Wikimedia Foundation Transparency Report/June 2015/Requests for Content Alteration & Takedown/fr

The Wikimedia projects make up one of the world's largest repositories of human knowledge. With that much information, someone is bound to get upset by some of the content from time to time. While the vast majority of content disputes are resolved by users themselves, in some extreme cases the Wikimedia Foundation may receive a legal demand to override our users.

Wikimedia Foundation Transparency Reports
Wikimedia Foundation Transparency Reports

All transparency reports

Privacy-related WMF Policies

The Wikimedia projects are yours, not ours. People just like you from around the world write, upload, edit, and curate all of the content. Therefore, we believe users should decide what belongs on Wikimedia projects whenever legally possible.

Below, you will find more information about the number of requests we receive, where they come from, and how they could impact free knowledge. You can also learn more about how we fight for freedom of speech through our user assistance programs in the FAQ.

Threats to freedom of speech, writing and action, though often trivial in isolation, are cumulative in their effect and, unless checked, lead to a general disrespect for the rights of the citizen.

— George Orwell, Writer,  (1948)
JANVIER 2015 - JUIN 2015
Nombre total de demandes
JANVIER 2015 - JUIN 2015
Percentage of Requests Granted


JANVIER 2015 - JUIN 2015
Government requests breakdown
Italie University (Asserting Governmental Rights) 1
Pologne Politicians, Candidates, & Political Parties 1
Sri Lanka Military 1
Suriname Politicians, Candidates, & Political Parties 1
Royaume-Uni Crown Prosecution Service 1
États-Unis Politicians, Candidates, & Political Parties 2
Agence fédérale 1
Inconnu Politicians, Candidates, & Political Parties 1
JANVIER 2015 - JUIN 2015
D'où venaient ces requêtes ?
Pays Reçu
  United States 85
  France 23
  Germany 23
  United Kingdom 13
  Italy 6
  Russia 6
  Japan 5
  Czech Republic 4
  Korea 4
  Australia 3
  Canada 3
  India 2
  Netherlands 2
  Spain 2
  Austria 2
  Brazil 1
  New Zealand 1
  Turkey 1
  Serbia 1
  Poland 1
  Sri Lanka 1
  China 1
  Belgium 1
  Sweden 1
  Slovenia 1
  Norway 1
  Latvia 1
  Pakistan 1
  Romania 1
  Denmark 1
  Suriname 1
  Taiwan 1
  Peru 1
Inconnu 33
JANVIER 2015 - JUIN 2015
Quels projets Wikimedia étaient ciblés ?
Projet Reçu
Wikipedia anglais 105
Wikimedia Commons 23
Wikipedia allemand 19
Wikipedia français 16
No Project Named 16
Not a WMF site 10
Wikipedia japonais 5
Wikipedia italien 4
Multiple 4
Wikisource russe 4
Wikipedia espagnol 3
Wikipedie tchèque 3
Wikipedia chinois 2
Wikipedia hollandais 2
Wikipedia russe 2
Wikipedia coréen 2
Wikipedia catalan 2
Wikipedia portugais 1
Wikipedia polonais 1
Wikipedia slovénien 1
Wikipedia suédois 1
Wikipedia arabe 1
English Wikispecies 1
Wikipedia roumain 1
Somali Wikipedia 1
Wikiquote danois 1
French Wiktionary 1
English Wiktionary 1


Copyrighting Facts

  • Période : Mai 2015
  • Story: A user contacted us to express concern about an English Wikipedia article on a famous work of art. They wanted to remove a single sentence, on the grounds that the sentence infringed their claimed copyright in a theory they had published some years ago. We explained to them that it is impossible to copyright an idea or a short statement of fact. They could copyright their article, but not the theories contained within. If the community thought the idea was interesting or notable and complied with Wikipedia’s policies, it was free to include it in the article.

Citation indispensable

  • Période : Janvier 2015
  • Story: A self-identified religious group wrote us, requesting that we remove multiple English Wikipedia articles. As support for their request, they cited a self-publication declaring that the founder of their tradition is the ruler of the universe. We explained that the Wikimedia Foundation does not edit or curate content on Wikipedia, and that if they were concerned about inaccuracies, they could consult Wikipedia's experienced volunteer editors. We also directed them to Wikipedia’s policy on verifiability and guide to identifying reliable sources, so that they could better understand the standards applied to Wikipedia articles and permissible sources to cite in those articles.

Political Points

  • Période : Mars 2015
  • Story: A lawyer reached out to us on behalf of a lesser-known North American political party that was unhappy with edits to English Wikipedia articles about the party and one of its leaders. Her clients apparently wanted previous, more promotional versions of the articles restored in place of the later versions. To better engage in discussions with the community, we encouraged them to familiarize themselves with Wikipedia's recommendations on style and tone and the policy restricting use of promotional language. We also advised that one of the best ways to resolve their concerns is to engage with the community directly.