Talk:List of people imprisoned for editing Wikipedia

Names in Arabic?

Does we have the capacity to convert the names of the doctors in Saudi Arabia to Arabic? jengod (talk) 19:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

OK I found that arwiki has a copy of this article so I tried a cut and paste but I have literally no idea if it's right so apologies if I messed it up. jengod (talk) 19:37, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Bassel Khartabil

Should Bassel Khartabil be on this list? Victor Grigas (talk) 16:28, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

The article is not crystal clear about his relationship w Wikipedia/media but such is communication under authoritarian regimes with plenty to hide. In any case, I vote yes he should be included.

Derivative questions:

• Do we know usernames for these people?
• Should we add them to article?
• If we add them, could we/should we lock their accounts globally to protect them from vandalism and other shenanigans? jengod (talk) 16:53, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I think we want to be careful about distinguishing people who edit Wikipedia and are imprisoned from people who are imprisoned for editing Wikipedia. I'm not sure (from reading the Wikipedia article) if Khartabil is in the latter category; I'd want to check the sources, which I won't have time to do for a bit but if anyone beats me to it, my thought is that as long as we have like two good RSes that explicitly say Wikipedia edits were at least part of the (stated) reason the authorities gave for the imprisonment, then yes, we should add him. Levivich (talk) 17:15, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I agree Victor Grigas (talk) 17:57, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

All good but one caveat for everyone:

Powerful people who have the ability to incarcerate Wikipedia editors for publishing unflattering material have NO incentive to be truthful about their motivations. The charges would typically be Treason Against God or Seditious Agitation or Contagious Degeneracy, etc. I know you all know how to use multiple reliable source correctly but this is one of those things where we should expect elaborate obscurity and multiple layers of plausible deniability on the part of the power structure. jengod (talk) 18:19, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

That's true, and I would add that it doesn't mean the government has to say Wikipedia edits were part of the reason for imprisonment. If an RS says that (as is, I think, the case for at least some if not all the RSes who are currently cited in this list), that would be sufficient for inclusion, even if the government did not say it. Levivich (talk) 18:23, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

If we have records of a public campaign or demonstration reacting to the imprisonment, as we do with Bassel and Wikipedia, then I think that is sufficient. Unusual aspects of Bassel's situation for including in this article are that his edits were not public and his incarceration included extra-judicial elements so conventional Western court journalism cannot occur. His user account is not publicly known. I think the sources say that he was imprisoned for posting user generated content to a number of Internet platforms, and that Wikipedia was among those platforms.

I do not think we will find sources saying that the legal process imprisoned him for editing Wikipedia, but we probably have sources which communicate that the Wikipedia community organized campaigns for him based on popular belief that he was a Wikipedia editor imprisoned for editing. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:11, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Scope

It occurs to me that there are probably Wikipedia editors who are imprisoned for editing Wikipedia, e.g. in the United States, because their Wikipedia edits were harassment or otherwise illegal (well, I mean not for political reasons but for "proper" reasons). We might need a more specific scope/title. But "political prisoner Wikipedians" sounds maybe self-important? I don't know. I'm not sure "List of people unjustly imprisoned" as a criteria complies with WP:NPOV? Does NPOV mean we include no matter why they're imprisoned? I'm not sure such a broad scope would meet WP:N, but if we applied WP:BLPCRIME, that might help. I'm just not sure. Levivich (talk) 18:30, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I think that any case with a reliable source is notable enough for this list. If they did something wrong and illegal, include them. If they did something right and illegal, include them. The information presented will inform as to the nature of those arrested for editing Wikipedia in particular jurisdictions. Victor Grigas (talk) 22:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

A great question but I think a second-tier problem until someone actually adds "Raven Rolfsdottir of Rekykavik was imprisoned by the capital region of Iceland for repeatedly vandalizing the Wikipedia article about the local chief of police."[14][15][16]" jengod (talk) 18:55, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

"List"

This "list" is actually prose and not a list. Should we move to People imprisoned for editing Wikipedia? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure, my thoughts in no particular order: I don't think "people imprisoned for editing Wikipedia" meets GNG as a topic; I started this as a bullet list and only removed the bullets so the pictures would line up; I'm not sure that a list has to have bullets or numbers to be a list, I think a list can be in paragraphs, too. I'd be fine with leaving it as is, restoring the bullets, or moving it; I don't really have a preference among the three. Levivich (talk) 23:03, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I disagree;it is a list @Another Believer TheTopRocketFan (talk) 23:46, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Prose is actually preferred in lists where possible, per MOS:PROSE. Silverseren^C 23:56, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Lists are allowed to have prose -- generally the better ones have more prose in them. This is one of those. Mrfoogles (talk) 22:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)