login bonus best online casino_match handicap in bet365 cricket_Welfare offer free casino games

Mon, 14 Jan 2019 10:35:15 -0800

At it.wiki:
*copyvios are hidden as soon as they're caught. Also precautionary hiding
is frequently used
*gross insults in summaries and revs are hidden in a discretionary way
*phone numbers and mild leaks are hidden
*profanities are always hidden.

Suppression is very rarely used, also because abusefilter log details are
private, thus reducing the need for suppressing abuselog details which can
only be suppressed.

AFAIK that's the wider revdelete usage across major wikis and likely the
most strict usage of suppression.

Vito

Il giorno lun 14 gen 2019 alle ore 19:20 effe iets anders <
effeietsand...@gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Thanks for those questions.
>
> Just as clarification, I'm talking about hiding revisions with the effect
> that the revisions are greyed out in the history, but that admins can still
> see their content. But I realize that oversight policies (the effect of
> oversight is stronger) may be more prominent, and that perhaps the
> ecosystem of different options should be considered in such a question :) .
>
> Thanks Anne for clarifying terminology - I am mostly aware with the
> terminology we use in Dutch, so may mistranslate some things.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 10:13 AM Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think one of the issues here is that we are not all using the same
> > terminology.
> >
> > "Hiding", on English Wikipedia, is generally reserved for some weird
> > extensions that had to have special features built in because
> > revision-deletion, deletion, and suppression did not work with them.  I
> > think all of those extensions are now disabled on English Wikipedia.
> >
> > "Revision-deletion" (which has the effect of removing a revision from the
> > view of the reading public and users who are not administrators or
> > equivalent) or complete page deletion is used for most copyright
> violations
> > on English Wikipedia.  Copyright violations should not be publicly
> > available, since it does not meet even the most basic requirements of
> edits
> > to the project; I have a hard time seeing why any project would leave
> them
> > in the page history, since that is the equivalent of leaving them in the
> > project.
> >
> > "Suppression" is an even higher-level form of revision-deletion that
> > removes the revision from the view of everyone except oversighters.  It
> > replaced the old "oversight" extension in 2009, and it is my
> understanding
> > that all of the revisions that were historically removed using the
> > oversight tool have now been returned to page history and suppressed.
> > (There are some exceptions.) Suppression is used on English Wikipedia for
> > most personal information, which can include anything listed in the WMF
> > privacy policy.
> >
> > There are variations in the use of the deletion/suppression tools: for
> > example, since 2009 we have been able to either "delete" or "suppress"
> > usernames and edit summaries that are highly inappropriate. The ability
> to
> > "suppress" usernames is sometimes used when someone edits while logged
> out,
> > not realizing their IP address will appear in the history.
> >
> > I suspect that English Wikipedia has lower thresholds for both
> > revision-deletion and suppression because it has historically been the
> > project that is most abused, sometimes in ways that I'd be hesitant to
> > publicly describe.
> >
> >
> > Risker/Anne
> > (English Wikipedia oversighter)
> >
> > On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 12:29, effe iets anders <effeietsand...@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> This is one of these things that seems particularly hard to find, so I'd
> >> like to pick your collective brains on this:
> >>
> >> What are the various policies across our little universe on using the
> >> 'hide
> >> version' functionality to hide historical versions of articles? I would
> >> especially appreciate it if you could elaborate a bit on how it's used
> in
> >> practice with regards to privacy violations (what is the threshold of
> >> private information that would justify hiding versions) and copyright
> >> violations (when do you actually hide the versions, rather than just
> >> remove
> >> it from the current version and leave it in the history).
> >>
> >> Are there any global policies on this? I think not, but always better to
> >> double check :).
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Lodewijk
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?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: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to