Jump to content

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2026-03-10/In the media

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Signpost
← Back to Contents
View Latest Issue


File:Blocked login.png
icon by Stifle (A), Sarang, final version by Bennylin
CC BY-SA 4.0
0
10
300
In the media

Indonesian government blocks Wikimedia logins; archive site scoured from Wikipedia after owner runs malware

Contribute   —  
Share this
By Bri, Mitchsavl, Robertsky, and Smallbones

A Swedish singer has called on her TikTok followers to change the photo on her biography, an open-source analyst encouraged people on his blog to improve a Wikipedia article, and a government blocked editors from logging into their Wikimedia accounts.

Logins blocked in Indonesia

Blocked login and registration for users from Indonesia. Bennylin, CC-BY-SA 4.0

Editors in Indonesia are currently unable to log into their Wikimedia accounts after the country's Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs (Komdigi) ordered internet providers on 25 February 2026 to block access to auth.wikimedia.org. The government cited the Wikimedia Foundation's failure to register as a private Electronic System Provider (Penyelenggara Sistem Elektronik, or PSE) under Indonesian regulations. (Tempo)

While readers' access to the various Wikimedia projects is not affected by this block, editors in Indonesia have effectively been prevented from logging into their accounts, and new accounts cannot be created. Editors who were logged in before the block was instituted are still able to use their accounts. However, as authentication cookies expire over time, Indonesian editors may gradually lose access to their accounts. This could prevent established editors from editing protected pages and administrators from using administrative tools needed to maintain the projects.

If Wikimedia Foundation registered as an "Electronic System Provider", then it would be subjected to Indonesian laws. These laws may give Indonesian authorities broad access to user data including access details as well as authority to demand the removal of "prohibited content". Human rights organizations have previously described content definitions as overly broad restrictions on free speech. (Human Rights Watch) The vague wording of what can be taken down, such as creating "community anxiety" or causing "disturbance in public order" are also a cause for concern among free speech advocates. The law was established in 2019 by the previous government and has since gone through several amendments. Tech in Asia notes that the enforcement on Wikimedia platforms is based on this already established law. Before the latest action on Wikimedia Foundation, other international companies or services such as PayPal, Steam, Dota, CS:Go, Yahoo, Origin.com, Epic Games, and Archive.org had run afoul of the law, having their platforms blocked as well until they had registered as PSEs. (Digital Policy Alert). As of writing, there are 779 foreign PSEs (around 4%) registered out of a total of 16,255 PSEs. (Komdigi PSE Statistics)

The latest enforcement on 25 February 2026 came on the heels of the formation of a dedicated Digital Space Oversight Directorate General in January 2025, which operates under the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs. It has an expanded mandate, and has also asked for an increase in its operating budget, in part to centralise digital oversight, including compliance and law enforcement, in the digital space. (Indonesia at Melbourne, Lexology). Prior to this, the Wikimedia Foundation had received multiple notifications from the authorities since November 2025, urging it to be registered as a PSE. (VOI) Cloudflare was similarly warned in November 2025, and its staff have met the authorities since then and are currently reviewing the applicable laws while stating that as an infrastructure provider, they do not directly curate content. (Tech in Asia 2)

In a statement to The Signpost, the Wikimedia Foundation said that it is aware of the access restriction in Indonesia and that Wikimedia projects remain accessible to read and contribute as logged-out users. The Foundation further explained that they are "actively investigating the scope and underlying basis of this situation", while engaging with the Indonesian authorities to seek a resolution. It added that it "deeply values the dedication and contributions of the Indonesian Wikimedia communities" and expressed hope that access would be restored soon so that volunteers could resume editing without disruption.

– RS

Addendum: On 9 March 2026, after a week of discussion, the Indonesian Wikipedia community released a statement asking Komdigi to undo the block (Original (in Indonesian), translated). Additionally, a Central Notice banner in Indonesian, alerting readers of the situation, has been requested to be placed across the various projects after seeking consensus among 20 other project communities. (Central Notice request)

Singer asks fans to help change photograph

An unrelated photo of Zara Larsson

Swedish singer Zara Larsson entreated millions of followers on TikTok to change the infobox photo in her Wikipedia article, which she loathed (People, Rolling Stone, The Independent). The resulting barrage of edits led to page protection, which quickly escalated from semi to extended-confirmed. The Daily Dot kind of nailed it when they said "The utopian open-source ethos of Wikipedia can become an enemy to a public figure trying to control their image." A Request for Comment on the talk page ensued.

Pitchfork followed up with what appear to be pretty straightforward directions to other artists on how to upload their favored photo and make an edit request. – B

Doctored, DDOSing depository ditched

See related "Signpost" coverage at News and notes and the Technology report.

"Wikipedia blacklists Archive.today, starts removing 695,000 archive links" and "If DDoSing a blog wasn't bad enough, archive site also tampered with web snapshots", said Ars Technica on Feb 20. The blacklisting was also described at Times of India, International Business Times, TechCrunch, Boing Boing, PC Magazine, Tom's Hardware, and others. – B

Wikipedia and little blue men

3 blue-skinned men wearing black shirts.
Not these blue men; ...
A small maritime militia ship.
... these.

Open-source analyst Andrew S. Erickson's blog had an entry about the Chinese People's Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM), in which he notes other analysts calling PAFMM "little blue men"[a] and invited more people to do their own analysis and contribute to Wikipedia. He says:

Folks outside government looking for a way to enhance public understanding may wish of their own accord to update and enhance Wikipedia’s entries on "Maritime Militia" (now in English, Chinese, Japanese, and Czech)—which have improved significantly yet remain far from comprehensive or complete. It's easy to become a Wikipedia editor, by the platform's very design...

In sum, rarely is a topic so little recognized and so little understood (even now), yet so important and so amenable to research using Chinese-language open sources.

– B

Site(s) locked to editing after security error unleashes computer worm

See related content at News and notes

A recent security incident involving a computer worm forced the Wikimedia Foundation to temporarily put all wikis into read-only mode. The incident has drawn the attention of some tech-focused outlets, with Bleeping Computer reporting that "approximately 3,996 pages were modified", with the commons.js files for 85 accounts being replaced by it. In the same article, they also analyzed the code. — B,M

404 Media reports that AI Translations Are Adding 'Hallucinations' to Wikipedia Articles. The Open Knowledge Association (OKA) is a small Swiss nonprofit associated with the effective altruism movement and run by its main donor, User:7804j. OKA recruits and pays newbie editors from the Global South to translate articles into English using AI translation, raising questions about paid editing, and the proper use of AI. Recent community discussions, culminating at WP:AN, have instructed OKA to make sure they comply with WP:Paid and AI rules, and suggest that more suggestions may be coming. 7804j seems amenable. Other interesting challenges may include the community's ability to adapt its governance processes to new conditions while continuing to assume good faith. – S

In brief

Video

  • Jimbo, live from Indian AI summit: Jimmy Wales is optimistic about India's future in tech, but emphasizes the importance of keeping humans in the AI loop.
  • Who can you trust?: Reason magazine talks about Wikipedia's power 62, Trump, Grokipedia, Justapedia, and "Can you trust Wikipedia?" (video and transcript). Zach Weissmueller interviews Betty Wills, Larry Sanger, and Jimmy Wales. You might even think that Jimbo and Larry have finally come together for an online debate. But no, the interviews were separate, and carefully spliced, with the questions and accompanying commentary rerecorded.
  • Props from Craigslist founder: Craig Newmark (known for his Craigslist) interviewed on Lay of the Land podcast... Starting at 36:45, he talks about Wikipedia, which he says "maintained a great moral compass" despite the lure of billions to go commercial.

And finally

The San Francisco Chronicle reviews Annie Rauwerda's stage show "The Depths of Wikipedia". Rauwerda first appeared in this Signpost column in 2021, and most Wikipedians are likely to be familiar with her work. The Chronicle gives lots of good reasons why it's a great show, but it boils down to one simple fact. It's fun! In one segment Riley Walz was invited on-stage and answered trivia questions from Rauwerda.

I got a chance to see the show this week in Philadelphia. Like Walz, I was invited on-stage (for about five minutes) and then was quizzed on WikiTrivia. I demonstrated that I don't know anything about WikiTrivia, so Rauwerda showed several photos that I've posted of my dog, Graf. It was great fun and the audience seemed to enjoy it. COI disclosure – I received a free ticket. – S



Do you want to contribute to "In the media" by writing a story or even just an "in brief" item? Edit next week's edition in the Newsroom or leave a tip on the suggestions page.


← Previous "In the media"
Next "In the media" →
+ Add a comment

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.

Indonesian semi-block vs. Wikimedia logins

Can the Indonesian semi-block be bypassed by people using VPN for the login session? (It needs to be disabled later for editing, of course, due to VPN blocks). If so, it's really is not a major problem (for dedicated users, at least - and frankly, it's good to educate folks about VPNs; just slap a -p please use VPN on id wiki login/new account creation page and move on. Down with censorship!: P). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:32, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus:
  1. Login page now goes to auth.wikimedia.org, so they can't see the login page at all.
  2. From what I have read, encouraging Indonesians how to bypass the block may end up blocking further pages or projects as it is an offence in the country, and the country seems to employ deep packet inspection on the national level which can enable them to do so.
  3. WP:BEANS. The Indonesian editors know what to do. :)
– robertsky (talk) 04:53, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Number #3, exactly. We're not really say out loud things here. We do have intermediaries in each local communities, and they should disseminate "the way" to their members. For general public, we have placed some information in id:WP:FAQ#VPN (or #DNS) and other places.
But to answer your original question, VPN is not widely used in Indonesia, because the internet is generally free. (With major exception of reddit). I don't see in the future we will have millions of casual Indonesian readers would be bothered to use VPN just to register to wiki, and then to login each time. Bennylin (talk) 07:07, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"The Indonesian editors know what to do."
Use VPNs and bleep Jakarta Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 13:54, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure Chinese Wikipedia editors from mainland China can teach them something Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 13:54, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • I strongly encourage the Wikipedias of every Indonesian language to, at a minimum, put a notice on the main page describing the government's actions against the project. I also support the WMF's efforts to negotiate with the government to find a way for access to return without compromising the safety of editors. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:40, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. We welcome international readers to sign the petition. But we are also realistic enough to know that the government won't budge. We don't have any leverage on them. Bennylin (talk) 07:08, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Personally, I am just happy to see that the WMF has treated the threat to user PIA with enough gravity to adopt a combative posture this time. The org's level of capitulation to state demands for similar information in markedly similar circumstances during the Indian/ANI crises over the last two years was, and remains, deeply concerning. I wonder if the difference in approach this time around is entirely driven by the substantially larger group of users who would immediately be caught up by the government's demands, or if there has also been an internal reconsideration in the foundation's operational and legal offices of the cost-benefit analysis of cooperation as opposed to a public showdown. SnowRise let's rap 11:52, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Snow Rise as per a recent update (after reading a Google translation of the article), it appears WMF is on the process of getting the entire platform "registered" as an Electronic System Provider. "We appreciate the communication that has been established by Wikimedia and its commitment to follow up the registration process as a Private Scope PSE, and normalization of access to affected services will be carried out after the registration process is verified." according to the Director General of Komdigi's Digital Space Supervision. Original Indonesian statement: "Kami mengapresiasi komunikasi yang telah dibangun oleh Wikimedia serta komitmennya untuk menindaklanjuti proses pendaftaran sebagai PSE Lingkup Privat, dan normalisasi akses layanan terdampak akan dilakukan setelah proses pendaftaran terverifikasi." JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:44, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, my first impulse was to say "unbelievable", but after reflecting for more than just a few seconds, it's eminently believable that the current iteration of the WMF, which has shown no capacity for rising to the moment of a worldwide tide sweeping towards censorship, and no spine for standing up to government institutions once the threat of a national block is made, would unflinchingly (and without consult to the community despite the broad implications for both the safety and rights of individual editors and the viability of neutral an undiluted content on our projects) capitulate in this manner. I'd love to ping a member of WMF legal here to ask point blank if this means they will be complying with demands from the Komdigi for volunteer PII, but after the ANI affair, there is very little doubt what the result would be: hand-wavey downplaying of the immediate consequences of registering, vague, euphemistic pledges about their continuing commitment to the movement's traditional posture with regard to censorship and protecting contributors....and then as soon as those demands for office actions to control content and demands for user info start coming in, they will immediately collaborate, probably with little to no transparency to the community about the true scale of these activities, and outright gaslighting when some of the consequences begin to leak into the public view. These career nonprofit functionaries, somewhat well-intentioned but ultimately unable to see the forest for the trees or develop a cogent, competent strategy for drawing a line in the sand on these sorts of issues, are going to give away the foundations of this movement, one brick at a time. And sadly, all too few members of the community have yet to fully realize just how completely we've already sprawled across the tipping point. SnowRise let's rap 13:47, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Snow Rise Indonesian Komdigi recently blocked Wikimedia Commons, too. See Censorship of Wikipedia#Indonesia for the update. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:09, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Snow Rise see this for update. Block vs. WikiCommons lifted on March 25. Komdigi vlaimed it was a "false positive" by their system due to the system detecting "illegal gambling" content on the media archive site. Komdigi is still assertive, though. They urge WMF to register as soon as possible to not get caught up by the system flags or Indonesian filters. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:05, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • @JWilz12345:, I really appreciate these updates. Unfortunately, I doubt the recognition of the false positives by Komdigi will cause the WMF to in turn reconsider it's plans for registration, with all the attendant compromises of volunteer PII/security and content neutrality, now that said plan is in motion. If it's not too big a favour to ask, please feel encouraged to keep me abreast of any further developments you catch wind of. It's manifestly clear that we have entered an era wherein the WMF is not eager to divulge these activities and engage the community in a holistic response any longer. Frankly, this is frightening. SnowRise let's rap 05:08, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Swedish singer photos

Do I understand correctly that Zara Larsson publicly stated that she didn't like the photo of her as a young girl that was in the article about her and a Signpost author thought that it would be funny to include that photo in this issue of the Signpost as an "unrelated photo?" If so, that's incredibly petty and a bit disrespectful. It's also more than a little creepy to use a photo of a young person for this joke. ElKevbo (talk) 04:36, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I often encounter this. Athletes, actors and other people concerned about their image want the professionally-created publicity photo illustrating their page, not the crap one someone took with an iphone. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:49, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"If that makes the human race sound like a bunch of red pen-wielding know-it-alls with far too much time on their hands, a more hopeful reading is that we have a stubborn inborn belief that truth exists, and together we can find it." -- SF Chronicle article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:49, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I understand the dispute that occurred in the article. But I don't understand why someone thought it appropriate to use the same photo in this Signpost article. It's not funny and it's not clever - it's petty. And it's especially offensive that it's not labeled as "The photo to which Larsson objected" or something helpful and honest but as "unrelated." This certainly skirts the edge of WP:BLP as a general principle. ElKevbo (talk) 05:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The photo that Larsson objected to is not the childhood photo, but this one, while the one Larsson prefers has been appropriately donated/uploaded with a free licence. CMD (talk) 05:03, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification! ElKevbo (talk) 05:09, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I liked that quote. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:14, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@ElKevbo: I captioned the photo in question; if you are interested in my lowkirkenuine opinion on the matter, you may wish to read my comment at the RfC where I describe the refusal to use her preferred image as a "bizarrely minor quibble" consisting of "eight million dust-mote-sized nitpicks" meant to "passive-aggressively antagonize the subjects of our articles" and that I am "embarrassed to be an administrator here if we are proud of doing this to somebody". jp×g🗯️ 08:07, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I just stumbled upon Previous Signpost on Guy Standing (via Tor's Cabinet of Curiosities) and had a good laugh. Bennylin (talk) 11:22, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

AI

More on photos

  • While I'm glad that the Pitchfork article included useful information for artists wanting more flattering photos in their articles, I hate that they led the 2nd paragraph with the sentence Musicians have long suffered in silence at the capricious whims of Wikipedia editors. Artists – and the general public – need to understand that we are seriously limited in what photos we can post due to strict licensing requirements. As a former pro photographer, I recognize that most people do not understand licensing terms or copyright law, at least in the US. But I'm glad that Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons take these issues seriously. Funcrunch (talk) 17:15, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    "Capricious whims"? Yuck. Why not "caprice". See, they need copyeditors. - Bri.public (talk) 18:14, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, they need professional photogs and/or an agent or publicity person who can understand the copyright requirements we've set, and who can pay for a pro photog to take a good photo and upload it to Commons with proper permission. If they do this - which should be a minor expenditure of money and effort to most professional entertainers - their problem is solved. @Funcrunch: - how much would a good pro photog charge for the service? (make the attribution to the photog) If we could convince the WMF to do an information campaign to contact agents, send out a few press releases, our problem would be solved too. Smallbones(smalltalk) 21:27, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure what the going rate is for professional portraits; my specialty was event photography, and I failed to even come close to making a living at it, so I'm not the best person to ask :-) Though I have contributed a number of my photos to Commons and even got recognized for it, so there's that.
    In any case, I believe the WikiPortraits initiative is doing some good work in creating freely-licensed, high-quality photos of subjects. Funcrunch (talk) 02:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a professional photographer on here/commons who uploads photographs of celebrities on requests of editors. I cant remember his name, but he uploaded couple of photos of pornstars on my request. —usernamekiran (talk) 13:04, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is a joke going on internet since a very long time: "Wikipedia editors use most unappealing photo of living person, and update it to a good one as soon as the person dies." I believe we should make this joke true/a fact. Especially for the articles with paid editing, or who "call their fans for help" or try to meddle with article in any manner. —usernamekiran (talk) 13:04, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I think if your reaction to this is "We have the power to punish these people using their articles, why aren't we using it?" you should be TBANed from BLP, frankly. Fundamental lack of respect for the responsibility editors have for their subjects. Parabolist (talk) 20:11, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I was being hyperbolic Parabolist, dont take it much seriously, and being aggressive over the text on something which wasnt directed at you, isnt healthy in general. —usernamekiran (talk) 23:23, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    He's kind of right, though. Is that really all we can aspire to? Making up a gigantic intricate system of rules, insisting they apply not only here but to every website on the Internet, and then sadistically punishing people for breaking them? Like, what's the thesis supposed to be? BLPs aren't allowed to say anything negative about the way we cover them, or we'll just trash them? The hyperbolic version is wildly unethical, but so is the normal version. Why even joke about it? In what universe is that not just, like, obviously bullying? jp×g🗯️ 21:47, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    There is nothing in WP:BLP that says that editors have a responsibility for their subjects. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:34, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If I was being pedantic, I'd said that the phrase "BLPs should be written responsibly" is literally in the text, but my actual point is that most of BLP is about our responsibility to the subjects of our articles. It's not a responsibility to be their advocate, defender, or stan, but to be honest and dignified and to respect the (minor but significant) power a writer can have over someone's life and image. It's why the policy is so critical. Parabolist (talk) 00:32, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, we have two choices. We can either aspire to be the greatest and most comprehensive reference work in the history of humanity, a magnificent monument to knowledge and understanding, reliable, trustworthy and impartial, or we can be a gossip tabloid that gets into beef with TikTokers and writes hitpieces about them to win Internet arguments. Impossible to tell which is a better use of time. jp×g🗯️ 21:49, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The Signpost: doing it for free since 2005.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2026-03-10/In_the_media&oldid=1346347934"