Wikimedia Forum

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
← Discussion pages Wikimedia Forums Archives →
Arabic Coffee.jpg

The Wikimedia Forum is a central place for questions and discussions about the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. (For discussion about the Meta wiki, see Meta:Babel.)
This is not the place to make technical queries regarding the MediaWiki software; please ask such questions at the MediaWiki support desk; technical questions about Wikimedia wikis, however, can be placed on Tech page.

You can reply to a topic by clicking the "[edit]" link beside that section, or you can start a new discussion.
Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Participate:

This box: view · talk · edit

Sudden changes of numbers of articles[edit]

Today many Wikipedias experienced sudden changes of number of articles. For example, English Wikipedia has increased by 95,000 articles, Italian by 9100, Russian by 5600. German one has decreased by 29,000 articles. Does anybody know what is happening? — Ace111 (talk) 19:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes. --Nemo 20:02, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. A more detailed answer could contain a reference to phabricator:T68867. Your link for Wikistats says it is outdated. Where I can see an official article count for today? — Ace111 (talk) 20:35, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

It would be also nice to have a logbook somewhere for completeness. It should say something like: "29-03-2015 23:59 UTC - Article count of Russian Wikiquote has been replaced: 13205 --> 9979". — Ace111 (talk) 16:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

There kind of is, take a look here. There are a couple reports that give you some ideas about Article numbers. Reguyla (talk) 18:04, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
I am afraid there is nothing there about sudden changes. — Ace111 (talk) 15:07, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Reguyla meant that monthly (more or less) article counts are archived there. Twice-daily (usually) counts are "archived" in the page history of List of Wikipedias/Table (as well as similar pages for the other projects). And finally, I run my own off-wiki script daily (sometimes less) to check for "milestone" changes (e.g., passing 10,000 articles), which I then announce at Wikimedia News — but in that case I almost never announce the actual before and after counts. I don't think the article-counting script itself actually logs its changes anywhere. Perhaps you could open a Phabricator task requesting that feature. - dcljr (talk) 04:19, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Ace111 please notice that for tiwiki, we have maintgraph, and we monitor the number of all pages of all namespaces. Something similar should be possible for other wikis as well.--Alexmar983 (talk) 02:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

use the wikikipedia site to create legislation[edit]

Why not create legislation out in the open on line. This would let the best and the brightest figure out the best path for the American people and legislatures can vote up or down. This idea came to me after reading of the success of wikipedia in Isaacson's book The Innovators followed by America's Bitter Pill which shows all the perils of our current system. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.107.13.40 (talk) 16:27, 6 April 2015‎

Hello. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia isn't the right place for this. However, you might be interested in the following links:
guillom 16:37, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Wikimedia may be hosted in the US but a large proportion of users are from outside the US. What you are proposing is political advocacy, which is something better served on a dedicated wiki, rather than educationally-oriented websites. Have a look at mw:Sites using MediaWiki/en and perhaps mw:Download. Green Giant (talk) 21:14, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Same opinion as Green Giant, just create your own Wiki, Wikipedia does not serve such purpose for political advocacy.--AldNonymousBicara? 17:03, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Artifical increase in statistics of Romanian Wikipedia[edit]

Here one can find that Romanian Wikipedia added +53% of its popularity (number of page views) last month.

But here one can find most visited pages on Romanian Wikipedia this month

  1. 1 (183 576 views)
  2. 2 (183 470 views)
  3. 6 (183 463 views)
  4. 5 (183 462 views)
  5. 8 (183 456 views)
  6. 4 (183 453 views)
  7. 7 (183 449 views)
  8. 3 (183 446 views)
  9. 9 (183 435 views)
  10. Zero (dezambiguizare) (183 432 views)

Strange. Is not it?

How to fight the artifical increase in the most important Wikipedia statistics? --Perohanych (talk) 04:22, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Research talk:Page view/Archive 1#To identify spider traffic. --Nemo 08:19, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
The dayly artifical increase in statistics of Romanian Wikipedia continues to exist :-( --Perohanych (talk) 08:40, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Stewards confirmation rules[edit]

Hello, I made a proposal on Meta to change the rules for the steward confirmations. Currently consensus to remove is required for a steward to lose his status, however I think it's fairer to the community if every steward needed the consensus to keep. As this is an issue that affects all WMF wikis, I'm sending this notification to let people know & be able to participate. Best regards, --MF-W 16:12, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

unified login headache[edit]

I had the same username but different passwords on a few wikimedia sites, but now none of them works any more. what to do? Okay, I can do the recovery process with my email, but if i change the password on one page, will it be that one on all pages after? how exactly does this work?

What is your username? Ruslik (talk) 20:03, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
When you change your password, the password will change everywhere (actually, with unified login there are no longer a dozen passwords but a single one, which is the one you changed). Your global account will now be using the password you had on your 'home' wiki (you can view at Special:CentralAuth which wiki the software considered your home wiki). Platonides (talk) 20:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Ah, Special:CentralAuth is useful, so I found out my home wiki is the German wikipedia. There is a capitalization of the Username in the German wikipedia, but that doesn't seem to matter. However my password there wasn't working either so I have made a new one with the password reset by email function. thanks. --Panoramedia (talk) 11:44, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Help needed on Hindi Wikipedia[edit]

Hello. I would like to draw your attention on a difficulty faced by Hindi Wikipedia. The following is the list of the IPs that are indulging in this activity of creating pages on Hindi wikipedia in Nepali language since the last two days:

  • 49.126.0.31
  • 49.126.0.38
  • 49.126.0.39
  • 49.126.0.36
  • 49.126.0.34
  • 49.126.0.42
  • 49.126.0.32

Here is the Village Pump discussion on the issue . Part of the discussion within the section referred here might be comprehensible to anyone as its in English.

We have eight admins on Hindi Wikipedia. Unfortunately, seven are unavailable since past some time and lone active admin examined the issue this morning with a promise that he'll block IPs if further mischief takes place. Messy things have happened. But unfortunately he isn't available. Please help Hindi Wikipedia by blocking these mischievous IPs. --Muzammil (talk) 16:15, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Try SRM. Glaisher (talk) 16:23, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
You can just block the 49.126.0.31/26 range. Ruslik (talk) 18:10, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Already actioned by me on SRM, regards.--AldNonymousBicara? 18:15, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Message Translation[edit]

I've translated. Transfer please. --Дагиров Умар (talk) 12:17, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Using personal data of a Wikimedian to publish information about namesakes[edit]

Dear coleagues, we, in the Czech Wikimedia community, have to deal with a situation when several editors [E] entered controversial information in several articles. These were well sourced information about real-world people, which isolated wouldn't constitute any problem, if they were not of the namesakes of our specific pseudonymic Wikimedian [PW]. To make it clear I repeat: They were not about the Wikimedain [PW] himself/herself, they were about his real-world namesake (with the name being the real, civil name, not the Wikimedia user name). The editors [E] knew the civil identity of the Wikimedian [PW] from various, out-of-Wikimedia-projects sources, maybe even from the PW himself, and they used the identity to identify the coincidence of names; while the Wikimedian [PW] tried hard to keep his identity away from being published and disseminated over the Wikimedia projects.

Do you think this kind of behavior is correct or disruptive? How would you deal with that? Have you ever experienced something similar? Are there any policies - Wikimedia-wide or project-specific - that deal with that? Thanks a lot. --Okino (talk) 17:35, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

I want to express my thanks to Okino for starting this topic here on Meta. But I think there might be some issues that are described quite unclearly, so I'll try to describe the situation without being politically correct.
The issue is, that several editors [E] abused the knowledge of another user's [PW] civil name to repeatedly harass them while not actually revealing their identity. I actually know about at least one other user, whose civil name was used in similar way. Both of them edit strictly under pseudonym and in the past they expressed they do not wish their civil name to be used in any way. [E] have been taking advantage of the fact that there is no defence for [PW] witout actually revealing their identity. One of [E] confirmed he was doing it for fun.
At the moment it seems we are moving to the stalemate, one group expresses their opinion that such behavior is intolerable while the other say, that [E] did not break any rule and PW might have deserved it. There is only small community there so I can't see a breakthrough without external opinion to this issue. I myself can't imagine I could work on the same project with the people I know are able to do such thing with confidential information. --Reaperman (talk) 19:45, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Effort to promote propaganda / ideology[edit]

This is with regard to newly created user account 20 anniversarier. This user has prepared a draft Fall of Srebrenica which he wants to see as an article on 30+ Wikis. See: global contribs. The aim appears to be create a parallel/ conflicting writeup to English Wikipedia article. On every Wiki, this user creates this writeup in userpage / sandbox and asks the community on village pump or community portal to create their own local version of the article. Request to please stop this propagation agenda.--Muzammil (talk) 12:36, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Muzammil I too have seen this message in our village pump and sandbox in our telugu wikipedia, I didn't go through the information though. Is it a partial view of something? --Pavan santhosh.s (talk) 06:12, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Here is a much clearer followup post on Hindi Wikipedia:

For years, English Wikipedia was occupied by serbophobs. Srebrenica massacre is absolutely false and based on anti-Serbian propaganda. Check sources before you blindly copy articles from en.wiki please. 20 anniversarier (वार्ता) 01:21, 20 अप्रैल 2015 (UTC)

Here is a 15-page Human Rights Watch report of the same event: http://www.hrw.org/reports/1995/10/15/fall-srebrenica-and-failure-un-peacekeeping Is the attempt to change the tone on non-English Wikis with a diagonally opposite view elsewhere not an effort to write history differently? --Muzammil (talk) 07:27, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

IMO it's a crosswiki spam.--AldNonymousBicara? 09:44, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Dear AldNonymous, a very sincere and dedicated contributor on Hindi Wikipedia had just volunteered to translate the propagation stuff on Hindi Wikipedia. I've informed him about the propaganda aspect. I request you please:
  1. Post a mass-message delivery on each of the pages where this user has asked for volunteer translation.
  2. Check on Wikidata for articles with the description "Fall of Srebrenica", "Fall of Srebrenica and Žepa", "Victory of Srebrenica".
  3. Any other check mechanism which you can suggest to counter this "crosswiki spam". --Muzammil (talk) 18:06, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
@Hindustanilanguage: You can place {{delete|crosswiki spam}} on the page he created crosswikis so local sysops can delete it, on wiki with no local sysops, stewards and global sysops will handle it. It's not even on local language, and he post Youtube propaganda videos crosswikis.--AldNonymousBicara? 05:57, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Nominations are being accepted for 2015 Wikimedia Foundation elections[edit]

This is a message from the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee. Translations are available.

Wmf logo vert pms.svg

Greetings,

I am pleased to announce that nominations are now being accepted for the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections. This year the Board and the FDC Staff are looking for a diverse set of candidates from regions and projects that are traditionally under-represented on the board and in the movement as well as candidates with experience in technology, product or finance. To this end they have published letters describing what they think is needed and, recognizing that those who know the community the best are the community themselves, the election committee is accepting nominations for community members you think should run and will reach out to those nominated to provide them with information about the job and the election process.

This year, elections are being held for the following roles:

Board of Trustees
The Board of Trustees is the decision-making body that is ultimately responsible for the long term sustainability of the Foundation, so we value wide input into its selection. There are three positions being filled. More information about this role can be found at the board elections page.

Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC)
The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) makes recommendations about how to allocate Wikimedia movement funds to eligible entities. There are five positions being filled. More information about this role can be found at the FDC elections page.

Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) Ombud
The FDC Ombud receives complaints and feedback about the FDC process, investigates complaints at the request of the Board of Trustees, and summarizes the investigations and feedback for the Board of Trustees on an annual basis. One position is being filled. More information about this role can be found at the FDC Ombudsperson elections page.

The candidacy submission phase lasts from 00:00 UTC April 20 to 23:59 UTC May 5 for the Board and from 00:00 UTCApril 20 to 23:59 UTC April 30 for the FDC and FDC Ombudsperson. This year, we are accepting both self-nominations and nominations of others. More information on this election and the nomination process can be found on the 2015 Wikimedia elections page on Meta-Wiki.

Please feel free to post a note about the election on your project's village pump. Any questions related to the election can be posted on the talk page on Meta, or sent to the election committee's mailing list, board-elections -at- wikimedia.org

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
-Gregory Varnum (User:Varnent)
Coordinator, 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of the 2015 Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee, 05:03, 21 April 2015 (UTC) • TranslateGet help