Change Details

* Affected components: TBD. * Engineer(s) or team for initial implementation: TBD. * Code steward: TBD. ### Motivation //(TBD: Define the problem you are seeking to solve.)// Some WikiMedia projects (especially among smaller language Wikipedias) are packed/controlled with or by admins that show highly problematic behavior. This keeps potential contributors to stay away (if they are informed of it like in [[ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Site-wide_administrator_abuse_and_WP:PILLARS_violations_on_the_Croatian_Wikipedia | Croatian Wikipedia ]])... or frustrates new users, as they are surprised by unexpected situation. Unfortunately it seems hard to resolve these issues easy and/or quickly, so instead of repeating the frustration for all newcomers over and over *(damaging the reputation of whole of WikiMedia), there should be a simple and practical way to gray-list such projects top-down so that all users are (explicitly visually) informed that project has issues reported and that use and contributions should be considered with that in mind. ##### Requirements //(TBD: Specify the features or criteria that need to be met.)// * Data on misconduct and abuse cased should be collected and presented * Such projects should be questioned, publicly listes and actively observed * Project should have a notice on top page at least that it s being questioned and observed by WMF * Project should have at least all the logos of WMF grayed out so it is visually obvious something is different * New users should be given explicit and easy to follow instructions on how to report issues (not complicated and time+energy draining procedures and protocols) ------- ### Exploration //(TBD: Use this space for data gathering, status quo, proposals, other considerations etc.)// * Maybe listing references: ** Croatian Wikipedia https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Site-wide_administrator_abuse_and_WP:PILLARS_violations_on_the_Croatian_Wikipedia

* Affected components: TBD. * Engineer(s) or team for initial implementation: TBD. * Code steward: TBD. ### Motivation //(TBD: Define the problem you are seeking to solve.)// Some of Wikimedia projects (especially common among smaller language Wikipedia instances) are packed/controlled with or by admins that show highly problematic behavior (in spectrum from passive-agressive to authoritarian). This keeps potential contributors to stay away (if they are informed of it like in [[ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Site-wide_administrator_abuse_and_WP:PILLARS_violations_on_the_Croatian_Wikipedia | Croatian Wikipedia ]])... or it frustrates new users, as they are surprised by unexpected situation of hostility. Unfortunately it seems hard to resolve these issues easy and/or quickly, so instead of repeating the frustration for all newcomers over and over *(damaging the reputation of whole of WikiMedia), there should be a simple and practical way to GRAYLIST such projects top-down so that all users are (explicitly visually) informed that project has issues reported and that use and contributions should be considered with that in mind. It is important not to fully blacklist them, as content and other aspects might be good, but to make it known that they are 'grayed' due to suspicion of malfunctioning or toxic working atmosphere. ##### Requirements //(TBD: Specify the features or criteria that need to be met.)// * Data on misconduct and abuse cased should be collected and presented * Such projects should be questioned, publicly lists and actively observed * Project should have a notice on top page at least that it s being questioned and observed by WMF * Project should have at least all the logos of WMF grayed out so it is visually obvious something is different * New users should be given explicit and easy to follow instructions on how to report issues (not complicated and time+energy draining procedures and protocols) ------- ### Exploration //(TBD: Use this space for data gathering, status quo, proposals, other considerations etc.)// * Maybe listing references: ** Croatian Wikipedia https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Site-wide_administrator_abuse_and_WP:PILLARS_violations_on_the_Croatian_Wikipedia

* Affected components: TBD. * Engineer(s) or team for initial implementation: TBD. * Code steward: TBD. ### Motivation //(TBD: Define the problem you are seeking to solve.)// Some of WikiMmedia projects (especially common among smaller language Wikipediasia instances) are packed/controlled with or by admins that show highly problematic behavior. (in spectrum from passive-agressive to authoritarian). This keeps potential contributors to stay away (if they are informed of it like in [[ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Site-wide_administrator_abuse_and_WP:PILLARS_violations_on_the_Croatian_Wikipedia | Croatian Wikipedia ]])... or it frustrates new users, as they are surprised by unexpected situation of hostility. Unfortunately it seems hard to resolve these issues easy and/or quickly, so instead of repeating the frustration for all newcomers over and over *(damaging the reputation of whole of WikiMedia), there should be a simple and practical way to gray-listGRAYLIST such projects top-down so that all users are (explicitly visually) informed that project has issues reported and that use and contributions should be considered with that in mind. It is important not to fully blacklist them, as content and other aspects might be good, but to make it known that they are 'grayed' due to suspicion of malfunctioning or toxic working atmosphere. ##### Requirements //(TBD: Specify the features or criteria that need to be met.)// * Data on misconduct and abuse cased should be collected and presented * Such projects should be questioned, publicly listes and actively observed * Project should have a notice on top page at least that it s being questioned and observed by WMF * Project should have at least all the logos of WMF grayed out so it is visually obvious something is different * New users should be given explicit and easy to follow instructions on how to report issues (not complicated and time+energy draining procedures and protocols) ------- ### Exploration //(TBD: Use this space for data gathering, status quo, proposals, other considerations etc.)// * Maybe listing references: ** Croatian Wikipedia https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Site-wide_administrator_abuse_and_WP:PILLARS_violations_on_the_Croatian_Wikipedia