Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF)
Policy | Technical | Proposals | Idea lab | WMF | Miscellaneous |
- Discussions of proposals which do not require significant foundation attention or involvement belong at Village pump (proposals)
- Discussions of bugs and routine technical issues belong at Village pump (technical).
- Consider developing new ideas at the Village pump (idea lab).
- This page is not a place to appeal decisions about article content, which the WMF does not control (except in very rare cases); see Dispute resolution for that.
- Issues that do not require project-wide attention should often be handled through Wikipedia:Contact us instead of here.
- This board is not the place to report emergencies; go to Wikipedia:Emergency for that.
Threads may be automatically archived after 14 days of inactivity.
Behaviour on this page: This page is for engaging with and discussing the Wikimedia Foundation. Editors commenting here are required to act with appropriate decorum. While grievances, complaints, or criticism of the foundation are frequently posted here, you are expected to present them without being rude or hostile. Comments that are uncivil may be removed without warning. Personal attacks against other users, including employees of the Wikimedia Foundation, will be met with sanctions.
Copyright tool
editOne of our most important tools, Earwig's Copyvio Detector, depends on access to Google. According to the tool's creator and operator, The Earwig, the WMF has kindly been paying for this Google access. Unfortunately, we've been hampered by a strict limit on the number of searches allowed per day. The Earwig mentioned that there might be a way to work out a special arrangement with Google to increase the cap. Would someone at the WMF be able to pursue this?
In case it helps, this is a vital tool to a number of English Wikipedia processes, and it would surprise me to learn that the sister projects aren't using it as well. We use the tool routinely as part of our new page patrol, articles for creation, contributor copyright investigations, did you know, good article, and featured article processes. Historically, the WMF has taken a special interest in supporting volunteer work that focuses on our legal responsibilities, of which compliance with copyright law is an obvious example. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:34, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- My understanding is that Google has a hard daily limit of 10,000 API accesses per day for absolutely everyone across the board, without exception. User:Novem Linguae/Essays/Copyvio detectors#Earwig copyvio detector. My impression is that an exception wasn't possible because Google doesn't provide an exception to anyone. Earwig would know best though.
- Was this post made because Earwig said "please ask WMF on my behalf to negotiate with Google", or is this more of general question? –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:15, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- cc Chlod. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:18, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Earwig didn't ask me to do anything on his behalf. He mentioned that
"the WMF pays for it, but Google's API terms limit our usage without some kind of special arrangement that I have been unable to get."
This was at a discussion at his user talk. I wasn't sure who might be able to negotiate a special arrangement, and I'm not sure it's a possibility, but this was the best place I could think to ask. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:26, 31 July 2024 (UTC)- A bit odd that Earwig isn't doing the advocating himself, but on the linked user talk page, it does sound like he's asking for some help with this. Would The Earwig be willing to share his contacts at WMF that have helped with this in the past? Sounds like WMF pays for the tool, so there's some accounting/finance/grants contact that knows a little about it. And we also have partnerships people like NPerry (WMF) that I believe has worked with Google before. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- From what I've heard, the WMF contact that Earwig had has since left the Foundation and wouldn't be able to help in this case. You are correct that WMF pays for the tool. I had mentioned this at the Hackathon with staff and it seems there's some resistance in getting the cost of extra tokens funded, although I'm unsure of exactly how the WMF's budgeting process works, so no clue on the impact it has in this situation (considering we don't have a Google liaison to begin with). Chlod (say hi!) 05:20, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Even the name of a former WMF employee contact would be helpful. Let's get all this documented so we can start figuring out what WMF departments/teams have assisted in the past. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:26, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- From what I've heard, the WMF contact that Earwig had has since left the Foundation and wouldn't be able to help in this case. You are correct that WMF pays for the tool. I had mentioned this at the Hackathon with staff and it seems there's some resistance in getting the cost of extra tokens funded, although I'm unsure of exactly how the WMF's budgeting process works, so no clue on the impact it has in this situation (considering we don't have a Google liaison to begin with). Chlod (say hi!) 05:20, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- A bit odd that Earwig isn't doing the advocating himself, but on the linked user talk page, it does sound like he's asking for some help with this. Would The Earwig be willing to share his contacts at WMF that have helped with this in the past? Sounds like WMF pays for the tool, so there's some accounting/finance/grants contact that knows a little about it. And we also have partnerships people like NPerry (WMF) that I believe has worked with Google before. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Earwig didn't ask me to do anything on his behalf. He mentioned that
Hi all. Firefangledfeathers, thanks for starting the discussion. Novem, sorry if this thread came up a bit strangely. In truth, I struggle a little with motivation these days, so I really appreciate others' help getting the ball rolling. I am still here, though—it comes in waves. (It's also good to involve the community in the tool so the institutional knowledge isn't stuck with me.)
BTW, I am working on more effectively managing automated/excessive tool usage and will soon require OAuth to run searches (see this active thread on my talk). Right now the tool really doesn't have any usage guards or a way to limit individual users' activity, which isn't good when our resources are so limited. It's possible doing that will free up our resources a lot if a substantial fraction of our current usage is coming from malicious crawlers, despite Chlod and I's attempts at blocking them (the tool has been running for over a decade and it's never been this bad, though I have a theory what this is about). Even so, finding a way to increase our search quota will enable us to support some requested features that are current nonstarters, even if the tool's entire current quota could be devoted to it, like checking all new pages.
My main point of contact with the WMF in the past was Kaldari. The last time we spoke about the tool was 2020; since then, the situation has been unclear. (MusikAnimal, do you remember if we've spoken about this?) Last year Runab WMF and DTankersley (WMF) reached out to me to discuss the tool in the context of WMF efforts "to find ways to reduce single points of failure for tools that require a third party API", but after an initial conversation I haven't heard back aside from being told that Deb was moved to another project, so I'm not sure what happened with those efforts.
Frequently we've discussed adding an alternate search backend aside from Google. While Google is really the gold standard for breadth of search coverage, as far as I'm aware—and this is really what the copyvio detector needs, not necessarily quality/intelligence; people have suggested services like DuckDuckGo, but they're really unsuitable because they just republish raw results from Bing with some additional flair that is basically useless for us—something like Bing itself might work as an (automatic) fallback if we exhaust our Google credits for the day. I believe Bing has roughly equivalent pricing/usage limits as Google, but it's been a while since I've looked into it. And we/the WMF would need to establish a relationship with Bing for that to work; I don't know if that's a better idea than attempting to negotiate our Google limits. There are also other options like Yandex (which the tool did use one dark time in the past before the Google relationship and after Yahoo ended their free service... it wasn't great, at least for English results, but it's something that could be looked into for some other language projects, perhaps). Finally, there was a discussion on my talk earlier this year with Samwalton9 (WMF) about adding The Wikipedia Library as another search backend, and I did correspond briefly with someone at EBSCO about this, but again, I haven't heard from either of them about this in several months. — The Earwig (talk) 06:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- So the Google API proxy and the Google account it runs on are wholly part of Community Tech's budget. Kaldari was the contact in the past when they were my manager on CommTech. So the good news is Community Tech is still here, and we are actively maintaining this proxy (I just migrated it to a newer Debian a few days ago). The part that hasn't changed is our quota from Google, and sadly I doubt it will change. We are already paying hefty fines for the quota we have now, but I believe it is also correct that 10K is a strict limit from Google. I can see from the graphs in the API console that we almost always hit that limit within the first 12 hours of each day.
I am working on more effectively managing automated/excessive tool usage and will soon require OAuth to run searches …
– that is most certainly the best immediate recourse for addressing this problem. From my years of shielding XTools from web crawlers, I can say with confidence that putting up a login wall by itself should make a big difference. I also think mitigating excessive and automated use is something that would probably be required before we could consider dishing out more money to Google. However again, I don't think such negotiations would get us anywhere anyway :(- As a general note, such "negotiations" are typically done these days via the Partnerships team. I went though them recently when we solidified our partnership with Turnitin. Speaking of which… do others find the "Use Turnitin" option of Copyvios at all useful? Because that's using the old Turnitin account (the new one can't be used outside CopyPatrol), and the last I checked there were still a few million credits left. — MusikAnimal talk 20:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for those details. So I can improve my notes at User:Novem Linguae/Essays/Copyvio detectors#Earwig copyvio detector, do you know why/how Google API Proxy ended up separate from the main tool? And does "paying hefty fines" mean that there is some sort of sliding scale of pricing and that getting near the cap gets more expensive? My notes currently state that Google API credits cost us $50/day. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- The Google API Proxy (docs at wikitech:Nova Resource:Google-api-proxy) exists solely to anonymize requests to the Google APIs, should they be used in a fashion that sends personal data such as your IP or user agent. As far as I know, Copyvios has always accessed Google APIs through this proxy.
- I'm not aware of any sort of sliding scale as far as pricing goes, and my use of the word "hefty" was relative to my team. However since I made my reply above, I have been informed that the budget is actually not solely from Community Tech, as it was in the past (but we do still maintain the proxy). I don't have any details about internal accounting, I'm afraid. My apologies for any confusion caused. — MusikAnimal talk 19:48, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Wouldn't the Toolforge tool itself serve as an anonymizing proxy as long as the Google API requests are being sent via a backend rather than via browser JavaScript? But that's a bit of a tangent :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- I imagine it also serves to decouple who pays Google from who operates the service using the Google API. isaacl (talk) 21:11, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Wouldn't the Toolforge tool itself serve as an anonymizing proxy as long as the Google API requests are being sent via a backend rather than via browser JavaScript? But that's a bit of a tangent :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
From my years of shielding XTools from web crawlers, I can say with confidence that putting up a login wall by itself should make a big difference
- Please, please, please do not restrict Earwig to only editors with accounts. Anonymous users have enough doors slammed in our faces as it already is. 2603:8001:4542:28FB:750C:1A25:D002:877B (talk) 19:32, 5 August 2024 (UTC) (Actual talk)
- I'm willing to entertain alternate methods for anonymous users to access the tool. I do need some way to attribute usage to a human, though. Any suggestions? I might present a challenge page where you have to answer some question (essentially a CAPTCHA, but one that works without JS). Or I can require anonymous users request a token (that would be saved as a cookie so does not need to be entered with each request). — The Earwig (talk) 00:00, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- @The Earwig will the new meta:IP Editing: Privacy Enhancement and Abuse Mitigation feature be of any value? I'm still figuring out the details, but my understanding is that it will use cookies to track anonymous users across changing IPs. It's not foolproof (and isn't meant to be), but it's a least a first pass at "all of these IP edits were done by one human". RoySmith (talk) 12:40, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- That's a good question, but I can't tell from the documentation whether temporary accounts are able to use OAuth. I would need to test it. (And we may need some other solution in the meantime, before that's deployed.) — The Earwig (talk) 14:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- I know nothing about what the "modern" methods are of telling bots and humans apart these days (besides knowing that CAPTCHAs are apparently broken: e.g. Table 3 in [1]), so I probably won't be able to provide many helpful suggestions. If we need to request a token from you, I for one would be okay with that if it's a one-time process, but would that be handled by an automatic system or by asking you for one manually—and if the latter, is there any indication how many anonymous editors (legitimately) use the tool so you won't be potentially flooded with hundreds of requests?
- Another idea I had is making sure the requesting IP address' /64 range (if IPv6, or the address alone if IPv4) has made at least one edit to the Wikimedia site the Earwig request is for. I could easily be assuming wrong, but I would think there wouldn't be many cases where an anonymous user would want to check for copyright violations on a site they've never even edited before. This would admittedly require anonymous users to be on the same device they edit from to use the tool, but so would requiring a browser token. ...however, I don't know how technically feasible that is, and obviously someone malicious could just manually change their IP address (but would someone running hundreds of web crawlers go to that effort for every single one of them?). 2603:8001:4542:28FB:9566:5D77:1AC4:CB78 (talk) 18:47, 12 August 2024 (UTC) (Actual talk)
- @The Earwig: OAuth is not available for temporary accounts. The T&S Product Team aims to make the experience with temporary accounts very similar to what IPs have now, which includes not having access to OAuth or user groups. @2603:*: For IPs, we don't have access to IP addresses on Toolforge, so we can't check on wikis if a specific Toolforge visitor's IP has made an edit on the wikis. Requesting a special token, as you've mentioned, is probably a better option to go for if we want to have anonymous editors keep their access. Since there aren't that many editors who do all of their edits on an IP, we shouldn't get too many requests for this. What should be decided is the minimum requirements for giving this access, and the criteria for revoking it (should we find out that an editor has been using a token maliciously). Chlod (say hi!) 05:44, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Given IP addresses (and thus contributions) can't be measured by Toolforge, what prerequisites could even be measured? Or would the token-giving occur on a different site?
- In terms of revoking, my knee-jerk thought is more than M requests in a minute or N requests in a day could cause the token to get revoked until the anonymous user interacts with a human to request it back. But A. I don't know if that's how things work with tokens and Toolforge, and B. I'd be curious to know what the already-established practice and limits for e.g. the Wikipedia API and whatnot are, to have some sort of a benchmark. 2603:8001:4542:28FB:C10F:60AC:578A:3F8 (talk) 22:48, 13 August 2024 (UTC) (Actual talk)
more than M requests in a minute ... could cause the token to get revoked
You need to be careful with that. When I'm checking DYK queues, I check a whole set at a time, which means opening nine (or more) Earwig windows in a few seconds. RoySmith (talk) 23:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- @The Earwig will the new meta:IP Editing: Privacy Enhancement and Abuse Mitigation feature be of any value? I'm still figuring out the details, but my understanding is that it will use cookies to track anonymous users across changing IPs. It's not foolproof (and isn't meant to be), but it's a least a first pass at "all of these IP edits were done by one human". RoySmith (talk) 12:40, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm willing to entertain alternate methods for anonymous users to access the tool. I do need some way to attribute usage to a human, though. Any suggestions? I might present a challenge page where you have to answer some question (essentially a CAPTCHA, but one that works without JS). Or I can require anonymous users request a token (that would be saved as a cookie so does not need to be entered with each request). — The Earwig (talk) 00:00, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for those details. So I can improve my notes at User:Novem Linguae/Essays/Copyvio detectors#Earwig copyvio detector, do you know why/how Google API Proxy ended up separate from the main tool? And does "paying hefty fines" mean that there is some sort of sliding scale of pricing and that getting near the cap gets more expensive? My notes currently state that Google API credits cost us $50/day. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:52, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- @The Earwig Thanks for the reminder about the EBSCO/Library integration - I've just poked that email thread to see if we can make any progress there. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 10:49, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin July Issue 2
editUpcoming and current events and conversations
Talking: 2024 continues
- Where to from here? A message from Wikimedia Foundation CEO, Maryana Iskander.
- The program for Wikimania Katowice (7–10 August 2024) is now live! Register now to attend virtually!
- Are you speaking at Wikimania? Here are some resources for speakers.
Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure
See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Research · Web · Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on Mediawiki.org
- The Foundation recently opened our first data center in South America. Read about how it is already lowering load times.
- Feature updates from the Tech News: Stewards can now globally block accounts; Wikimedia site users can now submit account vanishing requests via GlobalVanishRequest; and interface of FlaggedRevs (also known as “Pending Changes”) is improved.
- Dark mode will transform Wikipedia's accessibility. Interface admins and user script maintainers are encouraged to check gadgets and user scripts in the dark mode, to find any hard-coded colors and fix them.
- Measure the impact of Wikimedia Commons with Commons Impact Metrics analytics dashboard, now available via data dumps and API.
- Key findings from user research about confusion in uploading images to Wikipedia.
- This month’s Wikimedia Research Showcase highlighted the impact machine translation has on both content and readers of Wikipedia and provided interesting insights on how to overcome related challenges. Watch the recording.
- The Charts project officially kicked off. The goal of this new initiative is to restore basic data visualization capabilities to the wikis. Check out the project page and follow our progress on Phabricator.
- The CampaignEvents extension is now available on Meta-wiki, Arabic Wikipedia, Igbo Wikipedia, and Swahili Wikipedia, and can be requested on other wikis. This extension helps manage and make events more visible. Learn about how to request this extension.
- The Campaigns Product & Programs teams have launched a consultation on WikiProjects and other forms of collaboration on the wikis. They want to understand why they work (or don’t work) for some Wikimedia communities, and they want to learn what can be done to improve the experience. Everyone is encouraged to share their feedback.
- Are you a technical contributor? Check out the latest Technical Community Newsletter.
Annual Goals Progress on Equity
See also a list of all movement events: on Meta
- The Wikimania Core Organizing Team (COT) for 2025 is delighted to announce that the 20th Wikimania will be hosted in Nairobi, Kenya.
- The Wikipedia Library secured new partnerships with Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Central European University Press, and l’Informé and is adding more content collections in the library.
- Three new A Wiki Minute videos have been released which address reader privacy and content management on Wikipedia, as well as how Wikipedia differs from social media platforms. Learn how A Wiki Minute videos have helped increase awareness about our work.
- The Committee Support Team year-in-review and reflections.
- A new 20-minute audio interview about the WikiLearn platform with Asaf Bartov, in an episode of the WikipediaPodden podcast.
- More of the Wikipedia core policies curriculum developed for the Africa Growth Pilot is available for review. After edits and improvements by the community, recorded videos would become a permanent core policies course on WikiLearn.
- One new wiki has been created: Wikivoyage in Czech.
Annual Goals Progress on Safety & Integrity
See also blogs: Global Advocacy blog · Global Advocacy Newsletter · Policy blog
- Voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open now until August 10. Learn more about voting and voter eligibility.
- US Supreme Court ruling on NetChoice cases: What does it mean for Wikipedia?
Annual Goals Progress on Effectiveness
See also: quarterly Metrics Reports
- Announcing the 2023-2024 Research Fund Grantees and their funded projects.
Board and Board committee updates
See Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard · Affiliations Committee Newsletter
- The outcomes of the June Board meeting are published on Meta. Agenda for the August meeting is here.
- Welcoming new affiliates: Recognition of Wikimedistas Wayuu User Group, Wikimedia Community of Togo User Group, and Wikimedians of Singapore User Group.
- The Board of Trustees selection pre-onboarding and campaign period is open from July 25 to August 26.
- Foundation Trustee Dariusz Jemelniak was appointed to the Governing Board of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology, established as part of the EU’s key funding program for research and innovation.
- Movement Charter voter feedback: All comments are now on Meta-wiki (65 comments from the affiliates voters and 447 comments from the individual voters).
Other Movement curated newsletters & news
See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Wikimedia World · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · other newsletters:
- Topics: Education · GLAM · The Wikipedia Library
- Wikimedia Projects: Milestones · Wikidata
- Regions: Central and Eastern Europe
Previous editions of this bulletin are on Meta. Let askcac wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!
SWViewer
editHowdy!
I am an occasional user of SWViewer, a vandalism patrolling tool that is (in my understanding) partly maintained by the Wikimedia Foundation. I generall like its interface and design, and I have found it to be a useful tool.
I do have one item that I would like to discuss though: I think it would be wise to add a checkbox for whether or not to mark an edit as minor. Currently, the interface allows users to tick a box for "Use undo" when rolling back an edit with a summary. This is good, but it only allows users to revert edits in a way that is marked as minor. I understand that certain wikis, such as the English Wikipedia, have a very narrow understanding of what constitutes a minor edit, and there are times when I want to undo an edit but it is not technically a minor edit. This makes me have to manually go to the English Wikipedia and click the "undo" button there rather than keeping all of this in the SWViewer interface.
Is there a way that the WMF could either:
- Not automatically mark edits made while "Use undo" is ticked as minor (i.e. submit them to non-minor edits); or
- Allow users to select whether or not their actions are considered to be minor edits (via a tick box)?
Thank you!
— Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:19, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- SWViewer is not AFAIK maintained by the foundation. It looks like their bug tracker is at m:Talk:SWViewer. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:08, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Mobile fundraising experiment
editHi, I'm not WMF staff (although I am the Wikimedian of the Year) but I noticed something I thought should have wider community input. Please keep in mind that as far as I'm aware this is in very early stages and there is no guarantee that it will actually be implemented. Also, please be nice. I anticipate that some people will be surprised by what it was being proposed here so I felt like this was an important reminder. Anyways: mw:Wikimedia Apps/Team/iOS/Fundraising Experiment in the iOS App. There is a feedback section towards the end of you wish to give it. I have already commented there. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 17:47, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- As alluring as this proposal may seem at first glance, I think it's ultimately better if things stay as they are right now. KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 07:14, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Kingoflettuce: If you have feedback, I would say this on the page itself. There is a link to the mediawiki link in my first comment. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 07:21, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Clovermoss, it’s Haley from the Mobile Apps team! You’re correct that the project is in very early stages. We just recently published the project page and had planned to start outreach after Wikimania—that’s why folks might not have heard about it yet. In short, the idea is that we want to try out other ways of fundraising beyond just banners – hopefully ways that make readers and editors feel more connected to each other. But we know that fundraising ideas have to be considered carefully, which is why our goal right now is just to be in conversation with the community on high level concepts. We hope people will join the discussion on the project page. P.S. Congratulations on Wikimedian of the Year! HNordeen (WMF) (talk) 16:01, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- As alluring as this proposal may seem at first glance, I think it's ultimately better if things stay as they are right now. KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 07:14, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- This should have been mentioned at the fundraising brainstorming page as soon as it was published. I object to the "gamification" aspect of giving money to people. I'm not sure how "donating from an article" is an improvement over just having a discrete "donate" button, which we already have. In conclusion: I think this is unnecessary.
- Also here – is it THAT HARD to say "introduce", which is a long-standing, universally recognized word, rather than "onboarding" which is today's #1 corporatese-jargon?
These things always make the WMF look bad, bureaucratic, corporate, and out of touch. Cremastra (talk) 17:06, 14 August 2024 (UTC)- @HNordeen (WMF): This is what I meant when I said at the page itself that this is likely to cause a public relations disaster. Imagine a thousand comments like this. Please understand that I really don't think this is a good idea and I don't say this because I wish you to fail but I wish to see everyone suceed. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 17:13, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'll also note that the phrase "Microinteraction and confirmation snackbar." was used without apparent embarrassment to mean "a notification/confirmation box". The thing is, phrases like this are inaccessible, and make these pages harder to understand. Cremastra (talk) 17:17, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- While "microinteraction" definitely should've been left out, that's not a "box". "Confirmation box" sounds like a dialog for you to confirm. A snackbar can only be a small message that pops up from the bottom to tell you that the operation has been a success (sometimes with an ündo" button to the right). Aaron Liu (talk) 18:17, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, what I meant by confirmation box was a box confirming that the operation worked. That is, it's sending you a confirmation, not the other way around. Cremastra (talk) 18:19, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah. That's why it's important for it to be called a snackbar or a toast as opposed to just box or bar. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:20, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- That's an important distinction for developers, but I think if the page is targeted to the general public, "notification bar" should suffice. Cremastra (talk) 18:46, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah. That's why it's important for it to be called a snackbar or a toast as opposed to just box or bar. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:20, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, what I meant by confirmation box was a box confirming that the operation worked. That is, it's sending you a confirmation, not the other way around. Cremastra (talk) 18:19, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- While "microinteraction" definitely should've been left out, that's not a "box". "Confirmation box" sounds like a dialog for you to confirm. A snackbar can only be a small message that pops up from the bottom to tell you that the operation has been a success (sometimes with an ündo" button to the right). Aaron Liu (talk) 18:17, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't mean to sound like a complete crank, but this is, I think, part of the reason some or many editors react badly to WMF pages like this: they're sometimes hard to understand and come off as a bit condescending. I've WP:BOLDly toned down the language so that it's easier to understand for non-developers. Cremastra (talk) 18:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I appreciate that my comment prompted you to reflect and tone things down a little. [2] I also know that your heart is in the right place too and that a lot of the time these comments are caused by a series of frustrating events and not feeling like one has been listened to. Feel free to tell me if I'm putting words in your mouth, Cremastra. I just know that HNordeen (WMF) is relatively new to the foundation and I don't want her to feel like all of this was directed at her personally. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 18:19, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Feel free to tell me if I'm putting words in your mouth, Cremastra.
Don't worry – you're not. Cremastra (talk) 18:19, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I appreciate that my comment prompted you to reflect and tone things down a little. [2] I also know that your heart is in the right place too and that a lot of the time these comments are caused by a series of frustrating events and not feeling like one has been listened to. Feel free to tell me if I'm putting words in your mouth, Cremastra. I just know that HNordeen (WMF) is relatively new to the foundation and I don't want her to feel like all of this was directed at her personally. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 18:19, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I guess I can put this here: I feel like calling this "mobile fundraising" is a little bit misleading. Do not misunderstand me: I sincerely appreciate Clovermoss bringing this here, regardless of the title. But this is not really about fundraising on mobile. That always has happened, and I doubt anyone will have feedback on that. This is about allowing people to donate to "support"/"champion"/"appreciate" a particular article. Would "allowing people to donate in appreciation of a particular article" be a neutral way to phrase what is being suggested? Best, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 18:32, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- "in appreciation" should be a good phrase to use. —— Eric Liu(Talk・Guestbook) 18:35, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I said mobile fundraising because I wasn't sure what else I could put without making it sound like I was canvassing and steering the discussion a certain way. Between here and CENT, I'm sure this will get enough eyes instead of being buried at mediawiki. If someone does change the title, I'd suggest that it's as clear and concise as possible. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 18:42, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster: What would you think if we added "experiment" to the end of the current text? It'd make it more clear that what is being proposed is a bit different compared to a normal mobile fundraising. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:01, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Works for me, Clovermoss :) HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 23:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster: What would you think if we added "experiment" to the end of the current text? It'd make it more clear that what is being proposed is a bit different compared to a normal mobile fundraising. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:01, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm largely indifferent to the idea of mobile fundraising in general, and was surprised it wasn't already well established. I'm also mostly indifferent to the idea of donations tied to articles. What I have a quite strong opinion about is what happens when someone donates "to" an article. To the point: there should be no direct connection between donations and the appearance of a Wikipedia article for anyone other than the donor. No matter how it's framed (badges, stickers, sponsors, endorsements, pictures, text, etc.), if there's any way to affect the appearance of the article with money, there will emerge metacommunicative/signalling strategies to manipulate the system in unacceptable ways. On some level, I like the idea of audiences being better able to communicate appreciation to contributors, but it has to be divorced from money. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:59, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
To the point: there should be no direct connection between donations and the appearance of a Wikipedia article for anyone other than the donor.
- Agreed. I also see that the WMF recognises at least some of issues this could cause, saying
Safeguards should be added to prevent inappropriate usage of the feature on sensitive articles
, but I don’t think they’ve thought through the complexity of accurately classifying articles as sensitive. - Alternatively, if they have already succeeded in doing so in a robust manner, can they please release the tool, as it will be very helpful in general? BilledMammal (talk) 00:23, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think the safeguards comment was in regards to the concerns that I and other people expressed at the page itself on why you wouldn't want something like this on controversial articles. As far as I'm aware, this is just an idea and nothing has actually been implemented. That would mean that there isn't a way to filter this content out yet either. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:41, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- I encourage people to leave their feedback on the mediawiki page itself (see my initial comments at the top of the thread) so it isn't scattered across pages and projects. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:45, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think the safeguards comment was in regards to the concerns that I and other people expressed at the page itself on why you wouldn't want something like this on controversial articles. As far as I'm aware, this is just an idea and nothing has actually been implemented. That would mean that there isn't a way to filter this content out yet either. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:41, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm concerned this could lead people to incorrectly think that they are donating to the article's writers, rather than the WMF. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 11:53, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- don’t worry, they already think that. ltbdl☃ (talk) 12:04, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank you to everyone who has spoken up here - I'll echo @Clovermoss's request to please leave thoughts and ideas on the mediawiki project page. The mediawiki page has been edited to make it more clear (thank you for suggestions on how to do that!) and in hopes to communicate that this is at an early stage, and we are not limited to this first idea that is on the page. I've also expanded the page to include risks that have been brought up so far. Thanks to everyone who has contributed, we have the capacity to try a new format of fundraising within the iOS app this year, and we're excited to work together with you to identify what form it could take. HNordeen (WMF) (talk) 21:04, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- @HNordeen (WMF):
identify what form it could take
makes it sound like this will be further developed even if the feedback you receive is overwhelming negative. I really hope that is not the case. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:07, 16 August 2024 (UTC)- Hi @Clovermoss, it's meant to communicate that we want to change direction to pursue alternate ideas in response to feedback and suggestions we receive. We want to work together with you to figure out ways of recognizing existing donors and creating pathways for potential donors, and we only want to proceed with ideas that we can all feel good about experimenting with. HNordeen (WMF) (talk) 16:16, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for clarifying that. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 16:56, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Clovermoss, it's meant to communicate that we want to change direction to pursue alternate ideas in response to feedback and suggestions we receive. We want to work together with you to figure out ways of recognizing existing donors and creating pathways for potential donors, and we only want to proceed with ideas that we can all feel good about experimenting with. HNordeen (WMF) (talk) 16:16, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Wikimedia Foundation banner fundraising campaign in India postponed to start on the 27th of August
editDear all,
As mentioned previously, the WMF is running its annual banner fundraising campaign for non logged in users in India. Initially, we planned the campaign to start tomorrow and run until the 10th of September. We have had some issues with our local payment provider in India and due to this we are postponing the campaign by a couple of weeks. Our new campaign dates are the 27th of August to the 24th of September.
You can find more information around the campaign, see example banners, and leave any questions or suggestions you might have, on the community collaboration page.
Generally, before and during the campaign, you can contact us:
- On the talk page of the fundraising team
- If you need to report a bug or technical issue, please create a phabricator ticket
- If you see a donor on a talk page, VRT or social media having difficulties in donating, please refer them to donate at wikimedia.org
Thank you for your understanding and regards, JBrungs (WMF) (talk) 10:44, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin August Issue 1
editSpecial Wikimania issue This is a special Wikimania issue of the Bulletin. We'll be back to our regular format in the next issue
- Catch up on missed sessions of Wikimania Katowice or revisit your favourites directly from the program, or review the day-long streams on YouTube: Day 1 streams, Day 2 streams, Day 3 streams, Day 4 streams.
- The Wikimedian of the Year Awards at Wikimania paid tribute to amazing Wikimedians who have made significant contributions to the movement. Learn about all of this year's winners.
- Daily highlights from Wikimania: Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, Day 4.
- Winners of the fifth edition of the Coolest Tool Award was announced at Wikimania.
- Highlights of product and tech sessions on Wikimania with links to description and recording.
- The Open Conversation with the Trustees at Wikimania hosted breakout discussions about the Movement Charter, affiliate strategy and hubs, the proposal for a Global Resource Distribution Committee (hybrid table--had streaming and is available to watch back online), the Product/Tech Advisory Council & Product/Tech priorities, building a sustainable revenue strategy for the movement: online fundraising, Wikimedia Enterprise and the Wikimedia Endowment, and responding to emerging threats to free knowledge: litigation, censorship, disinformation, and trust in an election year.
- Catch up on Foundation-led sessions from Wikimania on safety and information integrity: Protecting Children on-Wiki: a Child Rights Solutions Workshop, Information Integrity during Elections: Collective effort to address mis and disinformation, Policy Advocacy Showcase: Stories of policy advocacy work in the movement and future trends.
- Wikimania 2024 in Poland celebrates global volunteers who make Wikipedia and sister projects possible.
Upcoming and current events and conversations
Talking: 2024 continues
- Language Community Meeting: Have topics to share or discuss? Add agenda here. (August 30 at 15:00 UTC.
Annual Goals Progress on Infrastructure
See also newsletters: Wikimedia Apps · Growth · Research · Web · Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia · Tech News · Language and Internationalization · other newsletters on Mediawiki.org
- Two new parser functions and more recent changes on Tech News.
- Help us better understand WikiProjects or similar online collaboration spaces. Fill out a brief survey or share your thoughts on the talkpage.
- Parsoid deployed on first production wikis and more updates on MediaWiki Product Insights.
- Applications to join the Product and Technology Advisory Council (PTAC) are extended until September 16.
Annual Goals Progress on Equity
See also a list of all movement events: on Meta
- The 4th edition of the Language & Internationalization newsletter (Aug 2024) is available.
- Reviving history and spreading the Spirit of Wikisource Loves Manuscripts (WILMA) in Naga City, the Philippines and Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Annual Goals Progress on Safety & Integrity
See also blogs: Global Advocacy blog · Global Advocacy Newsletter · Policy blog
- Digital Rights and Inclusion Forum, Global Digital Compact, and Anti-Disinformation Repository: Highlights from the Global Advocacy Team.
Other Movement curated newsletters & news
See also: Diff blog · Goings-on · Wikimedia World · Signpost (en) · Kurier (de) · other newsletters:
- Topics: Education · GLAM · The Wikipedia Library
- Wikimedia Projects: Milestones · Wikidata
- Regions: Central and Eastern Europe
Previous editions of this bulletin are on Meta. Let askcac wikimedia.org know if you have any feedback or suggestions for improvement!