Wikimedia Forum

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

(Redirected from Metapub)
Jump to: navigation, search
←Discussion pages Wikimedia Forum Archives→
Shortcut:
WM:FORUM

+/-

Afrikaans: Die Wikimedia Forum is 'n sentrale plek vir vrae en besprekings aangaande die Wikimedia Stigting en sy projekte. (vir Metawiki besprekings, sien Meta:Babel.)
العربية: ميتابب هي المكان المركزي للأسئلة و النقاش المتعلق بمؤسسة ويكيميديا و مشاريعها (للنقاش حول ميتاويكي، انظر Meta:Babel
Brezhoneg: Wikimedia Forum zo anezhañ ul lec'h kreiz evit eskemm ha sevel goulennoù war diazezadur Wikimedia hag ar raktresoù stag outañ. (Evit kaozeal diwar-benn Meta wiki, gwelet Meta:Babel.)
Català: El Wikimedia Forum és el lloc central per a preguntes i discussions sobre la fundació Wikimedia i els seus projectes. (Per a la discussió sobre Meta wiki, vegeu Meta:Babel.)
Česky: Wikimedia Forum je stránka určená pro dotazy a diskusi o nadaci Wikimedia a jejích projektech. (Diskusi o Metě vizte na Meta:Babel.)
Deutsch: Das Wikimedia Forum ist eine zentrale Seite für Fragen und Diskussionen, die die Wikimedia Foundation und ihre Projekte betreffen. (Für Diskussionen über Metawiki, siehe Meta:Babel.)
English: The Wikimedia Forum is a central place for questions and discussions about the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. (For discussion about the Meta wiki, see Meta:Babel.)
Español: El Wikimedia Forum es un lugar central para las preguntas y las discusiones sobre la fundación de Wikimedia y sus proyectos. (Para la discusión sobre Meta wiki, ver Meta:Babel.)
فارسی: متاپاب محل مرکزی برای سوالات و بحث‌های راجع به بنیاد ویکی‌مدیا و پروژه‌های آن است.برای بحث راجع به متاویکی لطفا ببنید.متا:بابل
Suomi: Wikimedia Forum on keskeinen paikka Wikimediasäätiöön ja sen hankkeisiin liittyville kysymyksille ja keskusteluille. (Meta-Wikiin liittyvä keskustelu löytyy sivulta Meta:Babel.)
Français: Le Wikimedia Forum est un endroit central pour des questions et des discussions sur la Wikimedia Foundation et ses projets. (Pour des discussions à propos du Metawiki, voir Meta:Babel).
Galego: O (Wikimedia Forum) é un lugar central para preguntas e conversas sobre a Fundación Wikimedia e os seus proxectos, parecido á Taberna dos proxectos galegos (para conversas sobre o Meta-Wiki, vexa Meta:Babel).
עברית: פורום ויקימדיה הוא מקום מרכזי לשאלות ודיונים על קרן ויקימדיה והפרויקטים שלה. (לדיון על מטא־ויקי, ראו מטא:בבל.)
Bahasa Indonesia: Wikimedia Forum adalah pusat untuk pertanyaan-pertanyaan dan diskusi mengenai Wikimedia Foundation dan proyek-proyeknya. (Untuk diskusi mengenai Meta wiki, lihat Meta:Babel.)
Italiano: Il Wikimedia Forum è il principale luogo dove si pongono domande e si discute sulla Wikimedia Foundation e i suoi progetti. (Per le discussioni che riguardano Meta wiki, si prega di guardare la pagina Meta:Babel).
Magyar: A Wikimedia Forum a Wikimedia Alapítványt és projektjeit érintő kérdések és megbeszélések központi helye. (A Meta-Wikiről szóló megbeszélésekhez lásd a Meta:Babel oldalt).)
日本語: メタパブ (Wikimedia Forum) はウィキメディア財団とそのプロジェクトについての質問と議論の中心となるページです。（メタ・ウィキについての議論はMeta:Babelをご覧ください。）
ភាសាខ្មែរ: មេតាផាប់ (Wikimedia Forum) ជាកន្លែងសំរាប់សួរនិងពិភាក្សាអំពី មូលនិធិវិគីមេឌា និងគំរោងនានារបស់មូលនិធិនេះ។ (ចំពោះការពិភាក្សាទាក់ទងនឹងមេតាវិគី (Meta wiki) សូមមើល Meta:Babel។)
한국어: 위키미디어 포럼은 위키미디어 재단과 그 프로젝트에 대해 논의하는 곳입니다. (메타위키에 자체에 대한 논의는 바벨에서 해 주세요.)
Ripoarisch: Dat Wikimedia Forum ess è Sigk öwwer'et Wikimädia on dämm sing Projäckcher ze klaafe. (Övver't Metawiki sällver kallt mer op Meta:Babel.)
Lietuvių: Wikimedia Forum yra pagrindinė vieta klausimams ir diskusijoms apie Wikimedia Foundation ir jos projektus. (Apie Meta Wiki diskusijas žiūrėkite Meta:Babel.)
Bahasa Melayu: Wikimedia Forum ini merupakan pusat pertanyaan dan perbincangan tentang Yayasan Wikimedia dan projek-projeknya. (Untuk perbincangan tentang Meta wiki, lihat Meta:Babel).
Malti: Wikimedia Forum hu post ċentrali għal mistoqsijiet u diskussjonijiet fuq il-Fondazzjoni Wikimedia u l-proġetti tagħha. (Għal diskussjoni fuq il-Meta wiki, ara Meta:Babel.)
Nederlands: Het Wikimedia Forum is een centrale plek voor vragen en discussies betreffende de Wikimedia Foundation en haar projecten. (voor discussies over de Metawiki, zie Meta:Babel.)
‪Norsk (bokmål)‬: Wikimedia Forum er et sentralt sted for spørsmål og diskusjoner om Wikimedia-stiftelsen og dens prosjekter. (For diskusjon om Meta, se Meta:Babel.)
Polski: Wikimedia Forum jest miejscem na dyskusje i pytania dotyczące Fundacji Wikimedia i jej projektów. (Dyskusje na temat Meta wiki toczą się na Meta:Babel.)
Português: A Wikimedia Forum é uma central para questões e discussões sobre a Fundação Wikimedia e seus projetos (para discussão sobre o Meta-Wiki, veja Meta:Babel).
Русский: Wikimedia Forum — место для вопросов и централизованных обсуждений, касающихся фонда Викимедиа. (Обсуждения, связанные с Мета-вики, ведутся на странице Meta:Babel)
Shqip: Wikimedia Forum është një qendër për pyetje dhe diskutime mbi Fondacionin Wikimedia dhe projektet e tij. (Për diskutim mbi Meta wiki, shihni Meta:Babel.)
Српски / Srpski: Wikimedia Forum је централно место за питања и дискусије о Викимедијиној фондацији и њеним пројектима. (За дискусије о Мета викију, погледајте Meta:Babel.)
Svenska: Wikimedia Forum är en central plats för att diskutera och ställa frågor om Wikimedia Foundation och dess projekt. (För diskussioner om Meta wiki, se Meta:Babel.)
ไทย: Wikimedia Forum เป็นศูนย์กลางสำหรับสอบถามและอภิปรายเกี่ยวกับมูลนิธิวิกิมีเดีย รวมไปถึงโครงการของมูลนิธิ (สำหรับการอภิปรายเกี่ยวกับเมต้าวิกิ ดู Meta:Babel)
Tagalog: Ang Wikimedia Forum ay isang sentral na pook para sa mga tanong at usapan ukol sa Wikimedia Foundation at mga proyekto nito. (Para sa mga usapan ukol sa Meta-Wiki, silipin ang Meta:Babel)
Türkçe: Wikimedia Forum Wikimedia Vakfı ve onun projeleri hakkındaki soru ve tartışmalar ile ilgili ana sayfadır. (Meta viki hakkındaki tartışmalar için Meta:Babel sayfasına bakınız.)
Tiếng Việt: Wikimedia Forum là nơi tập trung những câu hỏi và thảo luận về Quỹ Wikimedia và những dự án của nó. (Để thảo luận về Meta wiki, mời xem Meta:Babel.)
Volapük: El Wikimedia Forum binon top zänodik ad bespikön eli Wikimedia Foundation e dotis tefü on äsi tefü proyegs valik ona. (Pro bespiks tefü vüki it: Meta, dabinon pad: Meta:Babel.)
中文: Wikimedia Forum 是讓大家提出有關維基媒體基金會及其各項計劃的疑問和討論的地方。（而有關元維基本身的討論，請到Meta:Babel。）
You can reply to a topic by clicking the '[edit]' link beside that section, or start a new discussion
[edit] Wikimedia Meta-Wiki
This page experimentally allows language localisation.

Contents

[edit] Global userpage

I was thinking today that a global userpage function would be really handy for global users. Based here on Meta, one could design a "global" userpage that would appear as a kind of default userpage on every project that a given global user has not specifically logged in to, has edited, or has previously created a userpage on. For instance, if I were to create a global userpage, I'd make mine a redirect to my meta userpage:

"[[m:User:Anonymous Dissident]]"

I think this could be very handy; personally, I'd make all of my user pages on projects I don't edit on much be simply a redirect to my meta userpage anyway, but I'd have to do it manually, so this would be a very useful functionality for anyone in the same state of mind. Thoughts? --Anonymous DissidentTalk 10:35, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Support, if it is a default page, which appears on accounts that are merged (auto or manual, not on all 745 ones), and that I can simly change them. For redirecting it would be great (I am sure, many users would use them for 50 KB selfpromotion, but you can not avoid this...), -jkb- (cs.source) 11:13, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
This is interesting. I have userpages on something like three dozen projects and they are mostly very similar.; I'd have more if creating them were a bit less tedious. I use subpages for different chunks of the page and pull them all together with with transclusion in the userpage proper. I think what this proposal basically entails is cross-wiki transclusion. Enabling that would be a truly great feature. I can think of several possible issues, so limits may be appropriate. Please, please, please, allow user-subpages, too. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:24, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I strongly support this idea, although how about the choice to choose what page is mirrored? I have some different content on my enwiki and meta userpages but would definitely create one in a meta user subpage e.g. a box in Preferences which says 'Mirrored userpage: User:E/mirroruser'. It's worth looking into and would be very helpful. — E talk 12:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I don't think this is an appropriate use of resources, though I agree that user pages should by default have a soft-redirect to the home wiki of the global editor (as that is what most people do). Though that would require the ability to choose one's home wiki I suppose. Conrad.Irwin 22:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
"appropriate use of resources"? Care to expound on that? --Anonymous DissidentTalk 00:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Interesting, and good idea. Support: Assuming it is, as said above, only the default, which can be changed simply by editing the local userpage. - Rjd0060 23:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I have similar thoughts. I think this is quite easy as long as the function of global redirection is enabled. People can choose which wikis they like to host their usepages. Most wikipedians contribute on the wikipedia by default. --Phlyming 02:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Be warned that MANY user pages uses a lot of templates that are speciic to one site and will not work on another; don't forget also the case of links that don't work identically (different namlespaces, collisions and disambiguation pages); in addition, they also use interwikis to another project where the same user page will not make the interwiki link work as expected (due to something I consider a bug, e.g. "w:en:apple" would work on French wikipedia to link to the English fruit, but not on English WP, and "w:apple" on EN.WP would not work correctly on FR.WP where it would give the page for the computer manufacturer. Having common pages and templates is really too much tricky.
Some more ideas:
  • On the opposite, having common preferences set automatically from the global account would allow reimporting automatically a few things like the user preferences, until the user starts creating content, where the preferences will be set locally and registered, then modifiable locally on each project.
  • In addition, there could exist an option in the User preferences that will explicitly reimport and overwrite these items.
  • Finally, user preferences are currently edited using only the configuration panel in the special page. However these preferences should have an history that can be ret by the user itself, to possibly revert a temporary change.
  • Another thing to add in the user preferences profile: the babel wikicodes and levels (that are sharable). When using {{#babel:...}} the list would be prefilled with items from the global user preferences, and will appear at the top, then other items can be used only to override some levels when they are of the form "<recognized-language-code>-<number>", or to add other items specific to the local wiki.
  • Note another related bug: the <languageslist/> is currently not sorted at all! This combobox is almost unusable: too hard to find any language in it!!! See for example the home page of Betawiki...
90.45.93.218 06:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I think a page managed from meta as a default (and modifiable) userpage for a global userpage is a good idea. seresin (¡?) 06:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Support This is a good idea. User pages may use some specific models which must be available on Meta. We also may have global monobook personnal scripts --DavidL 14:43, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Agree with DavidL, if a global userpage is activated, I think that a global .css/.js-userfile would be a very good idea. //Moralist 13:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Support - Another great idea brought to you by Anonymous Dissident (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 13:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

  • Please look at bugzilla:14759 "Make pages in User: namespace transparent to meta:User:". guillom 13:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the link guillom (talk · contribs), this would be quite useful IMO if this actually goes through and it looks like there is some progress. Perhaps we should post a note about this with a link to bugzilla:14759 at community locations on other wikis? Cirt (talk) 14:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Support strongly. Daniel (talk) 09:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Support This is a great idea. However there's one problem with it. How will it work with multiple userpages in different languages. Sure you can have a global userpage, but how will the wikis tell which one's is in that wiki's language. But, it's not really a problem with me because I only speak English so I support. Techman224 19:59, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Support It'll be easier to maintain the userpage on the home-wiki rather than doing it manually on each wiki-sites which is rather time-consuming if someone has something else to do. Dark Mage 20:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Support What a very good idea! :-) fr33kman t - c 20:12, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Support - it would save a lot of time copying and pasting sometimes. It Is Me Here 13:23, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I am a bit worried:
  • Will a default global user page overwrite the user pages that I have already set up on some wikis? I don't fancy rewriting any user pages. Would the default user page turn up automatically on any wiki I happen to visit just once? I don't want to leave the impression that I am an active user on a wiki through having unintentionally created a user page. If we could choose by tick boxes which wikis would be covered by a default user page then would this issue be solved?
  • I usually use different user preferences on the different wikis covered by my global account, especially whether to receive e-mail notification of changes to pages on the watchlist, and the default language of the wiki. I quite often change the default language on a wiki back and forth to help with translation work. I would prefer not to set global preferences at all. Would it be possible to opt out of a global preferences system? Lloffiwr 18:14, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alternative: The WikiEditors Wiki

(Or some such name)

Personally, (and especially with all the new global permissions and such), I think that it would be far better to have all userpages on a separate wiki.

This would deal with quite a few issues.

Consider Wikipedia: en:wp:Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. (Or Wiktionary, or any of the other sister projects)

Any page that doesn't directly serve each project can thus be removed/transwikied from each project. (This also deals with the google question concerning userpages and all other "non-project-specific" pages.)

And on the converse, this removes the need to have to keep an eye on over a dozen user talk pages. (user and user talk namespaces would be disabled on all wikimedia projects)

And implementation for linking? No problem, just set the wiki shortcut to be User: - thus, no need to change any pages to update links, they'd still automatically point to the users' page or talk page. (And User talk: to point to user:talk:).

And it also removes the "appearance" or "feeling" of separate projects. I would presume editors would be more likely to help out at other projects if this seeming wall which highlights too concretely the differences between them. When in truth, they are all wikis.

One thing this would likely eventually cause (however) is global behavioral guidelines/policies.

Content inclusion/disinclusion and naming and other style guidelines may be determined "locally", but editor behavior (such as civility and socking) will likely need to be drawn up globally. (And in some ways it has already I believe?)

And note, just to dispel any possible confusion, this proposal is not suggesting a change to anyone's wiki preferences, edits, watchlists, contrib history, or anything else tied to the user's username. This is merely proposing moving pages to this proposed wiki.

All-in-all, I think that having an editor wiki would be not just a "good thing", but a great thing.

(And for all I know, they may be working towards this already.)

Thoughts and/or concerns are welcome. - Jc37 02:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't like this idea. For example I've written an English language page on en:User:Alpertron but w:es:Usuario:Alpertron is in Spanish for obvious reasons. Which would be the language used on that editor wiki? Notice that most people do not understand English. Best regards, Alpertron 14:05, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I supp00ort this, presuming that <div class="multilingual"> and such can be used to make it simpler for different languages. Also, would the new messages bar appear on say, en.wikinews, when someone sends me a message on the editors wiki?Anonymous101 08:20, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Cross-wiki new talk notification has been on my to-do list for quite some time. Werdna 01:34, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merging importers and transwiki importers

Importers and transwiki importers are similar group permission. I can't understand why these permission should be seperated. I suggest merging Importers and transwiki importer to Importer. Thanks.--Kwj2772 06:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

  • I Support this, although they are slightly different, they are very similar so it makes sense to make them the same user class. If someone can be trusted to imp0ort from other wm wikis I don't see the problem with them importing from other wikis. Anonymous101 08:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Support the merger.--Jusjih 17:13, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New feature request

When the next software update goes online, would it be possible to have a feature which allows moving sections or subsections up and down a page without having to edit the whole article? I am thinking of something in the style of php forums, where you can move subforums up and down with a simple click on the "Up/Down" button. I guess it might be a little risky at first because it could cause easy vandalism, with vandals being able to move sections with one click, but this could be solved by restricting the feature to users with a certain number of editions/who have been around for X days. Is this feature possible? Leptictidium 18:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I can't really say that I've had many times that I've thought "man, that'd be an awesome feature". PHP forums are a totally different beast in comparison to MediaWiki, so you can't just compare certain features... EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


I have found that the pronunciaton code is too complex for me to truely learn, especially due to the non-english words. It would be nice if some genius could write a piece of JAVA code that will actually convert the pronunciation symbols into their respective phonemes, and say the word when clicked on.

ks4au 14 Nov 2008

[edit] Cloud computing and the Foundation

Have you ever thought about Cloud computing? We have more than 400 machines which are not all the time working under full load. Why not open our machines for the public? I don´t know which price modell would be the best, maybe a time-dependent modell? Earning some money with our machines might not bad. By the way, is it cheaper to buy new machines or to rent a place to run MediaWiki at peak-time, maybe from Amazon Web Services. --195.4.207.131 17:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Another possibility is to start an non-profit cloud. --Goldzahn 00:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

If the servers had spare load, we'd be using it to refresh query caches, or make a database dump, or allow code that uses up more server time, or something else foundation-related. Werdna 08:49, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

This could perhaps be developed more at Wikiversity. Emesee 19:23, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The d: prefix should go to our dictionary.

→ Talk:Interwiki map#Wiktionary

[edit] Bugzilla logo change

I don't know whether this is the right place but I think the Bugzilla logo need to be changed. I propose this logo:

Meta-Wiki-like Buzilla logo

In higher resolution, the upper edge looks imperfect, it's due to improper drawing technique, I didn't edit it to make it looks like it was eaten by bugs. Anyhow, this is just a suggestion. Kurniasan 21:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Bugzilla isn't a democracy. ;-) Try bringing this up on wikitech-l. Cbrown1023 talk 23:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

It's okay, I'll pass. :) Kurniasan 23:16, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I rather like it, though I think the antennae need to be thicker so they show up more if the image size is reduced. Seems worth suggesting to the developers. WJBscribe (talk) 00:52, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
I personally don't mind it, I'm just concerned that this kind of design involving the red, blue and green might begin to become confusing, what with Incubator, the WMF logo and Meta-Wiki. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 10:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, probably it'll be confusing if this design is used. But I think they should to come up with a new logo. The current logo looks more to a mascot. Plus their current favicon is a real bug. Kurniasan 13:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Is there anyway to adapt the MediaWiki logo, the flower, to include some bug theme or software patch theme? MBisanz talk 13:32, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Bugzilla is not just Mediawiki issues though. I do like the idea of having a bug incorporated into the logo as it happens. Majorly talk
Bugzilla works only for Wikimedia or all Wikis using MediaWiki software? Kurniasan 23:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
MediaWiki is developed for Wikimedia projects. Bugs submitted to bugzilla to get fixes will be fixed in MediaWiki, which presumably other sites will update. Majorly talk 23:40, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
This logo could be used, but it'd be better if we had a different colour schematic. This shouldn't be a violation of any kind; after all, many of our logos diverge quite decisively from the green, blue and red. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 08:21, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
It needs longer antennas. OhanaUnitedTalk page 12:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Adorable. Durova 09:50, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

It needs legs, otherwise it just looks like a weird WMF logo. I was thinking of a cockroach or similar bug in square brackets in the same way as the current MediaWiki logo (possible starting image). MER-C 09:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
That's too discusting. Kurniasan 13:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Longer and thicker antennas, few legs and whole in yellow-brown color and it is there.--Kozuch 21:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Here's another design... Kurniasan 14:32, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I like it :) --Aphaia 16:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Enable mw:Extension:Nuke on WMF wikis by default

I have moved the discussion to Metapub/Nuke extension on Wikimedia. Please continue the discussion or op-out there.--Hillgentleman 03:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Table sorting broken?

Spaces None Comma Period
1 46 934 46934 46,934 46.934
2 35 613 35613 35,613 35.613
3 3 013 3013 3,013 3.013
4 713 713 713 713
5 11 000 11000 11,000 11.000

The numbers with spaces for thousand separator was being sorted numerically and now is sorted alphabetically. Did something change in the javascript? Allowing for "spaces" instead of "commas" for the thousand separator should be supported, right? --MarsRover 02:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

You can use an utility template to properly sort the numeric columns. See for example the template w:fr:Modèle:0 on French Wikipedia, in action on this page where it is also used to "hide" sort keys for text. You can see other examples by looking at the list of pages that use it (there's not a lot of them, but it is used on some statistics pages, or in this High Quality French Wikipedia article w:fr:Pois for the top 10 producings countries.
Another technic is used to sort texts correctly ignoring accents that are present in country names on this page, by hiding the sort key enabled in the templates for the country names when you set t=1 (t is abbreviation for "tri" in French , meaning "sort") in those templates: w:fr:ISO 3166-1.
Note: the template "hides" zeroes and digit grouping spaces that are also used to properly align the numbers, even if the column data is centered (with it, you no longer need to align the numbers on right, and you can also hide zeoes after the decimal separators, if they must not presented, in order to align the decimal separators.
This template is typically used for sorting columns numerically, even when they contain something else than digits (for example when there's a currency unit or another unit like inhabitants, inhabitants per km², ...) verdy_p 21:57, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
A more convincing example here: w:fr:Calvados (département)#Communes ayant plus de 10% de résidences secondaires
Unroll the block (click the "dérouler" link on the right) to see the fully sortable data table, and see how the numeric columns (with hidden zeroes, but still properly aligned figures) are sorted correctly with this template used on almost all pages about French departments for presenting demographic data. verdy_p 22:16, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Your example using Template:0 (already implemented here on Meta, but just extended to support more than just a single hidden zero (here it can accept separators like spaces, comma or period), the current default). note that centering works as well and still maintains the correct alignment of figures, including when there is a unit after the number :

Spaces None Comma Period
1 46 934 46934 46,934 46.934%
2 35 613 35613 35,613 35.613%
3 03 013 03013 03,013 03.013%
4 00 713 00713 00,713 00.713%
5 11 000 11000 11,000 11.000%

verdy_p 21:27, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

See how the datatable is also properly aligned in the Wiki code itself, allowing simpler edits of values.
Caveat: you can insert negative numbers, lexicographical sorting will correctly render all the negative numbers before the positive ones, but they negative numbers will be sorted in a reversed direction.
Interest: you can still copy-paste the content of the rendered data table in a spreadsheet or notepad: it will import the hidden zeroes and separators, and the speadsheet should still work with them; in a notepad, you will see the zeroes (they are not really replaced by spaces), but the data will also be aligned in your text file. verdy_p 21:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] German Main page on META corrupted

Hi, I hope this is the page to ask for help in this matter. I think some mediawiki-update caused Hauptseite to look funny. Is there somebody familiar with advanced formatting etc. who could make the box "Wikimedia META-WIKI" appear at the right side of the box "Neuigkeiten" as it used to do. That would be a great help since I failed changing it. :-( Thank you in advance and best regards. --Marbot 11:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I think I found the affecting change. Kylu 13:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I do not quite understand what you meant with your comment. However the problem fixed itself as miraculously as it came. Thank you anyway. Best regards --Marbot 20:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Add the "Rollbackers" group to the Simple English wikipedia and others

Hi, I noticed that there are no "Rollbackers" group on the simple english Wikipedia. I request that the group should be added. Also, if there are no "Rollbackers" groups on the other simple english wikis, I also request for them to be implemented as soon as possible. All of the other wikimedia project use them to prevent vandalism, and without the "Rollbackers" group, the only way to rollback is to have the global rollback permission (which is harder to get). Could someone repond to this. Thanks. Techman224 02:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

There is already a request for this; it simply awaits implementation.  — Mike.lifeguard | talk 03:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I also mean the other simple english wikis too. Techman224 00:36, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Erm...there's only one Simple English wiki. Daniel (talk) 00:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
I think he means Simple English Wikiquote, Simple English Wiktionary, and Simple English Wikibooks, in addition to Simple English Wikipedia. MBisanz talk 13:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
That's right. Techman224 01:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] OpenID

What about OpenID implementation accross WikiMedia?--Kozuch 16:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

It's been brought up before, try asking on wikitech-l. Cbrown1023 talk 20:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
And what is the status or what was the result of the discussion?--Kozuch 14:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The charge: catalans flooded a minor wikipedia

Fabexplosive (it:Utente:Fabexplosive), an administrator of the italian wikipedia, in an online newspaper (of 22-sept-2008), accuses catalans to have flooded the lombard wikipedia. Here http://www.dnews.eu/contents/pdfedizioni/22-09-2008_DNewsBergamo.pdf he said, pag. 11 : "Lombard Wikipedia? All written by catalans".

The administrator and member of italian Wikimedia Association also accuses: "the old administrators were not lombards but catalans" (pag. 11).

Fabexplosive is also a controversial administrator of the lombard wikipedia : Requests_for_comments/Lombard_wikipedia,_urgent_desysoping_and_unblock_requests

Paesaggix 20:12, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Without even looking at this beyond the surface, what would you have us do? This seems to me to be a non-issue.  — Mike.lifeguard | talk 02:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Since it is insinuated that I am a sockpuppet of Lombard, let me answer this one. What you should do? Look at this beyond the surface, of course. You refused to do so with zea.Wikipedia an now that project is dead (no content edits in a month). How many projects need to fall before you are willing to do something? Guido den Broeder 08:46, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rename to Forum

Per this. Is everyone fine with this? Please raise any objections now, because we have what seems to constitute a rough consensus on Babel. If no-one says anything over the next 72 hours, I'll make the move. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 13:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

As I have said and people have okayed before people will still be confused no matter which name you choose unless you include "wikimedia" and the current proposal should then be "Wikimedia forum". Hillgentleman 18:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikimedia forum is okay with me.--Kozuch 19:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Done. This was a huge move, and there are still pages to be updated. Any help with that is appreciated; I've likely missed some things. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 02:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Seems a reasonable move to me - less room for confusion than with "metapub". WJBscribe (talk) 20:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Logo changing question

I have aware that to change a logo for a WikiMedia project I have to go to Bugzilla. So I've report a bug to change logo for wiktionary:ms: and assigned it to Wikibug. But the logo doesn't change, and I don't know what I did wrong. Or it need votes or did I missed a step? So I wonder if someone could help since this is my first time using bugzilla. My bug is here: bugzilla:15771. Thanks Kurniasan 10:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, just wait. When a developer has time, they'll process the bugs and change your logo. You don't have to do anything more (unless they ask you for more information) and you don't need to get votes for something like that. Cbrown1023 talk 13:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the reply and information. Kurniasan 14:07, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Secure Portal

I just today discover that there is a "wikimedia secure Portal" but I didn't find anywhere an explanation what is it useful for. Which security it provides? for whom? Do secure portal crash less often than non-secure wikimedia sites ? Is it based on the same database ? Is it up to date as the pages it is mirroring ? Is there only a redirection ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ArnoLagrange (talk • contribs) . 21:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The only thing Google found for me is «What the heck is "secure wikipedia" and why can't I seem to find any information about it online?» posted 5 months ago, which "best answer" says : «it is true that there isn't really a decent page describing the secure server » Arno Lagrange ✉ 21:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
I suspect that it refers to the SSL (HTTPS) encrypted method of connecting to the site(s). It has serious problems and I don't even know where to report them. You can log in here:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/wiki/Special:UserLogin
Warning! BEWARE, that if you log in through the aforementioned link, there is a good chance that you will be redirected to non-SSL pages and anything you post could reveal your IP address and all content you read and submit.
Frankly, I think it should be disabled until it is fixed. —Danorton (talk) 18:22, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Interlanguage feature

It's an idea I have since more than four years. I wonder it is not yet realized. I think it would be a great simplification and there were a lot of advantages. Technically I guess it's not very complicated to concretize.

Instead of (handly or robotly) adding interlanguages links in each page, it would be more simple to have a iwiki.project.org domain where pages would contain the list of existing interlanguages links. iwiki pages must have a title. Then you only had to link from your language project to the iwiki:page and the database would be automatically updated: existing links would be added on your own page, and a link to your language page would be added to all the other linked ones. Example I am working on abc:wikitoto project, I create an article titled Arcturus. At the end of the page I simply add [[iwiki:Arcturus]] which links to the page in the iwiki:wikitoto which contain was :

 
 [[def:Arcturjus]]
 [[ghi:Arkturo]]
 [[jkl:Arcktury]]
 ...

saving my edit adds the link [[abc:Arcturus]]; all that links automatically will be displayed in each projects (abc def ghi ...) This feature could also make red links links to an iwiki page saying «This article doesn't exist yet in your language, but you can read it in one of the following languages and consider to translate it into your language». I'm sure such a feature has already be proposed and discussed, but I have no idea how to find such a discussion. Arno Lagrange ✉ 21:46, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

See bug 15607 and A newer look at the interlanguage link. Cbrown1023 talk 22:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
OK Thanks. The right place is A_newer_look_at_the_interlanguage_link Arno Lagrange ✉ 09:58, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disclaimers

Was the disclaimer of the wikipedia in english designed by the community or the foundation? Can consensus of users change it, modify or remove things told in it?

And what about the disclaimers at wikipedias at other languajes? Someone has or had to do the work of translating it to that languaje. Do they have to be translated in their entire extension, or can such users decide to translate the parts they like and leave the ones they don't?

Even more, is such traducted disclaimer the real disclaimer to be considered if some legal problem even arises, or is that the one in english, with the traducted one being just of informative purposes? Belgrano 14:27, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I believe it was created by a lawyer for the foundation, and that modifying it may be either not permitted or cause legal problems. So I think the answer to your second question Can consensus of users change it, modify or remove things told in it? is no. Anonymous101 08:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Anonymous101 is kinda right, it was originally written by Alex756 who was originally a part of the old legal department (he did work for the Foundation pro bono, not sure if he was an "official" Foundation lawyer or not). It is not necessarily official policy now, I suggest you bring this up on the foundation-l mailing list. That way people who have been around a while and know things can weigh in (also, our current lawyer is on that mailing list -- he will be able to help). Cbrown1023 talk 20:00, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cometstyles releasing classified checkuser information onto Encyclopedia Dramatica IRC

Does it violate Wikimedia Foundation policy if a checkuser releases a person's IP address, browser, operating system, .NET passport, and server information onto Encyclopedia Dramatica's IRC channel?

Cometstyles does not have checkuser access. Daniel (talk) 09:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Lol Grawp, you really ain't that smart ...--Cometstyles 10:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiGarden (proposal)

I don't know if there's already something like this idea out there yet, but over the last few weeks I've thinking about a project that describes garden and crop plants: WikiGarden and Wiki Crop. It could be like an interface, where you log in with your own account that has a description of your climate zone, soil type and other variables.

The pages describe garden plants or crop plants with their different varieties and cultivars etc, and every user can check boxes to rate the growth of this plant in their own garden. After a while, this could develop into a somewhat reliable sort of guide to see if a certain plant is fit for the circumstances that you enter into your search box. It could also have two discussion pages: one on the properties of the plant in question, and one on the editing of the page itself.

As I'm not much of a gardener or a computerist (just a contributor with an idea), I was thinking that maybe it could be interesting to start this up as a project of agricultural, horticultural and florists schools all over the world. Perhaps anyone knows teachers on schools who would like to participate with their pupils in setting this up. Anyone any ideas? --Satrughna 09:51, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

You may be interested in b:Horticulture and v:Bloom Clock. User:SB_Johnny might have some better ideas about your proposal, but at present I would say that subject area can be adequately covered by existing projects.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 13:46, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Mike! You've been a great help with this comment, I'll write to Johnny then Greetings, --Satrughna 16:12, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproof

Hi!

I saw a lot requests for new projects like gardenwiki or so. I have a new idea too:

What about a wiki that gathers studies, trials, evidence and so? Is wikisource the right place for that?

Some – maybe most – of studies aren't free to share under GNU FDL. So in this case we could write an article in wikiproof (wikevidence, wikiresearch, whatever) with a description: date, authors, theme, outcome... And very important: Maybe a vague declaration of significance (in the meaning of validity, reliability)?

Greetings, -- Serpens 07:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Case studies would be a great addition to any of our law textbooks.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikiversity might also be interested in this. Cbrown1023 talk 21:48, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Inactive bureaucrats on smaller wikis

As a steward, I have seen inactive bureaucrats on smaller wikis impeding stewards while they cannot always be easily contacted. This is why I would like to propose Bureaucrat/Removal for inactivity on small wiki as a global policy or guideline. For smaller wikis, I consider having all the bureaucrats being inactive for 60 days too long, so I propose reminding them for 30-day inactivity, then take back the bureaucrat flag if no response.--Jusjih 17:28, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Taking back flag for inactivity is normal in the meantime on many projects. But when we speak about small i.e. really small projects so I can understand that there could arise different problems when there is no possibility to contact the local bureaucrat. Thus I will fully support Jusjih's proposal. But, to speak in the words of Frank'N¨Furter „But maybe the rain / Isn't really to blame / So I'll remove the cause / But not the symptom“, inactive bureaucrats (on small wikis means as well that we have created projects that had no ability to be projets. Here we should start and be very carefull. -jkb- (cs.source) 18:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
I've been thinking about removal of 'crats from projects the last days, because of something similar; I got sysop on a project with "Hi, I'm a sysop on wikipedia and wish to do some reorganizing; can I have sysop-rights?". The project is too small to have "inexperienced" 'crats, and (in reality) my sysop-rights are now permanent (since there isn't any community to de-sysop me). Laaknor 19:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
In small wikis, there can be fewer bureaucrat actions than once in two months. There may not be a lot of wikis who want to sign up. It is easier to tweak the steward policies to allow stewards to work in such circumstances. E.g. if the action is simple then the steward can do it; otherwise and if there is no bureaucrat who is active, the steward can work with a group of trusted user, such as a long term established user or sysop. --Hillgentleman 01:50, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't see a need to remove the crat flag from them, just change the rule that says "stewards won't do crat work on projects with crats" to "stewards won't do crat work on projects with active crats". The crats can stay crats, but stewards can do the work if they're not around. --Tango 10:42, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Tango. We may determine what kind of crats are considered to be inactive (3 mths inactivity?) and place a one-week waiting for inquiry which may justify steward action to those projects. --Aphaia 11:31, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I would define no active crats as no crat actions performed within a week (maybe 2 weeks) of the request being made (and ready for a crat - if local policy is to have a week's discussion on an adminship request, then it's only a crat action request once that week is up). The request itself doesn't need to be dealt with within a week since there may be backlogs and it's not a stewards job to help a local project clear a backlog, but there needs to be a crat doing some crat work otherwise a steward can step in. (Possible alternative is to count a crat doing non-crat work as active on the grounds that it's the local project's problem if their crats aren't prioritising tasks correctly.) --Tango 13:22, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Reading this I would prefer Tango's solution that has some advantages. -jkb- (cs.source) 12:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
On a small wiki, a bureaucrat would appear inactive just because there aren't any requests. So, I agree that "inactivity" should be defined as no action from a bureaucrat when a request is two weeks old. Maybe it should also be considered to check not only the bureaucrat's use of rights but his wiki activity in general, if he hasn't edited for a long time he is more than probably an inactive user. If he is editing but not fulfilling requests then it could be another local wiki problem.--Geraki TL 19:45, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I support Geraki's proposal. Let us see an example on a small wiki: jawikinews. I'm a bureaucrat there and my recent crat actions were one in September, one in July and then one in April. During those days other crats were on wikibreak, so there is no other crat action. Let me know if I am an "inactive bureaucrat"? I don't think so myself - I may be a crat with little actions, but inactivity is another thing. I recommend to check rather their general actions - edits in general. --Aphaia 20:20, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
As long as only activity while the request is pending is considered, I don't see a problem. An active crat is one that is available to do crat actions, not necessary one actually doing them. You post the request locally and if, after a week or two, no crat has dealt with it and it isn't because they've been doing other crat actions and there's just a backlog, then a steward (when asked) can determine that there are no active crats and fulfil the request. --Tango 22:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't support your arugment which is based on an assumption every project fulfills the request within one or two weeks at most. On English Wikiquote for example, usurpation request needs a three-week reviewing. When you cannot understand fully local policies which you may not know their language, how can you safely assume one or two week waiting is enough to determine they are inactive? That is why I think their general activities, not crat actions, are to be measurement: otherwise you may breach their local policy unconsciously in the worst case. --Aphaia 16:32, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
I specifically said you don't start counting until the request is actually ready for a crat. Please read everything before assuming that other people are making assumptions... --Tango 18:39, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
I'd say this should be in the definition of 'action'. Explicitly refusing to fulfill a request is also action, in my opinion. When someone makes an usurpation request when there has been no review period yet, do you let the request just sit there for three weeks? Or do you add a short message, saying that it will not be decided before then-and-then? In the second case, this should be fine. In the first case, a bit more common decency would not be a bad thing.... - Andre Engels 13:05, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
In our case, most of requests are followed by a short message but it is not mandatory. Saying that it will not be decided before then-and-then is already given in the request page for usurpation, so while redundancy is decent here I don't think it a problem if a given request is uncommented until its fulfillment. Since it is no obligation for all projects they speak English, they may not find this discussion or other requests unnoticed.
Another case: I eventually found a "request" on a sysop talk page (it should have gone to its proper request page though) left unfulfilled just it was written in English until someone else who can understand English became active and then the request appeared not fitting the local policy. In the case how stewards could justify to process the request which may not be fulfilled according to the local policy which the requester doesn't understand or agreed? Without strict definition of crat actions and their "activities", I think it shouldn't be codified as proposed. --Aphaia 18:39, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I have seen a steward intervene to EN WQ and processed requests which hadn't had been submitted to the local request page but someone randomly coming around from another project claimed on IRC that request should have been promptly done. Those two guys didn't leave any note on the project. And then there were three active bureaucrats on the project. Later I asked that steward not to do it anymore but he denied my request and stated stewards could use their common sense and dealt with thing outside of local processes. In this circumstance I cannot support your idea since you give no way how to know "it isn't because they've been doing other crat actions and there's just a backlog" and while I got no answer from that steward nor ombudsman if such thing like ignorance of local project policy is acceptable. --Aphaia 20:00, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Aphaia, Your problem appears to have come from the steward, not the policy or process. I have suggested before that stewards work with trusted users (e.g. sysops or long term established users) if they can find no active local bureaucrats. Hillgentleman 04:36, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand - it's easy to know if the crats are doing other crat work, you just look at the logs... --Tango 16:42, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
PS You may also want to check their edits in case they have been refusing requests which, as Andre says, is a crat action but wouldn't appear in the logs. --Tango 16:57, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
In reality those stewards didn't think it easy to know or find active crats but preferred to chime in, without logging in or consulting the local policy. I talk from our experience. The reality suggests it is not easy for you stewards to know if local crats are active. Or you stewards find much easier to verdict they are inactive and do whatever they want ignoring local policies and processes. I cannot agree with you here. --Aphaia 18:47, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
As Geraki pointed out, it is no good measure that if the crats are doing other crat work. Please let me tell if your intervene, for instance, would be justified on JA WN case I introduced on the above where the previous legitimate crat work was one or more months ago. Then action log is no good measurement to determine if they are active. Here you try to impose steward rules regardless what each local project rules. It is not acceptable and serious potential breach of local project sovereignty. --Aphaia 18:25, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Firstly, I should clarify, I am not a steward. Secondly, you don't seem to understand my suggestion. In my suggestion, only activity while the request was pending (and "request" means a request ready for a crat, so after any discussion period or whatever has expired). If the request has been pending for a week and no crat has done any crat actions during that week, then it's fair to say there are no active crats and for a steward to step in. Your problems with stewards seem to be cases where the steward hasn't followed policy or established procedure - what the policy is is irrelevant in such cases, since it isn't being followed, so it's a disciplinary matter not a policy matter. --Tango 19:01, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

You don't give the way how stewards determine if a request is ready to do specially none of stewards understand project's lang. I have seen stewards ignore the local policy when it was in their language (eventually their mother tongue). Your proposal cannot be acceptable unless you show how you can assure they determine rightly local policies. I rather counterpropose steward must not intervene local requests unless 1) no local bureaucrat is assigned or 2) the latest editing active (not crat action you vaguely definied) of b'crats was 3 months ago or more. Editing should be measure not depending your arbitrary usable "crat action". If you think you may have no problem in any language which may be used on local projects, and I understand your position so, since you imply such local policies may be understood correctly regardless of their language, I rather want to discuss this matter in Japanese so other editors can join the discussion now. If you think it impossible or not feasible, do not bind local projects with the new policy which the local project community may be affected but written in the language they may not be used and moreover and stewards may not understand their policies in details vice versa. --Aphaia 21:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

If stewards can't interpret local policy and act accordingly for projects with crats how are they meant to do so for projects without them? A steward needs to determine that there is a consensus for the action requested, that's going to require some understanding of the language, I would have thought. Aren't stewards chosen for their language skills? --Tango 23:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
You recognize the situation wrongly. They are not chosen for their language skills. It is your wrong assumption. We have no stewards who are capable of Japanese, Korean or Vietnamese for example. On those projects steward actions are taken on demands. When the community reached a consensus someone who speaks English submits a request on meta in English. So it is assured to be within community norms and policies. But intervention without beking asked by the local community is another matter. Stewards have to keep the line between the local project community and their global workspace and not disturb the former with their arbitrary judgment and actions. --Aphaia 08:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I would agree with this action. However, the community itself should voice the problem out and this shouldn't focus only on small wikis. The three months notice is more than sufficient time for bureaucrats to respond unless he or she is having serious problems. Just do it in the right manner without abusing of power.

Maybe each removal should come with a seconded person from the community to verify.Perhaps there are inactive stewards out there too. Diagramma Della Verita 08:42, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome message templates to point to wiki projects in other languages

Over on en.wikipedia there are a four welcome templates in en:Category:Poor English welcome messages for when an editor appears to be writing in a language other than english, and is directed to the corresponding language project. I was wondering if it would be best to write a set for all language pairs of these where both of the languages and the WMF project could be interchanged. So each local would have a set where the originating welcome in one half, and the destination language on the other. I could only picture this being used from the same project to a different language (en.wikipedia -> es.wikipedia), and not both to a different language and project from another one (en.wikipedia -> es.wikibooks). -Optigan13 09:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

That sounds like a lot of templates. If you want to do it, go for it, but this seems like an awful lot of overkill to me.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

It looks complicated since there are so many languages and wikis involve. It might take time for that to become reality. What's the main purpose of that besides informing user that another wiki is available in their own language. Diagramma Della Verita 08:48, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election processes

A page to describe and compare the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election processes at different Wikipedias - please help to fill it out if you are proficient in one of the listed languages. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 14:02, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wiktionary

Not sure I'm am in the right place, but I'd like to suggest a press release about the double event of last week-end: both en.wiktionary and fr.wiktionary have reached 1 000 000 entries. It could be along these lines:

Le cap du million est franchi !

Wiktionary est un projet de la fondation Wikimedia destiné à définir tous les mots de toutes les langues, et cela dans toutes les langues. C'est un peu le dictionnaire de langue de Wikipédia. Il comporte déjà des projets par langue pour xxx langues. Les deux projets les plus actifs sont les branches anglophone et francophone (Wiktionnaire), qui viennent toutes les deux de franchir le cap du million d'entrées !

Le projet a besoin de nouveaux contributeurs bénévoles. Tous ceux qui s'intéressent aux mots (de n'importe quelles langues) sont les bienvenus.

Lmaltier 16:52, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with this, I tipped off Jay and Cary earlier that it happened. We'll see if it takes off. However, the Wiktionary community can also write a press release itself. See Wikiquote and Commons for examples. Cbrown1023 talk 21:29, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Writing something is easy, but sending it to journalists is another matter. Lmaltier 16:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I know that. What I mean is you can write your own and put it on Wiktionary. Then you can send it to Jay (with it all tidy and done), and he'll probably really think about sending it out as a Foundation press release. :-) Cbrown1023 talk 21:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I left a message (w:User:Jay) but I'm unlucky, he seems to be absent. Lmaltier 08:32, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
I think you were looking for m:User:Jaywalsh, who is a different user :) Daniel (talk) 08:45, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bot assistance

Can someone please either answer the following question or point me to the best place to ask it? I am interested in whether a bot can (efficiently) obtain a list of all interwiki links from a given wiki. (This information could be used to index articles on a small wiki by the titles of the equivalent English articles.) Thanks. Alan012 08:44, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Assistance on mt.wiki

I am a user on mt.wiki and currently all users accessing this wiki cannot browse the Special:RecentChanges page because it seems as if it redirects to Special:RelatedChanges. Can you please tell us what could have happenend? —Chrisportelli 15:59, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

I added bug report. Cbrown1023