User talk:Mdennis (WMF)/Archive 3

Community wish list

Hi Maggie. I read with interest your new appointment. Community Tach has completed its annual 'wish list' survey for requests for new and/or improved software. Our bid for urgently needed improvents to the Page Curation system for New Page Patrolling came out top of the list. However, the requirements are many and complex and in order to address and accomplish these requests, it may compromise the team's capacity to address other well deserving requests in the remaining items on the top-ten list. Personally, as Page Curation was a WMF development in 2012 - largely with my collaboration, I realise that this is a large and important task, so I am wondering if a special team could be allocated to this. Warmest regards, Chris. Kudpung (talk) 02:24, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Chris. :) I’m happy to hear that you’re still very active in this area and contributing to evolution. I do not myself have a direct role in staffing product development - in my new role, I will be closely integrating with a number of community-facing functions, but product remains firmly in the purview of our Audiences department. I’ll ask our Community Relations team to pass your note along, however. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 15:31, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Maggie. Kudpung (talk) 22:57, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Discriminatory Practices on AM.Wikipedia

Hello Maggie! Sorry to bother you with this, but does the WMF have a global policy regarding discrimination against users on the bases of sexual orientation or is there something in the TOU that would protect users? This has come up on AM.Wikipedia, where it has been brought to light that this project has routinely been blocking users on the bases of their sexuality or perceived sexuality. This has gained attention from multiple users from various projects, myself included. The relevant discussion can be seen here. I know the WMF doesn't condone this type of behavior, but I'm hoping that there is a policy that protects users from minority groups. --Cameron11598 (talk) 21:37, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

@Cameron11598: Thanks for bringing this up for discussion! I'm just leaving this as a quick note to let you know that we've seen your question and we're working on putting together a substantive answer. We should be back to you soon (probably early next week, at a guess) with that. Kbrown (WMF) (talk) 21:46, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kbrown (WMF): Thanks! --Cameron11598 (talk) 02:03, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kbrown (WMF):, I just came across this it looks like up until 2017 the WMF's non-discrimination policy protected users but was changed in March of 2017 by someone from WMF legal to only include staff and contractors. Its the only policy that I can find other than a board resolution adopted in January, 14 2006. I was wondering if you could provide some context on why the change was made that removed general users from the policy? Thanks! --Cameron11598 (talk) 20:43, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

@Cameron11598: Thanks for your patience on this! After looking into it, here's what we've found:

The old policy raised in the community discussions, despite the ambiguous language, has historically been read only to apply to staff. The confusion did arise in the past, notably in early 2015 when a proposal to create women-only spaces was under discussion. Back then, the Foundation’s then-Deputy General Counsel clarified onwiki that “the non-discrimination policy does not prohibit users from setting up a women-only discussion in their user space, because the policy was passed by the Foundation board to apply to acts taken by the Foundation and Foundation employees, not individual users.”

So the reading of the policy has been consistent for a long period of time. More information about its 2017 overhaul was published at the time on the Foundation’s blog.

The Terms of Use set the boundaries within which project communities are developing and enforcing their own governance. Alongside those expectations, we also have our publicly available Values, which reaffirm our commitment to inclusiveness - as that page says, ‘It’s about saying, “We see you and you belong with us.”’ In the past, we have stepped in when communities made policy choices that were in contradiction to the ToU or our Values.

Our Trust & Safety Policy team are currently examining the particular case that you cite, including the local policy that was cited as reasoning for the block. While we are not a fast-response team except in cases of life-threatening emergencies (which are handled under a different protocol, as you may know already), we are focused on fully examining the issue and coming up with reasonable and viable outcomes. Meanwhile, our review and any potential outcome deriving from it do not prevent the community from continuing to take actions as they see fit and in accordance to global and project policies, as they are already doing. Kbrown (WMF) (talk) 16:08, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Reverse DNS lookup subscription?

Hi Maggie. Years ago I remember that one of the IP lookup providers offered WMF a number of free subscriptions for some of their lookup services, and example https://whois.domaintools.com. Do you know if these are still on offer from these providers? If yes, who should I be approaching to discuss access to a service for anti-spam work at wikimedia?

BACKGROUND. When the subs were previously offered I had a reasonable free service that I managed within the limitations. Since that time the tools have been put behind paywalls, and now with the increased, targeted spambot activity and I am seeing specific domain server IP addresses, and to proactively neuter these spambot attacks I want to start doing lookups, collecting the range of problematic domain names at the IP addresss and blacklist the F out of them. :-)

As a general comment that the spambots are getting through our defences so easily—or maybe it is just brute force of numbers—is truly problematic and quite wearing. When I have addressed this matter quietly to a number of sympathetic personnel, I find that it falls between teams and no-one team evidently taking ownership. And I know that I have harped on this matter for numbers of years, but I still do wish that there was more that we were doing, or maybe it just not evident doing to some of us lowly volunteers.

Thanks. Hope all is well with you. And just for smiles ... some bird song from my place  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:24, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Thank you for bringing this up for discussion! I also want to thank you for sharing detailed background information as it is very helpful in addressing current spam issues. I will go ahead and look to see if this is still something that providers are offering. Once I receive an update on the current state of DNS lookup subscription I will leave an update here to continue the discussion with the hope that we can work towards addressing the concerns around spam. THargrove (WMF) —Preceding undated comment added 20:20, 11 February 2019‎ (UTC).

@THargrove (WMF): Any word on that update? --Guy Macon (talk) 13:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

@Guy Macon: Thank you for your patience in regards to receiving an update in regards to Domaintools. Unfortunately, this item is still under investigation as the original Domaintools concept was out of scope at the time. The spam workflow has only recently resurfaced again in security -T&S workflows. I hope to provide a more substantial update at the end of the month. THargrove (WMF)

@Guy Macon::@Billinghurst: Thank you both for you patience in regards to receiving an update. After investigation it was discovered that we do not have a subscription to Domaintools at this time. It has been suggested that in the meantime that you all take a look at https://stat.ripe.net/. It offers reverse hostname lookup. Please let me know if this is sufficient for what you are aiming to achieve. THargrove (WMF)

New wing of Legal?

Congratulations on the new title/role. :) Could you give a bit of info on the new "Community Resilience and Sustainability" wing of Legal? I know that someone will probably write up a more thorough description eventually, but I'd like to have at least a skeleton page up rather than a redlink, with the appropriate links from related pages. Also, I'd like to be able to update the Template:WMF Staff data template; are there other teams (besides T&S) that are part of the new wing? (And is "wing" now part of the standard terminology? Previously, things went department -> team -> subteam, right?) Thanks.

(I've also updated the box at the top of your talk page. Hope that's okay.) --Yair rand (talk) 19:26, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Yair rand. Thank you! And thanks so much for updating the talk page box. That's very okay. :) I forgot that. I'm not sure if "wing" is the right term to use. When we were with Community Engagement and planning to distribute, we were calling them hemispheres, at least for a while. :) As a Vice President, I'll have work areas beneath me that aren't that closely aligned, so I don't know if "team" and "subteam" is the right terminology. My expectation is that I will eventually have multiple teams. But I may not know that for sure until annual planning, around May. Right now, the only team that is with me is Trust & Safety, but I should be launching a hire for an individual in the next couple of weeks who manages Crisis Response. They won't have a team of their own--at least at first--but will be leading temporary teams from across the Foundation in handling the organization’s appropriate response to unexpected major safety, security, and political issues affecting Wikimedia volunteers, the Wikimedia Foundation projects, or events. I'm also anticipating a diversity, equity and inclusion strategist to undertake some of the work committed to in Wikimedia Foundation Medium-term plan 2019/Thriving movement, but I am again thinking they may be at least initially pulling together people from other teams more than leading a team of their own. I've been talking to others about how this individual can ensure that Foundation programs are evaluated for impact on diversity as well as help different teams across the Foundation to coordinate on programs that are planned in the Thriving Movement diversity drive. I'm sorry this is still vague! I wanted to put out something about the new job title even though it isn't thoroughly defined yet. I'll try to prioritize getting a description of the "wing" (unless that terminology seems wrong) as soon as I have more than this to describe. We're having our first meetings of the expanded department this week! --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 18:55, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

4 June Office Hour -- transcript?

Hi Maggie, I saw you held your office hours via Zoom. Is there a transcript of the meeting? I know I could view the record on YouTube, but I find reading a transcript is far faster & easier for me (& I suspect others) to comprehend than watching a YouTube recording. Thanks. -- Llywrch (talk) 23:41, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

@Llywrch: There's a log at IRC office hours/Office hours 2020-06-04. --Yair rand (talk) 01:14, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Yair rand. I suspect the WMF staff often forget that even long-term volunteers sometimes don't know their way around the meta Wiki, & sometimes need things made more obvious. -- Llywrch (talk) 03:42, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for helping to create the Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy Recommendations

		Wikimedia 2030
		Thank you for your guidance to myself and the Core Team as well as your ongoing commitment toward our movement’s future and the creation of the Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy Recommendations! --KStineRowe (WMF) (talk) 22:03, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Locked staff account

Hello. Heather (WMF) was locked a few days back as the account owner isn't working for WMF anymore. However, it seems that the account has administrator and translation administrator rights. Can you remove them? --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 09:40, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Minorax, I have gone ahead and removed the rights from this account. Joe Sutherland (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 18:31, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both! :D --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 16:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas & Let's see the year out!

Hi Maggie,

Meta doesn't believe in Christmassy templates, so please use your imagination and picture as festive an image as possible!

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! In this toughest of years, thank you for continuing to care about others - both in your editing, your words, and just in your being. Roll on 2021 and I'll see you there! Nosebagbear (talk)

About some suggestion on ZhWiki

Dear Maggie,

I've known OA202109 recently, that I should have noticed some policy what the community or foundation can do the action now. So, I have some idea that would need you to give me a few comments:

1. Reform the system : Behind the existing RfA, there's some risk canvassing guidelines and doxing policies. Fixing it to make anonymous voting and next to cancel anonymity in the end of voting may reduce the risk from electoral fraud.
2. Defer Voting : There's active discussion on ZhWiki, in order to avoid disputes, suggest community do not nominate RfA until all OA202109 finished.
3. Recourse mechanism : To refuse that administrator abuse their authority, how can foundation provide possibly the recourse mechanism to make sure help "Zh-Wikipedians" complaint?
4. Arbitration Committee : About Arbitration Committee, ZhWiki has invite discussions many times, but hasn't reached a consensus. How would the foundation have comments or suggestions on it?

I'm looking forward to hearing from you.--卡達 (talk) 07:26, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I would suggest WMF to conduct surveys (either via online or email) to engage the community of ZhWiki regarding their views as well as constructive dispute resolution mechanisms, before taking further course of top-down actions that risk escalations of tension and further dividing the community of Chinese-language contributors. P.S. For those who do not read in Chinese, I sense there is a common sentiment among zhwiki users that the recent global blocking en mass is a WMF overreaction based on isolated allegations. --Zhenqinli (talk) 15:04, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Moin Zhenqinli and 卡達. While I am not Maggie, of course, I would like to point you to her reply published here. I will join the local conversation on Zh.WP to address the RfA questions discussed there that you note. So the local community has it all in one place. Best regards, --Jan (WMF) (talk) 21:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

References

Thank you!

Just thanks for your letter: Office actions/September 2021 statement ! --陈少静 | 月立龍头 (talk) 11:01, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

That's one small step for WIKI, one giant leap for mankind. 這是維基百科一小步、是人類的一大步。--陈少静 | 月立龍头 (talk) 07:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

haha. :D Thank you both. I wish it did not cause so much disruption to people, and I wish that the situation had not occurred to begin with. :( --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 11:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes. WE need to fight evil.--陈少静 | 月立龍头 (talk) 06:47, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Comments to the press

Hello, FYI your alleged comments to the press are being translated in very imaginative ways by the press in Italy. Does WMF have any policy on communication surrounding office actions? Studying the Stack Exchange controversy could be fruitful. Nemo 08:36, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh, boy. :/ Thanks for telling me and for sharing that. I am completely out of my comfort zone in talking to the press. We'll dig into that story. Previously our policy has been that we do not discuss them, so we're forging new ground here. Given how unprecedented this was, we thought it was necessary, but I especially am learning as I go. The BBC article didn't misquote me at all, and I am convinced the author was working in good faith, but I would have presented some of that very differently. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 13:37, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Forgot to ping you, Nemo. A bit out of practice. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 13:38, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer. I do realise it's exceptionally difficult to handle communications of such matters. Nemo 14:15, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

So when will the office hour be held?

I think it can be held at The holidays of National Day of the People's Republic of China (October 1st - 7th, 2021). --忒有钱 (talk) 17:16, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

忒有钱, I'm sorry for the delay. :) We had originally planned to do it that week, but I have had to reorganize to accommodate some other community events around the listening tour of the incoming Foundation CEO and also to make sure we hosted the meeting at a time that would permit Asian attendance during waking hours. We are ALMOST ready to announce it, and I'm almost certain it will be on October 14 at 13:00 UTC. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 18:00, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Maggie, I would like to ask a hypothetical question if organizers of Chinese Wikipedia events (eg. editathons) are prohibited to use materials prepared or procured by global banned users even as outsiders. It is because I has been reminded that back a long time ago when Walter Grassroot was in friendly terms with many of us, he has expressed a desire to send gifts to participants of another article contest provided that they fulfilled the criteria.--Spring Roll Conan ( Teahouse · Contributions ) 16:04, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Spring Roll Conan. Why doesn't anybody ever ask me easy questions? :D It's a good question, and I'm going to have to get back with you with an answer, since this is a question of interpreting policy. I need lawyer involvement for that. However, I can tell you what I think as I go do that. Our policies around engaging with Foundation banned individuals are meant to be protective of the platform and the community, not punitive. In terms of how others interact with globally banned individuals, the only clear articulation I know of is that people are not permitted to act as "proxies" for them. People who edit on behalf of a banned user may be sanctioned in the same way that the banned user has been. We do not expect or ask people to change their engagements with people outside of Wikipedia. Where this gets really hard is when we are in possession of facts that might make people choose to stop associating with others outside of Wikimedia projects. :/ Because we can't talk about what specific individuals have done, we can't necessarily warn people of dangers to avoid. That's one of the challenges of setting policies. :/ There are some people on the Foundation ban list about whom I would say, "No, please, for your own safety stay very, very far away." But I'm not able to say that. :/ Anyway, these are some of the factors to be considered, but I'll get lawyer feedback on this one. <3 --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 13:04, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

A request

Hi Maggie,

We have posted an open letter to the Foundation and Board of Trustees. It concerns the development of MediaWiki extensions and needs the personal attention of all concerned developers and managers. Please see it at:

Open_letter_from_English_Wikipedia_New_Page_Reviewers

Your comments are most welcome. Many thanks.

Kind regards,

On behalf of the English Wikipedia Community

Kudpung (talk) 08:27, 22 September 2022 (UTC)