Editing Progress Report 2024-01-07 (section)

== Stub notice ==

A [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/StubNotice Stub Notice] has been made to be posted above articles. '''EDIT: STUB [[NEEDS TO BE HERE IN TEMPLATE]], NOT JUST A PAGE LABELED STUB NOTICE. WHEN EDITING MEDIAWIKI AND WANTING TO CREATE SHORTCUTS LIKE THAT YOU NEED TO MAKE IT A TEMPLATE PAGE. DOH. MOVED IT TO THE RIGHT PLACE AND PLACED A LABEL IN THE OLD ONE. SO THE PAGE IS <pre>Template:StubNotice</pre> INSTEAD OF <pre>StubNotice</pre>

'''USAGE:''' Place the following at the top of an article in the ''source editor'' , not the ''visual editor''.

<pre>{{StubNotice}}</pre>
This notice will be placed on articles that have potential to be compliant with our mission statement and rules, that are not yet so.

Abusefilter rule was added to ensure that a normal user can’t remove a stub notice, and a [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/MediaWiki:Removing_stub_notice warning page was created].

=== TO DO - example articles for each type in [[Article Types|article types page linked here]] ===
We need a single sample article for each of these types so that we can point users to what an ideal article would look like. '''Someone needs to write one of each!'''

# '''Themes'''  ''High-level articles explaining and justifying core consumer protection concepts, providing examples of harm caused and their broader implications. ([[Forced Arbitration|Done]])''
# '''Companies'''  ''Articles offering an overview of a company, its size, activities, and a summary of its consumer protection practices and controversies.''
# '''Product Lines'''  ''Pages dedicated to specific product lines when discussing all of a company's activities in one article would be too cumbersome. [[HP Instant Ink|(done here )]]''
# '''Individuals'''  ''Biographical articles about key individuals with significant influence over consumer protection-related decisions or incidents.''[[Sample Individual|(DONE: 01-13-2025)]]
# '''Incidents'''  ''Detailed accounts of specific events or chains of events involving anti-consumer activities, with citations and a focus on factual reporting. (we've got a [[Honey Browser Plugin|draft here]], but needs to comply with tone guidelines before it can be held up as an example)''
# '''Sources'''  ''Articles describing major information sources for the wiki (such as a Youtube channel with a long backlog of content to mine), detailing their credibility and relevance, and providing suggestions for further article creation. (example at the moment is the [[Video Table Fix Attempt|video list page]])''
# '''Transcripts'''  ''Pages containing machine-generated transcripts of relevant videos, summaries, and tags to aid in article creation and avoid duplication.''

=== TO DO - stub notice tests ===

# Make sample article.
# Try to add stub notice as an admin.
# Try to remove stub notice as an anonymous user, or normally logged in user. '''This should not work, as per rules set in [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/Special:AbuseFilter abusefilter].'''

* Removing that stub notice should result in [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/MediaWiki:Removing_stub_notice this error message].

<ol start="4" style="list-style-type: decimal;">
<li>Try to remove stub notice as an administrator. '''This should work, as per rules set in [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/Special:AbuseFilter abusefilter].'''</li></ol>

=== TO DO -  Stub notice variants ===
As well as a stub notice (for articles that are just way too short/under-detailed, we need the following two notices:

* Needs additional verification (for an article that might be basically fine, but is dangerously under-cited, or the citations are very sus. should only lead to deletion if it's in massive violation of NOR and there's no good sources to fix it with)
* Questionable Relevance (for an article that is on the edge of not being relevant/being a yelp-like thing. Basically a limbo to put articles in where 'you'd better give a good reason for this article to exist, or else it's not going to exist in a few days!')

On a technical level, these should be implemented in much the same way as the stub - we just need different notices for different problem articles.<span id="to-do---stub-moderation-guidelines"></span>

=== TO DO - stub moderation guidelines must be added to moderation/rules (Done ✅ on the moderator guidelines side) ===

These rules must be made clear in simple terms in the moderation guidelines in an easy to follow way:

* If an article is compliant according to the [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/Moderator_Guidelines Moderator Guidelines], it stays.
* If an article has POTENTIAL to be compliant according to the [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/Moderator_Guidelines Moderator Guidelines], it will have a Stub Notice placed at the top of the article as a warning with <code><nowiki>{{StubNotice}}</nowiki></code> which can only be removed by an administrator after the article has been appealed in the <code>#appeals</code> channel of the discord server.
* If an article has NO CHANCE OF BEING COMPLIANT, it will not be deleted. Rather:
** the article will be edited to represent that it is non-compliant by an administrator
** the article will have its contents below the administrator’s edit removed.
** Links to the article should be removed
** the article will maintain its edit history so that it can be referred back to if necessary, _as long as the article:
**# does not threaten violence
**# include/suggest illegal activity
**# target harassment in obvious, explicit terms
**# doxx an entity/individual that should remain private.removing the content of the article
**(if numerous attempts are made to revive the article without good reason) the placeholder article should be locked.
* If the article is pure spam/shitposting:
** remove the article
** block the user
** ban them by IP address
** audit other articles/contributions they’ve created for related shitposting. lean on the side of removing all of their creations/edits based on the severity of shitposts.<span id="to-do---captcha-tests"></span>

=== TO DO - Captcha tests ✅✅✅✅ DONE ===

All of these tasks can be tested currently, before I migrate over to captcha.

* Make sure that you do not need a captcha if you are someone I have confirmed is a mod. '''DONE'''  ✅
* Make sure that normal registered users that I have not personally flagged as trusted &amp; anonymous users do need a captcha (I can confirm that both as a register user and as anonymous I had to complete captchas at every edit - Kostas)
* Remind me to switch out the google recaptcha for hcaptcha, since recaptcha is worse.<span id="to-do---fix-video-list"></span><span id="to-do---fix-video-list"></span> '''DONE'''  ✅

=== TO DO - replace google recaptcha with hcaptcha '''DONE'''  ✅ ===
recaptcha is getting owned on my other wiki. hcaptcha works better, and isn't google. 

=== TO DO - fix video list ===

'''NOTE:''' THIS IS WHERE SOMEONE WITH LINUX SYSADMIN EXPERIENCE WHO CAN DIG INTO AND FIGURE OUT INFRASTRUCTURE STUFF WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL

I will ask people to start out by going through the [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/Videos_to_Convert_to_Articles video list] and making an article for each video. Once they have made an article, they will insert their wiki URL to their article into this list so that other users know which articles have been created already, and so moderators can view their articles.

This can be edited in the source editor, but not the visual editor. One of two things must occur:

# the visual editor is fixed to work with this page.
# a more simplistic way of creating this page must be done that is still easy on the eyes with the visual editor, while being editable by the visual editor.

Given that this is literally a table of URLs and plaintext, there is no excuse for visualeditor to fail that badly at loading it.

'''[NOTE] See''' [[Video Table Fix Attempt]] ''', after splitting the table in suitable/unsuitable videos also sorted by year the visual editor works fine. If ok it needs to move in place of the original. -Kostas'''