Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/User analysis tool

Purpose of page
I've opened this page for a discussion of the proposed removal of the opt-in from the User analysis tool, for users who have edited the English Wikipedia. The tool is hosted by the Foundation and run by. The main purpose of the page is: (1) to invite stakeholders to offer background on the legal, technical, privacy and possible editor-retention issues; (2) to determine whether we need another RfC; and (3) if so, whether it should be here or on Meta, and what we should ask.

Background
The User analysis tool used to be X's edit counter. It was run by until he retired, and was hosted on the toolserver in Germany. Because it was hosted in Germany and (if I've understood correctly) European privacy legislation prohibits creating or posting these profiles without users' consent, we all had to opt-in for the stats to be collected and made public.

The tool presents aggregated data from users' contributions to create user profiles (monthly stats, to which namespaces edits were made, most-edited articles, etc). There are plans to expand it to include edit-summary analysis, edit analysis (don't know what that is), and files uploaded. See example of an opt-in (this was posted on the most recent RfC with 's consent).

Although the information is based on public data, its presentation makes certain things much easier to find, including in some cases a user's location and identity. The profiles can be misleading as well as revealing. For example, a user's most-edited article could be something he was briefly involved in years ago, giving a misleading impression as to overall or current interests. This could cause a problem for people who have edited contentious articles.

Within the last year or so, the tool was moved to the Foundation's servers in the United States, so the same privacy concerns no longer apply. When Soxred93 retired, Cyberpower took over the tool and renamed it the User analysis tool. He has initiated three RfCs to ask that the opt-in be removed. The first, on enwiki, was cut short and moved to Meta. The Meta RfC closed in July 2013 with no consensus to remove the opt-in. An enwiki RfC closed on 6 May 2014 and gained 57 percent support in favour of removing it, which was closed as consensus. The RfC was problematic in several ways (in my view); more about that below shortly.

In the meantime, I'm pinging several people who have discussed this. It would be very helpful if they could outline their views or offer information about previous discussions, so that everything is in one place. ,, , , , , , , , , . SlimVirgin (talk) 19:12, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Previous discussions

 * 1) 4–22 June 2013: X!'s Edit Counter (RfC), Village Pump, closed prematurely to move RfC to Meta (retain opt-in: 14; replace with opt-out: 1; remove opt-in completely: 37).
 * 2) June – July 2013: Requests for comment/X!'s Edit Counter, Meta, no consensus to remove opt-in (retain opt-in: 259; replace with opt-out: 26; remove opt-in completely: 195. Result: 40.6 percent in favour of removal).
 * 3) December 2013 – February 2014: Note on Labs Terms / Response to NNW and Alternative Labs terms proposal: per-project opt-in, Meta discussion about whether to introduce a per-project opt-in, no conclusion reached.
 * 4) April – May 2014: Edit Counter Optin (RfC), Village Pump, closed as consensus to remove opt-in from enwiki editors (retain opt-in: 108; replace with opt-out: 22; remove opt-in completely: 173. Result: 57 percent in favour of removal).
 * 5) May 2014: User talk:Philippe (WMF).

Privacy policies

 * Toolserver privacy policy: "Tools that allow profiling of individual user's activity (beyond what can easily be achieved directly on the public wiki sites) must only be applied with the respective user's consent (opt-in)." But it also says: "Edit counters are in general allowed. The information they provide is available from the public sites, though it would be very hard to come by using the web interface."
 * Foundation privacy policy
 * Data retention guidelines (also see talk page)