[Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
79 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

jmh649
I have a fairly good understanding of copyright. Deal with a fair bit of
copyright issues occurring via paid editing and flicker washing of images
and would be happy to do admin work around that if the Commons community
was interested.

James

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:00 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Wikimedia project communities in general seem to be quite stagnant, if not
> declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole
> different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it is
> now when I joined in 2009. I always found it a very pleasant place, but
> overtime I understood I was the exception there, and most people had bad
> experiences. And it is as Yann has shown there, it's a few sysops running
> the entire show almost alone, not because they want that, but because
> nobody else helps with that.
>
> IMO the problem is not with the existing sysops, but because people in
> general do not feel attracted to copyright and other similar minucious
> stuff which marks everyday life in Commons. And, without that knowledge it
> is pointless, if not counterproductive, to place a candidacy to sysop. No
> idea what the solution could be, but it certainly is not blaming Commons
> and the existing sysops. If more people was interested in copyright, less
> mistakes would be happening in Commons as well. Whatever the solution is,
> it probably passes by that.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
> Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia segunda,
> 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
>
> > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And
> > maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>



--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Paulo Santos Perneta
In reply to this post by Peter Southwood
In my view it has not that much to do with AGF. In general people at
Commons do assume good faith, or at least they should. But when an user
uploads a mix of own work with copyvios, or a GLAM shows a complete lack of
understanding on copyright laws (by uploading modern art, for instance,
claiming that they own the paintings, so the copyright is theirs), in those
situations, use of the AGF principle is not possible, and the Precautionary
Principle enters the scene. In those situations it is common that the baby
gets thrown out with the bath water, which, IMO, is understandable and
expectable. In any case, whatever gets wrongly deleted in those situations
can be recovered afterwards.

Best,
Paulo

Peter Southwood <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia segunda,
13/05/2019 à(s) 08:03:

> The precautionary principle is labelled as an official policy of Commons.
> I think it should be mentioned on the assume good faith page as it explains
> why it is sometimes impractical to assume good faith to the extent of
> allowing  content to remain. If not mentioned, it can lead to severe
> disappointment and surprise. It should be made very clear to anyone who
> uploads that this policy may be applied, and why it is necessary. It would
> also be useful to explain what to do if it is applied where it should not
> be applied, whether from lack of evidence or for any other reason, and how
> to avoid the problem.
> It might even be advisable to state this policy clearly in the upload
> wizard. When people have been reasonably warned, they are less likely to be
> offended.
> Cheers,
> Peter Southwood
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:[hidden email]] On
> Behalf Of Yann Forget
> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 6:10 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
>
> This was reverted. It is a dishonest edit with a misleading summary.
>
> Regards,
> Yann
> Jai Jagat 2020 Grand March Coordinator
> https://www.jaijagat2020.org/
> +91-74 34 93 33 58 (also WhatsApp)
>
>
>
> Le dim. 12 mai 2019 à 19:59, Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> > This episode exposes a policy of Commons that may be unknown to many
> folks
> > - the precautionary principle.
> >
> > It is an explicit exception to assuming good faith, so I noted this on
> the
> > AGF page on Commons.
> >
> >
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Assume_good_faith&oldid=prev&diff=349650525
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 10:23 AM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > As I am the author of the post, some remarks:
> > >
> > >   *   Commons is, indeed, the only [cloud] storage for file in most of
> > the
> > > Wikipedias. Making an accusation of using Commons as a storage place is
> > > unfair and nonsense.
> > >   *   Communication could be better, of course, but we don't have to
> > think
> > > on experienced editors and wikimedians, but on people we are trying to
> > > convince to upload to the Commons and find this burden. They don't know
> > how
> > > to communicate and why they must do it.
> > >   *   The upload system allow you to upload something if you are the
> > > author. Period.
> > >   *   Claiming that something is a derivative work without saying which
> > is
> > > the original work is not a good practice.
> > >   *   Of course, commons volunteers are few, and they have a great
> > > job-queue. But outreach volunteers are less, and a project like this
> can
> > > take a whole year of volunteer work.
> > >   *   After all the victim-blaming seen on this discussion no one was
> > able
> > > to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone.
> > >
> > > Let's hope we can follow with this project next year and we will have
> > less
> > > problems.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > > Galder
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Wikimedia-l <[hidden email]> on behalf
> of
> > > Vi to <[hidden email]>
> > > Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 3:35 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
> > >
> > > I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to delete/undelete images
> > on
> > > commons in order to reduce workload. Most risky commons' uploads come
> > from
> > > cw-upload, allow local sysops to handle them could work.
> > >
> > > Vito
> > >
> > > Il giorno dom 12 mag 2019 alle ore 15:31 James Heilman <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > ha scritto:
> > >
> > > > It is hard to get the admin bit there aswell. Is Commons interested
> in
> > > > having more admins?
> > > >
> > > > James
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 5:41 AM Fæ <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for
> > > > > access to the Google image matching API access so we could run a
> > > > > copyvio bot on the live new uploads list. Such a bot would not be
> > > > > terribly hard to get working, and would be a great experiment to
> see
> > > > > if this aspect of the more boring side of sysop tools could be
> > > > > reduced.[1]
> > > > >
> > > > > Not specifically advocating auto-deletion, but daily housekeeping
> > > > > image matches to highly likely copyrighted categories would make
> mass
> > > > > housekeeping very easy.
> > > > >
> > > > > A separate old chestnut was my proposal to introduce systemic image
> > > > > hashes, which neatly show "close" image matches.[2] With a Commons
> > hat
> > > > > on, such a project would be of far more immediate pragmatic use
> than
> > > > > mobile-related and structured data-related projects that seem to
> suck
> > > > > up all the oxygen and volunteer time available.
> > > > >
> > > > > Note that the history of these project/funding ideas is so long,
> that
> > > > > several of the most experienced long term volunteers that were
> > > > > originally interested have since retired. Without some positive
> short
> > > > > term encouragement, not only do these ideas never reach the useful
> > > > > experiment stage, but the volunteers involved simply fade away.
> > > > >
> > > > > Links
> > > > > 1.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2016/02#Google_has_opened_an_API_for_image_recognition
> > > > > 2. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae/Imagehash
> > > > >
> > > > > Fae
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 12 May 2019 at 12:21, Amir Sarabadani <[hidden email]
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IMO commons need either a Clue Bot NG for new uploads or ores
> > support
> > > > for
> > > > > > images that might be copyright violation, or both.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:10 PM Yaroslav Blanter <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Just the active community itself is too small, compared with
> the
> > > > > amount of
> > > > > > > material it has to deal with.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > > Yaroslav
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta <
> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Is the shortage of admins due to a lack of people willing or
> > > > capable
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > the job, or increasing difficulty in obtaining the bit?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On May 12, 2019, at 3:55 AM, Tomasz Ganicz <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Well, Actually, at the moment it looks they are all
> > undeleted.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The good habit - which I was keeping when organizing
> several
> > > > > > > GLAM-related
> > > > > > > > > mass uploads - was to create on Commons project page
> > describing
> > > > > what it
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > intended to be uploaded, preferably in English. Then you
> can
> > > > > create a
> > > > > > > > > project template to mark all uploads with them.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > See:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Partnerships
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Despite practical issue of avoiding unnecessary clashes
> with
> > > > > Common's
> > > > > > > > > admins - creating template and project page helps to
> promote
> > > you
> > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > across Wikimedia communities and may inspire others to do
> > > > something
> > > > > > > > similar.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Commons is indeed quite hostile environment for uploaders,
> > but
> > > on
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > other
> > > > > > > > > hand it is constantly flooded by hundreds  of copyright
> > > violating
> > > > > > > files a
> > > > > > > > > day:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > See the list from just one day:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2019/05/01
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > so this hostility works both ways - Common's admins have to
> > > cope
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > aggressive hostile copyright violators every day, and after
> > > some
> > > > > time -
> > > > > > > > > decide to leave or became being hostile themselves... and
> the
> > > > other
> > > > > > > issue
> > > > > > > > > is decreasing number of active admins and OTRS agents.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think - sooner or later - all this system - uploads -
> > > screening
> > > > > > > uploads
> > > > > > > > > by admins, and OTRS agreements - needs deep rethinking.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > niedz., 12 maj 2019 o 10:48 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > > > > > > > > [hidden email]> napisał(a):
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> Hello all,
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> There seems to be a dispute between the Outreach and the
> > > Commons
> > > > > > > > components
> > > > > > > > >> of The Community, judging by the article "Wikimedia
> > Commons: a
> > > > > highly
> > > > > > > > >> hostile place for multimedia students contributions" at
> the
> > > > > Education
> > > > > > > > >> Newsletter
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/News/April_2019/Wikimedia_Commons:_a_highly_hostile_place_for_multimedia_students_contributions
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> As far as I can understand it, some students on an
> Outreach
> > > > > project
> > > > > > > > >> uploaded some rather well-made video material, and comeone
> > on
> > > > > Commons
> > > > > > > > >> deleted them because they appeared to well-made to be
> > student
> > > > > projects
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >> so concluded they were copyright violations.  But some
> > rather
> > > > odd
> > > > > > > > remarks
> > > > > > > > >> were made "Commons has to fight the endless stream of
> > uploaded
> > > > > > > > copyrighted
> > > > > > > > >> content on behalf of a headquarters in San Francisco that
> > > > doesn't
> > > > > > > care."
> > > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > > >> "you have regarded Commons as little more than free cloud
> > > > storage
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > >> images you intend to use on Wikipedia ".
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Perhaps the Foundation needs to resolve this dispute?
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Thrapostibongles
> > > > > > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > >> 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > >> Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > ,
> > > > > > > > >> <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > > > > > > > > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > > > > > > > > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Amir (he/him)
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > James Heilman
> > > > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > --
> > -Andrew Lih
> > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> > University, Columbia University, USC
> > ---
> > Email: [hidden email]
> > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Paulo Santos Perneta
In reply to this post by jmh649
As a Commoner, I can tell we certainly are, James, please apply here:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators

Even if your sysop actions are rather occasional or seasonal, or focused on
a certain topic, like mine, all help is very much welcomed there.

Best,
Paulo

James Heilman <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia segunda, 13/05/2019 à(s)
11:02:

> I have a fairly good understanding of copyright. Deal with a fair bit of
> copyright issues occurring via paid editing and flicker washing of images
> and would be happy to do admin work around that if the Commons community
> was interested.
>
> James
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:00 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Wikimedia project communities in general seem to be quite stagnant, if
> not
> > declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole
> > different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it is
> > now when I joined in 2009. I always found it a very pleasant place, but
> > overtime I understood I was the exception there, and most people had bad
> > experiences. And it is as Yann has shown there, it's a few sysops running
> > the entire show almost alone, not because they want that, but because
> > nobody else helps with that.
> >
> > IMO the problem is not with the existing sysops, but because people in
> > general do not feel attracted to copyright and other similar minucious
> > stuff which marks everyday life in Commons. And, without that knowledge
> it
> > is pointless, if not counterproductive, to place a candidacy to sysop. No
> > idea what the solution could be, but it certainly is not blaming Commons
> > and the existing sysops. If more people was interested in copyright, less
> > mistakes would be happening in Commons as well. Whatever the solution is,
> > it probably passes by that.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia
> segunda,
> > 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
> >
> > > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And
> > > maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed
> 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Kiril Simeonovski
In reply to this post by Paulo Santos Perneta
Hi all,

I think that Tomasz and Paulo have made two excellent points. Firstly,
Wikimedia Commons is a project on its own with a community that deserves
full respect and not just a storage of files that acts as a cloud service
to Wikipedia. Secondly, there is evident stagnation and even decline in the
on-wiki communities on the account of the expansion of the off-wiki
activities.

The problem here that almost all have pointed out is the enormous increase
of content compared to the fairly stagnant community growth. My impression
is that this is being allowed by the affiliates themselves when reaching
out to new partners and massively adding content with unchecked licencing
without caring much about the size of the on-wiki community that has to
deal with it. So, an ideal scenario would be to see affiliates not only
delivering new content but also contributing to community growth. As things
stand, the content growth at the current rates will make things impossible
to maintain by human hand, thus inviting the development of highly
sophisticated technology that needs to be integrated at a very high price.

In sum, the solution is either the development of new technology or
instructing the affiliates to grow the community while engaging in
collaborations that result in mass uploads.

Best,
Kiril

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 12:00 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Wikimedia project communities in general seem to be quite stagnant, if not
> declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole
> different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it is
> now when I joined in 2009. I always found it a very pleasant place, but
> overtime I understood I was the exception there, and most people had bad
> experiences. And it is as Yann has shown there, it's a few sysops running
> the entire show almost alone, not because they want that, but because
> nobody else helps with that.
>
> IMO the problem is not with the existing sysops, but because people in
> general do not feel attracted to copyright and other similar minucious
> stuff which marks everyday life in Commons. And, without that knowledge it
> is pointless, if not counterproductive, to place a candidacy to sysop. No
> idea what the solution could be, but it certainly is not blaming Commons
> and the existing sysops. If more people was interested in copyright, less
> mistakes would be happening in Commons as well. Whatever the solution is,
> it probably passes by that.
>
> Best,
> Paulo
>
> Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia segunda,
> 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
>
> > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And
> > maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

John Erling Blad
In reply to this post by Fæ
I have proposed use of local sensitive hashing algorithms for at least
three different purposes in the past. All being turned down. Probably
it is due to LSHs being difficult to understand, and not to forget it
is a fairly bit of fighting over what is and whats not a "real" LSH.
In the past there have been a proposal to remove the SHA-1 digest for
the revision, which I guess shows how hard it is to argue about the
necessity of hashes.

If we want to do LSH for media, then we should probably check which
DCT gives best performance. In particular we should check out whether
there are methods that gives smaller footprints and faster calculation
and comparison. Media streams can also be fingerprinted by using clip
points. Also, as DCT is closely related to Fourier transforms (it is a
real component Fourier transform), it could also be interesting to
checking out cepstrum based transforms.

Related to this is also face recognition, but then we must discuss
various methods for generating eigenfaces. Not sure if this is the
proper forum for that!

On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:41 PM Fæ <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for
> access to the Google image matching API access so we could run a
> copyvio bot on the live new uploads list. Such a bot would not be
> terribly hard to get working, and would be a great experiment to see
> if this aspect of the more boring side of sysop tools could be
> reduced.[1]
>
> Not specifically advocating auto-deletion, but daily housekeeping
> image matches to highly likely copyrighted categories would make mass
> housekeeping very easy.
>
> A separate old chestnut was my proposal to introduce systemic image
> hashes, which neatly show "close" image matches.[2] With a Commons hat
> on, such a project would be of far more immediate pragmatic use than
> mobile-related and structured data-related projects that seem to suck
> up all the oxygen and volunteer time available.
>
> Note that the history of these project/funding ideas is so long, that
> several of the most experienced long term volunteers that were
> originally interested have since retired. Without some positive short
> term encouragement, not only do these ideas never reach the useful
> experiment stage, but the volunteers involved simply fade away.
>
> Links
> 1. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2016/02#Google_has_opened_an_API_for_image_recognition
> 2. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae/Imagehash
>
> Fae
>
> On Sun, 12 May 2019 at 12:21, Amir Sarabadani <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > IMO commons need either a Clue Bot NG for new uploads or ores support for
> > images that might be copyright violation, or both.
> >
> > Best
> >
> > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:10 PM Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Just the active community itself is too small, compared with the amount of
> > > material it has to deal with.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Yaroslav
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Is the shortage of admins due to a lack of people willing or capable to
> > > do
> > > > the job, or increasing difficulty in obtaining the bit?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On May 12, 2019, at 3:55 AM, Tomasz Ganicz <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Well, Actually, at the moment it looks they are all undeleted.
> > > > >
> > > > > The good habit - which I was keeping when organizing several
> > > GLAM-related
> > > > > mass uploads - was to create on Commons project page describing what it
> > > > is
> > > > > intended to be uploaded, preferably in English. Then you can create a
> > > > > project template to mark all uploads with them.
> > > > >
> > > > > See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Partnerships
> > > > >
> > > > > Despite practical issue of avoiding unnecessary clashes with Common's
> > > > > admins - creating template and project page helps to promote you
> > > project
> > > > > across Wikimedia communities and may inspire others to do something
> > > > similar.
> > > > >
> > > > > Commons is indeed quite hostile environment for uploaders, but on the
> > > > other
> > > > > hand it is constantly flooded by hundreds  of copyright violating
> > > files a
> > > > > day:
> > > > >
> > > > > See the list from just one day:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2019/05/01
> > > > >
> > > > > so this hostility works both ways - Common's admins have to cope with
> > > > > aggressive hostile copyright violators every day, and after some time -
> > > > > decide to leave or became being hostile themselves... and the other
> > > issue
> > > > > is decreasing number of active admins and OTRS agents.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think - sooner or later - all this system - uploads - screening
> > > uploads
> > > > > by admins, and OTRS agreements - needs deep rethinking.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > niedz., 12 maj 2019 o 10:48 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > > > > [hidden email]> napisał(a):
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hello all,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There seems to be a dispute between the Outreach and the Commons
> > > > components
> > > > >> of The Community, judging by the article "Wikimedia Commons: a highly
> > > > >> hostile place for multimedia students contributions" at the Education
> > > > >> Newsletter
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/News/April_2019/Wikimedia_Commons:_a_highly_hostile_place_for_multimedia_students_contributions
> > > > >>
> > > > >> As far as I can understand it, some students on an Outreach project
> > > > >> uploaded some rather well-made video material, and comeone on Commons
> > > > >> deleted them because they appeared to well-made to be student projects
> > > > and
> > > > >> so concluded they were copyright violations.  But some rather odd
> > > > remarks
> > > > >> were made "Commons has to fight the endless stream of uploaded
> > > > copyrighted
> > > > >> content on behalf of a headquarters in San Francisco that doesn't
> > > care."
> > > > >> and
> > > > >> "you have regarded Commons as little more than free cloud storage for
> > > > >> images you intend to use on Wikipedia ".
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Perhaps the Foundation needs to resolve this dispute?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thrapostibongles
> > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > >> 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: [hidden email]
> > > > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > ,
> > > > >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > > > > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > > > > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Amir (he/him)
> > _______________________________________________
> [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

John Erling Blad
In reply to this post by Amir Sarabadani-2
I can imagine a bot comparing photos found by Google (ie. comparing
hashes) but not a system extracting some kind of unique feature that
says an image is a copyright violation. So how do you imagine ORES
being used for copyright violations? I can't see how a copyright
violation would have any kind of feature that is exclusive? The
argument is quite simple; I as a photographer for a newspaper could
take the exact same pictures as I as an amateur photographer. (I have
photographed a lot for various newspapers.) Using the same equipment,
and me being me, what is different?

On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:21 PM Amir Sarabadani <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> IMO commons need either a Clue Bot NG for new uploads or ores support for
> images that might be copyright violation, or both.
>
> Best
>
> On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:10 PM Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Just the active community itself is too small, compared with the amount of
> > material it has to deal with.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Yaroslav
> >
> > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Is the shortage of admins due to a lack of people willing or capable to
> > do
> > > the job, or increasing difficulty in obtaining the bit?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On May 12, 2019, at 3:55 AM, Tomasz Ganicz <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Well, Actually, at the moment it looks they are all undeleted.
> > > >
> > > > The good habit - which I was keeping when organizing several
> > GLAM-related
> > > > mass uploads - was to create on Commons project page describing what it
> > > is
> > > > intended to be uploaded, preferably in English. Then you can create a
> > > > project template to mark all uploads with them.
> > > >
> > > > See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Partnerships
> > > >
> > > > Despite practical issue of avoiding unnecessary clashes with Common's
> > > > admins - creating template and project page helps to promote you
> > project
> > > > across Wikimedia communities and may inspire others to do something
> > > similar.
> > > >
> > > > Commons is indeed quite hostile environment for uploaders, but on the
> > > other
> > > > hand it is constantly flooded by hundreds  of copyright violating
> > files a
> > > > day:
> > > >
> > > > See the list from just one day:
> > > >
> > > >
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2019/05/01
> > > >
> > > > so this hostility works both ways - Common's admins have to cope with
> > > > aggressive hostile copyright violators every day, and after some time -
> > > > decide to leave or became being hostile themselves... and the other
> > issue
> > > > is decreasing number of active admins and OTRS agents.
> > > >
> > > > I think - sooner or later - all this system - uploads - screening
> > uploads
> > > > by admins, and OTRS agreements - needs deep rethinking.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > niedz., 12 maj 2019 o 10:48 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > > > [hidden email]> napisał(a):
> > > >
> > > >> Hello all,
> > > >>
> > > >> There seems to be a dispute between the Outreach and the Commons
> > > components
> > > >> of The Community, judging by the article "Wikimedia Commons: a highly
> > > >> hostile place for multimedia students contributions" at the Education
> > > >> Newsletter
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/News/April_2019/Wikimedia_Commons:_a_highly_hostile_place_for_multimedia_students_contributions
> > > >>
> > > >> As far as I can understand it, some students on an Outreach project
> > > >> uploaded some rather well-made video material, and comeone on Commons
> > > >> deleted them because they appeared to well-made to be student projects
> > > and
> > > >> so concluded they were copyright violations.  But some rather odd
> > > remarks
> > > >> were made "Commons has to fight the endless stream of uploaded
> > > copyrighted
> > > >> content on behalf of a headquarters in San Francisco that doesn't
> > care."
> > > >> and
> > > >> "you have regarded Commons as little more than free cloud storage for
> > > >> images you intend to use on Wikipedia ".
> > > >>
> > > >> Perhaps the Foundation needs to resolve this dispute?
> > > >>
> > > >> Thrapostibongles
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> 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: [hidden email]
> > > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > ,
> > > >> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > > > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > > > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> Amir (he/him)
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

John Erling Blad
In reply to this post by Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
This is wrong: "The upload system allow you to upload something if you
are the author. Period."

The system as it is now will allow anyone to upload a file given (s)he
has the necessary rights. That does not imply the uploader being the
author of the material.

Note that verifying whether the uploaded material already exist out on
the web must be done before the file is made public, otherwise any
attempt on detecting a copyviolation will fail. That would imply that
a copyvio algorithm must be automated. The questionable material could
still be uploaded, but then a permission should be forwarded to OTRS.
Also, a report from the copyvio algorithm should be stored with the
uploaded material, as it is impossible to retrace the detection after
the material is made public.

On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 4:23 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> As I am the author of the post, some remarks:
>
>   *   Commons is, indeed, the only [cloud] storage for file in most of the Wikipedias. Making an accusation of using Commons as a storage place is unfair and nonsense.
>   *   Communication could be better, of course, but we don't have to think on experienced editors and wikimedians, but on people we are trying to convince to upload to the Commons and find this burden. They don't know how to communicate and why they must do it.
>   *   The upload system allow you to upload something if you are the author. Period.
>   *   Claiming that something is a derivative work without saying which is the original work is not a good practice.
>   *   Of course, commons volunteers are few, and they have a great job-queue. But outreach volunteers are less, and a project like this can take a whole year of volunteer work.
>   *   After all the victim-blaming seen on this discussion no one was able to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone.
>
> Let's hope we can follow with this project next year and we will have less problems.
>
> Cheers
>
> Galder
> ________________________________
> From: Wikimedia-l <[hidden email]> on behalf of Vi to <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 3:35 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
>
> I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to delete/undelete images on
> commons in order to reduce workload. Most risky commons' uploads come from
> cw-upload, allow local sysops to handle them could work.
>
> Vito
>
> Il giorno dom 12 mag 2019 alle ore 15:31 James Heilman <[hidden email]>
> ha scritto:
>
> > It is hard to get the admin bit there aswell. Is Commons interested in
> > having more admins?
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 5:41 AM Fæ <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for
> > > access to the Google image matching API access so we could run a
> > > copyvio bot on the live new uploads list. Such a bot would not be
> > > terribly hard to get working, and would be a great experiment to see
> > > if this aspect of the more boring side of sysop tools could be
> > > reduced.[1]
> > >
> > > Not specifically advocating auto-deletion, but daily housekeeping
> > > image matches to highly likely copyrighted categories would make mass
> > > housekeeping very easy.
> > >
> > > A separate old chestnut was my proposal to introduce systemic image
> > > hashes, which neatly show "close" image matches.[2] With a Commons hat
> > > on, such a project would be of far more immediate pragmatic use than
> > > mobile-related and structured data-related projects that seem to suck
> > > up all the oxygen and volunteer time available.
> > >
> > > Note that the history of these project/funding ideas is so long, that
> > > several of the most experienced long term volunteers that were
> > > originally interested have since retired. Without some positive short
> > > term encouragement, not only do these ideas never reach the useful
> > > experiment stage, but the volunteers involved simply fade away.
> > >
> > > Links
> > > 1.
> > >
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2016/02#Google_has_opened_an_API_for_image_recognition
> > > 2. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae/Imagehash
> > >
> > > Fae
> > >
> > > On Sun, 12 May 2019 at 12:21, Amir Sarabadani <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > IMO commons need either a Clue Bot NG for new uploads or ores support
> > for
> > > > images that might be copyright violation, or both.
> > > >
> > > > Best
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:10 PM Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Just the active community itself is too small, compared with the
> > > amount of
> > > > > material it has to deal with.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > > Yaroslav
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is the shortage of admins due to a lack of people willing or
> > capable
> > > to
> > > > > do
> > > > > > the job, or increasing difficulty in obtaining the bit?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On May 12, 2019, at 3:55 AM, Tomasz Ganicz <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Well, Actually, at the moment it looks they are all undeleted.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The good habit - which I was keeping when organizing several
> > > > > GLAM-related
> > > > > > > mass uploads - was to create on Commons project page describing
> > > what it
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > intended to be uploaded, preferably in English. Then you can
> > > create a
> > > > > > > project template to mark all uploads with them.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Partnerships
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Despite practical issue of avoiding unnecessary clashes with
> > > Common's
> > > > > > > admins - creating template and project page helps to promote you
> > > > > project
> > > > > > > across Wikimedia communities and may inspire others to do
> > something
> > > > > > similar.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Commons is indeed quite hostile environment for uploaders, but on
> > > the
> > > > > > other
> > > > > > > hand it is constantly flooded by hundreds  of copyright violating
> > > > > files a
> > > > > > > day:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > See the list from just one day:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2019/05/01
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > so this hostility works both ways - Common's admins have to cope
> > > with
> > > > > > > aggressive hostile copyright violators every day, and after some
> > > time -
> > > > > > > decide to leave or became being hostile themselves... and the
> > other
> > > > > issue
> > > > > > > is decreasing number of active admins and OTRS agents.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think - sooner or later - all this system - uploads - screening
> > > > > uploads
> > > > > > > by admins, and OTRS agreements - needs deep rethinking.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > niedz., 12 maj 2019 o 10:48 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > > > > > > [hidden email]> napisał(a):
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Hello all,
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> There seems to be a dispute between the Outreach and the Commons
> > > > > > components
> > > > > > >> of The Community, judging by the article "Wikimedia Commons: a
> > > highly
> > > > > > >> hostile place for multimedia students contributions" at the
> > > Education
> > > > > > >> Newsletter
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/News/April_2019/Wikimedia_Commons:_a_highly_hostile_place_for_multimedia_students_contributions
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> As far as I can understand it, some students on an Outreach
> > > project
> > > > > > >> uploaded some rather well-made video material, and comeone on
> > > Commons
> > > > > > >> deleted them because they appeared to well-made to be student
> > > projects
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > >> so concluded they were copyright violations.  But some rather
> > odd
> > > > > > remarks
> > > > > > >> were made "Commons has to fight the endless stream of uploaded
> > > > > > copyrighted
> > > > > > >> content on behalf of a headquarters in San Francisco that
> > doesn't
> > > > > care."
> > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> "you have regarded Commons as little more than free cloud
> > storage
> > > for
> > > > > > >> images you intend to use on Wikipedia ".
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Perhaps the Foundation needs to resolve this dispute?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Thrapostibongles
> > > > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > > > >> 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > > > ,
> > > > > > >> <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > > > > > > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > > > > > > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Amir (he/him)
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > James Heilman
> > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

John Erling Blad
In reply to this post by Yann Forget-3
<mumbles>Trying to explain European copyright to Americans can be
quite hard… </mumbles>

;)

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:07 AM Yann Forget <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hi James,
>
> Of course. More admins would lesser the work charge, and it would be great.
> We specially appreciate admins with multi-language capabilities, as it is a
> multilangual project.
> Of course, comprehensive knowledge of copyright is needed.
> That is complex, but it can be learnt.
>
> Regards,
> Yann
> Jai Jagat 2020 Grand March Coordinator
> https://www.jaijagat2020.org/
> +91-74 34 93 33 58 (also WhatsApp)
>
>
>
> Le dim. 12 mai 2019 à 19:01, James Heilman <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> > It is hard to get the admin bit there aswell. Is Commons interested in
> > having more admins?
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 5:41 AM Fæ <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for
> > > access to the Google image matching API access so we could run a
> > > copyvio bot on the live new uploads list. Such a bot would not be
> > > terribly hard to get working, and would be a great experiment to see
> > > if this aspect of the more boring side of sysop tools could be
> > > reduced.[1]
> > >
> > > Not specifically advocating auto-deletion, but daily housekeeping
> > > image matches to highly likely copyrighted categories would make mass
> > > housekeeping very easy.
> > >
> > > A separate old chestnut was my proposal to introduce systemic image
> > > hashes, which neatly show "close" image matches.[2] With a Commons hat
> > > on, such a project would be of far more immediate pragmatic use than
> > > mobile-related and structured data-related projects that seem to suck
> > > up all the oxygen and volunteer time available.
> > >
> > > Note that the history of these project/funding ideas is so long, that
> > > several of the most experienced long term volunteers that were
> > > originally interested have since retired. Without some positive short
> > > term encouragement, not only do these ideas never reach the useful
> > > experiment stage, but the volunteers involved simply fade away.
> > >
> > > Links
> > > 1.
> > >
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2016/02#Google_has_opened_an_API_for_image_recognition
> > > 2. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae/Imagehash
> > >
> > > Fae
> > >
> > > On Sun, 12 May 2019 at 12:21, Amir Sarabadani <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > IMO commons need either a Clue Bot NG for new uploads or ores support
> > for
> > > > images that might be copyright violation, or both.
> > > >
> > > > Best
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:10 PM Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Just the active community itself is too small, compared with the
> > > amount of
> > > > > material it has to deal with.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > > Yaroslav
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is the shortage of admins due to a lack of people willing or
> > capable
> > > to
> > > > > do
> > > > > > the job, or increasing difficulty in obtaining the bit?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On May 12, 2019, at 3:55 AM, Tomasz Ganicz <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Well, Actually, at the moment it looks they are all undeleted.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The good habit - which I was keeping when organizing several
> > > > > GLAM-related
> > > > > > > mass uploads - was to create on Commons project page describing
> > > what it
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > intended to be uploaded, preferably in English. Then you can
> > > create a
> > > > > > > project template to mark all uploads with them.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Partnerships
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Despite practical issue of avoiding unnecessary clashes with
> > > Common's
> > > > > > > admins - creating template and project page helps to promote you
> > > > > project
> > > > > > > across Wikimedia communities and may inspire others to do
> > something
> > > > > > similar.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Commons is indeed quite hostile environment for uploaders, but on
> > > the
> > > > > > other
> > > > > > > hand it is constantly flooded by hundreds  of copyright violating
> > > > > files a
> > > > > > > day:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > See the list from just one day:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2019/05/01
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > so this hostility works both ways - Common's admins have to cope
> > > with
> > > > > > > aggressive hostile copyright violators every day, and after some
> > > time -
> > > > > > > decide to leave or became being hostile themselves... and the
> > other
> > > > > issue
> > > > > > > is decreasing number of active admins and OTRS agents.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think - sooner or later - all this system - uploads - screening
> > > > > uploads
> > > > > > > by admins, and OTRS agreements - needs deep rethinking.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > niedz., 12 maj 2019 o 10:48 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > > > > > > [hidden email]> napisał(a):
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Hello all,
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> There seems to be a dispute between the Outreach and the Commons
> > > > > > components
> > > > > > >> of The Community, judging by the article "Wikimedia Commons: a
> > > highly
> > > > > > >> hostile place for multimedia students contributions" at the
> > > Education
> > > > > > >> Newsletter
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/News/April_2019/Wikimedia_Commons:_a_highly_hostile_place_for_multimedia_students_contributions
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> As far as I can understand it, some students on an Outreach
> > > project
> > > > > > >> uploaded some rather well-made video material, and comeone on
> > > Commons
> > > > > > >> deleted them because they appeared to well-made to be student
> > > projects
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > >> so concluded they were copyright violations.  But some rather
> > odd
> > > > > > remarks
> > > > > > >> were made "Commons has to fight the endless stream of uploaded
> > > > > > copyrighted
> > > > > > >> content on behalf of a headquarters in San Francisco that
> > doesn't
> > > > > care."
> > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> "you have regarded Commons as little more than free cloud
> > storage
> > > for
> > > > > > >> images you intend to use on Wikipedia ".
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Perhaps the Foundation needs to resolve this dispute?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Thrapostibongles
> > > > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > > > >> 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > >> Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > > > ,
> > > > > > >> <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > > > > > > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > > > > > > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Amir (he/him)
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > James Heilman
> > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

John Erling Blad
In reply to this post by Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
Some years ago I did a quite simplified analysis of the number of
active contributors, and normalized the number against the number of
people wit internet connections for the respective language groups.
The relative number was pretty similar for all languages from similar
cultural groups. I suspect that for a given group, or project, there
is a limit on the relative number of contributors and we can't get
above it without changing the project somehow. Another indication that
there is a "crowdsource constant" is the trend themselves on
contributors at the individual projects, they have been stable (or
near stable) for a very long time. (Yes they drop somewhat, I know
that!)

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 8:09 AM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l
 If I could share my vision, I am not part of the group of "expert flagged users"(I have some flags here and there, I was asked to get more but I have no rush) and I am not part of the group of "expert outreach users" (I make events but change them so often I do not play any specific role). Surprisingly, I never had any problem so far with Commons. Some unnecessary excess, but limited and mostly immediately showed to newbies as an example. Obviously, there is no way I sugar coat them, it's part of being a honest teacher to show these aspects and they are not cow to milk. I guess it works probably because my approach is far from those that I see here on both side.

The people who patrol (or have similar functions) show often limited interested in a functional working environment. Their approach is in my opinion one of the cause of the backlog, not a consequence. I could make you a long detailed list right now about that.

On the other side, people who do outreach push too much for results with lmited understanding of the ecosystem they ask students to interact. I have met people who ask for "button men" at their initiatives with poor regard for the real expertise, often overselling what they do. it's not nice to be treated superficially when you try to explain why a certain topic is not relevant or why sending a ticket is appropriate for a certain image. If you are too focused on "your stuff", I wouldn't be surprised if you don't care for a functional working environment as well. You just expect someone else to build it for you.

That being said, that there are many small ways to improve the situation, not even complicated ones, and they can act as a catalysts on the long term but they don't come for free or because "WMF does stuff" or because there are patient users who build them step by step in the dark. They could, if you are lucky, but probably in this scenario they will also start from from your self-criticism.

if you can spot such attitude in these mails, there's hope. Otherwise, it's probably going to be the same for some time.
BTW, glad to be proven wrong.
have a nice wiki
A.M.



    Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 14:27:01 CEST, John Erling Blad <[hidden email]> ha scritto:  
 
 Some years ago I did a quite simplified analysis of the number of
active contributors, and normalized the number against the number of
people wit internet connections for the respective language groups.
The relative number was pretty similar for all languages from similar
cultural groups. I suspect that for a given group, or project, there
is a limit on the relative number of contributors and we can't get
above it without changing the project somehow. Another indication that
there is a "crowdsource constant" is the trend themselves on
contributors at the individual projects, they have been stable (or
near stable) for a very long time. (Yes they drop somewhat, I know
that!)

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 8:09 AM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>  
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Asaf Bartov
In reply to this post by Paulo Santos Perneta
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 1:10 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> As a Commoner, I can tell we certainly are, James, please apply here:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators
>
> Even if your sysop actions are rather occasional or seasonal, or focused on
> a certain topic, like mine, all help is very much welcomed there.
> rg/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l>, <mailto:
> [hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>


That has not been my experience.  I recently wanted to help reduce the
load, in my volunteer capacity, by becoming a Commons admin focused on
undeletion requests (which ties in with my volunteer work as an OTRS agent,
and would save me and Admins the time of filing and handling a COM:UDR
request).  Despite my thousands of contributions to Commons, my track
record in the movement, and my understanding of copyright, a small majority
opposed. Some of them specifically said they don't want admins focused on a
certain topic, and others wanted to see me active in deletion discussions
(specifically) before they would consider accepting my help.  This does
suggest there is a certain reluctance to give the admin bit even to very
low-risk volunteers like me.

I certainly did not feel my help was welcomed.

   A.
--
Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]>
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

metasj
In reply to this post by jmh649
Ditto.  But did not have the impression that this was {a, the} pressing
need.
Perhaps we also need better ways to highlight workload overloads (and
continue conversations about them through time, rather than sporadic
proposals of specific implementations that can easily fail) to stimulate
cross-project brainstorming to solve the most pressing problems of scale

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:02 AM James Heilman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have a fairly good understanding of copyright. Deal with a fair bit of
> copyright issues occurring via paid editing and flicker washing of images
> and would be happy to do admin work around that if the Commons community
> was interested.
>
> James
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:00 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Wikimedia project communities in general seem to be quite stagnant, if
> not
> > declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole
> > different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it is
> > now when I joined in 2009. I always found it a very pleasant place, but
> > overtime I understood I was the exception there, and most people had bad
> > experiences. And it is as Yann has shown there, it's a few sysops running
> > the entire show almost alone, not because they want that, but because
> > nobody else helps with that.
> >
> > IMO the problem is not with the existing sysops, but because people in
> > general do not feel attracted to copyright and other similar minucious
> > stuff which marks everyday life in Commons. And, without that knowledge
> it
> > is pointless, if not counterproductive, to place a candidacy to sysop. No
> > idea what the solution could be, but it certainly is not blaming Commons
> > and the existing sysops. If more people was interested in copyright, less
> > mistakes would be happening in Commons as well. Whatever the solution is,
> > it probably passes by that.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia
> segunda,
> > 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
> >
> > > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And
> > > maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed
> 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>



--
Samuel Klein          @metasj           w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

metasj
In reply to this post by John Erling Blad
I love this thread.  Thank you to all participating in it...

Also: speeding these things with automation is also much easier once there
is a quarantine where anyone can see flagged material without being an
admin!   SJ

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 7:39 AM John Erling Blad <[hidden email]> wrote:

> This is wrong: "The upload system allow you to upload something if you
> are the author. Period."
>
> The system as it is now will allow anyone to upload a file given (s)he
> has the necessary rights. That does not imply the uploader being the
> author of the material.
>
> Note that verifying whether the uploaded material already exist out on
> the web must be done before the file is made public, otherwise any
> attempt on detecting a copyviolation will fail. That would imply that
> a copyvio algorithm must be automated. The questionable material could
> still be uploaded, but then a permission should be forwarded to OTRS.
> Also, a report from the copyvio algorithm should be stored with the
> uploaded material, as it is impossible to retrace the detection after
> the material is made public.
>
> On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 4:23 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > As I am the author of the post, some remarks:
> >
> >   *   Commons is, indeed, the only [cloud] storage for file in most of
> the Wikipedias. Making an accusation of using Commons as a storage place is
> unfair and nonsense.
> >   *   Communication could be better, of course, but we don't have to
> think on experienced editors and wikimedians, but on people we are trying
> to convince to upload to the Commons and find this burden. They don't know
> how to communicate and why they must do it.
> >   *   The upload system allow you to upload something if you are the
> author. Period.
> >   *   Claiming that something is a derivative work without saying which
> is the original work is not a good practice.
> >   *   Of course, commons volunteers are few, and they have a great
> job-queue. But outreach volunteers are less, and a project like this can
> take a whole year of volunteer work.
> >   *   After all the victim-blaming seen on this discussion no one was
> able to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone.
> >
> > Let's hope we can follow with this project next year and we will have
> less problems.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Galder
> > ________________________________
> > From: Wikimedia-l <[hidden email]> on behalf
> of Vi to <[hidden email]>
> > Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 3:35 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
> >
> > I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to delete/undelete images
> on
> > commons in order to reduce workload. Most risky commons' uploads come
> from
> > cw-upload, allow local sysops to handle them could work.
> >
> > Vito
> >
> > Il giorno dom 12 mag 2019 alle ore 15:31 James Heilman <[hidden email]
> >
> > ha scritto:
> >
> > > It is hard to get the admin bit there aswell. Is Commons interested in
> > > having more admins?
> > >
> > > James
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 5:41 AM Fæ <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for
> > > > access to the Google image matching API access so we could run a
> > > > copyvio bot on the live new uploads list. Such a bot would not be
> > > > terribly hard to get working, and would be a great experiment to see
> > > > if this aspect of the more boring side of sysop tools could be
> > > > reduced.[1]
> > > >
> > > > Not specifically advocating auto-deletion, but daily housekeeping
> > > > image matches to highly likely copyrighted categories would make mass
> > > > housekeeping very easy.
> > > >
> > > > A separate old chestnut was my proposal to introduce systemic image
> > > > hashes, which neatly show "close" image matches.[2] With a Commons
> hat
> > > > on, such a project would be of far more immediate pragmatic use than
> > > > mobile-related and structured data-related projects that seem to suck
> > > > up all the oxygen and volunteer time available.
> > > >
> > > > Note that the history of these project/funding ideas is so long, that
> > > > several of the most experienced long term volunteers that were
> > > > originally interested have since retired. Without some positive short
> > > > term encouragement, not only do these ideas never reach the useful
> > > > experiment stage, but the volunteers involved simply fade away.
> > > >
> > > > Links
> > > > 1.
> > > >
> > >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2016/02#Google_has_opened_an_API_for_image_recognition
> > > > 2. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae/Imagehash
> > > >
> > > > Fae
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 12 May 2019 at 12:21, Amir Sarabadani <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > IMO commons need either a Clue Bot NG for new uploads or ores
> support
> > > for
> > > > > images that might be copyright violation, or both.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:10 PM Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Just the active community itself is too small, compared with the
> > > > amount of
> > > > > > material it has to deal with.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > Yaroslav
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta <
> > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is the shortage of admins due to a lack of people willing or
> > > capable
> > > > to
> > > > > > do
> > > > > > > the job, or increasing difficulty in obtaining the bit?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On May 12, 2019, at 3:55 AM, Tomasz Ganicz <
> [hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Well, Actually, at the moment it looks they are all
> undeleted.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The good habit - which I was keeping when organizing several
> > > > > > GLAM-related
> > > > > > > > mass uploads - was to create on Commons project page
> describing
> > > > what it
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > intended to be uploaded, preferably in English. Then you can
> > > > create a
> > > > > > > > project template to mark all uploads with them.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Partnerships
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Despite practical issue of avoiding unnecessary clashes with
> > > > Common's
> > > > > > > > admins - creating template and project page helps to promote
> you
> > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > across Wikimedia communities and may inspire others to do
> > > something
> > > > > > > similar.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Commons is indeed quite hostile environment for uploaders,
> but on
> > > > the
> > > > > > > other
> > > > > > > > hand it is constantly flooded by hundreds  of copyright
> violating
> > > > > > files a
> > > > > > > > day:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > See the list from just one day:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2019/05/01
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > so this hostility works both ways - Common's admins have to
> cope
> > > > with
> > > > > > > > aggressive hostile copyright violators every day, and after
> some
> > > > time -
> > > > > > > > decide to leave or became being hostile themselves... and the
> > > other
> > > > > > issue
> > > > > > > > is decreasing number of active admins and OTRS agents.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think - sooner or later - all this system - uploads -
> screening
> > > > > > uploads
> > > > > > > > by admins, and OTRS agreements - needs deep rethinking.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > niedz., 12 maj 2019 o 10:48 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > > > > > > > [hidden email]> napisał(a):
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Hello all,
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> There seems to be a dispute between the Outreach and the
> Commons
> > > > > > > components
> > > > > > > >> of The Community, judging by the article "Wikimedia
> Commons: a
> > > > highly
> > > > > > > >> hostile place for multimedia students contributions" at the
> > > > Education
> > > > > > > >> Newsletter
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/News/April_2019/Wikimedia_Commons:_a_highly_hostile_place_for_multimedia_students_contributions
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> As far as I can understand it, some students on an Outreach
> > > > project
> > > > > > > >> uploaded some rather well-made video material, and comeone
> on
> > > > Commons
> > > > > > > >> deleted them because they appeared to well-made to be
> student
> > > > projects
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > >> so concluded they were copyright violations.  But some
> rather
> > > odd
> > > > > > > remarks
> > > > > > > >> were made "Commons has to fight the endless stream of
> uploaded
> > > > > > > copyrighted
> > > > > > > >> content on behalf of a headquarters in San Francisco that
> > > doesn't
> > > > > > care."
> > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > >> "you have regarded Commons as little more than free cloud
> > > storage
> > > > for
> > > > > > > >> images you intend to use on Wikipedia ".
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Perhaps the Foundation needs to resolve this dispute?
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Thrapostibongles
> > > > > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > >> 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > >> Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > > > > ,
> > > > > > > >> <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > > > > > > > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > > > > > > > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Amir (he/him)
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > James Heilman
> > > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>



--
Samuel Klein          @metasj           w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Andrew Lih
In reply to this post by Yann Forget-3
Oh the irony!

You assumed bad faith on my good faith edit to [[Commons:Assume good
faith]].

What would you consider "dishonest" about the edits or the summaries?
Telling folks that the [[Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle]] is
part of the policy dynamic that even experienced Wikipedians may not know
about (I certainly didn't) is most certainly useful.

That people are reverting the edits, in what seems to be an attempt to
either hide the precautionary principle or obfuscate it seems quite odd.
I'm assuming good faith here, so I'm not ascribing any motives to these
reverts. You did not even give any reason for your revert, whereas I did in
fact leave edit summaries.

For reference:

Edit 1 - "add precautionary principle"
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Assume_good_faith&diff=prev&oldid=349110161

Reverted by Yann with no comment.

Edit 2 - "refine wording"
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Assume_good_faith&diff=prev&oldid=349650525

Reverted by Colin with "Nothing to do with AFG [sic] and certainly not
"refine wording" -- dishonest edit summary"

I changed "should be deleted" to "may be deleted" in case that was the
wording someone had issue with. That's why the edit summary said "refine
wording."

-Andrew




On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 12:10 AM Yann Forget <[hidden email]> wrote:

> This was reverted. It is a dishonest edit with a misleading summary.
>
> Regards,
> Yann
> Jai Jagat 2020 Grand March Coordinator
> https://www.jaijagat2020.org/
> +91-74 34 93 33 58 (also WhatsApp)
>
>
>
> Le dim. 12 mai 2019 à 19:59, Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> > This episode exposes a policy of Commons that may be unknown to many
> folks
> > - the precautionary principle.
> >
> > It is an explicit exception to assuming good faith, so I noted this on
> the
> > AGF page on Commons.
> >
> >
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Assume_good_faith&oldid=prev&diff=349650525
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 10:23 AM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > As I am the author of the post, some remarks:
> > >
> > >   *   Commons is, indeed, the only [cloud] storage for file in most of
> > the
> > > Wikipedias. Making an accusation of using Commons as a storage place is
> > > unfair and nonsense.
> > >   *   Communication could be better, of course, but we don't have to
> > think
> > > on experienced editors and wikimedians, but on people we are trying to
> > > convince to upload to the Commons and find this burden. They don't know
> > how
> > > to communicate and why they must do it.
> > >   *   The upload system allow you to upload something if you are the
> > > author. Period.
> > >   *   Claiming that something is a derivative work without saying which
> > is
> > > the original work is not a good practice.
> > >   *   Of course, commons volunteers are few, and they have a great
> > > job-queue. But outreach volunteers are less, and a project like this
> can
> > > take a whole year of volunteer work.
> > >   *   After all the victim-blaming seen on this discussion no one was
> > able
> > > to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone.
> > >
> > > Let's hope we can follow with this project next year and we will have
> > less
> > > problems.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > > Galder
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Wikimedia-l <[hidden email]> on behalf
> of
> > > Vi to <[hidden email]>
> > > Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 3:35 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
> > >
> > > I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to delete/undelete images
> > on
> > > commons in order to reduce workload. Most risky commons' uploads come
> > from
> > > cw-upload, allow local sysops to handle them could work.
> > >
> > > Vito
> > >
> > > Il giorno dom 12 mag 2019 alle ore 15:31 James Heilman <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > ha scritto:
> > >
> > > > It is hard to get the admin bit there aswell. Is Commons interested
> in
> > > > having more admins?
> > > >
> > > > James
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 5:41 AM Fæ <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for
> > > > > access to the Google image matching API access so we could run a
> > > > > copyvio bot on the live new uploads list. Such a bot would not be
> > > > > terribly hard to get working, and would be a great experiment to
> see
> > > > > if this aspect of the more boring side of sysop tools could be
> > > > > reduced.[1]
> > > > >
> > > > > Not specifically advocating auto-deletion, but daily housekeeping
> > > > > image matches to highly likely copyrighted categories would make
> mass
> > > > > housekeeping very easy.
> > > > >
> > > > > A separate old chestnut was my proposal to introduce systemic image
> > > > > hashes, which neatly show "close" image matches.[2] With a Commons
> > hat
> > > > > on, such a project would be of far more immediate pragmatic use
> than
> > > > > mobile-related and structured data-related projects that seem to
> suck
> > > > > up all the oxygen and volunteer time available.
> > > > >
> > > > > Note that the history of these project/funding ideas is so long,
> that
> > > > > several of the most experienced long term volunteers that were
> > > > > originally interested have since retired. Without some positive
> short
> > > > > term encouragement, not only do these ideas never reach the useful
> > > > > experiment stage, but the volunteers involved simply fade away.
> > > > >
> > > > > Links
> > > > > 1.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2016/02#Google_has_opened_an_API_for_image_recognition
> > > > > 2. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae/Imagehash
> > > > >
> > > > > Fae
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 12 May 2019 at 12:21, Amir Sarabadani <[hidden email]
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IMO commons need either a Clue Bot NG for new uploads or ores
> > support
> > > > for
> > > > > > images that might be copyright violation, or both.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:10 PM Yaroslav Blanter <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Just the active community itself is too small, compared with
> the
> > > > > amount of
> > > > > > > material it has to deal with.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > > Yaroslav
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta <
> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Is the shortage of admins due to a lack of people willing or
> > > > capable
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > the job, or increasing difficulty in obtaining the bit?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On May 12, 2019, at 3:55 AM, Tomasz Ganicz <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Well, Actually, at the moment it looks they are all
> > undeleted.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The good habit - which I was keeping when organizing
> several
> > > > > > > GLAM-related
> > > > > > > > > mass uploads - was to create on Commons project page
> > describing
> > > > > what it
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > intended to be uploaded, preferably in English. Then you
> can
> > > > > create a
> > > > > > > > > project template to mark all uploads with them.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > See:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Partnerships
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Despite practical issue of avoiding unnecessary clashes
> with
> > > > > Common's
> > > > > > > > > admins - creating template and project page helps to
> promote
> > > you
> > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > across Wikimedia communities and may inspire others to do
> > > > something
> > > > > > > > similar.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Commons is indeed quite hostile environment for uploaders,
> > but
> > > on
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > other
> > > > > > > > > hand it is constantly flooded by hundreds  of copyright
> > > violating
> > > > > > > files a
> > > > > > > > > day:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > See the list from just one day:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2019/05/01
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > so this hostility works both ways - Common's admins have to
> > > cope
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > aggressive hostile copyright violators every day, and after
> > > some
> > > > > time -
> > > > > > > > > decide to leave or became being hostile themselves... and
> the
> > > > other
> > > > > > > issue
> > > > > > > > > is decreasing number of active admins and OTRS agents.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think - sooner or later - all this system - uploads -
> > > screening
> > > > > > > uploads
> > > > > > > > > by admins, and OTRS agreements - needs deep rethinking.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > niedz., 12 maj 2019 o 10:48 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > > > > > > > > [hidden email]> napisał(a):
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> Hello all,
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> There seems to be a dispute between the Outreach and the
> > > Commons
> > > > > > > > components
> > > > > > > > >> of The Community, judging by the article "Wikimedia
> > Commons: a
> > > > > highly
> > > > > > > > >> hostile place for multimedia students contributions" at
> the
> > > > > Education
> > > > > > > > >> Newsletter
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/News/April_2019/Wikimedia_Commons:_a_highly_hostile_place_for_multimedia_students_contributions
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> As far as I can understand it, some students on an
> Outreach
> > > > > project
> > > > > > > > >> uploaded some rather well-made video material, and comeone
> > on
> > > > > Commons
> > > > > > > > >> deleted them because they appeared to well-made to be
> > student
> > > > > projects
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >> so concluded they were copyright violations.  But some
> > rather
> > > > odd
> > > > > > > > remarks
> > > > > > > > >> were made "Commons has to fight the endless stream of
> > uploaded
> > > > > > > > copyrighted
> > > > > > > > >> content on behalf of a headquarters in San Francisco that
> > > > doesn't
> > > > > > > care."
> > > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > > >> "you have regarded Commons as little more than free cloud
> > > > storage
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > >> images you intend to use on Wikipedia ".
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Perhaps the Foundation needs to resolve this dispute?
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Thrapostibongles
> > > > > > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > >> 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > >> Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > ,
> > > > > > > > >> <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > > > > > > > > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > > > > > > > > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Amir (he/him)
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > James Heilman
> > > > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > --
> > -Andrew Lih
> > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> > University, Columbia University, USC
> > ---
> > Email: [hidden email]
> > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>



--
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
University, Columbia University, USC
---
Email: [hidden email]
WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Andrew Lih
In reply to this post by Peter Southwood
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 3:03 AM Peter Southwood <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> The precautionary principle is labelled as an official policy of Commons.
> I think it should be mentioned on the assume good faith page as it explains
> why it is sometimes impractical to assume good faith to the extent of
> allowing  content to remain. If not mentioned, it can lead to severe
> disappointment and surprise. It should be made very clear to anyone who
> uploads that this policy may be applied, and why it is necessary. It would
> also be useful to explain what to do if it is applied where it should not
> be applied, whether from lack of evidence or for any other reason, and how
> to avoid the problem.
> It might even be advisable to state this policy clearly in the upload
> wizard. When people have been reasonably warned, they are less likely to be
> offended.
>

Exactly this.

Commons veterans are annoyed that uploaders don't understand all the
principles and rules of Commons.

So to be helpful, I go into Commons:AGF to add the precautionary principle.

This way, people like Galder and students will know that: "where there is
significant doubt about the freedom of a particular file, it should be
deleted"

My attempt to help is then reverted. Twice. Then I get threatened that I
will be blocked if I try to help give better instructions.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fuzheado&diff=349936173&oldid=345797075

Tell me then, which is it going to be?

-Andrew
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l
In reply to this post by metasj
 We have dozens of cross project brainstorming off-wiki. But the general feeling is often that if you encourage the social dynamics of a platform in a way that people who like to "play cops" are a key actor... when this is established there is no point in creating sophisticated or efficient tools, because as long as they force such people to work in a different way they will kinda oppose them.
For example, many time I find a deleted file  I could spot dozens of similar in the very same category and the few times I have asked the user who deleted it or ask the deletion, I could feel he had no real interested in completing the job. The fight for copyright is not a goal, it's a just a mean for him. He probably has fun cherry-picking one random file, with no consistent approach. So how many times for example I found files from the USA where there is no FOP for statues deleted maybe if uploaded by the European users but not by the American ones. Because of course if you did delete them all (as you should),  enwikipedia community will notice and it will be a bigger deal.. it's a problem when all images of a monument disappear, right? So let's delete some random files, and vanish when somebody point out the other ones, just to repeat the same pattern somewhere else after a while. That's why it's so easy to find en-N users from the USA who have limited clue with rule of FOP. Now, the users who perform this type of deletion pattern will dislike any tools or preference who simply encourage to do it in a consistent way... they are expert and they know how categories work, if they don't complete the job is probably because they don't want to. If we get close to the issue, we manage to get around some "the newbes will misuse it" or "its a delicate matter", I guess the "good faith " clause will appear.

So, we keep a random patrolling and retropatrolling on this issue, which means poor overall copyright literacy, angry users because of the procedural incoherence and in the end a huge backlog (since the bulk of the files remain there). Take this dynamics, in other fields, with different nuances, multiplied by a dozens of different legal and workload scenarios and voilà. You have one of the reason of our current situation.

I guess there is no tool which can fix that, it's just the way a community really wants to be. Tools can help to encourage people to think differently of course, but I fear that would be a strong resistance.

A. M:


    Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 16:56:49 CEST, Samuel Klein <[hidden email]> ha scritto:  
 
 Ditto.  But did not have the impression that this was {a, the} pressing
need.
Perhaps we also need better ways to highlight workload overloads (and
continue conversations about them through time, rather than sporadic
proposals of specific implementations that can easily fail) to stimulate
cross-project brainstorming to solve the most pressing problems of scale

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:02 AM James Heilman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have a fairly good understanding of copyright. Deal with a fair bit of
> copyright issues occurring via paid editing and flicker washing of images
> and would be happy to do admin work around that if the Commons community
> was interested.
>
> James
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:00 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Wikimedia project communities in general seem to be quite stagnant, if
> not
> > declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole
> > different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it is
> > now when I joined in 2009. I always found it a very pleasant place, but
> > overtime I understood I was the exception there, and most people had bad
> > experiences. And it is as Yann has shown there, it's a few sysops running
> > the entire show almost alone, not because they want that, but because
> > nobody else helps with that.
> >
> > IMO the problem is not with the existing sysops, but because people in
> > general do not feel attracted to copyright and other similar minucious
> > stuff which marks everyday life in Commons. And, without that knowledge
> it
> > is pointless, if not counterproductive, to place a candidacy to sysop. No
> > idea what the solution could be, but it certainly is not blaming Commons
> > and the existing sysops. If more people was interested in copyright, less
> > mistakes would be happening in Commons as well. Whatever the solution is,
> > it probably passes by that.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia
> segunda,
> > 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
> >
> > > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And
> > > maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed
> 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>



--
Samuel Klein          @metasj          w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>  
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
I read this:

On the other side, people who do outreach push too much for results with lmited understanding of the ecosystem they ask students to interact. I have met people who ask for "button men" at their initiatives with poor regard for the real expertise, often overselling what they do. it's not nice to be treated superficially when you try to explain why a certain topic is not relevant or why sending a ticket is appropriate for a certain image. If you are too focused on "your stuff", I wouldn't be surprised if you don't care for a functional working environment as well. You just expect someone else to build it for you.

And I want to talk about what we did in this situation, and why the environment triggers frustration.

First, when the professors came with the idea of creating multimedia contents for making richer Wikipedia articles, we focused on some issues: the content should be as neutral as possible, all the content should be original and the music used should be cc-by-(sa). We explained this idea twice in two different meetings, first with one professor, then with all the team that was going to guide the students.

Second, we stressed on this ideas with students during a four hours (four hours!) workshop. We gave them examples of bad content, we gave them examples of good content, we encouraged them to use only free sources and we explained how to work on Commons and why the content should be there.

Third, the professors spent three more weeks with them, helping develop the video, how to make good recordins, how to make them more neutral (what to focus on), and how to find material that could be reused.

Fourth, I went again with them to a four hour class where we revised all the materials, we certified that all the music was free, we checked all the illustrations and we asked not to upload those that were of poor value or had any doubt about their copyright status.

Fifth, we helped students to find suitable songs for their videos, how to tag that the files were derivative works if applicable using Commons uploading system, how to fill everything if they were using video2commons and how to use the materials on wikipedia. It was my fourth morning with the students, and the third one dedicated to Commons. We also explained again what was the difference between free access and free license, because some of the students didn't get why we were not allowing them to upload some content.

Sixth, yes, there is a sixth, I spent another morning with the professors evaluating all the materials from a wikimedian point of view, talking about their quality and designing improvements for next year. Students then presented their works to a broader audience at the University.

Seventh, students went on vacations. At this moment an admin decided that all the previous work was not valid and claimed that it should be DW. Period. And then I noticed that some stuff was missing when I started to write a report about the experience for the Outreach Newsletter. And as I have followed all the steps, I have a dedicated place at the Outreach Dashboard where I can track everything this students created, uploaded or edited: https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/HUHEZI/Ikus-entzunezko_komunikazioa_(2019)/home . This content is public and can be easily reached in our dedicated education programme portal: https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari:Hezkuntza

It should be maybe few days spent with them explaining how Commons work, what licenses are suitable and why free content matters. If you feel so, then I should explain that we have created two videotutorials, a leaflet and a small book explaining everything we were explaining direcdtly to them, so if they had any doubt they could read them. And we gave a copy to each student, so they could have a guidance. And we also gave them a direct e-mail so they could ask for copyrights issues: two of them did it and we gave them some answers.

Cheers

Galder
________________________________
From: Wikimedia-l <[hidden email]> on behalf of Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 5:30 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

We have dozens of cross project brainstorming off-wiki. But the general feeling is often that if you encourage the social dynamics of a platform in a way that people who like to "play cops" are a key actor... when this is established there is no point in creating sophisticated or efficient tools, because as long as they force such people to work in a different way they will kinda oppose them.
For example, many time I find a deleted file  I could spot dozens of similar in the very same category and the few times I have asked the user who deleted it or ask the deletion, I could feel he had no real interested in completing the job. The fight for copyright is not a goal, it's a just a mean for him. He probably has fun cherry-picking one random file, with no consistent approach. So how many times for example I found files from the USA where there is no FOP for statues deleted maybe if uploaded by the European users but not by the American ones. Because of course if you did delete them all (as you should),  enwikipedia community will notice and it will be a bigger deal.. it's a problem when all images of a monument disappear, right? So let's delete some random files, and vanish when somebody point out the other ones, just to repeat the same pattern somewhere else after a while. That's why it's so easy to find en-N users from the USA who have limited clue with rule of FOP. Now, the users who perform this type of deletion pattern will dislike any tools or preference who simply encourage to do it in a consistent way... they are expert and they know how categories work, if they don't complete the job is probably because they don't want to. If we get close to the issue, we manage to get around some "the newbes will misuse it" or "its a delicate matter", I guess the "good faith " clause will appear.

So, we keep a random patrolling and retropatrolling on this issue, which means poor overall copyright literacy, angry users because of the procedural incoherence and in the end a huge backlog (since the bulk of the files remain there). Take this dynamics, in other fields, with different nuances, multiplied by a dozens of different legal and workload scenarios and voilà. You have one of the reason of our current situation.

I guess there is no tool which can fix that, it's just the way a community really wants to be. Tools can help to encourage people to think differently of course, but I fear that would be a strong resistance.

A. M:


    Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 16:56:49 CEST, Samuel Klein <[hidden email]> ha scritto:

 Ditto.  But did not have the impression that this was {a, the} pressing
need.
Perhaps we also need better ways to highlight workload overloads (and
continue conversations about them through time, rather than sporadic
proposals of specific implementations that can easily fail) to stimulate
cross-project brainstorming to solve the most pressing problems of scale

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:02 AM James Heilman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have a fairly good understanding of copyright. Deal with a fair bit of
> copyright issues occurring via paid editing and flicker washing of images
> and would be happy to do admin work around that if the Commons community
> was interested.
>
> James
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:00 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Wikimedia project communities in general seem to be quite stagnant, if
> not
> > declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole
> > different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it is
> > now when I joined in 2009. I always found it a very pleasant place, but
> > overtime I understood I was the exception there, and most people had bad
> > experiences. And it is as Yann has shown there, it's a few sysops running
> > the entire show almost alone, not because they want that, but because
> > nobody else helps with that.
> >
> > IMO the problem is not with the existing sysops, but because people in
> > general do not feel attracted to copyright and other similar minucious
> > stuff which marks everyday life in Commons. And, without that knowledge
> it
> > is pointless, if not counterproductive, to place a candidacy to sysop. No
> > idea what the solution could be, but it certainly is not blaming Commons
> > and the existing sysops. If more people was interested in copyright, less
> > mistakes would be happening in Commons as well. Whatever the solution is,
> > it probably passes by that.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia
> segunda,
> > 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
> >
> > > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And
> > > maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed
> 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>



--
Samuel Klein          @metasj          w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Andrew Lih
Thanks for this, Galder. It's clear you went the extra mile to make sure
all these issues were addressed and in ways that exceed any education
project I have seen before, and I've been involved with Wikimedia and
education since 2003!

-Andrew


On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 12:01 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> I read this:
>
> On the other side, people who do outreach push too much for results with
> lmited understanding of the ecosystem they ask students to interact. I have
> met people who ask for "button men" at their initiatives with poor regard
> for the real expertise, often overselling what they do. it's not nice to be
> treated superficially when you try to explain why a certain topic is not
> relevant or why sending a ticket is appropriate for a certain image. If you
> are too focused on "your stuff", I wouldn't be surprised if you don't care
> for a functional working environment as well. You just expect someone else
> to build it for you.
>
> And I want to talk about what we did in this situation, and why the
> environment triggers frustration.
>
> First, when the professors came with the idea of creating multimedia
> contents for making richer Wikipedia articles, we focused on some issues:
> the content should be as neutral as possible, all the content should be
> original and the music used should be cc-by-(sa). We explained this idea
> twice in two different meetings, first with one professor, then with all
> the team that was going to guide the students.
>
> Second, we stressed on this ideas with students during a four hours (four
> hours!) workshop. We gave them examples of bad content, we gave them
> examples of good content, we encouraged them to use only free sources and
> we explained how to work on Commons and why the content should be there.
>
> Third, the professors spent three more weeks with them, helping develop
> the video, how to make good recordins, how to make them more neutral (what
> to focus on), and how to find material that could be reused.
>
> Fourth, I went again with them to a four hour class where we revised all
> the materials, we certified that all the music was free, we checked all the
> illustrations and we asked not to upload those that were of poor value or
> had any doubt about their copyright status.
>
> Fifth, we helped students to find suitable songs for their videos, how to
> tag that the files were derivative works if applicable using Commons
> uploading system, how to fill everything if they were using video2commons
> and how to use the materials on wikipedia. It was my fourth morning with
> the students, and the third one dedicated to Commons. We also explained
> again what was the difference between free access and free license, because
> some of the students didn't get why we were not allowing them to upload
> some content.
>
> Sixth, yes, there is a sixth, I spent another morning with the professors
> evaluating all the materials from a wikimedian point of view, talking about
> their quality and designing improvements for next year. Students then
> presented their works to a broader audience at the University.
>
> Seventh, students went on vacations. At this moment an admin decided that
> all the previous work was not valid and claimed that it should be DW.
> Period. And then I noticed that some stuff was missing when I started to
> write a report about the experience for the Outreach Newsletter. And as I
> have followed all the steps, I have a dedicated place at the Outreach
> Dashboard where I can track everything this students created, uploaded or
> edited:
> https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/HUHEZI/Ikus-entzunezko_komunikazioa_(2019)/home
> . This content is public and can be easily reached in our dedicated
> education programme portal: https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari:Hezkuntza
>
> It should be maybe few days spent with them explaining how Commons work,
> what licenses are suitable and why free content matters. If you feel so,
> then I should explain that we have created two videotutorials, a leaflet
> and a small book explaining everything we were explaining direcdtly to
> them, so if they had any doubt they could read them. And we gave a copy to
> each student, so they could have a guidance. And we also gave them a direct
> e-mail so they could ask for copyrights issues: two of them did it and we
> gave them some answers.
>
> Cheers
>
> Galder
> ________________________________
> From: Wikimedia-l <[hidden email]> on behalf of
> Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <[hidden email]>
> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 5:30 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
>
> We have dozens of cross project brainstorming off-wiki. But the general
> feeling is often that if you encourage the social dynamics of a platform in
> a way that people who like to "play cops" are a key actor... when this is
> established there is no point in creating sophisticated or efficient tools,
> because as long as they force such people to work in a different way they
> will kinda oppose them.
> For example, many time I find a deleted file  I could spot dozens of
> similar in the very same category and the few times I have asked the user
> who deleted it or ask the deletion, I could feel he had no real interested
> in completing the job. The fight for copyright is not a goal, it's a just a
> mean for him. He probably has fun cherry-picking one random file, with no
> consistent approach. So how many times for example I found files from the
> USA where there is no FOP for statues deleted maybe if uploaded by the
> European users but not by the American ones. Because of course if you did
> delete them all (as you should),  enwikipedia community will notice and it
> will be a bigger deal.. it's a problem when all images of a monument
> disappear, right? So let's delete some random files, and vanish when
> somebody point out the other ones, just to repeat the same pattern
> somewhere else after a while. That's why it's so easy to find en-N users
> from the USA who have limited clue with rule of FOP. Now, the users who
> perform this type of deletion pattern will dislike any tools or preference
> who simply encourage to do it in a consistent way... they are expert and
> they know how categories work, if they don't complete the job is probably
> because they don't want to. If we get close to the issue, we manage to get
> around some "the newbes will misuse it" or "its a delicate matter", I guess
> the "good faith " clause will appear.
>
> So, we keep a random patrolling and retropatrolling on this issue, which
> means poor overall copyright literacy, angry users because of the
> procedural incoherence and in the end a huge backlog (since the bulk of the
> files remain there). Take this dynamics, in other fields, with different
> nuances, multiplied by a dozens of different legal and workload scenarios
> and voilà. You have one of the reason of our current situation.
>
> I guess there is no tool which can fix that, it's just the way a community
> really wants to be. Tools can help to encourage people to think differently
> of course, but I fear that would be a strong resistance.
>
> A. M:
>
>
>     Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 16:56:49 CEST, Samuel Klein <
> [hidden email]> ha scritto:
>
>  Ditto.  But did not have the impression that this was {a, the} pressing
> need.
> Perhaps we also need better ways to highlight workload overloads (and
> continue conversations about them through time, rather than sporadic
> proposals of specific implementations that can easily fail) to stimulate
> cross-project brainstorming to solve the most pressing problems of scale
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:02 AM James Heilman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I have a fairly good understanding of copyright. Deal with a fair bit of
> > copyright issues occurring via paid editing and flicker washing of images
> > and would be happy to do admin work around that if the Commons community
> > was interested.
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:00 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Wikimedia project communities in general seem to be quite stagnant, if
> > not
> > > declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole
> > > different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it
> is
> > > now when I joined in 2009. I always found it a very pleasant place, but
> > > overtime I understood I was the exception there, and most people had
> bad
> > > experiences. And it is as Yann has shown there, it's a few sysops
> running
> > > the entire show almost alone, not because they want that, but because
> > > nobody else helps with that.
> > >
> > > IMO the problem is not with the existing sysops, but because people in
> > > general do not feel attracted to copyright and other similar minucious
> > > stuff which marks everyday life in Commons. And, without that knowledge
> > it
> > > is pointless, if not counterproductive, to place a candidacy to sysop.
> No
> > > idea what the solution could be, but it certainly is not blaming
> Commons
> > > and the existing sysops. If more people was interested in copyright,
> less
> > > mistakes would be happening in Commons as well. Whatever the solution
> is,
> > > it probably passes by that.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia
> > segunda,
> > > 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
> > >
> > > > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing.
> And
> > > > maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > James Heilman
> > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> Samuel Klein          @metasj          w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>



--
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
University, Columbia University, USC
---
Email: [hidden email]
WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l
In reply to this post by Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
 I was not referring to your case, but in general. Even if so, talking about your case, you simply did what we all do. Or what we all should do, and we just know that sometimes it's not enough.

Did you tell them that no matter what, somebody could have decided to delete them in any case? Because that's what happen, it's just part of life on Wiki. Sometimes I show them the pages with the situations similar to yours, and they coexist with sloppy activities full of copyviol nobody cares (which I sometimes share too)

When I am in charge of a workshop or class, I clearly point this out. No matter how wonderful the slides about sharing and good faith sound, these things occurred and occurs. Reality is not something I can change for them. When I am in charge almost nothing that is inserted or uploaded is deleted, as far as I remember once a student upload a funny gif before my class, but really almost nothing else... I encourage them to write down in the description what is useful to clarify the situation and I clearly tell them that they can fell lucky, but it might end bad. I show them all the controls I do because that's actually what they have to learn themselves. They same copyviol tools the sysop might use, for example. The same pattern patrollers will use to find their upload. There were nice or useful files I did not encourage to upload at a course because it wold have been complicated, and for me it's fine because there are so many different things to take care on wiki, that some useful files can wait until Commons improve its situation.

When I am not in charge however, and I try to explain these aspects, usually somebody who organized the event tell me that I should not bother students with it. They say, this will discourage them (actually, I never had discourages students) Sometimes I was told to hide these aspects when proposing a seminar o activity, which I usually refuse.i know it's not going to be easy and it's not going to be appreciated but it's a honest description. In the end, it's useful to learn in life, in general, that human communities are not linear. Especially when you share something valuable for free you might be mistreated, I see no point in deprive them of such life lesson. these dynamics are usually stronger in volunteer-based communities, because some people really want to behave that way, it's what they like to do in their free time, they are very motivated.

Also, so far I never had problems with professional as well. One of the best video for Wiki Science Competition was proposed for deletion, the user  had to track all details about it. But the person who went through that was not upset, he was ready, because I told him so the week before. And as a good doctor, he was just aware of human nature, I guess. 

So If you work on the platforms, you know this happens. And you know how you can usually go around it and when it is worth to face it or not, but this is not the matter of a procedure or a  checklist, it's mostly being aware of the human nature. Of course, I wish platforms were different. I tried to do my part for them to be different, I simply know it won't be soon. And I think that WMF can do nothing about that.
Alessandro




    Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 18:00:47 CEST, Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <[hidden email]> ha scritto:  
 
 #yiv1485519652 P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}I read this:

On the other side, people who do outreach push too much for results with lmited understanding of the ecosystem they ask students to interact. I have met people who ask for "button men" at their initiatives with poor regard for the real expertise, often overselling what they do. it's not nice to be treated superficially when you try to explain why a certain topic is not relevant or why sending a ticket is appropriate for a certain image. If you are too focused on "your stuff", I wouldn't be surprised if you don't care for a functional working environment as well. You just expect someone else to build it for you.
And I want to talk about what we did in this situation, and why the environment triggers frustration.

First, when the professors came with the idea of creating multimedia contents for making richer Wikipedia articles, we focused on some issues: the content should be as neutral as possible, all the content should be original and the music used should be cc-by-(sa). We explained this idea twice in two different meetings, first with one professor, then with all the team that was going to guide the students.
Second, we stressed on this ideas with students during a four hours (four hours!) workshop. We gave them examples of bad content, we gave them examples of good content, we encouraged them to use only free sources and we explained how to work on Commons and why the content should be there.
Third, the professors spent three more weeks with them, helping develop the video, how to make good recordins, how to make them more neutral (what to focus on), and how to find material that could be reused.
Fourth, I went again with them to a four hour class where we revised all the materials, we certified that all the music was free, we checked all the illustrations and we asked not to upload those that were of poor value or had any doubt about their copyright status.
Fifth, we helped students to find suitable songs for their videos, how to tag that the files were derivative works if applicable using Commons uploading system, how to fill everything if they were using video2commons and how to use the materials on wikipedia. It was my fourth morning with the students, and the third one dedicated to Commons. We also explained again what was the difference between free access and free license, because some of the students didn't get why we were not allowing them to upload some content.
Sixth, yes, there is a sixth, I spent another morning with the professors evaluating all the materials from a wikimedian point of view, talking about their quality and designing improvements for next year. Students then presented their works to a broader audience at the University.
Seventh, students went on vacations. At this moment an admin decided that all the previous work was not valid and claimed that it should be DW. Period. And then I noticed that some stuff was missing when I started to write a report about the experience for the Outreach Newsletter. And as I have followed all the steps, I have a dedicated place at the Outreach Dashboard where I can track everything this students created, uploaded or edited:https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/HUHEZI/Ikus-entzunezko_komunikazioa_(2019)/home . This content is public and can be easily reached in our dedicated education programme portal:https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari:Hezkuntza

It should be maybe few days spent with them explaining how Commons work, what licenses are suitable and why free content matters. If you feel so, then I should explain that we have created two videotutorials, a leaflet and a small book explaining everything we were explaining direcdtly to them, so if they had any doubt they could read them. And we gave a copy to each student, so they could have a guidance. And we also gave them a direct e-mail so they could ask for copyrights issues: two of them did it and we gave them some answers.
Cheers
Galder
From: Wikimedia-l <[hidden email]> on behalf of Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 5:30 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach We have dozens of cross project brainstorming off-wiki. But the general feeling is often that if you encourage the social dynamics of a platform in a way that people who like to "play cops" are a key actor... when this is established there is no point in creating sophisticated or efficient tools, because as long as they force such people to work in a different way they will kinda oppose them.
For example, many time I find a deleted file  I could spot dozens of similar in the very same category and the few times I have asked the user who deleted it or ask the deletion, I could feel he had no real interested in completing the job. The fight for copyright is not a goal, it's a just a mean for him. He probably has fun cherry-picking one random file, with no consistent approach. So how many times for example I found files from the USA where there is no FOP for statues deleted maybe if uploaded by the European users but not by the American ones. Because of course if you did delete them all (as you should),  enwikipedia community will notice and it will be a bigger deal.. it's a problem when all images of a monument disappear, right? So let's delete some random files, and vanish when somebody point out the other ones, just to repeat the same pattern somewhere else after a while. That's why it's so easy to find en-N users from the USA who have limited clue with rule of FOP. Now, the users who perform this type of deletion pattern will dislike any tools or preference who simply encourage to do it in a consistent way... they are expert and they know how categories work, if they don't complete the job is probably because they don't want to. If we get close to the issue, we manage to get around some "the newbes will misuse it" or "its a delicate matter", I guess the "good faith " clause will appear.

So, we keep a random patrolling and retropatrolling on this issue, which means poor overall copyright literacy, angry users because of the procedural incoherence and in the end a huge backlog (since the bulk of the files remain there). Take this dynamics, in other fields, with different nuances, multiplied by a dozens of different legal and workload scenarios and voilà. You have one of the reason of our current situation.

I guess there is no tool which can fix that, it's just the way a community really wants to be. Tools can help to encourage people to think differently of course, but I fear that would be a strong resistance.

A. M:


    Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 16:56:49 CEST, Samuel Klein <[hidden email]> ha scritto: 
 
 Ditto.  But did not have the impression that this was {a, the} pressing
need.
Perhaps we also need better ways to highlight workload overloads (and
continue conversations about them through time, rather than sporadic
proposals of specific implementations that can easily fail) to stimulate
cross-project brainstorming to solve the most pressing problems of scale

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:02 AM James Heilman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have a fairly good understanding of copyright. Deal with a fair bit of
> copyright issues occurring via paid editing and flicker washing of images
> and would be happy to do admin work around that if the Commons community
> was interested.
>
> James
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:00 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Wikimedia project communities in general seem to be quite stagnant, if
> not
> > declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole
> > different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it is
> > now when I joined in 2009. I always found it a very pleasant place, but
> > overtime I understood I was the exception there, and most people had bad
> > experiences. And it is as Yann has shown there, it's a few sysops running
> > the entire show almost alone, not because they want that, but because
> > nobody else helps with that.
> >
> > IMO the problem is not with the existing sysops, but because people in
> > general do not feel attracted to copyright and other similar minucious
> > stuff which marks everyday life in Commons. And, without that knowledge
> it
> > is pointless, if not counterproductive, to place a candidacy to sysop. No
> > idea what the solution could be, but it certainly is not blaming Commons
> > and the existing sysops. If more people was interested in copyright, less
> > mistakes would be happening in Commons as well. Whatever the solution is,
> > it probably passes by that.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <[hidden email]> escreveu no dia
> segunda,
> > 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
> >
> > > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And
> > > maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed
> 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>



--
Samuel Klein          @metasj          w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe> 
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>  
_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Yann Forget-3
Yann, you SERIOUSLY need to back up this claim of "dishonesty" on the
part of a Wikmedian of long experience.  Your assumption of bad faith
here is stupendous.

You can't simultaneously complain of the workload, then work this hard
to drive people away.


- d.


On Mon, 13 May 2019 at 05:10, Yann Forget <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> This was reverted. It is a dishonest edit with a misleading summary.
>
> Regards,
> Yann
> Jai Jagat 2020 Grand March Coordinator
> https://www.jaijagat2020.org/
> +91-74 34 93 33 58 (also WhatsApp)
>
>
>
> Le dim. 12 mai 2019 à 19:59, Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> > This episode exposes a policy of Commons that may be unknown to many folks
> > - the precautionary principle.
> >
> > It is an explicit exception to assuming good faith, so I noted this on the
> > AGF page on Commons.
> >
> >
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Assume_good_faith&oldid=prev&diff=349650525
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 10:23 AM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > As I am the author of the post, some remarks:
> > >
> > >   *   Commons is, indeed, the only [cloud] storage for file in most of
> > the
> > > Wikipedias. Making an accusation of using Commons as a storage place is
> > > unfair and nonsense.
> > >   *   Communication could be better, of course, but we don't have to
> > think
> > > on experienced editors and wikimedians, but on people we are trying to
> > > convince to upload to the Commons and find this burden. They don't know
> > how
> > > to communicate and why they must do it.
> > >   *   The upload system allow you to upload something if you are the
> > > author. Period.
> > >   *   Claiming that something is a derivative work without saying which
> > is
> > > the original work is not a good practice.
> > >   *   Of course, commons volunteers are few, and they have a great
> > > job-queue. But outreach volunteers are less, and a project like this can
> > > take a whole year of volunteer work.
> > >   *   After all the victim-blaming seen on this discussion no one was
> > able
> > > to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone.
> > >
> > > Let's hope we can follow with this project next year and we will have
> > less
> > > problems.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > > Galder
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Wikimedia-l <[hidden email]> on behalf of
> > > Vi to <[hidden email]>
> > > Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 3:35 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
> > >
> > > I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to delete/undelete images
> > on
> > > commons in order to reduce workload. Most risky commons' uploads come
> > from
> > > cw-upload, allow local sysops to handle them could work.
> > >
> > > Vito
> > >
> > > Il giorno dom 12 mag 2019 alle ore 15:31 James Heilman <[hidden email]
> > >
> > > ha scritto:
> > >
> > > > It is hard to get the admin bit there aswell. Is Commons interested in
> > > > having more admins?
> > > >
> > > > James
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 5:41 AM Fæ <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for
> > > > > access to the Google image matching API access so we could run a
> > > > > copyvio bot on the live new uploads list. Such a bot would not be
> > > > > terribly hard to get working, and would be a great experiment to see
> > > > > if this aspect of the more boring side of sysop tools could be
> > > > > reduced.[1]
> > > > >
> > > > > Not specifically advocating auto-deletion, but daily housekeeping
> > > > > image matches to highly likely copyrighted categories would make mass
> > > > > housekeeping very easy.
> > > > >
> > > > > A separate old chestnut was my proposal to introduce systemic image
> > > > > hashes, which neatly show "close" image matches.[2] With a Commons
> > hat
> > > > > on, such a project would be of far more immediate pragmatic use than
> > > > > mobile-related and structured data-related projects that seem to suck
> > > > > up all the oxygen and volunteer time available.
> > > > >
> > > > > Note that the history of these project/funding ideas is so long, that
> > > > > several of the most experienced long term volunteers that were
> > > > > originally interested have since retired. Without some positive short
> > > > > term encouragement, not only do these ideas never reach the useful
> > > > > experiment stage, but the volunteers involved simply fade away.
> > > > >
> > > > > Links
> > > > > 1.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2016/02#Google_has_opened_an_API_for_image_recognition
> > > > > 2. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae/Imagehash
> > > > >
> > > > > Fae
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 12 May 2019 at 12:21, Amir Sarabadani <[hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IMO commons need either a Clue Bot NG for new uploads or ores
> > support
> > > > for
> > > > > > images that might be copyright violation, or both.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:10 PM Yaroslav Blanter <[hidden email]
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Just the active community itself is too small, compared with the
> > > > > amount of
> > > > > > > material it has to deal with.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > > Yaroslav
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 1:07 PM Benjamin Ikuta <
> > > > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Is the shortage of admins due to a lack of people willing or
> > > > capable
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > the job, or increasing difficulty in obtaining the bit?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On May 12, 2019, at 3:55 AM, Tomasz Ganicz <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Well, Actually, at the moment it looks they are all
> > undeleted.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The good habit - which I was keeping when organizing several
> > > > > > > GLAM-related
> > > > > > > > > mass uploads - was to create on Commons project page
> > describing
> > > > > what it
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > intended to be uploaded, preferably in English. Then you can
> > > > > create a
> > > > > > > > > project template to mark all uploads with them.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Partnerships
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Despite practical issue of avoiding unnecessary clashes with
> > > > > Common's
> > > > > > > > > admins - creating template and project page helps to promote
> > > you
> > > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > across Wikimedia communities and may inspire others to do
> > > > something
> > > > > > > > similar.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Commons is indeed quite hostile environment for uploaders,
> > but
> > > on
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > other
> > > > > > > > > hand it is constantly flooded by hundreds  of copyright
> > > violating
> > > > > > > files a
> > > > > > > > > day:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > See the list from just one day:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/2019/05/01
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > so this hostility works both ways - Common's admins have to
> > > cope
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > aggressive hostile copyright violators every day, and after
> > > some
> > > > > time -
> > > > > > > > > decide to leave or became being hostile themselves... and the
> > > > other
> > > > > > > issue
> > > > > > > > > is decreasing number of active admins and OTRS agents.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think - sooner or later - all this system - uploads -
> > > screening
> > > > > > > uploads
> > > > > > > > > by admins, and OTRS agreements - needs deep rethinking.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > niedz., 12 maj 2019 o 10:48 Mister Thrapostibongles <
> > > > > > > > > [hidden email]> napisał(a):
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> Hello all,
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> There seems to be a dispute between the Outreach and the
> > > Commons
> > > > > > > > components
> > > > > > > > >> of The Community, judging by the article "Wikimedia
> > Commons: a
> > > > > highly
> > > > > > > > >> hostile place for multimedia students contributions" at the
> > > > > Education
> > > > > > > > >> Newsletter
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Education/News/April_2019/Wikimedia_Commons:_a_highly_hostile_place_for_multimedia_students_contributions
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> As far as I can understand it, some students on an Outreach
> > > > > project
> > > > > > > > >> uploaded some rather well-made video material, and comeone
> > on
> > > > > Commons
> > > > > > > > >> deleted them because they appeared to well-made to be
> > student
> > > > > projects
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >> so concluded they were copyright violations.  But some
> > rather
> > > > odd
> > > > > > > > remarks
> > > > > > > > >> were made "Commons has to fight the endless stream of
> > uploaded
> > > > > > > > copyrighted
> > > > > > > > >> content on behalf of a headquarters in San Francisco that
> > > > doesn't
> > > > > > > care."
> > > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > > >> "you have regarded Commons as little more than free cloud
> > > > storage
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > >> images you intend to use on Wikipedia ".
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Perhaps the Foundation needs to resolve this dispute?
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Thrapostibongles
> > > > > > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > >> 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > >> Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > ,
> > > > > > > > >> <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > > > > > > > > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > > > > > > > > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Amir (he/him)
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > [hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > James Heilman
> > > > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: [hidden email]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > --
> > -Andrew Lih
> > Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
> > US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
> > Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
> > Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
> > Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
> > University, Columbia University, USC
> > ---
> > Email: [hidden email]
> > WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
> > PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

_______________________________________________
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: [hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
1234