Opened 2 months ago

Last modified 2 months ago

#27668 new task

Wikipedia wants more attention

Reported by: traumschule Owned by: alison
Priority: Medium Milestone:
Component: Community Version:
Severity: Normal Keywords:
Cc: ggus Actual Points:
Parent ID: Points:
Reviewer: Sponsor:

Description

There's probably more to do, but these stubs are a starting point:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Tor_(anonymity_network)_stubs

(was not sure if Webpages are a better place, if you don't like to have it, feel free to move :)

Child Tickets

Change History (3)

comment:1 Changed 2 months ago by atagar

Hi traumschule, I'd suggest being careful. Wikipedia has made it pretty clear in the past that they don't want us to take a hand in maintaining tor related pages. Roger has had frustrations on this front, and my account got banned when I corrected links for one of my projects...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alexf&oldid=658485347#Blocked_User_(atagar)

Personally I'm still pissed with that Alexf guy. Eventually by serendipity I crossed paths with a couple other (much friendlier) Wikipedia admins at a tech meetup that unblocked my account but cautioned me that we should only leave notes on the talk pages - not directly edit pages ourselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Atagar#Suggestion_for_unblock_request

To their credit they've been phenomenally responsive when we do that. For example...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tor_(anonymity_network)#Arm_renamed

What kind of 'more attention' did you have in mind? Seems to me they've pretty clearly told us to generally stay away. :)

comment:2 Changed 2 months ago by traumschule

at least i was thinking of #27669

comment:3 Changed 2 months ago by traumschule

Some suggestions from the list. It's generally good to prepare changes with references to a credible source (not our pages) and get in contact at #wikipedia when in doubt.

I recently reviewed the English Tor Wikipedia page as per our conversation at the last meeting. All and all, it was accurate; there were probably some parts that were understated and others that were overstated, but there was nothing too glaring. I'm not sure who will be dealing with the changes, but I can chat with them as well if further information is needed.
I did have a few suggestions, though they mostly pertain to formatting and elaborating on existing content:

  1. 'Tor Browser' header could use a more concise explanation and feature list
  2. 'Third party applications' subheader could use some loving as you can see
  3. 'Levels of Security' header - why is this a million miles below the browser section? Could use revisions as well
  4. 'Tor Messenger' bar should be removed - as it's no longer current or reccomended, it would be better to not showcase it any longer.
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.