I was not referring to your case, but in general. Even if so, talking about
your case, you simply did what we all do. Or what we all should do, and we just
know that sometimes it's not enough.
Did you tell them that no matter what, somebody could have decided to delete
them in any case? Because that's what happen, it's just part of life on Wiki.
Sometimes I show them the pages with the situations similar to yours, and they
coexist with sloppy activities full of copyviol nobody cares (which I sometimes
share too)
When I am in charge of a workshop or class, I clearly point this out. No matter
how wonderful the slides about sharing and good faith sound, these things
occurred and occurs. Reality is not something I can change for them. When I am
in charge almost nothing that is inserted or uploaded is deleted, as far as I
remember once a student upload a funny gif before my class, but really almost
nothing else... I encourage them to write down in the description what is
useful to clarify the situation and I clearly tell them that they can fell
lucky, but it might end bad. I show them all the controls I do because that's
actually what they have to learn themselves. They same copyviol tools the sysop
might use, for example. The same pattern patrollers will use to find their
upload. There were nice or useful files I did not encourage to upload at a
course because it wold have been complicated, and for me it's fine because
there are so many different things to take care on wiki, that some useful files
can wait until Commons improve its situation.
When I am not in charge however, and I try to explain these aspects, usually
somebody who organized the event tell me that I should not bother students with
it. They say, this will discourage them (actually, I never had discourages
students) Sometimes I was told to hide these aspects when proposing a seminar o
activity, which I usually refuse.i know it's not going to be easy and it's not
going to be appreciated but it's a honest description. In the end, it's useful
to learn in life, in general, that human communities are not linear. Especially
when you share something valuable for free you might be mistreated, I see no
point in deprive them of such life lesson. these dynamics are usually stronger
in volunteer-based communities, because some people really want to behave that
way, it's what they like to do in their free time, they are very motivated.
Also, so far I never had problems with professional as well. One of the best
video for Wiki Science Competition was proposed for deletion, the user had to
track all details about it. But the person who went through that was not upset,
he was ready, because I told him so the week before. And as a good doctor, he
was just aware of human nature, I guess.
So If you work on the platforms, you know this happens. And you know how you
can usually go around it and when it is worth to face it or not, but this is
not the matter of a procedure or a checklist, it's mostly being aware of the
human nature. Of course, I wish platforms were different. I tried to do my part
for them to be different, I simply know it won't be soon. And I think that WMF
can do nothing about that.
Alessandro
Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 18:00:47 CEST, Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
<[email protected]> ha scritto:
#yiv1485519652 P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}I read this:
On the other side, people who do outreach push too much for results with lmited
understanding of the ecosystem they ask students to interact. I have met people
who ask for "button men" at their initiatives with poor regard for the real
expertise, often overselling what they do. it's not nice to be treated
superficially when you try to explain why a certain topic is not relevant or
why sending a ticket is appropriate for a certain image. If you are too focused
on "your stuff", I wouldn't be surprised if you don't care for a functional
working environment as well. You just expect someone else to build it for you.
And I want to talk about what we did in this situation, and why the environment
triggers frustration.
First, when the professors came with the idea of creating multimedia contents
for making richer Wikipedia articles, we focused on some issues: the content
should be as neutral as possible, all the content should be original and the
music used should be cc-by-(sa). We explained this idea twice in two different
meetings, first with one professor, then with all the team that was going to
guide the students.
Second, we stressed on this ideas with students during a four hours (four
hours!) workshop. We gave them examples of bad content, we gave them examples
of good content, we encouraged them to use only free sources and we explained
how to work on Commons and why the content should be there.
Third, the professors spent three more weeks with them, helping develop the
video, how to make good recordins, how to make them more neutral (what to focus
on), and how to find material that could be reused.
Fourth, I went again with them to a four hour class where we revised all the
materials, we certified that all the music was free, we checked all the
illustrations and we asked not to upload those that were of poor value or had
any doubt about their copyright status.
Fifth, we helped students to find suitable songs for their videos, how to tag
that the files were derivative works if applicable using Commons uploading
system, how to fill everything if they were using video2commons and how to use
the materials on wikipedia. It was my fourth morning with the students, and the
third one dedicated to Commons. We also explained again what was the difference
between free access and free license, because some of the students didn't get
why we were not allowing them to upload some content.
Sixth, yes, there is a sixth, I spent another morning with the professors
evaluating all the materials from a wikimedian point of view, talking about
their quality and designing improvements for next year. Students then presented
their works to a broader audience at the University.
Seventh, students went on vacations. At this moment an admin decided that all
the previous work was not valid and claimed that it should be DW. Period. And
then I noticed that some stuff was missing when I started to write a report
about the experience for the Outreach Newsletter. And as I have followed all
the steps, I have a dedicated place at the Outreach Dashboard where I can track
everything this students created, uploaded or
edited:https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/HUHEZI/Ikus-entzunezko_komunikazioa_(2019)/home
. This content is public and can be easily reached in our dedicated education
programme portal:https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari:Hezkuntza
It should be maybe few days spent with them explaining how Commons work, what
licenses are suitable and why free content matters. If you feel so, then I
should explain that we have created two videotutorials, a leaflet and a small
book explaining everything we were explaining direcdtly to them, so if they had
any doubt they could read them. And we gave a copy to each student, so they
could have a guidance. And we also gave them a direct e-mail so they could ask
for copyrights issues: two of them did it and we gave them some answers.
Cheers
Galder
From: Wikimedia-l <[email protected]> on behalf of
Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 5:30 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach We have dozens
of cross project brainstorming off-wiki. But the general feeling is often that
if you encourage the social dynamics of a platform in a way that people who
like to "play cops" are a key actor... when this is established there is no
point in creating sophisticated or efficient tools, because as long as they
force such people to work in a different way they will kinda oppose them.
For example, many time I find a deleted file I could spot dozens of similar in
the very same category and the few times I have asked the user who deleted it
or ask the deletion, I could feel he had no real interested in completing the
job. The fight for copyright is not a goal, it's a just a mean for him. He
probably has fun cherry-picking one random file, with no consistent approach.
So how many times for example I found files from the USA where there is no FOP
for statues deleted maybe if uploaded by the European users but not by the
American ones. Because of course if you did delete them all (as you should),
enwikipedia community will notice and it will be a bigger deal.. it's a problem
when all images of a monument disappear, right? So let's delete some random
files, and vanish when somebody point out the other ones, just to repeat the
same pattern somewhere else after a while. That's why it's so easy to find en-N
users from the USA who have limited clue with rule of FOP. Now, the users who
perform this type of deletion pattern will dislike any tools or preference who
simply encourage to do it in a consistent way... they are expert and they know
how categories work, if they don't complete the job is probably because they
don't want to. If we get close to the issue, we manage to get around some "the
newbes will misuse it" or "its a delicate matter", I guess the "good faith "
clause will appear.
So, we keep a random patrolling and retropatrolling on this issue, which means
poor overall copyright literacy, angry users because of the procedural
incoherence and in the end a huge backlog (since the bulk of the files remain
there). Take this dynamics, in other fields, with different nuances, multiplied
by a dozens of different legal and workload scenarios and voilà. You have one
of the reason of our current situation.
I guess there is no tool which can fix that, it's just the way a community
really wants to be. Tools can help to encourage people to think differently of
course, but I fear that would be a strong resistance.
A. M:
Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 16:56:49 CEST, Samuel Klein <[email protected]>
ha scritto:
Ditto. But did not have the impression that this was {a, the} pressing
need.
Perhaps we also need better ways to highlight workload overloads (and
continue conversations about them through time, rather than sporadic
proposals of specific implementations that can easily fail) to stimulate
cross-project brainstorming to solve the most pressing problems of scale
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:02 AM James Heilman <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have a fairly good understanding of copyright. Deal with a fair bit of
> copyright issues occurring via paid editing and flicker washing of images
> and would be happy to do admin work around that if the Commons community
> was interested.
>
> James
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:00 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Wikimedia project communities in general seem to be quite stagnant, if
> not
> > declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole
> > different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it is
> > now when I joined in 2009. I always found it a very pleasant place, but
> > overtime I understood I was the exception there, and most people had bad
> > experiences. And it is as Yann has shown there, it's a few sysops running
> > the entire show almost alone, not because they want that, but because
> > nobody else helps with that.
> >
> > IMO the problem is not with the existing sysops, but because people in
> > general do not feel attracted to copyright and other similar minucious
> > stuff which marks everyday life in Commons. And, without that knowledge
> it
> > is pointless, if not counterproductive, to place a candidacy to sysop. No
> > idea what the solution could be, but it certainly is not blaming Commons
> > and the existing sysops. If more people was interested in copyright, less
> > mistakes would be happening in Commons as well. Whatever the solution is,
> > it probably passes by that.
> >
> > Best,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <[email protected]> escreveu no dia
> segunda,
> > 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
> >
> > > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing. And
> > > maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed
> here.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: [email protected]
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: [email protected]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
