The French-language Wikipedia celebrated its millionth article with the creation of the article Louis Babel on September 21. The French-language Wikipedia is the third to cross this threshold, after the German (with 1.1 million) and English Wikipedias (with 3.4), having grown at a steady rate since its formation in 2001. It has more than 60 million individual edits and 300,000 active contributors; article creation at WP.fr spiked in 2005–06, driven by the addition of some 36,000 geographical stubs, then stabilized to a present rate of 300–400 new articles a day, as well as 800 active contributor registrations per month.
The milestone was also announced on Wikimedia France's Twitter feed. Because of lag on the Wikipedia page lists, the milestone was expected to be hit two days later, on September 23; following a flurry of page creations, the developers revealed that the milestone had been hit with the creation of Louis Babel, two days prior to the expected date.
The next Wikipedias likely to break the threshold are the Polish (now at 729,000 articles) and the Italian (728,000).
Part Two of three installments of the 2010 Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content has been released (see earlier Signpost coverage: "Board resolution on offensive content", "Study on controversial content"). Authored by consultants Robert Harris and Dory Carr-Harris, it sets out 11 recommendations for discussion, to be presented to the Board in October, among them that:
Part Three will contain a "rough catalogue" of existing sexual images on Commons.
After a deliberation process lasting more than a year, the free wiki-based online encyclopedia Citizendium has adopted a charter (consisting of 55 articles laying a constitution-like foundation for the project's governance). This was announced last week by its founder Larry Sanger, whose role as editor-in-chief ended with the charter's ratification.
Plans for a charter had already been mentioned in Citizendium's initial press release in October 2006, but the drafting process did not start until a July 2009 statement by Sanger, in which he announced his intention to step down as editor-in-chief, partly to fulfill his pledge to do so two or three years after Citizendium's inception, and partly due to his inactivity on the project.
The charter's 55 articles are in seven sections ("Citizenship and editorship", "Content and style", "Organization and offices", "Community policy", "Behavior and dispute resolution", "Administrative matters", and "Transitional measures"). A nomination process has now begun to fill governance roles set out in the charter: A five-member Management Council, a seven-member Editorial Council, a Managing Editor, and an Ombudsman. The preamble to the charter describes Citizendium as "a collaborative effort to collect, structure, and cultivate knowledge and to render it conveniently accessible to the public for free", without mentioning the word "encyclopedia". There were concerns about ambiguous statements and a lack of copy-editing in the final version (there are typos such as "Managament Council"). Sanger himself, who was not directly involved in the drafting process, had objected to the wording of several articles, including those mentioning original research and advertising, and to the absence from the charter of "anything like a bill of rights enumerating the rights of Citizens against unfair procedures and punishments". In last week's announcement, Sanger also criticized the charter's "lack of any requirement that articles be family-friendly" (as in Citizendium's current family-friendly policy), and added that "there is some seriously twisted stuff on Wikipedia that has no business in a resource calling itself an 'encyclopedia'" (cf. Signpost coverage of his earlier allegations against Wikimedia Commons). On the other hand, he expressed hope that the charter would make it easier to exclude problematic contributors from Citizendium, which he said suffered from the presence of "ideologues" and "cranks" (the project has been criticized for being over-lenient towards advocates of topics such as homeopathy or chiropractic).
Despite the criticism of the final version, it was overwhelmingly approved, by 65 of 72 participating members. (In each of the past two months, there were around 100 active Citizendium users, i.e. accounts that had made at least one edit, according to Citizendium's statistics.) Half of the eight-member Charter Drafting Committee had "dropped out" before the vote, and one of the remaining committee members (also the Secretary of Citizendium's Editorial Council) justified the decision not to delay the process further: "Citizendium is on intensive care life support. I think it has a chance to recover with an imperfect charter".
In his announcement, Sanger dismissed "hopeful, mean-spirited reports of our impending demise", observing that "our traffic has been steadily growing, and I've observed new people continuing to get involved". However, he warned that "the funds available to pay for the Citizendium servers are running low" and advised the community to think about funding options and cheaper hosting (see also July 26 Signpost coverage).
The interim poll on the use of Pending changes on Wikipedia has closed. After the two-month Pending changes trial, an earlier straw poll had produced 407 in favor, 217 opposed, plus 44 other responses. Jimbo Wales then asked the Wikimedia Foundation to keep the tool running until there had been further discourse (see Signpost story).
The interim poll, from September 20–27, was run to decide whether the system should be kept in place until the release of a new version, projected for November 9, that is expected to address some concerns. It closed with 289 votes for temporary continuation and 199 for temporary removal.
A trial that would apply Pending changes to WP:MEDS articles has been proposed, to gather additional data. Testing has been centralized, and the poll has received a large amount of debate on its talk page.
Barry Newstead, the Wikimedia Foundation's Chief Global Development Officer, visited India last week to prepare the opening of the organization's first office outside the US, combined with the hiring of a "National Program Director" for India (see Signpost coverage: September 6 and August 30).
Newstead visited New Delhi, Mumbai and Bangalore. It was the first time a Wikipedia Meetup was ever organized in New Delhi and Mumbai. It brought together a mix of bloggers, Wikipedians and people generally interested in contributing to Wikipedia. Some 40 people attended the Mumbai and Bangalore Meetups and about 20 attended the Delhi meet, despite heavy monsoon rains disrupting the city. Along with WMF Trustee Bishakha Datta and advisory board member Achal Prabhala, Newstead addressed a press conference in Bangalore city.
The office is set to open in early 2011, and its location has not been announced yet. Yet various Indian media speculated which of the three cities might have the best chances. Bangalore, which is already the seat of the Indian Wikimedia chapter appears to be the front-runner according to The Hindu ("Wikipedia eyes Bangalore"), Times of India ("Wiki logs into India for its second office"), and The Economic Times ("Wikipedia aims to interact in top 10 Indian languages"). However, The Press Trust of India ("Wikipedia to open India office soon") said "Wikipedia" would launch the office "probably in Mumbai", while Daily News and Analysis ("Bangalore is in fray to become Wikipedia's India capital") mentioned Pune as a fourth possibility.
Time Out Mumbai quoted Prabhala on possible reasons that might still be "keeping Indians from becoming active contributors". The Economic Times described some of Newstead's personal background. Before becoming the Foundation's CGDO in June (see Signpost coverage), he had been a consultant at the non-profit Bridgespan Group, having quit a lucrative career at the Boston Consulting Group. Newstead explained: "I’ve always had a passion for education and knowledge. I enjoyed the training I got in consulting, but it was a personal decision to spend my career working on important social issues".
In related news, the first Indian Wikimedia Community Newsletter has been released last week. The publication contains a foreword by Bishdatta and Jimbo Wales (who already praised the Indian-language Wikipedias last month). The newsletter is 36 pages long in PDF format.
The newsletter reports the size of the Indian community: because of the large number of languages in India, there are about 20 different Wikipedias, as well as a similar number in the incubator. There is also significant Indian editing activity on the English Wikipedia (English is one of the official languages of India). There is a story on the activities of the Indian Wikipedia Chapter, and information on the activities of the various Indian-language WMF projects and the interactions between them. Some interesting tidbits:
On September 25 and 26, the third "CPOV" conference about Wikipedia took place in Leipzig, Germany. Unlike the previous installments that had been held in Bangalore in January and in Amsterdam in March (Signpost coverage), this one was held in a local language (Wikipedia:Ein kritischer Standpunkt).
As in the other conferences, most of the presentations were by academic researchers from the humanities. But this installment saw more participation by active Wikipedians, several of whom discussed with researchers in a "Wikipedia and Science" roundtable and on a "Wikipedia and Criticism" panel, and gave introductory Wikipedia workshops on the first day, supported by the local chapter, Wikimedia Germany.
The event generated coverage in several major German media. For example, TV news service Tageschau interviewed the director of the Leipzig university library (one of the conference sites) about Wikipedia, with one question being about the new Article feedback tool.
The "1st International Competition on Wikipedia Vandalism Detection" was held in Padua, Italy on 22–23 September 2010, to evaluate automated tools for detecting malicious edits on Wikipedia (workshop page), having received submissions from nine teams. It was based on a corpus of 32452 edits, sampled from one week of Wikipedia's recent changes, that had been classified by 753 human annotators recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk, enabling the project to check the accuracy of the automatic vandalism detectors, for example by comparing true positives and false positives ("TP" and "FP" in the PDF file). One conclusion was that a combination of all 9 submitted detectors can perform better than any single detector. The combined detector has performance of FP=20% at a threshold level where TP=95% (right-hand chart on page 11), i.e. it would catch 19 out of 20 vandalism edits if it were allowed an error rate of wrongly classifying one in five legitimate edits as vandalism. A data point for higher detection levels is FP=35% at TP=98%. The paper also catalogued the different features that the detectors combine to assess the probability that a given edit is vandalism (one of the simplest characteristics, employed by seven of the nine contestants, is whether it was made by an anonymous editor).
Some other automatic vandalism detection tools were not part of the competition, among them vandal fighting bots like User:ClueBot that already operate on Wikipedia, the STiki tool developed at the University of Pennsylvania (whose author says that it would have finished second if it had participated) and a recently announced project at the University of Iowa.
This week, The Signpost visited WikiProject Architecture. The project was created in April 2004 to explore architecture, buildings, and construction. Members and enthusiasts discuss common issues, develop standards, and create templates. The project is now home to more than 16,000 articles, including 67 featured articles, 67 featured lists, 3 A-class articles, and 183 good articles. We interviewed project members Binksternet, Warofdreams, and Elekhh.
Warofdreams started the WikiProject back in 2004 upon a suggestion from User:Isomorphic. This architecture graduate had already been contributing on a wide range of topics connected with this area architecture. Having just created the timeline of architecture, he hoped to encourage the identification of gaps and weak areas in en.WP's coverage. Project member Binksternet joined the WikiProject because of his interest in architectural preservation in the San Francisco Bay Area, where he lived. He is inspired by Spanish Revival and Art Deco architecture from the 1920s and 1930s, mid-century modern and Googie from the 1950s and 60s, and "bold and fanciful statements made in construction of a building".
For Elekhh, who started contributing to Wikipedia only a year ago with the aim of improving architecture and articles related to urban design, joining this WikiProject was natural. He is interested in 20th-century and contemporary architecture. Elekhh is also a member of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, which he says is unfortunately not very active.
Binksternet has contributed his share to building the project's repertoire of Featured and Good Articles. He greatly expanded the article about architect Timothy L. Pflueger, helped it to earn GA status, and hopes to bring it to FA some day. He was heavily involved in the articles 100 McAllister Street and Hotel Valley Ho, and advanced them to GA. Having reviewed articles for GA status including World Trade Center and Architecture of Denmark, and helped with FA reviews, he is eager for more. However, he encourages more new editors to get involved, and hopes to encourage anyone to jump in and learn what is required to get an article to GA status.
Many of the potential subjects covered by the project are iconic works of art, and deserve to be portrayed by high-quality images. Warofdreams says it is easy to take average-quality pictures of buildings, as they are easily accessible to all. However, he has some advice to offer for getting better results: "If you have the time, visiting a building at different times of the day or week can reveal how the appearance of the building changes with different lighting. It's also good to consider whether a Wikipedia article might benefit from close-ups of particular details, or shots illustrating the setting of the building, or showing it in use." Binksternet, a casual photographer, expressed frustration at not being able to "stalk" the perfect shot by always being ready at the right time of day or season.
Elekhh says some jurisdictions may impose legal constraints of photographing buildings and monuments. He said that the main difficulty of illustrating 20th-century architecture articles lies with compliance with the Wikimedia image licensing requirements in countries without Freedom of panorama, such as France, Italy or Russia.
The project has a large backlog of requests for new articles. Elekhh says there has been effort by project members to treat these requests by prioritising articles of general interest over local interest. Articles belonging to the former category have been addressed more swiftly in the last year. Unfortunately, many requested articles stay unaddressed for a longer period. These tend to be about architects or buildings of local interest and would be rated as low-mid importance for the Wikiproject.
Warofdreams laments how many requests for input posted elicit little or no feedback. He urges more editors with an interest in the field to join, add it to their watchlist, and take part in relevant discussions. Elekhh said "Architecture articles have a good coverage of English speaking countries, in particular of the United States, but rather weak coverage of other countries. I see attracting contributors from non-English-speaking countries to the English Wikipedia as a priority. Binksternet believes that topics of architectural lighting, interior architecture and landscape architecture deserve greater attention.
Editors can help the project by creating and improving articles about architects, architecture, buildings, and construction. Next week, we'll get to the core of a hot project. Until then, read our previous reports in the archive.
Reader comments
The Signpost welcomes Ron Ritzman (nom), from Atlanta, as a new admin. Ron focuses on maintenance tasks and has a history of contributions going back to 2005, with high levels of activity since mid-2008. He has particularly strong experience at AfD and as a new-page patroller.
Eleven lists were promoted:
Choice of the week. Ruslik0 has written three featured lists in astronomy topics, and is a regular reviewer at FLC. Here is his favorite of the week:
“ | Among the lists promoted for the last week, one really stands out. I am talking about List of National Treasures of Japan (crafts: swords), which provides a wealth of information not only about swords but also about History of Japan in general. Some of this information is actually quite difficult to come by. The list is also part of a series of articles about the national treasures of Japan written by the same author, some of which I reviewed in the past. All of the them are of the same high quality. So, I find that List of National Treasures of Japan (crafts: swords) is the best of the week, and would recommend everyone to read it. | ” |
Choice of the week. Gazhiley, a regular reviewer and nominator at featured picture candidates, told The Signpost:
“ | For me this week it's been between two very similar, but entirely different pictures: Mespelbrunn Castle and Koppelpoort. The difference in the architecture of these two castles is striking. I have to say though that I find the Mespelbrunn Castle picture is the best. The outstanding colours, the clarity of detail and the unique setting make this picture extremely attractive. And for a picture to receive just one Oppose is a good sign! This is definitely my Choice of the Week. [Picture at top] | ” |
The Arbitration Committee opened no new cases, leaving one open.
This case resulted from the merging of several Arbitration requests on the same topic into a single case, and the failure of a related request for comment to make headway. Innovations have been introduced for this case, including special rules of conduct that were put in place at the start. However, the handling of the case has been criticized by some participants; for example, although the evidence and workshop pages were closed for about five weeks, during this time, no proposals were posted on the proposed decision page and participants were prevented from further discussing their case on the case pages (see earlier Signpost coverage).
The proposed decision, drafted by Newyorkbrad, Risker, and Rlevse, sparked a large quantity of unstructured discussion, much of it comprising concerns about the proposed decision (see earlier Signpost coverage). A number of users, including participants and arbitrator Carcharoth, made the discussion more structured, but the quantity of discussion has continued to increase significantly. Rlevse had said that arbitrators were trying to complete the proposed decision before September 6, but it was later made clear that he will no longer be voting on this decision. This week, arbitrators made further additions to the proposed decision.
Earlier this week, arbitrators provided their first responses to the request to reimpose an Eastern European topic ban on Radeksz. As reported earlier, the proposed topic ban was originally imposed at the conclusion of the case, but was lifted three months ago by the Committee. Arbitrator SirFozzie warned that most “drastic action” may result if there is no improvement in the topic area, and echoed this in response to the Piotrus request (see below). Arbitrator KnightLago stated that there was a “growing tiredness within the Arbitration Committee for all things EEML related” which "confused" an editor a bit. Other arbitrators asked participants to read and consider both arbitrator's comments.
Earlier this week, Piotrus filed a request for his Eastern Europe topic ban to be lifted. This amendment request is identical to the request which was filed in July (see earlier Signpost coverage) – in that request, this statement (by former arbitrator Charles Matthews), and this statement, persuaded the majority of the Committee to oppose modifying the restrictions. However, arbitrator Newyorkbrad is again considering a motion to partially lift the effect of the restriction.
At the time of writing, no further progress has been made on this clarification request since last week’s Signpost coverage concerning discretionary sanctions. In response to arbitrator Newyorkbrad's question of whether anything further is being requested, the filer confirmed that arbitrators have not responded to, or not answered multiple questions that the filer asked.
At the time of writing, no further progress has been made on this amendment request - to impose a topic ban on Ferahgo the Assassin from race and intelligence related articles. Although an arbitrator stated that he would support a topic ban, no arbitrator has cast formal on-wiki votes for the proposal yet.
The Community has been invited to comment on the Wikipedia:Audit Subcommittee (AUSC); in particular, the preferred methods of selecting community representatives, and the duration of time they would serve. “The result of the discussion will inform the Arbitration Committee on how best to proceed before progressing to another election cycle.” AUSC is a subcommittee of the Arbitration Committee which should review and act upon concerns received by the community about CheckUser and Oversight activities. Currently, AUSC consist of three community representatives elected by the community, who serve one-year terms, and three arbitrators who rotate every six months or so. A summary of AUSC’s activity has also been posted for comment.
Reader comments
Wikimedia's Chief Technical Officer Danese Cooper last week took part in an "office hours" discussion on IRC. Speaking about her own role, the state of Wikimedia's technical departments, and answering questions from the community, she gave insights into what the future might hold for Wikimedia (public logs). Although discussion was fragmented, a number of important points were touched on:
Michael Dale, a Kaltura employee working with the Wikimedia Foundation to build easier ways of using the power of video in Wikimedia projects, this week announced the creation of a free "video sequencer" for Commons (Wikimedia techblog). The sequencer, which allows users to remix existing and new video, audio, text and images into single video sections (see example, right), was described by Kaltura as "a stepping stone in the world of online media". It requires a modern browser to use, with the best performance by the Firefox 4 betas. It is hoped the sequencer will bridge the gap between images, which are relatively common on Wikimedia projects, and videos, which are relatively rare, to create overview, documentary-style introductions to topics on Wikipedia, among other uses.
As the capabilities around video are refined and expanded, a worry has been that increased usage of video would impose a significant additional cost on the Foundation, especially due to bandwith usage. Michael Dale announced a cooperation with P2P-Next, who presented at Wikimania this year. Their technology makes it possible to use peer-to-peer technology for downloading the videos and all you need is to enter the mwEmbed video pilot and install the P2P-Next Swarmplayer Firefox plugin (a plugin for Internet Explorer and a MacOS version of Swarmplayer are still in development). After viewing the video, your browser will share the video for you with other viewers and thus alleviate the strain on the resources of the Foundation. It is claimed that the sharing is configurable and will not get in the way of your browsing experience.
We conclude a series of articles about this year's Google Summer of Code (GSoC) with Stephen LaPorte, a law school student, who describes his project to creating a tool to format judicial decisions, legal scholarship, and statutes for Wikipedia's sister project Wikisource:
“ | WikiSource should be a repository of statutory law, judicial decisions, and legal scholarship. Prof. Timothy K. Armstrong identified Wikisource as solution to the architectural limitations of existing repositories for judicial decisions and legal scholarship. Prof. Armstrong listed three obstacles for Wikisource--legal, content, and cultural issues. The legal and cultural issues can be address through education and outreach. This project addresses the problem of content.
A tool to format judicial decisions and statutes will help users move text that is already electronically available and in the public domain to Wikisource, solving the "chicken-and-egg" problem that Wikisource currently faces. Once Wikisource has a substantial body of legal sources, users will gain value from and improve the coverage of those legal sources. |
” |
Stephen worked on four such tools: importing U.S. Supreme Court cases (example), importing the current U.S. legal code (example), wikifying legal citations (tool) and helping categorise U.S. Supreme Court cases (tool).
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.
action=parse
" module was briefly deactivated over performance concerns stemming from the Extension:ImageAnnotator gadget, before being re-enabled.<!-- interwiki at top -->
to a page will now prevent bots running on the popular pywikipedia framework from moving interwikis to the bottom of the page (as is the norm for the vast majority of pages).