Directory:Virgilio A. P. Machado/Lack of brotherhood spirit and Wikimedia

Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Monument of Brotherhood and Unity in Pristina

Human rights in Wikimedia projects

• "Virgilio, your accusations are outrageous and false to the point of making no coherent sense whatsoever. No one is violating anyone's human rights on Wikipedia. Please stop wasting people's time."--Jimbo Wales (talk) 11:16, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia Strategic Planning

Talk:March 2011 Update

• Feedback from new editors, Asinthior, 14:19, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
  • "I've participated in a couple of discussion pages. On one of them an experienced user was downright hostile from the very start. As if I was being a naughty kid or I was disrupting the article on purpose. I hadn't done any changes, I was just suggesting it be done. As I see it I had a logic argument that would suffice anywhere in the world. What they told me (or what I interpreted I was being told) was that according to WP policies my argument meant nothing. I found that profoundly unfair and frustrating. Add to that the fact that this editor were completely uncivil and hostile from the start and it's miracle I'm still here. A second experience was slightly civil. Once again I posted a comment on a discussion page of an article suggesting a change. This time a very civil experienced editor showed me the ropes and give all kinds of information on WP policy to explain why this change was unfitting. I did my homework, followed all the links, read them, ask questions to other users and came back to argue my case just to be confronted with a veiled threat that I was rocking the boat for no good and it may have repercussions. As I've never been blocked before and I don't intend to be, I just gave up. [...] To my surprise I found the editor from the first story I recounted (easily a couple of years after I first crossed paths with him or her) in a wikiquette alert. All administrators participating in the discussion wanted nothing to be done, as this was an experienced user and a new user should know better than upsetting an experienced user."
• New users creating new articles, Flatterworld, 21:06, 12 March 2011
  • "You may as well hang out a sign: We Hate Non-Nerds! and be done with it. Fix the obvious first instead of looking for endless ways to spend more money and time. This. Isn't. Rocket. Science. A few descriptions would solve the problem for 90% of the people. (I really can't believe no staff or Admin has ever noticed that. That tells you a lot, right there.)
• case in point "article probation.", Decora, 16:13, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
  • "I have never heard of this until today. "Article Probation"
    "The community has placed this article on article probation as specified at Talk:Barack Obama/Article probation. Any addition of content that is not properly sourced, does not conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, or is defamatory will be promptly removed. In addition, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia without any further warning."
    Imagine how a n00b feels reading that? Dont screw up or we will ban you. Not very inviting. we wont just remove your edit, we will banish you. no discussion, no appeal, no explanation.
    I have already suggested several times that the Edit Notice (the thing you see right above 'save my edit' button) should include a link to the EFF 'blogger legal guide',and advise people not to post defamatory or libelous material. my suggestion has been routinely ignored"
  • "what is 'you may be blocked without further warning'? the idea that violators of rules get to know what they did wrong is a principle as old as the Magna Carta. a good organization does not banish someone without giving a reason.
    This is a 'redundant regulation'. It is alreayd the policy, under Biography of Living Person, that any material not properly sourced is immediately removed. What is the extra step of banishing the editor? There are already procedures to ban people who have broken the rules repeatedly. You can also simply lock articles for a while. Why the redundancy?
    The upshot is that, if you want to know what drives people away, its that sort of thing. IMHO. Not a lack of a visual editor or whatever. It's the attitude of 'guilty of bad faith until proven innocent'."
• New users creating new articles, Finell, 09:22, 12 March 2011
  • "A lot of experienced editors treat well meaning newbies badly, with nasty edit summaries on their reverts, nasty talk page posts ("Welcome to Wikipedia, thanks for your contribution, but what you wrote is utter nonsense ..."), and overly aggressive use of warning templates."
• Another simple explanation of editing trends, Light First Light, 04:27, 12 March 2011
  • "[...] is the main purpose of Wikipedia [...] to create a welcoming and friendly online community, at which it seems to be failing?"
• Glossary of Terms, Raymond Kerry Raymond], 01:42, 12 March 2011
  • "Every time I turn around someone seems to be complaining about something I've done (although I am not clear about exactly what it is)
    [...]
    I saw a comment somewhere about whether people felt they are members of the Wikipedia/Wikimedia community. After a number of years, I never have. Partly because (until I stumbled on this page this morning) I never found anywhere I could talk to anyone, and talking is surely the basis for community."

A notable issue with Wikipedia

• Artw, 1:47 PM, 11 March 2011. (96 comments total) 13 users marked this as a favorite
  • "Between 2005 and 2007, newbies started having real trouble successfully joining the Wikimedia community. Before 2005 in the English Wikipedia, nearly 40% of new editors would still be active a year after their first edit. After 2007, only about 12-15% of new editors were still active a year after their first edit. Post-2007, lots of people were still trying to become Wikipedia editors. What had changed, though, is that they were increasingly failing to integrate into the Wikipedia community, and failing increasingly quickly. The Wikimedia community had become too hard to penetrate."

Requests for assistance

• Updated request for assistance Vapmachado 19:55, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Please let me know:

a) why my request for unblock was never answered,

b) where on page (2) are the occurrences of "harassment,"

c) if after Dec. 23, "he's just returned to do the same thing that lead him to be blocked in the first instance.",

d) where are the occurrences of "continued hostile behavior,"

e) towards what or whom is that "continued hostile behavior,"

f) why my "interesting history" of "cross-wiki" pioneering achievements is never mentioned, a clear violation of a NPOV in decision making.

• Request for assistance Vapmachado Wed Jan 5 19:15:37 UTC 2011
• I believe I need some serious help Vapmachado Fri Nov 12 23:16:56 UTC 2010
  • [...] There is an almost systematic interference by «Yanguas», a wiki.pt administrator, with the user pages of the students listed on these two pages (further details available): "Logística 2008/Trabalhos concluídos" and "Logística 2009/Trabalhos concluídos" besides my own user page. I would like to know if there is someone willing and able to help with this situation.

"You're an idiot"

• Wikipedia is not the encyclopedia anyone can edit Gregory Kohs August 9th, 2010 9:02 am ET
  • "Wikipedia may claim as a headline on its very own main page to be "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit", but nothing could be further from the truth. [...] you could be the sweetest, most innocent Wikipedia editor ever to grace its community, but if you choose a user name like "Gbmontreal" or "Rawnuke", you're liable to be blocked (as was the case with these two editor accounts) by a guy like "Orangemike"."
• Wikimedia Foundation's boss gives orders Gregory Kohs August 4th, 2010 1:23 pm ET
  • "Seth, you're an idiot." --Jimbo Wales January, 2008
  • [...] "I have said this many times in the past and will say it many times in the future I am sure: some people need to find a different hobby, because whatever they are here for, it is not to help build an encyclopedia." [...] --Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
• Wikipedia criticism group purges three critics Gregory Kohs July 27th, 2010 5:50 pm ET
  • "An academic group dedicated to fostering a "critical point of view" as regards Wikipedia has decided to purge three noteworthy Wikipedia critics from its ranks. The crime? They were too critical of Wikipedia."

Forget altruism

• "antisocial production", Eddie Tejeda, Sat Jun 27 21:57:44 UTC 2009
  • 'Forget altruism. Misanthropy and egotism are the fuel of online social production. That's the conclusion suggested by a new study of the character traits of the contributors to Wikipedia. A team of Israeli research psychologists gave personality tests to 69 Wikipedians and 70 non-Wikipedians. They discovered that, as New Scientist puts it,[1] Wikipedians are generally "grumpy," "disagreeable," and "closed to new ideas."'[2]
• Always knew this, Fred Bauder, Sat Jun 27 22:07:15 UTC 2009
  • Always knew this, Wikipedia is generally an outlet for folks who have low interpersonal social skills, or at least insufficient outlets for self expression. As to "Disagreeable and closed to new ideas", that is policy, Wikipedia is a compendium of established knowledge, not a place for new ideas, which we call original research.
• it is "policy" to be "disagreeable"? Marc Riddell, Sat Jun 27 22:27:23 UTC 2009
  • C'mon, Fred; it is "policy" to be "disagreeable"?
• pretty accurate, David Moran, Sat Jun 27 22:35:25 UTC 2009
  • While not exactly science, having gone to more than one Wikipedia picnic to break bread with my fellow contributors ... the conclusions seem pretty accurate to me.

In Portuguese

• Diário da Wikipedista, blog de Anne Valladares, February 9, 2008
  • A fotografia que uma wikipedista mostra de outro wikipedista
• From WikiPT, Felipe Micaroni Lalli, December 15th, 2007 2:52 (UTC)
  • «Na própria Wikipédia o que se vê nos bastidores é uma disputa de egos sem fim. Eu diria até que numa empresa extremamente capitalista não há tanto corporativismo e tanta deslealdade como na política da Wikipédia.»

Human rights

On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [...]. Following this historic act the Assembly called upon all Member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and "to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories."[3]

Preamble

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

[...] the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

[...]

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

[...]

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance [...]

Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 28. Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29. (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible. (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society. (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any [...] group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Share this page

<sharethis />

Human rights Cyberspace Wikimedia Meta-Wiki Wikimedia Meta-Wiki Meta Brazilian Wikipedia Brazilian Wikipedia Portuguese Wikipedia Portuguese Civilized community Civilized Community Wikimedia projects Metaphors Tale Two drivers Brotherhood spirit Brotherhood Freedom of opinion and expression Freedom of opinion Freedom of expression Wikipédia There is no such thing as a free lunch There is no such thing Free lunch Crusaders against education Crusaders Education Quem é Quem Governance Language Portuguese Language Wikimedia Portugal Portugal Wikimedia Brazil Brazil WikiPT list WikiPT Windows Live Messenger Windows Live Messenger Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Foundation Mailing List Mailing List Foundation list Foundation-l Wikimedia Education Mailing List Education Mailing List Education List Wikimedia Wiktionary Wiktionary Wikimedia Outreach Outreach Wikimedia Commons Commons Wikimedia Who's Who Who's Who