Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-01-16/From the editors Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-01-16/Traffic report Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-01-16/In the media
Having spent three weeks collecting data on which interface design prompts the most useful feedback, the ArticleFeedback version 5 trial entered its second phase this week. This phase will look at the impact of interface placement on the quality and quantity of feedback solicited from the small percentage of pages on which the extension will be active. As Oliver Keyes, a WMF Community Liaison helping with the tool described:
“ | Even with Wikipedia readership reaching half a billion users per month, the feedback form its current position (at the end of the article) doesn’t see a whole lot of activity. In this test, we’ll be experimenting with a more prominent way to access to tool. When a user loads the page with the test version of the Article Feedback Tool, they will see an "Improve this article" link docked on the bottom right hand corner of the page.
The introduction of this link will undoubtedly increase the amount of feedback. We need to, however, understand how it affects the quality of the feedback. ... As with the last tests, it'll be on a very small subset of articles and probably won't be noticed by most people. ... We'll also be doing some preliminary analysis on whether such a prominent link cannibalizes editing behaviour. |
” |
It is possible for logged-in users to hide the display of both the current version 4, and the new version 5, of the ArticleFeedback extension via their user preferences; an RfC is also currently open for editors wishing to influence the future direction of the extension, particularly with regards to handling textual feedback such as general comments about the article. As already noted, it is planned that phase 3 will focus on the impact of the extension on editing levels. Phase 4 is set to focus on the impact of the tool on readers; phase 5 will look at its longer term impact on editor levels. Although versions of the extension are trialled on the English Wikipedia, other wikis also run versions of it.
Not all fixes may have gone live to WMF sites at the time of writing; some may not be scheduled to go live for many weeks.
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-01-16/Essay Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-01-16/Opinion
</noinclude>
Although the exact actions to be taken through the Wikipedia SOPA initiative are uncertain as of publication, there is general consensus for a single-day blackout on January 18, to coincide with similar actions by several other prominent sites. At the time of writing, the proposal for a full multinational blackout holds the widest support, with just under 500 editors in favour. Among the first to cover the story has been the CBS News site ("Wikipedia to join Web blackout protesting SOPA").
The Signpost asked the head of communications for the Wikimedia Foundation, Jay Walsh, what the significance is of acting in concert with other major sites? Will this really produce a politically effective message beyond acting in isolation?
What are the trigger points, so to speak, for persuading voters to contact the politicians? What do American voters respond to? Is the creation of newsworthiness in the media by the protest just as important as the direct persuasion of voters to lobby the politicians? Are there really two aims?
Did the Italian Wikipedia’s protest action last year achieve its goal of stopping the passage of the Italian law that would have had significant implications for Internet freedom?
We asked what the dangers might be for the project if these two laws pass.
15 January is Wikipedia's birthday, and this year marks 11 years since The Free Encyclopedia first went online. 2011 saw the total number of articles pass the 20 million mark (now close to 21), the number of unique visitors 400 million, individual page requests 16 billion per month, and 282 Wikipedia languages currently available. Wikimedians gathered to celebrate so-called Wikipedia Day, including "meet-ups, hack-a-thons, a bicycle rally, a kite festival in India, and a picnic in Caracas."
As Wikipedians prepared their celebrations, Commons broke an important milestone, when at 22:17 on 12 January, User:Crazyale pushed the project over the 12 million mark with File:Egyptian Building.JPG, a depiction of the Egyptian Building in Richmond, Virginia. The building is a U.S. National Historic Landmark and is on the National Register of Historic Places. Commons celebrated 10 million files in April last year and 11 million files in September 2011.
WikiProject Medicine has launched the Translation task force project, in partnership with Wikimedia Canada and Translators Without Borders. The goal is to improve the quality of vital topic medicine articles, to good or featured status, and translate them into many languages. In the process, the articles will be copyedited and simplified, into Simple English.
As the medicine-related articles on the English Wikipedia alone receive 150–200 million page views each month, and the articles are read by medical professionals and the public alike, project leaders believe "that this project will have a significant impact on the availability of good health care information wordwide and that this, in turn, is likely to save many lives and to improve the quality of life of many people globally." Volunteers are needed to improve the content of these medical articles in English, to help simplify them, translate them, and incorporate the translated articles back into other language Wikipedia projects.
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-01-16/Serendipity Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-01-16/Op-ed Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-01-16/In focus
The Arbitration Committee opened no new cases this week, nor closed any, leaving four open. All information is as at the time of writing.
The Betacommand 3 case remained at the proposed decision phase this week. Originally the case was opened to address the multitude of sanctions in effect on the editor. None of the proposed remedies, ranging from site bans to editing restrictions, has garnered adequate support to pass.
This open case entered its third week. The case, which is one of the most active at present, was initially opened due to the actions of several administrators in relation to a user who was blocked over perceived incivility. Substantial activity took place in both the evidence and workshop pages, on which multiple users presented evidence and proposals. The current date set for the posting of a proposed decision has been extended to 29 January.
The case was opened to address which depictions of Muhammad, if any, are appropriate to display in the respective articles, and has had substantial activity in its fourth week. Drafter AGK recently posted an outline of the proposed decision. In the outline, he noted several principles and findings of fact, as well as remedies that include discretionary sanctions, topic and/or site bans, as well as admonishments. The full proposed decision is expected to be posted over the next few days.
This open case continued into its fifth week. It was brought to the Committee by the editor to appeal their site ban that was imposed by Jimmy Wales. The expected proposed decision, as mentioned in previous Signpost coverage, is yet to be posted. Discussion has continued on the workshop and workshop talk pages over the past week.
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-01-16/Humour