Wikimedia Forum

← Discussion pages

Wikimedia Forums

Archives →

The Wikimedia Forum is a central place for questions, announcements and other 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

• About Meta
• Discussion pages
• Request pages
• Policies and guidelines
• Information and statistics
• Categories
• Help pages

Participate:

• How to edit a page
• Meta-Wiki discussion page

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

Edit request: Module:WikidataIB

@Billinghurst: I've a quick edit request for Module:WikidataIB. Could an admin please update it with the code below (from w:Module:WikidataIB). It is necessary for the proper functioning of Template:WiR table row.

Extended content
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- qualsToTable takes most of the usual parameters. -- The usual whitelisting, blacklisting, onlysourced, etc. are implemented. -- A qid may be given, and the first unnamed parameter is the property ID, which is of type wikibase item. -- It takes a list of qualifier property IDs as |quals= -- For a given qid and property, it creates the rows of an html table, -- each row being a value of the property (optionally only if the property matches the value in |pval= ) -- each cell being the first value of the qualifier corresponding to the list in |quals ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Dependencies: parseParam; setRanks; parseInput; sourced; ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- p.qualsToTable = function(frame) local args = frame.args local quals = args.quals or "" if quals == "" then return "" end args.reqranks = setRanks(args.rank) local propertyID = mw.text.trim(args[1] or "") local f = {} f.args = args local entityid, props = parseInput(f, "", propertyID) if not entityid then return "" end args.langobj = findLang(args.lang) args.lang = args.langobj.code local pval = args.pval or "" local qplist = mw.text.split(quals, "%p") -- split at punctuation and make a sequential table for i, v in ipairs(qplist) do qplist[i] = mw.text.trim(v):upper() -- remove whitespace and capitalise end local col1 = args.firstcol or "" if col1 ~= "" then col1 = col1 .. "</td><td>" end local emptycell = args.emptycell or " " -- construct a 2-D array of qualifier values in qvals local qvals = {} for i, v in ipairs(props) do local skip = false if pval ~= "" then local pid = v.mainsnak.datavalue and v.mainsnak.datavalue.value.id if pid ~= pval then skip = true end end if not skip then local qval = {} local vqualifiers = v.qualifiers or {} -- go through list of wanted qualifier properties for i1, v1 in ipairs(qplist) do -- check for that property ID in the statement's qualifiers local qv, qtype if vqualifiers[v1] then qtype = vqualifiers[v1][1].datatype if qtype == "time" then if vqualifiers[v1][1].snaktype == "value" then qv = mw.wikibase.renderSnak(vqualifiers[v1][1]) qv = frame:expandTemplate{title="dts", args={qv}} else qv = "?" end elseif qtype == "url" then qv = mw.wikibase.renderSnak(vqualifiers[v1][1]) local display = mw.ustring.match( mw.uri.decode(qv, "WIKI"), "([%w ]+)$" ) if display then qv = "[" .. qv .. " " .. display .. "]" end else qv = mw.wikibase.formatValue(vqualifiers[v1][1]) end end -- record either the value or a placeholder qval[i1] = qv or emptycell end -- of loop through list of qualifiers -- add the list of qualifier values as a "row" in the main list qvals[#qvals+1] = qval end end -- of for each value loop local out = {} for i, v in ipairs(qvals) do out[i] = "<tr><td>" .. col1 .. table.concat(qvals[i], "</td><td>") .. "</td></tr>" end return table.concat(out, "\n") end

Thank you! T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)^talk 09:48, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

@Evolution and evolvability: I have just re-imported the module. I think that this is one script that just needs to be fully aligned with its origin, rather than patched. FWIW usually Meta:RfH would get the most attention for such a request.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:59, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Good idea - thank you. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)^talk 08:00, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposal: That WMF ask Google to stop indexing certain bot-generated articles

• Problem: Google is picking up on of ceb.wikipedia geography articles that have been created by bot. The articles are more than 95% spot-on, but when they are wrong they are very wrong. The incorrect information may even be in the title. One example is that the bot produced three articles for the same island in the same location, but each article claimed the island was in a different county. This would not be a problem to the English-speaking world if it wasn't that the titles of the articles are in English, either completely or in part. Because of this, the bot generated information gets fed into Google results for searches made in English. Due to the thousands of bot generated articles it is not practical for humans to completely curate the ceb.wikipedia articles anytime soon. As many of the bot generated articles have some value, it does not seem reasonable to demand that ceb.wikipedia change its standards and delete all the articles en masse.

Proposal: Instead, the WMF should ask Google to stop indexing all ceb.wikipedia geography articles in English speaking lands such as North America and Canada that depict local geographies like counties, cities, towns, buildings, islands, reefs, etc. Articles on states, provinces, and countries may still be indexed. There should be an opt-in whitelist mechanism for certain important locations like Manhattan or Oahu, but ceb.wikipedia must indicate that they have curated these articles with a human reviewer.

Additionally, Google needs to not index all wikipedia clones of the blacklisted ceb.wikipedia geography articles. The WMF should ask Google to do this.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 19:30, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Now that this is in the right venue, I'll comment on its merits. First, this doesn't require an explicit request to Google, and could be done by noindexing the pages. This could be accomplished by a configuration change, followed by an edit to ceb:Template:paghimo ni bot. Second, why is it the duty of the Wikimedia Foundation to care about individual wikis failing to properly curate their content? * Pppery * _{it has begun} 20:02, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Noindexing sounds like a great idea. In addition, the WMF should coordinate with Google so that all Wiki-clones of noidexed bot generated clones do not show up on Google either. Google needs to develop software that tracks which wikipedia pages are noindexed, and then use it as a screen against clones. The WMF should suggest this. As for the duty question, the WMF doesn't have a duty to get information right but rather an incentive if they want people to take the encyclopedia seriously. An analogy could be made with the National Weather Service offices--before releasing their data they coordinate with other regional offices to make sure that their forecasts do not contradict each other. There is nothing inherently wrong with, say, a rural area near the border of two National Weather Service districts having wildly different forecasts on the same day in a border area, but the NWS people are concerned that if the regional offices contradict each other, the people reading the forecasts will think they are probably both unreliable. It is more of a consumer confidence measure to preserve their own status and an authority than a duty to the public.

The problem is that if you live in VBNM County and search "ASDF Island" and you personally know that "ASDF Island" is in your county. But if Google comes back with results from ceb.wikipedia titled on the search engine page "ASDF Island (ZXCV County)"--you will think "That is completely wrong; of course it is wrong--its Wikipedia!" Several months ago I was confused and called up the county courthouse of the neighboring county to double check. The county employee was not pleased with me, from the nearby county, questioning the ownership of his county's island. He explained that it had always been part of his county. (I'm not an irredentist, really!).

If all the page titles were in Cebuano it would not be a problem, but location titles in many languages are frequently kept in their original languages. I would imagine that if the English Wikipedia titled their article "El Paso (Oklahoma)" the people who work on the Spanish Wikipedia would not be pleased that when Spanish speaking people type "El Paso" Google rings up both their wikipedia article on "El Paso (Texas)" and the enwiki article on "El Paso (Oklahoma)"--it would make people not take the es.wikipedia seriously. If the English speaking article was titled "The Pass (Oklahoma)" there would be no trouble to the Spanish speakers because only the English speakers would be led astray. But place names don't work that way. If one language gets it wrong, it confuses people searching Google in all the languages. So if there were thousands of errors like "El Paso (Oklahoma)" and "Mexico City (Honduras)" and the people managing the English speaking wikipedia only managed to fix a few every year, it would be reasonable for the people working on the es.wikipedia to want Google stop indexing all the non-curated English wikipedia articles.

Since some people have reservations with potentially granting censorship authority to the WMF, then as an alternative someone could translate a kindly request to the Cebuano wikipedia and ask them to no-index the geography pages tagged with the bot tag (it appears at the top of all the bot pages). If they are willing to do it on their own than all WMF would have to do is coordinate with Google to get the clones no-indexed too.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 22:15, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

How about "El Paso (Baja Oklahoma)"? :-). Smallbones (talk) 23:35, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Epiphyllumlover, you need to understand that the WMF does not control Google, and it's very unlikely that Google would take any notice of them over content on their own sites, and even more unlikely that it would over content on mirrors. Google does what it thinks is best for itself, which is to list the results of search queries according to its own algorithms, not some special pleading from the owners of web sites. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:19, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

So you are saying that it couldn't hurt to ask and that the WMF should do so? :) --Guy Macon (talk) 05:55, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

• What evidence do we have that the ceb.wiki search results are a problem for anyone in the real world? Simply being indexed in Google doesn't mean that your page will ever be shown to a real user. You'd need to find what kind of keywords, language and geography ever gets ceb.wiki in the first page of results, and whether it displaces some more suitable result. Judging from the unique devices, with 100k "users" per month it's hard to believe there is any rampant excess visibility. The spikes of 500-600k might point to temporary changes in Google traffic. Nemo 06:04, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

That's the right question, I think. Because I check geographical names for Vicipaedia (Latin), I often look on Google for strange word combinations. I typically get a small number of results, with, somewhere in the list, Vicipaedias in unexpected languages -- e.g. Indonesian, because both Indonesian and Latin use the word "universitas". I never yet noticed Cebuano in my results, but, if I did, it would be because of a chance homonymy like that.

And, meanwhile, a Cebuano-speaking user of Google might actually want those pages and might improve one of them. There's no reason to prevent that. Andrew Dalby (talk) 13:03, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Reforming the RFC process

I have made the above proposal to reform the Requests for comment process, which for right now serves as the only dispute resolution forum for many wikis. --Rschen7754 21:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

A small request

Can someone delete my user page and talk page on Commons? I do not wish to participate in that project any more. I tried asking the admins there, but they just ignored it. (I would also like my uploads removed, to whatever extent reasonable, but I doubt this is going to happen anyway.) — Keφr 16:08, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

We can't help you here as Commons have their own admins. Usually talk pages can't be removed, but it's up to local policies on every wikis. Stryn (talk) 16:49, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikirecords

I proposed a new project which may be a complement of Wikidata. Feel free to discuss it.--GZWDer (talk) 06:35, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to Wikimedia Café Sat 20 June 2020

meeting online live in one hour!

Everyone is invited to the monthly Wikimedia Café video chat on Saturday 20 June 2020. See the project page for details on this upcoming meeting and notes on previous meetings.

• Wikimedia Café

Wikimedia Café is a modest, one-hour, monthly online meeting which for the past few months has had fewer than 10 attendees. At these meetings anyone can propose to discuss any topic of broad Wikimedia community interest, as if we all were able to meet in person over coffee. The meetings themselves are an experiment in small group Wikimedia community conversation with video chat, phone access options, and online shared notetaking. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:34, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Syntaxerkennung funzt nicht

Moin!

Beim Kollegen User:Bahnmoeller funzt aus völlig unerklärlicher Ursache das Erkennen von normalen Zeichen, die als Syntaxzeichen funktionieren sollten, nicht (Zwei seiner Beiträge hier habe ich entsprechend ausgebessert). So werden Doppelpunkte an Zeilenanfängen nicht als Einrückungen erkennt, und 4 Tilden nicht als Unterschrift. Ich habe ihn diesbezüglich schon auf seiner Benutzerdisk auf deWP angesprochen, aber er hat keine Erklärung. Kann das hier irgendwer irgendwie erklären? Grüße vom Sänger ♫^(Reden) 20:07, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Er hat keinen Doppelpunkt eingefügt sondern ein "Triangular Colon", das normalerweise nur für IPA verwendet wird. Die Tilde war kein sondern eine "Combining tilde overlay". Beide wurde wohl über das "Special characters"-Eingabewerkzeug eingefügt. --Count Count (talk) 13:32, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Ich tippe was ein ̈ das war die STernchentaste auf dem Nummernblock

ː das ist der Doppelpunkt beim .

̃ das war strg alt Tilde

nix special characters

Und nun aus dem "Insertable wiki markup" die vier Tilden Bahnmoeller (talk) 16:16, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Ich mach das jetzt mal einfach ganz groß kopiert von Dir:

̈ das war die STernchentaste auf dem Nummernblock

ː das ist der Doppelpunkt beim .

̃ das war strg alt Tilde

Und jetzt das Ganze aus meiner Tastatur:

* das war die Sternchentaste auf dem Nummernblock

: das ist der Doppelpunkt beim .

~ das war Alt Gr Tilde

Du siehst den Unterschied? Grüße vom Sänger ♫^(Reden) 16:44, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Was ich tue ist auf de, en, fr, und commoms immer gleich. Nur auf meta funktioniert es nicht. Und da sagt mein Rasiermesser, das auf meta wohl etwas anders ist als in den anderen Wikimedia-Installationen. Ich werde wohl zum kopieren übergehen. Bahnmoeller (talk) 10:34, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Das würde ich auch so sehen, allerdings wäre es schon intressant, welche Skripte oder Einstellungen das hier verursachen. Wo wäre denn, wenn nicht hier im Forum, der richtige Platz, so etwas anzusprechen? Grüße vom Sänger ♫^(Reden) 10:36, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Why does global rollback include autopatrol?

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T256688

Global rollback includes the autopatrol right. This.. doesn't quite make sense to me? A global rollbacker may be able to spot and revert obvious vandalism on any wiki ("COCKS!!"), but if a global rollbacker tries to create or improve an article on a project in a language they are not fluent in, I would imagine that autopatrol would not be desirable. Similarly on Commons, users on Commons are only granted autopatrol if they are believed to have a sufficient understanding of copyright law. I doubt global rollbackers are put to the same test. — Alexis Jazz (ping me) 09:25, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

For the note: autopatrol was added in the group with this discussion. I wonder if we can have autopatrolrestore to replace it with autopatrol, like there is autoreviewrestore for FlaggedRevs. -- CptViraj (talk) 09:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

The autopatrol right has its justification. GR make many Error fixes in many projekts and remove vandalism, this need not be checked.--𝐖𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐁𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐫 👤💬 09:58, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@CptViraj: I thought rollbacks were already patrolled automatically, but I'm not sure. autopatrolrestore for mw-undo and mw-rollback could work. @WikiBayer: That's only true for the anti-vandalism work. Unless you expect global rollbackers to create an alternative account for regular use, this is not ideal. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 10:09, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Oh yes I forgot, rollbacks are automatically patrolled. Then ya it could work for undo though. -- CptViraj (talk) 10:21, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Not certain that the additional permissions are available by default, see Special:GlobalGroupPermissions/global-rollbacker for what is available.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:13, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

In general, these users should be trustworthy enough to not clog up patrol backlogs all over the place - keep in mind that on many projects patrolling applies to every namespace. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:28, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: Patrolling isn't just about trust. If you aren't familiar with the customs of any given project, you shouldn't be autopatrolled there. And nobody is familiar with the customs of all projects. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 21:13, 29 June 2020‎ (UTC)

Just for reference, stewards and Jimbo Wales have autopatrol on all projects via their groups as well. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:51, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

I'd argue that those groups shouldn't have global autopatrol either, though Jimbo ('founder' group) is a special case as nobody else will ever be added to the 'founder' group and if Jimbo never makes edits on any wiki that require patrolling, there would be literally no possible use case. Also, the 'founder' group is in part "a traditional and largely honorary thing". — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 08:59, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

OK, leave about founder group as a traditional and largely honorary thing. What next? Global Flow creator, Global interface editors, Global sysops, Staff, Stewards and System administrators all those groups have autopatrol on all projects. Global rollbacker have adequate demonstrated trust from the community. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 10:46, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Its useful for projects with recent change patrolling enabled where counter-vandalism may involve manually editing to account for merge conflicts, or when only part of an edit is problematic. DannyS712 (talk) 00:51, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@DannyS712: The problem is it can't be turned off. Even the most trusted user shouldn't be autopatrolled when editing a wiki they aren't familiar with beyond anti-vandalism. And rollbacks are already autopatrolled, which leaves just mw-undo. And if you are removing only part of an edit or you manually edit to avoid an edit conflict on, say, jawiki, perhaps your edit should be patrolled. You might have accidentally removed something that shouldn't have been removed, overlooked a part of the vandalism or the article may contain unspotted vandalism done prior to the edit you have just reverted. And if you remove so much vandalism on jawiki without error that it bothers the patrollers.. Well, they can still just make you autopatrolled, right? The alternative here is that I start discussions about this on local projects, explain the pros and cons, and some might opt out of global rollbackers. I think that would be worse. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 05:21, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

For not being able to turn it off, for page creation, see w:Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers#Autopatrol and global rollback. As for rollbacks being autopatrolled, source please DannyS712 (talk) 05:23, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@DannyS712: Not sure a bot is the ideal solution in this case. Here's what I meant about the patrolling thing: Rollback shouldn't patrol without log entry. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 08:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Try it the other way around: having a vote on every single wiki to grant autopatrol to these 91 users who are in most cases clueless about local policies and language. For example, it didn't take me very long to find this edit by User:1997kB (global rollbacker) that reduced the number of shops from 25000 (25.000) to 25 (25,000). (and even marked that edit as minor) w:Decimal separator for more info. I'll grant you that in this particular case 1997kB wasn't a global rollbacker yet, but that's nitpicking. For a more recent example, see [1] where you inserted the template "Birth date and age".. which doesn't exist on dewiki. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 09:36, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I was editing that wiki because I was reviewing draft on enwiki ([2]) and has nothing to do with global rollback. As you said I was not GR back then, so this edit (even it was not right) went through local processes and citing it here is misleading. [Please ping if anybody need further clarification]. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 10:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@1997kB: Are you saying that if you would have had global rollback (autopatrol) at that time, you wouldn't have made the edit? This isn't anything against you (frankly if your username had been Z1997kB I probably wouldn't have picked you), it's just about global autopatrol in general. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 10:11, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

What I am trying to say is a 3-4 month old account (as I was) can't have GR. GR applications go through long established community process and as I have seen people don't support users who are clueless about global rollback guidelines. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 00:15, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

For dewiki, I am already an `autochecked user` and an `editor`, so gr has nothing to do with it. Also, the dewiki edit you linked was imported from enwiki, where I made the edit in question - see w:de:Special:Redirect/logid/120250064 DannyS712 (talk) 11:05, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Comment Where is this discussion going? This is a rights allocation that has been in place for twelve years and there is no evidence of abuse nor of community-reported problems. We are talking about 75 users who have passed through a community consultation after demonstrating their value to the global community. The list is an well-credentialed list of contributors to Wikimedia. It seems to have become an argument in search of a problem.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Further, the creation of a phabricator ticket and its linking is quite presumptive with a discussion at this point.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:45, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

When someone falls back to the argument "it's been like this for (insert amount of time)", you know you've struck a nerve. That argument can be used to defend men-only voting rights, the death sentence, slavery, colonization, apartheid and so on. It's not a useful argument for anything. As for the Phabricator ticket, it's just a feature request. It doesn't ask for enabling it anywhere. It could be used globally, locally or even on non-WMF wikis which are often forgotten to exist. Any local project for example might decide to grant rollback to a relatively new user who is interested in fighting vandalism. The reverts by that user may not require patrolling, but other edits to articles still might as the user may not be familiar yet with all the policies. The whole discussion was triggered by the Tulsi Bhagat case as he lost his global sysop+rollback rights for "abusing global autopatrol", despite there being no way to disable autopatrol and it not being a conscious decision to enable autopatrol for the offending edits. You too seem to think that autopatrol is just about trust, but it isn't. Understanding of local policy and language is required, and since nobody has an understanding of all local policies on Wikimedia.. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 10:28, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

(wearing my community member hat) I can understand where this concern comes from, but I think that the pros of granting global rollbackers autopatrol outweigh the cons, especially for projects with recent change patrolling. No, GRs don't know local policies everywhere, but they can generally be trusted to contribute and improve rather than harm the wikis. --DannyS712 (talk) 10:38, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

(wearing my developer hat) The work needed to implement such a feature request would likely only be warranted if this right was going to be used on wmf wikis, and had signoff from whatever the relevant WMF team is. While the new EditResult class should make this a bit easier for detecting manual reverts, it would still be a fair amount of work to write the code for, and, having made this mistake myself, I know that developers are less likely to write the code if they don't know if it will be approved and merged. Until there is consensus that such a right is needed, the phabricator ticket is indeed a bit premature. --DannyS712 (talk) 10:38, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Does autopatrol not simply mean that an edit can be presumed to not be vandalism? Even on dewiki, which uses the "escalated" version of autopatrol, FlaggedRevs, reviewing only means a page is not vandalised, not that the edit is high-quality or whatever. --MF-W 11:58, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@MF-Warburg: This may differ from project to project, but I know that at least on Commons, being known to not be a vandal is not sufficient to get autopatrol. Edits that may need to be reverted or adjusted need to be patrolled. So on Commons, without any need for malicious intent, your edits need patrolling in case you accidentally upload copyvio or overcategorize stuff. On Commons, files are only categorized in the deepest subcategory, so a picture that is in Category:Titanic shall not be in Category:Boats. But newbies don't know that. I sometimes make small changes to articles in languages I don't understand 100%. Generally altering or adding an image caption for an image I replace or add. These captions often take the form of "Last name in year", which requires me to figure out how to say "in" in that other language. I don't think I've ever gotten it wrong, but such changes should be patrolled, even though I'm not a vandal. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 13:01, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

commons appears to be fine giving this to those that make a large amount of good edits that do not need to be patrolled, to reduce the clutter on Watchlists. - "edits" are pretty broad. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:38, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: The guideline is 500 useful edits total, but it gets judged on a case-by-case basis. If you have 100 useful anti-vandalism reverts but haven't demonstrated good knowledge of copyright, you likely wouldn't be granted autopatrol. If you have 500 useful anti-vandalism reverts but also recently uploaded some photos of the Burj Khalifa, chances are your request for autopatrol would be denied. Also, 100 edits are a drop in a bucket on Commons. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 00:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: does commonswiki have a "global rights policy" specifying how global rights may/may not be used? — xaosflux ^Talk 15:41, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: Nothing I'm aware of. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 00:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

• Global rollback contains autopatrol because, back when it was created, many/some projects still required all edits to be patrolled (not just page creations), and GRs were thought to be trusted. GR is still a very difficult group to be admitted to, the users are highly trusted, there have been no actual issues with the autopatrolled access beyond one incident that was at least 50% misunderstanding on enwiki. There is no need to change the status quo. – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:07, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
• I agreed with Ajraddatz, if there is any consent in commons then you can open a proposals discussion on COM:VP/P. I think bot DannyS712 proposed for enwiki that also can work for commons, or can made global rights policy for commonswiki. As Ajraddatz said many projects still required all edits to be patrolled, like commons, wikidata, bnwiki and many more where RC patrolling enabled. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 17:10, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

  I'm repeating myself, but autopatrol isn't just about trust. You can have the best intentions in the world and still not get autopatrol until you understand the language and policies of any given project. I still believe autopatrol for edits other than reverts (and things like global file renames and username changes) is a local matter, not a global one. Another method (that doesn't require new MediaWiki features) could be to grant autopatrol to all global rollbackers on all projects on which they have at least 50 edits and distribute a message where each project can look up which users were granted autopatrol. Then autopatrol could be removed from global right sets without suddenly overloading patrol backlogs, and local projects can control how to deal with it. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 00:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

• As per Ajraddatz said, I suggest ťo make a new Global Patroller in global user group so it's very help for patrolling wiki, that is able to get, than global rollbacker, it should wait for a long time to get it, with highly trusted reason. Global patroller can simply to make a user care about wikimedia project, and build cooperate in small situation. Syman51 19:02, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

  Global Patroller will not be possible, for that user should understand all local patrolling policy. Per Bangla Wikipedia new article patrol policy, no article clearing tags or 'conflicts, sources / quotes / references, couldn't be added within 48 hours. CSD judgment are not covered by this policy, like copyright, spam, advertising, own biography, etc. Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 10:46, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Having that right attached makes no sense, is unrelated, and IMO a bad idea. IMO you should remove it. North8000 (talk) 05:57, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

• I'm inclined to remove autopatrol from the GR group unless autopatrol could be actually "turned off". Enwiki can unpatrol an article via page curation and has AFC process but other projects cannot turn it off. While GRs may know what they are doing, will try to comply with local policies and sometimes consult before act on projects where they do not hold local autopatrol, it wouldn't hurt to double-check their article creations/ revisions until they get autopatrol. If they are not active members of that community, it wouldn't impose a burden on that wiki's workflow. If they are active, they can request for local autopatrol when eligible.--94rain ^Talk 14:21, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Annual contest Wikipedia Pages Wanting Photos

Wikipedia Pages Wanting Photos (WPWP)

This is to invite you to join the Wikipedia Pages Wanting Photos (WPWP) campaign to help improve Wikipedia articles with photos and win prizes. The campaign starts today 1st July 2020 and closes 31st August 2020.

The campaign primarily aims at using images from Wikimedia Commons on Wikipedia articles that are lacking images. Participants will choose among Wikipedia pages without photo images, then add a suitable file from among the many thousands of photos in the Wikimedia Commons, especially those uploaded from thematic contests (Wiki Loves Africa, Wiki Loves Earth, Wiki Loves Folklore, etc.) over the years.

Please visit the campaign page to learn more about the WPWP Campaign.

With kind regards,

Thank you,

Deborah Schwartz Jacobs, Communities Liaison, On behalf of the Wikipedia Pages Wanting Photos Organizing Team - 08:24, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

feel free to translate this message to your local language when this helps your community

Feedback on movement names

Hello. Apologies if you are not reading this message in your native language. Please help translate to your language if necessary. Thank you!

There are a lot of conversations happening about the future of our movement names. We hope that you are part of these discussions and that your community is represented.

Since 16 June, the Foundation Brand Team has been running a survey in 7 languages about 3 naming options. There are also community members sharing concerns about renaming in a Community Open Letter.

Our goal in this call for feedback is to hear from across the community, so we encourage you to participate in the survey, the open letter, or both. The survey will go through 7 July in all timezones. Input from the survey and discussions will be analyzed and published on Meta-Wiki.

Thanks for thinking about the future of the movement, --The Brand Project team, 20:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Note: The survey is conducted via a third-party service, which may subject it to additional terms. For more information on privacy and data-handling, see the survey privacy statement.

Nachdem das Banner für diese unbrauchbare und parteiische Umfrage aus methodischen Gründen abgelehnt wurde, jetzt halt dieser Versuch der Streuung, um für den Schrott noch TeilnehmerInnen zu finden. Statt endlich aufzuhören hinter dem schlechten Geld weiteres hinterher zu werfen, und dieses unsägliche und bislang unbrauchbare Umbenennungsunterfangen gegen den erklärten Widerstand der Community fortzuführen, wird einfach ohne Nachdenken weitergemacht. Auf die Community zu hören scheint keine denkbare Option bei der kleinen Gruppe UmbenennerInnen zu sein. Habt Ihr eigentlich gar keine Skrupel? Grüße vom Sänger ♫^(Reden) 20:45, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Equals sign parser function template conflicts

I just created this page: Equals sign parser function template conflicts. The following wikis are affected: bewiktionary, dsbwiki, dvwiki, enwikinews, hewikisource, huwiki, huwiktionary, hywiki, jawiktionary, jbowiktionary, nlwiktionary, nvwiki, orwiktionary, ruwiktionary, sqwikibooks, ttwiki, ukwiktionary, sourceswiki, frwikisource. If you can help or communicate the issue to the involved wikis in their own language, please do and comment.

I made a separate page for the issue to make it easier to track progress, and I expect this to take a while. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:21, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: This conflict strikes me as something that should be tracked on Phabricator. Would you like me to add a task there describing this issue and referencing your page? I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 17:03, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@I JethroBT (WMF): You mean a subtask of phab:T91154? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 17:36, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: I'm not sure whether a comment or a subtask is more appropriate in this case-- I think your comments and references on the task capture the problem well enough, though. I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 19:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Where to store this data/information?

fr:Modèle:Plan des tramways vicinaux de Gand au 01/01/1950 It would be usefull if this mapdata now stored in a template on the French Wikipedia would be available to all language Wikipedia's. Its structuraly not for Wikidata. May be a Wikidata item for the whole or the lines individualy as far as it goes. Can this type of data be integrated into the project Abstract Wikipedia? There must be a tool allowing modifications. The licensing is also an issue as this would be mostly own work (tracing) based on other sources (old maps, Google Earth, written sources etc) Maybe look at how the Openstreet community does it.Smiley.toerist (talk) 22:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@Smiley.toerist: you might be able to use mw:Help:Tabular Data#Usage, but you might run into performance issues. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 19:10, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Blocking

Why system detected that I used proxi, if I didnʼt use it (I have having this IP for much time)? 217.117.125.72 16:35, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Your IP could be in a range together with abusive IPs or your IP may have been assigned to a proxy before it was assigned to you. Which wiki are you trying to edit? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 17:14, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Blocking is in past. And assignation was at least one year before blocking. 217.117.125.72 10:07, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

There is little value in discussing this here. Talk to the stewards if you have a global block issue. Even better create and edit from an account so that mitigating any block that catches you is easier.

Either way, you are not currently globally blocked Special:GlobalBlockList/217.117.125.72 so what is the point of the conversation?  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

No account can be created on foundation.wikimedia.org

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T257578

You can't create an account on foundation.wikimedia.org. Very strange, because translated pages like foundation:Naming Convention Proposals Movement Feedback Survey Privacy Statement/de do exist, but you can't change the language of the interface unless you happen to know uselang, but that gets old real fast because it will only last one page. And if you have any other preferences (say, you prefer timeless), well tough luck. No foundation:Special:Preferences for you. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:00, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, limiting user accounts at Wikimedia Foundation Governance Wiki was intentional. Users were told to request edits at FWF and one used to be able to request an account at Request for an account on the Foundation wiki. Killiondude (talk) 16:57, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

I understand it's intentional, but being unable to change preferences isn't nice. This could be made possible by allowing user accounts to be created (even if they can't edit) or somehow allow some preferences to be set without logging in. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 17:32, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: put in a phabricator: ticket to see what they can free up for languages. That seems to be a reasonable setting for a locked down wiki.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:49, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Okay. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 14:09, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Announcing a new wiki project! Welcome, Abstract Wikipedia

Hi all,

It is my honor to introduce Abstract Wikipedia, a new project that has been unanimously approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. Abstract Wikipedia proposes a new way to generate baseline encyclopedic content in a multilingual fashion, allowing more contributors and more readers to share more knowledge in more languages. It is an approach that aims to make cross-lingual cooperation easier on our projects, increase the sustainability of our movement through expanding access to participation, improve the user experience for readers of all languages, and innovate in free knowledge by connecting some of the strengths of our movement to create something new.

This is our first new project in over seven years. Abstract Wikipedia was submitted as a project proposal by Denny Vrandečić in May 2020 after years of preparation and research, leading to a detailed plan and lively discussions in the Wikimedia communities. We know that the energy and the creativity of the community often runs up against language barriers, and information that is available in one language may not make it to other language Wikipedias. Abstract Wikipedia intends to look and feel like a Wikipedia, but build on the powerful, language-independent conceptual models of Wikidata, with the goal of letting volunteers create and maintain Wikipedia articles across our polyglot Wikimedia world.

The project will allow volunteers to assemble the fundamentals of an article using words and entities from Wikidata. Because Wikidata uses conceptual models that are meant to be universal across languages, it should be possible to use and extend these building blocks of knowledge to create models for articles that also have universal value. Using code, volunteers will be able to translate these abstract “articles” into their own languages. If successful, this could eventually allow everyone to read about any topic in Wikidata in their own language.

As you can imagine, this work will require a lot of software development, and a lot of cooperation among Wikimedians. In order to make this effort possible, Denny will join the Foundation as a staff member in July and lead this initiative. You may know Denny as the creator of Wikidata, a long-time community member, a former staff member at Wikimedia Deutschland, and a former Trustee at the Wikimedia Foundation . We are very excited that Denny will bring his skills and expertise to work on this project alongside the Foundation’s product, technology, and community liaison teams.

It is important to acknowledge that this is an experimental project, and that every Wikipedia community has different needs. This project may offer some communities great advantages. Other communities may engage less. Every language Wikipedia community will be free to choose and moderate whether or how they would use content from this project.

We are excited that this new wiki-project has the possibility to advance knowledge equity through increased access to knowledge. It also invites us to consider and engage with critical questions about how and by whom knowledge is constructed. We look forward to working in cooperation with the communities to think through these important questions.

There is much to do as we begin designing a plan for Abstract Wikipedia in close collaboration with our communities. I encourage you to get involved by going to the project page and joining the new mailing list . We recognize that Abstract Wikipedia is ambitious, but we also recognize its potential. We invite you all to join us on a new, unexplored path.

Yours,

Katherine Maher (Executive Director, Wikimedia Foundation)

Sent by m:User:Elitre (WMF) 19:56, 9 July 2020 (UTC) - m:Special:MyLanguage/Abstract Wikipedia/July 2020 announcement

Can section links be provided inside the section headers on articles?

I was just talking to one of my friends recently and he remarked to me that the user interface of Wikipedia is not really great when you want to link to a single section of an article. To do that, you have to scroll all the way up to the TOC, and find the specific section you want to link to in order to be able to get the anchor link. What I'd like to request is if it would be okay to have a small anchor link appear next to a section whenever you're hovering over it. That's something a lot of other websites already use, and it seems a bit "2010" to not have this on Wikimedia projects. As an example, GitHub uses such anchor links, and so do other self-respecting wiki projects.

I have read the banner at the very top of this page that tries to deter technical questions, but I believe this is much more a policy question than a technical question. If you want, I can easily make a pull request that implements this, but I'm not sure if that pull request would just be accepted. So my question is: would it be okay to have anchor links added to all (level 2 ==headers==) to appear on hover-over?

I've made an example script to be able to see what it might look like; try running it (if you know what you're doing with JS) to have a look at the effect. Since Wikipedia generally has a fairly simplistic layout, I think the following implementation would already look really well:

$('h2 .mw-headline').before(function() {return '<a class="sectionlink" href="#'+this.id+'">#</a>';});
$('<style type="text/css">a.sectionlink {display: none; position: absolute; transform: translate(-100%, 0); padding: 0 0.2em; text-decoration: none;} :root h2:hover a.sectionlink {display:inline;}</style>').prependTo(document.head)

(some technical details: I've included the :root selector there to make sure the anchor-link does not appear on Internet Explorer versions 8 or lower, since they'll not be able to render the icon properly due to not supporting the necessary transform style)

Joeytje50 (talk) 22:52, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@Joeytje50: Some people are working on it already :) (and have been for a long time, but hopefully it will move forward, soon?).

See phab:T18691 for many details and further links and open questions.

In the meantime, logged-in users can get these handy links via a gadget; see example of how I do it. Or anyone can do it via a greasemonkey script like this one. (they both work a bit differently, and neither is perfect)

Hope that helps! Quiddity (talk) 18:17, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Animation Course - Animation Institute In Delhi - AnimationBoom

BEST ANIMATION COURSE IN DELHI. WHY ONLY ANIMATION BOOM?

Animation Boom is the leading Institute in West Zone. They provide the best animation course in delhi. They design their course in such a way that the student became animator in 16th Months, so it is not wrong to say that it is the best animation course in delhi. Even in the lock-down they give classes to their students through online.

Animation Boom situated in Dwarka near Metro Station sector 12. Our institute provide free pick and drop facility from sector 12 metro station. We also give an written job agreement to our students. Which give surety to them for their future. The Multimedia Sector is growing so fast that everyone needs animator for their work. The faculties are eminent and efficient in their field. They provide Graphic Designing, Web Designing, Interior Designing and Animation at a very nominal cost. We kept our fees at very low cost because we want that those families whose not able to enroll themselves in animation courses, they feel free and happy to join the animation courses. The demand of these courses in all sectors are rising very high. The staff is very helpful and friendly and they we help you when you need them. The facilities provided by Animation Boom are quite beneficial. It means that it is the good place to learn, understand and grow. In over all i would say that whether you take the fees,facilities, pick and drop facilities, staff and the course duration are very best of animation boom. t is quite write to say that it is the best animation course in delhi which are provided by our institute. If you have an any query related to the courses and our institute you are free to call up at 9899116732. We are happy to hear from yourside.