Wikipedia:Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram/Summary: Difference between revisions
Usedtobecool (talk | contribs) |
add fram was blocked by self-request. maybe my last addition here for a while |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
==Summary of relevant events == |
==Summary of relevant events == |
||
* Major contributor |
* Major contributor up to 28 June 2019. Did not and will not edit any event pertaining to myself. '''[[User:Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">starship</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">.paint</span>]] ([[User talk:Starship.paint|talk]])''' |
||
* Other contributors: [[User:Andrybak|User:andrybak]], [[User:Aquillion]], [[User:Mr Ernie]], [[User:Promethean]], [[User:Ad Orientem]] |
* Other contributors: [[User:Andrybak|User:andrybak]], [[User:Aquillion]], [[User:Mr Ernie]], [[User:Promethean]], [[User:Ad Orientem]] |
||
Line 98: | Line 98: | ||
#'''THE SIGNPOST''' (30 June): A special report by the ''[[The Signpost]]'', titled ''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2019-06-30/Special report | Did Fram harass other editors?]]'', says at least <b>nine</b> editors claim to have experienced/witnessed harrassment by Fram. <b>Five</b> of them complained to T&S or to ArbCom. The report also covered two past declined arbitration requests regarding Fram's behaviour in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=824688727#Fram February 2018], and in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=746359373#Fram October 2016]. Fram responds to the article [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fram#The_next_Signpost here]. User {{noping|Haukur}} creates a new post at [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Serious_accusations,_anonymously_sourced|ANI]] over the use of anonymous sources in the report, and then launches a full [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Disputed Signpost article|arbitration request]] following the discussion there. Jehochman speedily deletes the page and urges colleagues not to restore it before the ArbCom issues a ruling. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&diff=prev&oldid=904330552&diffmode=source Statement]. |
#'''THE SIGNPOST''' (30 June): A special report by the ''[[The Signpost]]'', titled ''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2019-06-30/Special report | Did Fram harass other editors?]]'', says at least <b>nine</b> editors claim to have experienced/witnessed harrassment by Fram. <b>Five</b> of them complained to T&S or to ArbCom. The report also covered two past declined arbitration requests regarding Fram's behaviour in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=824688727#Fram February 2018], and in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=746359373#Fram October 2016]. Fram responds to the article [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fram#The_next_Signpost here]. User {{noping|Haukur}} creates a new post at [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Serious_accusations,_anonymously_sourced|ANI]] over the use of anonymous sources in the report, and then launches a full [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Disputed Signpost article|arbitration request]] following the discussion there. Jehochman speedily deletes the page and urges colleagues not to restore it before the ArbCom issues a ruling. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&diff=prev&oldid=904330552&diffmode=source Statement]. |
||
#'''STATEMENT''' (1 July): {{noping|Jimbo Wales}} says on his talkpage that the board met the previous day and will release a statement after achieving unanimity, adding-- {{tq|...overall I think people are going to be happy with the statement and with the things we are asking the WMF staff to do going forward.}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&curid=9870625&diff=904321621&oldid=904320063&diffmode=source#Upcoming Full Statement.] |
#'''STATEMENT''' (1 July): {{noping|Jimbo Wales}} says on his talkpage that the board met the previous day and will release a statement after achieving unanimity, adding-- {{tq|...overall I think people are going to be happy with the statement and with the things we are asking the WMF staff to do going forward.}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&curid=9870625&diff=904321621&oldid=904320063&diffmode=source#Upcoming Full Statement.] |
||
#'''ACTIONS''' (1 July) Fram requests on Commons [https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fram&diff=19179846&oldid=19179281] that he be blocked on en.wiki so that he does not accidentally edit or post on en.wiki. Administrator Future Perfect at Sunrise [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=User%3AFram&type=block blocks] Fram until 10 June 2020. |
|||
=== Resignations === |
=== Resignations === |
Revision as of 13:42, 1 July 2019
Various summaries of the main events since the Fram affair, and locations and references of items relating to these events.
Summary of relevant events
- Major contributor up to 28 June 2019. Did not and will not edit any event pertaining to myself. starship.paint (talk)
- Other contributors: User:andrybak, User:Aquillion, User:Mr Ernie, User:Promethean, User:Ad Orientem
What has WMF effectively told us?
Click [show] -->
|
---|
|
What has Fram told us?
Click [show] -->
|
---|
(1) In April 2018, WMF emailed him a "conduct warning".
(3) In June 2019, WMF banned Fram, citing this May 2019 edit [3].
|
What has ArbCom told us?
Click [show] -->
|
---|
Arb Com member Joe Roe: WMF told ArbCom ArbCom member Premeditated Chaos: |
List of significant events
- ACTION (10 June) [4] Fram
banned by the Wikimedia Foundation from editing the English Wikipedia for a period of 1 year, consistent with the Terms of Use
- STATEMENT (10 June) WMF 1st statement - notes that Fram was temporarily de-sysoped along with the ban. The ban arose from
complaints from the community
. No disclosure of who made the complaints, or what the complaints are. The bandoes not offer an opportunity to appeal.
- STATEMENT (11 June) Fram responds on Commons - claims ban was due to one diff [5], that diff being
an escalation to the Foundation’s past efforts to encourage course correction, including a conduct warning issued to you on April 2018 and a conduct warning reminder issued to you on March 2019.
Fram further says that the March 2019 warning was based on these two October 2018 diffs: [6] [7] - STATEMENT (11 June) ArbCom member Opabinia regalis says that during a conference call with WMF where OR was the only available ArbCom representative, WMF informed OR that
an action to do with Fram was under consideration ... That information was not final and did not get into the specifics of their investigation ... The rest of the arbs did have the minutes from the meeting available shortly after.
(OR's words) - ACTION (11 June) WMF Board member Doc James requests a briefing from the WMF; while WMF Chair Emeritus Jimbo Wales is also on the case.
- STATEMENT (11 June) WMF 2nd statement -
it would have been improper to ask the Arbcom to adjudicate a case in which it was one primary target of the person in question
...we do not release details about Trust & Safety investigations due to privacy concerns
...What we can say in this case is that the issues reported to us fell under section 4 of the terms of use, as noted above, specifically under the first provision entitled “harassing and abusing others.”
That provision lists the following harmful activities: Engaging in harassment, threats, stalking, spamming, or vandalism; and Transmitting chain mail, junk mail, or spam to other users. WMF wrote thatwhy a one-year local ban was placed ... there was reason to think time might change behavior, or where disruption is limited to a single project
. - DISCUSSIONS (11 June and 14 June) - editors from German Wikipedia one, and Chinese Wikipedia two and three discuss bans by WMF on our sister sites.
- ACTION (11 June) Floquenbeam unblocks Fram citing community consensus. There was a prior discussion here.
- ACTION + STATEMENT (12 June) WMF 3rd statement, reblocks Fram and desysops Floquenbeam for a month.
- STATEMENT (12 June) WMF 4th statement is a further clarification of 2nd statement. One of the quotes:
Neither the Foundation nor community institutions, like ArbCom, are above criticism. Such criticism naturally can be direct and hard on the facts, but in a community it should also remain strictly respectful in tone towards others.
- ACTION (12 June) Bishonen unblocks Fram, citing WP:WHEEL.
- STATEMENT (12 June) WMF Chair of the Board, Raystorm makes a personal statement (not on behalf of the WMF Board) that they were uninvolved.
- STATEMENT (12 June) Fram 2nd statement.
- STATEMENT (12 June) Fram's 3rd statement begins with a response to another editor, and ends with a request that
the WMF to provide their evidence to a number of trusted enwiki people
tojudge the evidence in private
. - ACTION (12 June to 14 June) Floquenbeam requests resysop. In the same thread, bureaucrat WJBscribe grants it, then WJBscribe requests ArbCom review their actions. BU Rob13 later adds Floquenbeam and Bishonen as parties to the ArbCom case request by WJBscribe. Jan Eissfeldt, lead manager of WMF T&S, adds a statement (his 2nd overall).
- STATEMENT (12 June) ArbCom member GorillaWarfare says ArbCom's
meeting notes from last week's meeting mentioned that the Trust & Safety team had made the recommendation in favor of the one-year ban
of Fram. - STATEMENT (13 June) Jan Eissfeldt, lead manager of WMF T&S, gives a 1st statement, saying that the new sanctions
are not an expansion of the team’s scope
, and that theywill not name or disclose the identities of the individuals involved in reporting incidents related to this Office Action.
T&S will not sanction Floquenbeam, Bishonen, WJBscribe. If Fram edits en.wiki, Fram will be banned globally. - OFF-WIKI STATEMENTS (13 June to 15 June) @WikiWomenInRed, the Twitter account operated by WP:WPWIR, posts several criticisms of Fram [8] [9][10][11], including a since-deleted tweet [12] that there were
real crimes
. The deletion was done by Rosiestep, who [13] apologized on-wiki on behalf of WP:WPWIR for that tweet as thewording lacked precision
. - STATEMENT (14 June) WMF's Jan offers further comments in his 3rd statement.
- DISCUSSION + STATEMENT (15 June to 18 June) - it is noted that a video [14] released around the time WP:FRAM started saw a WMF member declare:
"Two of the big initiatives that are going to be happening this next year - one of them is writing a universal code of conduct, and the second one is us making a new reporting system."
Wikimedia is conducting a consultation [15] on a new reporting system for harassment. Sydney Poore of WMF responds. - STATEMENTS (17 June) WMF's Jan offers an update in his 4th statement, that
we cannot tell you what specific behaviors by Fram brought about this action
,cannot publicly disclose details of this or any particular case
and states that in Fram's case, WMFdid send more than one of those
conduct warnings to Fram prior to the one-year ban. Fram responds asking Jan to confirm if the alleged misconduct was only on-wiki. - STATEMENT (17 June) Fram publishes part of the email for his first conduct warning in April 2018, stating that it is from Kalliope of WMF. It is reposted here.
I have not seen you literally threatening other contributors. But ... the sum of your activity ... having a similar effect to that of a threat ... From what I've seen, you are very good at spotting problematic edits and editing patterns; the issue is with the way and the perseverance with which you appear to approach the editors responsible for them. In many cases, even if your concerns have been valid, their raising has been done with a degree of abruptness, repetition, scrutiny and persistence that feels like hounding to the person on the receiving end, and causes them to abandon the project or limit their contributions.
- STATEMENT (17 June to 19 June) - Fram responds to a suggested resolution by Newyorkbrad, which having over 100 votes so far, is the most voted proposal on WP:FRAM thus far. The ratio for support versus oppose was around 3:1 considering the first 100 such votes.
- DISCUSSION (19 June) Carcharoth and Someguy1221 highlight concerns with how the WMF handled an incident [16] [17] with Wikimedia Belgium. Geertivp, chair of Wikimedia Belgium, gives a statement [18] requesting that this specific conflict not be discussed because
lot of important details are missing, are single-sided interpretations, or even completely wrong.
- UPDATE (20 June) WMF Board member Doc James says that
the board is still working on this. No, there is no timeline for the statement
by the Board on this matter - STATEMENT (21 June) WMF's Jan offers an update:
the community does not and cannot have all the facts of this case
. - UPDATE (22 June) ArbCom member Opabinia says [19] some ArbCom members did have a
dialogue
with T&S, and that ArbCom isstill digesting and considering followup.
- STATISTIC - as of 03:47, 23 June 2019 (UTC), over 400 editors have posted at WP:FRAM, which has racked up over 110,000 views (for current statistics, click here. Over 100 editors have made a statement on the request for arbitration on the reversal of office actions and related matters.
- STATEMENTS (24 June and 25 June) ArbCom member Joe Roe says [20] [21] WMF told ArbCom
there is additional, private and
alsoinformation that is not currently publicly available on Wikipedia
which isrelevant to the ban
of Fram,ArbCom doesn't have all of it
, and WMFdo not consider the ban, as an office action, to be overturnable by ArbCom
. ArbCom member Premeditated Chaos says [22]:I want to clearly state that the Arbitration Committee has no more information about the details behind Fram's ban than anyone else.
- ACTION (24 June) Bureaucrat Xeno changes Wikipedia:Office actions from a community policy page to an information page, citing that the changes of February 2019 are not
community-endorsed in its entirety
. Then, an RfC was started on this decision. - ACTIONS (25 June to 26 June) Bureaucrat WJBscribe restores Fram's adminship, but does not oppose a reversal as wheel warring. Bureaucrat Primefac closes the discussion, declaring that the action should be reversed. Bureaucrat Maxim endorses Primefac's close and removes Fram's adminship. [23] Moe Epsilon requests the recall of WJBScribe for his recent action. [24] With the overturning of their actions, WJBScribe resigns.
- ACTIONS (27 June) Admin Jehochman lodges a case request with ArbCom against Fram, after announcing on 25 June that evidence of Fram having committed harassment was found. Jehochman provided public evidence on 27 June. ArbCom declined to take up the case, with 7 Arbs opposing.
- MEDIA COVERAGE (27 June) The first known media article on this issue is published by Joseph Bernstein in Buzzfeed News under The Culture War Has Finally Come For Wikipedia. Within that article, Bernstein quotes that WMF made a statement to him in which it said Fram's ban was meant
to maintain "respect and civility" on the platform. "Uncivil behavior, including harassment, threats, stalking, spamming, or vandalism, is against our Terms of Use, which are applicable to anyone who edits on our projects,"
On his Twitter account, Bernstein hypes his article on Wikipedia once, then posts links to the published article three times [25]. (according to WP:RSP, there is consensus that BuzzFeed News is generally reliable as a source on en.WP) - OFF-WIKI STATEMENTS (27 June) Katherine Maher, WMF CEO and executive director, tweets [26]:
When you have to retweet your shitty pseudo-thinkpiece three times because no one cares.
Some Twitter accounts who like the post are: (1) Joe Sutherland @jrbsuTrust & Safety @Wikimedia/@Wikipedia.
, (2) jdforrester @jdforresterCoder @Wikimedia
and (3) Gregory Varnum @GregVarnumAdvocate / policy wonk / tech geek / @Wikimedia Foundation employee
.Meanwhile, a fourth liker (4) Joseph Seddon @JosephSeddon is aSeddon has since reversed the like with this comment.Free Knowledge advocate
- OFF-WIKI STATEMENTS (27 June to 28 June) Katherine Maher tweets responses: (1)
This wasn’t even meant to be something that rose to the level of Wikidrama
[27] (2)This tweet was not a comment on the gravity of concerns of English Wikipedians.
[28] (3)it wasn’t about a specific author or article.
[29] (4)This was not a directed comment. The world is full of bad takes, and bad take pushers. It is a good thing when people start tuning them out in favor of critical information, challenging opinions, and informed debate.
[30][31]. - ACTIONS (28 June) starship.paint is indef-blocked by TonyBallioni for "
Cross-wiki harassment of WMF staffers after being warned on the inappropriateness of similar actions
", here. (The referenced activity was directly related to Fram's ban.) Later that day, they are unblocked by User:Geni, here. Ongoing discussion here. TonyBallioni requests Geni's resignation here. Govindaharihari iniatiates an arbitration request over the confusion created by the apparentadmin warring
. Starship.paint decides to step away from the project. - STATEMENTS (28 June): User:Doc_James, one of the Community Selected Members on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, posted an update stating that
The board is working on a statement.
andWith respect to a timeline we should have a statement within a week.
- MEDIA COVERAGE (28 June) Another piece about the affair Wikipedia Editors Revolt over Site’s Ban of Veteran Administrator is published by Breitbart News, by an anonymous former banned Wikipedian writing as T.D. Adler. The piece covers material already reported on earlier by Buzzfeed News (according to WP:BREITBART, Breitbart is on the Wikipedia spam blacklist, but It can still be used as a primary source when attributing opinion/viewpoint/commentary; the specific Breitbart article has been "white-listed" by the MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist board).
- STATEMENTS (28 June): User:Katherine (WMF) posts a response on-wiki for the first time, on her talk page. The
tweet wasn't really meant to be about the BuzzFeed article
. The articleaccurately covers the situation in the community and the anger or frustration
butthe way it handled reporting on the alleged targets of harassment was objectionable
.The Foundation communications team has been in touch with the Buzzfeed editors ...
. Maher hasbeen closely monitoring what’s been going on here on en-wiki
. Her goalis to find a path to de-escalate the current situation and build better, lasting solutions to the issues of harassment
whichmeans consulting with the enWP community to address your articulated concerns about our respective roles and community processes, identifying some clear next steps to resolve some of the current concerns, and consulting on how we can work together to strengthen community self-governance while also cultivating a respectful editing environment that safeguards everyone in the community
. Maher made many responses to follow up comments by editors on her talk page, and in one response she noted that thatthere is likely a role for ArbCom in the immediate case
but refrained from making any promises as she can't speak for other parties involved (it was Friday night). - ACTION (28 June): The mainspace-article Fram controversy is created, later merged to List of Wikipedia controversies.
- ACTION and STATEMENT (30 June): The Arbitration Committee sends an open letter to the WMF BoT. The letter is posted on-wiki here and the ArbCom invites discussion on it, to be conducted here. The ArbCom finds that it
must conclude that T&S’ action is an attempt to extend the use of office actions into enforcing behavioural norms in local communities, an area conventionally left to community self-governance
. It asks thatthe WMF commits to leaving behavioural complaints pertaining solely to the English Wikipedia to established local processes.
It also cautions --If we are unable to find a satisfactory resolution, at least four members of the committee have expressed the intention to resign.
Jan Eissfeldt acknowledges receipt of the letter [32]. Doc James acknowledges that all board members have received the letter [33]. - THE SIGNPOST (30 June): A special report by the The Signpost, titled Did Fram harass other editors?, says at least nine editors claim to have experienced/witnessed harrassment by Fram. Five of them complained to T&S or to ArbCom. The report also covered two past declined arbitration requests regarding Fram's behaviour in February 2018, and in October 2016. Fram responds to the article here. User Haukur creates a new post at ANI over the use of anonymous sources in the report, and then launches a full arbitration request following the discussion there. Jehochman speedily deletes the page and urges colleagues not to restore it before the ArbCom issues a ruling. Statement.
- STATEMENT (1 July): Jimbo Wales says on his talkpage that the board met the previous day and will release a statement after achieving unanimity, adding--
...overall I think people are going to be happy with the statement and with the things we are asking the WMF staff to do going forward.
Full Statement. - ACTIONS (1 July) Fram requests on Commons [34] that he be blocked on en.wiki so that he does not accidentally edit or post on en.wiki. Administrator Future Perfect at Sunrise blocks Fram until 10 June 2020.
Resignations
- Total number of active admins: 521 Wikipedia:List of administrators/stat table
- Total number of admins with over 20 edits per month: 237 User:Sphilbrick/Admin stats one year limited
- BU Rob13 (90K edits, was semi-retired before WP:FRAM, then resigned adminship and retired:
I do not feel safe here
(diff) due to actions by the community) - Ansh666 (resigned adminship:
the whole WMF ban mess was the straw that broke the camel's back
) - Nick (resigned adminship:
I'll re-collect it when the Wikimedia Foundation comes to its senses
) - TheDJ (resigned adminship:
I cannot support a community that undermines T&S.
) (protest against community underminig T&S) - Jc86035 (resigned template editorship:
in protest of the Wikimedia Foundation's inconsistent, opaque, oblivious and inadequate handling of user conduct issues
) - Gadfium (resigned adminship,
dispirited by the recent action of T&S, and even more so by their refusal to explain their action in any meaningful way, to provide any mechanism for an appeal, or to negotiate on a compromise
) - Boing! said Zebedee (resigned adminship and global renamer:
I am not willing to serve Jan and the T&S team … under undisclosed new rules and under threat of unappealable sanctions should I (or those I interact with) violate those undisclosed rules, rather than serving the Wikipedia Community under its imperfect but transparent and accountable rules.
) - Kusma (resigned adminship, citing Gadfium and Boing)
- Dennis Brown (resigned adminship:
We are not subjects of the WMF ... you have to give us the same respect you demand for yourselves.
) - Lectonar (resigned adminship:
Yeah....I handed in my bit too; somehow I can feel a change in the wind....community seems to matter less and less.
) - GB fan (resigned adminship: no reason stated, but said
it is related
to the events) - WJBscribe (resigned adminship and bureaucrat:
I note that my action has been overturned by other bureaucrats. In light of that action in the context of recent WMF actions (and failure to engage regarding them), and irrespective of the "recall" discussion started above, I neither wish to continue as an administrator or bureaucrat of this project, nor is it tenable for me to do so.
) - 28bytes (resigned as bureaucrat, adminship, and global renamer:
There's not much to say that hasn't already been said better by others, so I'll spare everyone my own manifesto except to say there are a lot of good people who edit here, and I will miss working with you all very much
) - MSGJ (resigned adminship:
I have thought long and hard about this, but do not feel able to continue to contribute in the current environment. I had hoped it would be resolved satisfactorily by now, but this is looking increasingly unlikely. Please accept my resignation and remove the admin tools. Thank you and best wishes
) - Floquenbeam (resigned adminship:
I am resigning my adminship to protest the contempt the WMF organization and CEO have for WP's volunteers
) - Ad Orientem (resigned adminship:
The bottom line is that I have lost confidence in the WMF and the manner in which it interacts with the community here
) - MikeLynch (resigned Sanskrit Wikipedia adminship and bureaucrat - now Sanskrit Wikipedia has no bureaucrats)
I would like to express my disappointment at the way the WMF has handled this matter so far
- Beeblebrox (resigned adminship:
I'm out unless and until the foundation repairs it's relationship with this community.
) - Jonathunder (resigned adminship:
Please remove my admin bit. I've said why on my user page. I think it's best I just go away for a while lest I say or do something rash.
) - DoRD (resigned adminship:
...the enwiki community is like the world's largest dysfunctional family, and I no longer wish to hold a position of responsibility here
). Before that, (requests removal of oversight and check user rights.) - Deor (resigned adminship: Citing Boing! said Zebedee's resignation statement)
- Spartaz (resigned adminship:
... it's no big deal to give it up at a time when the WMF are sticking two fingers up To the community here. I simply don't want to use my free time helping to run a website so they can gather more donations for "stuff".
)
Retirements
- Bradv (25K edits, ArbCom clerk) (retired:
enough. Email me when the WMF takes steps to actually fix this place instead of destroy it.
) - The Rambling Man (200K edits, retired:
retiring until WMF provide suitable explanation for their behaviour
) - Davey2010 (100K edits, retired:
Right now I've all but lost faith in the Wikimedia Foundation
diff) - David J Wilson (8K edits, retired
One of the great things about volunteering is that when an organisation supposedly devoted to supporting you shows itself incapable of providing a level of support that you consider adequate, there are no adverse consequence from simply withdrawing your labour, which is what I am now doing.
diff)
Editors on strike
- EllenCT (6+ years, 8.7K+ edits) (stopped editing;
I've decided to stop editing until this is resolved in a way that shows the Foundation is more interested in addressing the obvious out-in-the-open abuse instead of vindictive retribution towards your critics.
) - Beetstra (13+ years, 162K+ edits, edit filter manager, administrator) and their anti-spam bot XLinkBot (as noted here) (stopped editing and all actions to maintain mainspace;
Until the WMF has rescinded all their actions towards Fram and have handed over the material to be handled locally, I will not perform any volunteer actions in order to protect the content on en.wikipedia (if anythong needs to be done --> ask T&S by email)
) - Reyk (~14 years, 26.5K+ edits) (stopped editing mainspace
I'm not doing any more mainspace work until we get a satisfying and credible answer to the question, "what the hell are the WMF up to?".
- Fish and Karate (14+ years, 37.8K+ edits, administrator) (Reported by The Signpost with this diff)
- Pythoncoder (3+ years, 10.5K+ edits) (Reported by The Signpost with this diff)
- Sitush (12 years, 236.6K+ edits) (Reported by The Signpost with this diff)
- Winged Blades of Godric (~6 years, 34K+ edits) (Reported by The Signpost with this diff)
- Wiae (12+ years, 78.6K+ edits) (Reported by The Signpost with this edit version)
- Praxidicae (3+ years, 81.7K+ edits) (Reported by The Signpost with this diff) In protest of community handling of harrassment
... no interest in helping a project that willfully allows and condones harassment, intimidation and stalking.
- Enigmaman (12+ years, 42.7K+ edits)(Reported by The Signpost with this diff)
- Nishidani (12+ years,74,000 edits) I have decided to not edit in content for a period commensurate with Fram's ban, . .not out of solidarity with F. Out of outrage for the WMF's kangaroo court encroachment.
Table of relevant locations
Location | Type | Link | Comments | Size (24 June)[1] |
---|---|---|---|---|
Community response | ||||
En | WP | Community response... (WP:Fram )
|
Main page (see also numbered archives
and named archives listed below) |
687k |
En | WP | Archive 1 ... | There are a lot of archives, the link is to the first | 152k, ... |
En | Talk | CR...Talk | Talk page | 77k |
En | Talk | Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3 | Archives | 144k,152k, 25k |
En | WP | CR.../Summary (WP:FRAMSUM )
|
Useful timelines | 14k |
En | WP | CR.../Proposals about WMF | Proposals about WMF Office | 34k |
En | WP | CR.../General Proposals | General Proposals | 175k |
En | WP | CR.../Fram's response | Originally on Commons and copied over | 22k |
En | WP | CR...Jan Eissfeldt | 10k | |
En | WP | CR.../Community Conduct | An essay on civility[2] | 11k |
Location | Type | Link | Comments | Size |
Administrator noticeboard | ||||
En | WP:AN | AN | Several proposals, all closed without action | |
En | WP:AN | AN | "Appropriate responses to FRAMBAN" | |
En | WP:ANI | ANI twitter | Brief kerfuffle related to Twitter issue | |
Village pump | ||||
En | WP:VP | Proposed 'crat power | Proposed, but quickly closed without action | |
Bureaucrat noticeboard | ||||
En | WP:BN | Fram Banned | Original notice, subsequently moved to WP:Fram | |
En | WP:BN | Desysop BU Rob13, Desysop Nick, Desysop The DJ and more | User request–granted[3], User request–granted... too many to list, see the BN generally | |
En | WP:BN | Desysop Floquenbeam | Notice of action | |
En | WP:BN | Resysop Floquenbeam | User request–granted by WJBscribe
(review by ArbCom requested) |
|
User talk pages | ||||
Location | Type | Link | Comments | Size |
En | U Talk | User talk:WMFOffice | Several messages intended for WMFOffice | 21k |
En | U Talk | Fram Banned, Board meeting?
more WMF questions, Who put the WMF in charge? |
Six threads on Jimbos talk page | |
En | U Talk | Notice to Fram | Only the notice at the top of the page is relevant | |
En | U Talk | Questions for Katherine | A few editors request some response about a tweet | |
En | U Talk | Katherine Mayer responds | Comments about the tweet and other issues[4] | |
Arbitration | ||||
Location | Type | Link | Comments | Size |
En | WP:Arb | Arbcom WJBscribe | Self report regarding the resysop of Floquenbeam | 218k |
En | WP | [35] [36] | Edits leading to second warning [5] | |
En | WT:Arb | Precipitating edit? | Claimed to be the edit which led to the ban | |
En | WT:Arb | Request for a comment | Request that Arbcom comment on the ban issue | |
En | WT:Arb | Can we handle harassment? | Discussion of Arbcom role vis-a-vis T&S | Whole page is 243k |
En | WP:Arb | Case request regarding Signpost article[6] | Case request invo;ing Signpost article about Fram | |
En | WT:Arb | Update from the Arbitration Committee | The initial notification that ArbCom is to take on the case | |
En | WP:Arb | Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fram | Arbitration case regarding Fram's behavior | |
Meta & Commons | ||||
Location | Type | Link | Comments | Size |
Meta | Meta | Office Actions[7] | Office actions Policy (on Meta) | 51k |
Meta | Meta | User reporting system consultation 2019[8] | User reporting system consultation 2019 | 21K since 13 June 2019 |
Meta | Talk | m:Talk:Trust and Safety#FYI | Standards for a fair process [9] | |
Commons | U Talk | Fram's Talk page | Most, but not all the material is relevant. Note: Commons asked that the discussion is taken somewhere more fitting. See below. | 65k |
Meta | U Talk | Fram's Talk page | Communication with Fram continues here, as Meta is the better Wiki for talking about this issue. | 19k |
Miscellaneous post-incident pages | ||||
En | WP | Office actions[7] (WP:OA )
|
Office actions Policy | 46k |
En | WP:Afd | Fram controversy | Discussion of draft article, leaning toward merge | |
En | WP | June Signpost | Several relevant articles | |
Location | Type | Link | Comments | Size |
Location | Type | Link | Comments | Size |
---|---|---|---|---|
Email lists | Wikipedia Mailing lists | |||
Social media | Pseudo thinkpiece (K Mayer), Monolith misnomer (K Mayer) | Tweets from the Executive Director[10] | ||
BuzzFeed | Media coverage | The Culture War Has Finally Come For Wikipedia | Buzzfeed article by Joseph Bernstein | |
Breitbart | Media coverage | Wikipedia Editors Revolt over Site’s Ban of Veteran Administrator | Breitbart article by T.D. Adler | |
Slate | Media coverage | Wikipedia’s “Constitutional Crisis” Pits Community Against Foundation | Slate article by Stephen Harrison |
Location | Type | Link | Comments | Size |
---|---|---|---|---|
En | WP:Arb | Fram Arbcom 2018 | Case Declined | |
En | WP:Arb | Fram Arbcom 2016 | Case Declined | |
En | WP:Arb | Crosswiki issues | A case initiated by Fram, but declined | |
En | WP:Arb | Dr. Blofeld | A case initiated by Fram, but declined | |
En | WP:ANI | Request for desysop of Fram | Did not happen | |
En | WP:ANI | ANI Complaint about Fram 2016 | Ended up as boomerang | |
En | WP:AN | AN complaint about insults 2013 | See subsection Administrator Fram | |
En | WP:ANI | Request for TBAN 2017 | Didn't happen | |
En | WP:ANI | Block review 2019 | Block issued by Fram reviewed and accepted |
- ^ I'm going to stop updating these numbers - you get the picture
- ^ Specifically mentions FramBan as motivation for this essay
- ^ Not caused by the WMF's actions here, but by the community's.
- ^ Note that some other threads on this talk page are also related to Fram issues
- ^ These were linked in Fram's response, but deserve separate mention
- ^ Link probably needs updating if case accepted
- ^ a b Although this page does not directly reference Fram, it the basis for the ban
- ^ No reference to Fram, but many editors have discussed how we ought to move forward and this page is very relevant to that discussion
- ^ No direct reference to Fram but arising out of this incident
- ^ See also followup tweets; notably, one where she explains why she did not delete the tweet
Timeline transcluded from User:Seraphimblade/Draft petition to WMF
another timeline of events
|
---|
References
|
Swarm's summary
no longer being updated
|
---|
|