Talk:Image filter referendum/Results/en

Archive of discussions prior to 22 October 2011

Additional statistical results published

8.0-8.5	Arabic
7.5-8.0	Persian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean
7.0-7.5	Vietnamese, Hebrew
6.5-7.0	Hungarian, Portuguese, Turkish
6.0-6.5	Spanish, Russian
5.5-6.0	English, French, Polish, Italian
5.0-5.5	Dutch, Norwegian, Finnish, Bulgarian
4.5-5.0	Czech, Romanian
4.0-4.5	German
3.5-4.0	(none)
3.0-3.5	Swedish, Danish, Estonian

Please note additional statistical results by project, and by age of account. Of note is the "consolidated" vote data for all projects from which fewer than 20 participants voted. These are all small projects, and publishing data from projects this small risks the vote security for the individual participants. Risker 21:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for posting those details; I know that several people asked for them.

This pretty much confirms what the WMF has been saying all along: the demand for a filter is significant in Asia, the Middle East, and South America, all of which are significant growth areas for the WMF. WhatamIdoing 04:56, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

It also shows a huge difference in "need", which was not assumed. The average ranges from 3 to 8 on a scale from 0 to 10, which is a pretty significant difference. I quoted "need", because there is little to no correlation in questioning if the feature is welcome or needed. It asked for importance, which could unluckily mean both and is very relative. --Niabot 08:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Without getting into what the votes mean, I think that the breakdown by project demonstrates that the variation in votes is not random statistical noise. I don't have the time now, and don't know if I'll get to, an effort to color in a blank svg map of the world with the average for question 1 by country code, but just looking at the data, you see .da and .sv and .es.et are fairly close together, .jp and .ch and .ko and .id likewise; similarly .he and .ar and .fa are not so far apart. It will take some doing as one needs to figure out the predominant language of each country, perhaps averaging the others by prevalence, but such a map could be made. What it illustrates, I think, is that freedom of speech, like the printing press itself, is an idea deeply rooted in Christianity, especially Protestant Christianity, and has not fully penetrated to every corner of the globe. While Wikimedia likes to think of itself as a truly global project, it is so only within the constraints of what Wikimedia is, which is to say, an open and free source of knowledge; and thus it remains, essentially and immutably, tied to a particular perspective that dates, ultimately, all the way back to the dusty streets of an ancient town where a certain man was unjustly sentenced to death for blasphemy. Wnt 20:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I think that it's not a "free speech"—which, by the way, predates Christianity by several centuries—but a difference in how much cultures value individual rights compared to community-mindedness. The cultures that prefer a filter are cultures that are very community-minded and thus would like to reduce the likelihood that they will accidentally offend their valued audience. The cultures that dislike the filter value the individual rights of the speaker far more than they value the collective rights of the audience.

A typical northern European attitude might be exaggerated by a cartoonist into, "I want to say this, and I don't care who is offended by it: you are required to hear me because I choose to speak". A typical East Asian attitude might be similarly exaggerated as "I want to say this, but I refuse to force my view onto the attention of any person who does not voluntarily wish to listen to me". The rejection of the filter is a means for the European contributor forcing his audience to hear what they do not wish to hear; the acceptance of the filter is a means for the East Asian contributor to show respect for his audience. WhatamIdoing 01:22, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Certainly I'm not suggesting the concept of free speech would be unique to Christianity, but I think historically it was significant. In any case I've created the map I describe, and inserted it at the top of the section. The size of some of these regions illustrates why some people are eager to make concessions to help penetrate them... I just don't think that's a direction we should go. Wnt 18:54, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all the hard work on making that map! --Shabidoo 02:16, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Great map, thank you very much. And the comment from WhatamIdoing (28 October) is really great!! This explains very well, why some countries like or dislike the filter. Especially: "The rejection of the filter is a means for the European contributor forcing his audience to hear what they do not wish to hear; the acceptance of the filter is a means for the East Asian contributor to show respect for his audience." This and the map should be made one of the most important results of this referendum! 139.20.164.48 09:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

India?

So, nobody from India voted on this issue? I find that hard to believe. ASCIIn2Bme 00:17, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

In case I was unclear, this is a map of languages of the Wikiprojects, not actual countries. The criterion I used for shading countries was that >90% of the people appeared to speak a given language, according to a quick skimming of the relevant Wikipedia article. Because English doesn't cross that threshold in India, it isn't colored. Wnt 03:21, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, come to think of it, I made one exception: when a language is associated with one particular country the country is colored even if it is less than 90%, so for example China is colored for .zh and Spain for .es. Wnt 20:21, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

@Wnt: I believe that ASCIIn2Bme is referring to Image filter referendum/Results/Votes by project/en and not your map. @ASCIIn2Bme: Please read the note on the bottom of Image filter referendum/Results/Votes by project/en. The chart is simplified with some wikis grouped in "consolidated". --Michaeldsuarez 15:02, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

There is no "Indian" project because "Indian" isn't a language. Presumably contributors from India are divided across multiple projects (Urdu, Bengali, Telugu, etc.) and ended up being lumped together with the small projects. WhatamIdoing 17:58, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm complaining about what happening in a website .

Why do you give me old results when searching. Please I need to know cause now the website is borry me... Osetse dikgathatso (talk) 06:19, 29 July 2016 (UTC)