User talk:PiRSquared17

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Afrikaans | العربية | azərbaycanca | Boarisch | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | བོད་ཡིག | bosanski | català | کوردی | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | ދިވެހިބަސް | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | Nordfriisk | Frysk | galego | Alemannisch | ગુજરાતી | עברית | हिन्दी | Fiji Hindi | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Ido | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | ភាសាខ្មែរ | 한국어 | Limburgs | lietuvių | Baso Minangkabau | македонски | മലയാളം | молдовеняскэ | Bahasa Melayu | مازِرونی | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | occitan | Kapampangan | polski | português | Runa Simi | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | Soomaaliga | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ślůnski | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkmençe | Tagalog | Türkçe | татарча/tatarça | tzm  | українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 吴语 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/-

Contents

Welcome to Meta![edit]

Hello PiRSquared17, and welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). If you would like, feel free to ask me questions on my talk page. Happy editing! Huib talk 18:28, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Un fenomeno curioso ma che è meglio risolvere[edit]

Ciao, Caro Prq17, mi sono resa conto solo recentemente di essere stata vittima innocente di un fenomeno curioso: avevo transitoriamente smesso di tradurre qui in Meta-Wiki per dedicarmi quasi esclusivamente (oltre alla mia real-life) all' editazione di vari articoli sulla eml.wikipedia; contemporaneamente soffrivo di strappi muscolari alla spalla-braccio destri. Esito: la concentrazione e preoccupazione per l'accuratezza e delicatezza di quel compito mi astraeva persino dalla solita postura idonea e giusta della dattilografa che resta coerente con la propria fisicità... Torno qui a tradurre August-Highlights (in eml) e ritrovo in breve tempo la giusta irrorazione e mantenimento ottimale di braccio e spalla... W le traduzioni, allora! --Gloria sah (talk) 20:41, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

@Gloria sah: come va il tuo lavoro su eml-wiki? PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:22, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Che piacere che non mi dimentichi!! Grazie del Tuo gentile interessamento: direi che le cose là in eml.wikipedia procedono bene, visto che io e il mio (quasi unico) collega, il Mirandolese, sforniamo un paio di articoli ciascuno ogni giorno! Totale circa 4 articoli al dì, non male per gente che ha famiglia e lavora di giorno!! Nel frattempo uscite fuori anche alcune malelingue (pettegoli cattivelli), che, una volta capito cosa vogliono, è solo questione di fare tesoro anche delle loro critiche... Di tradurre verso l'italiano, nel frattempo mi sono stancata: mi sono registrata solo per tradurre verso l' eml-egl, poichè lì veramente manca la gente.. Te, sempre stessa posizione/ruolo, o hai diciamo fatto qualche scelta diversa e ulteriore? Attenderò di avere Tue notizie, Ciao, --Gloria sah (talk) 23:10, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Tech News: 2013-42[edit]

09:29, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

You have new messages
Hello, PiRSquared17. You have new messages at Vogone's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jianhui67 talkcontribs 11:29, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Cross wikiing[edit]

I'd be curious to hear what you've found to work. SJ talk  04:48, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

@Sj: Could you please be more specific? Do you mean importing/exporting to other wikis? PiRSquared17 (talk) 13:42, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes!
@Sj: Hi? :) PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:27, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello r \pi r that is precisely what I mean. SJ talk  00:44, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm still not completely sure what you mean, so I will answer a few possibilities rather than ask for further clarification. If I do not answer your question, please clarify.
If you mean importing pages, then I agree with some of Help:Transwiki, but find it out-of-date. Where I have access (i.e., on global sysop wikis and Meta), I usually use Special:Import to import pages, and usually only import the last revision, but really I have only used it a few times. If I don't have access, I just copy and paste, with a link to the original on the talk page on in the edit summary. According to the terms of use, with which I am sure you are well aware, a hyperlink (i.e., URL) suffices as attribution. Sometimes it is better to give a permanent link. The help page I linked before recommends copying the whole history, which is also an acceptable form of attribution. The part I don't understand is the transwiki log. I don't think I have ever seen someone create a "transwiki" page as described there. If you want to export a large number of pages, you can use Special:Export and then import the XML files with the 'importupload' right.
If you mean importing users or something like that, then see not my wiki.
If you mean creating user pages on multiple wikis, see Synchbot, my own solution, Hoo man's, and the current discussions on the Wikimedia Forum about crosswiki JS/CSS.
If you just mean switching between multiple wikis: I personally find this quite easy, but others don't. I use similar preferences ans scripts on most wikis, so I do not find it hard to go between wikis. Maybe because I am used to doing it so much.
PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:27, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I was in the neighborhood[edit]

...and thought I'd say hello. Been seeing a number of your posts at VPT over on enwp. You certainly know your stuff. I was dealing with some ABF over at enwp for a while and thought about moving to the smaller wikis. Which ones need the most help? Kind regards. 64.40.54.157 05:06, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, it depends on what you're interested in. If you want to stick to en-language projects you have several options, including these:
  • You might enjoy contributing travel information to Wikivoyage, the WMF's newest project.
  • The English Wiktionary is hardly small, and I've heard that its community can be harsh, but you might be interested in adding definitions and cleaning up formatting. (Alternative: the smaller Simple English Wiktionary, or non-Wikimedia OmegaWiki)
  • Wikisource could always use more transcribers/proofreaders (Alternative: any other Wikisource subdomain, as long as you can transcribe/read that language)
  • Wikiquote seems nice to me, but I don't have any experience there so I can't tell you for sure
  • (en)Wikinews has a small community, but it seems many new users are driven away by the admins. (in my experience, they're not as bad as some say.)
  • Wikibooks is a good project, and you can contribute to any topic you are interested in there.
  • Not a lot of people outside of academia edit Wikiversity and Wikispecies, but they seem to be doing fine.
  • Simple English Wikipedia. I don't know how they're doing recently.
  • multilingual projects (Commons/Wikidata/Meta). They all use English as a main language. Commons is the most controversial, but probably also the most well known. Wikidata is the newest and is now a sort of buzzword in the Wikimedia movement. Meta is old and needs a lot of help with organization.
If you're willing to venture outside the en-projects (and simple.*, sco.*, etc.), you will find the projects that really need the most help. See an incomplete list here or here (ignore closed wikis). Most African language projects fall into this category, as well as some projects in small European (nrm.wikipedia), Asian (e.g., bo.wikipedia), and Native American languages (e.g., chywiki). One way to help these projects is to join the SWMT. Some other projects that need help are the ones currently in the incubator:. I recommend you continue to edit enwiki occasionally even if you start to contribute elsewhere. If there are problems there, try to fix them rather than leaving. HTH PiRSquared17 (talk) 13:29, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
talkpage stalker swoops in to comment... I have recent experience (albeit only a couple edits) with wikiquote, and my correction was not insta-reverted. I did, however, take the precaution of looking at the edit-history of the page I was planning on changing, noting the talkpage of the admin who looked like they reverted the most vandalism, and then first asking permission on that specific admin's talkpage, with a couple words about the changes I was planning ("fix obvious spelling errors"), and a link to the page in question. They immediately told me to WP:BOLD, and I was, and my changes stuck, so probably the precaution was not actually necessary. If you have interest in famous wise sayings, wikiquote is pretty fun, and they need help -- the obvious spelling errors were in the Steinbeck page, which I would have thought would get plenty of wikiLove. (( Update a few minutes later -- small world.... the wikiquote admin that was perfectly cool with beginners was ningauble, see below, they just posted something about the wikiquote-bot-stuff, in the next section of this very talkpage. ))
   As for the rumors that wiktionary 'can be harsh' ...that is an incredible understatement, in my anecdotal experience anyhoo. When I last was there, a couple weeks ago (first time in years), I posted a definition of the phrase "strong silent type" as used in the movie industry (I needed to link there from an article here on enWiki), which I found wiktionary did not have at all, though dictionary.reference.com did have the entry (in the Dictionary Of Idioms or somesuch... but Wikipedia:WP:NOTPAPER, right?). Of course, when I tried to post my definition, it was rejected, because I had provided URLs as citations that attested the phrase was in use, and wiktionary bots detected my harmful action and disallowed it. Deja vu....
   So, I mangled the URLs, and submitted anyways, with a note to the submission-approving Wikipedia:WP:NINJA that was no doubt about to review my *new* harmful action, explaining that a bot made me do it, and predicting that they would revert without reading my self-referential complaint. Within a minute or two, the entry had been deleted as non-dictionary-ic (wikipedia deletionists have the advantage that "non-encyclopedic" is a real word... even if it is not usually indicative of a real reason beyond Wikipedia:WP:IDONTLIKEIT). I read the policy they cited, copied the summary sentence -- "dictionaries should have words and phrases people are likely to look up" -- then went to their talkpage, and complained, posting Wikipedia:WP:GOOG proof that "silent strong type" was very rarely used, except in one newspaper column on the sports page of Bozeman Montana, whereas "strong silent type" had fourfold as many hits, 350k or so. The sum-of-parts reversion was just flat wrong.
   Yet, the deletionist never even responded. I specifically asked them to visit me on enWiki so I would hear about it. Actually, let's just check.[8] As of today, two registered-account wiktionary users have chimed in, to say they agree with me... but they DID NOT then bother to re-create the entry. Recommend staying far away, unless you have vastly more patience than me, or unless you are extremely fluent in a language where wiktionary very badly needs help, and can become an admin yourself in short order.
   The problem over there is not just one bad admin -- in fact, I actually think SemperBlotto tries quite hard to be a *great* admin, having seen their name before; they are pretty famous over at wiktionary, and pretty fair. (Some other admins(weasel words) at wiktionary *are* worse unfortunately.) That said, wiktionary folks in general, including even otherwise-very-good admins like SemperBlotto, are just flat not interested in Wikipedia:WP:RETENTION... trying to find a talkpage citation for my unsourced-anecdote (now elided since I could not source my old-school harshness-of-wiktionary anecdote from a few years ago), I ran across this unwritten policy on beginners, from back in 2010.[9] I'm worried wikipedia is starting to have the same unwritten rule, despite Wikipedia:WP:BITE and pillar four. 74.192.84.101 02:41, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
I don't really know how to reply to that. The English Wiktionary has confusing rules and strict admins, but I find that its content is very useful. The English Wikinews has also had a lot of controversy about its community. Why don't you start contributing to a few projects (e.g., Wikisource and Wikiquote) and see which one is the friendliest? By the way, if either of you ever have trouble with AbuseFilters or other discrimination against unregistered users, feel free to ask me for help. (74.192: although the section below from Ningauble is about implementing an AbuseFilter, I think you'll be happy to know that I opposed their discussion on implementing automatic blocks.) PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very kindly, πr2. I always appreciate your input and am always amazed at your technical knowledge. I have about a decade at enwp and things have changed drastically in that time. I'm getting burned out with it, but I always find so much work that needs to be done there that I'll probably always contribute something.
Thanks very much for the heads up, 74. I must say I was shocked after reading some of the links you provided. I've never contributed at Wiktionary, so it's good find out this stuff before I try. I've been doing little bits here and there at Wikiquote for about a year and they seem to be a friendly bunch of volunteers. I actually suggested an edit filter at q:WQ:AN#Edit filter maybe over the summer, but that was for repeating characters. It didn't get a response, so I don't think I encouraged the recent edit filter discussion.
I appreciate the input from both of you. I guess I'll wander around some of the smaller wikis and see what I can see. Thanks for the help. 64.40.54.76 05:07, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Spambots at Wikiquote[edit]

You have e-mail re. your offer to help at q:en:Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard. ~ Ningauble (talk) 21:48, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikivoyage/it#Lingue[edit]

Have you any idea on why the column lingua is still in English, and ...this is THE question... why Italian it has been converted into Hebrew?

I've tried to fix it but I don't know where to put my hands.

Let me know, --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:51, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

@Andyrom75: Hello! Although this was fixed in the main Wikivoyage article a while ago, the changes have not been automatically applied to the translations. I fixed this by null editing one of the translation units of the /it page: [10]. Hope this helps. PiRSquared17 (talk) 12:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Gosh! Easier than I've tought! :-D I'll check & fix the other language versions that have the same issue. Thanks, --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:35, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Oops: just noticed that I can't edit them. Could you do it? --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:38, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
For your convenience I'm adding here the list of the page that needs to be fixed:
Please let me know if you can fix it. Thanks, --Andyrom75 (talk) 14:33, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Tech News: 2013-43[edit]

09:58, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Question on time/date templates[edit]

I have time/date templates on two of my user pages:
w:en:User:StevenJ81
w:simple:User:StevenJ81
When I go to the one on simple, I always see an updated page when I go to it. When I go to the one on en, I do not. (I am signed in, and using https.) Any sense why one is automatically updating and one is requiring a manual purge? (The en used to work correctly, I think.) Many thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:01, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

@StevenJ81: Are you sure it always updates on simple? It still says 1:07 pm for me. I had to purge your userpage on enwiki to get it to say "26 Cheshvan 5774". I don't know the details of caching on Wikimedia sites. PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:18, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
It does at least the first time I go in a session. Not a big deal; just wondered. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:25, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
StevenJ81: This is hard to reproduce and diagnose. :/ I'll look into this more tomorrow. You might get a better response from the Wikimedia server experts in #wikimedia-techconnect or maybe even on w:WP:VPT. PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:36, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
I'll give those a try. Thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:58, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Unlock the Secrets of Wikipedia Zero/Video (South Africa)[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de français, italien et lituanien sur Meta. La page Unlock the Secrets of Wikipedia Zero/Video (South Africa) est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici:

La priorité de cette page est moyenne. La date limite pour traduire cette page est 2013-11-30.

To unsubscribe from translation notifications, uncheck the boxes on this page.

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 22:50, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

luri lrc translation[edit]

Hello
so thanks I'm luri translator not arabic translator and unfurtunatly luri language doesn't support in meta.wikimedia.org
I have a question: how could enable luri lrc in meta wikimedia for translation? could you help me please?
I'll wait for your answers !!! lrc lori (talk) 02:02, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Wikimedia Highlights, September 2013[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de français, italien et lituanien sur Meta. La page Wikimedia Highlights, September 2013 est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici:



Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from the month of September. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, project village pumps and (for some languages) mailing lists. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, ask them here. You can manage your subscription here.

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 10:01, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Technical problem[edit]

Hello I'm on Bugzilla does not change anything it is automatic. if you do not mind please let them know about it. -- Дагиров Умар (talk) 07:05, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Tech News: 2013-44[edit]

10:47, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

IRC[edit]

Hello,

Could you meet me on IRC tonight or sometime soon?

There are some things that need to be discussed.

Thanks,

Espreon (talk) 19:41, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Wikimedia LGBT sorting[edit]

PiRSquared17, I'm afraid I am still not understanding how to sort pages in Category:Wikimedia LGBT by subpage, then language, as opposed to just by language abbreviation. If you are able to help in any way, even just by showing me an example of what to do so that I know for future reference, your help would be much appreciated. Thanks for your consideration. --Another Believer (talk) 17:12, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

@Another Believer: It depends on how you want to sort.
  1. If you want "Wikimedia LGBT/Foo/fr" to show up under "Wikimedia LGBT/Foo/fr", just use the default sortkey.
  2. If you want to create a separate category for each language (e.g., "Category:Wikimedia LGBT/fr"), then use {{LangCat}}.
  3. If you want to sort by the "Bar" in "Wikimedia LGBT/Foo/Bar/fr", then use this as the sort key: {{#ifeq:{{PAGECONTENTLANG}}|en|{{#ifeq:{{SUBPAGENAME}}|en|{{SUBPAGENAME:{{BASEPAGENAME}}}}|{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}|{{SUBPAGENAME:{{BASEPAGENAME}}}}}}.
  4. If you want to sort by the "Wikimedia LGBT/Foo" in "Wikimedia LGBT/Foo/fr", then use this as the sort key: {{#ifeq:{{PAGECONTENTLANG}}|en|{{#ifeq:{{SUBPAGENAME}}|en|{{BASEPAGENAME}}|{{PAGENAME}}}}|{{BASEPAGENAME}}}}.
  5. If you want something else, ask me.
If you want me to mark it for translation and update the existing subpages, just ask. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:58, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for responding. I think at some point in the future the group might benefit from having pages separated by language, but for now I think it would be better to sort the Category:Wikimedia LGBT by subpage (or from your example, Wikimedia LGBT/Foo). Here the main "Wikimedia LGBT" and the "Collaborations" pages are grouped nicely together, but the "Activities" and "Communications" pages are all over the place (sorted by language). My hope is that all like pages in the category can be grouped together. Is this what you mean by Option 4? If so, I have no idea what that documentation means! :p Are individual pages edited, or just one major fix at one location? Sorry for the trouble, but thank you for being helpful. --Another Believer (talk) 22:39, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
@Another Believer: You want #3, assuming you don't have any triple-subpages (Wikimedia LGBT/X/Y/de). I think you can just update Wikimedia LGBT/Nav, but some pages might override default sort. PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:46, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Like so? Making an edit on this nav template can impact the entire Wikimedia LGBT category? --Another Believer (talk) 16:18, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Option 3 sorts by the triple-subpage, but the Wikimedia LGBT links are just subpages (Wikimedia LGBT/Activities, Wikimedia LGBT/Interwiki, etc.). That's why I thought Option 4 was more appropriate. --Another Believer (talk) 18:35, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
@Another Believer: I fixed it to use #3 above. Sorry for not explaining it well. Tell me if it's good. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:14, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Brilliant! Thank you, thank you, thank you! Sorry for the trouble, but please know how much I sincerely appreciate your assistance. --Another Believer (talk) 20:25, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Template:Welcome/lang[edit]

Please add the following line:
<!-- tt-->[[Template:Welcome/tt|{{#language:tt}}]] |
Regards, Frhdkazan (talk) 10:00, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done PiRSquared17 (talk) 13:17, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Re: Interwiki usage[edit]

tools:~nemobis/tmp/iwm/wiki (note that non-usage on WMF wikis is just one necessary condition, not a sufficient condition). I use a script Liangent made for me, tswiki:MySQL queries#List of interwiki links from all wikis. --Nemo 16:08, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:23, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

88.235.9.59[edit]

Hi. Please help us by urgent trwiki. He/She is vandal. --►Cekli829 19:35, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Barras already blocked it. I don't have any advance rights on trwiki, as I am only a global sysop, not a steward. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:43, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Oooo... Sorry, you bet! Best regards, --►Cekli829 17:48, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

You have new messages
Hello, PiRSquared17. You have new messages at AmaryllisGardener's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--AmaryllisGardener (talk) 20:36, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

luri lrc verification to eligiblity[edit]

Hello
please see https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/lrc/Main_Page and https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Portal:Lrc
whether is possible to verify luri lrc to eligiblity?
so thanks

lrc lori (talk) 14:25, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

I wish I could help, but I am not part of LangCom. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Tech News: 2013-46[edit]

08:59, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Vector[edit]

I am not know. How you create tool for edit global user page? --Kolega2357 (talk) 13:49, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

This is my java script. He can not work common.js. --Kolega2357 (talk) 13:55, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Do you know how to globaly change language on account? --Kolega2357 (talk) 14:02, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

How you fixing user page? For example: Fixing userpage (per request), https://sr.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%9A%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA:Jayantanth&action=history . --Kolega2357 (talk) 15:26, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

How I can fix my user page for example? --Kolega2357 (talk) 15:30, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Which one? You can just request it to Pathoschild or Hoo, or use my script with the settings you want. But be careful. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:31, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

How I am user your script to fix my user page in future? --Kolega2357 (talk) 15:46, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Just request Pathoschild's Synchbot or Hoo's if you can't figure my script out. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:47, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki Tooltips[edit]

Hello,

I see that interwiki tooltips have the names of languages in the current wiki's language, thus, as byspel, on the Spanish Wikipedia, an English interwiki link's tooltip will have "inglés" and a Bulgarian interwiki link's tooltip on the Modern English Wikipedia will have "Bulgarian".

I've been trying to find a way to translate these for OE wikiprojects, but I couldn't find anything.

Do you know anything about this?

Thanks,

Espreon (talk) 14:37, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I never realized this. Can you give an example link that does this? PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Just go to the Spanish Wikipedia's mainpage and have your cursor hover over the interwiki links on the left pane.
Espreon (talk) 14:53, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
@Espreon: See translatewiki:FAQ#Language_names. PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi User:PiRSquared17, would you modify all my userpages if need be like you did for Jayantanth ? Thanks for your help and time. Face-smile.svg Lotje (talk) 16:46, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

be.wikiquote.org[edit]

Hi. Where's requests are served on the status of the administrator on an abandoned Fund projects? --Адмирал Вуллф Юларен (talk) 15:51, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what you mean, Admiral Yularen, but I think you're looking for SRP. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:27, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

beat you by 30 seconds... well, it was a *moral* victory, at least[edit]

Nevermind, cancel my request below, already fixed. Thanks.  :-)

MF-Warburg, can you fix this again please?[30]

(cur | prev) 19:31, 19 November 2013‎ Claudio 73 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (9 bytes) (-47,768)‎ . . (Replaced content with "ptmav5c5f")
(cur | prev) 18:45, 19 November 2013‎ MF-Warburg (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (47,777 bytes) (0)‎ . . (Protected "Trademark policy": Excessive vandalism ([Edit=Allow only autoconfirmed users] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only autoconfirmed users] (indefinite)))

I would click undo myself, but page is semi-protected, so.... Gracias. 74.192.84.101 19:42, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

No problemo. By the way, I think you'll be pleased by my modifications to Special:AbuseFilter/71. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:45, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Cool, I'll check it out. I'm still working on my template-rewrites... also, it turns out that GRCA Mortgages Corporation has a wikipedia page, or at least, their Notable CEO does. What does Wikipedia:WP:IAR say about such cases? So what is the trigger for the influx of edits by Burgerbros / HarrysMilkyNip / Rayburnkory / Claudio73 / prollyMoreLater? Are they some sort of script-kiddies, who do their hacktivism on wikipedia, because security on the CIA homepage is too tough nowadays?
That first edit by BurgerBros looked way too surgical to be vandalism; struck me more as a protest against friendlyism, since they kept 100% of the content, and just deleted the "dumbed-down" portion of the FAQ. Harry&Claudio were seemingly just vandals... but Rayburn aka 56549 sounds like a script-kiddie out for attention to my ears. Are they all the same username? How did they all find out about it at the same approximate time? No reverts the previous twenty-four-hour span, not counting sigma self-reverting. p.s. Also, the message says autoconfirmed-only, so how did Claudio73 get autoconfirmed? 74.192.84.101 20:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I don't understand what you're saying about "GRCA", but a link would be nice. Burgerbros has a few edits on enwiki. They seem to be editing in good faith, but don't understand Wikipedia's rules. This leads me to believe that it is more likely that they accidentally removed the content and/or it was a test edit. I'm not sure what more can be done about Rayburnkory. Some kid (probably) isn't going to really "hack" into Wikipedia, at least not someone who writes in all caps. Maybe they don't realize that Wikipedia is (and other wikis are) supposed to be editable. Autoconfirmed is four days with no edit count requirement here. See that page for details. Edit: and to answer your other question, the page is linked in a CentralNotice campaign's banner, but is only targeted to registered users. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:32, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Ah, okay; I'm used to 10 edits reqd for autoconfirmed status. I'm also only used to seeing fundraising-spam; this is helpful.[31] I stumbled across a message over here instead.[32] I think my EN_US into EN_RMS translation is a big improvement, maybe we should schedule that alternative version for anons in central-notice? <grin> Anyhoo, I understand now why there was a burst of complaining today. But in that case, semi-protected indefinitely sounds nuts. Why not full-protected for just the next couple days, rather than semi && forever? I'm prolly one of the few anons to even see the page, and all the vandalism was from registered uids. And... is there an opt-out mechanism for every CentralNotice advert-campaign? See also, w:WP:TEMPLAR. 74.192.84.101 22:03, 19 November 2013 (UTC)


  My other questions take a bit more verbosity to explain. GRCA uh whoops wrong acronym GSF is owned by some 38-year-old CEO in Michigan; this Notable person has a BLP article for enWiki (and maybe uaWiki), although their *corporation* does not yet have an article. One of the 400 employees, at the same (or a very similarly-named) company GSFMG, in one of the (perhaps) out of state branches -- or conceivably an adversary trying to give the company bad press -- hired this spambot.[33] Which produced this spam.[34] Now, theoretically GSF might not be the same as GSFMG, and given the confusing use of Florida and also Virginia, who really knows whether the spam is accurate, or more importantly, whether it is genuinely from the fine corporation GSF, or one of their employees, plus just because some employee did something, it is plausible the young CEO is unaware. But... if I was the sort of person who liked pillar five, and wanted to improve wikipedia... could I not do something here? Methinks perhaps I could. I know everything I need to know, about all the actors in the play. But what actions, that I could conceivably take, would be most likely to improve wikipedia, in the long-term? That is my question. (The next question being, what sort of wiki-tool will automate the tedious portions of such work.) 74.192.84.101 22:03, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
This question in a nutshell: I know off-wiki contact info for the purchasers-aka-clients behind a spambot (the spammer-aka-botnet-owner they hired is unknown to me... however that info cannot be unknown to them and mayhap they would reveal such if we asked). I'm interested in reducing spam, by training their corporation in how to *correctly* use wikipedia; they already have a wikipedia BLP. What is the correct way forward? *Is* there a correct way forward? I have a list of ten ideas, but they cannot all be good ones, let alone Good ones. 74.192.84.101 21:12, 21 November 2013 (UTC)


  As for the topic today, the short list of P&TO-policy-haters, I'll see if I can have a chat with BurgerBros, and figure out what's up. Rayburn would tell you THAT ALL THE INFROMATION needed to crack into wikipedia is *already* posted on their TotallySuperCoolGiveMeAttentionMeMeMeeeeeeeeDotCom website if you would just *visit* them sometimes and pay some attention to them and... whoa, sorry.  :-)   And yes, I wasn't suggesting that their claim to have HAQKED into the mediawiki server-farm, thereby preventing reversion, was legit. More, I was wondering what the usual policy is for dealing with folks "like" our good friend Rayburn... which I'll leave vague and scarequoted to avoid NPA. Basically, my question is, might there be some way to channel their energies, into a useful... or at least less-destructive... sort of activity?
  I would be hard-pressed to call Rayburn's edit good-faith... but it was also not obviously wholly in Bad Faith. Maybe their website TotallySuperWhatever really does have all the cool info, just as they claim in their spam.  ;-)   And it is true that wikipedia's reliability suffers from the random person's ability to create an account and make edits, five minutes before I see the page... and said edits look identical to other edits elsewhere on the page, made years ago by esteemed wikipedians, which have survived for many moons without being reverted. So at least Rayburn was right about that. As you may have guessed, I have a channeling-scheme in mind, as well as a reliability-rendering-scheme that might be useful in such cases. But before I bend your ear to Yet Another Scheme To Friendlyize And Rainbowize Our WikiVerse (henceforth YASTFAROW), what is the current policy for dealing with editors that do some damage... but unlike Claudio's pure destruction for LULZ, also seem to have some other sort of motivations, like Rayburn? 74.192.84.101 22:03, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I agree that the RMS translation is better. I don't really want to change the protection now, because some WMF staff might not have the right to edit fully-protected page (although they could get it). I'm pretty sure every campaign banner has an "X" button which adds a cookie to disable that banner. Re: the "hacker" (not as in RMS, ESR, etc.) I don't know of any policy about that, but maybe directing them to the normal enwiki new-user tutorials, help desks/teahouse, and even "adoption" would be useful. There's probably some WP: or page on Meta or meatball: about this, but I don't know what it is. Maybe this even, idk. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:38, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Forgot to mention this... but yes, I'm also pretty sure there is a per-banner-per-campaign-opt-out. Note that this is *not* the same thing as an opt-out message that the w:CAN-SPAM#Unsubscribe_compliance, which I'm pretty sure the WMF believes they are legally exempt from. Not least because they are. :-)   But regardless of what the legalese loopholes permit, WMF is sending advert-spam (e.g. "10% off in the wikipedia store" was a one-day advert campaign this summer). They are not giving users the ability to opt-out, permanently. Do other sites have banner adverts, which they require you to see? Sure. Should wikipedia? Nope. Or at least: not without a vote of the 200M monthly visitors, plus the 31k active editors. Anyways, at the moment I have too many WP:RGW things on my plate, but in the long run, I'd like to see WMF reorganized as a bottom-up governance system; that's related to busting up the wikiCulture, of course, but not absolutely *required* perhaps. 74.192.84.101 21:25, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

retention vs wikiCulture[edit]

"some WMF staff might not have the right" This is the problem, in a nutshell, that I am fighting. WikiCulture is the real trouble here, not any particular protection of any particular page, or any particular text of any particular message. Why is a spambot lower-caste than a human vandal? Why is a human vandal lower-caste than an anon contributor? Why is an anon lower-caste than a registered UID? Why is a registered UID lower-caste than WMF staff? Why is Chuck Norris, may he live ten thousand years, on top of the caste-system?
  In other words, why are specific decisions made they way they are? The abuseFilter57 is an example, the antispamTemplateSpam message is an example, and the trademark page is an example. The latter one is a concrete and specific Poor Decision (no offense to MfWarburg -- they seem to be on the side of The Good,[35] from discussions I've seen them engage in elsewhere, and I don't want to harp on them, but vague generalities are too handwavy to get my point across). I'll ping them in case they object to my characterization here.
  So what happened with the trademark-page and the semi-prot-indef? MfWarburg saw three(3) felt-were-unconstructive-edits. One was a surgical removal of the dumbed-down-repetitive-stuff at the top of the page. One was something about pr0n. One was a script-kiddie trying to make a w:WP:POINT. They all happened in a single day, because WMF spammed all 31k registered enWiki usernames with their form-letter... sheesh.
  Response: indefinite protection. Not an hour. Not a day. Not a week. Indefinite. Against whom, exactly? Well, me, alone, I think. I'm probably the only anon who knows that the trademark-thing is up for discussion, because the spam only went to registered uids. But taken more broadly... all three reverted edits were from registered uid folks. There were *zero* reverted edits from IP folks. But the knee-jerk reaction is to follow the caste-system rules, and protect against IPs. Of course, shortly afterwards, the first case of *obvious* vandalism, where the page was replaced with gibberish that did not even qualify as pr0n, was from Claudio73, that you caught and fixed. Hint: an autoconfirmed uid! Define irony, as usual.
  So my basic assertion is this: three edits, by three different UIDs, does not persistent constitute, as yoda might say. Knee-jerk protecting against anons specifically (strike one), when no anons were notified in the first place (strike two), and no anons had ever edited the page from what I can tell (strike three), was the wrong decision. Indef "protection" from dastardly anons? Well, that's the wikiCulture caste-system at work. While it would please me to see the page changed to pending-level-one, rather than indef-against-anons, what would really please me is to see it unprotected. But that's a minor victory that won't matter a year from now. I'm seeking a major victory. I want to bust up the caste-system. I want admins to stop knee-jerk reacting. I want folks to really really WP:AGF once more, and for editors to really really have liberty to edit the encyclopedia that anyone can edit again. Right now, we are on the downhill slide towards deWiki.
  But the root of the problem, exacerbating our WikiCulture difficulties, is that we are steadily losing editors every month, not gaining. It is a vicious cycle: the more shorthanded we become, the more admins feel busy-busy, and get painted into a corner where they knee-jerk react, shoot from the hip, and then rush to the next fire. I want more retention, so admins will have more time, and I want to fix wikiCulture, so that those admins will feel the moral compulsion to *take* their time.
  The problem is not that MfWarburg made this one poor decision in haste, shooting from the hip at the wrong target... the problem is that nobody else corrected their mistake. Even more subtly, most uid editors would not even see the change *as* a problem! Page vandalized three times? Must be them damn IP vandals. Semi-protect indef. Perma-ban the culprits. Gotta clean up this mess, wish Jimbo would die, so we could finally force everybody to register with quad-factor-auth. 74.192.84.101 20:45, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I have seen the 3 vandalistic edits and decided to protect the page since I expected more nonsense to appear because of the CentralNotice. I did not set an expiry because I don't think the trademark policy (draft) needs much edits anyway which come from non-WMF (not because I think that only staffers have enough intelligence to edit a draft, but because I know that in the end they decide anyway, so e.g. improvement suggestions about the content of the policy are better made on the talk page, instead of editing them in by oneself). The protection naturally was meant to prevent further vandalism of the type that had appeared — by new accounts. Though thinking about it it might be that due to some SUL mechanisms people from other (WMF) wikis nowadays might get registered automatically on Meta much earlier than before they ever visit it "personally". I did not expect an autoconfirmed vandal to appear just after the protection (irony of fate!). I would state that to my defense, we don't know how many attempted vandal edits by IPs and non-autoconfirmed users were prevented now by the protection; but since the CentralNotice, as I have seen now in the CN calendar, was not visible for IPs, and for the SUL reason mentioned above, I guess it's possible that that number might be too low to have justified the protection.
In any case, I have now removed the protection. --MF-W 22:12, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
You should not lower your defenses so quickly, Skywalker.... Muuaahhhaha! Now my plan is complete! Strike, my army of anons, strike! Whoa. Not sure where *that* came from.  ;-)   Since as you say the trademark-policy is effectively a legal document, with terms-of-service stuff, to me it should be under level-one w:WP:FLAGGED protection. That way, myself -- or anybody else -- can make an edit to the page, but the edit will not go live until somebody with reviewer-permissions glances it over.
  I also am trying to convince PiRsquared that the same level of protection (or perhaps admin-only or even dev-only rather than reviewer-only) is a good idea for the error-message of AbuseFilter#71, and for that matter, the regex behind AbuseFilter#71, and the PHP code in the abuse-filter-extension itself. As for the trademark-page, I was also confused about the autoconfirmed thing, but the rules for min-edit-count-to-achieve-autoconfirmed differ by wiki (meta is zero), yet at the same time the "days registered" is a *global* counter across all wikis. So my intuition was also out of whack, much like yours... and then, when I tried to revert the fourth vandal, I could not, because of the semi-protection!  ;-)   Double the irony, double the fun.
  But, this suggests that instead of the meaning of "semi-protected" being a dynamically-defined thing, which varies based on the local wiki's definition of autoconfirmed, and the local wiki's definition of days-registered, it would instead be smarter to explicitly define some protection-levels based on min-edit-count. That way, if you as the steward applied G99-protection to some page on meta, it could only be edited by folks -- registered or anons makes no difference -- with at least 100 edits globally. Alternatively, you could instead apply L99-protection, keeping the page from being edited by anybody with less than 100 edits on the local wiki (in this example scenario metaWiki). Could also use GM99 and LM99 for mainspace, and boolean-combos like G99-or-(LM55-and-LT22)-protection. Has anybody ever tried something like this before? 74.192.84.101 00:17, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
p.s. It is only a rough metric, but if you have a count of the number of times 'view source' was clicked, that will tell us how many anons attempted to edit the page by clicking the button where 'edit' would normally be found. Of course, that's prolly not tracked except in the raw webserver logfiles, and furthermore, some would know better than to bother clicking, since it no longer says 'edit'. Maybe worth changing that, so such things can be tracked? 74.192.84.101 00:21, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
MF-W is a local sysop on Meta, as well as a steward. He is (IMO) one of the nicest people around here. A problem with that is that editcount is not equivalent to trust, and it is completely different from the way protection is currently implemented; core would need a few changes to support that. Stewards and global sysops (etc.) don't technically have local rights to do things, but our global rights allow us to use those rights. When we do so, we use the same interface that someone with the equivalent local rights would use. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:41, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, I'm fuzzy on the whole steward-globalSysop-etc world of details; MF seems peachy to me, though. :-)   But I'm not fuzzy on the page-protection-implementation; should not be *terribly* hard to add some additional page-prot mechanisms, based on some edit-count-metric. Agree that editcountitis != trust, with any reliability. But neither does autoconfirmed == trust, so I'm not clear we lose anything, philosophically speaking. We could always implement some kind of RSA-signed web-of-trust thing, but that seems like a solution looking for a problem. 74.192.84.101 04:11, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Why don't you search bugzilla or file a bug? I guess you would need to ask on mw:RFC if you want it in core, not an extension. An easier solution might be to create two more automatically-assigned groups, one for users with >100 edits and one for users with >500 edits, and add protection levels for those groups, since I doubt we need any more restrictions than that. But wouldn't pending changes be better in cases like this? PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
About flagged revisions stuff, FlaggedRevs is not enabled on Meta. --MF-W 19:52, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Okay... is it to avoid the slippery slope, or for some other reason? 74.192.84.101 04:11, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
1) We don't need it very much. 2) We already have systems for our highest risk pages (e.g., the "/temp" subpages of www portals, and the talk page of the Spam blacklist). If you think we should have flaggedrevs, ask on Meta:Babel. PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:07, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

abuseFilter#71, new user adding links and removing existing content[edit]

Well, I was trying to check out your improvements, but got stuck.

  1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/history
  2. clicked on the upper of your two changes on Nov 17th
  3. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/history/71/diff/prev/601
  4. PHP fatal error in /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.23wmf4/extensions/AbuseFilter/Views/AbuseFilterViewDiff.php line 30:
  5. Call to undefined method TableDiffFormatterFullContext::_start_diff()

Tried repeating, but got the same error... and undefined method sounds like a fatal error, methinks. 74.192.84.101 20:34, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I already filed a bug. ;) I left a note in the textbox thing describing the changes. Oh, are the notes private too? Here you go: "Down to 3, and more descriptive title. Remove 'prevent', and make public. --PiRSquared" The name of the filter was something like "spam". PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:37, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
No, I can see the note that you added a more descriptive title just fine. (You too <ohJoy> can simulate being an IP-anon, by opening another distinct browser-executable, in which you have not saved your login-data, methinks. Just don't forget, and accidentally click "edit" over the in not-logged-in-Safari-or-whatever window; maybe some client-side javascript could help enforce that rule?) But yes, heh heh, just noticed that it says "Notes (private)" on the screen... maybe time to file a different bugzilla request. Now obviously, I'd vastly prefer the bug-report to say "delete the incorrect word 'private' from the label" as opposed to the alternative bug-report of "hide the secret notes-field away from prying anons as the label demands".  :-)   The reason I was trying to view the history, was to see what the *old* title was (spam-or-whatever), before you changed it on the 17th, and there is no 'history' thing at the top of the page in question. And of course, warn-rather-than-prevent is always a win for WP:NICE. Appreciate it.
  Best of all, there is now even a button where I can edit the 'abusefilter-warning' which appears. "Warning: This action has been automatically identified as harmful.... the abuse rule which your action matched is: $1" Pfffttt. Of course, the page is locked, so that *I* cannot actually make any edits to the message. "You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason: This page provides interface text for the software on this wiki, and is protected to prevent abuse." Maybe add a link there, to the appropriate noticeboard, so that people who *do* want the message changed, can contact somebody with the power to change it?
  That said, I recently made some edits to something for which I did not have permission, which was also protected to prevent trouble. Why not downgrade the 'abusefilter-warning' level of protection to be the same as the-man-who-could-not-have-acted-alone? Here is the message you get when you edit that page, fully compliant with friendlyism methinks: "Note: Edits to this page are subject to review (help). (show details)" When you look at the details, it says that the reason was 'persistent vandalism' ... which prolly means more than *three* instances of vandalism, if my whiskers have any sensitivity left. Not sure if the pending-changes-review-setting is indefinite, since it doesn't say, but probably it is (sigh). enWiki looks more and more like deWiki, every day.
  Anyhoo, methinks pending-change-protection would be a much better model for stopping abusive changes to the template-message-texts. For that matter, it is seemingly the *obvious* model for Trademark_Policy ... confirmed by an admin should be good enough, but still editable by anybody, just like it says on the tin. Am I offbase here? 74.192.84.101 22:46, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I'll reply to this and the other post later. I was obviously too lazy to check it in another browser, although I have quite a few installed, or to log out. Maybe I'll file the nice one as a bug later. I can make the warning transclude a publicly-editable template if your really want. We don't have pending changes here. There are arguments both ways on that issue: it is better than preventing edits completely, but it also means that "the website you can edit" is now "the website you can request edits to and have accepted". In this case, I agree that PC is better. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:18, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
No hurry, as you may recall, I suffer from WALLOFTEXT syndrome.  :-/   Ping my enWiki talkpage if you reply, and I don't respond promply enough for you. Well, or you can just wait until I cycle back here, to briefly save yourself from the next TLDR. <grin> Lemme know if the verbosity is overwhelming, please, and I'll try to dial it down a notch. On a related topic, I'd file the bug myself, but methinks the nice-version will have a better chance of getting implemented without pushback, if you file rather than moi. :-)
  We are on exactly the same page regarding w:WP:FLAGGED, as a violation of enWiki's core mission. I would love to see the day where ArbCom insta-ban discretionary sanctions list grew *smaller* rather than endlessly larger, and where "indefinite" was not the default behavior, and where "persistent" was not defined by the admin's frustration-level but rather a four-digit-number-per-year, and in general that we Stick To The Goal intransigently: the encyclopedia anybody can edit.
  That said, I don't want random editors (anons *or* pseudonyms) to be able to fiddle with the abusefilter-message-text, or the live-this-minute in-production PHP code which runs mediawiki. But the deWiki folks went to all the trouble to invent pending changes... why not use it to make the error-messages, and someday even the *code* itself, something anybody can request-to-be-edited? enWiki has a lot of sysadmins and programmers amongst the ~~200m uniques we get every month. WMF funding is always low, WMF schedules always slip, VizEd has already cost millions and is w:not even wrong. We ought to play to our strengths.
  p.s. CentralNotice is a bit of a madhouse... is there a page where I can run a query, that will show me a list of the *text* of the adverts which somebody logged in to enWiki would have seen (statistical chance of seeing each message in the first column and plaintext message in the second column) during the past N months? Or do I have to write something myself for that? Gracias. 74.192.84.101 12:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
In reply to the CentralNotice thing, you can use https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/api.php?action=centralnoticeallocations&format=json&project=wikipedia&country=US&anonymous=false&language=en to get that data, but I'm not sure if it's possible to get it in a human-readable format (well, JSON and XML are pretty readable when formatted nicely). You could also go to this ridiculously useful special page and click "Make request". I think the "Device" can be "Android" or "iPhone", but idk. I filed bugzilla:57305 about the message. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:35, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
It would be possible to write a script to display this in a nice table, but I personally find the pretty-printed JSON from ApiSandbox to be pretty nice as it is. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:27, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, since you ping, I'll give you a tidbit-answer. I was planning on reading the API docs you pointed me towards to see if I could figure this table-generation out myself, but I'm happy for you to tell me the answer.  :-)   Unless I'm misunderstanding, the queries you are showing me give me the *names* of the banners belonging to a campaign, but not the *plaintext* of the banners. "name": "trademarkpolicyA", "campaign": "Trademark policy discussion". To see what the banner *says* to random registered folks, I have to click these places... [36][37][38] then scroll down to Translatable-banner-messages and read the text1 == "Help shape new policy for these logos and other Wikimedia trademarks."
  Which is good enough for my purposes, although of course, the actual GUI-look-n-feel of the CSS-n-JS-powered banner is lost thataway... it also includes this imagefile, for instance.[39] That can be done with this trick.[40] But my goal here, is to have a page where I'm able to keep track of the banners that are popping up to folks with registered uids, without needing to become one. So I'd like to see something similar to this dataset,[41] but specialized by country-spec & language-spec & wiki-spec, then spread across discrete chunks of time. Roughly....

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Config: proj=meta , lang=en , nation=GB , pri=NULL , datespan=2013-01-01 through 2013-99-99 , chunksize=month.

chunk text1 banner campaign proj lang nation start end pri
aug#1 (lazy) (lazy) HTTPS-switch-over All All except gom-latn All 2013-08-21 21:29 2013-08-29 00:00 emergency
sep#1 (lazy) (lazy) Privacy Policy Draft All All except gom-latn All 2013-09-04 04:40 2013-09-15 14:00 high
sep#2 (lazy) (lazy) Temporary blank balancer All All except gom-latn All 2013-09-15 14:00 2013-10-05 15:00 normal
sep#3 (lazy) (lazy) wlm 2013-uk commons, meta, wm & wp All except gom-latn GB 2013-09-21 01:20 2013-09-30 22:49 normal
oct#1 (AGAIN) (AGAIN) Temporary blank balancer All All except gom-latn All 2013-09-15 14:00 2013-10-05 15:00 normal
oct#2 (lazy) (lazy) FDCpropreview20133UK All All except gom-latn GB 2013-10-29 02:38 2013-10-31 23:00 normal
oct#3 (lazy) (lazy) FDCreview2013-3 All All except gom-latn All 2013-10-29 03:27 2013-10-31 23:00 normal
nov#1 Help shape new policy
for these logos and
other Wikimedia trademarks.
gif
trademarkpolicyA Trademark policy discussion All All All 2013-11-19 00:00 2013-11-21 23:59 normal

I am also imagining that there would be a handwaving mechanism to show approximately what percentage of readers/anonEditors/uidEditors/admins would see each message, and how many times, and other such stuff. But the basic idea is to have a here-is-the-spam-you-missed page, and for that, text1 is the crucial part. Note also that I'd like the fields to be boolean (or at least multi-select), so that one can see lang=en&&fr rather than lang=en||fr should that be desired. Does my goal make sense? For personal use, obviously, though methinks it might also be a good js-gadget or talkpage-URL to improve the experience of anons in general. 74.192.84.101 19:46, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

This does make sense. I'll try to write a script to do this, but maybe it should be part of the extension. Is CentralNotice/Calendar at all helpful (I know it cannot be filtered)? PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:09, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, you mentioning it was infinitely helpful, in the sense that I didn't know until now it was used for *important* stuff like trademark-policy-discussion-announcements.  :-)   As far as I knew, it was just for the annual money-begging-adverts. And it's a few clicks, but I'm perfectly capable of drilling down to figure out what text1 is, and picking out the English-banners from the others. Thanks for helping me, appreciate it. That said, the point of scripting it is to make it easier on anons besides myself, though of course it will also be easier for myself, too. (I'm also interested in writing up a watchlist for anons.) I don't might writing the code, but if you can point me in the right direction I'll get there faster. *Is* it possible with the API, or does it require screen-scraping slash raw-RDBMS-access? 74.192.84.101 23:54, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Do you want to code it? I already started. You don't need anything other than access to the API, afaik. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:31, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
I have some other wiki-coding projects on the todo-list, but this one seems an easy starter-project for me. You can go for it, of course, since it may only take you an hour to code, test, document, et al -- and others may find it useful besides myself. Just don't tell me your answer yet.  :-)   My API-fu with mediawiki is weak, so no doubt it will take me longer, and may require hints, but I'll still try to make my own flavor mostly on my own (and then improve it to be closer to yours as a learning opportunity). What API call will "drill down", after my initial grab of the JSON centralNotice-calendar? Is there a getChildItem(targetChild == 'trademarkPolicyA', parentEntity == 'CentralNotice/Calendar') ? 74.192.84.101 03:55, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the delayed response -- I've been a bit busy this week. I already have some working JS to do this, but as you wish I will not release it. ;) Can you explain what you are trying to do exactly? When you say parentEntity == 'CentralNotice/Calendar', do you mean you are trying to parse CentralNotice/Calendar? That might be a bit harder than just using this API feature. If you use that API thing, you could just do
(can we unindent this discussion?) PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:54, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

I'll reply later to all these comments. PiRSquared17 (talk) 05:04, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Request for de-indentation... DENIED!  :-)   — 74.192.84.101 00:47, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Okay okay. Thanks for your snippets, I will see if I can figure out how to make the API do what I mean. But yes, I think the API thing you were pointing at is what I want, or close thereto. 74.192.84.101 00:47, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

[edit]

See, this is what trademarking of logos results in: taking more and more freedom away from us, the community. Perhaps you can voice your opinion here or here before the Foundation takes further action, as announced in this blog post. odder (talk) 11:10, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Can you explain this in 250 words or less? I know my own ability to explain tersely is limited, but I sometimes demand more of others, or at least, challenge them to strive for excellence.  :-)   I read through the volumnious links, and at the end of the day was not sure which was the better pathway. If the WMF trademarks it, we get the stuff in the draft-trademark-paper, right, with banning on even the smallest wiki equivalent to surrendering the right to use the rgb-deathstar-logo? Whereas if the WMF abandons the trademark of the logo, it becomes kinda-sorta like the "Linux" wordmark, with almost no restrictions? 74.192.84.101 23:57, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Elsewhere, PiRsquared wrote: "The Community logo is just that -- the community logo. Not the WMF logo."    Brain... not... understanding..... There is a little green globe,[42] with a red 120-degree arc to the north, and two blue arcs to the southeast and southwest. Right or wrong, *that* is the community logo, invented in 2006 by WarX-aka-Artur, placed into the public domain with respect to copyright, and then later (not sure when) 'adopted' as the meta.wikipedia.org logo, and then recently 2012-n-2013 put under trademark-law-protection by WMF? ...some would say trademark protection-racket? Or am I just totally off my rocker?
  I do realize there is also a stick-figure-in-a-circle "main" WMF logo.[43] But just like enWiki and the puzzle-globe-logo, which is a "WMF logo" in the sense it is *trademarked* by the WMF, is not the community logo now also being (or attempting-to-being pardon the grammar) trademarked by the WMF for much the same legal reasons? Danke. 74.192.84.101 03:45, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm not sure what's better either, but I'd like to see some logo that can be used for anything, not just WMF®-approved WIKILICENSE™ uses. The community logo was originally created so that there would be a logo with no restrictions, but now the WMF is (legally) trademarking it. I won't be upset either way. Really, what's so bad about someone using the community logo who has under n edits? It's not a well-known logo outside our community anyway. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:50, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
The worry, in a nutshell, is that "naked licensing" will result in the trademark being overturned, and then the little RGB-globe that most wikipedians associate with 'meta.wikipedia.org' will be something *any* corporation can use on *any* website. There is no such thing as a public-domain-trademark, fortunately or unfortunately. If they are going to go through the expense and trouble to trademark it, then it makes sense that it should be legally defensible (i.e. in a courtroom if Bomis Corporation is abusing the RGB-globe to sell widgets and implicitly claiming they are WMF-approved by printing the RGB-globe on them). Is your position that metaWiki should pick a new logo, and leave the RGB-globe fully in the public domain? If so, then the *best* pathway is to trademark it now, naked-license it, and then *not* complain when the naked licensing is overturned. Because if the WMF does *not* trademark the thing, then in the future somebody else *could* do it (Bomis Corp or somesuch), either in one country or in all countries. 74.192.84.101 00:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
I really don't know what is best. Is the WMF going to sue people who don't meet the criteria for "community membership" whose use the logo? What if Jimmy Wales or Tim Shell, the CEO of Bomis, make 300 edits? Then they can (ab)use the logo. I don't see how these rules stop them from doing so. Anyway, see this change: Trademark_policy#policy-communitylogo. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:45, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Currently says: "But you may not file trademark applications incorporating the logo." This has no teeth, legally. Any hypercorp can trademark the logo, if they start using it "as part of their trade", in one or more countries. That is why WMF is trying to trademark it... but then, they become overprotective, and treated it like all the others, "semi-tightly" regulated. There were 45 supports for the 'collective mark' thingie,[44] which methinks is like Rotary Int'l or somesuch, and might be a solution.
  However, a better solution, if my lawyer-fu holds any water, is for the WMF to fully trademark the community-logo, and then fail to enforce it in any way. This would allow it to eventually become untrademarkable by anybody, if I grok the situation correctly, and that is the ideal outcome. Maybe we can get consensus to do that counter-intuitive trick, in the next year or so? But there are subtle issues here... the rgb-globe and the other "small fry" trademarks are all reasonably similar in color-scheme and overall shape and so on. (The puzzle-globe and the WikipediA wordmark are not very similar at all by contrast.) My understanding of the vagaries of international trademark dilution are too wimpy, so maybe my scheme is incredibly risky and dangerous.
  But from what I understand, maybe the current scheme — i.e. doing nothing — is incredibly risky and dangerous, because if the rbg-globe is taken down, maybe that will dilute the value of the *other* dozen WMF marks which are similar-in-some-sense. Anywhoo, I'd like somebody to help figure out if wikipe-tan is trademark-able, as an alt-community-logo of sorts. Definitely an interesting discussion.
  p.s. Regarding the mis-use of the marks, the key provision is the revocation in 6.2 which says "at any time and in any manner". I would *like* that to be the rule for cakes and shirts and such, but LVilla says it is too likely to bite us in the buttocks in court someday, and I believe them... though I believe we *can* figure it out, if not during the next month, then during the next couple of years. 74.192.84.101 02:36, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
That sounds like a good solution. I was mainly against their restrictions on usage. If they do not enforce, but prevent others from registering it, I would be happy. I honestly didn't find the community member requirements too bad, but they seem against Wikimedia philosophy. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:06, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Chabi1[edit]

I am trying to help the Wikipedias in African languages. However, I don't spaek any of those languages and that's is why I'm just helping with templates and categories. I believe that Wikipedia is a great project that can help to spread knowledge and this it's helpful to people in Africa. --Chabi1 (talk) 17:04, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Beginning of MassMessage, end of EdwardsBot[edit]

Hi. You're being contacted as you're listed as an EdwardsBot user.

MassMessage has been deployed to all Wikimedia wikis. For help using the new tool, please check out its help page or drop a note on Meta-Wiki.

With over 400,000 edits to Wikimedia wikis, EdwardsBot has served us well; however EdwardsBot will no longer perform local or global message delivery after December 31, 2013.

A huge thanks to Legoktm, Reedy, Aaron Schulz and everyone else who helped to get MassMessage deployed. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:36, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:40, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Tool request![edit]

Hey, I was wondering if you could replicate your tool which monitors cvn-sw for wikidata. One of the common concerns from admins is the difficulty of finding edits - perhaps that could help? Thanks, Ajraddatz (Talk) 17:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Template:InterProject[edit]

Hi! Please, can you help me with Template:InterProject? (see Template talk:InterProject). Thank you! --FRacco (talk) 03:49, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:51, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Eccellente! Please, can you create also: MediaWiki:Sisterprojects-links-title

Links to other Wikimedia projects

and MediaWiki:Sisterprojects-links-title/it

Collegamenti agli altri progetti Wikimedia

Thanks again! --FRacco (talk) 04:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Done, sorry for not noticing sooner. (I was busy on another wiki.) PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:14, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

RE:[edit]

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Blog/Drafts/Opinions_on_the_most_advanced_wikis --Goldenburg111 (talk) 20:40, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Re: ang from "Eald Englisc" to "Ænglisc"[edit]

Done. You can still edit the /temp page and all. The Lua module doesn't generate HTML yet, it just parses it and tells us if there are issues. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 20:56, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Grants:Index/Eligibility requirements[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de français, italien et lituanien sur Meta. La page Grants:Index/Eligibility requirements est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :



Dear translators,

I have updated the Eligibility Requirements page for the Project and Event Grants program, and re-organized the information to be more readable, as well as easier to translate.

Your help in bringing this information to different language communities has tremendous value: many people are timid about grants, and having to digest all this relatively-formal information in English makes it even more scary.

Your translations can help more Wikimedians apply for funding, and thereby enable more awesome work to take place around the world. Thank you for your valuable efforts!

Asaf Bartov, Grantmaking team, WMF

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 22:01, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Grants:Index/Eligibility requirements[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de français, italien et lituanien sur Meta. La page Grants:Index/Eligibility requirements est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :



Dear translators,

I have updated the Eligibility Requirements page for the Project and Event Grants program, and re-organized the information to be more readable, as well as easier to translate.

Your help in bringing this information to different language communities has tremendous value: many people are timid about grants, and having to digest all this relatively-formal information in English makes it even more scary.

Your translations can help more Wikimedians apply for funding, and thereby enable more awesome work to take place around the world. Thank you for your valuable efforts!

Asaf Bartov, Grantmaking team, WMF

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 22:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

interesting[edit]

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Mitch_Ames - the summary of deletion is intriguing - the actual user i know in real life, and have interacted on wp en with quite a bit, yet the summary of deletion seems odd. sats (talk) 15:53, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

@SatuSuro: It wasn't created by the user. :-) It was created by an anonymous spambot with content like "Best Winter Sports Free Bet | Winter Sports online Bookies | Winter Sports Online Free Bets [...]". Don't worry, the user is not responsible for this and their edits look great. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:58, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
I am perpetually curious what motivates spambots to choose the pages they do... Ajraddatz (Talk) 16:01, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Please do not take me as interfering a discussion, the motivation for Spambots are: It's just for fun, or computer code. It's a mystery. --Goldenburg111 22:08, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
And, obviously, for monetary gain: spambots think(they are self-aware???) spambot-operators think that they are attracting potential customers to their site/business. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:05, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations PiR! You have solved the mystery ;) --Goldenburg111 21:31, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for deleting the spam, PiRSquared17. (I've been away for a bit, so I've only just discovered the creation/deletion.) Mitch Ames (talk) 09:06, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

No problem. :) PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:47, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Did you get my message? Talkback --Goldenburg111 22:06, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Your patch for bug #56634[edit]

Just so you know… the discussion is now stuck, unless you can submit the patch for review in Gerrit. I posted comment 18 because I was surprised that you submitted the patch to Bugzilla, and because I was, at that time, thinking that comment 16 referred to the need of adding general aliases in MessagesAng.php. Hope this clears up the confusion a bit, and thanks for submitting the patch! :-) odder (talk) 13:38, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

@Odder: I don't know how to use gerrit, git, diff, patching, etc. Can't the file just be added to the directory? I'm not a professional programmer, so I don't even know how to install git... (I've been trying for months to figure out how to submit a patch to gerrit. Even the patch submission on toollabs is too hard for me to use... is there a version of this for technically illiterate people like me?)PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:12, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I believe I could just commit it for you, but that would be like giving you a fish instead of teaching you how to catch one :-) There is a git tutorial on MediaWiki.org, as well as a getting started page. If you'd be willing to spend some time on learning git, I could provide you with all the needed help on IRC, and we could go through the tutorial step-by-step together. (That's how I got involved, too, though admittedly I had some previous experience in SVN.) odder (talk) 15:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Do you have to use the command-line? PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:02, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
In general, yes, unless you want to submit stuff through github with SuchABot, but that's limited to a few chosen repositories (operations/mediawiki-config and core are not part of this yet). odder (talk) 16:23, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
PiRsquared, are you at liberty to reveal your OS version and browser version, that you are planning to work on git with? There are some graphical front-ends, and methinks some browser-front-ends, though I'm not sure you can interface with the repo you are needing to work with, thataway. Are you against the command-line for pragmatic reasons, or for philosophical ones? 74.192.84.101 00:34, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

You have new messages
Hello, PiRSquared17. You have new messages at Goldenburg111's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Goldenburg111 20:59, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

@Goldenburg111: instead of using {{tb}}, why not use {{ping|PiRSquared17}} on your talk page? PiRSquared17 (talk) 21:13, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! Or we could just watch each other's talk page :) --Goldenburg111 21:53, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Adminship; Wikiversity Discussion[edit]

Can you please participate in this discussion? Remember to look at my contributions at Wikiversity! Thanks! Link to discussion --Goldenburg111 16:44, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't know much about Wikiversity or your history, so I don't think I will comment. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:09, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for responding. --Goldenburg111 20:27, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Re: Category:Wikimedia projects[edit]

Well, there's clearly more than that in the category, I don't know if subcategories can be made for everything. Design could go under Category:Wikimedia directly, but it seems excessive. --Nemo 15:21, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Tech News: 2013-49[edit]

08:38, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Etherpad&diff=next&oldid=5429174[edit]

Hi, PiRSquared17, just to let you know: ...Old pads were archived to etherpad-old.wikimedia.org, which was removed on Monday, 30 December 2013. Lotje (talk) 05:29, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

@Lotje: I wrote it in the past tense so I don't have to update it. Feel free to fix it. ;) PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:47, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
I see! Thanks. Lotje (talk) 20:04, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Wikimedia Highlights, November 2013[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de français, italien et lituanien sur Meta. La page Wikimedia Highlights, November 2013 est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :

La priorité de cette page est moyenne.


Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from last month. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, project village pumps and (for some languages) mailing lists. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, ask them here. You can manage your subscription here.

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 02:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Fundraising/Translation/Thank you email 20131202[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de français, italien et lituanien sur Meta. La page Fundraising/Translation/Thank you email 20131202 est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :

La priorité de cette page est haute. La date limite pour traduire cette page est 2014-01-02.

Thank you for your help translating this 'Thank you letter' from the Wikimedia Foundation's Executive Director Sue Gardner into your language.

If you have any questions, please post them on my talk page https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jrobell

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 22:34, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Standard offer[edit]

I wasn't notified of the deletion either, till I saw it redlinked (or I guess you put the @Leucosticte notifier in your message; that's the first I've ever seen anyone do that. That's a nice feature.) (Kinda cool, by the way, that in that Star Wars scene, he says "Cell block 1138". I think that "THX 1138" was to George Lucas was "CRM 114" was to Stanley Kubrick. Just some weird collection of letters and numbers they liked to randomly use, kinda like how programmers use "foo," "bar" and "baz.") Leucosticte (talk) 22:39, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, in Tegel's defense, it was almost an exact copy of the enwiki page. If I restore it, will you expand it or leave it in its previous state? I think the standard offer is mainly used on enwiki and maybe simplewiki. (BTW, w:1138_(number)#George_Lucas_and_Lucasfilm.) PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:46, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
I certainly haven't heard of it being used elsewhere - and this comes dangerously close to trying to make an enwiki principle global when it is not. --Rschen7754 23:12, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedians in Exile/Data on granting and denial of standard offer requests does not look good either. --Rschen7754 23:12, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
It's useful to have another wiki, besides the wiki that is controlled by the powers that regulate speech and ban people, to discuss the regulation of speech and banning of people on that wiki. Otherwise, a catch-22 can occur, in which one can't question authority because that authority has made it difficult for those most-affected by that authority to question authority. Meta is like the United Nations, which provides a venue, not under the control of country X, to discuss what goes on in country X and whether it's good policy that should be adopted elsewhere.
Exiles have to have somewhere to go, or it isn't really exile, is it? Unless of course it's The Dark Knight Rises kind of exile, which makes it unnecessary to worry about the person's voicing dissent anymore. Stalin was not content to banish Trotsky, but felt the need to completely destroy his ability to badmouth the Soviet regime.
As for Wikipedians in Exile/Data on granting and denial of standard offer requests, it can be userfied if that would be preferable, but I see no reason to move a baby tree from public property onto private property just because it's a baby tree. That would eventually work against the goal of having lots of healthy adult trees on public property. Leucosticte (talk) 23:31, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Talkstalk sez.... that I first read this as an analogy of the "money tree" where pieces-of-eight sprouted instead of leaves... and was wondering why newborns-instead-of-leaves was the topic.... :-)   As for places to discuss blocks/bans/etc, there is only one, a very unfortunate one methinks: off-wiki. Pretty much guarantees bad blood. The rule about 'proxy editing' also seems asinine. 74.192.84.101 02:17, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
That is not what Meta-Wiki is. We have no power to overturn the Arbitration Committee's decisions on the English Wikipedia. --Rschen7754 23:48, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Nor can the United Nations overturn any country's decision to punish someone (ask José Medellín). So the analogy is (somewhat) apt. I think meta's a good place to document and opine about what goes on at the various wikis, because it's neutral ground. Those discussions can help influence the wiki in question from afar, and possibly influence other wikis not to do what that wiki does. To some extent, Meta is to Wikipedia what RationalWiki originally was to Conservapedia — a place for exiles and other interested parties to go where they could collaboratively document and comment on the goings-on at other wikis, and where they could not be silenced or censored by those wikis' leaders. Leucosticte (talk) 00:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
The problem is, that is not Meta's purpose. This is not the place for you to complain about the indefinite block you received there; that should be handled on en.wikipedia, not here. --Rschen7754 00:09, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
I think that complaining about enwiki policies and practices could fall within meta purposes #1 and #3, as long as it's not done in a way that interferes with meta's other goals. Obviously I can't complain about the indef block, or anything else, at enwiki. This could easily broaden into a major discussion; if you want to discuss my behavior, please post further messages to User talk:Leucosticte so we can get out of PiRSquared17's hair. Thanks. Leucosticte (talk) 01:34, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
(ec) If what you say about the standard offer's usage is correct, there might not be much more research to be done. Being the archetypical American that I am, I lack fluency in languages other than English, so I wouldn't be going anywhere but the other English project. I'm coming up empty on wikiquote:Wikiquote:Standard offer, wiktionary:Wiktionary:Standard offer, wikiversity:Wikiversity:Standard offer, mw:Project:Standard offer, wikibooks:Wikibooks:Standard offer, and wikisource:Wikisource:Standard offer. However, we could still say, "This isn't used anywhere than enwiki and maybe simplewiki" and that would be providing at least one shred of info. It's always good to know what the various projects are and aren't doing, although if one were to carry that far enough, meta mainspace would become the union of all policies, guidelines, essays and other projectspace content on all Wikimedia projects. That would be useful information, but possibly overwhelming; maybe there should be a separate wiki just for that. Leucosticte (talk) 01:34, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Rschen is absolutely correct; Meta isn't for overturning other wikis' decisions, and has no power to do so. You may however discuss typical rules of other wikis, and their pros/cons. Since I am not really involved in this issue (except for noticing that the page I had just looked at was deleted), maybe you should discuss this at Rschen's or Tegel's talk page. So far I have not been involved in any drama or ArbCom cases, so I have no idea what that is like (and do not wish to discuss specific ArbCom cases on my talk page if possible). PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:11, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
The problem is, it's sometimes disruptive to convos to move them to other venues. However, the orange bar can indeed get tiresome, so I feel your pain (even if I do nothing to alleviate it and in fact make it worse). Actually this is more of a meta-discussion about the discussion of ArbCom cases in general, rather than specific ArbCom cases. Hopefully the discussion is about to peter out on its own, and we'll all go our separate ways. Leucosticte (talk) 01:34, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Update: I just scoped out simplewiki; simple:Wikipedia:Standard offer doesn't exist, but sometimes people talk about the standard offer. I also see that the goings-on at their administrators' noticeboard are just as ridiculous as at enwiki's. See simple:Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Current_issues_and_requests_archive_36#CR90.27s_ban_review and do a Ctrl-f on "god bless". Kinda ridiculous, what two words can stir up. Leucosticte (talk) 23:31, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
There is a draft of the policy in a (former?) admin's userspace. It is almost exactly the same as the enwiki essay. There is some usage at ruwiki (links to essay). Obviously, some unblocks are under similar conditions to the standard offer. There's probably some more general "second chance" pattern. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:11, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. Leucosticte (talk) 01:34, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I think we can consider this closed. We have established that some wikis other than the English Wikipedia have similar essays, but most Wikimedia projects do not seem to. Also Meta cannot override ArbCom, but here you can discuss problems, philosophical or practical, as long as they relate to Wikimedia, and you stay civil. The original problem with the page has been resolved, as it was rewritten. Of course, you can ask me if you have any questions--but I think this is resolved for now. PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:43, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Username[edit]

Nice username, by the way. I was asked just today by Google+ what I wanted my permanent username to be. I hesitated between putting a 256 or a 3141 at the end. On the one hand, my Gmail address ends with the first four digits of pi, so that would keep the two accounts consistent. On the other hand, 28 is a nice, "tider" number" and one that is related to computer science, one of my interests (although I prefer the practical side of it, viz., development of software that will have actual users besides the teaching assistant who tests it in order to assign a grade, to the more theoretical aspects taught in college that one will generally never use after graduating).

I ultimately chose 3141, because the world is not a nice, tidy place, and it's important to always be reminded of that. Pi is a symbol not just of the unknown but the unknowable. Any numerical representation of pi is not only incomplete, but also unable to ever be completed — just like Wikipedia! We won't even have time in our lifespans to memorize all the digits of pi that people and their machines have already calculated — just as we won't have time before our deaths to read all the Wikipedia pages that editors and their bots have already written!

It also is a philosophical metaphor. There are some questions, such as the hard problem of consciousness, that humans cannot even put into words very well. Pi is the same way: you can't put down on paper exactly what it is, numerically; you can only say something like "the circumference of a circle divided by 2r." Thus it is humbling reminder of man's limitations, despite all that we have accomplished. There's a handy mnemonic device, by the way, which, due to its sheer awesomeness, I try to impart to people whenever I can find or manufacture some pretext for doing so — viz. a nifty little song and dance that we learnt in geometry class that goes to the tune of Y.M.C.A.:

The circumference of a circle is twooo-pi-r! / . . . . When you wanna know / how far around to go / it's pi-r-t-w-o!

I can't remember the rest of the song or the body language for the "two-pi-r" part other than that the "two" involved holding up two fingers. The contortions involved in making one's body look like a pi symbol or an r have regrettably slipped my mind, but that was the part that corresponded to "Y-M-C-A" in the lyrics for the Village People song. That song is even better than that other jingle we learnt (gosh, I almost typed "learned") that went to the tune We're Off to See the Wizard: "The area of a rectangle / is equal to base times height..." I believe it ended with "The circumference of a circle is pi times the diameter". Here are some more I found on YouTube. Leucosticte (talk) 05:29, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I actually have memorized all the decimal digits of pi, but I still have to work on the ordering. :-) Pi is very interesting, as it is irrational, transcendental, and maybe even a normal number (which is not what most people think of when you say "normal number"). It is beautifully complex, with no visible patterns. Powers of two are probably more practical to memorize (at least if you're going to be in CS or programming), but they are not really as mathematically interesting, at least to me. Of course, Mersenne primes have some interest, but we're not talking about that. I've never heard either of those mnemonics before. As for math-related songs, I quite like Tom Lehrer's "That's Mathematics". I also like this, but it's not a personal favorite. [55] PiRSquared17 (talk) 06:08, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Oh dear, that last YouTube vid you linked to made me feel like I'd entered the Total Perspective Vortex. I almost had to switch it off partway through, lest I be destroyed by the sense of proportion it was beginning to induce, but somehow I mustered the fortitude to make it to the end and was rewarded with that final glimmer of hope that maybe there's more intelligent life elsewhere. (And I'm including myself in that "bugger-all down on earth" because some of my own mistakes cause me as much painful regret or chagrin as many of the blunders I perceive others to have made. If I feel excruciating regret over and over, that means I either erred grievously in the past, or I'm erring grievously now in regretting what I did, or both; any of those three cases indicates great imperfection. The melancholy temperament tends toward perfectionism, at least if you believe in Florence Littaeuer's personality groups.) I was just posting on the topic of human imperfection recently. Leucosticte (talk) 07:44, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Tech News: 2013-50[edit]

08:24, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Reviewiki[edit]

Would you please close this (clearly unsuccessful) proposal? Thanks Smiley green alien aaah.svg --Ricordisamoa 17:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

@Ricordisamoa: I have closed it. I don't see why you couldn't have done so yourself. :-) PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:11, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
COI - I had already voted against :-P --Ricordisamoa 18:25, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Re: c2 interwiki[edit]

No, personally I don't like the idea at all and I don't see any good reason for it. I'm not taking care of the interwiki map any longer though, as I'm not sysop. --Nemo 00:43, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

@Nemo bis: You can at least comment on Talk:Interwiki map. Currently it has unanimous support. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:48, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Tech News: 2013-51[edit]

08:22, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-01[edit]

08:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Can't make it to hack on saturday[edit]

Sorry. Something came up and I'll be away from Internet. How's Monday? --EpochFail (talk) 08:28, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Fine, User:EpochFail. PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:07, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Stop lieing[edit]

Stop losing and take that Wikibreak off! You have been regularly editing here ;) --Goldenburg111 00:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-02[edit]

08:35, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Re: Protected talk page on Meta[edit]

Hello. If there is a lot of vandalism to revert then you can protect my talk page here. People can always send me an e-mail, which is even a better option, since I am not very active at the moment. Regards, Beau (talk) 08:46, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Privacy policy[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de français, italien et lituanien sur Meta. La page Privacy policy est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :

La priorité de cette page est haute.


The discussion phase about the draft for the Wikimedia Foundation's new privacy policy is ending on January 15. Your help is welcome in translating the current version of the draft, which is expected to be

close to the final version. This will also enable more community members to contribute comments before the discussion phase ends.

The main text of the privacy policy is contained in the following pages, please click "Translate" on each of them:

Privacy policy / Summary / What the policy doesn't cover / Definitions

Please also consider translating the FAQ and other supplementary material, which can be found (along with the main text) here:

[116]

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 08:45, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

More IRC[edit]

Hello,

Is it possible for us to talk on IRC today or sometime soon?

There's something I need to talk to you about.

Espreon (talk) 18:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't think I'll be on IRC soon. I think I know what you are referring to, however. Did he give an explanation? PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:19, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Sadly, no. Espreon (talk) 02:22, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Your case of sockpuppetry[edit]

You stated here that I was using sockpuppet accounts under different usernames, wrong. I use this main account to start a new clean start, it is not my fault for being a 9 year old kid not knowing the basics of the Wikimedia Projects. I think this comment is a very offensive comment. Their is no need to keep dwelling on the past. Now the new respect has vanished due to one comment by one person. Life is ruined. --Goldenburg111 19:04, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

It is not a clean start if you return to the same behavior that you had under the old account. --Rschen7754 19:07, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
And what is that Rschen? --Goldenburg111 19:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
No such thing. 88.113.158.34 19:13, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
IP, I am not going to believe you unless you are Rschen. If no such thing, that is not an appropriate answer I should receive. --Goldenburg111 19:16, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Repeated hat collecting requests, wikilawyering, disruptive behavior... --Rschen7754 19:18, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Let's go through the list:
  • Rights are not a power, they are needed tools Rschen, wow, and I thought you were experienced.
  • Wikilawyering, got no idea what that is. New word made on 19:19, January 11 2014 (UTC). Bravo!!! New Words!
  • Disruptive Behavior, false drama.
--Goldenburg111 19:21, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
I hate to interrupt your one-on-one discussion over eachother but; 1. Correct, rights are not a power and they are needed but a user who joins a project should not be asking for sysop and checkuser <1 week unless they have a valid rationale or trust (then again <1 week is still too short) 2. Wikilawyering exists. 3. Disruptive behaviour is not false drama. False drama is itself disruptive if taken too far. John F. Lewis (talk) 19:28, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

For your information John, I don't think an inexperienced user who just joined should be held accountable for something he has acknowledged. Wikilawyering, sure, I go around Wikis wasting my time saying Your contributions are bad and You are a bad editor, that's me! Referring false drama to him calling me disruptive, offensive and uncivil, isn't it. Let's go back to the Llama case. You forgave Llama for his sockpuppetry and wrongs in the past, yet I am just the opposite, expect the time. --Goldenburg111 19:34, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I forgave them because they demonstrated trust and the ability to move on and ignore anything they feel is wrong. Here we have a single sockpuppetry comment and you poke and user and then get involved in a long pointless discussion which is not needed. John F. Lewis (talk) 19:38, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
That is what I am trying to do. And here is where I get yelled at by a bunch of people about "disruptive editing" when literally the case is I am getting fused at for no reasons. That is how broken up the Wikimedia Projects can be, full of people who do not forgive people for their wrongs. --Goldenburg111 19:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
We all know that. Which is why you forget them and move on. John F. Lewis (talk) 19:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Explain to me then why PIR is reminding us tragedy and frustration? --Goldenburg111 19:47, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Because a) People are like that b) it is relevant John F. Lewis (talk) 19:51, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
(a This is not a proper answer, but I'll take it anyway. --Goldenburg111 19:52, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
  1. I apologize if my comment was offensive. I was just wondering if you thought your own case was different.
  2. You are doing good work on Wikimedia projects currently, and I hope you continue.
  3. Can you please forgive me? Obviously my wording was offensive. Feel free to remove it from the archived discussion.
  4. In my own defence, the comment was completely factual. I did not accuse you of abusing accounts, nor sockpuppetry, but merely of "using" accounts. I explicitly added that I did not intend to offend you, and I didn't expect you would have this reaction. Do you remember how, on the Simple English Wiktionary, I was trying to help you when other wanted you block you? Perhaps not. I think my question was valid, at the time. Why couldn't you forgive LlamaAl for his old mistakes?

PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:16, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

@Goldenburg111: I apologize. I hope you can forgive me. What can I do to make it up to you? Perhaps I could fix up the blog post or proofread any article/entries you are working on. Mea culpa, PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:21, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Just a note that I've reverted John F. Lewis' revert on Llama's RfA. It is long-standing practice that potentially defamatory comments can be removed or modified by the original poster at the request of the user they offend, and there is no reason why that shouldn't happen here. The comment was not a critical part of the discussion. Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:39, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
John, Adrian, thank you both for reverting to the revision you thought was more appropriate. However, I would like to make it absolutely clear that (1) it was not my intention to start an edit war (2) I do not mean to offend anyone, and I sincerely apologize for my mistake. Edit summaries are not a great communication medium. I hope Goldenburg can forgive me for my comment, as I believe he has the potential to be a great editor if he keeps up his work. I don't really want to argue about comments I left on closed RfAs, but if you must, continue. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:44, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
I do not see a valid reason to have it removed. Pi was simply pointing a fact out which is interesting to someone viewing the archives. There is not defamatory about it. In this case, I could argue your revert is defamatory and it should be oversighted, should it? No because it is not. It also some contribute to the discussion in that it points out the fact Goldenburg has participated in the action he is opposing for. Also we should not be messing with archived discussions, if it was a major issue, it would have been dealt with upon its posting not 11 days after. John F. Lewis (talk) 00:54, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
I am amazed that you feel the need to edit war over it. Have fun. Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:58, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
This is not an edit war... John F. Lewis (talk) 01:05, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Could you two please stop arguing about such a petty dispute? ;) PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:06, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Wow![edit]

Just when I'm retiring from meta because it seems totally useless to pay any attention to what happens here, I see your discussion with Goldenburg111, above, and your cookies for him on Wikiversity, and your prior concerns about using the abuse filter for blocking. I'm still going to stop looking at meta, for the most part, but ... still, seeing someone who cares does give me some hope that the global community has not gone entirely to weeds, thorns, and brambles.

On the abuse filter, looks like the current level is one or two blocks per day. --Abd (talk) 04:19, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Abd, for the kind words. I am happy you found that Meta has some good discussions and users. :-) PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:33, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Second the kind wow-thanks-for-the-hope words, which are entirely true and applicable.  :-)   This is a welcome change from arguing with bitter-content-dispute-participants that the overall project goals as enshrined in pillar four simply don't permit folks to call each other rude crude names, even though said names are often entirely true and applicable of all parties.  ;-)
  But I see that Abd mentions block-stats. How *does* one see the current-level-of-abuseFilter-blocks? From experience I know the filter-hit-counter on the summary-page are incorrect... most of them show zero, but that's just a reporting bug, many of the individual filter-bohts *are* performing blocks, which aren't getting tallied. 74.192.84.101 17:34, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean, but Special:AbuseLog and Special:Log/Abuse filter should give you information about blocks. PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:22, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
I mean, can someone please tell me what the URL for Special:Log/Abuse filter is, because I don't know it.  :-)   Thanks! Additionally, due to my ignorance, I was not positive that Abd was actually talking about *blocks* per day as displayed in that Special:Log/Abuse filter, as opposed to *disallows* per day which are showing up in Special:AbuseLog (albeit buried among other things). The eyeballed-info of around two filter-caused-blocks-per-day found by inspecting Special:Log/Abuse filter is likely an accurate count (barring spikes buried further back than one looks), because blocking an account requires a specific database-level event to occur. 74.192.84.101 21:55, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
What I worried was happening, was something else entirely, a known-but-non-urgent bug-set (known to me at least... I'll document here). On the main Special:AbuseFilter summary-list-page, there are some statistical-counters which are supposed to indicate how many disallows/warns/tags/blocks/etc each particular AbuseFilterBohtRegex (one per row) has generated, historically. 22 out of 41 aka the majority of the hit-count-statistics are blank, reason being because those 22 rows are marked 'private' methinks. That is the reporting-bug#1 I was speaking of. If you just look at the mainpage at noon on Tuesday, and then look again at noon on Wednesday, you will not see much change... but that is because only the 'public' filters have hit-counts. Interestingly, it turns out that one *could* manually calculate the hit-counts for the private-filter-rows, using Special:AbuseLog.

Using the list of all enabled filters,[117] and the descriptions in the 26 log-entries above, we can figure out the filter-id of each of the 26-log-entries. Reporting-bug#2 is that Special:AbuseLog does not show the filter-id-number, except for 'public' ones.

  • boht#mAF43, _Public 2055 hits, ______. 02:27, 23 Oct'13 PiRSquared17. New users adding external links on their user page.
  • boht#mAF51, Private _____ hits, W_T__. 12:24, 17 Nov'12 MarcoAurelio. Possible spambot (en).
  • boht#mAF65, Private _____ hits, __DTB_. 13:33, 17 Nov'13 Billinghurst. Specific user page spam.
  • boht#mAF72, Private _____ hits, ___T_G. 09:07, 10 Oct'13 Billinghurst. Global test filter against Ntsamr.
  • boht#mAF76, Private _____ hits, WDT_G. 10:25, 11 Sep'13 Billinghurst. general new user spam in several ns.
  • boht#mAF79, _Public 0193 hits, ___T__. 00:59, 29 Dec'13 PiRSquared17. New articles with no categories or templates.

Now, given that we are interested in #79, we can click on the "193 hits" link,[118] and see just those 193 tagging-events. Because of reporting-bug#1, there is no "NNNN hits" link to click for #76, being it is marked Private. However, knowing the filter-id, and the hit-link, we can tweak the querystring appropriately, theoretically.[119] In practice, that does not quite Do The Right Thing... instead of seeing just the list of #76 disallow-events, we get back the whole Special:AbuseLog listing. Knowing that the description-string is "general new user spam in several ns" for #76, we can manually figure it out. But reporting-bug#3 is that we should be able to click the link[120] and let the machines do the work of plucking out #76 whilst hiding the rest for us.

  None of these reporting-bugs is urgent, because there are workarounds... the data is available, for external API-scripts to gather, or for manual-eyeballing. HTH. p.s. While I'm asking, is there a way to specify a timespan in the querystring? Maybe, https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseLog&offset=&limit=100&wpSearchFilter=43&start_time=2013-01-02T03:04:05.678UTC&end_time=2013-12-25T03:04:05.678UTC Danke. 74.192.84.101 21:55, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Could you come on IRC? If not, basically: 1) why don't you file a bug for those problems? 2) I don't know of a way to do that using Special:AbuseLog, but there may be a way and I'll ask. Until then, you could just use the API :P Based on your example. You could change the props you want and use an online JSON-to-table converted too. PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:40, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Ahh, nice. API is kinda what I was fishing for.  :-)   Even though I haven't finished my past API effort yet, the centralNotice thing. Not to mention my twelve other projects that rely thereon. Messing with trying to bring new users up to speed, as usual, perfecting my Jungle Manual. When what I *really* really should be doing in writing ExecDir proposal draft#3, which is finished in my head, but doesn't do any good there! Sigh. Prioritize, prioritize.
  Anyways, I'm on IRC lurking from time to time in the en-help channel where teahouse and AfC folks get sent with questions. /msg does not seem to work cross-channel, in wiki-IRC, or is that not the correct incantation? What is your normal channel, I guess is a better question, for future use.
  Philosophically, though, the answer to your question, of why I post my bug-reports here, rather than filing them through the proper existing channels, is that I firmly believe the proper existing channels are wrong. They are designed, consciously or unconsciously, to dissuade contributors. See the related greenbox over here User_talk:74.192.84.101#User_talk:Miriam_Hondjo, about hazing beginners with our strange talkpage system (plus please email Miriam at info she provided if you think my blogs.wm.org suggestion is good). 74.192.84.101 15:53, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
/msg has nothing to do with which channel you are on. The reason it does not work is that I am not currently on IRC. When I'm online you can use /msg PiRSquared [or whatever my nick is, usually "PiRSquared" or "huh"]. I think you should email Miriam as I am not as good with new users, and I don't want to discourage her any more than the discussion system already has. PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:16, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Here is the trouble required to figure out how to file a bug report.

So, a small improvement, would be to have a link to http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org that appears in the sidebar (or at the bottom) of every wikipedia page that might have a software-bug.

Perhaps. You could file a bug for that. :P The MediaWiki logo in the bottom right links to mediawiki.org. Bug tracker is prominently featured in the sidebar there. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

  Still, bugzilla is a pain, and most people won't report software-bugs once they figure out how much up-front hassle doing that involves. The stated rationale, for all this trouble, is that 1) devs want to be able to contact me if my bug-report was unclear, and 2) devs want to easily manage the bugs. They insist on bugzilla, with world-visible email address, and specifically reject on-wiki technology-slash-anonymity as being an option. So in order to file a bug, the following steps are needed.

I used to avoid using Bugzilla, until I realized registration is harmless. Why not just use it? PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
  1. write up bug-report, in bugzilla syntax, ideally including code-patch
    Code patch goes to gerrit. Bugzilla syntax is very minimal. Anyone can submit a patch to Gerrit. It's even easier with toollabs:gerrit-patch-uploader. Would something like this for Bugzilla be good? PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
    Could you explain me which diff tool I have to use on Win8 in order to use that tool properly? I used to use git on Ubuntu but am now despaired of this Gerrit Patch Uploader. Not a clue how to get the "header" working (the thing with the l. 1 --- <path1> l. 2 +++ <path2>). Thanks. Vogone talk 16:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Well, you might want to use git and git-review for real if you have access and technical knowledge (I'm a n00b). If you want to use Gerrit Patch Uploader and you have git, it is easiest to do "git clone https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/PATH" (where PATH is e.g. mediawiki/core or operations/mediawiki-config), then make your edits, then do "git diff > somefile" and upload that file. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:22, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  2. create trash-email, link it to primary email
  3. create bugzilla account, link it to trash-email
  4. paste bug-report into http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org
  5. wait a month or two, maybe it will get fixed
    Your forgot a step: poke a bunch of devs so they will look at it.

Here's what would be a significant improvement, so that wikipedians could easily report bugs... which of course, is distinct from developers being able to easily manage bugs:

  1. write up a bug-report, in regular wiki-markup, ideally including a code-patch
  2. no email reqd Y
  3. no login reqd Y
  4. paste bug-report into http://bug.en.wikipedia.org (under the hood, this can be 'translated' into bugzilla, if necessary)
    Don't like the domain name particularly. Why should each wiki have a separate bug tracker? Would be better to keep it unified, IMHO. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
  5. wait a month or two, maybe it will get fixed

So the goal here, is being able to report bugs on-wiki (using wiki-markup just like in any other on-wiki editing), with any further requests from the devs being sent to one's user-talkpage or to the specific-bug-talkpage (just like any other on-wiki collaboration).

  Additionally, on top of that, it might make sense to have an email-this-bug-feature which would accept input via bugs@en.wikipedia.org (and then strip the email info an auto-paste the contents into http://bug.en.wikipedia.org using an auto-generated uid). It also might make sense to have a call-center, for people to phone in their bugs. We've got millions of dollars coming in every year, and plenty of volunteers. The trouble is how to utilize them optimally. 74.192.84.101 15:53, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't think a call center is worth the cost. Is bugzilla really that bad? BTW, Bugzilla is already mostly based on email as opposed to account names. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

why settle for improvement when we can have a wikiRevolution[edit]

  But hey... all that stuff above is assuming that we *want* people to report bugs. Arguably, what we really want is for people to *fix* the bugs, not merely report them for somebody else to fix. We allow any random person on the internet to go onto an article-talkpage, and complain about the content in mainspace, but we prefer they be w:WP:BOLD and just w:WP:SOFIXIT directly in mainspace themselves. For some pages, we have w:WP:FLAGGED to keep sensitive articles (or for *every* article on deWiki) from being messed up. So here's another pair of pathways, which assume the person who notices the bug, also happens to be a programmer:

  1. notice bug
  2. browse repo to find problem
  3. write up code-patch
  4. test the patch, on a local DIY installation of mediawiki
  5. write up bug-report, in bugzilla syntax, including said patch
  6. bug report -> bugzilla, patch -> gerrit. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
  7. create trash-email, link it to primary email
  8. create bugzilla account, link it to trash-email
  9. paste bug-report into http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org
  10. wait a month or two, maybe it will get deployed
    No, they should submit it to gerrit. They can even use toollabs:gerrit-patch-uploader if they have an account on Wikimedia wikis (specifically need mw: account). Bugzilla is good for reporting issues, prioritizing, and discussing bugs, but Gerrit is what we should use for code review. And what is currently used. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
  11. communication takes place via bugzilla and/or email and/or talkpages and/or IRC ... or just doesn't take place

Here's what I'd actually like to see someday:

  1. notice bug
  2. browse repo click 'edit code' at top of page Y
  3. write up code-patch
  4. test the patch, on a DIY installation WMF-provided test8.wm.org Y
  5. no bugzilla reqd Y
    Bugzilla is not reqd to submit a patch to gerrit AFAIK.
  6. no email reqd Y
    email isn't strictly required to submit a patch to gerrit using the uploader tool I linked. You could just use the gerritpatchuploader@gmail instead. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
  7. no login reqd Y
  8. paste bug-report into http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org click 'save' on the page where you click 'edit code' Y
  9. wait a month or two, maybe it will get deployed after somebody with the WP:FLAGGED-level-two-sysop-permbits has reviewed your suggested change
    currently we wait for someone to +2 and merge it. Not much different. But WP should not be involved here, as this applies to code not Wikipedia the encyclopedia. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
  10. communication takes place via the usual on-wiki mechanisms (edit-summary && codefile-talkpage), with watchlists ... other options still available, but no longer 'primary'
    What about people who are blocked onwiki? They should be allowed to submit bugs IMHO, and discuss them. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Therefore, although at some point I'll prolly break down and create the trash-email and start doing the bugzilla and the gerrit thing, it's only because I've done them before and will be comfy enough. But on-wiki tools are better, and if we want to have a wikiRevolutionary increase in the number of editors, methinks we will probably need a wikiRevolutionary increase in how we deal with the PHP codebase, the JS codebase, the SQL codebase, and those dern annoying template-messages which are so sternly officious.

  I submit to you, my friend, that right this second *I* ought to be able to make changes to the running codebase of wikipedia, just like I can make changes to mainspace... although prolly level-two-pending-changes-protection will be necessary... and maybe also a whitelist/blacklist for who is allowed to make suggestions. p.s. I used {{tick}} because {{aye}} is not installed on metaWiki. The steps with greens tick-marks aren't really {{done}} yet I will point out, just for the record.  ;-)   — 74.192.84.101 15:53, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

May I reply inline, point-by-point? It's a lot easier for these walls of text. :) PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:16, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Yup, feel free. Henceforth, not just this message. I'll be able to tell which bricks are mine. You can put commentary in b or i if you want to jam it on a single line, or just indent midstream. 74.192.84.101 19:17, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Done. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-03[edit]

09:33, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

stew2014noms[edit]

Was [136] a mistake? It's causing the banner to display to all logged in user rather than only sysops. Also ping Snowolf (talk · contribs) -- KTC (talk) 22:29, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

It was likely to test it on aawikibooks where he isn't a sysop :) It's all good and live right now :) Snowolf How can I help? 21:38, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
@Snowolf: You are exactly correct! :-) I'm sorry for not being active lately. I have been busy. I'll be back soon. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:30, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

A few issues[edit]

Hello again. I've noticed that after typing on the wiki's search engine, when traveling between wikis, that there is a odd search link popping up titled "Outreach:Cherokee". Can you check in either your Vector or Monobook skin whether this is the case, or just a bug on my end? To do this, just type in something like "out" in the search bar and have autocomplete suggest it for you. If it does pop up, I speculate it's an actual wiki page lost in the interwiki conflict, or a bad cache leftover from the search function, and I'll probably ask the devs about it. (Sorry if I'm confusing you, I'm not great at explaining this.)

Also, since you're translation admin, I have to ask, is the page that I recently wrote up at Echo (Notifications) eligible for translation? The translation noticeboard at Translation requests doesn't seem to give very clear instructions on what to do to make already existing pages translatable.

--TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 08:33, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

@TeleComNasSprVen: I can confirm that "Outreach:Cherokee" is showing up when I type in "out". Very strange. I can get a screenshot if you want. Also, the page will be marked for translation. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:32, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

tvars all over the steward elections[edit]

Hi! Would you mind trying to fix the damage as described at User talk:Verdy p (see the last few sections, including my and Snowolf's posts). --Rschen7754 23:54, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

@Rschen7754: which page has tvars? PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Seems that it's been cleared up now, though there may be further template issues. --Rschen7754 00:48, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

You are welcome ;). LlamaAl (talk) 03:09, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

:) PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:11, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

luri lrc verification to eligiblity[edit]

Hello MR PiRSquared17
please help us to verification luri lrc,this language has more than 7millions speakers in iran and other countries like oman this is luri lrc requesting pageː https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Lurish
please verify luri lrc language to eligible this language these days has many actions and increase it's articles, and this language has six active writers please help so thanks!!!
lrc lori (talk) 13:20, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-04[edit]

10:22, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Twinkle[edit]

Hello. There was Twinkle recently enabled for my Wikidata account, but an issue emerged after that. I was unable to edit items on Wikidata until I disabled Twinkle. The problem was found on loading any page in Your script User:PiRSquared17/twinkle.js. The error tells: «ReferenceError: userIsInGroup is not defined».

If You need any more info, I can provide it. Thanks. --Renessaince (talk) 16:37, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I think the problem might have to do with Wikidata's API. I fixed the userIsInGroup problem, can you try again and see what errors you get? (purge cache) PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:43, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
On scroll: TypeError: activeInstances[i].update is not a function — load.php:203
On click «add»: TypeError: editableSiteLink.siteIdInterface is undefined — load.php:668
On typing into the label window: TypeError: iInterface.isActive is not a function — load.php:628
On deleting inputted text: TypeError: this._interfaces[i].valueCompare is not a function — load.php:629 --Renessaince (talk) 19:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
None of these errors appear if Twinkle is disabled. --Renessaince (talk) 19:52, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

waray-waray stats, plus non-mobile-pageviews[edit]

Heh. Bohts indeed. http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/PlotsPngEditHistoryAll.htm#war Also interesting is [158] who seems to have done a lot of work here. They don't come to the same conclusions as me (Timeshifter seems to want to desysop a bunch of folks && fork wikipedia away from the WMF && increase arbcom's powers dramatically... I'd prefer to "en-sysop" another few thousand + approval vote the WMF + create content dispute juries to help mediate sticky wickets). But they see many of the same problems as me, and have a bunch of interesting graphs and links, including the one to the waray-waray dataset. Haven't found the exact graph I'm looking for yet (1+ and 5+ and 25+ and 99+ trendlines ... although Timeshifter has the graph of 5+ and 25+ and 99+ on their userpage, see w:User:Timeshifter which is from here.[159]

  p.s. In that last link, near the bottom, the (recent) downward overall trend in pageviews per month is worrying, which just started to happen in 2013. My interpretation is that enough people are now using tablets, that PC/laptop use is finally declining. However, although we have a reasonably steady upward-growth-trend in pageviews from tablet-users, it is not enough to mask the new sharp decline in PC-users. Editing wikipedia at *all* is pretty tricksy... editing from a tablet is horrendously difficult, because tablets are designed for consumption, not really for interaction. Prolly voice-enabled talkpages is the only hope, in the long run; vKeybs are too painful. Has the WMF ever tried opening a volunteer-staffed VoIP-based call center, where people can call in to request edits? 74.192.84.101 17:20, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

My interpretation of the pageview-downslope starting in 2013+ was almost certaily incorrect, and in fact, backwards. Tablet-users and phone-users suffer from small screen-size, therefore, in search results they tend not to have sidebars and such, because there is no room for them. PC-users tend to have a very large screen-size, and laptop-users tend to have 13"/15"/17" depending on laptop-category, but still at least 1366x768 or 1280x720, and this larger real-estate (plus the dreaded infoboxen) permits the dominant search engine to keep readership from visiting wikipedia. This insight can be scientifically checked, or at least, statistically checked. The insight is not mine: w:User:Carrite figured it out, and w:User_talk:Thekohser (fka w:User_talk:MyWikiBiz) was impressed and wrote up an informative article, which you can indirectly find, over here. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Google+Knowledge+Graph+Boxes+Wikipedia Hit#1 is a good summary, hit#2 is the primary source methinks.
  The statistical-science-y trick is as follows. Because the roll-out-date of the 'knowledge box' sidebar by google differs by country, if one were to graph the launch-date of the sidebar at www.google.com / www.google.fr / www.google.it / www.google.es / www.google.pt , onto a set of historical pageviews-per-day graphs of enWiki / frWiki / itWiki / esWiki / ptWiki, there seems to be a clear correlation between the infobox-powered knowledge-box, and the start of a decline in wikipedia pageviews.
  This *is* therefore still worrying, but for a very different reason. The problem is not that wikipedia-via-tablets is so horrid we're losing readership... the 'problem' is that google is monetizing CC-BY-SA content. Which is allowed by the license terms, of course, but I'm not sure it is in line with the oft-touted Don't Be Evil bylaw number ten (cf w:Google Knol which was their earlier attempt to overtake wikipedia via w:WP:MEDRS... and note that google can *accept* new contributions under a proprietary copyright-license-scheme should they ever decide to create the GoogEditor for the data in the sidebar). Google *has* changed their bylaws... they once, back in the day(™) claimed not to be interested in providing horoscope-data. Now they do, of course.  :-)
  So the question becomes... if wikipedia (purposely vague on who specifically that would be) were to ask that w:WP:GOOG start displaying clear attribution in "their" sidebar, and give wikipedians control over the *contents* of the sidebar-iframe, so that we could display banner-adverts seeking donations on google's search-result-pages... plus dukgo/bing/yahoo/etc getting the same deal... then could we simultaneously decrease load on our server-farm, *and* reduce the donation-begging-adverts on the actual wikipedia site? High risk, high reward, methinks. Note that many googlers already have a financial relationship with google, and if google handles the donation-gathering and then gives the WMF a big cheque at the end, payment-processing fees are amortized to nearly zero. Hope this helps.
  p.s. See my proposal to remove the google-namespace-prefix, or if not, to add other prefixii for the other engines out there... that seems like it could be a perk, for iframed-infoboxen-related compliance, eh? p.p.s. If we *really* wanted to be devious, instead of asking google to let us have some control over "their" sidebar... we could instead publicly offer to help Microsoft create Sartori (the bing-competitor to the google-knowledge-box), in exchange for them giving us control of the Sartori iframe. Or maybe we just suggest to google that we're thinking of suggesting such a deal to Ballmer.... p.p.p.s. I hope the new ExecDir is an extremely tough person. 74.192.84.101 20:01, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Admin activity review[edit]

Hey PiRSquared. Just want to let you know that I've changed this page and Admin activity review/2013/Notice to inactive right holders, and since you're translation admin I want to ask you to check if any of my changes to these pages warrants retranslations. Specifically my most significant changes were eliminating an increasingly annoying number of "by"s and "of"s and consequently changing passive voice to active voice on these pages. I've also included a wikilink to Wikimedia chapters on the first page, so that probably needs some tvar tags like the other ones do. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:01, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

@TeleComNasSprVen: Hi, I did mark that version for translation. Now that Abd has reverted your changes, you should discuss the edits on the talk page of AAR. You two don't seem to get along very well, but could you please just try to discuss it civilly or compromise? I don't actually know which parts of the edits Abd disliked, but it seemed okay to me (and I was involved in the original RfC). I guess the technical reason Abd reverted is because policy changes need to be reviewed, but I don't see a change in meaning. (Also please don't discuss this on my talk) Thank you, PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:35, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I hope you won't mind this explanation, PRS. I saw the edit, because your talk page is on my watchlist, and saw that it was massive and had not been discussed. I did look over the changes and saw nothing wrong, but this is a policy with widespread impact. The changes were extensive, such that it would not be immediately clear if there was a change in meaning. The page explicitly requires approval before modifying it. That, in theory, could include spelling corrections, but standard wiki practice is to allow such. On the other hand, many syntactical changes can require substantial review, and that's difficult to do thoroughly in looking at a diff. My reversion did not mean that there was anything wrong with the changes, only that procedure that is required, for good reason, was set aside. If you have carefully reviewed the changes and find nothing wrong, that would be totally adequate, you may revert me. Indeed, I'm done with the page. The user did not revert me, and that restraint was proper. And there was nothing wrong with improving the clarity of the language, if that is what he did and if there were no modifications to meaning. But ... I would not suggest making massive changes to a policy page, ever, even if they are all minor, without doing something like self-reversion (which is much superior to describing desired changes on Talk before making them.) In the past, I've done just that with policy pages, pointed to the edit on Talk, inviting review, stating intent to revert my changes back in if there was no objection, and when there was no comment for a substantial period, reverting my changes back in. It works, and it's "wiki." --Abd (talk) 01:36, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I understand your reasons for reverting the changes. I left MF-W, the steward most involved with this policy, a message about the changes. If he thinks they modify the meaning of the policy, we can partially revert. Thank you for the explanation. Could you please not discuss this on that external site? You know the one. We can solve this "issue" here. Do you think any consensus could approve these changes or do we need to find a steward to "approve" it? The "community approval" links to RfC, but we certainly won't have a RfC for a copyedit. I'm not really an expert in modifying policies. Regards, PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:44, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, PRS. RfC would have been silly. There is nothing here worth taking to that site, if I know what you mean. I rarely take anything there, and certainly not something like this tempest in a teapot. You did what was needed to resolve the issue, and if you hadn't, someone else would have, in short order. It was simple from the beginning. --Abd (talk) 03:21, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the notice. By the way, when you left the message for the other user, did you happen to pull it from a machine translation? Your babel boxes don't seem to indicate you have any fluency in Vietnamese. Not saying whatever the message you left is wrong, just curious. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 22:46, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I adapted vi:Bản mẫu:Thử nghiệm. I would have given attribution, but I didn't want to confuse the user. PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello again. For the 2014 Steward Elections page, is it better to translate the table headers "Yes" and "No" as "Support" and "Oppose" respectively? I know it's a break from the regular tradition for the steward elections, but it's honestly easier for the multilingual translators if we just use English "Support" and "Oppose" as "Yes" and "No" are rather vague (yes and no to what questions exactly?) Also, I saw your post on my talkpage on outreach and if I see a page that needs translation there, I prefer to contact you through your talkpage on meta for convenience of access. Outreach is pretty low-traffic as far as I can tell and messages there will be received very late, perhaps for both you and me. I hope you understand. Regards, TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 05:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-05[edit]

09:46, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Proposal to create a genealogy wiki using Wikidata[edit]

I recently added some comments proposing to create a new genealogy-oriented wiki on top of Wikidata that I hope to get your input on if you have time. Thanks.--Dallan (talk) 00:52, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Re: this see that TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 02:11, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Unblock[edit]

Hello. I just wanted to ask you if you could please unblock me from Wikipedia because I was just trying to improve articles, but someone found it to be spam. I honestly try not to spam and do my best to help out. Please, I am begging you with all my heart. -- 70.190.250.58 3:37pm, January 30, 2014 (UTC)

Can you please get someone to unblock me and explain to them of why I request this? -- 70.190.250.58 4:41pm, January 31, 2014 (UTC)

It is a global block, and will need to be appealed to SRG. You will need to present a stronger case to get a removal of cross wiki spam.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Note prior user contributions and appeals. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 12:29, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Like, what would a stronger case be? --70.190.250.58 12:59, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Bad advice, actually. Because of the appeals, on this page and a steward page that I have watchlisted, I looked at contributions. There are extensive global contributions for this IP. It's not clear to me that this is the same user, and, bottom line, the user has other recourse that would be far simpler to follow than trying to get the block lifted. I don't get that this is a spammer, genuine spammers don't waste this kind of time. On meta, I see a block for "vandalism," December 15. There was an edit the same day from this IP,[165] and the editor was warned, but also, it appears, blocked for a week. That edit was not vandalism. It was clueless, but harmless. When I looked at global contributions, nothing stood out. Globally blocked, history. I looked and found no global block request. There is a discussion on the blocking steward's talk page. That discussion shows that this isn't a vandal or spammer, but clueless, and is now "spamming" requests for assistance. I will advise the user on User talk:70.190.250.58 as to how to return to editing. I will also warn the editor against continuing to ask various users for assistance. The user may communicate with me on the user's talk page, that should be liberally allowed. --Abd (talk) 13:37, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Some of what this user has done is so unbelievably clueless that it's hard to believe, and I start to think about trolling. For example, [166]. However, before I started editing Wikipedia, I had some substantial on-line experience going back fifteen years, and there was still stuff I didn't get. I remember trying to construct a signature from page history; believe it or not, instructions written by people who know what to do sometimes can be missed by people who don't have the same background. Bottom line: this user is clueless, and very active users who are clueless, and believe that they are being helpful, create work for others to clean up. If the user asks me, I'll not only say not to edit other's comments, as I have, but the reason why we don't do that. It's related to why this user is blocked. If this user isn't simply trolling, the first thing for the user to get is the personal lack of clue. If that can be recognized, then learning becomes possible. I'll be suggesting Wikiversity, and that the user stay away from the 'pedias for a while. I'll expect stuff to clean up there, but education in wiki practice and culture and skills is part of what we do on Wikiversity. We'll see how the user responds, there has been one good sign and one not-so-good. Thanks, PRS, for supporting this effort. If I need assistance, I'll ask for it. There is no way I'm taking this user to SRG yet and even suggesting it is a Bad Idea, a procedurally correct Waste of Time. Later, maybe. First things first. --Abd (talk) 19:22, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
That probably was a bad idea now that I think about it. The user has created this section. Maybe you could try to help them some more? PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:03, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

problema[edit]

Estava ativado. Já desativei obrigada. E leio inglês, mas não sei escrever direito em inglês. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 05:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

my English

I don´t know talk well, and I don´t know write well in English. But I undestand what I read. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 05:36, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Eu não falo bem português, mas eu entendo a maioria das línguas românicas um pouco. I don't speak Portuguese well, but I understand most Romance languages a little. If you have any other questions or problems, feel free to ask me in Portuguese or English for help. PiRSquared17 (talk) 05:41, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok[edit]

Não falei nada antes com o senhor, porque pensei que não entendia o português. Eu não sabia o que é língua românica.Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 05:54, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

pt:Línguas românicas (línguas latinas): espanhol, francês, italiano, português, catalão, etc. PiRSquared17 (talk) 05:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I like talking with you. Good Night. Here at 4 am. Se eu tiver algum outro problema te procuro. Obrigada. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 06:13, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Tradução[edit]

Nas traduções que eu tenho feito e revisado, notei o seguinte. Tem textos que eu já havia traduzido, não tinha nada a revisar e eu coloquei o status Pronto. Dias depois eu notei que houve alteração na quantidade de páginas a traduzir. Alguém alterou alguns dos textos, e outros alteraram algumas palavras em outro texto. Eram no idioma em inglês mas a pessoa não mudou o status de pronto para atualização ou revisão. Como o texto já estava no 100% traduzido e status amarelo de Pronto, se não mudar o status do texto novamente é difícil da pessoa que está fazendo a tradução adivinhar quem veio uma pessoa e alterou algumas palavras e colocou o texto novamente para se fazer uma tradução. :) O senhor é de qual país? Good Night. :) Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 03:39, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Because, I am a woman, darling. Volevo farlo Ana Gauna (talk) 20:14, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Eu lembrei que eu vi o italiano no seu perfil, e eu gosto da Laura Pausine, então estava faltando traduzir aquele diálogo para o Italiano. risos Ana Gauna (talk) 20:35, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Lembra daquele dia, que eu perguntei qual é a sua nacionalidade? Você não me disse até hoje, me deixou curiosa. Mas, aquela tradução em Italiano, no perfil do Teles, ela ficou correta, ou o Bing traduziu com muitos erros? Ana Gauna (talk) 21:15, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-06[edit]

08:30, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Translation[edit]

Good Morning. When I finish my translation I put "ready" status but I don't change the status to "Published" after, because I do not know what it is to be published, and what is not to be published. So after I finish my translation will always leave only with the Status of ready. Confesso, eu usei o tranlator do Bing para lhe escrever isso.  :-) Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 13:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Não sei qual é o padrão aqui na Meta. Você acha melhor o quê? Eu deixo escrito a palavra Category ou Categoria quando eu traduzo algo? Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 14:59, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Ficou zangado comigo pelo que eu disse outro dia? Eu sempre falo o que eu penso, é o meu defeito.  :-) Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 20:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Amgauna, acho que se deve traduzir para "Categoria" (depois do "|"), mas deixar o link original para que funcione, como de resto tem feito. ~ DanielTom (talk) 21:11, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Re ready vs published: it's not very important which you use. "Ready" is fine. See also: mw:Help:Extension:Translate/Message_group_states. Re Category/Categoria: Daniel está correto. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Eu pensei que o senhor não estava online. Eu não sabia disso, que tinha que usar Category/Categoria: fiz errado, será preciso revisar as categorias que eu já traduzi anteriormente. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 01:38, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
@Amgauna: When you translate a category like Category:Meta-Wiki_maintenance, you may and should use "Categoria". If you see a link like [[Category:...]], do not translate it, but the title of categories can be translated to use "Categoria". PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:43, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
If I may drop in, why not just use Special:MyLanguage for all your links and mark the [[Category:...]] part of the wikilink before the vertical bar untranslatable? TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 03:04, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry. Agora eu não entendi nada do que disse. Não entendi esses links. O primeiro link é um código de programa PHP, eu não sei PHP. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 01:51, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
(Amgauna, não se preocupe, eu acho que vc está a traduzir corretamente. Vou perguntar a ele.) Pir, is there anything wrong in this diff? I think Amgauna is doing it correctly. ~ DanielTom (talk) 01:54, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Eu nunca usei esse Media Wiki. Não sei para que ele serve. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Daniel, that diff is correct. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:00, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Amgauna, tanto quanto sei, só não pode editar o que vai antes de "|", o que vem depois pode traduzir. É isso que vc tem vindo a fazer, e está correto. Pode continuar em paz, que não está a cometer nenhum erro. ~ DanielTom (talk) 02:04, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Correct, sorry if what I said was confusing. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:06, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Eu sou programadora. Eu fiquei analisando os códigos das páginas. e escolhi o francês e o espanhol e antes o italiano para ver como eles faziam a tradução de código, depois que eu entendi como o código funcionava, traduzir o resto foi mais fácil. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 02:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

O dificil é que eu não conheço as palavras que não são para traduzir. Quando um texto voltava para mim depois que eu traduzi foi que eu vi qual palavra tinha predefinição que não era para traduzir. Mas consegui traduzir o teu inglês. Achei algumas palavras que não existia no meu dicionário, tive que procurar o significado delas online. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 02:24, 5 February 2014 (UTC) Escolhi os idiomas para me guiar aqui. Opções de tradução. idiomas auxiliares. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 02:29, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Eu disse algo errado? Já tem muitos anos que eu não programo nada. Eu sei HTML4 não sei esse HTML5 que a Meta usa aqui, ainda. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 02:41, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Não sei se entendi esse Special My Language. Eu configurei o meu idioma como pt-br em preferências no menu acima. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 03:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry. Não vou mais aborrecê-lo com as minhas bobagens. Deve ser muito ocupado. Good Night. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 03:57, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Special:MyLanguage/Example redirects to Example/pt if your user language (en) is set to 'pt' and the translation (/pt) exists, otherwise redirects to Example. There might be fallbacks like pt-bt -> pt, but I'm not sure. @DanielTom: Is this correct? PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:04, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
No. :-) DanielTom (talk) 09:19, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Boa Noite, sabe qual é o significado de "Sanitizing user-agent strings" não consegui traduzir, não sei o quer dizer isso. :-) Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 02:53, 6 February 2014 (UTC) Esquece. o Google não traduziu para mim, mas o BING sim. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 03:00, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Good Night Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 04:09, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
O Verdy alterou uma categoria que eu traduzi, O Verdy diz que eu estou errada. Não vou ficar teimando com ele. Já que estou errada. Traduzi tudo errado. Não vou mais traduzir nenhuma Categoria. Não sei mais o seu layout padrão, qual é o correto para as Categorias da Meta. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 16:48, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Não sei o que fazer, ele pensa em francês e você pensa em inglês. Vocês dois querem é me deixar maluca. Perdi várias horas hoje a toa traduzi e ele logo em seguida desfêz tudo. Quem tem que digitar o nome da Categoria em inglês é pessoa que tem o idioma em inglês. O meu idioma é o português então é lógico tenho que digitar o nome em português e a categoria tem que aparecer, porque eu traduzi o nome de inglês para o português. E o padrão naquela barra de categorias é usar o Category, isso eu já testei lá com as que já existem lá em português Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 05:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
O que eu uso para traduzir = https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:LanguageStats#sortable:2=asc
Você, outro dia, disse para eu olhar isso, mas é uma página VAZIA = https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Meta-Wiki_maintenance/Translations
Eu já li o manual da ferramenta de tradução, eu traduzi ele de inglês para português já tem um mês. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 02:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Help?[edit]

Special:Contribs/2602:304:AF53:3E99:70AB:F702:6722:4F0A. I'm not knowledgeable about this type of stuff. Could you check whether anything got damaged in these edits or whether they should be like that? (Sorry, but I don't know whom to contact about this type of stuff. :p) --Glaisher [talk] 17:42, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

@Glaisher: I really don't know what is better. You might want to ask User:Verdy p. PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:48, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
I've fixed the template as it had incorrect wikisyntax (mixup of opening/closing noinclude tags, incorrect parameter names, broken links), and invalid or very verbose/inefficient/non portable CSS/HTML (alignment problems, RTL layout broken for Arabic/Hebrew, incorrect language tagging...), it also used an outdated and unmaintained method for just a few fallbacks. verdy_p (talk) 22:57, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, Verdy p and Pi. --Glaisher [talk] 08:32, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Categorias[edit]

Como o Verdy disse que eu traduzi errado nas Categorias, não vou mais traduzir nenhuma Categoria. Não sei mais o correto a fazer nelas. No meu perfil de usuário da Meta a palavra Categoria não funciona, o que está funcionando lá é o Category. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 21:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

You have not understood at all what I said you!
You have translated things in the correct items. But you wanted to include English words in the proposed Portuguese translation or removed existing Portuguese words to replace them by English where it is absolutely not required (and often undesirable).
This is not needed at all. "Categoria(s)" is the correct Portuguese word for translating the English word "Category(ies)" and you did not need to change it back to English EVEN IF it is used in the namespace part of the pagename (you are NOT creating new pagenames, you create ONLY a Portuguese title, visible at top in the wiki page).
When you translate anything from English to Portuguese, translate **all** the English text, as long as it makes sense in Portuguese.
----
Also you absolutely need to read the doc: don't translate template names between "{{" and "|" braces if this occurs in some source translations. I recommend you read the basics about Wiki syntax, but we are preparing sources of translations so that you should rarely fond them in actual source texts to translate.
Some basic Wikisyntax you'll find often are the 2 or 3 single quotes for encoding italics or bold, or lines starting by "*" for lists of items, and texts between "==" for section headings. This is the very basic Wiki syntax you should familiarize with.
verdy_p (talk) 22:55, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Está correto. Não entendi mesmo. Mas, eu vou pelo que eu estou vendo que está funcionando comigo, dentro do meu perfil. Já olhou o novo rodapé das Categorias da Meta? Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 23:01, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Gauna, Verdy is completely correct. When you are translating page titles, you should translate "Category:" as "Categoria", and you should not add /pt-br to the title. This is completely distinct from when you create a page beginning with "Categoria:" or link like [[Categoria:...|...]] (don't do that here). You are only changing the text that is displayed, not the actual page name. I don't understand this comment, what do you mean? Hope this helps, PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:04, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Que tal testar? O rodapé está ai embaixo. Qual foi a categoria que eu criei? Qual foi a Categoria que o Verdy criou? o que estiver errado acho que não irá funcionar no rodapé novo. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 23:09, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

A Categoria Software/pt-br funcionou dentro do meu perfil. As outras que eu testei não funcionam, dentro desse rodapé novo de Categorias. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 23:56, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
I don't think you understand what we are saying at all. The actual category name will be "Community/pt-br" but when you go to Category:Community/pt-br it will say "Categoria:Comunidade" at the top. I'm not sure how else to explain this. It's no different than translating any other page title. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:58, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Look = https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Software/pt-br

Quando eu traduzi, no dia que eu traduzi, eu tenho certeza absoluta que eu escrevi Comunidade (português) = Community (English) Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 00:03, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Aqui no Brasil nós usamos a palavra software e hardware (sem traduzir) quem trabalha com computadores. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 00:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Eu tinha escrito Category ontem dentro de pt-br na ferramenta de tradução, e agora lá está escrito Categoria. Alguém alterou o que eu tinha escrito lá de ontem para hoje. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 00:21, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Look = https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia/pt-br

Recommendation: If you do not understand after Verdy and I have tried to explain many times, just don't translate categories. There is plenty to translate other than categories. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I understand he. I only not understand he talk about your projects. I not understand about your projects. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 00:41, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I not work in not projects in Meta and Wikipedia and etc. I only translate at 3 weeks. Mas eu nem sei o que eu crio lá. Good Night. Bye. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 00:58, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Maybe pt-N user like Teles or DanielTom could help explain this. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:19, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Não conheço eles, somente os vi ontem. Não preciso de nenhuma explicação. Não faço parte de nenhum dos projetos da Meta. Nunca me envolvi em nenhum dos projetos. Ontem eu já vi o que está funcionando nas categorias que eu traduzi e que eu testei ontem a noite nesse rodapé novo de categorias que existe na meta, vou traduzir aquelas categorias depois. Bom dia. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 11:31, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Aqui na Meta quem eu conheço online ha mais tempo é o senhor. o Verdy desmanchou as categorias que eu fiz hoje de tarde e agora elas não funcionam mais no rodapé existente de categorias, que ordena as categorias automaticamente para se fazer uma busca automática entre elas. Eu já expliquei mas ele não me compreende. Look option Category = https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets Vou usar o exemplo Reino Unido que o Verdy trocou de Category para Categoria, para você poder observar a diferença. Essa categoria irá aparecer como página inexistente e ela existe. Ele trocou para Categoria:Reino Unido que não funciona no rodapé que ordena automático. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 03:30, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Você pensa in english. Eu penso in portuguese. Eu tenho que digitar a Categoria em português e a categoria tem que aparecer, porque eu traduzi a categoria. Não entende isso? O Verdy trocou Category:Reino Unido/pt-br por Categoria:Reino Unido e a minha categoria em português que eu traduzi hoje de tarde, várias, parou de funcionar em português. Desisto. Boa noite. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 04:10, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Sabe de uma coisa? De hoje em diante eu não vou mais tentar me lembrar de nada do que eu aprendi em francês anos atrás. Não vou mais saber mais nada desse idioma. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 17:03, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Aqui na Meta tem técnicos que desenvolvem o sistema online. Eles é devem saber o que existe de errado nas Categorias que eu já traduzi, e o que funciona e não funciona. Eu não entendo o sitema que a Meta usa. Eu uso a Meta como um usuário simples, com um computador simples. Se colocarem categorias para eu traduzir eu farei a tradução do modo que eu entendi, se estiver algo errado, um técnico da Meta teria que dizer o que é para poder consertar. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 21:21, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Ana, the name of the page is Category:United Kingdom/pt-br. The translation of the name is "Categoria:Reino Unido", but that does not mean you should add pages to the category called Category:Reino Unido (this is a red link). @Teles: can you please help translate this? The "Reino Unido" only appears on the top of Category:United Kingdom/pt-br. PiRSquared17 (talk) 06:14, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Reverted autotranslate[edit]

I see that you have reverted the change to use TNT instead of Autotranslate, because your comment says that parameters 1 and 2 are not passed. This is wrong. They are passed by TNT.

See my User:Verdy_p/sandbox where I use a TNT call to render the translated User:Verdy_p/sandbox/2014/01. I pass 2 positional parameters a and b, and they are rendered in the page.

It seems that you are confused by the fact that the Blacked user and so on will only categorize pages invoking the template if they are in the User namespace. There are two legacy requests for unbanning users, but effectively they don't give a reason for why.

I wonder where it is wrong, if you have noticed something because all user pages that use these blocked/unblick template and that I have seen properly displayed the reason, provided that it was specified.

But may be this is a problem of cache. Did you try a null-edit first of these pages ? verdy_p (talk) 09:23, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Note: I know there are still issues in the TNT template. I've fixed a few of them for tricky cases (notably the MEdiaWiki docuentation about mw.title is wrong when it says that it will always return a title object with at last id=0, sometimes it throws an exception (for example when the namespace does not exist).
I have also fixed some legacy usages of language codes in Meta that are no longer supported by MediaWiki itself; something changed in the Lua support for Scribunto recently about how language codes are handled.
I am currently debugging/testing these languages (indirectly in the pseduo-namespaces or parser functions "int:" and "MediaWiki:"; there are some ongoing changes there on how language fallbacks are handled, but some cases are forgotten, notably for legacy language codes used in Wikipedia such as "nrm" or "be-x-old", or for new language variants such as "shi-tglg" (and "shi", assuming the latin version there, is currently wrong). verdy_p (talk) 09:33, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
@Verdy p:, I think that your edits caused a problem with unblock templates. I just re-reverted {{unblock granted}} to your version. See User_talk:Kathrinsticher. It's obviously broken. PiRSquared17 (talk) 12:00, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
In fact what is broken is the code present in some translated versions of the blocking templates. They are unsynchronized with the layout template, and they break on equal signs which may be present in the reason texts. I'll fix them. verdy_p (talk) 12:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
@Verdy p: thanks in advance, PiRSquared17 (talk) 12:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Re: Your Notification[edit]

Dear PiRSquared17,

Thank you for your notification of the deletion proposal attempt by User:Sven manguard. I have replied on that page to express my viewpoint on this matter and would like to inform you in advance that I would not have the time to deal with these matters due to personal time contraints to attend to matters in real life. FYI, my last major activity on Wikipedia was actually eight months ago and I do not intend to be active on Wikipedia for the next five years or beyond. Any activity whatsoever will be very fleeting in nature. (Such I believe is also the case with former Wikipedia participants such as User:Pietras1988.)

As for their inquiries regarding the accuracy of the TJC interwiki article translations, I will admit to you now that the early translations prior to January 2006 were performed by online machine, then help was requested to the native speakers and/or admins of that particular language edition. After that date, machine translation was not used because (i) the translation accuracy for certain of those languages was poor and it was often easier to translate directly from English, and (ii) machine translation was not available for the majority of those languages (unlike today). As you had correctly pointed out, the vast majority (99%) of those language editions were gradually improved upon by native speakers to the point where errors were ironed out and grammar inconsistencies eliminated. The only language editions that were never "proofread" by native speakers are the following: Bislama and Saterlandic (for Saterlandic I had requested for translation help from their administrator and his reply was "I will consider it, don't fear.[186]". --Jose77 (talk) 11:37, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-07[edit]

09:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Abusive user:Amgauna[edit]

See User_talk:Amgauna#ABUSIVE_Blanking_of_my_user_page. She blanked my user page in a series of edits. verdy_p (talk) 15:43, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

AGF. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:56, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Se é lista para me eliminar. Eu já disse que pode me eliminar. Não sei porque o Verdy não quis me eliminar.  :-)

<! -- Eu li e entendi o que o senhor escreveu para mim. Não gostei. Boa Noite. -->

@DanielTom, Teles: can you help? PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:33, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

a palavra duck te lembra de algo que falou horas atras para mim?

@Amgauna: o PiRSquared17 estava só tentando ajudar você; o que foi que não gostou mesmo? Vc o está deixando preocupado! :-) DanielTom (talk) 00:38, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

No meu email, o troço foi escrito as 17:30hs. Agora tente se lembrar o que foi que o senhor escreveu para mim (invisivel) só no email (visivel)

Eu vi. Mas não vou te responder essa pergunta, porque você não tem email. Você estava com o cérebro onde para escrever aquela bobagem? Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 01:41, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Boa noite. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 02:09, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Porque você não coloca o português nivel 1 lá junto dos teus idiomas? Você sabe falar muita coisa, até o que não deve. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 12:55, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Qual a sua idade? 17 anos? Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 15:43, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Why? Because of my username? PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes

Já que eles dizem que eu sou vandalismo e abusive filter e estragam o que eu faço aqui, vou embora. Bye. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 16:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

You have accused me of vandalism on my talk page when I restored the Porguguese word that you had replaced by the English word)...
You have lied several times to various people, including people selected randomly like a, Indonesian user that you harassed with the same non-sense.
I did not use that "vandalism" term against you, I (and others) said what you did was wrong and did not want to listen or understand (even when @Teles: explained it to you in Portuguese).
I attempted to be calm but at one point this became unsupportable, and someone took the lead on the issue, but you ignored him, and continued to talk to me, and cite me in other unrelated places (without signing your own messages...)
I don't know what yo do with you, others will be upsetted too. But I cannot simply ignore your messages on my talk page (giving the time for others to discuss with you), until someone else wants to comment on messages that you post about every hour on my talk page. verdy_p (talk) 16:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Eu vou retirar o francês do meu idioma lá no perfil. Ele termina com a minha paciência. E já que para você e os demais eu sou vandalismo e abuse filter, não tem sentido. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 17:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

PiRSquared17 (talk), I was on vacation in I employ, I'm going back to work tomorrow, I'll spend a little less time online on all sites I use. Bye Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 18:44, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

PiRSquared17 (talk), Eu não marquei a página de ninguém como vigiada. Ela se marcou sozinha. E esse teu amigo trocou diversas palavras em português do texto do Tech News que eu traduzi ha umas 2 semana atrás. Eu estou cansada desse homem (Verdy p) ele acabou com a minha paciência = I have not marked the page as nobody watched. She scored alone. And that your friend exchanged several words in Portuguese text of Tech News I translate ha about 2 weeks ago. I'm tired of this man (Verdy p) he exhausted my patience. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 21:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
You know, I have many years last time someone left me with stress. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 21:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
PiRSquared17 (talk Gostei de te conhecer aqui. Boa noite. Desculpe se eu te aborreci outro dia. Boa noite. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 01:35, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
You didn't upset me. I've just been a bit busy with other things (as you have been). Regards, PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:40, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

RE: Diff links in edit summary[edit]

I think that it's best to use the full URL in case the page history is exported to a different wiki. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 16:10, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

@Michaeldsuarez: that's a good idea, but won't m:special:diff/12345 work in that case? Anyway, I was just letting you know. It's fine if you think URLs are better for some reason. :) PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
I haven't thought about that, but "m:" won't work outside of Wikimedia. It would have to be metawikipedia:Special:Diff/12345 in order to work outside Wikimedia projects. Anyways, I think that it's easier just to copy what's in the address bar. Thanks for the help. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 16:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

TL[edit]

Perfect it's now 100%.Ald™ (talk) 04:42, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Help[edit]

Since I can't edit the translated version directly please fix this template loop. Glossary/id.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 22:25, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@Aldnonymous: if you translate it now, it should work. PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:29, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
I almost null edit since it's already 100% and there's no purge button in it, in the end I just making some addition. Thanks!--AldNonUcallin?☎ 22:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

I had Microsoft Windows 7, I did 2 times reload, the page opened its normal for me. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 22:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Stewards/Confirm/2014/MF-Warburg[edit]

Replied. --►Cekli829 06:10, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-08[edit]

08:38, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Should ever happen[edit]

I've gblocked HitvLrlyr as a spam only account. Should them contact you, please feel free to act according to your own judgment.

Ciao, M/ (talk) 09:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Meta:About[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de italien sur Meta. La page Meta:About est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :

La priorité de cette page est moyenne.


-----------------

Dear Collegues! This main description of Meta-wiki. Please check translation into your language and make it up to date.


Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 22:31, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Sock Puppetting[edit]

What is this wikis policy on Sock Puppeting?
--Treevax 03:52, 18 February 2014 (UTC)Nostal

See w:WP:SOCK. PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


Thanks!
--Treevax 03:52, 18 February 2014 (UTC)Nostal

@Nostal: Why don't you just use ~~~~? Anyway, please stop bothering other users about signatures, as you did here. They're not very important. What matters is the content of your contributions, and the message of your comments. The signature is just a personal style, and is not something to think about so much. PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:05, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


Thundra2000 19:14, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
The only reason I used the four letter tide signature is because I was tired and didn't feel like typing the rest of that crap I don't like the four letter tide because its impossible to decorate my signature are working there functional I'll stop "bothering people" about it.
If your going to bother me some more about the four letter tide sign my Guestbook (no four letter tides).
Thundra2000 19:14, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Yeah thought so.
Thundra2000 19:14, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

globalprefs[edit]

How to change time zone, signature, echo settings and watchlist settings? Face-smile.svg --Kolega2357 (talk) 19:28, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Currently it is not possible with globalprefs, but you can request it on Synchbot for Quentinv57 to do it. Please note that Synchbot will be discontinued by Feb 28, so you should request it before then. Legoktm, the developer of globalprefs, will add that functionality soon. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:51, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Stress[edit]

Desculpe, eu estou com stress. sorry, I'm with my brain tired Ana Gauna (talk) 23:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Your request on Requests for comment/Wikimedia Commons[edit]

[228]. I have collapsed two sections of comment that do not relate to the RfC itself, but only to the recent history of editor activity, discussion of closing/re-opening, more than the bare facts, and the question of what numbers are enough for "global consensus," a question which has no simple answer. We had consensus in 2011, but whether it was broad enough is an issue of interpretation. Someone thought it wasn't, and I'm not sure how far we should stand on our heads to satisfy a (single developer?).

I'd prefer these be moved to Talk, but am not doing that because it has already resulted in revert warring, these moves to Talk. Moving to Talk, possibly with a section link in the RfC, is superior for mobile devices.

The page looks much cleaner without those segues. Thanks. --Abd (talk) 21:38, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Ugh. The user pulled his own comments out of collapse, reverting the strikeout correction of his alleged error, leaving criticism of the error in the collapse, along with argument about the substance of what he pulled out, when it is all irrelevant to the RfC itself.

We are having a discussion on the RfC page, that's a fait accompli, and the issue of whether or not 23/23 was sufficient to claim a consensus is now moot, and bears not at all on the question now before users. This is entirely the user wanting to make himself look right, the issue of strikeout is covering up an error instead of simply acknowledging it, and the behavior is entirely consistent, long-term.

So I made the correction explicitly in my comment (which, of course, made no sense without the strikeout in place.) --Abd (talk) 00:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I would prefer we not import our debate onto someone else's talkpage, like what was done with Billinghurst's. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 00:36, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Furthermore this is not me trying to look "right" in any circumstance, you're still free to comment above the collapse and below my comments. Any more referencing this matter will lead me to have to take it to the attention of administrators. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 00:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
I don't want any more Abd vs. TCNSV discussions on my talk page, unless you try to be nicer to each other than you have been all the other times you've argued. Sorry, but my patience is running out, and your arguments have accomplished nothing. Take a step back and realize that you could have spent this time on more productive things. You can get along, but you need to try. Otherwise an interaction ban would be required, which is not something I would really like to see. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:51, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Very well, PiRSquared. My comment here was showing a conciliatory action, removing the dispute from disrupting the page, not involving any attack. It's been reverted, and I'm still standing by my analysis, but I'm being threatened with a request to administrators to block me over it, and seeing your comment on RFH, I have no sense of security. Since I'm not seeing support here, and even though I've gotten many Thank you comments, I'm going where I have more productive, easier, and safer work to do. I expect I'll be back at some time, because I not infrequently have business here, related to Wikiversity. Good luck. --Abd (talk) 02:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
@Abd: I hope you will forgive me for my comment on RFH. I was overreacting after all these arguments have gotten on my nerves. Maybe you should get an opinion from someone else, as I would like to take a break from this for a while. I hope to see you return soon, and please don't be too discouraged by my comments. Regards, PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:42, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

wq[edit]

You are a diamond in the desert too, even among global sysops, so my comments do not apply to you. Anyway, it's a losing battle, clearly GS will be opted in. (I write this here, because of your TP soft redirect at WQ.) ~ DanielTom (talk) 21:52, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-09[edit]

10:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Hot diggity[edit]

Look at you go! — Scott talk 16:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

global common.js/css[edit]

Hi, if it is technically possible, pleas batch delete my global common.js/css. Thanks --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:51, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

While this is technically possible (on GS wikis), why can't you just blank User:Steinsplitter/global.js and User:Steinsplitter/global.css? Additionally, if you really want, request it on Synchbot before Feb 28 and it will be done on all wikis by a steward. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:24, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/Board Service[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de français, italien et lituanien sur Meta. La page Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/Board Service est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :

La priorité de cette page est moyenne.


This is the second in a series of blogs posts by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, explaining the work of the Board Governance Committee. It is planned to be published at https://blog.wikimedia.org/ on Friday, February 28.

Translations are also still welcome for the first post in the series, titled "Introduction to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees", where Vice Chair Phoebe Ayers explains the Board, its mandate, and its work within the community. It will hopefully remain a useful reference for a long time to come. It can be translated at [244].

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 19:39, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikimedia genealogy project[edit]

Please visit this page if you wish to contribute to a centralized discussion about a Wikimedia genealogy project. Thank you! --Another Believer (talk) 22:00, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Wikimedia Highlights, January 2014[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de français, italien et lituanien sur Meta. La page Wikimedia Highlights, January 2014 est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :

La priorité de cette page est moyenne.


Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from January. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, project village pumps and (for some languages) mailing lists.

Translations are also still welcome for the recently published December Highlights, at [245].

If you have questions about the translation notifications system, ask them here. You can manage your subscription here.

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 09:20, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Olá[edit]

Não, eu não sabia. Hoje de manhã ainda tinha o bloqueio. Só vi agora que expirou. (No, I didn't know. This morning still had the lock. I just saw now that has expired.) :-) Ana Gauna (talk) 20:14, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Eu vou dar um tempo nessas traduções. Vou reler e estudar meus livros de inglês. (I'll take a break in these translations. I'm going to reread and study my English books.) Ana Gauna (talk) 20:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Ouviu e gostou das músicas brasileiras no meu perfil? Hoje o Rio de Janeiro comemora aniversário 449 anos. Ana Gauna (talk) 21:23, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Boa noite. Vi que apagou seu perfil. Eu costumo fazer isso algumas vezes. Você está bem? Good night. (I saw your profile deleted. I usually do this a few times. Are you okay?) Ana Gauna (talk) 22:41, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

I like you friend. :-) Ana Gauna (talk) 23:14, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Aqui no Brasil, esta semana é Carnaval. (Here in Brazil, this week's Carnaval.) Ana Gauna (talk) 00:00, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Inclui meu Google+ no meu perfil da Meta. Ana Gauna (talk) 01:20, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Brevemente eu vou estar bloqueada novamente, pelo Steward Teles, e dessa vez por mais tempo. Ontem a noite ele ficou implicando comigo novamente. (Soon I'll be blocked again by Steward Teles, and this time for longer. Last night he was teasing me again.) Ana Gauna (talk) 13:23, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I will use less Meta. I started this week a course online English (EF English Town). Ana Gauna (talk) 17:13, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Descobri hoje o curso de idiomas da Babbel, vou estudar novamente o meu francês lá. :-) Ana Gauna (talk) 23:28, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Question[edit]

May I ask you what you are currently testing with your user page? I just saw your signature becoming red (which looks very nice, btw) and wondered what could possibly have happened. Do you mind keeping your signature red permanently? Best regards, Vogone talk 22:59, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

I hate to ruin the joke, but if anyone is wondering, Vogone asked me to delete my userpage on IRC (after he had deleted his userpage on Wikidata). It is now restored (yes, I restored all revisions). Hope nobody minds. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:01, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-10[edit]

09:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Fundraising/Translation[edit]

For Indonesian, can I ask, why we using old version that's has wrong translation? we have newer one, corrected version.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 16:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Can you please clarify what is wrong with Fundraising/Translation/id and Fundraising/Translation? I do not understand. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:42, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
The translation is wrong, so I fix it, yet it's not showing up on id.wikipedia.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 16:47, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
@Aldnonymous: Published. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:50, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I should've known it was Fuzzybot messing with parameter. Once again Thanks.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 16:58, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Re:[edit]

It's definitely trolling though meta threshold has dramatically fallen during last months. --Vituzzu (talk) 19:38, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

RTA is the involved part, I'm more inclined to close an eye to the directly affected people rather than those coming to give their precious trolling out. --Vituzzu (talk) 20:04, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Definitely trolling, by Vituzzu, who reverted me again. Indeed, "meta threshold has dramatically fallen", how abusive users like this can become stewards, will forever be beyond human comprehension. ~ DanielTom (talk) 19:45, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Ciao, come vanno le cose?[edit]

Ciao, qui le cose vanno abbastanza bene: come eml. wikipedia siamo passati da un indecoroso 190° posto in classifica a un 180/179° posto, ancora però fanalino di coda delle wiki regionali italiane, ma non per molto! Stiamo cercando, senza fretta, però, di riorganizzare la PP, pagina principale, perchè così com'è ora, è abbastanza non-completata e bruttina. Ci stanno dando una mano il Gato Salvadego veneto e ieri anche il Nemo Bis. Prima o poi arriveremo anche a quel risultato. Ho ripreso un po' le traduzioni qua, ma anche un po' per ripicca (che pochissimi italiani vengono a contribuire nelle ns. wiki regionali) non mi va di tradurre verso l'Italiano, ma piuttosto verso il mio Emiliano. Affettuosamente, --Gloria sah (talk) 11:44, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-11[edit]

09:10, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Grants:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round2/Staff summary/Progress report form/Q2[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de français, italien et lituanien sur Meta. La page Grants:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round2/Staff summary/Progress report form/Q2 est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :

La priorité de cette page est moyenne.


This report is written by FDC Staff and is intended for the FDC, FDC grantees, and the larger movement. It includes a summary table of financial information from this past quarter, and summaries of each entity’s progress report in this past quarter.

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 10:41, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Upcoming IdeaLab Events: IEG Proposal Clinics[edit]

Idea Lab
Idea Lab

Hello, PiRSquared17! We've added Events to IdeaLab, and you're invited :)

Upcoming events focus on turning ideas into Individual Engagement Grant proposals before the March 31 deadline. Need help or have questions about IEG? Join us at a Hangout:

  • Thursday, 13 March 2014, 1600 UTC
  • Wednesday, 19 March 2014, 1700 UTC
  • Saturday, 29 March 2014, 1700 UTC

Hope to see you there!

This message was delivered automatically to IEG and IdeaLab participants. To unsubscribe from any future IEG reminders, remove your name from this list

Request for feedback on my GSoC'14 proposal[edit]

Hi PiRSquared17,

I am planning to work on the project titled "Tools for mass migration of legacy translated wiki content" this summer under Google Summer of Code. I have drafted a proposal for the same over the past few weeks. This project is going to help the translation adminstrators like you in a great way, as it would completely automate the tedious manual task of preparing a page for translation and then importing the translations into the Translate extension. You can check the proposal page for detailed information on how I plan to accomplish this.

As you would be an end user of this tool, it would be great if you could go through the proposal and provide feedback/suggestions. Your feedback would definitely help me improve the proposal as well help in creating an even better tool. You can do the same on the discussion page of the proposal or reply here, whichever is convenient for you. I look forward to hearing from you! Thank you!

P.S: I need to submit the proposal to Google by March 19, 2014.

BPositive (talk) 13:15, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

@BPositive: in fact, I already replied on Meta talk:Babylon. I'll look at the proposal in more detail and give suggestions. PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:30, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I remember you had replied on Babylon. But I hope to get some more detailed feedback from your side since you are a very active translation admin. Cheers! BPositive (talk) 18:18, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

isiXhosa Editor just passed away[edit]

There is an Xhosa editor and graduate of Sinenjongo High School who just passed away tragically in an auto accident. His name was Ntsika Kellem.

this is Ntsika at graduation a few months ago

He's in this video at 0:15 with table mountain behind him:

Ntsika Kellem at 0:15

When he let me into his house, this is what he had to say about Wikipedia:

Ntsika Kellem talking about what Wikipedia means to him

Here is his userpage: Ntsika_Lain

This is a photo he uploaded when we went on a photo walk:

Cleaners in Joe Slovo Park

This is a terrible tragedy - Ntsika had just graduated and was studying computer science at a school in Cape Town. I was wondering if you might be able to help add a 'deceased Wikipedian' notice to his userpage? Thanks, let me know if you need anything from me.


Vgrigas (talk) 02:18, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I am very sad to hear this tragic news. I recognize him from those videos, and I believe his death will be a large loss for his community. I am glad Wikipedia, WMF, and you and/or Oarabile (and others) in particular were able to inspire and help him. I will add a notice (in English, as my Xhosa is not very good -- sorry) to his userpage and add him to the list of Deceased editors. My thoughts are with his family and friends. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:50, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Archiving[edit]

Please have a look at the history, I just tried to fix up a mess.

--M/ (talk) 15:23, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-12[edit]

07:14, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

meta elections are a joke[edit]

Thought I should explain. In a discussion about reconfirmations/re-elections of admins, on Wikipedia, about an year ago, I stated that admins shouldn't be allowed to vote in them, because of "too much conflict of interest". Of course, such re-elections are never going to happen on Wikipedia (as I also stated there, "Admins would overwhelming reject the idea, and it would be in their self-interest to do so."), but I took the time to explain—

I do not propose that admins should be "[blocked] from the proceedings altogether"; indeed, they should certainly be allowed in the general discussion, but most definitely not to !vote. I do not doubt that there are important disagreements among admins, but in one thing they all must agree, and that is that they want to keep their power. If admins were allowed to !vote, then the "re-election" would become a joke process, a self-interest façade even. Not something I would want to see. ~ DanielTom (talk) 18:26, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

It would seem, that Meta is better, but this is an illusion. Meta is definitely worse. The only way for admins to be elected on Wikipedia, is through self-deception, never getting involved in controversial disputes, and creating an immaculate resumé over the years as spineless cowards. But, on Meta, this is not necessary. It's obviously much harder to be elected on Wikipedia, than on Meta, for a great many different reasons.

In the first place, very few regular users are aware of Meta activities, and even fewer participate in hat awarding discussions, which in turn makes these Meta "elections" just a show. It's like watching politicians vote for themselves. And even though there are "confirmations", e.g., for stewards, every year, the ones who participate in such "discussions" are either stewards themselves, or users with advanced permissions, or the "wanna-be"s, who vote "support" in all sorts of elections, because predictably they too will be running for a new hat soon. Global rollbacker/sysop elections are filled with such votes.

I myself do not believe that people actually bother looking at the candidates' global edits, in Meta elections. Judging from the comments [if they make any—usually it's just "Support Support"], they absolutely do not look at the edits. And who can blame them? Just a few minutes ago, I started looking at the global "contributions" of a recently-elected global sysop, and he has already edited in over 200 wikis!!! (Jesus! I didn't even know there were that many wikis. What possible "contributions" could he be making there?) I found so many mistakes just looking at the first few wikis, that I gave up, and won't be looking further.

What's shocking is that these candidates know they are going to be elected, on a "you vote for me, I vote for you" basis, and that no one is going to check their edits (other than looking at its number. «Oh, he "contributed" to so many wikis! Perfect candidate!»). So they just go to random wikis, whose language they don't understand in the slightest, and start reverting IPs whose edits look suspicious. They don't want to protect wikis. They just want to collect global edits.

Now my first reaction, when I see a global rollbacker wanna-be, or an actual global rollbacker, or global sysop, revert something, is to think: "okay, let's see what else this guy screwed up." Unfortunately, inexperienced contributors, and IP editors, can only see their contributions being reverted, and don't understand what's going on, so they think they've done something wrong. (If only they knew the reverters are just collecting global edits!) God, what a joke this place is. ~ DanielTom (talk) 19:41, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

200 wikis is not even a lot. I have an account on 755 wikis, 714 of which I have edited (to be fair, most <4 edit wikis are just userpage creations or very trivial things). People active in the SWMT (#cvn-sw on freenode, which I have not been visiting much lately) do tend to support each other, I admit, but for good reason: they would actually use the rights. Edit count is a useless measure of value of contributions, but it is useful to compare which wikis people have edited on, etc. Just complaining about this without proposing any solution will not get you far, I'm afraid. Maybe you could just comment on SRGP candidates' contributions more often? PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:44, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
My commenting anywhere doesn't make any difference (even if I provide many diffs of recent wrong harmful reversions, the candidates still get elected, without a single oppose). And, I don't do "opposes", I already have too many enemies who want me blocked. I think that a simple, but persistent, reminder to rollbackers that they should only revert clear and obvious vandalism, would do wonders. Other than this, I don't see any solution. ~ DanielTom (talk) 21:07, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Just as a sidenote, most of those "Support Support ~~~~" guys do not belong to the SWMT at all and the minority of the participants in such discussions is even actively contributing to that team. It would be wrong to pigeon-hole our active SWMT members who are mostly even more critical than the rest of the participants in such discussions. Though I agree that closing stewards should be more looking at provided arguments when closing an SRGP rather than simply counting commentless supports in some cases. Vogone talk 21:24, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Of course members of the SWMT are going to vote for like-minded people that they have and will continue to work with. It is unfortunate that something like a 5 year-old sockpuppeting incident can faster block a request for global rollback than problems with reverts, but that's how society works. If you follow the norms, you are "rewarded", and those norms are more about perceived work than the actual quality of it.
Like I suggested before, there are ways of formatting your comments which would make them received better. You don't need to do this to gain favour so you can collect hats in the future, but it would better conform to the norms of global voting and thus people would be more comfortable siding with you than if you make a usual textwall. Textwalls are nice for complaining about something you can't change (I make them myself all the time :D), but when you have a legitimate complaint on a request it is good to conform as much as possible so it can be well received. I would be glad to help you formulate those comments if you'd like, regardless of whether or not I agree with them. Ajraddatz (Talk) 21:26, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
(Ajraddatz, your first paragraph was very good; impressive to see a steward saying that.) ~ DanielTom (talk) 21:49, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Ajraddatz, great comment as always. Vogone, I also agree that many votes are not of SWMT members, but looking at e.g. this, I mostly see familiar names from #cvn-sw. Only one or two who have not been there, I think. PiRSquared17 (talk) 21:55, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Wikis ought to be able to decide for themselves which users should be trusted with advanced permissions. Unfortunately, as far as I know there is no equivalent to "opting-out" of global rollbackers, as there is (in theory) with global sysops, so even large wikis have to put up with these clueless users, reverting IPs in languages they don't understand, with such authority that if you even question them you are immediately accused of "bad faith". What I see happening, is a bunch of friends, usually about 10 in number, getting together and voting themselves up for these positions, with greater facility than I would have ever imagined possible. Needless to say, many, if not all, of global rollbackers, would never be elected, or even considered eligible, locally. This whole affair of granting global rollback rights, from Meta, is completely illegitimate. ~ DanielTom (talk) 22:57, 19 March 2014 (UTC) (P.S. Pir: please do feel free to hide, or delete, this whole section, or whatever else you might prefer—this is your talk page, after all, and I didn't mean to hijack it.)
That's not a fair generalization to make. The friends club which selects global rollbackers does, in the average case, a very good job. Any serious concerns will block a RfGR, as past requests have shown. Everyone makes mistakes when reverting - global rollbackers tend to make very few compared to their "good" reverts globally. If you seriously want to look for this, check all of my global contributions. There are a few thousand of them. I would estimate my own error rate to be less than 1% (even lower when you take into count the errors I have made and then reverted myself). Finding one or two mistakes out of hundreds or thousands does not represent a significant rate of error. Furthermore, how else would you suggest assigning global rollback? A steward-type election? That would be a waste of time and wouldn't get any better candidates passing.
Political and social theory is my area of study, so the potential for quid pro quo voting on an open ballot is something that interests me. However, I think that this sort of voting doesn't make a huge difference on global requests. Users with global rights often oppose others or don't vote at all; it all depends on the situation. What does make somewhat of a difference is the effect that I described above, where people vote for those similar to them based on their perceived behaviour. If you don't want this to happen, try to make nicely worded comments on RfGRs. I can't speak for everyone, but I will certainly take them into account.
While we're on the topic, I think that quid pro quo voting makes a huge difference on steward elections, as does the informational social influence (looking to what experienced people are doing). I doubt I would have been able to get 80% support (never mind 90%) with a closed ballot, since people would have actually had to judge me on my merits rather than looking at the stewards and other "trusted" users who voted for me. For GR I don't think that a closed ballot would be worth it; far better to see and respond to criticism. However, for steward, I would like to see elections done with a closed ballot, though the 80% support requirement would need to be revised. Some food for thought for the next elections anyway. Ajraddatz (Talk) 00:08, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
What I'm saying, is that only a very restricted number of users, all with conflicts of interest, participate in these advanced-permissions discussions, which makes the granting of these rights illegitimate. My question: do we really need global rollbackers? The only wikis that arguably need them, are very small ones, but those are rarely subject to vandalism. And global rollbackers, global sysops, and stewards, only make very occasional reverts in them—again, they usually do it just to collect global edits (and are happy to have just 3-4 edits, in each wiki, nothing very substantial). These rights, and occasional reversions, appear to be nothing more than a sort of mental masturbation: just like some editors enjoy creating new articles, global rollbackers enjoy reverting IPs. Perhaps the answer might be: no, we don't need global rollbackers. ~ DanielTom (talk) 00:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
There is more vandalism/spam on small wikis than you think. Global sysops and global rollbackers serve a useful purpose, by cleaning this up. I think hrwiki and possibly mrwiki wanted to opt-out of global rollbackers, but currently all wikis are affected by the global group. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:23, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
I would also argue that the peer-review from the current RfGR/S system is good - it allows for review by the people active in that area, who should know the most about it. Legitimacy is subjective, and while I would say that the current process is legitimate, your concerns are well taken (though I'm not sure what better system could exist for GR/GS). Motivation for globally active users probably varies widely, but I don't think anyone particularly cares how many global edits they have, nor have I ever seen a vote on an RfGR/GS being based on edits alone. If the global rollback group just included the "rollback" right then it probably wouldn't be needed, considering the various scripts that can duplicate its functionality, but there is more to it than that. Ajraddatz (Talk) 02:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
I do not think it should be particularly difficult to get global rollback, for anyone who will use it with reasonable care. The problem is not global rollback, itself, and I've personally seen no abuse of it. As long as most rollbacks are proper, there could be a fairly high error rate and it would still be useful as long as global rollbackers do not revert war with local users. I've never seen that happen. If it has, it would be a cause for concern about that particular global rollbacker. If a global rollbacker has a thousand global edits, say, and a hundred of them were mistakes, say, that would still be 9:1 good edits. Yet one could collect all the mistakes and try to make the rollbacker look really bad, it would not be difficult.
As a Wikiversity user, I've seen global rollbackers do good work. Occasionally something that might be locally legitimate was rolled back. It was easy to undo that. We need to keep our eye on the ball. There are many wiki problems, this is not even a problem. Administrative privileges on local wikis are a far more serious issue. It is generally very difficult to remove an abusive administrator, and they can do a great deal of damage before the community finally figures out what is going on. If it ever does figure that out. It's a basic wiki structural problem, and I found, on en.wikipedia, that the core community was not interested in addressing it. It's obvious why: the system works for those who have power in it, so those will resist change. There are ways to address this, but, again, those with excess power will resist such change.
On the other hand, another reason why the system does not change is that those who dislike it complain bitterly, wring their hands, and blame users who are merely filling roles that the system created. There have been efforts to set up experiments that would move beyond the present restrictions, and they have not been supported. Actually doing something? Nah, much easier to whine and complain, get blocked, and then stew in "being right."
The system burns editors out. While there would be a certain natural attrition, the wiki system is almost inherently rolling the Sisyphean boulder up the hill and watching it roll down again. That, as well, could be fixed, with hybrid systems, but who cares? --Abd (talk) 15:42, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Oh, I just found out about this delightful thread. Funny thing was I suggested something similar about the steward elections at Talk:Stewards/Elections 2014#Question for the Election Committee on conflict-of-interest voting between stewards, and how impartial the Election Committee might or might not be. The catch-22 here is, of course, those with advanced permissions / those in power are most apt to try and keep it, as with all conflicts-of-interest, and yet they are also the most qualified to speak on how those permissions work and what the demands of the job are, to judge the effectiveness of another advanced permissions user. But enough philosophizing. As far as I can tell with the limited interaction I've had with the many users there, the Meta elections have been if not successful at least innocuous to the machinations of most large and medium-sized wikis.
As to closed balloting, I agree that it might be an interesting idea to consider during the next election. I believe English Wikipedia had a MediaWiki extension crafted especially for their own purposes when the time comes to elect new Arbitrators. There would be questions of implementation though, such as i18n issues with the interface for a new special page. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 05:37, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
It's not only used at English Wikipedia's Arbcom elections. It has been used here at Meta too. WMF Board elections are also held by mw:Extension:SecurePoll. See Special:SecurePoll for history. --Glaisher [talk] 12:42, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello DanielTom, have you ever visit #cvn-sw? Here be surprised thousand vandalism recorded in a single day, every day.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 21:46, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
The global rollbackers, and others, who use the advanced permissions illegitimately awarded to them, to fight vandalism, and protect wikis, are doing something very noble, and should be commended. ~ DanielTom (talk) 23:33, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Rollback is hardly an "advanced permission." It is routinely awarded on en.wiki on request, without any election at all. Daniel, that word "illegitimately" implies that there is some standard of what is legitimate and what is not, but wikis don't start with that, at all. A wiki is simply a founder or set of founders, and a community, and it does whatever it does. Where some representation has been made as to policy, as to what to expect, there does come to be some standard for "legitimacy," i.e., where a community, or members of a community, might act "illegitimately" according to standards the community has accepted or declared. I'm not seeing that being alleged here. Rather, I'm seeing some fixed idea of legitimacy that is absolute, as if one could illegitimately do what is noble. That's an oxymoron, particularly on wikis where w:WP:IAR is general policy.
I have seen complaint about rollback, where there was some substance to the complaint. It was not about a global rollbacker, it was about a local admin. The reason is that rollback is designed solely to handle vandalism, where edit summaries are not necessary. I've seen an admin use rollback to revert a change the admin didn't like, that wasn't vandalism. And, indeed, that got him into some hot water. But it's not really a big deal. If that were the worst thing he ever did, geez, can't we get upset about something with actual harmful consequence other than a ruffled feather?
I'm not sure of the fact. Don't local wikis have to "opt in" to allowing global rollback? Rollback is only a small increment of power over being an ordinary editor, it takes me an extra click or two to revert vandalism without the rollback tool, I can simply edit and save the prior revision. I suspect, Daniel, that you are a complaint looking for something to complain about. (I.e., your real complaint is about something else.) What is it? --Abd (talk) 17:28, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Re. global rollbackers: never mind the bad reverts, just watch how these users are elected (hint: strong correlation with number of friends, or how many other users they "supported", in their own elections). To be fair, sometimes people can see through hat collectors, who try to request this right on countless wikis, get rejected, and then turn to Meta to subvert local decision processes. But often they do not. This thread was just a clarification. I had told Pir, on WQ: "Meta elections are kind of a joke." That discussion actually got me in trouble, and was even cited by user Jasper Deng as a reason that would pseudo-justify banning me (I'll abstain from expressing what I think of this Deng, another "global rollbacker", so I don't get blocked again). Speaking of legitimacy, how on Earth is it accepted, that editors contributing, and not blocked, in dozens of wikis, should be forcefully prevented from editing said wikis, against its communities' wishes, just because a bunch of nutcases vote, from Meta, to "ban" them, often with the most absurd and laughable, completely forged, rationales ("ban"??? what is this, the time of kings all over again?). No, I don't recognize Meta's "legitimacy" for any of this. ~ DanielTom (talk) 18:25, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Meta is like the European Union: it may be an absolutely awesome, worthy, and noble project, but legitimate, it is not. ~ DanielTom (talk) 18:43, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
  • It is neither legitimate nor not legitimate. That is, either label is invented, not objective, unless standards are given.
  • So suppose global vandalism patrol is done by a collection of buddies. So? Basically, Daniel, you are making up a story about global rollbackers that may be based on an example, maybe a couple of examples, and you are extrapolating that to an entire group. And it's all without real significance. Yeah, I could come up with an opinion about the person you name, but so what? What does this have to do, even, with elections?
  • As to "bans," there is one globally banned editor, so you are deriving a lot from that single example. I personally disagreed strongly with that ban, but I also would not describe those who voted for it as "nutcases," at all, and that you do, Daniel, is inviting someone to take you seriously and block you for incivility. Why?
  • Someone started a global ban discussion on you. It was completely illegitimate, did not follow global ban policy, and the result of it was actually that you were unblocked here, thus pulling the rug completely out from under the argument that you were "banned" on two wikis, the absolute minimum standard. If you read the policy, a block is not a ban, even if indef. A ban must be a community decision.
  • Is this the time of kings? No, this is a wiki, and wikis are vulnerable to certain social phenomena, all quite predictable, in fact. Banning or shunning are tribal in nature. You think it's bad people, "nutcases," but it isn't. These are all just people. Some smart, some not, some with high motivation, some with low, some considerate, some not. The same as everywhere. --Abd (talk) 03:21, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello again DanielTom, that was pretty biased, and also, you might give a good solution to this rather than give criticize without actually giving out the solution, critics are good, but you might also need to add solution and give us better idea rather than blindly criticize it, for now GR and GS is working with error rate less than 2%.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 06:51, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Abd, that person should not have been "globally banned". What does that mean, anyway? Why was the decision made on behalf of so many wikis, even those where he edited so productively? No, Meta, or the "global community", has no legitimacy to do that. I say, if that user wants to edit Wikiquote again, (where he has always made great contributions, under several reincarnations,) as long as he openly discloses his username this time, then he should be welcomed. But, this is a decision that would have to be made by the Wikiquote community. We'd have people who'd oppose it, and people who'd support it (more than me). Maybe it would be denied. The question is, what does Meta have anything to do with this? Zero. And what does the "global community" (which doesn't exist) have to do with this? Again, nothing, zero. It may shock some people, the WMF, and ArbCom, that some wikis may come to different conclusions about what is fair, and what is best for them, but don't they pretend to preach wiki independence? The Meta "discussions" often breach that independence. GR is just a minor issue. However, if stewards are not careful, and start awarding these rights not just to hat collectors, but to hat collectors who were denied the same rights on local wikis, then people might start to wake up, and see their community decision processes being usurped, and taken away from them. It won't ever come to that, though. (Even if it did, no one would care, people see "wiki independence" as a nuisance, something to be bypassed.) Is this a lot of "criticism", and no "solutions"? Well, are we going to abolish global "bans"? No, we are not. Perhaps some improvements could be made to policy, for example giving the same weight to different wikis, ensuring equal representation, etc. But who has time for that? I certainly do not. (Or, if I do, I'd prefer to waste it on other things.) Just like I don't have the time to go over all the reverts by global rollbackers to wikis in languages neither them, nor I, understand, to see with my own eyes their "error rate less than 2%". At this point, I'm with the French philosopher: Laissez-faire, laissez-passer, le monde va de lui-même... DanielTom (talk) 10:12, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Hahaha, I think you should read the definition of Meta and also there's no such thing as "Meta User" Meta is a hub, and meta is what connecting all this user to many project, also >bans< instead of >block< I don't think you understand YET the difference of those two, aaaand for for example giving the same weight to different wikis, you should read this Small and large wikis, thank you for your input :D.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 12:12, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
PS : #cvn-swconnect get in here to see how SWMT works :D.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 12:13, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for your deletion on wuu wiki.--Lt2818 (talk) 11:11, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-13[edit]

18:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Re-hi[edit]

Dear PiRSquared17, I understand if you don't reply immediatly to me, because I see that you are full of writings to read, big important things to adjust, many questions to answer, and also my subjects are not so relevant. Just a hello is the top for us, and also some kisses of sympathy. Soon, --Gloria sah (talk) 23:09, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Threats of harm[edit]

Can you please import over Wikipedia:Responding to threats of harm to an article on threats of harm? I think this is a good policy/procedure to follow and having it on Meta would centralize similar things from multiple wikis. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 16:55, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

@TeleComNasSprVen: Yes check.svg Done. Would you like to make it more general to other projects (and possibly translatable) or shall I? PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:01, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Too important, yes please make it translatable.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 22:04, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I've not had time yet to do the necessary adaptations to generalize it for all projects, so could you do that for me? Much appreciated and thanks again. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 03:44, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Fundraising/Translation[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de italien sur Meta. La page Fundraising/Translation est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :

La priorité de cette page est haute. La date limite pour traduire cette page est 2014-04-09.

WMF will be running its global fundraising campaign on Italian Wikipedia in the next coming weeks. For this purpose, we kindly ask for your help to translate fundraising messages into Italian.

If you have any questions, please send an email to jrobell@wikimedia.org




Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 12:57, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Translations on outreach[edit]

I was considering unmarking a page for translation (specifically this page which was turned into a redirect a few days ago) when I realized, I needed translation admin rights for that to happen. I think we should unmark redirects for translation as there's not much to translate, but if you want to be safe you can ask ragesoss first. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 10:37, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Removed from translation. PiRSquared17 (talk) 12:05, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Just a heads up, the Wikipedia Ambassador Program page also got turned into a redirect for now but it's still marked for translation. An idea I have in mind: why not just have translation automatically removed when a page is converted into a redirect and then automatically restored when it becomes otherwise? TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 11:20, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for support[edit]

Hello PiRSquared17! Your support was much appreciated, thank you. I also want to place a RfTA in MediaWiki and Incubator but can't find the appropriate pages for it. Could you point me in the right direction, please? --WikiBronze [T] 21:12, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

mw:Project:Requests for MediaWiki.org. incubator:I:RFA, but please read the 'Translators & translation administrators' section on that page. --Glaisher [talk] 05:24, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the links Glaisher! I have read the 'Translators & translation administrators' section. --WikiBronze [T] 13:34, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for missing this. PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:01, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
No problem! Thanks anyway :) --WikiBronze [T] 17:13, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-14[edit]

09:20, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

April Fools[edit]

Good god...--AldNonUcallin?☎ 04:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

What he said! Quiddity (talk) 05:48, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
¿sıɥʇ sɐ ɥɔns sʇıpǝ ǝʌısnqɐ ɹoɟ ǝɯ ʞuɐɥʇ oʇ ǝʌɐɥ noʎ op ʎɥʍ--Glaisher [talk] 15:19, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
˙unɟ ʎlǝʌᴉsnqɐ sᴉ ƃuᴉʞuɐɥʇ ǝsnɐɔǝq PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:23, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-15[edit]

08:00, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Open proxy[edit]

[319] The IP is a "network sharing device," i.e, is accessed by mobile phones or other wireless network devices. Perhaps the custom is to include this in "open proxy," but it's not the same as what I've known as open proxies, where a user, say, in Switzerland, could appear to be editing from an open proxy in China. But I suppose that any Chinese user could set up, with their mobile equipment, such a proxy service, so maybe some do. They would receive the message, through their domain, and resend it over the mobile network for a small monthly fee. The IP would be China Mobile. The user agent could be spoofed. Or it could be done here, I could do it, with AT&T. Of course, that would be a violation of my phone TOS and I could lose my phone service.... I think I'll choose some other way to make money.... --Abd (talk) 19:16, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Abuse[edit]

! --Glaisher [talk] 15:19, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

@Glaisher: Abuse. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:40, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
May I ask what/who PiRSquared17 abused? Vogone talk 16:04, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Everything. John F. Lewis (talk) 16:05, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Abused everything. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:22, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
@Vogone: Abuse. --Glaisher [talk] 16:41, 10 April 2014 (UTC) Special:Log/thanks
Funny... thank you for spamming me with the thanks log... :D.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 16:52, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome. I'm going to try thanking people for edits I respected (maybe even disagree with, but who make significant positive contributions) and see if it increase their morale. PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:58, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Pssst pssst for some people it's an annoyance keep it at moderate level. ;) --AldNonUcallin?☎ 17:12, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
How about once per user per week? PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:17, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
I am in school and currently, my teacher is teaching us, thanks for thanking me, but thats normal for me ;-) --Goldenburg111 17:37, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Once per week? Outrageous! you should do 1-twice a day.--AldNonUcallin?☎ 17:53, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/Heartbleed[edit]

Bonjour PiRSquared17,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur de français, italien et lituanien sur Meta. La page Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/Heartbleed est disponible pour la traduction. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :



This is the text of a just published blog post summarizing the actions taken to protect users of Wikimedia sites against the recently discovered "Heartbleed" security vulnerability. (The post explains that users will need to re-login the next time they use their accounts and suggests to change passwords as a standard precautionary measure, but it is currently not intended to enforce a password change for all users.) Completed translations will be added to the blog post.

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Des traducteurs comme vous aident Meta à fonctionner comme une communauté réellement multilingue.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de la traduction de Meta‎, 19:24, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-16[edit]

07:18, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

On Wikinewsie.org[edit]

As one of the people who bailed out of Laura's efforts on TWG, I feel it is appropriate - should you not have seen notice elsewhere - to highlight that I'm trying to restart discussion in a more-open manner.

https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Water_cooler/miscellaneous#The_Wikinewsie_Group

--Brian McNeil / talk 14:40, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Ping[edit]

Howdy. I've left a request on your en.wp talk page for another DB query. Best, — Scott talk 14:36, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi! I saw your request but I've been a bit busy in real life. I'll reply right away. Sorry for the delay. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:13, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Tech News #17[edit]

Thanks so much for your help with Tech News #17. It looks like a great issue to me, so many interesting this to report! odder (talk) 22:40, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.[edit]

Thanks for giving me autopatrol user right Face-smile.svg. I hope I will do right use of it. Tauhid (talk) 05:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

No problem. Face-smile.svg PiRSquared17 (talk) 05:13, 19 April 2014 (UTC)