Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Virgo

The following discussion is an archived proposal of the WikiProject below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the project's talk page (if created) or the WikiProject Council). No further edits should be made to this page.

The resulting WikiProject was created at User:Bob the Wikipedian/Virgo

WikiProject Virgo: A series of content filters for Wikipedia

Description (Virgo)

Virgo This task force will be responsible for creating and maintaining subscribable content filters to block images on Wikipedia and the WikiMedia websites. Subjects of concern include porn, violence, etc. Filters would be tailored for specific audiences, therefore, if a special audience would like a content filter to be created, a member of their party should maintain it. This will not modify any exisiting content of Wikipedia/WikiMedia, only enhance it, and will apply only to clients who willingly install it. --revised 23:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Virgo

Support (Virgo)

Oppose (Virgo)

Neutral (Virgo)

Discussion (Virgo)

In general I think user initiated client-side content filtration is an idea with some merit. It allows those who are easily startled by the human form to use Wikipedia without fear, and it causes no content disruption for the rest of us. Unfortunately I think you have a daunting task ahead of you. Generating custom tags that can be added to article and image pages would be a fairly transparent way to accomplish your aim. The problem is that such a model creates a new vector for vandalism (with Virgo tags either being purposely added or removed from articles/images). With the aid of a bot, a vandal could render large swaths of Wikipedia unviewable to Virgo users. Or worse for Virgo users, tags could be removed making objectionable content once again visible. To avoid such, your application has to not rely on Wikipedia tags in any way. All “bad” image and article lists have to be external to Wikipedia. In any case, the technical hurdles are your issue. Hopefully if this project is successful it will cut down on a lot of the unnecessary image deletions from articles. As a prolific creator of "objectionable" images, I would willingly support any plan that would allow users to filter their own content, as opposed to blanket censorship of Wikipedia. As a parting comment, let me state for the record that I find it fascinatingly odd that this project focuses solely on protecting users from being exposed to images of human skin, yet does nothing to protect viewers from being exposed to images of violence, gore, or death. Lord forbid somebody see naked breasts in an article about breasts... but bodies being thrown into the ovens? No problemo. --SeedFeeder (talk) 09:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be wonderful to be able to provide the sort of service you describe, Seedfeeder, which would not only cater to those not wishing to see nudity but also to those not wanting to see violence, gore, death, and a wide variety of other subjects. Unfortunately, we can't proceed that quickly. As you have said, this is a huge undertaking, and the code has yet to even be written. If Virgo becomes stable and reliable enough, I do, in fact, plan to extend it to other categories as well.

I have already considered the possibilities of vandalism as you have described. I can with confidence tell you that this project will not use tags, at least not for the purpose of running the filter. Discussion-type tags such as the merger proposal tag (placed on the discussion page, however) might be appropriate for notifying Virgo team members, but these might be obtrusive. Suggestions could also be made on the Virgo discussion page or some other page set aside specifically for that purpose.

Currently, I plan to have Virgo programmed to search an alphabetized list of file names with attributes in order to determine whether to censor or not. This may take some extra time, but it is a price users will have to pay if they want to use the add-on. Additionally, the list will probably not be on Wikipedia, but somewhere off-site. I'm not exactly sure where I can have the list hosted yet, but I'm hoping that server will be fast and allow for traffic. I don't feel that Wikipedia is an appropriate place to make a list of filenames and their attributes for this program, as it is not funded by Wikipedia nor is it endorsed by Wikipedia.

I am happy to announce that the first bit of code is in order. Anyone who applies the add-on at this point in time will find the text "Virgo beta 0.9.1.2009.0119.1807" at the top of their page and will find that all thumbnails of the original barnstar are replaced with thumbnails of the goddess Virgo. This is merely for testing purposes and is by no means part of the final product. Thanks for taking the time to review this proposal. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I very much support the development of such a system. One leading concern in my eyes is that certain nations, many of them Arab Muslim nations, have different moral norms than many of us from North America, Europe and elsewhere have, and it does none of us any good to alienate all such people out of hand. While I agree with SeedFeeder that graphically violent content is often at least as objectionable, and would support development of such, I am aware of any religious or cultural groups which have as pronounced objections to such content, so it would probably not be quite so high a priority. John Carter (talk) 16:58, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Seedfeeder, your concern regarding the treatment of various topics is covered. Each member of the project (due to technical restraints) may host a single filter, covering whatever topic they choose. The only concern I've heard that hasn't been solved yet is the possibility that system administrators will implement filters in public scenarios. I'm not sure that's actually our concern, though. If a system administrator has rules, then people should respect them. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:44, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the project has been entirely redesigned once again, and that the project is ready to be launched into the Wikipedia namespace, as it will no longer involve writing a script. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A question

What will this task force actually be for? It's not like we have lots of pages about that specific user-created Wikipedia filter (having to use so many words to describe a task force isn't a good argument for its scope, BTW). —Admiral Norton ^(talk) 13:47, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, considering how many times the means were revamped, it's no surprise that there is any confusion here. Maybe this will simplify it:

Virgo will be series of subscribable client-end content filters for images on the WikiMedia websites.
Each one will address a single issue, such as porn or violence, and is tailored toward a specific group of people, such as Catholics, Muslims, etc.
These content filters will affect no one except the clients who choose to install them.
There will be no tags added to images, and no modification to any of WikiMedia's websites, except for the main project page, which will include a list of the available subscriptions.

Hope this clears up the confusion. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:08, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship

In what way is this related to Wikipedia? Why would this be need a WikiProject? Do other browser add-ons or web filtering software need projects? The technology hasn't been described, so I assume it's just one or several optional packages for a specific browser. Seems more like a SourceForge project than a WikiProject. If it were a project to tag items with standard filter tags, that would seem appropriate for a WikiProject. -- SEWilco (talk) 15:23, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point. The way that it's related to Wikipedia is that it is maintained by Wikipedians, applies only to Wikipedia, and will be used by Wikipedians for a better Wikipedia-browsing experience.

So SEWilco, what are you suggesting be done with this proposal then...keep it in the user namespace instead of the Wikipedia namespace? I suppose that isn't a bad idea, although it makes it difficult to find. Perhaps adding it to the Virgo disambiguation page couldn't hurt, although I couldn't be the one to do it, since it would be a conflict of interest. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep what? Will the filter rules be in a Wikipedia file, editable by all? Or is this project still active? The clues to the single existing filter file point at a nonfunctional URL, so is that file going to be in Wikipedia servers? Why not keep it on an open source software project site -- or is this not an open source project? -- SEWilco (talk) 03:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't found a decent way to allow multiple editors to a single filter yet. In fact, I haven't even found a way to allow me to edit a single filter from a second computer. However, any filter may may used by as many clients as needed. Because of this handicap, I have placed a request section on the page for the filter I'm managing (User:Bob the Wikipedian/Porn Filter for Roman Catholics). Additionally, I have not found a way for multiple filters to be managed by a single editor without the help of a second computer. I'm sure that as the project grows, minds will work together to come up with better ways to do all of this.

Also, this isn't a piece of software, per se. It's the application of already existing software in a way that is useful to Wikipedians. The reason I'd like to take it to a community level is so that (a) more filters can be managed for more audiences, and (b) more thorough filtering can be done.

However, if this is never launched as a full-fledged WikiProject, I do plan to keep it in my userspace, as I don't believe it's hurting anyone or anything.

As for the "nonfunctional URL"...I forgot to read part of the user agreement at Ripway...they delete your account if you don't physically log in after 30 days, which I didn't (I only let an application update the file automatically). I have set up a new account and will be logging in to make sure the link doesn't go bad again. The link should work again.

I really do feel that this is Wikipedia-related and still stand my ground with the proposal. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:31, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the project's talk page (if created) or at the WikiProject Council). No further edits should be made to this page.