Wikimedia Forum

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
(Redirected from Wikimedia forum)
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

Deep conflict over an instance of paid editing[edit]

Hi, I would appreciate you taking a moment to look at an issue raised at w:en:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Obviously conflicted edits to A2 milk. A complaint has been made against me by a Wikipedia editor in response to a disclosure notice at my user page that I have received a fee for editing an article. My response there details the context in which I began editing the specific article, on A2 milk, and my assertion that I have no intention of promoting that milk product or brand. It also details:

  • The hostility that has been directed at me -- quite unfairly -- by other editors who are, understandably I suppose, suspicious of my motives; and
  • The subsequent obstruction, associated with what seems to be a reflex action to ensure A2 milk is portrayed in a bad light (see talk page at BCM7 and Scientific evidence of A2 benefits over A1.

I would emphasise here, as I have done there, that I have accepted some extensive excisions from my original edit, and continue to work on a science section of the article to improve the sourcing and balance. I have strived to collaborate. But I am accused there of trying to create a marketing pamphlet for A2 Milk, which is utterly unjustified.

I appreciate that the Wikimedia Terms of Use now accept paid editing and establish clear rules on disclosure. I would hope that Wikimedia or Wikipedia subsequently provide individual editors who accept a fee (as I have done) with some support, rather than leaving us to be hung to dry. In many ways this is uncharted territory, and I appreciate that some editors will react with fear and loathing when they see it actually taking place. I would like some statement at that ANI to address this issue and provide some clarity. Many thanks. User:BlackCab

RFC: Distinguishing Wikimedia Foundation staff accounts for official actions and personal use[edit]

This discussion has been moved to a RFC subpage. unsigned comment by Zellfaze (talk) 23:20, 28 July 2014

Help Needed: For Project started to improve CATEGORIES on WP[edit]

Hi, there has been a serious discussion to set up a technical system on Wikipedia that will allow users to both sort and view categories either alphabetically or by topic. Until now there is no single system or method at work in categories that has allowed them to become disorganized and, well, "un"categorized in spite of being named as such! In order to remedy this situation, please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#CatVisor; Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#JQuery workaround; Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Update requested, as well as the the steady work at User:Paradoctor/CatVisor; User:Paradoctor/CatVisor#Planned features; User:Paradoctor/CatVisor#JQuery workaround by Salix alba; User:Paradoctor/CatVisor#Releases (alpha 2; alpha 1; alpha 0). In order to successfully complete and implement the proposed improvements, the input and deployment of the Wikimedia Foundation is needed as well as the attention of its professional staff is required in order to successfully fully implement the project. Please direct this communication and request to the most appropriate technical and decision-making individuals. Thank you so much in advance! Yours sincerely, IZAK (talk) 02:03, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

  • How about technical system on Wikipedia that will allow users to view alternative category trees (category trees, which are created by the individual or group of editors)? Now we have only one common, edited by the community, no individual сategory tree. To make such a feature ("alternative category trees") - a large technical problem? Fractaler (talk) 08:54, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Global renamers#Discussion as to length of candidacies[edit]

I have started a discussion about the length of certain global renamer candidacies above. --Rschen7754 19:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Is there any mechanism to help in these types of queries?[edit]

Hi, I am from Hindi Wikipedia. Recently there has been a query on our village pump if there is a mechanism to know the list of articles present on 30 or more Wikipedias, so that such articles can be translated into Hindi (when they are not on our Wiki, and obviously most translations from English Wikipedia). Is there a mechanism by which we can arrive at such a list? --Muzammil (talk) 08:31, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

List of articles every Wikipedia should have says: «Thanks to Wikidata it's also possible to list the top 1000 most translated (linked) pages in some languages, at Wikidata Terminator» (though it currently has a problem). Is that link not visible enough? Where did you look for this information and where could I add it so that it's found more and more easily? --Nemo 08:50, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
@Nemo bis: List of articles every Wikipedia should have - Society and social sciences is a standard list (similar to many other related lists). I am not disputing with that. I am saying based on editors' interests cross-wiki I/Hindi Wikipedians would like to have a tool listing articles present on 30 or more Wikipedias (in addition to standard lists).--Muzammil (talk) 10:21, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, and the tool does that.[1] Is this what you need? sadly it's not available for Hindi yet, I filed the request at [2]. --Nemo 13:41, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
@Nemo bis: Thank you very much!Thank you very much! --Muzammil (talk) 18:34, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Grants to improve your project[edit]

Apologies for English. Please help translate this message.

Greetings! The Individual Engagement Grants program is accepting proposals for funding new experiments from September 1st to 30th. Your idea could improve Wikimedia projects with a new tool or gadget, a better process to support community-building on your wiki, research on an important issue, or something else we haven't thought of yet. Whether you need $200 or $30,000 USD, Individual Engagement Grants can cover your own project development time in addition to hiring others to help you.

Handling of steward abuse[edit]

Quite a few local Wikimedia projects' administrator policies provide for deprivation of access in case of abuse. Why doesn't the Stewards policy contain the said norm? --Синкретик (talk) 13:16, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

It does. Stewards policy#Poll after a year. --Nemo 13:39, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I see. I meant the abuse that required immediate intervention. --Синкретик (talk) 14:09, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I guess it wasn't considered when the policy was written; feel free to propose a change. In the absence of a policy, the "default" position of an RFC to propose removal of the rights would seem to apply. However, it's worth saying that Stewards agree as part of standing for election to abide by the Oversight and CheckUser policies and not following these policies is clearly stated as grounds for removal of Steward rights (e.g., see CheckUser_policy#Removal_of_access). QuiteUnusual (talk) 14:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict) That's extremely unlikely to happen, but it would fall under the "don't override consensus" section and would be performed with a request at Steward requests/Global permissions. Why extremely unlikely? Because stewards act in public and collegially, so a steward action rarely is made which most stewards would disagree with; and if it happens, it's quickly reversed; and it would take a wheel war after that, for a single steward to be an immediate risk. Unless there are privacy policy violations, in which case the Ombudsman commission should be contacted instead. --Nemo 14:42, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia planning on joining the "Go Slow Day" on Sep 10th?[edit]

Has there been any discussion about this? Links? Jason Quinn (talk) 15:52, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

It would be helpful if a link was provided: does the initiative have an official web page? In the meanwhile, [3]. Ah, apparently their website is https://www.battleforthenet.com/sept10th/ (via [4]; parbleu, what horrible unusable websites). --Nemo 15:54, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Noting it doesn't actually make the sites slow, just gives an "annoying" loading thing to notify users of the problem. Once per site I guess. Reedy (talk) 16:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, CentralNotice does that all year long already. :P --Nemo 17:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Currently this is some discussion on the English Wikipedia. Mike VTalk 19:58, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Preview of banners[edit]

Hello. I am trying to set up the future banner for the Wiki Loves Africa contest. And I wanted to simplify things in inspiring myself from similar banners to create my banner. Problem is that I just can not figure out how to "preview" banners (see the final version actually displayed in the central notice). If I pick up a recent example... here is the banner for the month of contribution [5]. There are links that obviously invite us to "preview" the banner. But when I click on these links... it leads me to totally unrelated pages on Wikipedia. So, yeah... how do I see already existing banners ? Thanks Anthere (talk) 17:01, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

@Anthere: The banner is at the top of the page. 'Preview on-wiki' links to a Special:Random https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Random&banner=Contrib_mnth&uselang=en&force=1 --Glaisher (talk) 17:10, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Ahhhh. Right :) Thanks Anthere (talk)
That is, an URL like https://fr.wikipedia.org/?banner=Contrib_mnth&force=1 is supposed to reliably show you the banner as it will actually be. --Nemo 17:15, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Good one. Thanks Anthere (talk)

Need for Hindi Wikipedians by number of contributions[edit]

Hello. This is a list of Wikipedians ordered by number of edits in the English language Wikipedia. I will be thankful if a similar tool is made available for the list of Wikipedians ordered by number of edits in the Hindi language Wikipedia - something which is non-existent as of now. Thanks in advance. --Muzammil (talk) 17:31, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Is stats:EN/TablesWikipediaHI.htm#wikipedians not enough? It usually is, for non-huge wikis. Otherwise you should in theory be able to get the full list from Wikistats csvs directly, but I'm not sure they're being kept up to date online. --Nemo 17:44, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Here are the top 1000 users by edit count, excluding current bots and global bots. You can export it to whatever format you want (CSV, JSON, etc.). PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:00, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

@PiRSquared17: Thank you very much!Thank you very much! for link. By the way, does the link provide static information (current status only) or dynamic (updated periodically, say daily/weekly)? --Muzammil (talk) 08:54, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

If you login, you can run an update with real-time data. --Nemo 10:01, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
@Nemo bis: Thank you very much!Thank you very much! for the info. In that case I guess output will be with a separate query number. --Muzammil (talk) 13:33, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Estimate of core community's monetary value[edit]

How much time does the average core community wikimedian donate per year?

I'm thinking about this, currently, because I used a f'rinstance figure for it in an (alas, less articulate than I'd wish) comment on Lila's user talk (yonder). The point I was trying for was that the fair-market value of what the core community donates is, well, substantial. Picturing English Wikipedia with a round 1000 core constributors, I said if they averaged a conservative 100 hours per year that'd be 100,000 hours per year. I mean 100 to be low enough to be really safe — is it? I contribute a whole lot more than that to my home project (English Wikinews), but I don't have a good sense of the English Wikipedia core community. The point of my post to Lila was that if you treat that as unskilled labor, with the 100-hour estimate, it'd be a million dollars, but it's actually skilled labor and should be valued considerably higher. --Pi zero (talk) 14:30, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

When non-profits try to calculate their income from volunteers, the value for volunteer time (in the US) is usually assumed to be the mean wage, which was about US $20 an hour the last time I looked (NB mean and not median; the mean is noticeably higher than the median wage). Since we have people all over the world, this is not necessarily a good number to apply to everyone.
I've seen the core community size for en.wp estimated at 3,000, but the number depends significantly on how you define "core". Editors around the top-500 mark (based purely on the number of edits) at en.wp are probably making 500 or more edits a month. At the 1000 mark, it's probably 300 or so edits each month.
Also, "active" and "productive" aren't the same. Every experienced editor has encountered people who spend a lot of time posting, but who accomplish remarkably little, or who even end up wasting so many other people's time that they have a negative effect on productivity. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
My own notion of "core" is probably linked to the ratio of productive edits. My sense is, contributors core in that sense are undervalued at twenty dollars an hour, if you're talking US rates. I can see the question of whether to use US rates could be argued back and forth.
All of this is, of course, to a significant extent a conceptual trap, since realistically the core community are irreplaceable if driven away en masse, and therefore by definition priceless. It's significant that (as I think I saw someone pointing out somewhere) the conjectural users the Foundation seems to be targeting are likely to have a poor productive-edit ratio, so that bringing in a lot of them would put more burden on the currently-endangered core. My reason for even looking at the estimated monetary value is, frankly, hoping to put things in terms that could be appreciated by someone who isn't able to appreciate the other reasoning they've been presented with.
But meanwhile, I've gotten genuinely curious about how much time the "core" people put in.
Number of edits doesn't tell you that, I think. For one thing, if someone is putting very little time in per edit, their edits may be least productive; that isn't always true, of course. Edits to clean up other people's unproductive edits may sometimes require relatively little time per edit. The nature of the edits can also make a huge difference, too. To take an example from English Wikinews, some reporters compose an article off-wiki and submit it in a single edit, while the reviewer may make a large number of edits during review, each small enough to have a useful edit summary and meaningful diff to make clear exactly what the reviewer is doing and why, with the result that counting edits one might imagine the reviewer was doing one or two dozen times as much "work" as the reporter (actually, for an inexperienced reporter the reviewer may do much more work, while for a sufficiently experienced reporter the reviewer may sometimes do much less). I'm less widely experienced with the patterns on Wikipedia, but I expect there are similarly skewed cases in parts of the workflow, as well as, of course, variations of individual style. So, interesting though number of edits is, it may not correspond to time spent, even if one restricts attention to the "core". --Pi zero (talk) 01:51, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

sco:Template:Shortcut[edit]

Could someone please have a look at sco:Template:Shortcut, as, in Read view, it seems to throw up an extra pair of double-square brackets? Maybe cf. en:Template:Shortcut, which appears not to be doing this, in case that helps? It Is Me Here t / c 12:07, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Fixed[6]. --Stryn (talk) 16:55, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
winkThanks! It Is Me Here t / c 12:31, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Change in renaming process[edit]

Part or all of this message may be in English. Please help translate if possible.

-- User:Keegan (WMF) (talk) 9. sep 2014, 18:22 (CEST)

Research:CO2 Carbon Dioxide[edit]

Just wanted to point this out to someone. Looks like it might be spam. 162.17.205.153 17:40, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


Changes in Babel needed for Urdu[edit]

Screenshot of Urdu Babel - circled red indicated "English" written in Urdu whereas green indicates correct "Urdu" in Urdu script.

Hello. I was referring to this userpage on incubator. I remember that in this userpage as well as in other userpages, for Urdu under Babel table, the link is rightly placed for the Urdu language. But the display is wrong - it is English (انگریزی) instead of Urdu (اردو).

Can anybody help me with the correction display of the language name? --Muzammil (talk) 13:46, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

You can fix it here. I would do it for you but I'm busy right now, sorry. PiRSquared17 (talk) 13:55, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Hindustanilanguage, I've fixed it for you :) --Stryn (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
@Stryn: Just checked Users:By_language:ur. for Urdu under Babel table, the link is rightly placed for the Urdu language. But the display is wrong - it is English (انگریزی) instead of Urdu (اردو). Probably you've corrected for User-N but User-1,2,3,4 and 5 need to corrected. Please make the changes on TranslateWiki. --Muzammil (talk) 10:10, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
@Hindustanilanguage: Seems fine to me. Perhaps the changes from translatewiki were not affected yet at the time when you checked it (it usually takes few days). Can you confirm it's ok now? --Stryn (talk) 16:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
@Stryn: I think the screenshot and description should make things fine for you. --Muzammil (talk) 08:43, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
@Hindustanilanguage: Strange... How I see it is here. Maybe you should purge your cache? --Stryn (talk) 10:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
@Stryn: Thank you very much!Thank you very much!. Now it's fine. --Muzammil (talk) 19:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

JavaScriptless math typesetting[edit]

I'm not using JavaScript. Can I have the math back in MathML, please? MathJax doesn't do a thing in my setup. --Gryllida 23:14, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Using 3D objects to illustrate a Wikipedia article[edit]

Can someone point me to a discussion about importing or embeding objs (3D objects) into Wiki, please? Can we not export open source objs? This Coffee Maker from Sketchgfab (not open) for example. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 12:15, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

ORCID[edit]

I've created a userbox, {{User ORCID}} for users who have an ORCID identifier. You can see it in use on my user page. ORCID identifiers disambiguate contributors with similar names, and unify the works of people who have published under different names. Anyone may sign up for one, free, and I encourage you to do so, and to display it using this template. More information on the use of ORCID identifiers by Wikimedia project editors may be found at w:en:WP:ORCID. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:08, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Logo changes on eu:Wikipedia[edit]

Hi! We recently made our 200.000th article and we want to put this file as logo. Can someone unblock it? -Theklan (talk) 08:30, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Do you mean changing the logo at the top left corner? If so, you could do that easily by adding the following code to eu:MediaWiki:Common.css. Before it is implemented, make sure that there is full consensus for it and that the file is fully-protected at Commons.
#p-logo a {
	background-image: url(//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f1/Euskarazko_Wikipedia_200.000.png)!important;
}
--Glaisher (talk) 15:47, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Fresh category members tool idea[edit]

Hi. I'd like to (and I'm almost in the process of) write a tool which would show latest category members -- with subcats, recursively -- for new page patrol purposes. It would be a web app where you type a wiki name and category name and get a list of category members sorted by time. Later on I'd have to implement pages (if there's too many) or limit the time frame. Is this worth doing given that categories would move to Wikibase soon? If so, how soon? Thoughts? (P.S. Please distribute to sister projects village pumps). Gryllida 07:34, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Partially dedicated WMF mainframer[edit]

I have initiated a proposal here for a Dedicated Programming Compiler, Grants:IEG/Dedicated Programming Compiler that may be possible either with appropriate firewalls using the WMF mainframe or a dedicated standalone. We are looking for a partially dedicated WMF mainframer who may be able to help install various (one or more) programming language compilers. These compilers or interpreters can then be used for teaching computer programming courses or lessons at Wikiversity. Any suggestions, comments, criticisms, or personnel recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Or, are those at WMF paid already to do this if the proposal is approved so that proposal funds may be used elsewhere? Marshallsumter (talk) 14:52, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

New wikipedia "wikipedia bahasa semende"[edit]

How about make new wiki with other language wich not yet haven in Wikipedia like "Wikipedia bahasa semende" unsigned comment by Az marzuq (talk)

@Az marzuq: If the language has an ISO code and enough native speakers to form a community and audience, you can propose the creation of a Wikipedia in that language at Requests for new languages. --Yair rand (talk) 03:02, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Assessing mobile edits on Hindi Wikipedia[edit]

Hello, there has interesting discussions in the press and the electronic media about the viewership and mobile edits on Hindi Wikipedia.

Can somebody help with a query to know the real extent of edits on this Wikipedia. Else, the information estimates might not give an accurate picture. --Muzammil (talk) 19:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Maryana (WMF) and User:Deskana (WMF) both deal with mobile editing. One of them might be able to get the information that you would like. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 23:54, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
@Hindustanilanguage: Hi there! So, all mobile edits on all Wikimedia wikis are tagged. These tags allow you to filter the edits. For example, this list will show you all edits made to the Hindi Wikipedia using either the mobile web interface or the mobile app, and you'll see that each edit also includes another tag that tells you specifically whether it was made through web or apps. If you want more information than that provided by the tags, you'll have to be more specific about what it is that you want and why you want it. Hopefully that helps. --Dan Garry, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 23:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
@DGarry (WMF), Maryana (WMF), Whatamidoing (WMF):, thanks for the info, but I already knew that information. I need a more classified info such as:
  1. No. of Mobile editors
  2. Monthly Mobile edits
  3. New articles created through Mobile edits
  4. Nature of Mobile edits - major / minor.
Regards, --Muzammil (talk) 09:11, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Statistics has the links you're looking for. And now Limn even has deep links at last, wow, so I can link you directly, in order:
  1. http://mobile-reportcard.wmflabs.org/graphs/edits-monthly-active-editors ,
  2. http://mobile-reportcard.wmflabs.org/graphs/monthly-contributions ,
  3. no idea,
  4. is there even a minor edit checkbox? --Nemo 09:17, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Nemo,

  • Does 1 & 2 pertain specifically to HiWP or is it an overview of all Wikis / Wikipedias?
  • For normal WP edits, I see checkbox "This is a minor edit". Categorization/ decategorization through Hotcat is automatically marked as minor. --Muzammil (talk) 18:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • All wikis. There may be similar graphs for hi.wiki somewhere but I don't remember right now.
  • Yes, but on Mobile? I doubt HotCat is available on Mobile, is it. --Nemo 18:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Nemo, but please, if you ever get HiWP-specific info, please post a message, here before the bot cuts the discussion abruptly, or on my talkpage, afterwards. --Muzammil (talk) 19:49, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Graphs, Maps, ... (experimental)[edit]

As part of my Zero efforts, I had to implement some graphs... and thus Graph Extension was born, adapting Vega visualization grammar. It is still in its infancy, but it can already do some fancy stuff. Since this is experimental, it has only been enabled on mediawiki.org and meta. It will not be enabled on production wikis until there is a consensus that 1) it is needed 2) it is secure 3) it won't melt our servers or be a bandwidth hog.

Graphs can plot various charts and maps with highlights, and templates can be used to dynamically change the behavior. For example, we could have a template {{WorldMapWithHighlight|country=NZ}} that would draw world map with New Zealand highlighted. It could also overlap some additional symbols/text/colors - anything that Vega allows.

This example was copied from the vega tutorial, and could have also been placed into a template or its own full page in the Graph: namespace. See other examples.

--Yurik (WMF) (talk) 05:57, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Comments/questions/rotten tomatoes:

Thanks for the update, always nice to see work on all things visual. --Nemo 06:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Missing accessibility features. An aria-label for the 'alt' text would be a minimum to solve that. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 11:09, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
TheDJ, if I understood correctly, <canvas aria-label="some text"> should be enough? I could easily add a new attribute to the <graph aria-label="some text"> tag, but for the Graph: namespace I would have to extend the vega syntax with an additional top-level key-value, e.g. "aria-label":"some text". For consistency sake, we probably should keep the second approach for both the graph tag and graph namespace. Is this acceptable? --Yurik (WMF) (talk) 17:58, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
An accessibility label is contextual, so ideally, you'd have both, with fallback to whatever is defined in the Graph namespace, and the the option to do a local 'transclusion' specific label. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 20:46, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
I think we are in an agreement - when users define graph in a namespace, they can use transclusion parameter, e.g. {{{label|default text}}} --Yurik (WMF) (talk) 04:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Lies regarding fundraising[edit]

You do not need donations "to keep [Wikipedia] online and ad-free another year" - the Wikimedia Foundation has way more than enough money to keep the site running. You could keep it running for decades with the donations already collected. Why do you continue to solicit funds with this lie? The preceding unsigned comment was added by 73.40.33.148 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

That's a good question. A reply from the WMF would be nice. - Ypnypn (talk) 19:15, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Most viewed articles - Hindi Wikipedia not included[edit]

Hello. http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikitrends/2013.html list does not include Hindi and many other Indian language while it includes Vietnamese and Slovak Wikipedia. Please include Hindi as well. --Muzammil (talk) 09:30, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

On the three revert rule in the english wikipedia[edit]

"Being "right" is not an exception to the three-revert rule, and claiming that your version is the "better" version is not a reason that will get you unblocked." - WHAT

This is a huge flaw that is currently being exploited by a russian admin and several russian editors in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_crisis article. Please see the history or just take one look at the article to see a clear lack of neutral point of view.

The russian admin there (Ymblanter) is abusing his powers by precisely using the rules to block non-russian editors, while excluding the pro-russian propoganda edits from the rules. In other words, he's cherry picking based on his own pro-russian bias.

All of that makes me mad as hell. Especially that wikipedia is made so people who follow the rules, but have no good faith or understanding of NPOV can attain admin status