Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-06-05/In the media

In the media

China blocks secure version of Wikipedia

Share this

An article on TheNextWeb.com says that the Chinese Government has "effectively blocked" Wikipedia by cutting off access to the

Great Firewall of China was not able to selectively block sensitive content, according to the initial report from Greatfire.org, a prominent censorship watch organization which the New York Times has previously featured. Greatfire.org accused Wikipedia of not caring about Chinese Wikipedia readers, using as evidence Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales' threat

to make https the default in the UK if its parliament passed a "snooping bill"—and the lack of similar support for those in China.

Greatfire is calling for the WMF to switch the default protocol for Chinese Wikipedia readers from http to https, which would make the Chinese government choose between lifting the blackout or keeping what would quickly become a highly publicized block.

When asked to respond, the Wikimedia Foundation's Head of Communications Jay Walsh soundly disputed the blog's assertions:

“

Clearly we don't hold any readers of our projects in any less regard. Our mission is to bring the knowledge contained in the Wikimedia projects to everyone on the planet. There is no strategic consideration around how we can make one or another language project more accessible or readable in one part of the world or another, and as the blog post does correctly state, we do not have control over how a national government operates its censorship system. We also do not work with any national censorship system to limit access to or project knowledge in any way.

”

Walsh also took issue with the blog post's factual assumptions, such as Jimmy's role within the WMF, which he says was mischaracterized by Greatfire. While Jimmy has indirect impact through his position on the board of trustees, he does not have direct, day-to-day impact on its staff. In addition, Walsh told the Signpost that while moving to an https default is a goal the WMF is actively working on, doing so is not "trivial"—it is a delicate process that the WMF plans to enable in graduated steps, from logged-in users to testing on smaller wikis before making it the default for anonymous users and readers on all projects.

Articles currently censored by the Chinese government primarily center around the

forbids discussion. Related discussion is currently occurring on the Wikimedia-l mailing list, and a technical description of the https "challenges" can be read here

.

In brief

Mobilink brings Wikipedia Zero to Pakistan: According to an announcement published in the Nation, an English-language Pakistani newspaper, Mobilink has launched Wikipedia Zero to Pakistani readers allowing them access to the "world's largest general reference database". Wikimedia Foundation Head of Communications Jay Walsh was ecstatic, telling the Signpost that it was a "big day" for Wikipedia Zero: "We're really thrilled to expand into another region and increase the number of readers who can access Wikipedia at no cost".
What would Wikipedia have looked like in the 1980s?: An article in the
Huffington Post explored this concept after a YouTube video emerged regarding what popular websites would have looked like about 30 years ago. The video can be viewed in its entirety here
.

WNBA franchise popularity and Wikipedia: An exposition on Sports Blog site SwishAppeal.com, a derivative of
SBNation.com, gave some analysis on gauging the popularity of Women's National Basketball Association (WNBA) teams based on page views on respective Wikipedia articles. Based on the analysis, the Los Angeles Sparks
are the most popular team.

Wikipedia's most controversial articles: Wired published an exposition on some of the most controversial articles (that is, articles with the highest frequency of reverts) on various language Wikipedias. On the English Wikipedia, George W. Bush was the most controversial, followed by Anarchism and Muhammad. Croatia took the top spot on the German Wikipedia, Chile on the Spanish Wikipedia, and Homosexuality on the Czech Wikipedia.
Photo contest in Nepal: The
Himalayan Times reported
that Wikipedians in Nepal have marked the 11th birthday of the Nepali Wikipedia (which was started on 3 June 2002) by announcing a photo contest on Nepal's cultural heritage. The contest will take place in September.

← Previous "In the media"

Next "In the media" →

In this issue

5 June 2013

From the editor

Discuss this story

These comments are automatically transcluded from this article's talk page. To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.

Hmm. How shall the WMF go about actively breaking down the Great Firewall of China? *evil smirk* Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty | Averted crashes} 10:22, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let me copy a relevant comment,
Mentioning Wikipedia on Chinese Skype triggers surveillance
:

The paper for this BusinessWeek article ("Skype's Been Hijacked in China, and Microsoft Is O.K. With It") refers to this Usenix paper (slides) which links to these Chinese Skype censorship stoplists and surveillance triggers, which in 2011 contained:

中文维基百科 ("Chinese-language Wikipedia")
维基百科 ("Wikipedia")
中文维基百科加密版 ("Encrypted version of the Chinese-language Wikipedia")

While "中文维基百科加密版" occurs in the most recent 3/8/2013 version of the surveillance trigger list, the other two do not.

See also https://en.greatfire.org/search/all/wikipedia for a list of blocked Wikipedia articles, chinese and english. --Atlasowa (talk) 12:39, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused; the http version of Wikipedia is perfectly accessible in China - I'm posting this right now in Beijing without a VPN. There is the normal keyword blocking, in which pages with certain sensitive terms will not load and render Wikipedia inaccessible for about 1 minute, but that is true for any website accessed in China. I just surfed over to the Chinese version and that seems to work fine too. Why does the article say that blocking the https is "almost completely cutting off access to those in China"?--Danaman5 (talk) 16:30, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I wrote based on the articles ... can you access

Tiananmen Square protests of 1989? Go Phightins! 17:20, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

The lede of the referenced TheNextWeb article says they "blocked the encrypted version" of Wikipedia, not Wikipedia as a whole, i.e. they blocked the loophole allowing uncensored access. The Signpost head and lede are thus misleading. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 02:39, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's not entirely misleading. A version was blocked, yes, and people viewing the pages are now subjected to government oversight and censored content. Still, I've changed the title to be more specific. :-)

[majestic titan] 02:48, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

My fault on the title. I just jotted something down at the top of the Google Doc to reference which was going to be the lead story, and forgot to go back to change it. Thanks for doing so, Ed. Go Phightins! 19:12, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure that the https version was never completely free of censorship in China. Keyword blocking works based on what is on the page, I don't think which version you use matters. There was a period during which the http version was blocked, but the https version was not, that's why people started using the latter, but that doesn't mean that it was free of censorship. I could be wrong on that, though, I didn't use the https version much after the http version was unblocked. I seem to remember hitting censorship when I did use it though. (and no, I can't access

Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 here. Strangely, it loaded once completely, but then when I tried reloading it, it gave me the usual error. Sometimes the keyword censorship is slow to catch up)--Danaman5 (talk) 13:47, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Interesting that unlike the Wikipedia in the 80s video, the Twitter in the 80s video assumed that users dialed a number using a modem to go online online to tweet. Their 80s vision of Wikipedia seems to be a memory-resident (possibly CD ROM-based) product. Certainly a better vision would involve dialing a 1200-baud modem to go online so you could actually edit the encyclopedia! Wbm1058 (talk) 16:47, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

https://upload.wikimeida.org also blocked in China --Shizhao (talk) 14:17, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost is looking for new talent.

Home

About