IP编辑:增強隱私和解決濫用的措施/葡萄牙语维基百科上禁止IP编辑实验的影响报告

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Outdated translations are marked like this.
下面发布的统计数据的演示文稿封面

背景

2020年秋季,葡萄牙语维基百科社群通过一次社群投票决定禁止IP编辑。他们在2020年10月4日执行了这项变动。维基媒体基金会项目分析小组建立了数据统计面板来跟踪这个改动对葡萄牙语维基百科的影响,以便了解IP编辑对维基百科计划的影响。数据以一周为统计周期。定量数据主要关注于编者、编辑及管理员操作。相关指标包括:

  • 新用户数量
  • 活跃用户数量
  • 用户留存率
  • 编辑数
  • 回退数
  • 净未被回退的编辑数
  • 净未被回退的内容编辑数
  • 封禁数
  • 被保护页面数
  • 用户查核请求

在本報告中,我們將回顧2020年10月至2021年6月期間上述指標的趨勢,即基金會2020/2021財年的第二至四季度。我們還將分享社區對此變化反饋的定性數據。

關鍵要點

我們評估了關閉IP編輯對葡萄牙語維基百科健康的影響,我們發現迄今為止進行的分析沒有顯著的負面影響。關鍵要點如下:

  • 自禁止IP编辑以來,葡萄牙語維基百科上的用戶帳戶註冊數量和活躍編輯數量都有所增加,但未知這是否是一個長期趨勢。
  • 用户留存率没有显著变化,亦未知對此的长期影响如何。
  • 回退、页面保护和封禁数量有所下降,这说明破坏减少了。
  • 包含機械人編輯和回退的總編輯數在這期間有所下降;不含機械人編輯和回退的淨編輯數在第二、三季度比上一年度較低,但在第四季度反比上一年度叫高。实验对编辑數的影响还不明朗。

我们也收集了葡语维基社群的反馈,多数编者對維持关闭IP编辑表示贊同,並指出爭議和矛盾都減少了。

建議

基于我们的研究所得,维基媒体基金会产品部门有以下建议:

  • 若葡語維基社群想維持禁止匿名編輯,基金會不會干涉。
  • 畢竟僅在一個維基項目的研究所得不具代表性,所以需要再在另外兩個社群有參與意願的維基百科語言項目中進行此實驗。
  • 公開發佈研究所得以推進社群對匿名編輯在維基媒體運動中的角色的長期討論。

對編輯者的影響

新用户数量

新帳號

匿名編輯在2020年10月4日關閉後,第二季度的新创建账号从每月平均12,487個增長到14,960個,年度增幅為20%。第三季度中則从每月平均12,873個增至16,234個新帳號,年度增長26%。在第四季度,每月平均新账号数是16,059,和上一年相同。这顯示关闭IP编辑之后,一些匿名编辑注册了账号。从IP地址中区分出特定编辑很难,因此我们无法获知有多少匿名编辑注册了,或者离开了,但是我們能看到新帳號數量在接下来六个月中有所增长。

活跃用户数量

活躍用戶

2020年10月至2021年3月(2020/21財年第二、三季度)間,葡語維基百科的活跃編輯用戶数有所增加。第二季度中平均每月的活躍編輯用戶從5,362名增至9,438名,年度增長76%;第三季度中則由上一年度的5,270名增長至10,409名,年度增幅為98%。第四季度中則由5,926名增長至9,836名,增幅66%。

用户留存率

用户留存率

留存率指在第一个月有编辑的非机器人用户中,在第二个月也有编辑的比例。根据这一定义,统计当然是进行在用户注册后的2个月。在Q2中,平均留存率从FY19/20的5.6%增长到FY20/21的6.7%。在Q3中,从3.71%增长到5.46%。我们认为增长团队的一些新功能对增长率有贡献,大概是0.3%。因此。关闭IP编辑的的结果是在Q2中增长0.8%,在Q2中增长1.4%。

要点

葡语维基百科关闭IP编辑之后,一些匿名编辑者注册了账号继续活动,因此新账号增长了26%。活跃编辑者的增长中的98%就是这些新注册的账号。以及,一些编辑本来就有账号但是不常用,现在他们开始登陆编辑了,这些人对活跃编辑者的增长也有贡献。

 

對編輯者的影響

编辑数

总编辑數

自2020年10月以來,總編輯量下降。第二季度月平均編輯量同比下降9%,從238069至216890。第三季度,第三季度同比下降22%,從282520至219327。第四季度,下降0.48% ,從239037至237883。

机器人、注册用户和匿名用户都可以编辑。通过观察各个用户类别的编辑数,我们确认第二季度的减少不是从机器人或注册用户的,而是从匿名用户的。在第三季度中的减少是从匿名用户和机器人的。

回退次数

48 小時內回退次数

回退次数的定义为产生后48小时内被回退的编辑数目。在Q2中同比减少46.8%,从24454到13006。在Q3中,减少了43.9%,从23421到13144。在Q4中,减少了47.2%,从25434到13429。这表明关闭IP编辑能一定程度减少破坏。

淨存留編輯

淨編輯量(除回退和機械人編輯)

As we discussed, bot edits and reverts are changing in different directions. Therefore we defined a metric to exclude the changes from bot edits and reverts and to only measure ‘meaningful’ edits by human users. Net non-reverted edits is defined as the number of edits which were not reverted within 48 hrs of editing, and not a revert edit, and not an edit by bots. Monthly average decreased by 0.9% in Q2, from 180066 to 178419, and increased by 2% in Q3, from 179613 to 183289. In Q4, it increased by 6%, from 185227 to 196557.

We estimate that features from the growth team increase edits by 0.3%. Therefore the impact of turning off IP editing on net edits is estimated to be a decrease of 1.2% in Q2, an increase of 1.7% in Q3, and an increase of 5.7% in Q4.

Monthly Edits Forecast

In Q2, the monthly average of net non-reverted edits across all wikipedias projects increased by 13.5% YoY. It makes us wonder what the trend would be on Portuguese Wikipedia if the intervention does not happen. We built a forecast model to estimate the edits on Portuguese Wikipedia if IP editing was not turned off, and compared with the actual edits. We do not have statistical evidence that turning off IP editing has negatively impacted editing activeness level. Given that the trend is not clear. We will keep monitoring this metric.

Net non-reverted content edits

Net non-reverted content edits decreased by 2.5% in Q2, from 132066 monthly average to 128690, and also decreased by 7.2% in Q3, from 133310 monthly average to 123779. It increased by 0.9% YoY, from 131338 to 132459.

Net Content Edits Excluding Bot Edits and Reverts

We estimate that features from growth team increase content edits by 0.5%. Therefore, the impact of turning off IP editing on net content edits is estimated to be -3% in Q2, -7.7% in Q3, +0.4% in Q4. The trend is not clear considering the fluctuation in history. We will keep monitoring this metric.

要点

关闭IP编辑后回退减少了。这表明破坏在某种程度上被抑制,因为回退通常是用于制止破坏的。对编辑数的影响还不明朗,由于今年和去年数量的起伏。非内容页面的编辑比较去年增长了。非内容页面编辑的增长主要来自讨论页、政策、准则和用户页。

對管理的影響

封禁

封禁次数

2020年10月以來封禁數量大幅下降。Q2 封禁月均同比變化為-86%,從9278至1274。Q3 減少79%,從4361至931。Q4減少了76%,從4207至992。

受保護頁面

受保護頁面

受保護頁面的數量在第二季度下降了 78%(從825至185),第三季度下降了 68%(從468至148),第四季度下降了 40%(從384至232)。

用戶查核员次數

用户查核请求

用户查核的請求沒有顯示出明顯的趨勢。

關鍵要點

大多數管理措施都是為了處理刻意破壞和反騷擾行為。我們看到行政行動顯著減少。關閉 IP 編輯似乎可以直接減少管理工作量。

社群反饋

我们在葡语维基社区发起了调查。19名编辑者回应了,14人支持禁止IP编辑,4人不支持,1人持中立观点。以下是她们的一些回答

支持禁制者的观点👍

[pt]
Depois de anos votando contra, no final do ano passado finalmente me rendi ao óbvio, o trabalho que o vandalismo dá não compensa alguma pouca melhoria, sem eles nossa vida está muito melhor, muitos artigos que viviam bloqueados puderam ser liberados, hoje podemos deixar uma mensagem para um novato que a chance de ser lida é maior que para um IP (aqui no Brasil IPs são atribuídos aleatoriamente cada vez que se conecta, a chance de receber o mesmo IP e portanto ler um aviso é quase zero). Os editores tem mais tempo para trabalhar nos artigos, incluindo fontes. E não é verdade que somos a primeira wiki da WMF a proibir IPs, o Meta, o Commons e o Phabricator nunca permitiram. Claro que ainda existem LTAs e um ou outro chato, mas o grosso do vandalismo sumiu. Foi a mudança mais positiva em meus tantos anos aqui.

 — Editor 1、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey


After years of voting against it, at the end of last year I finally surrendered to the obvious, the work that vandalism does does not compensate for any little improvement, without them our lives are much better, many articles that used to be protected could be freed up, today we can leave a message for a newbie which has a greater chance of being read than for an IP (here in Brazil IPs are assigned randomly each time you connect, the chance of receiving the same IP and therefore reading a warning is almost zero). Editors have more time to work on articles, including sources. And it is not true that we are the first WMF wiki to ban IPs, Meta, Commons and Phabricator never allowed it. Of course, there are still LTAs and this or that minor annoyance but the bulk of the vandalism is gone. It was the most positive change in my many years here.

 — Editor 1、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey

[pt]
Certamente não foi uma decisão que tomamos com prazer, mas minha lista de páginas vigiadas nunca andou tão pacífica, e olha que ultimamente eu nem tenho conseguido olhá-la o tempo todo como uns meses atrás. Os IPs agora fazem certa farra nas páginas de contato, mas é um efeito colateral do qual não vejo escapatória.

 — Editor 2、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey


It certainly wasn't a decision we were happy to make, but my watchlist has never been so quiet, and lately I haven't even been able to look at it all the time like a few months ago. IPs horse around a bit on the contact pages, but it's a side effect that I see no escape from.

 — Editor 2、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey

[en]
My impression about the ip block, or I rather call it "obligation for account registration". It has been very positive for the community. The sheer drop in blocks and vandalism is very impressive, dropped by around 80%. Blocking and reverting vandalism by registered accounts is much easier, we have a lot more context for their edits. We have even started unprotecting several long-term protected articles with little vandalism. Resulting in more articles that newcomers can edit. Another very positive impact is the interaction, registered users see the messages and respond at a much higher rate than unregistered users. This means less friction and more understanding from newcomers and patrollers.

 — Editor 3、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey


My impression about the ip block, or I rather call it "obligation for account registration". It has been very positive for the community. The sheer drop in blocks and vandalism is very impressive, dropped by around 80%. Blocking and reverting vandalism by registered accounts is much easier, we have a lot more context for their edits. We have even started unprotecting several long-term protected articles with little vandalism. Resulting in more articles that newcomers can edit. Another very positive impact is the interaction, registered users see the messages and respond at a much higher rate than unregistered users. This means less friction and more understanding from newcomers and patrollers.

 — Editor 3、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey

[pt]
A edição se tornou muitíssimo mais agradável, desapareceu muita da pressão causada pelo vandalismo. O nível de hostilidade e conflito dentro da comunidade baixou também, e agora tenho mais tempo para ajudar os novatos, e fazer aquilo que realmente gosto no projecto (editar, manutenção focada, etc).

 — Editor 4、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey


The editing became much more pleasant, much of the pressure caused by vandalism disappeared. The level of hostility and conflict within the community has also dropped, and now I have more time to help newbies, and do what I really like about the project (editing, focused maintenance, etc.).

 — Editor 4、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey

反对禁制者的观点 👎

[pt]
Não concordo com o banimento de IPs. Na minha experiência como editora, observo que grande parte do vandalismo na wiki acontece a olhos vistos, mts vezes por parte de usuários altos na hierarquia, adm especialmente. O bullying de usuários, o viés de gênero, a intolerância cultural e política devem ser considerados vandalismo na wiki porque tem repercussão nas páginas como constantes reversões, sugestão de eliminação etc. Além disso, por outro lado, a utilização do IP pode servir como ferramenta para alguém que queira contribuir, mas, por conta dessas perseguições, prefira preservar sua privacidade. Por fim, não vejo de maneira positiva uma mudança que afasta tanto a wiki pt do modelo das outras wiki ao redor do mundo.

 — Editor 5、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey


I do not agree with the ban on IPs. In my experience as a publisher, I notice that much of the vandalism on the wiki happens in plain sight, often by high users in the hierarchy, especially admin. User bullying, gender bias, cultural and political intolerance should be considered vandalism on the wiki because it has repercussions on the pages as constant reversals, suggested elimination, etc. In addition, on the other hand, the use of IP can serve as a tool for someone who wants to contribute, but, because of these persecutions, prefer to preserve their privacy. Finally, I do not see in a positive way a change that distances the wiki pt from the model of other wiki around the world.

 — Editor 5、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey

[pt]
Acho um erro. Um retrocesso. Sabemos que a Wikipédia cresceu justamente por ser totalmente aberta. Existem de sobra usuários com poderes e tempo para controlar vandalismos na Wikipédia em português. Além de outras ferramentas. Fechar assim a edição por IP é mais perder do que ganhar.

 — Editor 6、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey


I think it's a mistake. A setback. We know that Wikipedia has grown precisely because it is completely open. There are plenty of users with the power and time to control vandalism on Wikipedia in Portuguese. In addition to other tools. Thus closing the edition by IP is more to lose than to win.

 — Editor 6、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey

持中立观点的编辑者 😐

[pt]
Foi importante a restrição de IPs no domínio principal, pois reduziu-se o número de vandalismo nestas páginas e no controle das mudanças recentes e na lista de minhas vigiadas. Por outro lado, não podemos esquecer que também caiu a possibilidade de anônimos desenvolverem conteúdo nos verbetes, o que não impediu que o número de contas criadas tenha aumentado e muitos usuários entenderam que vale mais a pena editar como registrado.

 — Editor 7、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey


The restriction of IPs in the main domain was important, as the number of vandalism on these pages was reduced and in the control of recent changes and in the list of my watchmen. On the other hand, we must not forget that the possibility of anonymous content developing in the entries has also fallen, which has not prevented the number of accounts created from increasing, and many users have understood that it is more worth editing as registered.

 — Editor 7、​IP Editing Ban Sentiment Survey

Some Frequently Asked Questions

Some frequently asked questions about this study are answered and available here.

其他研究

以上定量和定性的数据仅仅反映关闭IP编辑对葡萄牙语维基百科的影响。单个维基的体验不能作为预测其他维基情况的证据。有更详细的研究,请看其他研究者发布的IP编辑的价值

参考资料

  1. Wikipedia:Votes/Registration required to edit Portuguese-speaking Wikipedia
  2. ptwiki Dashboard
  3. Research:IP编辑的价值

––
Anti-Harassment Tools Team

Please use the talk page for discussions on the matter. The Wikimedia Foundation staff posting the updates are Niharika Kohli, Product Manager – niharika(_AT_)wikimedia.org and cc Sandister Tei, Community Relations Specialist – stei(_AT_)wikimedia.org. You can send them a message via email or via the talk page.

For more information or documentation on IP editing, masking and an overview of what has been done so far including community discussions, please see the links below.