Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2013-11-06

Single-page Edition

WP:POST/1

6 November 2013

News and notes
Alleged "outing" of editor's personal information leads to Wikipedia ban

Traffic report
Danse Macabre

Featured content
Five years of work leads to 63-article featured topic

WikiProject report
WikiProject Accessibility

Arbitration report
Ebionites 3 case closed

Discussion report
Sockpuppet investigations, VisualEditor, Wikidata's birthday, and more

2013-11-06

Alleged "outing" of editor's personal information leads to Wikipedia ban

Contribute —

Share this

By The ed17 and Andrew Lih

As part of the second major "outing" controversy to hit the English Wikipedia in less than a year, the Chelsea/Bradley Manning naming dispute was dragged into the spotlight yet again when the English Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee ruled by motion to remove the administrator tools from long-time Wikipedia contributor Phil Sandifer and to ban him from the site. The committee stated that a personal blog post by Sandifer, which extensively profiled the real-life name, location, and employers of a user involved with the Chelsea Manning renaming case, went too far—violating a formerly little-used policy corner of the English Wikipedia, "outing", which governs the release of editors' personal information.

Sandifer's ban was surprising in that it was based solely on content published outside Wikipedia; he did not link to his writing or publish any personal information on the English Wikipedia, Wikimedia sites, or associated content areas, such as mailing lists and IRCs. It was instead published solely on his personal blog, focusing on the editor Cla68.

The committee's decision to take action was split into three clauses. The first, which passed 9–2, declared that Sandifer broke policy, while the second removed his administrator tools and had slightly less support at 8–3. The third clause indefinitely banned Sandifer. It passed with the least amount of support: seven in favor, three opposed (Kirill Lokshin, David Fuchs, Carcharoth) and one abstention (Risker).

The Signpost has examined statements by arbitrators on both sides of the issue and contacted specific members for comments, in addition to collecting reactions from Wikipedians on the talk page of the Committee's noticeboard.

What has been revealed?

In his 22 October blog post, "Wikipedia Goes All-In on Transphobia", Sandifer revealed personal information about Cla68's location and occupation to make a point about what he considered a conflict of interest in the Chelsea Manning naming case. The post contrasted the associations—and potential conflicts of interests—of editors such as David Gerard, who was recently topic-banned by the Committee, to that of Cla68, who received no sanctions. (Editor's note: in keeping with the Signpost's practice in covering outing policy, we give no direct hyperlink to Sandifer's blog post.)

One paragraph in Sandifer's lengthy piece brought up Cla68's involvement in the naming dispute and potential conflict with his occupation, noting that Cla68's background was "a fact he has studiously attempted to hide" from the Internet community. When Sandifer's post was brought to the attention of the Committee, it probably raised red flags, on the basis that revealing this information could be considered "outing" Cla68 against his wishes. For his part, Cla68 told the Signpost:

“

With the Manning article, several Wikipedia "old-hands" were trying to use their insider status to try to influence the outcome of a topic debate in which they had an openly activist agenda. After I presented evidence of this in the ArbCom case, one of the participants then appeared to try to retaliate by posting some very personal, but unnecessary information about me in a public forum. To me, it showed that he was not going to stop escalating his battle over that particular topic area in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not supposed to be used as an activist battleground. When someone openly shows that they're not going to stop doing it, especially when they're an admin, then they need to have their access revoked.

”

Whether it actually constituted an outing by the definition of Wikipedia policy has been a point of debate. In the past, Cla68 has given his full name to a number of media organizations, such as an interview with the Register (UK), and on-wiki in a 2009 "Not the Wikipedia Weekly" episode. As for location, Cla68 has declared his basic prefecture-level geographic location on his user page since 2006. He has also given the name of the city where he once lived on more than one occasion, including in several early revisions on his userpage. However, Cla has never, on Wikipedia, named his current location.

A second claim, that he has never revealed his employer, falls into a far grayer area. Cla68 did detail his work history on at least one open forum that is easily found with an Internet search engine, and on Wikipedia he has edited on multiple occasions—perhaps inadvertently—from an IP address traceable to his employer. However, the exact details of his occupation (detailed in Sandifer's blog post) did not seem to be previously widely known, and confirming them requires either an inference or some level of off-wiki research.

Sandifer told the Signpost that his alleged outing was discerned from a careful reading of Wikipedia edits and by making inferences from them—which in a careful reading could fall under the "although references to still-existing, self-disclosed information is not considered outing" clause of the English Wikipedia's harassment policy. Still, given the context of the surrounding text, it could be taken in the opposite direction. The policy also provides guidance, though unclear in places: "If an editor has previously posted their own personal information but later redacted it, it should not be repeated on Wikipedia; although references to still-existing, self-disclosed information is not considered outing. If the previously posted information has been removed by oversight, then repeating it on Wikipedia is considered outing."

Previous outing

Oddly, Cla68 was himself accused of revealing the personal information of another editor earlier this year. As in this case, the information was published on an outside site—Wikipediocracy, a well-known forum that is openly critical of the English Wikipedia, where he is a "global moderator." Wikipediocracy has been a host to many personal attacks and outing efforts. For his part, Cla68 told the Signpost that Wikipediocracy moderators "quickly remove overly personal details like phone numbers, home addresses, etc. and usually move the rest to non-public forums. I myself never take part in trying to find personal details on other people. I stay out of it."

For the March story, when the Signpost asked Cla68 how his actions did not constitute outing, he stated:

“

...each individual Internet user is responsible for their own privacy. If someone is at least making an effort to be private, then Wikipedia should try to help them maintain their privacy. In this case, however, the editor in question was not making much effort at all, if any, to protect his privacy. In that case, it makes WP's administration look very foolish to act like a serious violation of privacy had occurred.

”

When prompted with this incident and the above quote, Sandifer commented to us that "I’m more than a little worried that the real objection is the fact that I’ve been so publicly criticizing people, and that my reporting got picked up by the Guardian. Clearly this isn’t really about outing for Cla68. And the shockingly severe sanction makes me worry that it’s not really about the outing for the committee either. I dearly hope I’m wrong, of course, and that this is simply a misunderstanding."

Ensuing debate

In discussions after the case, some of the arbitrators detailed their stance in an extensive, spirited debate with community members.

Newyorkbrad, who voted for all three clauses, commented that "it is unacceptable for an administrator, or for any editor sufficiently experienced to be aware of our policies and project norms, to escalate an on-wiki disagreement by publicizing the real-life identity, employer, and geographical location of a fellow editor, as Phil Sandifer ("Phil") did in this instance." Risker, who voted to reprimand and remove Sandifer's adminship, but abstained from a full ban, elaborated on her role:

“

I wrote to Phil personally to ask him to consider removing the non-public personal information involved from the blog (and only that information—even if I disagree with him on several points, I believe his blog is otherwise fair comment), but he responded very clearly that he had no intention of removing the information. I don't believe administrators should be posting that kind of information about other Wikipedians, no matter how strongly they disagree with them. Thus I supported the desysop.

”

In opposition, arbitrator Kirill Lokshin noted the problem of banning a Wikipedian for aggregating existing information together as a case of outing. To the Committee's mailing list, repeated in communications to the Signpost, he was blunt: "It's untenable for us to pretend that someone's identity is private when they're openly making statements to the press under their real name." Fellow arbitrator David Fuchs, who voted against banning Sandifer, was more nuanced, saying that while Sandifer's blog post was "unnecessary, unhelpful, [and] poorly reasoned", "off-wiki conduct alone is generally not enough to provoke on-wiki sanctions."

David Gerard and Morwen, previous parties involved in the transgender individuals dispute, both vigorously disagreed with the Committee's decision. Gerard disputed the nature of the outing: "It wouldn't pass muster as material to out a user on-site, but it certainly passes muster as an exercise in applied journalism, which is what the post was. So the arbcom has now banned someone from Wikipedia for journalism about Wikipedia."

Samuel Klein, a member of the Wikimedia Foundation's board of trustees, was disappointed: "This does look like a successful breach experiment. Extraordinary and heartbreaking that it extended to a ban."

In the extended discussion about the decision, long-time Wikipedia editor Jehochman echoed the views of a number of commenters about the nature of "outing" someone with known information.

“

ArbCom's action creates the appearance that Phil was sanctioned for challenging ArbCom's authority. Risker wrote to him; he refused to comply with her chilling request; and he got banned. AGK has asserted that private info was revealed, when no such thing happened. Cla68 looks like he was head hunting Phil, and snookered ArbCom into doing his bidding. ... Once the subject voluntarily places information in the public view, he can no longer claim outing. He might be able to claim harassment or stalking, but I'm not seeing either of those yet.

”

Beeblebrox, who was involved with the blocking of Cla68 in March and whom the Committee has granted oversight powers, expressed dismay: "I don't often comment on ArbCom decisions, but this one is so puzzlingly inconsistent and weird I feel compelled to comment ... This is the most schizophrenic thing this schizophrenic incarnation of ArbCom has done yet. Some of you have been consistent as individuals but as a group you have been wildly inconsistent. I can't say it has been a pleasure working for this particular committee and I sincerely hope there are is a substantial turnover in the next election."

Under the committee's interpretation of the outing policy, all external links to Sandifer's blog post on the English Wikipedia have been systematically removed and the revisions oversighted.

Editor's notes: The authors have had several minor interactions with participants on both sides over the years. The ed17 has collaborated on several English Wikipedia featured articles with Cla68.

Wikipedia Weekly's podcast #104, which Fuzheado hosts in concert with other Wikipedia editors, had hyperlinks to Phil Sandifer's blog post when discussing the block of David Gerard. The episode was released 22 October 2013. Though the podcast and its participants did not mention the case of Cla68 or his personal details, the wiki page has since been "oversighted" and a link was removed by arbitrator AGK on 7 November.

While the original Committee motion did not mention the username in question, it was revealed as Cla68 on the talk page of the Arbitration Committee's noticeboard.

In brief

Wikipedia Zero expands to Myanmar: The Wikimedia Foundation has announced via press release that it has furthered its Wikipedia Zero partnership with the Telenor Group, a global telecommunications company headquartered in Norway, to include the nation of Myanmar in Southeast Asia. The agreement comes after Telenor applied for and was one of a few companies to receive a telecommunications license in Myanmar, which was one of the world's last untapped markets for cell-phone usage. Eight months after the company comes to an agreement with the country's government, it plans to launch teleservices that will include free access to Wikipedia.
- In related news, the Foundation has released a video of South African students reading an open letter to telecommunications companies, asking them for free access to Wikipedia through Wikipedia Zero. The video's description explains why: "In much of the world, many students only way to study and access knowledge is through Wikipedia on their mobile phones. Six out of seven persons on the planet has a cellphone today. While cellphones are a means of access to Wikipedia, the data charges can be very expensive for many. That leaves many students with a choice to study or save money." The video has spawned a Change.org petition.
FLC elections closed: After a 15-day voting period, the 2013 featured list candidates elections are over. The two new delegates are Crisco 1492 and SchroCat, who join Giants2008 and Hahc21.
Affcom: The Affiliations Committee has published a call for volunteers. The committee advises the Foundation's board of trustees on which provisional movement affiliates should be approved.
WMF audit: The results of the Foundation's fiscal year 2012–13 audit have been published on the Foundation's official wiki.

Reader comments

2013-11-06

Danse Macabre

Contribute —

Share this

By Serendipodous

Summary: For the first time in a while, the article on Deaths in 2013 failed to breach the top 10; however, it's fair to say that commemorating death was a strong theme this week, with Lou Reed's passing generating interest, as well as a Google Doodle celebrating the costume designer Edith Head. And of course, the world's greatest celebrations of the dead, Halloween and the Day of the Dead, were also popular this week.

For the complete top 25 report, including analysis and exclusions, see WP:TOP25

For the week of October 27 to November 2, the 10 most popular articles on Wikipedia, as determined from the report of the 5,000 most trafficked pages* were:

Rank	Article	Views	Notes
1	Edith Head	2,837,065	A Google Doodle on the 106th birthday of Hollywood's Queen of Costumes (who to this day holds the record for the most Oscars won by a woman and who, together with Hubert de Givenchy, created the image of Audrey Hepburn) led to a fairly staggering amount of interest from the public.
2	Halloween	2,298,933	'Tis the night after Hallows, and all through the house, every tummy is stirring, and the children do grouse.
3	Lou Reed	1,350,798	One of Rock & roll's great storytellers and an inveterate New Yorker, Lou Reed may never have attained the status of his contemporaries and friends, Andy Warhol and David Bowie among them, but his all-pervading influence, and continuously played hits like "Perfect Day" and "Walk on the Wild Side", ensured his high regard when he died on 27 October.
4	Day of the Dead	610,516	Mexico's slightly more laid-back take on Halloween, with its sugar skulls and marigolds, is becoming ever more popular each year, particularly in places, like the United States, with an expanding Hispanic influence.
5	Diwali	539,433	The Hindu festival of light, which draws attention to the inner light beyond the material body, the Atman, fell on 3 November this year.
6	Facebook	477,920	A perennially popular article
7	Krrish 3	400,260	Bollywood's homegrown superhero movie franchise opened its latest instalment on 1 November to take advantage of the Diwali holiday, and earned Rs 728 million (US$11 million) in its first three days.
8	Ender's Game	370,617	Orson Scott Card's military science fiction cult classic was finally released as a film in its home market on 1 November after decades in hibernation due to Card's desire for creative control.
9	The Marshall Mathers LP 2	365,868	The next album by rapper Eminem will be released on November 5.
10	World War II	364,003	Another perennially popular article. (The 16th most popular article from 2010–12, in fact, see Table 2 here.)

Reader comments

2013-11-06

Five years of work leads to 63-article featured topic

Contribute —

Share this

By Cdtew and The ed17

This Signpost "Featured content" report covers material promoted from 27 October 2013 through 2 November 2013.

Featured articles

Eleven featured articles were promoted this week.

Operation Tungsten (nom) by Nick-D. This Second World War air raid targeted the German battleship Tirpitz, a sister ship of the infamous Bismarck, due to the Allies' fear that the warship would put to sea and sink or disrupt vital supply convoys to the Soviet Union.
European Storm Petrel (nom) by Jimfbleak. Nominated with a frightful poem by Jimfbleak, this bird breeds on islands off the coast of Europe that do have predatory land mammals, like rats or cats. Strangely, the article notes that the bird's "presence in rough weather at sea has led to various mariners' superstitions, and, by analogy, to its use as a symbol by revolutionary and anarchist groups."
Japanese aircraft carrier Shinano (nom) by Sturmvogel 66. This Second World War ship was converted into an aircraft carrier from Japan's massive Yamato class design. The ship, which remained the largest warship ever built until the US launched its first supercarrier in 1954, was sunk by submarine-launched torpedoes on its first voyage, a consequence of poor design and untrained seamen.
Constance Stokes (nom) by Hamiltonstone. This Australian painter was active for a large portion of her 84–85 year life, receiving high praise from critics at the time but getting little recognition from present-day critics until a 2009 book.
Menominee Tribe v. United States (nom) by GregJackP. This American Supreme Court case resulted from Congress' then-policy of terminating Native Americans' special relationship with the US government. However, the bill abolishing the Menominee Tribe's rights did not mention their hunting and fishing rights, which led the Court to rule that the tribe kept those for itself—despite the federal government not recognizing it as a separate entity.
Volubilis (nom) by Prioryman. This Roman town began as a Carthaginian settlement before being taken over by Mauritania. It fell to the Roman Empire in the first century CE and was significantly expanded before the empire's decline led to its loss in 285 CE. Although it was inhabited for several more centuries, the town remained remarkably intact, leading to its status today as "an exceptionally well preserved example of a large Roman colonial town on the fringes of the Empire".
Jefferson Davis (nom) by Omnedon. The first and final president of the Confederate States of America—the rebel nation-state created during the American Civil War—was elected by a constitutional convention to the position in 1861. He served in this capacity until the war's end, whereupon he was imprisoned for two years. In modern times, his reputation has been restored in part by his 1881 memoir.
2011 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final (nom) by Skotywa. This 2011 association football match was the closing game in the named tournament, which is odd in that it is open to both professional and amateur teams in the United States. This year's game featured two teams from the professional Major League Soccer; the winner, Seattle, became the first team since 1968 to win three straight Lamar Hunt tournaments.
Albert Ball (nom) by Georgejdorner and Ian Rose. This British First World War fighter pilot racked up 44 aerial kills, making him the UK's leading ace at the time of his death in 1917. When the famous Red Baron heard of Ball's death, he is said to have remarked that he was "by far the best English flying man".
Twenty-cent piece (United States coin) (nom) by Wehwalt. An oddball coin, the US twenty-cent piece was struck for only three years, two of those being exclusively for collectors. Its downfall, as explained by the nominator, laid in its similarities to the twenty-five cent quarter: "the twenty-cent piece was one of those mistakes that Congress and the Mint just didn't learn from. Not only did they make it too similar in size to the quarter, they used the same design for one side!"
Choiseul Pigeon (nom) by FunkMonk. This pigeon most likely lived on just a sole island in the Solomon Islands, and its last known sighting (unconfirmed) was in the 1940s. Like many island species, it was killed off with the introduction of feral cats to the environment.

Featured lists

Three featured lists were promoted this week.

List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Bob Willis (nom) by Lugnuts and Zia Khan. This list covers the English fast bowler Bob Willis' five-wicket hauls, which are held in high regard by cricket historians and fans. Willis managed to do this sixteen times in his thirteen-year career.
Yugoslav order of battle for the invasion of Yugoslavia (nom) by Peacemaker67. This list of Yugoslavia's operational military formations at the beginning of Nazi Germany's invasion of that country in 1941 includes some 33 divisions and 10 independent brigades, even though only seven divisions and six smaller formations were available due to the country's "tentative and incomplete mobilization."
List of battleships of Italy (nom) by Parsecboy. Italy constructed several classes of battleships during the end of the 19th and first half of the 20th centuries, first as a counter to the Austro-Hungarian Navy, and later to oppose the French Navy.

Featured pictures

Four featured pictures were promoted this week.

Common Redshank (nom, related article) created by Andreas Trepte and nominated by Nikhil. This extremely common bird is a resident of European coastlines, the Mediterranean in winter and as far north as the United Kingdom. It is also present as far east as South Asia.
Omni Shoreham Hotel (nom, related article) created by Jürgen Matern and nominated by Tomer T. This Washington, D.C. four-star hotel was built in 1930. Its illustrious history includes more than a half-century of presidential inaugural balls, numerous entertainers, and a haunted room.
Praia da Nazaré (nom, related article) created and nominated by Alvesgaspar. This image was taken on a winter morning just a few short weeks before a man surfed the world's highest waves at the lighthouse on the left side of the image.
Stu-mick-o-súcks (Buffalo Bull's Back Fat) (nom, related article) created by George Catlin and nominated by MatGTAM. This Native American war chief was depicted in this painting in 1832. According to the nomination, this "historically and culturally important painting...shows traditional Blackfoot clothing/apparel such as the beaded buckskin shirt, hair roach, eagle feather, face paint, and beaded pipe. "

Featured topics

Three featured topics were promoted this week.

Battlecruisers of the world (nom) written by many editors and nominated by Sturmvogel 66. What is now Wikipedia's largest featured topic (clocking in at 63 total articles) is the product of five years of work by members of Operation Majestic Titan. It covers all of the world's battlecruisers that served in a navy or reached a reasonable stage of planning before being canceled. The United Kingdom built by far the most examples of this type of ship, with Imperial Germany's fleet during the First World War coming in a distant second. Another point of note includes Russia's multiple attempts to build battlecruisers, though none ever came into service. No ships of this type are extant in the world today. This topic is part of a larger effort to raise all of the articles related to battleships and battlecruisers to featured status (see previous Signpost coverage).
Lexington-class battlecruiser & aircraft carrier (nom) nominated by Sturmvogel 66. This topic covers the United States' Lexington-class aircraft carriers. The class was originally conceived as a group of six battlecruisers—fast, heavily armed, and weakly armored capital ships—but the end of the First World War and a naval-limiting treaty led to four being scrapped while under construction and two being converted into aircraft carriers, both of which served in the Second World War.
Category 5 Pacific hurricanes (Good topic nom) nominated by Miss Madeline. This new featured topic covering a number of Category 5 hurricanes in the Pacific Ocean went back to featured status when an article listed in the topic, Hurricane Patsy (1959) was merged with 1959 Pacific hurricane season, thus increasing the proportion of featured articles. This topic was first promoted to a Good Topic in 2008.

Battlecruiser

63 articles

Reader comments

2013-11-06

WikiProject Accessibility

Contribute —

Share this

By Mabeenot

Your source for

WikiProject News

WikiProjects are requested to test the first release of Flow, a new discussion and collaboration system for all Wikimedia projects. If you'd like your project to be included in the Flow pilot this December, please contact Maryana.

Submit your project's news and announcements for next week's WikiProject Report at the Signpost's WikiProject Desk.

This week, we spent some time with WikiProject Accessibility, a project that strives to make Wikipedia accessible for users with disabilities. The project improves Wikipedia's guidelines and Manual of Style, collects useful templates and scripts, and provides support to impaired Wikipedians. We interviewed Graham87, Paul MacDermott, John Carter, and TheDJ.

What motivated you to join WikiProject Accessibility?: Graham87: I'm totally blind and use a screen reader, so accessibility issues directly affect me. Therefore it was logical that I would join the WikiProject once it was established. Before that time I had helped shape the accessibility guidelines, and pointed out accessibility issues throughout Wikipedia.; Paul MacDermott: I am visually impaired and use a screen magnifier to enlarge text to a readable size, so am also affected by accessibility issues. I found the project a couple of years ago after looking to see what help might be available on Wikipedia when I started to encounter problems as I attempted more difficult editing tasks.; John Carter: Having seen a number of editors who have on their user pages courageously indicated that they have some form of difficulty which might potentially impact their editing, it struck me as reasonable to try to offer what assistance I could should any such editors request it when facing a problem related to their difficulties.; TheDJ: As a developer I like working on what some people would consider 'fringe' areas. Improve support for uncommon browsers, uncommon languages and also accessibility. Being able to find and discuss with editors that share this interest can be very useful.

What are the biggest hurdles preventing users with disabilities from reading and editing Wikipedia articles? How does the project address these issues?: Graham87: I'm only familiar with accessibility problems related to screen readers; I have summarized the most important ones at a recent Signpost story.; Paul MacDermott: Using a screen magnifier means you see only a portion of the screen at any time, so changes to screen layout can present problems. Also, I personally find some of the Unicode difficult to follow, particularly when adding tables, etc. I have lost count of the number of mistakes I've had to go back and correct. Images can sometimes be an issue too with screen magnifiers (screen freezes, etc), though more recent software seems to be more reliable.; John Carter: I believe the project was one of the first advocates for offering specific skins which would be less problematic to people who can't see colors, and a few other similar ideas.; TheDJ: People often have a very narrow view of what accessibility means. In practice it means that we strive to make the webpages as accessible to as large a group as possible. That means thinking about a multitude of usergroups who might require a bit of extra work to make reading or editing the pages easier. For instance, this WikiProject has in the past been instrumental in giving feedback on color schemes for both content and interface, taking into account the specials needs of people with colorblindness or similar vision limitations. Screenreader and keyboard navigation is another often-discussed topic. Since Wikipedia still has a rather limited amount of audio and video material, we haven't had to spend as much time on those issues so far.

Has WikiProject Accessibility been involved in any of the proposed or implemented changes to Wikipedia's user interface and features, like VisualEditor or Flow?: Graham87: The WMF community liaisons have kept us in the loop both individually and as a project about the upcoming changes to Wikipedia's user interface, and I for one have provided some feedback about the notifications system.; TheDJ: Unfortunately this still isn't a primary concern of the Foundation, I fear. They have trouble enough getting stuff off the ground without having to consider accessibility as a core concern, unfortunately. However there is a small set of volunteer developers that have done some work on accessibility that are now polled for 'accessibility reviews' of individual changes to the MediaWiki software. Sometimes this leads to questions for feedback to the Accessibility project, which definitely help the software forward. Recently the German Wikimedia Foundation hired Hoo man to specifically solve some of the accessibility issues that had been reported by users and editors in and outside of WikiProject Accessibility.

Does the project rely on any outside organizations, standards, or initiatives to determine how Wikipedia's accessibility can be improved? Would it be worthwhile to have an outside observer audit Wikipedia's accessibility?: Graham87: We try to adhere to the WCAG 2.0 guidelines where possible. We have received some accessibility feedback from the German Central Library for the Blind (German: Deutsche Zentralbücherei für Blinde, DZB); Paul MacDermott: I wonder if an organisation such as the Royal National Institute of Blind People would be worth contacting for advice.; TheDJ: A great deal actually. Mostly we rely on W3, and WCAG to set proper standards, for instance. Most importantly in my view, though, is that we are extremely dependent on browser and screenreader vendors. We need these parties to truly invest in these user groups and to collaborate closely with each other to make a healthy ecosystem. From a technical perspective much of the technology required for superb screenreader support is still somewhat stuck in a phase that can be compared with the Internet Explorer 6 era. Standards are inconsistently and, worse, often incorrectly implemented. If the quality and consistency of that part of the web would improve, the Accessibility project and also MediaWiki developers could do a lot more for the users who rely on this technology.

Does WikiProject Accessibility collaborate with any other WikiProjects? What initiatives can WikiProjects undertake to improve the accessibility of articles under the project's scope? How can WikiProjects make their own discussion and resource space more accessible for editors with disabilities?: Graham87: We don't formerly collaborate with any WikiProjects, but individual members sometimes ask us questions either at the accessibility WikiProject's talk page or the accessibility guideline's talk page. If members of WikiProjects want to become acquainted with the accessibility guidelines, that would be good. To make WikiProject spaces accessible, just use Wikipedia's standard conventions for such things.

What are the project's most urgent needs? How can a new contributor help today?: Graham87: You can help us by pointing out articles that you think may have accessibility problems, or asking questions about any new techniques or software that might be developed. Also, if you have accessibility issues that we may be able to help with, we'd love to hear about them.; TheDJ: I echo Graham here, please share where you are having trouble with your ability to read or edit articles. Solving the 10% most common problems would probably significantly improve the experiences for all readers and editors.

Anything else you'd like to add?: Graham87: I'd just like to put in a plug for the WCAG theme song. Enjoy!; TheDJ: I'd like to add that making content accessible in the basics is not so big a problem. When it comes to Wikipedia, the challenge is often in doing this as 'automatically' as possible, so that ideally it does not require extra effort of editors. The other big challenge is making it more accessible for those who need this extra accessibility, while at the same time not creating too much 'noise' for those who do not desire or require these additional or alternative presentations. These are the most difficult problems to solve. Examples are for instance {{flatlist}} and appropriate usage of headings (and not using 'fake' visual headings). This required convincing the editor community of the importance of these simple techniques, even though they might not directly benefit the majority of the editors. Through healthy debate and collaboration with editors these techniques are now commonplace for the past few years, but had not been so for many years in the early days of the project.

Next week's article will be filled with drama. Until then, wash your mouth out with soap in the archive.

Reader comments

2013-11-06

Ebionites 3 case closed

Contribute —

Share this

By Neotarf

The Ebionites 3 case has closed with an interaction ban for the two editors involved in the dispute.

Ebionites 3

The Ebionites 3 case, initiated by Ignocrates, which involved a long-running dispute between two editors over a 2nd century religious document, was closed. The following remedies were enacted:

“

Ignocrates and John Carter are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with each other (subject to the ordinary exceptions).
John Carter is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to Ebionites, broadly construed.
John Carter requested removal of his administrator rights on 1 November 2013, while these arbitration proceedings were in progress. John Carter may regain these rights only through a new request for adminship.

”

Other requests and committee action

Clarification request:Infoboxes: A request made by Anthonyhcole for clarification of Gerda Arendt's restriction on adding infoboxes was closed . The Committee clarified that acting on behalf of a restricted user to breach a restriction is WP:PROXYING and so is not permitted, and that Gerda did breach her restriction by adding the infobox to the article in question. Arbitrator Carcharoth emphasized that "The restrictions on adding or removing infoboxes are not because the articles should or shouldn't have infoboxes, but because the editors given those restrictions have demonstrated poor judgement over discussions."
Clarification request:Ayn Rand: An amendment request initiated by TParis regarding an administrator editing through protection on an article with Arbcom sanctions was declined, after the editor in question self-reverted the edit .
Motion regarding Manning naming dispute : By motion of the committee, finding of fact 22, regarding Baseball Bugs, has been replaced by the following: "During the course of the dispute, Baseball Bugs (talk · contribs) frequently accused other participants in the dispute of misconduct [1], [2] [3]; engaged in soapboxing based on his personal view of the article subject's actions [4] [5] [6] [7]; and needlessly personalised the dispute [8]."
Motion regarding Phil Sandifer: the committee resolved by motion to desysop and indefinitely ban Phil Sandifer for posting allegedly non-public personal information about a Wikipedia editor on an external website. See also this week's related Signpost article: "Alleged 'outing' of an editor's personal information leads to Wikipedia ban".
Arbitration Committee Elections RFC: The yearly Arbitration Committee Election request for comments is now closed.
Arbitration Clerk changes: Arbitration clerks Guerillero and AlexandrDmitri have resigned. Bbb23 has joined the clerk team as a trainee clerk.
Discretionary sanctions discussion: A request by the committee for comment on discretionary sanctions was closed.

Reader comments

2013-11-06

Sockpuppet investigations, VisualEditor, Wikidata's birthday, and more

Contribute —

Share this

By Pine

This is mostly a list of Non-article page requests for comment believed to be active on 5 November 2013 linked from subpages of Wikipedia:RfC, recent watchlist notices and SiteNotices. The latter two are in bold. Items that are new to this report are in italics even if they are not new discussions. If an item can be listed under more than one category it is usually listed once only in this report. Clarifications and corrections are appreciated; please leave them in this article's comment box at the bottom of the page.