Strange object in Juniata Terrace, Pennsylvania
.png){kind=link}
