Talk:Universal Code of Conduct/Research - Wikipedia

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

System and accuracy[edit]

@NNair (WMF): My ability to independently check the accuracy of this is quite limited, as I don't speak most of these languages, but my quick check of Esperanto and Hebrew indicates some issues with this research. The EO list entirely misses eo:Vikipedio:Estu afabla al novuloj, eo:Vikipedio:Neniu persona atako, eo:Vikipedio:Supozu bonajn intencojn, and eo:Vikipedio:Kvin principoj, among others, and marks the project as "No or little work done on policies". Even Russian and Polish Wikipedias, which are some of our largest Wikipedias and (after checking using Google Translate) appear to have reasonably well-developed conduct policies, are listed as "No or little work done on policies". I'm not sure what to make of this. What standard is being used for the 0 ranking? It seems quite inconsistent, and I don't think we can count on these assessments as being accurate. --Yair rand (talk) 17:09, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Yair rand: Thank you for your input. I really appreciate them. It is an ongoing research and thus can be prone to imprecision. Feedback such as yours is extremely helpful in finding out inaccuracies and making the research more robust as we move further. I’ll cross-check your inputs and make the changes where necessary.--NNair (WMF) (talk) 15:23, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I think Yair rand made a good point. Reading the description of the methodolog, it did not became totally clear to me what exactly is the purpose of the study. It is not explained (if I see correctly) what is a (distinct) unique policy. And what is a policy, or "one" policy compared to another one, or a policy as something different to a recommendation or guideline. Ziko (talk) 13:37, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Pelagic: Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Pinging Mehman (WMF) to verify and change accordingly.--NNair (WMF) (talk) 04:15, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Serbo-Croatian is listed as no translation, score=0. But as of August, Google Translate works for me, and though I see some redlinked pages they do have NPOV, 5P, NOT, CIV, AGF. Pelagic (talk) 03:34, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello all! Unfortunately, I didn't participate in this research, so I can't say much. Yes, there was a mistake with regard to Russian Wikipedia, but as I see it, the volunteers fixed it and I also changed the status from "0 = No or little work done on policies" to "2 = a combination of original and translated policies". Thanks to all, --Mehman (WMF) (talk) 07:26, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism etiquette[edit]

Being the first and main author of the Kritik-Knigge in the German wikipedia, I am dismayed by the way it is used in the table. This "Knigge" never intended to be an "etiquette" or "code of conduct", much less a set of rules. Its ideas are based on persuasion and not on enforcement ot admonition or nudging or anything like that. I think that it is and was useful, but its use heavily relies on its non-binding character. It would be worse than useless, even damaging, if it was used as a binding code. Persuasion needs freedom.Mautpreller (talk) 11:35, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]