Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2014-01-08

< Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost | Single
The Signpost
Single-page Edition
WP:POST/1
8 January 2014

 

2014-01-08

Why the year 2019 is so significant

Contribute  —  
Share this
By kosboot
The views expressed in this op-ed are those of the author only; responses and critical commentary are invited in the comments section. The Signpost welcomes proposals for op-eds at our opinion desk.
Letter (in Russian) from Sergei Rachmaninoff to Mr. Jules, dated 1926

Public Domain Day—January 1, 2014—gives me an opportunity to reflect on this important asset, mandated by the Constitution of the United States.

Compared with the years before 1998, the public domain has had a relatively small amount of material added to it for a whole generation. Since then, we have been in a catch-up period. Until 1998, the expiration on copyright was the life of the author plus 50 years, and 75 years for a work of corporate authorship/ownership. But here's the complicated bit, so please bear with me: the US Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 (CTEA) lengthened that period to the life of the author plus 70 years and for works of corporate authorship to 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation, whichever endpoint is reached earlier. Copyright protection for works published before January 1, 1978 was increased by 20 years to a total of 95 years from their publication date. In practical terms, this means that works published in 1923 should have entered the public domain in 1999. Because of the CTEA, works published in 1923 have to wait until 2019 to enter the public domain. So far, that amounts to 15 years of withholding published works from entering the public domain (with five more years to wait).

There's been a small consolation: unpublished work by authors who died 70 years ago has been entering the public domain. On January 1, 2014, unpublished works (i.e. works never copyrighted) created by people such as composer Sergei Rachmaninoff, director Max Reinhardt, author Kermit Roosevelt, painter Chaim Soutine, philosopher Simone Weil, inventor Nikola Tesla, and actor Conrad Veidt entered the public domain.[1]

Part of the issue with the CTEA was that Congress had been heavily lobbied by the entertainment industry and others to pass the act, since those industries would be the beneficiaries. But what about the public? On that score, remarkably few individuals testified against extending copyright. Congress practically ignored entreaties that the extension of copyright might cause issues.

Likelihood of further lobbying to restrict PD

As we patiently wait for 2019, there is a fear that Congress will again be influenced by the entertainment and other industries to again extend the length of copyright. It is unfortunate that while Congress can welcome the entreaties of the heavily financed industry leaders in favor of copyright extension, there are no concomitantly powerful organizations representing the Citizens of the United States arguing against extension and support for the public domain.

It took some by surprise that Maria Pallante, the Register of Copyrights, has called on Congress to examine many aspects of copyright for the 21st century due to the vast changes brought about by the Internet and the variety of of electronic communication. Among her points is re-examining term length for copyright, to recognize that copyright is not a one way highway for rights holders, but should be a balance achieved between copyright holders and the public.[2]

Chart by Joseph Schillinger graphing JS Bach's Invention No. 8 in F Major, BWV 779

On the surface it may seem as if the public may not be able to do anything. Such a defeatist view sees us at the mercy of the U.S. Congress, lacking the means to mount as effective a response that would be comparable to what the entertainment industry could muster.

But we are not helpless. Each Public Domain Day welcomes many unpublished works that can now be used freely without permission or payment. One form of benefit is that the public is allowed to enjoy these works, But perhaps more importantly, these works can now serve as the basis for the creation of new works. That is the other half of what the US copyright law is about. The annual replenishment of newly free work has been one of the economy’s engines since the 19th century, and has been hampered since the passage of the CTEA.

In this regard, the efforts of Wikimedians all over the world can not be underestimated: increasingly, I see newspapers and journals using media from Commons instead of contracting with for-profit media libraries. At nearly 20 million items and always increasing, Wikimedia Commons provides a counterweight to licensed use of media, giving the world options that were not previously available through such a widespread effort.

Citizens should not be shy in communicating the benefits they derive from public domain works. Creative artists, scholars and numerous other kinds of people and professions depend on freely available work. You are encouraged to strengthen free culture by participating and getting others to participate in photograph events and other media/content creation contests such as edit-a-thons and especially the annual Wiki Loves Monuments competition.

We should make every effort to celebrate and publicize public domain day, to educate the general public and raise the awareness of copyright and public domain, and the balance that needs to be struck between the copyright holders and the public.

May we all look forward and work to ensure that on January 1, 2019, works published in 1923 finally are allowed to enter the public domain, and that in successive years we will welcome published works whose nearly century-old protection comes to its legal conclusion.

References

  1. ^ With some works the situation can be more complex. Unpublished works that have been copyrighted by an author’s heirs will continue their protection not based on when they were created, but on when they were copyrighted, ensuring that some works will remain in copyright for well over a century, longer than any living human being.
  2. ^ Mike Masnick, "More Details On Copyright Register Maria Pallante's Call For Comprehensive, 'Forward-Thinking, But Flexible' Copyright Reform" Mar. 18, 2013.


Reader comments

2014-01-08

Tragedy and television

Contribute  —  
Share this
By Serendipodous

The various maladies that befall humanity got some well-known faces this week: the death of the well-liked actor James Avery topped the list, but Michael Schumacher, who is in a coma after a skiing accident, also drew attention. Jordan Belfort, one of the many faces of the economic tragedy unfolding around us, remained in focus as the inspiration for the film The Wolf of Wall Street. And Anderson Silva's failed attempt to reclaim his UFC champion's crown from his nemesis Chris Weidman drew sympathy for the kind of tragedy everyone can relate to. In other news, the return of the TV series Sherlock energised the world, while Breaking Bad, despite being over for two months, continues to be a talking point.

For the week of 29 December to 4 January, here are the ten most popular articles on the English Wikipedia. For the complete top 25 report, see WP:TOP25.

Rank Article Class Views Image Notes
1 James Avery (actor) Start-class 624,917
The much loved actor who played Will Smith's uncle Philip Banks on The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air (and voiced the Shredder in the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles TV series) died unexpectedly on New Year's Eve, sparking an outpouring of affection.
2 Michael Schumacher Good Article 624,452
The man whom many regard as the greatest Formula One driver of all time is now in a critical condition and a medically induced coma after an off-piste skiing accident. As of this writing, his condition is described as stable, though naturally fans are desperate for updates.
3 Sherlock (TV series) Good Article 607,049
The contemporary-set revamp of the Sherlock Holmes mythos has become a surprise global hit (and turned its star, Benedict Cumberbatch into an international sex symbol) and is now watched in 200 countries and territories (out of 254), so it's not surprising that its much ballyhooed return from a two-year hiatus was met with feverish anticipation.
4 Jordan Belfort Start-class 514,459 Onetime stockbroker who spent 22 months in prison for running a penny stock boiler room, he went on to write the books that the film The Wolf of Wall Street is based on.
5 Facebook B-class 410,816
A perennially popular article
6 Breaking Bad B-class 401,159
People just can't let this show go. The most Wikipedia'd show of the year ended for good two months ago; even so, with its appearance on countless "best of the year" lists, and an unexpected endorsement from US President Barack Obama, it's still drumming interest from the public. On December 27, AMC began a four-day marathon, showing all 62 episodes.
7 The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film) C-Class 308,837 Martin Scorsese's acclaimed account of one person's contribution to our general economic misery opened to a respectable $34 million on Christmas Day.
8 American Hustle (2013 film) Start-class 286,132 David O. Russell's star-studded 70s art-forgery caper is getting strong reviews and decent box office returns, having grossed $90 million domestic in its first 24 days.
9 UFC 168 Unassessed 355,541
The rematch between Anderson Silva and Chris Weidman, who took the UFC Middleweight Championship title when he knocked Silva out last July, again went to Weidman.
10 Frozen (2013 film) C-class 321,251 Disney's de facto sequel to Tangled has become something of a sensation. It reclaimed the top spot in the US charts on its sixth weekend (a feat only matched by Avatar and Titanic) and has already outperformed its predecessor at the box office, having grossed nearly $650 million worldwide.


Reader comments

2014-01-08

Gearing up for the Architecture Summit

Contribute  —  
Share this
By Legoktm

MediaWiki developers will be meeting in San Francisco on January 23–24 for an Architecture Summit. The first architecture meeting was during the Amsterdam Hackathon, and discussed the Architecture guidelines document and parts of the MediaWiki codebase. Further meetings were held at Wikimania 2013 in Hong Kong and at the WMF Engineering's All-Hands meeting; there were also bi-weekly meetings on IRC to review various requests for comments.

For the summit, RfCs have been split into clusters to facilitate discussion. Developers are now voting in a straw poll on what they are interested in concerning the creation of the program. As of writing, the categories with the most votes are:

In brief

Not all fixes may have gone live to WMF sites at the time of writing; some may not be scheduled to go live for several weeks.

2014-01-08

WMF employee forced out over "paid advocacy editing"

Contribute  —  
Share this
By The ed17 and Tony1
On 8 January, the Wikimedia Foundation notified the Wikimedia-l mailing list that Sarah Stierch, a popular Wikimedian and the Foundation's Program Evaluation Community Coordinator, no longer works for the organization as a result of accepting payment to create articles on the English Wikipedia.

The issue of paid advocacy—the practice of being paid to promote something—has long been thorny on the English Wikipedia. The most recent battle was over the public relations company Wiki-PR, whose employees created, edited, or maintained several thousand Wikipedia articles for paying clients using a sophisticated array of concealed user accounts, violating several English Wikipedia policies in the process. These practices were exposed by the Signpost and other news outlets.

Shortly after, the executive director of the Foundation, Sue Gardner, authored a press release that in part distinguished between paid editing and paid advocacy:

Gardner could not have predicted that the very next controversy would be so close to home, involving the dismissal of Sarah Stierch, whose paid-for editing activities were first revealed in a blog post. This included a screenshot of Stierch's profile on oDesk, a global clearinghouse for the hiring and management of remote workers. The profile showed that she had been paid US$300 to author a Wikipedia page for an "individual", along with two billed hours for a "Wikipedia Writer Editor" job that was "in progress". Since that screenshot, the profile has been updated to rate her work at five stars, saying "Thanks, Sarah! I really appreciate you!".

Sarah Stierch: WMF staff photograph
The Foundation uses oDesk to pay its contractors and most of its non-US workforce; the screenshot clearly shows that Stierch's account had previously been credited for more than a thousand hours of work for a previous WMF position—a community fellowship—as far back as January 2012.

The topic also hit the talkpage of Jimmy Wales, the outspoken co-founder of Wikipedia, who immediately intoned: "I very very strongly condemn such editing, and this is no exception."

Just days after the revelations, Stierch found herself without her WMF job. Frank Schulenburg, the Foundation's Senior Director of Programs, told the community that she edited for pay "even though it is widely known that paid editing is frowned upon by many in the editing community and by the Wikimedia Foundation" (he later corrected this statement to read "paid advocacy editing" rather than paid editing).

In his announcement of Stierch's dismissal, Schulenburg wrote, without overt irony: "I would like to believe that the Wikimedia movement is a place of forgiveness and compassion. ...". It can only be speculated what the motivations were for Stierch's paid editing, but a sense of this might be gleaned from her tweets in late December.

The Signpost asked Schulenburg whether Wales was involved in the decision to sack Stierch. He replied: "We aren’t going to give specifics about a personnel matter. In general, decisions about dismissals are made by an employee's manager, in consultation with HR and other parts of the staff." On whether the boundary between paid editing and paid advocacy was a factor in the decision to dismiss, Schulenburg was unforthcoming: "The terms paid editing and paid advocacy are very specific, and may not always be clear to many." Other questions he deferred as a "personnel matter", declining to go beyond what was stated in his opening post.

The WMF does not appear to have an explicit agreement with its employees or contractors that bans them from either paid editing or paid advocacy. We asked WMF spokesperson Jay Walsh whether the Foundation explicitly forbids its employees from either paid editing or paid advocacy:

Jay Walsh, WMF spokesperson and former Senior Director, Communications, though still listed as active on the WMF's site

Walsh told us that some of the basic substance of the agreement is in the WMF's COI policy, which is specifically aimed at officers, board members, and executives; however, "this is not exactly the same as the employee agreements. Not all of those agreements are necessarily identical, given that staff work in different jurisdictions around the world. But the basic principles and expectations are the same."

The Signpost was unable to find definitive evidence in the terms of use of a clause that Stierch might have breached, even though both Gardner and Walsh have both cited the terms in relation to paid advocacy—Walsh specifically in relation to the Sarah Stierch dismissal. One term of use listed under "Engaging in False Statements, Impersonation, or Fraud" mentions "misrepresenting your affiliation with any individual or entity, or using the username of another user with the intent to deceive". In this respect, the Foundation may be relying on Stierch's failure to openly and proactively disclose her "affiliations" (contractual relationships) with clients. However, if this interpretation of the terms of use were applied evenly throughout the movement, many editors would be in breach, and accepted practices in a number of foreign-language Wikipedias deemed invalid.

Back in the early years, I had a little statement on my userpage encouraging people to donate money to me if they liked my work and wanted me to do more on Wikipedia. —Erik Möller, deputy vice-president, WMF

The Foundation's conflict-of-interest policy does insist that a "Covered Person"—which does not include employees such as Stierch—acknowledge "not less than annually, that he or she has read and is in compliance with this policy on a pledge of personal commitment."

Wikipediocracy, the persistent blog and forum dedicated to discussing and criticizing the Wikimedia movement, kindled press coverage by tipping off the Daily Dot's Tim Sampson. The resulting article outlined the controversy and explored the site's previous coverage of the English Wikipedia's experience with paid advocacy. Another early runner was the major German-language news portal Heise.de, with a particular focus on IT. Ars Technica, The Independent, Netzpolitik, and Il Messaggero followed. Although Stierch is saying nothing publicly about the incident, Walsh told the Signpost that "it's her decision if she should wish to speak about the matter."

Many commentators confuse paid editing with paid advocacy, despite Sue Gardner's attempt to distinguish the two. Paid editing is commonly accepted on Wikimedia projects, most prominently in the form of collaborations with public institutions such as galleries, libraries, archives, and museums. One such editor is Dominic McDevitt-Parks, the recently hired digital content specialist at the US National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). NARA has contributed a set of guidelines for its staff when editing Wikipedia during the course of their job, created after the unrelated Gibraltar scandal in Europe.

McDevitt-Parks has uploaded to the English Wikipedia his full job description and a personal FAQ page, where he takes on the notion that he could be considered to have a conflict of interest when editing the site: "As a cultural institution with an educational mission, we believe that there are certain activities we can undertake where NARA and Wikimedia have a shared interest, rather than a conflict of interest. ... The two organizations have a conflict of interest when it comes to, for example, the National Archives and Records Administration article itself, but we do not have an interest in editing those types of articles."

Is the WMF's stance on paid advocacy out of step with the wider community?

Some of the other Wikipedias take a starkly different approach by allowing corporate-named accounts and direct editing by the paid employees of firms. Dirk Franke is a long-standing member of the German editing community and has just taken up a position with the German chapter (unrelated to paid editing). The Signpost asked him what the German Wikipedia's current stance towards paid editing/advocacy is. Emphasizing that he was speaking only for himself, not his employer, he said the situation is complicated: a number of editors are very outspoken against it, but the project had two major "non-binding" polls on banning it completely, and both failed by big margins. "The majority of the community seems to grudgingly accept a policy of toleration—we can't stop it without massively violating WP:ANON, so we try to make the best out of it." In his opinion:

Dirk Franke (User:Southpark)

The German Wikipedia and its local support team keep a register of official institutional editor accounts. It has a "user verification" system in place that attempts to prevent unauthorized people from operating from what would appear to be an official account for a business or individual. The process is simple, involving an email from a company domain sent to Wikimedia's OTRS system. The result is editors like Benutzer:Coca-Cola De, an account for the Coca-Cola Company. Such an account would be immediately blocked on the English Wikipedia under its username policy. Oddly, they are still free to edit—as long as they use a different username that would not be considered "promotional".

The Swedish Wikipedia also welcomes paid editors. Anders Wennersten wrote that the paid editing problem "is a privilege that only the biggest version can have"—the site is by some orders of magnitude smaller than the English Wikipedia (about 2% of the active users and fewer than 4% of the total edits; while the Swedish Wikipedia has a relatively high total article count of more than 1.6M articles, these are in large part due to the operations of an automated computer program). Wennersten said that as long as paid advocates play by the basic rules, they are key stakeholders in ensuring that the site continually improves in "value and quality", despite its small core of active editors. He related an anecdote about a publishing company that had contributed "excellent" articles on their affiliated authors. While they have to work with them to remove "fluff and promotion", they obtain valuable information for the area that was not previously covered.

So, too, does the Norwegian Wikipedia. Erlend Bjørtvedt added that a major discussion among the site's administrators concluded that a straight ban on paid editors was wholly impractical, as it would also ban editors who were working for public institutions. Edits from third parties paid to edit for a commercial entity and non-neutral editing for pay are frowned on, but the site attempts to judge editors on their actions, not affiliation. In fact, employees' editing their employers' articles "is not only tolerated, but quite common" on the site; according to Bjørtvedt, many of the administrators and bureaucrats who joined a debate at Oslo's Wikipedia Academy last month had participated in paid editing:

In contrast, the English Wikipedia has had a tortuous relationship with paid advocacy and the related "conflict of interest" (COI) guideline. Some of the most prominent paid editors have been banned, such as Gregory Kohs, but three proposals that would have abolished or severely limited paid advocacy were voted down. An entire section on the COI guideline is devoted to financial issues, yet some advocates have found that they can thrive—if they are careful. Jimmy Wales has championed a "bright line" rule where advocates would not be able to edit articles directly, but few support it. McDevitt-Parks is free to edit in his role, but those suspected of advocacy are vigorously criticized.

Unresolved questions

There appear to be at least four questions hanging in the air over the dismissal of Sarah Stierch. First, how is the Foundation interpreting its terms of use in relation not just to paid advocacy, but to paid editing where the contractual relationship is undisclosed but the product adheres to the requirements for balance? Second, is the WMF basing its decision to dismiss solely on an interpretation of the English Wikipedia's discourse on paid editing and advocacy, without regard to the policies and practices of non-English-language WMF sites? Third, is the Foundation clearly setting out where paid editing ends and paid advocacy editing starts? And fourth, is the Foundation making it sufficiently clear to its employees and contractors that they should not engage in any form of paid editing?

In brief

  • Public Domain Day: A user on the Wikimedia Commons has gone through and collected all of the images on the site that have entered the public domain as a result of the new year. In a similar vein, Duke University has published a list of what could have entered the public domain this year had the US not altered its copyright laws in the late 1970s.
  • Copyright consultation: The European Union is conducting a public review of its copyright rules, and a Wikimedia-centered response is currently in draft form on Meta.
  • Open Access Metadata: The National Information Standards Organization has published a set of recommendations on how to indicate usage rights on scholarly publications, including a new set of metadata tags. The institution is accepting comments on their draft until 4 February, and the Open Access WikiProject has prepared its own thoughts on how to do so on Wikipedia. The Signpost published an op-ed on metadata last July.
  • English Wikipedia
  • On-wiki writing contests: Sarah Stierch, formerly of the WMF's Program Evaluation and Design Team, released a new program evaluation about on-wiki writing contests. It reports that on-wiki writing contests are successful at meeting their goal of improving the quality of English Wikipedia articles and in retaining experienced editors.
  • Guidelines open to community comment: The drafts of three new guidelines are open to public comment; two of them, privacy policy and Access to nonpublic information policy until next Wednesday, 15 January; and one, data retention guidelines until Friday 14 February. The last policy draft concerns which requirements for the access to and disclosure of personal information should be placed on volunteers who safeguard the projects.



Reader comments

2014-01-08

WikiCup competition beginning a new year

Contribute  —  
Share this
By J Milburn
The views expressed in this op-ed are those of the author only; responses and critical commentary are invited in the comments section. The Signpost welcomes proposals for op-eds at our opinion desk.
Wales Cwmhiraeth won the 2013 competition, becoming the first user to ever win the competition twice.

At the very start of the new year, 2014's WikiCup competition began. As you read this, it's likely that the competition has only just started, and rules limiting points to content developed in 2014 mean that it can take a few weeks for most people to really start scoring – but this is part of the excitement, as competitors and followers wait to see who scores the first of each type of content, from the bread-and-butter of the competition, like did you knows and good articles, into some of the more obscure corners of Wikipedia, like featured portal candidates.

Hold up, what is the WikiCup?

The WikiCup is an annual competition which has been held on Wikipedia in various forms since 2007. Points are awarded to users based on their production of high-quality, audited content: did you know articles, in the news articles, good articles, featured articles, featured lists, featured pictures, featured portals, good topics, featured topics and good article reviews. In addition, "bonus points" are awarded to certain kinds of content; mainly for articles on topics which appear on numerous Wikipedias, which we use as a rough (but generally fairly reliable) gauge of the article's importance.

In 2007 and 2008, the project was relatively small, and effectively an editcount competition. 12 took part in 2007, and Austria Dreamafter was crowned the winner; in 2008, 24 took part, and Germany jj137 was victorious. In 2009, the focus was shifted to points for audited content, though points per manual edits (to articles or portals) remained. Mexico Durova won the competition, based on her large number of featured picture credits. 64 took part, starting in 8 pools of 8. In 2010, points per edit were removed, and the first round opened with one very large pool so that all of the 155 users who signed up could take part. 2010 saw Colorado Sturmvogel_66 win out against around 150 others, based on the production of high quality articles on the subject of naval warfare.

After a frantic competition in 2011, 2012 was relatively subdued. Points for good article reviews were introduced, and Zanzibar Hurricanehink, who, as his name suggests, works on meteorological articles, won the competition. Things changed in 2012 with the introduction of bonus points for more important articles; topics which are covered on a large number of Wikipedias could earn double or more points, reflecting their likely higher significance and corresponding difficulty. Wales Cwmhiraeth won the competition, taking full advantage of the bonus points on offer for producing high-quality content on high-importance topics. Details about last year's WikiCup can be seen below.

You may have noticed the flags. Since the first competition, one of the WikiCup's quirks has been that competitors choose a flag to fly. This may be the flag of the competitor's home country, state, county or town, or may be a nation with which they have some affiliation; it may be the flag of a place which fascinates them or just a flag they like. In previous years, everyone had to fly a different flag; now, though, certain flags (such as the flag of India or of the United Kingdom) are flown by many. A second quirk is that the competition is run by judges, who do not participate themselves. The judges might more reasonably be called "coordinators", as little actual judging is required; the rules are set prior to the competition's beginning. The current judging team consists of J Milburn, who has been a judge since the latter half of 2009, The ed17, who has likewise been on the judging team since 2009, and Miyagawa, who is new to the role.

What happened last year?

For the first time, we had someone win the competition twice; Wales Cwmhiraeth emerged victorious after a large number of articles in the natural sciences, including some enormous scores for articles of high importance. Australia Hawkeye7, a newcomer to the WikiCup, finished in second place, while Canada Sasata, who has reached the final round several times, finished third. Colorado Sturmvogel_66, a former winner, finished in fourth. As is traditional, a number of additional prizes were awarded:

  • New South Wales Casliber won the featured article prize, for producing four featured articles in round 4.
  • Colorado Sturmvogel_66 won the good article prize, for producing 20 good articles in round 3.
  • Portland, Oregon Another Believer won the featured list prize, for producing four featured lists in round 2.
  • Scotland Adam Cuerden won the featured picture prize, for producing 23 featured pictures in round 5.
  • Republic of Rose Island Sven Manguard won the featured portal prize, for producing 2 featured portals in round 3.
  • Australia Hawkeye7 won the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5.
  • Wales Cwmhiraeth won the did you know prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5.
  • Ohio ThaddeusB won the in news prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4.
  • United States Ed! won the review prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1.
  • The judges also awarding the Oddball Barnstar to United Kingdom The C of E, for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
  • Finally, the judges awarded Wales Cwmhiraeth the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points (7.2 times as much as a normal featured article).

What will happen this year?

For 2014 there have been a few small changes to the rules; for example, we've upped the number of points on offer for old articles brought to did you know and the points for featured portals. In addition, Miyagawa has joined the judging team. However, these are relatively small changes, and the format remains mostly unchanged. More than 100 users have signed up to the competition, and signups will remain open until the end of January; all users, newcomers and veterans, are invited to join the competition.

At the end of February, the 64 highest scorers will move into the second round, where they will be split into eight pools of eight. The two highest scorers in each pool, along with the next 16 highest scorers overall, will make it to round three. 32 will become 16, and 16 will become eight. The winner will be declared at the end of October.

Reader comments

2014-01-08

Jumping into the television universe

Contribute  —  
Share this
By Mabeenot
Your source for
WikiProject News
Submit your project's news and announcements for next week's WikiProject Report at the Signpost's WikiProject Desk.
Televisions for sale
The Indian-head test pattern seen in the 1940s and 1950s in the United States
A television studio in Germany
An early television remote control
These cameras are part of a closed-circuit television system

This week, we spent some time with WikiProject Television. The project began in September 2003 and grew to include nearly 78,000 pages, including 290 pieces of Featured material and almost 1,900 Good Articles. We interviewed Gen. Quon and TonyTheTiger.

What motivated you to join WikiProject Television? Have you focused on a particular genre or on a specific television series? Do you contribute to articles about the technical aspects of television or the history of the medium?
  • Gen. Quon: When I started to actively edit Wikipedia, I found myself largely editing articles about my favorite bands and TV shows. For almost four years, that trend has continued, and most of my recent edits are exclusively towards TV-related articles. I first got involved via The X-Files project, where I helped several other editors improve and promote articles to good and featured status. I'm happy to say that since I've started, we as a team managed to promote every single episode of the series to good article or beyond! I've also reviewed a few articles, although in my opinion, reviewing isn't my strongest point (but I help out when needed). I've really focused my attention on three series: The X-Files, The Office, and Adventure Time.
  • TonyTheTiger: I don't really think of myself as a member of the project because my most significant contributions are things where I don't really see eye-to-eye with many project members. I have done a lot of work on templates for TV and film awards as well as media franchises. I am also active in identifying important episodes and seasons for project to do lists. I mostly review and edit American drama shows. I am not a technical writer. Most of my time on the project talk page is spent fighting about whether historical critically acclaimed television series should have season articles split from series list articles and whether award templates should be partitioned. I have become more active in the project since I began writing television scripts a little more than 3 years ago.
Have you played a role in promoting any of the project's nearly 300 pieces of Featured content or the over 1,800 Good Articles? Are there any extremely active editors or subprojects that have been contributing to this wealth of Featured and Good material?
Is it difficult to find images for television articles? What are the limitations for using non-free images in articles about television programs? What are alternative ways of illustrating articles without using screen captures from the television program?
  • TonyTheTiger: Television articles are difficult to find free images for. We have images for many actors and can often use them to give a somewhat representative illustration. Also, in some cases promotional posters are suitable illustration.
  • Gen. Quon: I distinctly remember going through 'wars' about whether or not certain screenshots from episodes fulfilled Wikipedia's fair use rationales. Screenshots from some series are easier to justify (The X-Files, with its special effects, jumps to mind) whereas others aren't (Most screenshots from The Office can be explained in words alone). To 'fix' this issue, we usually use free images to describe important parts of the articles. For instance, Grapple X used an image of foie gras to illustrate a plot point in the "Squeeze" (The X-Files) featured article. As TonyTheTiger mentioned, we also make heavy use of free images of actors, writers, directors, etc.
Have you had any contact with the dozens of regional, genre, or series specific projects and task forces under the scope of WikiProject Television? Do the subprojects keep to themselves or do they cooperate? Are there any untapped opportunities to collaborate that should be explored?
  • Gen. Quon: I actively participate in both The X-Files and The Office projects and task forces. I've noticed that, while some editors in the different task forces may not have an interest in another area, they will be willing to at least help out if they can. For instance, I recently nominated List of Adventure Time episodes for featured list, and several editors who are not active Adventure Time editors (but are TV editors) helped me out by pointing out suggestions.
Are some genres, time periods, or geographic regions better covered than others by Wikipedia's television articles? What can be done to improve neglected television topics?
  • TonyTheTiger: I monitor the most important American Television Episodes for creation and Seasons for creation. Although I continue to be surprised that season articles do not exist for "Downton Abbey" and "Girls", the vast majority of new and expanded content is needed for shows over 20 years old. I think I have identified the most important content in these areas in need of attention. There is also contentious discussion on whether many other existant season articles should exist when they are redundant with series episode list articles. Expanding important season articles so that they contain content that is not redundant with series episode list articles is difficult for many older series, but if one has the patience and diligence to find sources for this content it would help a much neglected area of the project, IMO.
  • Gen. Quon: I agree with TonyTheTiger; I've noticed that newer shows often receive much more attention that older shows, although I think this makes sense since people will inevitably be drawn towards shows that are currently airing and therefore actively entertaining them.


Next week, we'll look for solutions to social problems. Until then, find your way through the archive.

Reader comments

2014-01-08

A portal to the wonderful world of technology

Contribute  —  
Share this
By Brambleberry of RiverClan
Aw, nuts! The red squirrel is the subject of this featured picture.
This Signpost featured report covers content promoted from 22 December 2013 to 4 January 2014.
Kim Guadagno, incumbent Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey.
Henry III of England travels to Brittany in 1230

Twelve featured articles were promoted over the last two weeks.

  • Ontario Highway 416 (nom) by Floydian. King's Highway 416, commonly referred to as Highway 416 and as the Veterans Memorial Highway, is a 400-series highway in the Canadian province of Ontario that connects the Trans-Canada Highway (Highway 417) in Ottawa with Highway 401 between Brockville and Cornwall.
  • Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey (nom) by ColonelHenry. The Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey is an elected constitutional officer in the executive branch of the state government of New Jersey in the United States. Republican Kim Guadagno is the first to serve in the post in its modern form. Guadagno, previously the sheriff in Monmouth County, was chosen by Governor Chris Christie to be his running mate on the Republican party ticket in the 2009 election.
  • Jean-Joseph Rabearivelo (nom) by Lemurbaby. Jean-Joseph Rabearivelo (4 March 1901 or 1903 – 22 June 1937), born Joseph-Casimir Rabearivelo, is widely considered to be Africa's first modern poet and the greatest literary artist of Madagascar. Part of the first generation raised under French colonization, Rabearivelo grew up impoverished and failed to complete secondary education.
  • Dredd (nom) by Darkwarriorblake. Dredd is a 2012 science fiction action film directed by Pete Travis and written and produced by Alex Garland. It is based on the 2000 AD comic strip Judge Dredd and its eponymous character created by John Wagner and Carlos Ezquerra. Karl Urban stars as Judge Dredd, a law enforcer given the power of judge, jury and executioner in a vast, dystopian metropolis called Mega-City One that lies in a post-apocalyptic wasteland.
  • Interstate 296 (nom) by Imzadi1979. Interstate 296 (I-296) is a part of the Interstate Highway System in the US state of Michigan. It is a state trunkline highway that runs for 3.43 miles (5.52 km) entirely within the Grand Rapids area. Its termini are I-96 on the north side of Grand Rapids in Walker and I-196 near downtown Grand Rapids.
  • Japanese aircraft carrier Ryūjō (nom) by Sturmvogel 66. Ryūjō (Japanese: 龍驤 "prancing dragon") was a light aircraft carrier built for the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) during the early 1930s. Small and lightly built in an attempt to exploit a loophole in the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922, she proved to be top-heavy and only marginally stable and was back in the shipyard for modifications to address those issues within a year of completion.
  • The Carpet from Bagdad (nom) by Squeamish Ossifrage. The Carpet from Bagdad is a 1915 American silent adventure film directed by Colin Campbell and based on Harold MacGrath's 1911 eponymous novel. In the story, Horace Wadsworth (played by Guy Oliver), one of a gang of criminals also planning a bank robbery in New York, steals the titular prayer rug from its Baghdad mosque. He sells the carpet to antique dealer George Jones (Wheeler Oakman) to fund the robbery scheme. But the theft places both men and Fortune Chedsoye (Kathlyn Williams), the innocent daughter of another conspirator, in danger from the carpet's guardian.
  • McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II (nom) by Sp33dyphil. The McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing) AV-8B Harrier II is a single-engine ground-attack aircraft that constitutes the second generation of the Harrier Jump Jet family. Capable of vertical or short takeoff and landing (V/STOL), the aircraft was designed in the late 1970s as an Anglo-American development of the British Hawker Siddeley Harrier, the first operational V/STOL aircraft.
  • Hattie Jacques (nom) by SchroCat and Cassianto. Hattie Jacques (born Josephine Edwina Jaques; 7 February 1922 – 6 October 1980) was an English comedy actress of stage, radio and screen. She is best known as a regular of the Carry On films, where she typically played strict, no-nonsense characters, but was also a prolific television and radio performer.
  • Henry III of England (nom) by Hchc2009. Henry III (1 October 1207 – 16 November 1272), also known as Henry of Winchester, was King of England, Lord of Ireland and Duke of Aquitaine from 1216 until his death. The son of King John and Isabella of Angoulême, Henry assumed the throne when he was only nine in the middle of the First Barons' War.
  • Two-cent piece (United States coin) (nom) by Wehwalt. The two-cent piece was produced by the Mint of the United States for circulation from 1864 to 1872 and for collectors in 1873. Designed by James B. Longacre, there were decreasing mintages each year, as other minor coins such as the nickel proved more popular. It was abolished by the Mint Act of 1873.
  • Waveguide filter (nom) by Spinningspark. A waveguide filter is an electronic filter that is constructed with waveguide technology. Waveguides are hollow metal tubes inside which an electromagnetic wave may be transmitted. Filters are devices used to allow signals at some frequencies to pass (the passband), while others are rejected (the stopband). Filters are a basic component of electronic engineering designs and have numerous applications.
Jason Newsted in 2013.

Three featured lists were promoted over the last two weeks.

  • List of songs recorded by Jason Newsted (nom) by Grapple X. Throughout his career, musician Jason Newsted has made over 250 recordings, encompassing studio albums, live material and work for film soundtracks, cover albums and charity releases. Although he began his career as a member of the thrash metal group Flotsam and Jetsam, Newsted's work has primarily been with the band Metallica, with whom he played bass guitar between 1987 and 2001.
  • List of international cricket centuries by David Boon (nom) by Sahara4u. David Boon is a former international cricketer who represented Australia between 1984 and 1996. A right-handed batsman who primarily played as an opener, Boon took part in 107 Test matches and 181 One Day Internationals (ODIs) for his country and scored centuries (100 or more runs in a single innings) on twenty-one and five occasions respectively.
  • List of international cricket centuries by Herschelle Gibbs (nom) by Vensatry. Herschelle Gibbs is a former South African cricketer who represented his country between 1996 and 2010. He made centuries (100 or more runs in a single innings) on 14 and 21 occasions in Test and One Day International (ODI) matches respectively. With over 14,000 runs, Gibbs is South Africa's third-most prolific run-scorer in international cricket.
Roger van der Weyden's Portrait of a Lady, c. 1460, was the first featured content of 2014

Seven featured pictures were promoted over the past two weeks.

  • Red squirrel (nom, related article) by Peter Trimming and nominated by Bellus Delphina. The red squirrel or Eurasian red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris) is a species of tree squirrel in the genus Sciurus common throughout Eurasia. The red squirrel is an arboreal, omnivorous rodent. In Great Britain, Italy and Ireland, numbers have decreased drastically in recent years, a decline associated with the introduction of the eastern grey squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) from North America, although habitat loss is also a factor.
  • Red-legged Partridge (nom, related article) by Pierre Dalous. and nominated by Tomer T. The Red-legged Partridge (Alectoris rufa) is a gamebird in the pheasant family Phasianidae of the order Galliformes, gallinaceous birds. It is sometimes known as French Partridge, to distinguish it from the Grey or English Partridge. It is a rotund bird, with a light brown back, grey breast and buff belly. The face is white with a black gorget. It has rufous-streaked flanks and red legs.
  • Karen L. Nyberg (nom, related article) by NASA and nominated by Brandmeister. Karen LuJean Nyberg (born 7 October 1969) is an American mechanical engineer and NASA astronaut. Nyberg became the 50th woman in space on her first mission in 2008. Nyberg started her space career in 1991 and spent a total of 180 days in space in 2008 and 2013 (as a Mission Specialist on STS-124 and a Flight Engineer on Soyuz TMA-09M).
  • Portrait of a Lady (nom, related article) by Rogier van der Weyden and nominated by Armbrust. Portrait of a Lady (or Portrait of a Woman) is a small oil-on-oak panel painting executed around 1460 by the Netherlandish painter Rogier van der Weyden. The composition is built from the geometric shapes that form the lines of the woman's veil, neckline, face, and arms, and by the fall of the light that illuminates her face and headdress. The vivid contrasts of darkness and light enhance the almost unnatural beauty and Gothic elegance of the model.
  • Victor Hugo (nom, related article) by Étienne Carjat and nominated by Yerevantsi. Victor Marie Hugo (26 February 1802 – 22 May 1885) was a French poet, novelist, and dramatist of the Romantic movement. He is considered one of the greatest and best known French writers. In France, Hugo's literary fame comes first from his poetry but also rests upon his novels and his dramatic achievements.
  • Black-sided hawkfish (nom, related article) by Nhobgood and nominated by Tomer T. The black-sided hawkfish, Paracirrhites forsteri, is a species of hawkfish from the Indo-Pacific. It is occasionally found in the aquarium trade and is also of minor importance to local commercial fisheries. It grows to a total length of 22 cm (8.7 in).
  • Ceiling of the Saint-Séverin, Paris (nom, related article) by Romanceor and nominated by Nyttend. A Vault is an architectural term for an arched form used to provide a space with a ceiling or roof. The parts of a vault exert lateral thrust that require a counter resistance. When vaults are built underground, the ground gives all the resistance required. However, when the vault is built above ground, various replacements are employed to supply the needed resistance.

One featured portal was promoted over the last two weeks.

  • Technology (nom) by Cirt and Sven Manguard. Technology is the making, modification, usage, and knowledge of tools, machines, techniques, crafts, systems, and methods of organization, in order to solve a problem, improve a pre-existing solution to a problem, achieve a goal, handle an applied input/output relation or perform a specific function. It can also refer to the collection of such tools, including machinery, modifications, arrangements and procedures.

<br\>

A juvenile black-sided hawkfish and the subject of a featured picture.
Disclaimer: Summaries on this page borrow shamelessly from the articles cited; see the article histories for attribution.


Reader comments
If articles have been updated, you may need to refresh the single-page edition.
The Signpost is looking for new talent.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Single/2014-01-08&oldid=1183872932"