Wikiwand AI

User talk:Timotheus Canens/Archives/2014/9

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What information is suppressible?

You have blocked MeropeRiddle for "reposting suppressible information". There was discussion of whether the name of the hostage should be permitted, and opinion seemed to have shifted toward including it. For example, it has been out in the open on Steven Sotloff for a day now.

Now there is no AFD history to consult, no specific citation of policy, and there is no particular person to ask what the policy is from on high. I have read that the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office requested that British media not publish about the hostage, but we are not British media, we have not had our attention called to any particular DA-Notice, we have no talk page to consult about this process, and any conversation we have about it is banned. In other words, there is no alternative provided to the procedure used by MeropeRiddle of trying it and seeing what happens.

I understand that Britain obviously has a strong lobby here, so their censorship has to be absolute, even though similar policies by China are rejected without consideration. Clearly not all countries are equal on Wikipedia, which is informally required to follow a partisan point of view. I wouldn't even dare suggest that our article be made useful to those people in Iraq; who would? My question is whether the Huginn and Muninn of censorship -- the censorship of what is censored and the continual redefinition of what is censored -- can that be avoided on Wikipedia?

Meanwhile, I still have absolutely no idea whether it would be safe, say, to add a couple of sources about the next victim to the Sotloff article, or to say what his occupation is, or even whether what is there is OK; it's all behind a Chinese wall. I am deeply, deeply unimpressed with the British government's administration of this site. Wnt (talk) 22:20, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

@Wnt: I'm stunned that MeropeRiddle was blocked without warning. Since there seems to a wall of silence regarding this I guess you email your complaint to arbcom-audit-en@lists.wikimedia.org ~Technophant (talk) 01:52, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
You know what isn't being suppressed? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_2014_celebrity_photo_leaks A crime was committed resulting in the release of intentionally concealed images of naked women. Lots of invasion of privacy. Lots of "intentionally concealed". No supression. lol.MeropeRiddle (talk) 02:10, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 September 2014

  • Arbitration report: Media viewer case is suspended
    "On 1 September, the Arbitrators voted to suspend the Media Viewer case for 60 days. After the suspension period is up, the case is to be closed unless the committee votes otherwise. The case suspension comes in response to several new initiatives and policies announced by the Wikimedia Foundation that may make the case moot. In the same motion, the committee declared that Eloquence's resignation of the administrator right was "under the cloud" and that he can only regain the right through another RfA."
  • Traffic report: Holding Pattern
    "This week we saw three of the top ten articles remain in place, with the Ice Bucket Challenge at #1, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis at #2, and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant at #5, all for a second straight week..."
  • WikiProject report: Gray's Anatomy (v. 2)
    "This week, the Signpost went out to meet WikiProject Anatomy, dedicated to improving the articles about all our bones, brains, bladders and biceps, and getting them to the high standard expected of a comprehensive encyclopaedia."

User:PNGWantok

I don't think this is User:Russavia -- it appears to me that she wasn't noticing the template vandalism that Russavia had inserted. Do you know something I don't? NawlinWiki (talk) 12:57, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Look at the edit on Template:User wikipedia/Oversighter. I don't believe it's simply "not noticing". T. Canens (talk) 13:00, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Ah, good catch. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 13:17, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps you can enlighten us...

After some more digging around, it looks like you may know more about what I am trying to discuss at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Protected page without log entry and could shed some lights on my questions there. Fram (talk) 09:41, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 September 2014

  • Op-ed: Media Viewer software is not ready
    Last month, I wrote an open letter to the Wikimedia Foundation, inviting others to join me in a simple but important request: roll back the recent actions—both technical and social—by which the Wikimedia Foundation has overruled legitimate decisions of several Wikimedia projects.
  • Traffic report: Refuge in celebrity
    Even though it's not quite 3/4 over, it's safe to say that 2014 will go down as a year of war, mass murder, plane crashes and terrible diseases. While certainly paying it some heed, it's not surprising that Wikipedia viewers tried this week to find any alternative to that litany of tragedy and pain, and their chosen method of escape was, as usual, celebrity.
  • Featured content: The louse and the fish's tongue
    The amazing and strange tongue-eating louse replacing a fish's tongue! Because isopods, the subject of a new featured article, are both awesome and really damn weird!
  • WikiProject report: Checking that everything's all right
    This week, the Signpost decided to have a look around with WikiProject Check Wikipedia a maintenance project not concerned so much with articles' content, but in all the tiny errors that are to be found scattered within them. Their front page gives a list of things they mainly focus on ...

The Signpost: 17 September 2014

  • WikiProject report: A trip up north to Scotland
    As Scotland is deciding its future this week, we thought it might be a good idea to get to know the editors of WikiProject Scotland and talk to them about the project.
  • Featured content: Which is not like the others?
    Four articles, two lists, and 51 pictures were promoted to "featured" status this week on the English Wikipedia.

The Signpost: 24 September 2014

  • Featured content: Oil paintings galore
    Six articles, four lists, one topic, and 17 pictures were promoted to "featured" status this week on the English Wikipedia.
  • In the media: Indian political editing, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Congressional chelonii
    The Hindustan Times speculates (September 18) that politicians and their supporters are "sanitizing" their articles in advance of the 2014 Maharashtra State Assembly election. The Times notes the absence of significant controversies in the articles of particular politicians and the presence of heavily promotional language.
  • Traffic report: Wikipedia watches the referendum in Scotland
    This could be the beginning of a new era for this list. Until now, decisions to remove suspicious content have been largely educated guesswork. This week though, we have a new collaborator who can shine a light on the origins and patterns, sorting once and for all the webwheat from the cyberchaff.
  • WikiProject report: GAN reviewers take note: competition time
    A year and a week later, we're with some of the members of WikiProject Good Articles, who wanted to share the news of their upcoming contest within the project, the GA Cup. The aim of this friendly competition, which is held in the same light friendly manner of the WikiCup and the Core Contest, is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed articles at Good article nominations which has been a constant problem for quite a few years for those running the GA process.
  • Arbitration report: Banning Policy, Gender Gap, and Waldorf education
    Banning Policy finishes the workshop phase on 23 September. Parties have proposed findings of fact on the topics of the 3RR, the role of Jimbo Wales, and proxying for banned users. A request for arbitration was posted on 20 September about Landmark Worldwide.

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks