I did not, could not guess how bad a turn it had taken. Despite the valiant efforts of some of its members, the institution is moribund, and cancerous.
— Coren
Just two months into his second term as an arbitrator on the English Wikipedia, Coren resigned from the Committee with a blistering attack on his fellow arbitrators. In a strongly worded statement posted both on his talk page and the arbitration noticeboard, he claimed that ArbCom has become politicised to the extent that "it can no longer do the job it was ostensibly elected for". Coren accused arbitrators of "filibustering and tactical maneuvers to gain the upper hand" and of "bickering about the 'image' of the committee with little or no concern for the project's fate". "Trying our damn best to do the Right Thing", he charged, "has been obsoleted in favour of trying to get reelected."
Arbitrator Worm That Turnedanswered Coren's claims, writing on the ArbCom noticeboard: "Personally, I find the statement from Coren to be rather unfair, ... I do give a damn what the community thinks. I consider the repercussions carefully and try to minimise the controversy surrounding events. I also care about the image that the committee portrays, as without the community's respect, the committee is nothing. I'm sure it's not only me that Coren's statement is reflecting, if it was I would be roundly ignored, but I believe I'm the most vocal about it. The leap that I cannot accept is that I'm doing this to be re-elected. ... I see no reason why we cannot do the right thing AND keep the community on side. If that's playing politics, then so be it."
Coren (Marc André Pelletier) is no newcomer to either the English Wikipedia or the Wikimedia movement as a whole. He served on the Arbitration Committee from 2009 to 2011, and was elected to a second term starting January 2013. Had he stayed on, his total service would have amounted to five years. In 2011, he ran for election to the WMF's Board of Trustees. On 25 February 2013, Coren took up a 12-month contract with the Foundation, joining the Engineering and Product Development Team; his primary focus will be to assist community developers to leverage the new Wikimedia Labs infrastructure for their tools, especially applications that are migrating from the toolserver.
Asked about the future of the Arbitration Committee on his talk page, Coren stated, "there is nothing wrong with the basic operation of the Committee when its members actually work towards the right objective – this is what I saw in 2009–2010 for instance. Part of the difficulty stems from the fact that some of mechanisms in place that make it work right fail in catastrophic ways when things go wrong." He then delivered a harsh accusation against the current Committee: "What I mean by 'politicized' was that decisions are not being argued around 'what is best for the project' but 'what will make [the committee] look good'. Add to that stonewalling, filibustering, and downright 'bullying' from those who aren't getting their way – to the point of having arbitrators being ... creative ... with ethics in order to get the upper hand".
The Signpost asked Coren to explain where he saw a conflict between caring about the image of the Committee and doing the best for the project.
“
If you attempt to decide according to whether people will whine and yell, all you are doing is giving the loudest voices the power to veto what the committee does "to preserve the image of the committee". The good of the project, on the other hand, doesn't rely on what is currently said about the committee. Things like applying the rules fairly, or fixing a long term problem, should not be affected by "who will complain", and "but that would cause drama". When you start having arbitrators start breaking rules (internal and otherwise) in order to find something, /anything/ to use as a pretext to avoid acting because it will make people dislike them, then the problem becomes serious.
”
The scales of justice, the centrepiece of the ArbCom logo
Coren did not respond to the Signpost's subsequent request to clarify what he meant by "breaking rules", or which cases involved whining and yelling.
Hersfold, who resigned from ArbCom the week before, echoed Coren's criticisms in general terms: "Unfortunately, I was hoping [that Coren would] be one of the ones to lead the charge against such politicization ... I noticed a steadily increasing emphasis from several arbitrators on avoiding actions that would look bad for the Committee's image or otherwise cause undue amounts of drama". When we invited him to be more specific, Hersfold told the Signpost, "I have no further comment."
Arbitrator AGK took strong exception to Coren's statements: "I consider Coren's resignation to be the rankest drama-mongering. ... throwing the toys from the pram because the community has moved on and the arbitrators who now staff the committee were not quite willing to go along with his extreme views on running ArbCom."
Invited to explain his views further, AGK told the Signpost:
“
... the notion that one or more arbitrators is consistently pushing the committee to do the most popular—rather than the most beneficial—thing in high-profile cases is utter nonsense.
As for arbitrators breaking rules to push for popular opinion to be reflected in committee decisions: this is, again, unsupported by fact.
In the situation Marc is speaking about, the committee maintained Marc was required to recuse from the discussion. Marc himself agreed, and he was not asked to recuse so that a suboptimal decision could be "forced through".
Marc has misappropriated his recusal to give the impression that some arbitrators are using underhand tactics to sideline people that are not "toeing" the line. This is wrong. When Marc was asked to recuse, it was because he had a plain conflict of interest. When Marc was out-voted, it was because his opinions were the wrong thing for the project, and had no support in the committee.
Marc is obliged, in my opinion, to withdraw (or substantiate) his accusations of impropriety, and I would also suggest he make it clear to the community that the real reason he resigned was that he could not get his way.
”
Chapters association elects new chair
Markus Glaser, pictured here at Wikimania 2012, has been elected as the chapters association's new chair.
Markus Glaser has been elected as the new chair of the chapters association. He replaces Ashley Van Haeften (Fæ), who had faced controversy after his unopposed election as chair with little substantive discussion during Wikimania 2012. Van Haeften attempted to address these concerns before the election:
“
I was never completely convinced with being elected to this position uncontested through a simple vote at our first meeting, as a demonstration of our democratic strength, and last year I committed to holding a more public, thorough, and hopefully contested election, ... Over the last few months, more than half of the current WMF board of trustees have approached myself or other members of the Council, raising their concerns about my ban from the English Wikipedia placed shortly after my election as Chair. Throughout I reassured them that this had been discussed on the Chapters list, that there was no appetite from the Council for me to stand down, and I would be calling an election before the Milan conference. However, after increased pressure, I have moved this forward from my original plan of March.
”
In the election, Glaser beat the English Wikipedia's Kirill Lokshin and Lorenzo Losa, who started as an editor on the Italian Wikipedia, although that "now takes only a small part of [his] Wikimedia-related time." Glaser, who began as a developer and came to the association as the representative of Wikimedia Germany, downplayed the powers he would have as chair, stating that he would favor forming an executive committee to make major decisions. He believes that the committee should:
“
Reach out and open up to all chapters, thematic organisations and other affiliations; establish a good connection.
Listen to the needs of these entities and become a place to form and voice common opinions.
Let the action plan suggested in our London meeting come to life. This means the WCA offers help, insight and support for chapters and other organisations in their various stages and paths of development.
Become a place of exchange for experiences, ideas and resources for chapters and other entities.
Have friendly relations with all entities in the Wikimedia movement, including WMF, the Board of Trustees, AffCom, FDC.
”
The troubled history of the chapters association was covered by the Signpost in June 2012 and in brief updates since then, such as February 2013. More information is available on Meta—the coordinating website for the Wikimedia movement—under the proposed name of the organization – "Wikimedia Chapters Association"; however, the Foundation has declined to recognize that name on the basis that the inclusion of Wikimedia is inconsistent with its trademark policy. The next meeting of the association will be in April, at the annual Wikimedia Conference in Milan, Italy.
In brief
WMF monthly report: The Wikimedia Foundation's February 2013 report has been published on Meta.
Wikipedia Zero: The WMF has announced that Axiata has become the newest partner in its Wikipedia Zero program, which aims to provide mobile users in developing countries free access to Wikipedia articles. The partnership marks the fifth Foundation–company partnership in this respect, and adds about 80 million people to the program. The number of people already covered varies depending on the source (the Q&A page states that there are 483 million users as of November 2012, but the WMF's blog post on the last partnership gave 330 million). In unrelated news, Wikipedia Zero won the activism award from South by Southwest (SXSW). Kul Takanao Wadhwa, the WMF's Head of Mobile, said: "We are honored that Wikipedia Zero won at SXSW and we appreciate the validation the award conveys to our efforts. But this is only the beginning. Activism is step one. Next stop, accelerating this program so it becomes a movement to benefit all of humankind."
Governance review redux: The WMF's general counsel, Geoff Brigham, has published a blog post highlighting several practices he thinks are worth following by all Wikimedia-related organizations. The Signpost covered the Wikimedia UK governance review, which these practices are drawn from, in February.
Community logo: The Wikimedia community logo, designed in 2006 by WarX and released into the public domain, became the topic of discussions this week on the Wikimedia-l mailing list and on Meta, both revolving around the WMF's attempt to trademark it. The WMF's deputy general counsel, Luis Villastated that the attempt was part of a broader effort to trademark these sorts of logo, so that the WMF would be able to take action if someone chose to abuse them. As it was part of this broader action, the WMF did not communicate with the community on this specific logo, a minor oversight that Villa apologized for not seeing sooner.
Want to learn how to edit Wikipedia?: A free online open educational resource class is being offered on p2pu.com. Titled "Writing Wikipedia Articles: The Basics and Beyond", it is the brainchild of Pete Forsyth and the Communicate OER project.
This week, we composed a tribute to WikiProject Composers. The project was created during the final hours of 2004 and finalized in early January 2005. It has grown to encompass over 8,000 pages, including 26 Featured Articles and 23 Good Articles. WikiProject Composers faces a difficult workload, with a relative WikiWork rating of 5.45. The project maintains a variety of guidelines, templates and tools to help editors expand Wikipedia's coverage of composers. We interviewed Smerus, Kleinzach, Opus33, and Toccata quarta.
What motivated you to join WikiProject Composers? Do you specialize in composers of a particular genre, time period, or nationality? Have you participated in any other music-related WikiProjects?
Smerus: Music is one of my great passions, particualrly Western music from the 17th century onwards, which is the area I feel competent to comment on. I am a sort of part-time musical historian in real life.
Kleinzach:Smerus is being modest. Speaking for myself, I joined around 2005 when few articles were properly developed. The challenge was to get them up to the standard of the rest of the encyclopaedia. I think we have succeeded, though there is still a lot of room for further improvement. I've participated in most of the other music-related projects.
Opus33: I've particularly enjoyed WP participation in this area because it's given me a chance to read more widely about classical music. There are a lot of great books out there, and I've seen my main role as trying to channel their content into coherent WP articles.
Are the composers of some genres, time periods, or nationalities better covered than others? What can be done to fill these gaps in Wikipedia's coverage?
Smerus: I am sure there are great gaps but like many I tend to keep to my comfort zones in editing. When I find a topic that interests me that is not covered (or has a poor quality article) I quite often put something up or rewrite.
Kleinzach: Obviously some composers are better served than others, but I don't think we have any gaps as such any longer. One reason for that is that we have looked at the main music encyclopedias from time to time and got ideas from them, and also we have attracted editors with special interests.
Toccata quarta: It seems to me that the best articles about composers tend to be those about composers from the Romantic era. This is unsurprising, as Romantic composers have the widest appeal. The weakest articles about composers are those about Renaissance and 20th-/21st-century composers, since their music usually attracts the types of people who are likely to dismiss the very concept of Wikipedia.
Do sourcing and notability concerns hinder the creation of many composer articles? Does this tend to affect dead and living composers equally? What steps can an editor take when creating a new article about a composer that will improve the article's chances of being kept?
Smerus: It hasn't hindered me but I have the advantage of a good home library and access to subscriber-only sources such as Oxford Music Online and JSTOR through my university connections. In my experience, new articles about composers are only "not kept" when they are non-notable; for otherwise weak articles, other editors tend to step in and improve.
Kleinzach: We have no problems establishing notability for historical composers. There are authoritative sources such as The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. When it comes to present-day composers we do indeed have difficulty establishing notability, but I think that's the same as in any other arts field.
Toccata quarta: From the deletion discussions that I have seen, there are always editors who make an effort to find evidence of notability. I don't think there is unfair treatment of young articles about composers going on.
How difficult has it been to acquire images and audio samples for articles about composers? Are there any library or museum collections that could be tapped to provide these media files? How can the average editor provide media that would help illustrate the composer articles?
Smerus: I've tended to find almost everything I needed on Wikimedia - or else have added items sourced elsewhere, but out of copyright, to Wikimedia.
Kleinzach: In general I think we've been able to find suitable images for articles. Audio samples are something else. Getting good quality usable audio for articles can be very difficult, but this is more a problem for WikiProject Classical music, as they handle articles about compositions.
Smerus: Pass on Haydn/Mozart. Wagner Project has been a bit dormant of late as some members (not including me) think there's not much more that can be added. Relevant info tends to be shared at both WagnerProject and Composers Project I think.
Kleinzach: Thanks to Smerus and some other specialists the WikiProject Richard Wagner was a spectacular success — so much so that little remains to be done now. The Haydn and Mozart task force on the other hand has never been very active, even though a number of editors have been busy on Haydn and Mozart articles, which are generally of a high standard.
Toccata quarta: It seems to me that such specialised task forces and WikiProjects tend to be highly inactive. Specific issues are usually raised on talk pages of articles or WP:COMPOSERS.
Opus33: We should get rid of that Haydn/Mozart task force -- it just never caught on. Thanks for pointing it out.
The use of infoboxes has been a topic of heated discussion for this project on numerous occasions dating back to 2007 and culminating in a particularly acrimonious debate in 2010. What was the outcome of these deliberations? How well has the project recovered from these divisive experiences?
Smerus: Has been? Still is from time to time, but most agitation on this issue comes not from project members but from editors outside the project,(often those who have a drum to beat - see also WP Opera). The project has expressed itself clearly on its attitude to infoboxes, and I think concentrates on its informational mission.
Toccata quarta: As Smerus said, most of the infobox noise comes from outside the project. Some of the treatment we have received over that issue is highly unpleasant.
Kleinzach: Sadly many contributing editors were driven away by the attempt to discipline what was regarded by some wider community editors as an "uppity" project that had the temerity to have a view on the effectiveness of a Wikipedia-wide publishing device. The project still hasn't recovered the vitality it had before. Judging by the discussions in the archives, activity In 2012 was down to only one-sixth of what it had been in 2009. So the project is now only a shadow of what it once was. Incidentally, we should clarify that the issue was specifically about biographical infoboxes, not infoboxes in general. Boxes for quantitative data have never been any kind of problem.
Opus33: I'm hoping that, sooner or later, the problems with infoboxes will be taken up by other editorial communities as well (for example, editors covering history or literature) and we'll eventually see a retreat of infoboxes across the whole WP.
Does WikiProject Composers collaborate with any other WikiProjects? Are there some ways the music projects can better support each other?
Smerus: There is some community of editors between WP Composers and other musical WPs (e.g. opera, classical music) which it seems to me keeps them generally aligned.
Kleinzach: The parent project is Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music. The editors there are almost the same as here. Project guidelines, approach etc are almost identical. Classical music is a bit more active than Composers (45 archives compared to 35).
Toccata quarta: Mostly with related projects (i.e., those that have to do with classical music).
What are the project's most urgent needs? How can a new contributor help today?
Smerus: Many older articles (e.g. Antonin Dvorak, Richard Strauss, Anton Rubinstein) are poorly organised and sourced; their diffuseness makes them confusing and unhelpful for readers. They need complete rewriting. This seems to me more urgent than the creation of new articles, as very few composers of consensus significance are completely lacking an entry.
Kleinzach: The most urgent need is enthusiasm. Any participating editor will be welcome. It doesn't matter so much where his or her personal interests lie. We need to get the project active again.
Toccata quarta: More text and more references. Very few (see [1]) articles are of substantial length, and many are extremely short (see [2]). Perhaps the most common problem with articles about composers is the lack of negative recent criticism. Articles such Gustav Mahler, Olivier Messiaen and Karlheinz Stockhausen (2 FAs and 1 GA) are among the most glaring examples of this.
The views expressed in this interview are those of the author and interviewee; responses and critical commentary are invited in the comments section. The Signpost welcomes proposals for such interviews and op-eds at our opinion desk.
Ask librarians what they think about Wikipedia and you might get some interesting answers. Some will throw up their hands about the laziness of the Google generation and their overdependence on Wikipedia. Some will fatalistically describe the excellent collections at their libraries that are being ignored in favour of shallow internet resources. Some see it as the "competition". And some will tell you it's the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Wikipedia and libraries are in the same business. Both institutions want to make as much knowledge available to as many people as possible, free of charge. Despite these shared aims, the two groups have remained largely distant. Of course, there are librarians who are Wikimedians, and there are libraries that have worked with Wikipedia's GLAM projects. There's Wikipedia Loves Libraries. Wikipedians have developed tools and links to help integrate library resources, but these remain few and underused. Libraries contain vast stores of knowledge, and many want to meet Wikipedia halfway, somehow. How can Wikipedia better bridge the gap to that knowledge?
Current Wikipedia–library interfaces
One barrier to integration is Wikipedia's ad hoc categorization system. In its early days, Wikipedia eschewed the standard organisation schemes in use by libraries, such as the Library of Congress' subject headings. Libraries assign various identifiers to their items; Wikipedia just shoots for a unique title, and maybe a disambiguation term in brackets. The categories come later, and are added (or not added) at the whim of editors.
Some efforts have been made to integrate Wikipedia's pages with larger, library-friendly metadata frameworks. The Virtual International Authority File (VIAF) project is an attempt to unify the various authority file systems used by national libraries. A template giving VIAF data links has been added to many of our biographical articles (read the RFC on the VIAF template). Libraries also benefit from the Special:BookSources page, which is linked through our International Standard Book Number fields in the citation templates. This page allows readers to use union catalogs, such as Online Computer Library Center (OCLC)'s WorldCat service, and find the linked item in a nearby library. OCLC also provides a link to books through the book infobox. However, these links and services provide no listing of a local library's holdings on a topic; they only link to specific items as requested.
Librarians have been exploring different ways to link up their collections with corresponding Wikipedia articles. Efforts by the University of Washington and the University of Houston focused on adding external links to relevant collections pages.[1] Some have sought out GLAM partnerships with experienced editors to better integrate their resources into Wikipedia.
A new platform
A screenshot of the template display
John Mark Ockerbloom (User:JohnMarkOckerbloom), a digital library architect and planner at the University of Pennsylvania, has devised a different platform, called "Forward to Libraries". This service uses the Wikipedia article title as a subject or keyword search in the user's library of choice, using the library's online public access catalog, or OPAC. One can choose a library from a sub-page, or go directly to a library of choice by allowing browser cookies. Ockerbloom discussed his ideas in a blog post last week. Boing Boing contributor, fiction author and Wikipedian Cory Doctorow was impressed, calling the template "a fabulous proposal for creating research synergies between libraries and Wikipedia".[2] Ockerbloom's new template is at Template:Library resources box. For an example of its use on a live page, see the "Further reading" section of Louisa May Alcott.
The Signpost interviewed Ockerbloom last week via email:
How did the idea of the template come about?
I talk a little about that in my blog post. The seed of the idea came last fall, when I heard yet another conversation lamenting patrons going to Google first instead of the library. Around the same time I was noticing that lots of Google searches on specific topics were pulling up Wikipedia content prominently, both in links to articles and in contextual sidebars. I thought "Gee, wouldn't it be great if you could also see what your own library had on a topic as easily as that?"
I knew that Wikipedia had been working on various library-related projects for a while, so I thought maybe I could figure out how to get them to put something special in Wikipedia articles to take them to a user's local library resources. Eventually I realized that a lot of those "special" parts of a Wikipedia article were constructed from templates, and that templates were something that any Wikipedia user could create.
So I coded up some that hooked up to a library referral service that I originally wrote for The Online Books Page, but generalized so I could use it for Wikipedia referrals as well.
You mention the "Google-Wikipedia-References" tendency in younger researchers in your blog. What worries you about the GWR search trend?
Well, for quick consultations, GWR can often work rather well. I've used that research pattern myself from time to time: I'll have a question about a subject, Google it, see a Wikipedia article about that topic, and then find it citing or linking a source that I recognize as authoritative on my question. I'll follow the link, check it out, and use the facts I find there. While I'm not ultimately relying on Wikipedia for the answer, Wikipedia is a useful resource to help me find and confirm answer from a source I consider reliable.
GWR is more worrisome, though, when people fall into it by default, don't really know what reliable sources exist to answer a question, and can't easily tell whether links and references on a given Wikipedia article are the most helpful and comprehensive, or are skewed towards biased approaches or ill-informed points of view. But if it's easy to pick out some links or references that you can be pretty sure will give you well-rounded, well-informed understanding of a subject—then Wikipedia can be a very useful starting point for more in-depth research.
That's one of the things I had in mind when creating my library link templates. Many libraries are well-regarded for the great information resources they have in their collections, and the help that librarians can give in guiding researchers in these collections. I want to make it as easy as possible for people looking for information in Wikipedia to find resources in the libraries they use and trust the most.
How does a library link up with the FTL service?
“
I want to make it as easy as possible for people looking for information in Wikipedia to find resources in the libraries they use and trust the most.
”
If they're not already in my data files—I have 138 registered at this writing—there's a form you can fill out to be included as a destination library for the service. If the library is using a reasonably standard catalog or discovery system with a known format for incoming search links, they usually get added within the next business day or two.
Here's the current list, with a link to the form for suggesting more.
Once a library is in the system, users who want that as their preferred library for Wikipedia links can choose it from the list at the above URL. This will put a cookie in their browser that will make FTL route to that library when they click on "resources in your library" links. I'm also working with a few institutions so that users of their local networks, if they haven't chosen a different library, will get automatically routed to the local institution's library without needing to get a cookie first. (This is still a limited experimental feature, though.)
Do you think the Wikipedia movement is indicative of an eventual total digitization of knowledge?
I don't think we'll ever see a total digitization of all knowledge, much less the completely free availability of such knowledge digitally. But I do think that Wikipedia plays an important role in the democratization of access to knowledge. And I think that libraries do too, in somewhat different ways. So I'd like to ensure that each supports the other in spreading useful knowledge among people.
One of the things I really like about Wikipedia, and the templates I've created, is how they make it possible for collective action to greatly multiply the reach of knowledge contribution. I announced my templates just last week, and people have only started to use them. But when you have various people put them on a few hundred articles, and you've made over 100 libraries reachable via the templates, that already effectively produces tens of thousands of links from Wikipedia to particular libraries on particular subjects. I couldn't have hoped to produce that many Wikipedia links myself in any reasonable time, but the power of the Wikipedia templating system, and the scale and interest of the Wikipedia editor community make that possible in very little time. I'm very grateful for that.
Templates and visual clutter
Templates that create "box" style displays on pages are not universally accepted among editors. Many find them aesthetically unpleasing, and debate their utility. Templates can also increase the load times of pages, disproportionally affecting those on poor connections. If there are too many in an article, the reader has to endure a "template ghetto" at the bottom of the page. As of writing, the Library resources box template hasn't been subjected to wide community scrutiny, although it has already attracted interest at its talk page. It remains to be seen how this idea will evolve, or whether it will gain support among Wikipedians.
There is no one way for a library to integrate its resources with Wikipedia. The community has not, at this point, prioritized these kind of relationships. One thing is certain, though: libraries want to work with Wikipedia. Will we meet them in the middle?
^Elder, Danielle; R. Niccole Westbrook; Michele Reilly (2012). "Wikipedia Lover, Not A Hater: Harnessing Wikipedia To Increase The Discoverability Of Library Resources". Journal of Web Librarianship. 6 (1): 32–44.
An Iñupiat family seen in a 1929 photo by noted ethnologist and photographer Edward S. Curtis. The photo is a new featured picture.
Featured articles
Nine featured articles were promoted this week:
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (nom) by Futuretrillionaire. Released in 2006, Oblivion is the fourth main entry in The Elder Scrolls video game series developed and published by Bethesda Softworks. Critically acclaimed, the game focuses on the main character's quest to defeat a daedrian group trying to destroy the world of Nirn by opening a series of portals to the underworld realm of Oblivion.
Réunion Ibis (nom) by FunkMonk. An extinct species of ibis that was endemic to the volcanic island of Réunion in the Indian Ocean. The first Réunion ibis sub-fossil remains were found in 1974, and the animal was first scientifically described in 1987.
Big Two-Hearted River (nom) by Truthkeeper88 and Ceoil. A two-part short story written by American author Ernest Hemingway and published in the 1925 Boni & Liveright edition of In Our Time, the first American volume of Hemingway's short stories. It features a single protagonist, Nick Adams, and it explores the destructive qualities of war. It is one of Hemingway's earliest to employ his iceberg theory of writing.
Sesame Street research (nom) by Figureskatingfan. When creating the Sesame Street show, its producers used research and over 1,000 studies and experiments to craft and test its impact on its young viewers' learning. The result of this strategy was named “The CTW model”.
Omayra Sánchez (nom) by Ceranthor. Sánchez (1972–1985) was a Colombian 13-year-old girl who died in the city of Armero due to the eruption of Nevado del Ruiz, which occurred in 1985. Omayra became internationally famous through a photograph of her taken shortly before her death by photojournalist Frank Fournier, which caused some controversy.
Russian battleship Rostislav (nom) by Sturmvogel 66. Built by the Nikolaev Admiralty Shipyard in the 1890s for the Black Sea Fleet of the Imperial Russian Navy, Rostislav was a pre-dreadnought battleship conceived as a small, inexpensive coastal defence ship, but later designed as a compact, seagoing battleship.
Flying Eagle cent (nom) by Wehwalt, a one-cent piece struck by the United States Bureau of the Mint as a pattern coin in 1856, and for circulation in 1857 and 1858. It was designed by Mint Chief Engraver James B. Longacre, and was issued in exchange for the worn Spanish colonial silver coin that had circulated in the U.S. until then, as well as for its larger predecessor.
Broken Sword: The Shadow of the Templars (nom) by Khanassassin. A 1996 point-and-click adventure game developed by Revolution Software, it was also called Circle of Blood when it was sold in the United States. It takes place in both real and fictional locations throughout Europe where the main character, George Stobbart, attempts to unravel a conspiracy.
Arthur W. Radford (nom) by Ed!. Radford (1896–1973) was a United States Navy admiral and naval aviator. First serving aboard the USS South Carolina during World War I, he was the architect of the development and expansion of the Navy's aviator training programs in the first years of the World War II. Radford was a central figure in the post-war debates on U.S. military policy.
A photo of the Russian battleship Rostislav, from the new featured article.
List of songs recorded by Cheryl Cole (nom) by Calvin999. British singer and former member of girl group Girls Aloud Cheryl Cole has released three studio albums, collaborating with a wide array of writers and producers from around the world.
Bernard Lee on stage and screen (nom) by SchroCat. Bernard Lee (1908 – 1981) was an English actor who performed in many light entertainment media. His career spanned from 1934 to 1981, and he is perhaps best known for playing M in the first eleven Eon-produced James Bond films. Lee appeared in more than 100 films.
Oregon Symphony discography (nom) by Another Believer. The Portland-based Oregon Symphony was founded in 1896 and stands as the sixth-oldest in the United States. As of 2012, the orchestra has released 18 studio albums and a compilation album.
List of camouflage methods (nom) by Chiswick Chap. Several camouflage methods exist, employed by terrestrial, aerial, and aquatic animals, and in military usage. Camouflage involves deception, whether by looking like the background or by resembling something else, which may be plainly visible to observers.
An Indian elephant bull in musth, seen in the new featured picture.
Featured pictures
Eleven featured pictures were promoted this week:
Elephas maximus (nom) created by Yathin sk and nominated by Yathin sk. The Indian elephant (Elephas maximus indicus) is a subspecies of the Asian elephant. The bull elephant shown in this photo is in musth. The photo was taken in Bandipur National Park, in the Indian state of Karnataka.
Black pepper (nom) created by Kallidaimaniac and nominated by Kallidaimaniac. The fruit of the black pepper (Piper nigrum) vine is often dried and used for seasoning. This photo shows unripe drupes of black pepper in Trivandrum, Kerala, India.
Steenbok (nom) created by Yathin sk and nominated by Tomer T. A steenbok is a common variety of antelope in southern and eastern Africa. This photo was taken in Etosha National Park in Namibia.
Inupiat Family (nom) created by Edward S. Curtis, restored and and nominated by Keraunoscopia. The Iñupiat are an Eskimo people who live in what is now the United States state of Alaska. This photo of an Iñupiat family was taken in 1929. The New York Times obituary of photographer Edward S. Curtis called him an “internationally known authority on the history of the North American Indian” who “devoted his life to compiling Indian history.” The restored photo is based on a digitized film negative at the United States Library of Congress.
Sapho (nom) created by Jean de Paleologu, and restored and nominated by Adam Cuerden. Sapho is a five act pièce lyrique that was first performed on 27 November 1897. Sapho is based on a novel of the same name by Alphonse Daudet. The music for the opera was composed by Jules Massenet, and the libretto was written by Henri Cain and Arthur Bernède.
Carina Nebula panorama (nom) created by ESO/T. Preibisch and nominated by Pine. The Carina Nebula is also known as the Great Nebula in Carina or the Eta Carina Nebula. It includes two of the brightest stars in the Milky Way Galaxy, HD 93129A and Eta Carinae. The Carina Nebula lies approximately 6,500 to 10,000 light-years from Earth. The European Southern Observatory reports that this photo was “taken in infrared light using the HAWK-I camera on ESO's Very Large Telescope” in the nation of Chile.
White-tailed Eagle (nom) created by Yathin sk and nominated by Pine. This photo was taken in Svolvær, Norway. The white-tailed eagle is a large Eurasian predator that is a close relative of the North American bald eagle. Its wingspan can reach up to 2.45 meters (8 feet).
Markham tract housing (nom) created by IDuke and nominated by Nyttend. Tract housing developments involve many similar houses being built on a subdivided plot of land. This photo is of a housing development near Markham, Ontario, Canada.
New City Hall Hanover (nom) created by Der Wolf im Wald and nominated by Elekhh. The New City Hall of Hanover, Germany, was built between 1901 and 1913. The architects were Hermann Eggert and Gustav Halmhuber. Emperor Wilhelm II opened the building. The dome of the building is nearly 100 meters (330 ft) high. The building's elevator is unique in Europe, having a parabolic course to the top of the dome. Over 90,000 people visited the building in 2005.
The new featured picture of the Carina Nebula.
Featured topic
One featured topic was promoted this week:
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (nom) nominated by Nergaal and with Geuiwogbil as the main contributor, achieved featured topic status with three featured articles and two good articles. The topic was promoted after the article The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion became featured (see above).
On Thursday, arbitrator Coren resigned, following closely on the heels of arbitrator Hersfold's resignation on Wednesday. There are two open cases. A final decision has been given in the Norton case.
Coren's resignation
Arbitrator Coren resigned, effective immediately, charging that the committee has become politicized. The matter is covered in this week's "News and notes."
This case, brought by Fram, involved allegations of an ongoing pattern of copyright violations in uploaded files, and in links to copyright-violating off-wiki pages. To address the issue of a portion of the evidence having been deleted and only viewable by administrators, a select number of deleted files were restored, with the contents visible via a template, for the duration of the case.
The committee passed the following findings of fact: that Norton had made more than 100,000 edits since 2004, that he had a history of adding text and images that were in violation of copyright, that he had done little to resolve copyright concerns, that he had violated a topic ban on article creation, and that he was willing to accept restrictions on his editing to prevent further incidents.
The committee passed the following remedies: that Norton is “strongly admonished" for copyright violations, that his topic ban on article creation remain in place, that he is restricted from uploading images for use on English Wikipedia, and that any links to external sites he has contributed to are to be vetted on the talk page before being added to article space by another editor.
This case, brought by Mark Arsten, was opened over a dispute over transgenderism topics that began off-wiki. The evidence phase was scheduled to close March 7, 2013, with a proposed decision due to be posted by March 21.
This case was brought to the Committee by KillerChihuahua, who alleges the discussion over this American political group has degenerated into incivility. The evidence phase of the case was due to close by March 20, 2013, and a decision is scheduled for April 3, 2013.
Other requests and committee action
Unblock request: Fæ: The committee accepted the appeal of Fæ, after he declared his past accounts, on the condition that Fæ is topic banned from images and BLPs "relating to sexuality, broadly construed".
Statement: Malleus Fatuorum and George Ponderevo: The committee responded to an assertion that Malleus Fatuorum had been using the account of George Ponderevo as an alternate account by passing a motion to mark the accounts with a shared IP tag.
Position changes at Audit Subcommittee (AUSC): The arbitration committee extended the terms of three of the members of the Audit Subcommittee (AUSC) whose terms originally ended on February 28, 2013 to April 30, 2013. An arbitrator was named to fill the position of an arbitrator who resigned. A call was issued for applications for three vacancies for non-arbitrator members to the subcommittee, to be submitted before April 1, 2013
Clarification Request: Arbitration Enforcement: A request for clarification has been brought by Gatoclass regarding whether an administrator can “act in a request" involving 1RR restrictions, whether an administrator can act when an editor has not received a formal warning, whether an administrator can adjudicate in an appeal if they adjudicated in the decision that lead to the appeal, and whether an administrator can issue a warning before consensus on a request has been reached.
Amendment Request: Monty Hall problem: A request has been made to the committee for amendment of the remedies, including removal of discretionary sanctions.
Clarification request: Climate change: A clarification request of the climate change case was filed by NewsAndEventsGuy, who requests clarification of who can post arbitration enforcement notices to talk pages and add to the notifications, blocks, bans, and sanctions log.
Clarification request: Discretionary sanctions appeals procedure: A request to clarify the appeal process for discretionary sanctions warnings was filed by Sandstein.
Wikimedia Labs now hosts 150 projects (down 5) and has 1002 registered users (up 71).
”
—Adapted from Engineering metrics, Wikimedia blog
The WMF's engineering report for February was published this week on the Wikimedia blog and on the MediaWiki wiki ("friendly" summary version), giving an overview of all Foundation-sponsored technical operations in that month (as well as brief coverage of progress on Wikimedia Deutschland's Wikidata project and the now Wikimedia CH-led Kiwix offline reader project). Of the seven headlines picked out for the report, five had already received some sort of Signpost coverage. The other two highlight the achievement of the Wikipedia mobile site in now serving some 3 billion page views a month, as well as improvements to jQuery.IME, a JavaScript internationalisation plugin intended not only to be of use to Wikimedia wikis but also to the web more broadly.
Progress on the Foundation's larger projects was steady during February, the report noted, with the VisualEditor "on schedule" for a July rollout. It was a similar story for Parsoid, the new parser that underpins the VisualEditor, which received various performance improvements and version 5 of the Article Feedback tool (the debate over its future notwithstanding). The Echo (notifications) project also continued apace with incremental extensions throughout February. The mobile team worked on mobile image uploads (now available on all wikis) as well as a dedicated Wikimedia Commons app, currently in beta mode (Google Play; iOS version), while the continuing boom in page traffic was made clear by the installation of 120 new application servers, intended to give the WMF enough capacity for another year, the report said.
The monthly engineering reports also provide a useful roundup of personnel changes at the Foundation. As has been the general trend over many years, the number of new staff outnumbered the number leaving: joining in February were Ed Sanders (Software Engineer, Visual Editor); Christian Aistleitner (contractor, Gerrit); Marc-Andre Pelletier (contractor, Wikimedia Labs and tool migration; better know by his pseudonym User:Coren); Kirsten Menger-Anderson (part-time Technical Writer, focussing on thus-far internal documentation relating to Editor Engagement Experiments) and Greg Grossmeier (Release Manager). Leaving was senior developer Patrick Reilly, just one month after his promotion to the position of Site Performance Engineer and Senior Technical Advisor and two years after first joining the WMF. At least 14 positions were still unfilled at time of writing.
In brief
Not all fixes may have gone live to WMF sites at the time of writing; some may not be scheduled to go live for several weeks.
Pick of the blogs: Valerie Juarez, currently interning with the WMF as part of the broader Outreach Program for Women (OPW), picks up on some of the critiques of the Wikimedia and MediaWiki bug tracking processes in a series of blog posts published this week ("How to create a good first bug report"; detailed traffic flow diagram). Wikipedia Zero was also in the news as it won an SXSW Activism award (Wikipedia blog) and signed up a new partner, Axiata, expanding Wikipedia provision in Southeast Asia.
.jpg)
.jpg)
_fruits.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
