User talk:Jayen466/Archives/2023/January

Happy Holidays

The 12 Days of Wikipedia On the 12th day of Christmas Jimbo sent to me 12 BLPs 11 RFAs 10 New Users 9 Barnstars 8 Admins Blocking 7 Socks Socking 6 Clerks Clerking 5 Check Users Checking 4 Oversighters Hiding 3 GAs 2 Did You Knows and an ARB in a pear tree. -May your holiday season be filled with joy, laughter and good health.--Chris Troutman (talk) 03:22, 26 December 2022 (UTC) This message was generated using {{subst: The 12 Days of Wikipedia}}

Thanks, Chris, Happy Holidays to you too, and thanks for being here. --Andreas JN466 08:58, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Post on WikiIslam's Talk Page

The discussion you linked to was interesting to read. Thank you. However, it does really muddy my understanding of WP:V and WP:OR. Any tips that you can offer? Snuish (talk) 15:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

@Snuish2: I feel Jimmy talked eminent sense in that discussion – which was followed by the abolition of the old "verifiability, not truth" wording.

As for the context in which I brought up the issue, I think you did exactly the right thing, pointing out that the quote would have been checked at the time and that similar statements were around. That made me go back to the source until I managed to convince Google Books to show me the URL reference the author had given, and a check in the Internet Archive then established that the quote was actually completely correct (and not a misquote, as I had originally thought). I was wrong and the source was right.

So I think it's good to demand a lot of scrutiny before deciding that a source is mistaken. At the same time, sources – including scholarly sources – simply are mistaken sometimes on simple matters of fact. (Here is an example I came across when researching an article many years ago, which struck me as particularly ridiculous: this book says, Rajneesh's health deteriorated after his arrest, and he died in custody in 1990. In fact, he was only briefly in custody and died years later in another country.)

Something like this is not a problem when (as in this case) there are lots of other sources covering the matter and contradicting the wrong one. It's more difficult when there are few sources around. I think if there is reasonable doubt, and there are BLP implications as in Jimmy's example, it is best to err on the side of caution and simply omit a statement. (A somewhat similar example is described in the In the Media section of this month's Signpost issue – the divorce case.)

Two of my favourite quotes which I think are worth bearing in mind:

• Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for that rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. —Erwin Knoll
• What people outside do not appreciate is that a newspaper is like a soufflé, prepared in a hurry for immediate consumption. This of course is why whenever you read a newspaper account of some event of which you have personal knowledge it is nearly always inadequate or inaccurate. Journalists are as aware as anyone of this defect; it is simply that if the information is to reach as many readers as possible, something less than perfection has often to be accepted. —David E. H. Jones, in New Scientist, Vol. 26

Best, --Andreas JN466 22:11, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 January 2023

• News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation ousts, bans quarter of Arabic Wikipedia admins

• In the media: Odd bedfellows, Elon and Jimbo, reliable sources for divorces, and more

• Interview: ComplexRational's RfA debrief

• Technology report: Wikimedia Foundation's Abstract Wikipedia project "at substantial risk of failure"

• Essay: Mobile editing

• Arbitration report: Arbitration Committee Election 2022

• Recent research: Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement in talk page disputes

• Serendipity: Wikipedia about FIFA World Cup 2022: quick, factual and critical

• Featured content: Would you like to swing on a star?

• Traffic report: Football, football, football! Wikipedia Football Club!

• CommonsComix: #4: The Course of WikiEmpire

• From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Speaking of reads like some sort of thriller novel.

I came across Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive338#Kate_Chaney last year. My guess is that she was annoyed the Australian Electoral Commission document (it had birth certificates and other stuff) was used for "born in the US" in the WP-article. Funny thing I noticed, was that when [1] appeared, it initially said "Born in Australia", but that changed after awhile. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Indeed it did! --Andreas JN466 10:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

FAR for Inner German border

User:Buidhe has nominated Inner German border for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Wondering

That I am not remotely acquainted with S. Arabia (except their persecution of dissidents), I wonder whether judgements of the SCC are publicly available? TrangaBellam (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Someone on Facebook said they had read the charges ("It was also shocking that when I browsed through the details of his arrest, one of the charges against him was because of his activity on Wikipedia!"). They may indeed be available somewhere. Andreas JN466 18:18, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah, nice! I tried to access Saudi Arabia's E-Court system but it asks for their equivalent of Social Security number at the very outset. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:27, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Spotted Jimbo's tweet; probably the only WMF guy to acknowledge of the news about the arrests! Given the Foundation's response to arrests in Russia and Belarus, they have been remarkably tightlipped. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:39, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Gee. As tweets on matters like this go, that had all the substance of blancmange. --Andreas JN466 21:50, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

<page stalker> Horrifying as the news are, it isn't really surprising for anyone watching the SA/Gulf scene. The suppression online is really unprecedented. "Wrong" tweets gets you decades in jail (I am not exaggerating, unfortunately). With the "all clear" from the US last year ("Khashoggi, who?") it can only get worse. And with the help of Israely spyware, and intenational companies like McKinsey & Company identifying targets; opposition is virtually non-existant (outside jail, that is). The Guardian had an article yeasterday [2], and the OsamaK account is gobally blocked [3]. I have been trying to find a picture of him from People at Wikimania 2019, with no success so far. Huldra (talk) 22:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC) PS: actually, it is quite widely reported; just search for Ziyad al-Sofiani or Osama Khalid

Someone recently created c:Category:Osama Khalid. Regards, HaeB (talk) 23:14, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, User:HaeB; I see a picture of them is already included in Signpost-article. Ziyad Alsufyani apparently was in his last year as a medical student in 2016, Huldra (talk) 20:11, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I guess this was why both had dialled down their contributions to Wikipedia significantly – focusing on their medical studies, and getting married in Osama's case, as someone said on Facebook. Andreas JN466 21:06, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

You should ask User:Fjmustak: he is the guy who took the picture of the two together; he might know some more? Huldra (talk) 23:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have not had contact with either of them for a very long time, and was just as shocked as anyone else to hear the news. The photo is from 2016, long before the arrests. Fjmustak (talk) 00:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Fjmustak. They had scaled down their Wikipedia editing significantly, probably because of their studies. It's still shocking that it took two years for the community to learn about it. Andreas JN466 22:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Fjmustak; anyway: great picture of the two. I do hope Ziyad al-Sofiani or Osama Khalid will not be red-linked for long - Huldra (talk) 22:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Huldra, actually, I very much hope they remain redlinked, unless they come up with a breakthrough in the field of medicine or some technical innovation of sorts! Fjmustak (talk) 12:12, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

User:Fjmustak why? From how I understand Sarah Leah Whitson in DAWN, publisity can only help them, now. Huldra (talk) 20:54, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@Fjmustak: I think we could wikilink them to Censorship_in_Saudi_Arabia#Since_2019. (Like you I hope there won't be any worse news.) Andreas JN466 13:07, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

As for Jimbo's response: note the difference between the reponse toward the Saudis jailed, and towards the Syrian Wikipedian, Bassel Khartabil. I wonder if Ziyad al-Sofiani or Osama Khalid ever will be blue-linked? Huldra (talk) 23:22, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey Huldra, so good to hear from you! Hope you're keeping well.

For what it's worth, I have now asked a few questions in line with the above on the Wikimedia-l mailing list: [4] Much love, Andreas JN466 21:33, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Dear Andreas, I'm fine, I'm just not as much on Wikipedia as I used to be (basically I am mostly finished doing the work I set out to do).

Some notes about the case;

The repression in SA -and in the other GCC countries- is absolutely horrific, and the Western media/Government mostly don't give a damn. Can you imagine the outrage if say, Russia, had jailed anyone for decades -for editing Wikipedia?

I recall As'ad AbuKhalil tweeting a couple of years ago that just about everyone he knew in SA were busy deleting all their social media accounts; "Big Brother is Watching You" has never been more true than in the GCC countries today.

Western companies are (mostly) up for sale when it comes to the GCC countries; McKinsey and countless other PR "consultants" are working non-stop for them. The GCC countries spend millions and millions of dollars every year for "online reputation management".

You note it very well on all sorts of articles, see Talk:Yousef_Al_Otaiba#Paid_editing? (<- extremely proficient paid editing) -and I have been struggeling for years to keep anything critical in the Neom-article. And all the articles about Gulf-royals: nothing about the billions they fleece from their people, everything about the peanuts they give back.

This case might be even worse for WMF than the Khartabil-case. From my understanding: Khartabil was arrested for issues mostly outside Wikipedia, but (again: for what I know) al-Sofiani and Khalid were arrested basically for their Wikipedia-work.

Sigh; I wish I had any trust in WMF' T&S: unfortunately I have not. Their T&S exists to protect WMF; not editors. (Anyway: that is my experience!)

I hope you and T. are fine, send her my regards! Hugs to both of you, Huldra (talk) 23:18, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Huldra. T. is sending fond wishes! Andreas JN466 22:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

😊❤️ to both of you! Huldra (talk) 22:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Special report

This looks fine to me; when you're ready for it to be copyedited, just mark it as such; I'll try to get to it as soon as possible (unless Bri does first). Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.3% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600^th FP!} 16:09, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Adam, I've now marked it ready. (I think Smallbones has already done a run-through.) I might still have to tweak things if there are further developments, but for now things seem to have quietened down. --Andreas JN466 17:59, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2023

• From the team: We heard zoomers liked fortnights: the biweekly Signpost rides again

• Special report: Coverage of 2022 bans reveals editors serving long sentences in Saudi Arabia since 2020

• News and notes: Revised Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines up for vote, WMF counsel departs, generative models under discussion

• In the media: Court orders user data in libel case, Saudi Wikipedia in the crosshairs, Larry Sanger at it again

• Technology report: View it! A new tool for image discovery

• In focus: Busting into Grand Central

• Serendipity: How I bought part of Wikipedia – for less than $100

• Gallery: What is our responsibility when it comes to images?

• Humour: New geologically speedy deletion criteria introduced

• Opinion: Good old days, in which fifth-symbol-lacking lipograms roam'd our librarious litany

• Featured content: Flip your lid

• Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2022

• From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:13, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Jailed Wikimedians

Hi Andreas--just read the article, thanks to you and JP for writing it. Do we have a project page about jailed Wikimedians anywhere? Like, a list? A "never forget" kind of thing? If not, should we make one? Levivich (talk) 05:25, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

We don't have one to my knowledge and I agree we should make one. Possibly a list in mainspace as well. --Andreas JN466 09:53, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

OK I started List of people imprisoned for editing Wikipedia but I won't be surprised if it ends up deleted. Levivich (talk) 19:49, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, we'll see! Andreas JN466 19:56, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

|}

Reminds me a little of the Tuhin Sinha case

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judd Hamilton (2nd nomination), you may find it interesting. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:14, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Also possibly interesting:[5] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:08, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I was just looking at that this morning. Given that Doug mistook that decade-old page for an attack page that had just been created, I sort of understand why he did what he did.

By the way, the lack of clarity in the UCoC about this area is why I am still voting against it. According to the letter of the UCoC, you commit harassment if you even so much as tell a family member or spouse in your own home that another human being edited Wikipedia, and none of the journalists who have written about this story would be welcome as editors here.

I imagine the WMF wrote it that way because they don't want people in authoritarian states reporting on others. But authoritarian states will always have some Stasi-like editors and UCoC bans are no effective deterrence there, especially given that any banned editor can just come back with a different name.

As we have just seen in the Saudi example, the WMF is toothless when it comes to protecting editors. People in those countries are (rightly) more afraid of their government than they are of the WMF. Andreas JN466 11:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Stop the presses. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC)