Updated for two weeks instead of 13 days.

Updated the link to local discussions. Moved because of the setup of the voting systems.

• Nov 25 - Nov 28: Election setup
  • Change the language of votewiki to Chinese (zh)
• Dec 13 -Dec 17: Tallying period
  • Change the language of votewiki back to English (en)

This schedule conflicts with this year's English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee Elections, which will be voting 00:00, 23 November 2021 (UTC) until Monday 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).

@JJMC89, the whole thing can be left after the election scrutineering period, but I think other setup processes can be done at the same time.

Possible to do the Change language ( Change the language of votewiki to Chinese (zh)) on 11 December while the vote goes from 11 December to 25 December.

Updated the whole election. This one should work?

In T295518#7497741, @JJMC89 wrote:

• Nov 25 - Nov 28: Election setup
  • Change the language of votewiki to Chinese (zh)
• Dec 13 -Dec 17: Tallying period
  • Change the language of votewiki back to English (en)

This schedule conflicts with this year's English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee Elections, which will be voting 00:00, 23 November 2021 (UTC) until Monday 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).

I want to confirm if it is not possible to host two elections in two languages at the same time (without vote language inteference).
It seems possible according to past events, and seems possible to set language using php code (which means that one of the two election links will need to include language code).

In T295518#7497785, @1233thehongkonger wrote:

I want to confirm if it is not possible to host two elections in two languages at the same time (without vote language inteference).
It seems possible according to past events, and seems possible to set language using php code (which means that one of the two election links will need to include language code).

Unfortunately this is not possible.

I would caution against holding an election that would require staff time on December 25, which is a major holiday in much of the world. The WMF, who would be supporting this vote, also has its entire staff on holiday between December 24 and 31.

I would instead like to ask if it is possible to push this back until January. It is important work, and I want to be sure that we can support it.

@jrbs May I ask if votewiki can be in English while the questions and options to be in Chinese (i.e. no election language change).

If that is possible, then may I ask if it is possible to set the whole election earlier (i.e. 1 Dec to 14 Dec or whatever two weeks (plus a few days) before Christmas).

Much thanks.

In T295518#7498775, @1233thehongkonger wrote:

@jrbs May I ask if votewiki can be in English while the questions and options to be in Chinese (i.e. no election language change).

Yes, I think this can work

If that is possible, then may I ask if it is possible to set the whole election earlier (i.e. 1 Dec to 14 Dec or whatever two weeks (plus a few days) before Christmas).

I am in the middle of time off, but I can check. It's possible to run two elections at the same time but the issue is more of staff bandwidth to support doing that. (It's basically just me, and the English ArbCom elections can be quite intense.) Let me get back to you with an answer next week on that, if that is okay.

The voter from mainland China has a problem, Affected by GFW, these people can only use proxy to vote, what are these people supposed to do?

在T295518#7499482中，@IN写道：

The voter from mainland China has a problem, Affected by GFW, these people can only use proxy to vote, what are these people supposed to do?

I also want to ask this question.

Scrutineers run necessary checks to strike votes submitted by socks or placed through proxy IP addresses

I want to ask this.

In T295518#7501386, @SD_hehua wrote:

在T295518#7499482中，@IN写道：

The voter from mainland China has a problem, Affected by GFW, these people can only use proxy to vote, what are these people supposed to do?

I also want to ask this question.

It seems that CheckUser can check accounts used Op/VPNs.

I don't know if that is the case for the Chinese Wikipedia, but the current settings in votewiki may need to boe slightly altered so as to enable votes from the Chinese Mainland Region, where Wikipedia and its sister projects are blocked locally.

Plus, should there be any voting irregularities, it should be reported to community first before anything concrete happens, though.

I'm open to all options, but I personally consider this as one of the possible solutions that bring the least opposition from across the sides (at least from my observation).

@1233thehongkonger Reminder: one day left for your due in the description.

Update from T&S -

• The timeline as it stands, for the actual voting anyway, seems OK. I will make sure that my colleague @Nahid is in a position to jump in during the tallying period should he be needed.
  • How many of the items scheduled here to be completed by November 25 have actually been done?
• I can get the SecurePoll election set up now. It is not impossible to hold it at the same time as the English Wikipedia one but it's usually a good idea to make sure there is enough bandwidth to support both.
• The question of scrutinising these elections: There are two issues to mention;
  • As mentioned here there is likely to be a large proportion of voters making use of VPNs/proxies to vote, which will be obviously make things more difficult to scrutinise (since it will be more difficult to tell if two users are the same person or not). SecurePoll does not, to my knowledge, block VPNs from voting by default so it is technically possible, but I think the community needs to consider this in light of how difficult it will be to scrutinise the election.
  • In terms of who performs the scrutiny: In the long-term, it is probably ideal for local communities to scrutinise their own elections (with an impartial committee), but precedent has been for the Stewards to do this which for now seems the best way. If they are willing to perform that role this time, that's great. If not, the T&S team is willing to fill in for that if the community wishes us to.

I apologise for the information dump but hopefully that is helpful to understand our current position. Thank you for working to set this up!

One more thing, I am assuming that such elections would be "support", "oppose" or "neutral" (called range voting, histogram range)? For this pilot it seems to be set up like a referendum, with one "yes or no" question, but also with a "support / oppose" for an administrator. That might be a little difficult to combine with SecurePoll but should be doable I think.

Yes, this is the case.

The question list will be:

Question 1:
您是否支持維基娘成為管理員？（僅為測試，不具實際效力）
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反對 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)
Question 2:
您是否同意在未來一場管理員選舉使用SecurePoll？
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反對 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)
Question 3:
您是否同意使用SecurePoll的投票應當每年固定舉行兩次？（僅意見收集，不具實際效力）
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反對 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)

List of Voters = list of extend-confirmed users.

We can start the election at anytime between 3 and 5 December.

List of users who are able to vote will be voters that contain the extendconfirmed right within the Chinese Wikipedia who is not blocked (partial block not counted in this case) nor locked at the start of the election.

在T295518#7530352中，@1233thehongkonger写道：

Yes, this is the case.

The question list will be:

Question 1:
您是否支持維基娘維基娘成為管理員？（僅為測試，不具實際效力）
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反對 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)
Question 2:
您是否同意在未來兩場管理員選舉使用SecureVote？
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反對 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)
Question 3:
您是否同意使用SecureVote的投票應當每年固定舉行兩次？（僅意見收集，不具實際效力）
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反對 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)

List of Voters = list of extend-confirmed users.

We can start the election at anytime between 3 and 5 December.

What is“維基娘維基娘”? You wrote it twice.

Direct quote error. Edited again

Hi @jrbs, it appears that no steward is willing to be the volunteer, so we would like T&S to be the scrutineers for this experimental election. Also, @1233thehongkonger do we still need local oversighters to become election admins (you said "haven't decided yet")? And I suggest moving the time of using the massmessage tool to notify all voters earlier (probably before Dec 5).

In T295518#7530352, @1233thehongkonger wrote:

We can start the election at anytime between 3 and 5 December.

Hm, the timeline in the description says December 11?

Also, I note in your questions that you say:

[...]（僅意見收集，不具實際效力）[...]

Is that just for testing or will the opinions indicated there actually be used for anything? It would be good to clarify this, and if they are not going to be used for anything, perhaps we should use a question that is more unambiguously for testing purposes.

In T295518#7535199, @jrbs wrote:

In T295518#7530352, @1233thehongkonger wrote:

We can start the election at anytime between 3 and 5 December.

Hm, the timeline in the description says December 11?

Yes it can start at anytime. We can edit the timeline, but I think it is up to how WMF Trust and Safety (plus Stewards, if possible) (plus local Oversight) can support the decision election/referendum/whatever you call.

In T295518#7535205, @jrbs wrote:

Also, I note in your questions that you say:

[...]（僅意見收集，不具實際效力）[...]

Is that just for testing or will the opinions indicated there actually be used for anything? It would be good to clarify this, and if they are not going to be used for anything, perhaps we should use a question that is more unambiguously for testing purposes.

For this, the opinion there is for collecting information about how the community determines best fit for the whole thingy.
Basically, in this poll, there is one test question, one really important question, and one question that collects opinion on how the thing will work for the local zh community.

Thank you for the clarifications!

In T295518#7536344, @1233thehongkonger wrote:

Yes it can start at anytime. We can edit the timeline, but I think it is up to how WMF Trust and Safety (plus Stewards, if possible) (plus local Oversight) can support the decision election/referendum/whatever you call.

I think December 11 would be fine. I will work with my colleagues to make sure there is coverage over the western holiday season.

In T295518#7535205, @jrbs wrote:

Also, I note in your questions that you say:

[...]（僅意見收集，不具實際效力）[...]

Is that just for testing or will the opinions indicated there actually be used for anything? It would be good to clarify this, and if they are not going to be used for anything, perhaps we should use a question that is more unambiguously for testing purposes.

For this, the opinion there is for collecting information about how the community determines best fit for the whole thingy.
Basically, in this poll, there is one test question, one really important question, and one question that collects opinion on how the thing will work for the local zh community.

OK, I understand. As long as "Only collection of opinions, no actual effect" (Google translation ;) ) does not imply that the result of the vote will not be used, otherwise people may not share their true opinion. If the community / voters understand this then there is no problem :)

By the way, I have now added the eligible voters to the election (all 2,639 users with the extendedconfirmed permission on zhwiki). Are there any more voting restrictions (i.e. users cannot be blocked, etc)? I am assuming that the requirement for extendedconfirmed means there is no minimum edit count.

One more question:

Make local oversighters election admins on votewiki (haven't decided yet, but local NDA signatories seems to have been limited to only Oversights and local OTRS at this time

Do we yet know who these people will be? :)

Do we yet know who these people will be? :)

We decided to set local oversights @Wong128hk and @jimmyxu as election admins, representing the community.

在T295518#7542805中，@Stang写道：

Do we yet know who these people will be? :)

We decided to set local oversights @Wong128hk and @jimmyxu as election admins, representing the community.

Needn't the community have a discussion about the decision?

In T295518#7542805, @Stang wrote:

We decided to set local oversights @Wong128hk and @jimmyxu as election admins, representing the community.

Could you please provide links to where this decision was made on the wikis? I am sorry to be bureaucratic here but I want to be sure we are following process and moving as smoothly as possible :)

In T295518#7543891, @jrbs wrote:

In T295518#7542805, @Stang wrote:

We decided to set local oversights @Wong128hk and @jimmyxu as election admins, representing the community.

Could you please provide links to where this decision was made on the wikis? I am sorry to be bureaucratic here but I want to be sure we are following process and moving as smoothly as possible :)

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:%E6%8A%95%E7%A5%A8/%E6%98%AF%E5%90%A6%E5%9C%A8%E7%AE%A1%E7%90%86%E5%93%A1%E9%81%B8%E8%88%89%E5%95%9F%E7%94%A8SecurePoll

"所以現在要可以當election admin的只有監管員。這點同其他語言。--1233 （T / C） 2021年11月8日 (一) 03:03 (UTC)"
“我是建議相關選舉的複查權只交給監管員而飛本地行政員/監督員。
然後無理對待其他用戶的問題我認為是更嚴重的問題。--1233 （T / C） 2021年11月4日 (四) 06:29 (UTC)”
And, until this moment, only local OTRS and Oversight have access to nonpublic information data noticeboard.

But, as always, if there are people who oppose this setting, it is completely welcome for people to discuss, where, at this moment, there are none who rose that question.

In T295518#7540665, @jrbs wrote:

By the way, I have now added the eligible voters to the election (all 2,639 users with the extendedconfirmed permission on zhwiki). Are there any more voting restrictions (i.e. users cannot be blocked, etc)? I am assuming that the requirement for extendedconfirmed means there is no minimum edit count.

Yes, the member should not be locked at all, and definitely, if there is the xc right, there is already a minimum count. Plus they can only get the right after August this year.

I think we can provide the translation of the voting instructions.

@jrbs
Due to local settings, it seems that admins are excluded in the group extendconfirmed, so I think we also need to add administrators into the eligible list of voters, or else they will be left out.

Also, update to question, seems to be minor phrasing.

Question 1:
您是否支持維基娘成為管理員？（僅為測試，不具實際效力）
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反對 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)
Question 2:
您是否同意在未來一場管理員選舉使用SecurePoll？
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反對 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)
Question 3:
您是否同意使用SecurePoll的投票應當每年固定舉行兩次？（僅意見收集，不具實際效力）
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反對 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)

@jrbs, I wonder if there exists any language converter on votewiki for questions?
If the answer is yes, the zh-hans version of questions are shown below

Question 1:
您是否支持维基娘成为管理员？（仅为测试，不具实际效力）
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反对 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)
Question 2:
您是否同意在未来一场管理员选举使用SecurePoll？
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反对 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)
Question 3:
您是否同意使用SecurePoll的投票应当每年固定举行两次？（仅意见征集，不具实际效力）
Option:
同意 (Support) / 反对 (Oppose) / 中立 (Neutral)

Thanks.

In T295518#7548062, @Stang wrote:

@jrbs, I wonder if there exists any language converter on votewiki for questions?

I think this is technically possible but may not be perfect. I can add the language proposed by @1233thehongkonger as the default and add your text as a translated version for zh-hans, in the same way we translate Board elections.

It would also be good to get the following text for the election. I've added some screenshots here of where that shows up using the ongoing English ArbCom elections as an example - they use a very long "intro", yours does not have to be this long.

• "intro" (i.e. instructions on how to vote, which appear just above the election itself)
• "jump text" (i.e. the piece of text seen before being sent to the voting server)
• "return text" (i.e. the name of the link people click to get back to the wiki after voting)
• "question" (i.e. the question introducing the questions people will vote on, can be something like "please vote below")
• "unqualified error" (i.e. the error message when someone tries to vote but is not on the list, usually inviting them to complain on the election talk page).

The title of the election will also need to be translated, currently it is "Chinese Wikipedia election pilot" (in English)

For the MCDC elections which just happened we used these messages in zh:

• "intro": (very long, visible here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Translation/zh)
• "jump text": 该投票将在中央维基被进行。请点击下面的按钮来跳转。
• "return text": 2021年運動憲章起草委員會委員選舉
• "question": 候选人 (this of course does not really apply here)
• "unqualified error": 如果您没有出现在合格选民名单里，我们深表歉意。如果您是合格选民，请访问[https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Movement_Charter/Drafting_Committee/Set_Up_Process#Election_process 选民帮助页面]以获取关于选民资格和如何加入到选民名单里的更多信息。

Much thanks for the clarification. I am wondering the same thing as this is the first time doing this type of election thingy, and, as a voter in quite some previous elections that use SecurePoll, that makes me doubt too.

We will translate them, or place useful text there accordingly.

Vote title: 試行安全投票
"jump text": 该投票将在投票專用维基舉行。請點擊下方按鈕跳轉至該專用維基。
"return text": Wikipedia:投票/是否在管理員選舉啟用SecurePoll
"unqualified error": 請注意，此投票僅限擁有延伸確認權限或管理員權限的用戶參與。如果閣下是延伸確認用戶或管理員而出現無法投票的問題，請確保閣下透過中文維基百科中的特定連結進入本頁。如問題持續，請聯繫 info-zh@wikimedia.org。

In T295518#7552044, @1233thehongkonger wrote:

Vote title: 試行安全投票
"jump text": 该投票将在投票專用维基舉行。請點擊下方按鈕跳轉至該專用維基。
"return text": Wikipedia:投票/是否在管理員選舉啟用SecurePoll
"unqualified error": 請注意，此投票僅限擁有延伸確認權限或管理員權限的用戶參與。如果閣下是延伸確認用戶或管理員而出現無法投票的問題，請確保閣下透過中文維基百科中的特定連結進入本頁。如問題持續，請聯繫 info-zh@wikimedia.org。

I have imported all of these translations now. All that is missing is the intro text, which does not need to be very long (perhaps it could be some text from [[Wikipedia:投票/是否在管理員選舉啟用SecurePoll]] explaining what the poll is about).

The voter list, for the record, should be everyone with the extendedconfirmed and/or sysop user rights on zhwiki. I don't know if there are expected to be any voters who don't fit into those categories. I'll also enable the setting that disallows blocked users from voting.

Update on the whole thing:

For zh-hant:
Vote title: 試行安全投票
"jump text": 該投票將在投票專用维基舉行。請點擊下方按鈕跳轉至該專用維基。
"return text": Wikipedia:投票/是否在管理員選舉啟用SecurePoll
"unqualified error": 請注意，此投票僅限擁有延伸確認權限或管理員權限的用戶參與。如果閣下是延伸確認用戶或管理員而出現無法投票的問題，請確保閣下透過中文維基百科中的特定連結進入本頁。如問題持續，請聯繫 info-zh-hant@wikimedia.org。

For zh-hans:

Vote title: 试行安全投票
"jump text": 该投票将在投票专用维基举行。请点击下方按钮跳转至该专用维基。
"return text": Wikipedia:投票/是否在管理员选举启用SecurePoll
"unqualified error": 请注意，此投票仅限拥有延伸确认权限或管理员权限的用户参与。如果阁下是延伸确认用户或管理员而出现无法投票的问题，请确保阁下通过中文维基百科中的特定链接进入本页。如问题持续，请联系 info-zh-hans@wikimedia.org。

@1233thehongkonger “透过” -> “通过”，“连结” -> “链接”。

In T295518#7555148, @1233thehongkonger wrote:

Update on the whole thing:

For zh-hant:
[...]
For zh-hans:

I have added both of these. Do the question / option text remain the same for hant and hans?

I have two outstanding questions, sorry:

1. Is this election intended to be encrypted? If you need / want this I can enable it very quickly, it just means we will need to decrypt it before we can tally it (which is fine).
2. I notice you say this:

Output is presented in two tables (one that shows the results of the decisions, and the other that shows the head-to-head comparison matrix of votes)

I don't exactly know what this means. The output will be "Support", "Oppose" and "Neutral", with numbers for each of those. So it will be for example:

etc.

In T295518#7563048, @jrbs wrote:

I have two outstanding questions, sorry:

1. Is this election intended to be encrypted? If you need / want this I can enable it very quickly, it just means we will need to decrypt it before we can tally it (which is fine).
2. I notice you say this:

Output is presented in two tables (one that shows the results of the decisions, and the other that shows the head-to-head comparison matrix of votes)

I don't exactly know what this means. The output will be "Support", "Oppose" and "Neutral", with numbers for each of those. So it will be for example:

Question	同意	反對	中立	Percentage (S / (S+O) )
您是否支持維基娘成為管理員？（僅為測試，不具實際效力	10	10	10	50%
您是否同意在未來一場管理員選舉使用SecurePoll？	10	10	10	50%

etc.

I'm not part of Chinese Wikipedia community, but I don't think encryption is necessary. We, at Farsi Wikiepdia, don't encrypt our elections too.

The second question pertains to Schulze method which is used on Farsi Wikipedia elections. Since Chinese Wikipedia is not using the Schulze method, that line should be struck as it does not make sense at all. This is a copy&paste problem.

In T295518#7563059, @4nn1l2 wrote:

I'm not part of Chinese Wikipedia community, but I don't think encryption is necessary. We, at Farsi Wikiepdia, don't encrypt our elections too.

Indeed :) Not encrypting the vote itself has the benefit of the tally running extremely fast, so once the scrutiny of the votes has concluded we will almost instantly know the results. This could be very useful since the election here will conclude on Christmas Day.

The second question pertains to Schulze method which is used on Farsi Wikipedia elections. Since Chinese Wikipedia is not using the Schulze method, that line should be struck as it does not make sense at all. This is a copy&paste problem.

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for fixing it.

Encrypt or not is the same, at least, for the Chinese Wikipedia Community - we just need to know who voted during the election (not how they vote), and possibly a matrix of people voting what after the election. For the sake of safety, the second part can also be mixed where the vote tallies are shown but each vote does not pertain to one person.

And for the second question, it is just a question of whether people would want to try it in real admin elections.

In T295518#7563186, @1233thehongkonger wrote:

Encrypt or not is the same, at least, for the Chinese Wikipedia Community - we just need to know who voted during the election (not how they vote), and possibly a matrix of people voting what after the election. For the sake of safety, the second part can also be mixed where the vote tallies are shown but each vote does not pertain to one person.

And for the second question, it is just a question of whether people would want to try it in real admin elections.

Understood - in that case, I will hold off on encryption. I think we are more or less ready to go.

we just need to know who voted during the election (not how they vote), and possibly a matrix of people voting what after the election.

This seems a little confusing to me. SecurePoll does not allow you to see how a certain individual voted, so we will get the number of "support", "oppose" etc votes for each of the three questions, but not which people voted any particular way, so we don't have enough data for such a matrix. Unless I am misunderstanding the request :)

We can also encrypt future admin elections on SecurePoll if that's something people would like to do in the future.

I am fine for that.
For future elections, we need to wait for the outcome of this election.

Vote ended.

Hey @Stang, @1233thehongkonger, and et al. Thanks for the update. Do you prefer local scrutineers at this stage? In which case, do you have enough community support for local oversighters to take on this task? If not, I can also take on that role from the T&S side.

I think that there is no apparent opposition from any side (nor much concern), and I don't know whether @jimmyxu and @Wong128hk can scrutinize the outcome without extra help as it is the first time such things are run. So I bet there will mean extra assistance from WMF side for this whole thing.

And it will be best for more people to scrutinize the outcome,

Hey @jimmyxu and @Wong128hk, still waiting for the confirmation :) Can you please confirm whether or not you will be able to take the role? I'm happy to support .

Confirmed. Please let me know what should I do next. Thanks.

We'll try it out and see what we can comfortably do.

Thanks. I've sent emails to both of you.

Results have been posted on-wiki here: https://zh.wikipedia.org/?diff=69380751