Community health initiative/User reporting system/Background discussions and research
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The following are links to discussions and information pertinent to the WMF's Anti-Harassment Tools team 2018 project of building improved tools and workflows to report harassment.
2017 Insights survey
From the 2017 CE Insights survey:
- In the past six months, how often did you report to the following groups for being harassed or attacked:
- To what extent was the problem resolved the last time you reported it to:
- Overall, how useful was the response you received the last time you reported it to:
- The following community processes are used for dealing with user behavior. To what extent do they need improvement?
- Making it an option to 'flag' an editor, after which a moderator would come and see whether the user should be blocked
- Make it very easy to report harassment to an anti-harassment force
- Simplify ways to expose overly-subjective arguments violating WP:NPOV and WP:CIVIL, using "POV-.." and "UW-.." templates designed for discussion pages.
- Harassment of Editors of an Article (talk page templates as reporting)
- Stop It Now! Button
- The Protection of Collaborative Information (anonymous reporting)
- way of reporting harassment from an admin
- Simpler, more accessible, feedback options. (buttons to report or rate comments)
- Require notification first to encourage editors to attempt to resolve things amicably before reporting them for a ban discussion
- Prompt and Quick Response to Reporting
- Confidential harassment support 24-7
- Community discussion on harassment reporting
English Wikipedia Talk page comments
- Wikipedia_talk:Administrators’_noticeboard & Archives
- Archiving issue? — confusion on how archiving works (there are many similar sections)
- A friendly reminder about WP:WALLOFTEXT might be helpful?
- Discussion archived without closure — Confusion about archival, ‘Resolved’ template
- Very unsatisfied with process. Could changed be made? (Better for Community Pump?) — proposes that only admins should participate, that participation is mandatory, reduce non-admin activity, and to better signify which users are admins
- Minimum experience on thread closing — Proposes that only tenured users should be able to archive discussions
- Please do not One-Click Archive threads until at least 24 hours after close
- Closing - is it really always necessary? — discussion about making ‘closing’ of threads mandatory before archival
- Usernames in ANI headings — what should reported cases by titled?
- A guideline on what to do if an ANI report goes stale?
- Page is reaching near 750KB and going towards 1MB as of how it is increasing now — performance and mobile data concerns
- Village Pump
- ThePahntomBot reporting to noticeboards — a bot that automatically reports identifyable abuse. But why not just use filters?
- ANI discussion structure and lack thereof — a few suggestions on how to add structure to ANI (limiting word count, use RFC/U’s form/template, limit scopecreep of discussions, separate admin and non-admin comments)
- Organization of WP:AN, WP:ANI, and similar noticeboards (including this one!) — Use sub-pages
- Formatted ANI Discussions — use strict forms. Heavily opposed
- Proposing DRN for user conduct issues — alternative method for reporting and discussing user conduct issues
- Classified index or subject-tagging for Village Pump discussions — System for tagging old sections for later retrieval.
- Getting to more productive discussions at AN/I using encryption — using a clerk as an intermediary to keep the discussion civil
- Automatic notification if a thread is started about an editor on AN/I
- WP:ARBPOL, Harassment, and Private hearings — opposed proposal to keep more information private after a private ArbCom case.
- en:Wikipedia talk:Volunteer Response Team § Validate OTRS tickets — discussion about displaying some private submission information publicly after closure
- en:Wikipedia:Dispute resolution/2017 RfC — Discussion about calcifying some aspects of Mediation and dispute resolution. Overall rejected, but the discussion was engaging.
- en:Wikipedia:2017 ANI reform RfC — Strongly opposed discussion about adding structure to ANI (word limits, templates, waiting period, clerks, and an edit filter)
- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Conflict Resolution — Discussion about how a WikiProject aimed at resolving conflict between users could operate. Seems to be mostly dormant.
- en:Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution § Moderated Dispute Resolution vs. Formal Mediation — Discussion (amongst many others) about why there are so many different forms of dispute resolution
- en:Wikipedia_talk:Harassment § Need for a better mechanism for private reporting — a designated address to email such private information in the case of COI or undisclosed paid editing
- en:Wikipedia_talk:Harassment § Flowcharts — Making help/project page instructions more straightforward for all users involved