Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/MicroG

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:36, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

MicroG

(
)

Created by Yae4 (talk) and Newslinger (talk). Nominated by Yae4 (talk) at 16:07, 22 December 2019 (UTC).

  • @Yae4: This article is new enough and barely, barely long enough (1505 characters). No DYK credits, so QPQ-exempt. Hook is cited and interesting; I think more "interesting" hooks might be just confusing. The hook is precisely 200 characters, and I think it might be too long to comfortably read. Is it possible to add a bit more prose and shorten the hook a bit? Raymie (t • c) 17:26, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
@Raymie: ALT1 is a shortened version of the hook for comment. I have a couple ideas for adding to the article, and will look at that next. -- Yae4 (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
I like ALT1. Ping me when the article's been expanded a bit. Raymie (t • c) 18:53, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
@Raymie: A paragraph has been added to the history section. -- Yae4 (talk) 19:25, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
That definitely helps! This gets a tick from me. Raymie (t • c) 20:48, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Yae4, I think the main concern brought up in WT:DYK § Prep 5: MicroG is that the proposed hooks are not interesting enough to non-technical readers and readers who are unfamiliar with the inner workings of Android. Looking at the article before the recent changes, I would have proposed something like "... that Google bribed users who switched to MicroG with $2 to return to Google Play?" Unfortunately, that claim was tenuously sourced, and I had to remove it. Here are two hooks that may hopefully appeal to laypeople:
    • ALT2:... that MicroG allows users to access Google mobile services on Android without tracking their device activity?
      • Source: MicroG allows Android apps to access the same application programming interfaces (APIs) that are provided by Google Play Services [...].[1][2] Unlike Google Play Services, MicroG does not track user activity on the device, [...].[1]
    • ALT3:... that when the LineageOS operating system refused to integrate MicroG software, the project forked its own version with MicroG pre-installed?
      • Source: MicroG released "LineageOS for MicroG", a fork of LineageOS – a free and open-source Android-based operating system – that includes both MicroG and the F-Droid app store as pre-installed software. LineageOS for MicroG was created after LineageOS developers declined to integrate MicroG into LineageOS [...][3][4]

References

  1. ^ a b Gordon, Arielle (7 June 2019). "The Open Source Project That Keeps Google's Hands Off Your Android Data". Vice. Retrieved 19 January 2020.
  2. ^ Vaughan-Nichols, Steven J. (12 November 2019). "The /e/ Google-free, pro-privacy Android phone runs well -- for a beta". ZDNet. Retrieved 21 November 2019.
  3. ^ Leemhuis, Thorsten (4 November 2017). "LineageOS-Ableger vermeidet Google-Code" [LineageOS offshoot avoids Google code]. Heise Online (in German). Retrieved 19 January 2020.
  4. ^ "195284: [RFC] Add signature spoofing permission". LineageOS Gerrit. 10 December 2017. Retrieved 19 January 2020.
— Newslinger talk 14:34, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Newslinger, Thank you very much for all your article improvements and suggestions here. I like ALT2 best, but could it be worded a little different to avoid saying (completely) without tracking? Although the source says that, I believe it's not technically accurate. True, MicroG doesn't track (I hope/believe), but Google still tracks, if you use their services via MicroG, I believe. Let me know if you think that's too picky. If we could add a weasel word like "almost no tracking" or something, I'd be on board. ALT3 looks good to me as is, but has a little less zest, I think. -- Yae4 (talk) 15:52, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
​No problem! You raise a good point, although I tried to word both the article and ALT2 to avoid saying something untrue. In ALT2, the phrase "without tracking their device activity" refers only to MicroG, since "MicroG" is the subject of the sentence. Because "Google mobile services" is the predicate, the grammar of the sentence prevents the phrase from referring to Google mobile services. It's true that people who use MicroG can still be tracked by Google on the server side, and by any app on either the client or the server side, but the cited Vice article says that MicroG doesn't do any tracking of its own: "MicroG's various components strive to replicate the experience of a fully loaded Android phone without any of the data tracking". Does this address your concern, or would you still prefer to reword the sentence to avoid misleading the reader? — Newslinger talk 16:03, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
​ I think "with less tracking of their device activity" would be better. -- Yae4 (talk) 16:23, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Here it is:
— Newslinger talk 16:28, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Just remembered that the word "less" needs to compare MicroG to something, since the phrasing in ALT4 is not a fully supported attribution. I've also tweaked the wording for brevity:

References

  1. ^ Vaughan-Nichols, Steven J. (12 November 2019). "The /e/ Google-free, pro-privacy Android phone runs well -- for a beta". ZDNet. Retrieved 21 November 2019.

My guess is that the average reader will be more interested if the hook mentions some well-known apps. — Newslinger talk 02:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

​ I like 7 or 5, and agree 6 & 7 are probably more interesting to average readers, so I vote for 7. -- Yae4 (talk) 04:38, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
​Great! I've struck through the rest. — Newslinger talk 04:40, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
  • But ALT7 sounds like an ad for the product. ALT3 and ALT5 are more like hooks. (I realize ALT5 is written like ALT7; it would be better to begin with the phrase ... that MicroG allows users to access.)Yoninah (talk) 22:36, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Yoninah, I see no significant difference between "lets" or "allows". So if you prefer "allows", feel free to make that change. -- Yae4 (talk) 01:55, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
  • OK, we need someone to review ALT7. Yoninah (talk) 12:40, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Looks OK to me. Let's let this one go. -- Yae4 (talk) 14:04, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
  • ALT7 appears to be the best hook mentioned so far. My only concern is that the hook mentions and links to tracking and Google Play Services without those words appearing in the related paragraph in the Reception section where the citation is. Otherwise, the article is in great shape and I noticed no other policy issues. Flibirigit (talk) 03:20, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

5, 6 and 7 seem to be flawed as 2/3 apps mentioned (Telegram and Signal) are designed to work without Google Play Services or MicroG. Although I know it would require a source which I cannot provide, wouldn't it be better to mention apps which MicroG actually helps? P4t4t4t4t (talk) 01:27, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: Those words appear in the Features section now; however, I'm also less happy with ALT7 than I was before. Could we go back to ALT3? I was the only one who said anything against it before. Now I think the "average person" will have no idea what anything in ALT3 means, so it will be a mystery, and they will click to find out. What better hook is there? -- Yae4 (talk)
Since ALT5,6,7 are challenged by the comments above, I have struck those. Since there was no reason posted to strike ALT3, I have removed the strike. I will go over the article again and comment shortly. Flibirigit (talk) 01:32, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
I have retrieved the hook below (labelled ALT8) from Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know/Archive_165#Prep_5:_MicroG as proposed by Yae4, and added here since it wasn't included here. Flibirigit (talk) 01:51, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
  • I considered ALT8, but the article does not explicitly say one primary developer although it is implied. Flibirigit (talk) 02:56, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
ALT3 is approved. It is properly cited and verified. The article meets all other DYK policies. Flibirigit (talk) 02:56, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/MicroG&oldid=1212750524"