Wikimedia Forum

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by MiszaBot (talk | contribs) at 19:20, 19 March 2009 (Archiving 3 thread(s) (older than 30d) to Wikimedia Forum/Archives/2009-02.). It may differ significantly from the current version.
Shortcut:
WM:FORUM

<translate> The Wikimedia Forum is a central place for questions, announcements and other discussions about the [[<tvar|wmf>Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia Foundation</>|Wikimedia Foundation]] and its projects. (For discussion about the Meta wiki, see [[<tvar|meta-babel>Special:MyLanguage/Meta:Babel</>|Meta:Babel]].)
This is not the place to make technical queries regarding the [[<tvar|mediawiki>Special:MyLanguage/MediaWiki</>|MediaWiki software]]; please ask such questions at the [[<tvar|mw-support-desk>mw:Project:Support desk</>|MediaWiki support desk]]; technical questions about Wikimedia wikis, however, can be placed on [[<tvar|tech>Special:MyLanguage/Tech</>|Tech]] page.</translate>

<translate> You can reply to a topic by clicking the "<tvar|editsection>[edit]</>" link beside that section, or you can [<tvar|newsection>//meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&action=edit&section=new</> start a new discussion].</translate>
You can reply to a topic by clicking the '[edit]' link beside that section, or start a new discussion
Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Participate:

This box: view · talk · edit
This page experimentally allows language localisation.

Strange edit in {{H-langs:Help}}

Please, check this strange edit made by user Rcalcazar. It seems like vandalism. I've rolled it back. --LonelyKoyote 17:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please help!!!!!!!!!!

Hi! when i go to a particular page for information i dont see an option to discuss or talk. moreover, i am a lot confused with a lot of information here and there. I was not able to reach Wikipedia Help..I had a query and did not find a place to write to you. I dont know if i am writing to you from the correct space. My topmost doubt is what are these "external links". How do they appear on the information's pages? for example..... if i browse info on paper, there are external links directing to private organisations. how do the external links happen to appear in that page of "paper"? I have a website that caters to industries and corporate organizations about information regarding manufacturers and suppliers of various products. external links such as TAPPI, internationalpaper.com & ecopaper.com are few of the links visible in the "external links" section under the article "paper".

if i want to exhibit an external link of my website where people around can get more information related to the topic what I need to do? after lookin at the external links I am confused about the Wikipedia policies. Please take this matter into keen consideration and reply to "augustgrace" so that I can avoid breach of policies here unknowingly Thak You, Augustgrace.

how to setup a discussion page with version 1.7

Hello

I would like to know how to setup a discussion page/forum with wiki 1.7

Thanks in advance

You might want to take it to Mediawiki site. This wiki is about Wikimedia projects, not Mediawiki itself. Thanks. Techman224Talk 02:11, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Case Study - The meatpuppeting attack on LMO wikipedia - Origin (source) of the meatpuppets

About one year ago, in the days 2-4-5-6 december 2007, a lot of people accessed for the first time the LMO wiki, immediately or after few minutes voted 5 new administrators [1] and then disappeared. What was the origin of the voters?

It's about a couple of month that I'm analyzing that meatpuppeting attack case. I know that the word "meatpuppet" should be used with great care ([2]), so the word "meatpuppet" will be used according the main definition given in the page ([3]):

Editors of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia use "meat puppet" to deprecate contributions from a new community member if the new member was (allegedly) recruited by an existing member only to back up the recruiting member's position.

I also know that personal attacks must be avoided ([4]). In this analysis there is some nickname, but only because those nicknames were involved in the meatpuppeting attack, as demonstrated by the logs.

Analysis of the Fabexplosive's election

As an example, here will be analyzed the election of one of the five admins "elected" during the meatpuppeting attack. His name is Fabexplosive: he was not elected by the LMO community, but by meatpuppets (as definition) come from away.

The summary of the Fabexplosive's election to admin is as follow:

  • he has been candidate to admin after only 3 edits [5] ;
  • on 2/4/5 dec 2007 the meatpuppets (as definition) voted him;
  • on 9 dec 2007 he had the admin rights, after about only 20 edits.

But let we analyze the votes of 17 people on the total of 19 (89% of the votes):

  1. Dracoroboter - [6] - his vote is his 15th edit;
  2. Xaura - [7] - first edit on 20:01, 2 dec 2007, voted after 1 minute;
  3. Ilario - [8] - first edit on 20:01, 2 dec 2007, voted after 1 minute and then disappeared;
  4. Marcok - [9] - first edit on 20:06, 2 dec 2007, voted after 4 minutes and then disappeared;
  5. Paginazero - [10] - his vote is his 4th edit and then disappeared
  6. Veneziano - [11] - first edit on 20:53, 2 dec 2007, voted after 23 minutes and then disappeared;
  7. Tanarus - [12] - his vote is his 3rd edit;
  8. Balabiot - [13] - first edit on 10:06, 4 dec 2007, voted after 5 minutes;
  9. bramfab(=Barbapedana) - [14] - first edit on 08:48, 3 dec 2007, voted after 1 day and 8 edits;
  10. .snoopy. - [15] - his vote is his 5th edit;
  11. Nemo - [16] - first edit on 17:14, 4 dec 2007, voted after 38 minutes;
  12. Olando - [17] - first edit on 13:40, 5 dec 2007, voted immediately (WORLD RECORD) and then disappeared;
  13. Civvi - [18] - first edit on 10:58, 5 dec 2007, voted after some our and then disappeared;
  14. Lusum - [19] - first edit on 20:34, 5 dec 2007, voted after 1 minute and then disappeared;
  15. Ripe - [20] - first edit on 20:31, 5 dec 2007, voted after 1 minute and then disappeared;
  16. Loroli - [21] - first edit on 20:32, 6 dec 2007, voted after 2 minutes and then disappeared;
  17. giacumìn - [22] - first edit on 15:25, 3 dec 2007, voted after 6 days and 19 edits.

According to the cited definition, the voters of Fabexplosive (and of the other 4 admins) should be considered meatpuppets.

Origin (source) of the meatpuppets

The 5 admins "elected" in that way were: Fabexplosive, Snowdog, Barbapedana, DracoRoboter and Remulazz: according to the cited definition, they should be considered (allegedly) recruiters (=meatpuppeters). The detailed analysis of the attack is above [23]. But what was the origin of the meatpuppets (as definition) and of the meatpuppeters (as definition) ?

It's difficult to find were the meatpuppeting attack was organized, but perhaps the cultural environment origin (source) of the meatpuppeting attack can be found. Let we analyze the following evidences:

  1. the meatpuppets (as definition) DracoRoboter (as Draco), Xaura, Ilario, Marcok, Paginazero, Nemo, Fabexplosive, kiado and M7 (as M/) took part to the organization of the 2008 Annual Meeting of the Italian Wikimedia Association (WMI), as we can see [24]. In the page there are also Nick1915, but see later;
  2. the meatpuppet (as definition) Nemo (first edit on LMO 17:14, 4 dic 2007, voted after 38 minutes for 3 admins [25]) is one of the 5 people in the Board of the Italian Wikimedia Association, as we can see [26];
  3. a steward (Paginazero) was heavly involved in the attack (maybe naivly): he voted for 3 admins ([27]: only 4 edits in total and then disappeared. Here we can see Paginazero receiving a premium for the Italian Wikimedia Association [28];
  4. another steward (Nick1915) backed up metpuppets and meatpuppeters for a longtime, till in the RFC [29] was explicitly requested to stop to backup the attackers and to follow better the Steward_policies, where it says "Stewards should always be neutral";
  5. the meatpuppet (as definition) Remulazz is an active member of the Italian Wikimedia Association, as we can see [30];
  6. the (allegedly) recruiter Snowdog has been vice president of the Italian Wikimedia Association [31].

And so on ... but it could be enough for now.

Yattagat 21:27, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All I know is that .snoopy is a well-standing admin here. I might return to comment more later. Fabexplosive himself is also a well-known global user. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 13:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately the main definition of "meatpuppet" is clear: "Editors of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia use "meat puppet" to deprecate contributions from a new community member if the new member was (allegedly) recruited by an existing member only to back up the recruiting member's position". And, in the same way, the logs are clear. Yattagat 21:47, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be a Wikimedia horror story.--Kozuch 20:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 21:06, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mike.lifeguard, erroneously you (on 20-dec, 21:07) destroyed the comment "A Case Study - The meatpuppeting attack on the LMO wikipedia - Corrective actions requested", writing "rm dupe section". Instead the informations and the analysis were not duplicated. May I restore the section? or almost the sections "Analisys of Dracoroboter's election" and "Analisys of Remulazz's election" ? Thank you, Yattagat 21:49, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Four day ago, I requested the permission to restore the informations and the analysis that Mike.lifeguard erroneously destroyed, writing: rm dupe section, while the informations were not duplicated. Having received no answer, I suppose that NULLA OSTA to restore. So, the analysis of the election of DracoRoboter and Remulazz will be restored. Yattagat 14:07, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Analisys of Dracoroboter's election

DracoRoboter was not elected by te community, but by people that came from away. Let we analyze the election of DracoRoboter, as we can see here: [32]. The votes of 18 people on the total of 20 (90% of the votes) were as follow:

  1. Fabexplosive - [33] - his vote is his 6th edit
  2. Xaura - [34] - first edit on 20:01, 2 dic 2007, voted immediately, WORLD RECORD
  3. Ilario - [35] - first edit on 20:01, 2 dic 2007, voted after 1 minutes and then disappeared
  4. Marcok - [36] - first edit on 20:06, 2 dic 2007, voted after 4 minutes and then disappeared
  5. Paginazero - [37] - his vote is his 4th edit and then disappeared
  6. Veneziano - [38] - first edit on 20:53, 2 dic 2007, voted after 23 minutes and then disappeared
  7. Tanarus - [39] - his vote is his 3rd edit
  8. Balabiot - [40] - first edit on 10:06, 4 dic 2007, voted after 5 minutes
  9. bramfab(=Barbapedana) - [41] - first edit on 08:48, 3 dic 2007, voted after 1 day, 7 hours and 52 minutes
  10. .snoopy. - [42] - his vote is his 5th edit and then disappeared
  11. Nemo - [43] - first edit on 17:14, 4 dic 2007, voted after 38 minutes
  12. Olando - [44] - first edit on 13:40, 5 dic 2007, voted immediately, WORLD RECORD and then disappeared
  13. giacumìn - [45] - his vote is his 7th edit
  14. Civvi - [46] - first edit on 10:58, 5 dic 2007, voted after 03:38 and then disappeared
  15. Lusum - [47] - first edit on 20:34, 5 dic 2007, voted after 1 minute and then disappeared
  16. Kiado - [48] - first edit on 17:13, 5 dic 2007, voted after 04:03
  17. Ripe - [49] - first edit on 20:31, 6 dic 2007, voted immediately and then disappeared
  18. Loroli - [50] - first edit on 20:32, 6 dic 2007, voted after 1 minute and then disappeared

Analisys of Remulazz's election

Remulazz was not elected by te community, but by people that came from away. Let we analyze the election of Remulazz, as we can see here: [51]. The votes of 16 people on the total of 17 (94% of the votes) were as follow:

  1. Dracoroboter - [52] - his vote for Snowdog were his 5th edit; after 2 day he voted for Remulazz
  2. Tanarus - [53] - his vote is his 13th edit
  3. Fabexplosive - [54] - his vote is his 12th edit
  4. bramfab(=Barbapedana) - [55] - first edit on 08:48, 3 dic 2007, voted after 1 day, 7 hours and 52 minutes
  5. .snoopy. - [56] - his vote is his 7th edit and then disappeared
  6. Balabiot - [57] - first edit on 10:06, 4 dic 2007, voted after 5 minutes for Snowdog, voted after 7 hours for Remulazz
  7. Nemo - [58] - first edit on 17:14, 4 dic 2007, voted after 38 minutes
  8. Xaura - [59] - first edit on 20:01, 2 dic 2007, voted immediately for Snowdog, voted after 2 days for Remulazz
  9. Olando - [60] - first edit on 13:40, 5 dic 2007, voted immediately, WORLD RECORD and then disappeared
  10. giacumìn - [61] - his vote is his 9th edit
  11. Lusum - [62] - first edit on 20:34, 5 dic 2007, voted after 2 minute and then disappeared
  12. Civvi - [63] - first edit on 10:58, 5 dic 2007, voted after 1 day and then disappeared
  13. Kiado - [64] - first edit on 17:13, 5 dic 2007, voted after 1 day
  14. Loroli - [65] - first edit on 20:32, 6 dic 2007, voted after 6 minutes and then disapeared
  15. Ripe - [66] - first edit on 20:31, 6 dic 2007, voted after 18 minutes and then disapeared
  16. Veneziano - [67] - first edit on 20:53, 2 dic 2007, voted after 23 minutes for Snowdog, voted 5 days after for Remulazz and then disappeared

Corrective action required

The admins of the LMO wikipedia, Fabexplosive, Snowdog and Barbapedana were elected (as detailed above) by users that suddenly accessed the LMO wikipedia, immediately or after few minutes voted and then disappeared. If the main definition of "meatpuppet" (Editors of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia use "meat puppet" to deprecate contributions from a new community member if the new member was (allegedly) recruited by an existing member only to back up the recruiting member's position) will not be changed, the recruited users should be considered meatpuppets and the recruiters should be considered meatpuppeters.

The admins elected in the way detailed, don't have the trust of the LMO community, they only had the vote of the meatpuppets. As corrective action, the following are proposed:

  1. the admins Fabexplosive, Snowolf and Barbapedana should resign and leave the LMO adminship;
  2. all the votes of meatpuppets and meatpuppeters, involved in the meatpuppeting attack, should be discarded during the polls on the LMO wikipedia (until meatpuppets and meatpuppeters will demonstrate, with their contributions, to be good wikipedians).

Yattagat 14:10, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some little news

On friday 16 jan 2009, the admin Fabexplosive resigned and leaved the adminship in the LMO wiki.

Users of the LMO wiki are waiting for the resignation of Snowdog (an ex steward) and of Barbapedana (alias Bramfab), the other two admins "elected" during the meatpuppeting attack of december 2007.

Yattagat 14:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Analisys of the Snowdog's election

The LMO users are asking the resignation of the admins "elected" during the meatppeting attack of december 2007 : "Ti chiedo di dire a tutti i tuoi soci di scegliere o di mettersi a contribuire e amministrare o di dimettersi. Grazie" [68].

The admin Snowdog, as ex steward and ex vice President of the Italian Wikimedia Association, should be the first to resign.

The admin Snowdog was not elected by te community, but by people that came from away. Let we analyze the election of Snowdog, as we can see there: [69]. The votes of 20 people on the total of 23 (87% of the votes) were as follow:

  1. Dracoroboter - [70] - his vote is his 5th edit
  2. Fabexplosive - [71] - his vote is his 5th edit
  3. Xaura - [72] - first edit on 20:01, 2 dic 2007, voted immediately, WORLD RECORD
  4. Ilario - [73] - first edit on 20:01, 2 dic 2007, voted immediately and then disappeared
  5. Marcok - [74] - first edit on 20:06, 2 dic 2007, voted after 4 minutes and then disappeared
  6. Paginazero - [75] - his vote is his 4th edit and then disappeared
  7. Veneziano - [76] - first edit on 20:53, 2 dic 2007, voted after 22 minutes after and then disappeared
  8. Tanarus - [77] - his vote is his 4th edit
  9. Balabiot - [78] - first edit on 10:06, 4 dic 2007, voted after 5 minutes
  10. bramfab(=Barbapedana) - [[79]] - first edit on 08:48, 3 dic 2007, voted after 1 day, 7 hours and 52 minutes
  11. .snoopy. - [80] - his vote is his 4th edit and then disappeared
  12. Nemo - [81] - first edit on 17:14, 4 dic 2007, voted after 38 minutes
  13. M7 - [82] - his vote is his 3rd edit and then disappeared
  14. Olando - [83] - first edit on 13:40, 5 dic 2007, voted immediately, WORLD RECORD and then disappeared
  15. giacumìn - [84] - his vote is his 6th edit
  16. Civvi - [85] - first edit on 10:58, 5 dic 2007, voted after 03:36
  17. Lusum - [86] - first edit on 20:34, 5 dic 2007, voted immediately and then disappeared
  18. Kiado - [87] - first edit on 17:13, 5 dic 2007, voted after 04:02
  19. Ripe - [88] - first edit on 20:31, 6 dic 2007, voted immediately and then disappeared
  20. Loroli - [89] - first edit on 20:32, 6 dic 2007, voted immediately and then disappeared

Yattagat 18:06, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Little problem with a user

Hello, i came here because i have a problem on many wikis with an user. For information I'm an administrator on FR. (fr:Utilisateur:Gdgourou)

History
  1. I request a bot flag for user:Ptbotgourou on a lot of wikis few months ago (mostly august and september) and many are without response
  2. On 21 octobre 2008, I translate from french a mail send by user Budelberger in which he complain that admin on small wikis are "ignorants, incompetent and vandal"...
this user is blocked indefinitely of FR [90] since may 2008 after a little "history"...
since he works on small wikis rather good but don't accept any authority.
« rather good »… Since then he make a systematic opposition on most of unresponded request i have. I don't check every wikis but on some he write my real name and write that I'm "a vandal", "consanguine" (in french it means prejorativly "have fuck with a consanguine"),...

Sometime i could be happy, it's a simple opposition.

Some examples of pending request

I don't check on wikis i have already the bot flag but perphaps there's more. I made a research on google http://www.google.fr/search?q=gdgourou+consanguin. I'm not very happy to have results. Have you a solution ? --Gdgourou 05:47, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also found an attack against Kahuroa

If you d'on't have any solution, perhaps some advices ? --Gdgourou 09:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried contacting local administrators? I'm not sure what could be done, but I'm not sure this is the venue for it. I'll try and think. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 13:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tsss… le vilain garçon ! il oublie de parler de la lettre d'insultes qu'il m'a envoyée en privé ! il tient absolument à ce que je la rende publique ?… -- (a user) Budelberger 18:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC) ().[reply]
C'est ma gloire ! Le Système acculé dans ses derniers retranchements ! Sa servilité établie ! -- (a user) Budelberger 18:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC) ().[reply]
Cet individu n'est jamais aussi bien décrit que par lui-même… (Cet individu est Français, et il fait honneur à une longue tradition nationale. Ils sont 178 autres comme lui – en ne comptant que les notables – sur «fr ». Dans les WikiMachins, « on » adore décerner des décorations à tout un chacun (les meilleurs larbins) : à Gdgourou, je décerne la Francisque d'or.) Quant à moi, je viens d'apprendre avec surprise que je figurais sur une « white list » ! (Et cet individu y figure à mes côtés : je suis mort de honte.) Il faut vite aviser « Huggle » de son erreur… --Budelberger 13:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC) ().[reply]
Comment appelez-vous en français ceux qui ne se reproduisent qu'entre eux ? Oui, je sais, la française langue, ça est un pneu ardu pour un individu comme vous ; ah ! que vous en ayez la fine connaissance d'un Andrew Dalby !… --Budelberger 13:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC) ().[reply]
Pour celle-ci, la tchouvache (et c'est vrai que vous êtes balaise en tchouvache, hein ? comment qu'on y dit « REDIRECT », par là-bas, hein ?…), vous auriez dû, monCanard, plutôt donner ce lien-ci, doux Seigneur ; une belle marque du vandalisme que vous vous croyez autorisé à pratiquer un peu partout, en proclamant urbite et orbite votre « qualité » d'administrateur de la fr.Wikipedia, ce ramassis de 179 cooptés (sans possibilité – pas fous, les frelons – de révocation ; quoi qu'ils fassent) IGNARROGANTS (sauf, bien sûr, et je m'incline : en manga ; que des mangarastes de première, les bougres). Alors, alors… on aurait un pneu honte de ses vandalismes, monBiquet ? -- (a user) Budelberger 18:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC) ().[reply]
(Le pauv' Chéri… il voudrait que partout partout partout il y ait un déluge d'ovations sur sa personne quémandant un flag ; c'est vrai que dans la Famille, on ne comprend pas le sens d'« Oppose » ; c'est bien simple, on efface les messages, et on bloque les comptes ; ailleurs comme ici, sur Meta : un seul choix, être d'accord. Les yeux rouges.)
Décidément, vous n'êtes pas doué, mon petit Délateur chéri (pas autant qu'Hégésippe, hein ?, mais Lui a l'antériorité – « pas autant chéri », entendez bien…) ; après avoir vandalisé la « cv », ou pas être foutu de rien connaître à l'histoire de la Carie, avec votre robot pour attardés, vous voilà pôs capab' – en tant que personne… – d'aligner un lien correct ; c'est icitte qu'il faut lire, monGrand ! --Budelberger 14:45, 22 December 2008 (UTC) (). (P.-S. : Comme toujours… « Serviteur » ! À votre avis, je reprends point par point votre poulet à la Kommandantur, ou vous vous en chargez ? « D'on't » you think so ?… Vous pourriez peut-être expliquer pourquoi, après avoir lu mes informations, « Lajsikonik » a changé d'avis sur vous ?…) (P.-P.-S. : Un conseil, Honorable Anonyme… Dois-je maintenant signer de ce doux nom (de section) : « a user » ? votre avis d'anonyme m'intéresse !)[reply]
Qu'est-ce qu'il en sait, avec ses disniaiseries pour tout bagage, le gourou ?… Qu'il prouve une once de compétence pour apprécier ! -- (a user) Budelberger 18:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC) ().[reply]
Toujours à propos de ce délicat esprit nommé « Kahuroa », propriétaire exclusif et perpétuel de la Wikipédia maorie ; peut-être avez-vous remarqué que certaines villes (Kurów, Curitibia, Uetersen, Końskowola…) et certaine église… tentent d'avoir un article dans chacun des projet, dans chacune des langues… – même dans l'Incubator. Regardez ici. Pourquoi se gênerait-il, après tout : il est inamovible et assuré de la solidarité (et protection, comme on dit dans la Famille) de ses Consanguins : cette Wikipedia est sa propriété personnelle ; un deuxième « Hugo.arg ». --Budelberger 22:53, 25 December 2008 (UTC) ().[reply]
@ Anonymous Dissident : Yes I try, but often the fact that he doesn't disturb a lot... is a reason to not block him
One more time, he put my real name on a wiki, this one [91], and it's only one thing, lot of insult... on others please could you do something ? --Gdgourou 23:36, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I consider that outing other users (by purposely putting their real name on various wikis) is intolerable and should be treated very seriously (it reminds me of an ex-english user doing that on his website, which is no different from our case).
  • Also, Budelberger seems to be harassing GdGourou on many projects. This is another offense that should be treated seriously.
  • And last, I noted in this section that he has not been contructive at all. Instead, he mainly abused it to write personnal attacks and other non-sense.

Was it only for me to decide, this account would be already locked. But, since I has a bias, I'd prefer other steward to decide what kind of sanction should be applied.

DarkoNeko 11:27, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Err, so. Does that silence mean you all agree on the fact I should lock him ? :) DarkoNeko 17:30, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The case is not clear to me. Did Gdgourou disclose a private email? Guido den Broeder 17:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you speak about the mail that I translate, it was a mail send by Budelberger to wikipedia-l(at)lists.wikimedia.org (date : 21 october 2008 11:54, subject : Révocations d'Administrateurs). SterkeBak request a translation which was also provided by andrew.gray and thomas.dalton. I don't know if the other persons who respond to the mail have been harassed by Budelberger ? Should i forward you the mail ? --Gdgourou 09:42, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For your information, Bastique respond to this mail the 23 october 2008 as Andrew Dalby. --Gdgourou 09:48, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Problem solved for meta... user banned --Gdgourou 19:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright policy on Albanian Wikipedia

What's the strategy for dealing with situations where one of the smaller projects does something blatantly against the rules in terms of copyright and image policy? This time it's the Albanian Wikipedia. They have an image template saying that certain media are published only for use on their own Wikipedia and must not be copied elsewhere, not even other Wikimedia projects. The template was created by one of their administrators and is currently used on some two dozen images, some of them historical photographs, others graphics that would quite obviously be replaceable with fully free media. I can see no indication of anything like a non-free media rationale, a source declaration, or an explanation of the supposed copyright status, or what the special sq-wiki-only licensing is supposed to be based on. Copyright policy on other images appears to be rather sloppy too, to put it mildly. (these are all claimed to be public domain, and hardly any of them even has a source provided.)

I don't speak Albanian. I tried speaking to one of their admins who I know does speak English, but he rather rudely refused to talk to me in anything but Albanian [92]. It's a very small project and competent English speakers appear to be rare there. I've asked him to join us over here. What else can be done? Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:56, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is GFDL violation. MUST be deleted unless it is used for fair use images.--Kwj2772 (論) 07:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
cf. wikimedia:Licensing policy.--Kwj2772 (論) 07:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I read your conversation at sq:Përdoruesi diskutim:Puntori. English is not this person't first language so it's tough to tell for sure, but I think he is confusing "free" (it didn't cost me anything) with "free" (free content). That's hard enough to explain to someone when we both speak the same language. ;) --B 15:18, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You mean that "speech vs. beer" is not instantaneously intuitively intelligible across cultures? :) -- Avi 15:40, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Words fail me. [93] --B 15:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if he wants it on his village pump rather than his user talk page, I'll gladly oblige. Let's have a kuvenda. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:45, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about not destroying the content of projects and instead 'helping' them? Instead of saying "your images are bad, solve the problem or the Foundation will delete them all!" you could rather tell them how to create a local fair use policy. Or try creating or finding free alternatives to the images. Or try helping them to find the sources of the images.
There is not a single "obvious" or "dangerous" copyvio among the images, just some very old pics where the source is not known exactly. No reason to make this a big issue. --::Slomox:: >< 20:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's not quite true. While the old photographs are likely to be unproblematic, the maps (like sq:Figura:P. Romake në Ballkan shk.V.PNG) are not; they are certainly more modern, and in the absence of source information must be presumed to be copyvios. Also, the particular images with this particular tag are only the tip of an iceberg, of a project crammed full of bad image uploads with all sorts of sloppy, missing or false copyright declarations. – As for helping, that presupposes that local editors are prepared to listen, to explain, and to do their homework. I can't help them create a fair use policy if they are not prepared to acknowledge that non-free content requires any consideration on their part at all. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:10, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Slomox, I follow this discussion here and on the sq.wiki. My opinion is that the colleagues here do not want to critisize only but are helping a bit with advices etc. The fact is though, that a tag or template "this image can be published here only and do not copy or use it elsewhere" an absolute nonsence is. Everybody who see it once can use it and that is the point: there is a copyright violation. Fair use is a obscure happening on the enwiki because of the US laws, but I do not think that somebody can help the sq.wiki to create a sq.fair-use-policy. The images must be deleted, and as somebody says on the sq.wiki, after learing the point they can be renewed. -jkb- 21:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Every project can create an Exemption Doctrine Policy if local law allows rights similar to "fair use". Whether this is the case can only be said after reading the Albanian copyright law. If you haven't read it, don't say, that they cannot create one.
This thread was about a specific template. 14 old images, 7 maps and one console screenshot. The maps and the screenshot can easily be recreated as free images. I cannot judge how prevalent problematic content is among the other uploads on sq. If it's a general problem, the original post shouldn't have asked about the specific template.
The fact is though, that a tag or template "this image can be published here only and do not copy or use it elsewhere" an absolute nonsence is. It's not a license tag but a warning tag. --::Slomox:: >< 22:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is evidently meant to be a licensing tag. There is nothing else at all on the image description pages. That's indicative of the overall level of copyright practice there. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Slomox, I did not read the Albanian law and I will not as I do not speak the language. But I would be very surprised if there is the possibility for fair use (see also the appropriate pages in commons, there are such tags not mentioned). But this does not matter. Important: there are no warning tags in the wikipedia projects. There is only a notice on the bottom of every page saying "Content is available under GNU Free Documentation License". Therefore all texts and all images which do not fullfill GFDL cannot be published here. I know the discussions about this from many projects, sometimes I am sorry about it, but this is the fact. -jkb- 22:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC) - - - P.S. Fair use according to the US law is sometning else and an exception of the en.wiki. -jkb- 22:31, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, sq:User:Dan has blanked the discussion on their village pump. --B 02:25, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not only blanked it, but also welcomed both you and me with nationalist insults ("barbarians" and others) [94], [95], [96]. It is clear now that this project as a whole is not willing to comply either with standards of content nor with standards of behaviour. I'm hardly surprised. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Finally I decided to lose time to write to you. It seems that you like a forum discussions. I wonder what are you doing here. Go and do forum talks.
Anyways, just as I said in my talk page: "This template is permanent". Is that hard to be understood? Let it be like it is until the right answer is found.
I told you that I can give license to the content (next 5 min). Then what?
I understand English Language very well and I can understand what means free in this topic, BUT THIS TEMPLATE IS TEMPORARILY.
So MR. B if I make the content FREE as you say than it means that that content is licensed which is not true, because the content is not licensed (it's not found the right license).
In sq.wikipedia almost all active users understand and write good English, but they do not lose time talking not important things with "forumist".
Some one have written that "he is not convinced" that we are "investigating" the the true license: Is that matter if you are or not convinced? Man, man, man. One time visit to sq.wikipedia and immediately want to be King. I told once if you do not understand the language and the situation in one wiki DO NOT BOTHER, go away.
So, what you are talking about? I can't understand. Puntori 13:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some people here are worst than me in understanding English. I said: "Those images are not licensed, and the template is temporary eadded". They say: The text in the template meant to be license text. This is not funny. I think that those users either want to bother us, or are playing stupid with the words I write.Puntori 14:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the expression of the template should be changed. "This file is only for sq.wikipedia.org" can cause misunderstanding like this case.--Kwj2772 (論) 14:13, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The text is :"Don't copy to other Wikimedia projects or in other web sites." Puntori 15:26, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Puntori. I hope it is OK when I mention some ideas. The text on your template is not only a bit not common for the wikimedia projects. It is also quite irritating. Sure, you say the image should not be copied etc., but on the same page (see e.g. w:sq:Figura:Asdreni.jpg) everybody can read on the bottom the sentence "Përmbajtja është në disponim nëpërmjet licencës GNU Free Documentation License". This is not compatible. Therefore, as some other colleagues suggested here already, it yould be better for all to delete the images as long as the licence and copyright are not clear. Later you can renew the images. I think this is the only and also the right way to avoid a copyright violation and to avoid a problems with the Wikimedia Foundation. Cheers and good luck, -jkb- 15:46, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to say, but it is hard to discuss with you. I say "let it be like it is until we clear this situation. You are dieing to delete this content. You can see in my delete log how many pictures I have deleted, and I do not like this kind of content. We are a few who actively work to protect sq.wikipedia and there are many who post stupidities and upload images by adding "fake" license.
So this situation with those pictures is clear, I mean, we know that those pictures are free to be used and we want to find the right license. At the other hand we do not have time do delete then turn back then delete then what whoever comes to sq.wiki ad judges things without knowing the situation.
I say: Give us a time. You say that you want to delete. So, delete, and I hope you'll be happy with that. Puntori 16:00, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please understand that these comments and advices are intended to help, and written with the best intentions. Apologies if this seem like interfering with an independent project, but the fact remains that there are certain rules that every wikimediaproject must follow. I understand that the template in question is meant to be only temporarily, used until the proper sources/licenses are found. The problem is that we (=wikimedia projects) should not nost&use files without sources/free licenses even temporarily. Files of unknown origin should be deleted, and only restored when/if the source is found,
Some projects (like en:wiki) host files that could not be used at other projects, and thus tag them "Do not move to Wikimedia Commons" or such. That is however files that fulfill a certain fair-use rationale as adapted by that particular project, not files where the source or copyrightstatus is unknown. Regards, Finn Rindahl 17:15, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is a behaviour dimension to this too. This project has a hostile, nationalist "us-versus-them" mentality towards other language communities. A fellow wikipedian from a foreign-language project comes to your place, to help. He is met with a flow of crass nationalist insults, from a local admin. The new user removes the insults from his own user talk page. You, Puntori, instead of rebuking your abusive fellow admin, have a friendly chat with him and then go and reinstate the abuse [97]. Is this how you usually deal with guests in your place? Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Puntori, you can believe me, not only on sq.wiki there are trolls. I am editing since May 2004 and I have been admin om three projects. There are thousands of trolls everywhere uploading nonsence and false informations. C'est la vie, such is the life, such is wiki. But here we want to point out what is the right way to handle images. You upload images and then you try to find a licence for it. Normally the way is the other one: you must know the licence and you must be sure the licence is right, then - and not earlier - you can upload it on commons or other wikimedia projects. This is the point of this discussion. So, when there are people who are like to help you here, let them help you. Nobody here is like to delete the sq.wiki I hope. Cheers -jkb- 18:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will comment to all with this last text.
I do my best in Albanian Language wikipedia (you can see my log aobut this).
I make discussions to make dessidions (with users and admins in sq.wiki). Not all the time thinks are going good, so I look for the best solution even for temporary solution.
We are just few editors and not 100 or 1000 so there will not be problem if I just stay deleting.
We need a motivation there, so some times I decide to move arund regulation and mean time find the right solution.
And for the wikipedian which discussion I recoverd I say: You do not have right to delete the discussion, no metter is that good or bad.
This is my lest comment about this topic. If you whant you can delete the images. I will not, because I am searching information about the true license.
Kind Regards, Puntori 22:13, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting more and more bizarre. Now I'm getting blocking threats from the most abusive of the admins there [98], [99]. This is the same guy who insists on calling non-Albanians "Barbarians" in every single posting of his, and who is actually edit-warring with his fellow admins to reinstate his insults against me [100]. And this because I dared to document that this same guy is a serial copyright offender [101].

So, what can be done? The state of affairs on that wiki is such that the cross-wiki community and the Foundation can't simply ignore it and let them be. From what I've seen, I'm very pessimistic about that wiki community finding the strength of cleaning itself from the abuse. It needs some pushing from outside. But I don't see how I can do much there, since I'm being threatened with blocks simply for the very act of posting there. The project is in effect using the language barrier to shut itself off from criticism and control.

Is there a way of starting a process here on meta to reach some binding, enforceable sanctions on such a wiki? I'm getting more and more convinced that at least one desysoping is absolutely necessary, and I don't see how that can be achieved through any process internal to the project. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:12, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that 'barbar' simply means 'foreigner'. Guido den Broeder 23:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Future and other ones. It really seems to be a problem or at least a lack of knowledge about copyright atd. there. But, after all, I have the feeling that we can cooperate with some users or admins from the sq.wiki, or at least to discuss with them, althoug some other ones are like to block etc. So, I would suggest, let us slow down and see if there is a possibility to gin somebody to mediate this problem. I just hope to solve a similar problem on the multisource. Let us slow down, the users on sq.wiki should recognize that we do not press them. -jkb- 22:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Under the [102] (8 and 11) [it is in english], the images such as w:sq:Figura:Asdreni.jpg are freely usable for educational purposes, even if they are copyrighted.
It can also be a logo, a copyrighted software screenshot, a patent, or everything else that is IP, can be used for non-profit (direct or indirect) educational purposes.
To remember it to you, this means it is GFDL compatible. It's like Creative Commons BY. --  eagleal  06:34, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's a misunderstanding, I'm afraid. Please read up on foundation:Resolution:Licensing policy and its application on en:WP:NFC. Copyrighted media are only "free" enough for Wikimedia projects if they are free even for commercial re-use. "Free for educational use" is not free enough for us. What you describe is what we treat as "fair use" media on en-wiki. Those are okay, but only under very narrow conditions. And, as I told Cradel, if you want to invoke such rules, you need to spell out the exact conditions under which you wish to do so, in what the Foundation calls an "exemption doctrine". Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:21, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand you, but since the Albanian country IP laws, allow educational use, so it does transform in a sort of CC-BY-NC (not fair-use) worldwide. You can use, redistribute, make derivative works, but you can't use it commercially.
Wikimedia host the image on US, under a CC-NC-BY. As I knew, a creative commons license, is a free license. --  eagleal  14:53, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm afraid that's incorrect. CC-BY-NC or equivalents of that are not accepted as free licenses on Wikimedia projects. A noncommercial-only or educational-only restriction is not compatible with the definition of a "free cultural work" as refered to in the Licensing policy. Also, I'm not at all sure whether you are interpreting the Albanian law correctly. I don't think the law is saying that you can take just any work produced in Albania and copy it on your website just because your website calls itself educational. Those articles 8 and 11, if they are meant to be in any way comparable to corresponding rules in other European copyright laws, describe something much more restrictive than that. Unfortunately, I can't say exactly what they are meant to say, because the English translation is unreadable. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I guess Fut.Perf. is right. Things like non commercial, only education etc. are not free in the sence of the foundation (any restriction differing from gfdl is a restriction). Additionally, you must distinguish two things: the Albanian copyright law on the one side and the rules of the foundation on the other one. Secondly, as far as the very unsuficient summary of the Albanian Copyright law ([103]) can be undestood, the rule is 70 years after the death of the author (chapter IV § 19) which will concern the most images and texts. The other paragraphs like 8 and 11 (8 telling about teaching not educational purposes as a whole) or the paragraphs with 50 years after having been published etc. (phonograms, performances etc.) are exeptions not matching our problem in the most cases (and also not matching the arised problem on the oldwikisource). May be it would not be a bad idea if you start a workshop about licensing and copyright (with the support of some colleagues from meta, commons etc.??), might be as a starting project for the Albanian Wikiversity. -jkb- 12:23, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
N.B.: The full English translation of the Albanian copyright law of 2005 can be found here, -jkb- 09:27, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

translation from al.source

Hello, and sorry I can not make a disscusion in english. I holpe thate somebody can understande this pise of text in albanian witch I'm writing dow here.

Nuk është problemi i figurave. Nuk është problemi i stampes. Është problemi i paraqitjes së administratorit të en.Wiki në një kohë të shkurtër pas paraqitjes së përdoruesit të mëparshëm në artikullin Kosova. Në fleten time të përdoruesit nuk ekziston asnjë shenjë ku shkruan se unë jamë njohës i ndonjë gjuhe tjetër. Është e vërtet që bisedat e lehta i kuptojë në disa gjuhë. Por kjo as se si nuk do të thotë se jamë në gjendje të diskutoj e aq më pakë për një temë që edhe për ne ka qenë e nxehtë. Dhe po ta njihja unë gjuhen angleze në atë shkallë sa të diskutoja, nuk bënë që të harrohet që gjuhë e projektit në fjalë është gjuha shqipe dhe secili antarë i saj ka të drejtë të kuptojë se për çka po flitet. Së paku të përshëndetet dhe të informohet se për cilën gjuhë bëhet fjala.

Ky administrator i interesuar për mirëmbajtje në një projekt, komunitetin e të cilit nuk e njehë, gjuhen e projektit nuk e njehë, ky administratorë që nuk u mundua të paraqesë synimet e tija si wikipedianë, nuk mori pakë kohë që së paku të mësojë çelsin e mirësjelljes në atë projekt TUNG, çelës i cili gjendet po thuaj se në çdo faqe diskutimi të përdoruesve. Ky administratorë që vije në projektin tonë, ashtu si të kishte zgjidhur gjitha problemet në projektin ku është zgjedhur administrator.

Zotëri, deri më tani, sq.Wikipedia nuk ka marr asnjë ankesë nga poseduesit e të drejtave të figurave. Vetëmbrojtja apo disa figura të licencuara gabimisht me pavetëdije nuk do të thotë tragjedi.

Ne jemi vullnetar. Vullnetar në përhapjen e njohurime ndër njerzimin. Poseduesëve të figurave mund të u garatojmë që brenda projektit tonë (sq) nuk do të ketë keqpërdorime. Por atyre nuk mund të ju garantojmë për keqpërdorime në projekte të fondacionint dhe jashë tij. Fondacioni ësht i madhë, ne jemi të vegjël.

Ky admiministrator nuk është për t'u admiruar por përkundrazi. --Hipi Zhdripi 09:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody else may be able to translate more, but from what I gather, Hipi Zhdripi is now arguing that because they are such a small project and because they don't get complaints from copyright holders, it doesn't really matter if they are a bit more careless about copyrights. Well, Hipi, that's not how it works. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:34, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's saying that he can't understand english well, only a few words of the language, and that in his user page also he doesn't say that speak any other language, except the Albanian.
Also from the text: "it's only that he make an intervention directly after a discussion of the article about Kosova".
The discussion than degraded and a user started insulting, and criticize the content of the article, even if he doesn't knew a word of Albanian.
Then Hipi says that he toughts the intervention of english admin (Fut.Perf.) was to support the user in the discussion of the article about Kosovo.
Fut.Perf he says came to sqwiki and didn't expose us his purposes, but instead he started pushing us.
We can guarantee the IP holders for the usage of the media in our wiki, but none in the others.
Note that this is not a litterally traduction of the text above. --  eagleal  15:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Toki Pona Wikipedia

Why Toki Pona Wikipedia can't be edited? Is that closed? - Matema 09:24, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and database locked. See http://tokipona.wikia.com/ for the moved content of that Wikipedia. --- Best regards, Melancholie 00:09, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
oooU.. Thanks for the info. - Matema 07:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But can I request to re-open it? - Matema 07:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt that would be successful due to the current language proposal policy, I don't know where it had been discussed to close it (all tokipona projects had been closed) but there had been at least two requests for closing (after it already was closed) Wikipedia 1, 2. If You wish to contribute to the tokipona "wikipedia" You can do that at wikia, where it had been moved to (like the Klingon projects etc.)
Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 18:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

blocking live mirrors?

Hello! I am often working on de:WP:WN/M, comparable to en:WP:MF. Both WPs ask for reporting live mirrors of WP contents on live mirrors because they cause significant load on our servers, funded by donations. But as far as I can see nobody blocks these sites on Wikimedia's servers. Is there a decision to tolerate live mirrors or what else is the background? Thanks for your answers and greeting. -- Martina Nolte 15:18, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we can do anything about this from a technical POV. Those sites probably get the content like any other user does. This means we would have to revoke access of the IP addresses they use. However, IPs are pretty cheap, so they can change quite frequently. In order not to exclude any users from viewing the content, range blocks cannot be set. So I really don't see how this should be done. Regards, --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 20:45, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Martina, I wouldn't worry about this too much. First, it's only a tiny fraction of the bandwith. Second, isn't our purpose to freely spread knowledge? Guido den Broeder 18:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-automated translation of missing articles aross wikis

I made a post to the English Wikipedia's village pump about this idea, but I think this may be a more appropriate place. I would like to create a process where a bot that generates a list of articles that are missing from one wiki, but can be found in another wiki. The generates list would have links to existing articles, as well as translation tools. Then willing editors use the translate tools to create a workable English version, or create redirects where appropriate. The example that led me to this idea was the word Syurga, which is the Islamic equivalent of Hell. It has an article on the Malaysian wiki, but not the English wiki.

I think this would increase the coverage in the English wiki very quickly, especially on areas like geography and biography. I think the easiest way would be to get data from the languages sidebar, then run that through a search, but I;m not sure how to write a tool to do that. Does anyone here have any thoughts? --NickPenguin 05:42, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The bot would need to be extremely intelligent to know all these equivalents. :-) Guido den Broeder 18:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted userspace characters

Hi Metawikipedians,

as I was working on an article concerning many languages in de:wp and thus visiting many wikipedias, I decided to create a minimalistic user page on each wiki, leading to my "home".

Unfortunately, the Makedonian Wikipedia seems to be somehow misconfigured: It's the only wiki out of about 260 that I visited which refuses to create a user page with my SUL user name. See here what happens if you try to create/edit my page.

Of course, I tried to ask the local admins what this is about (see here), but (A) they don't answer and (B) I don't speak Makedonian and thus am unable to find the perfect discussion page to reach the local admins.

So, what I ask you now: Is this page restriction possibly a thing that should be globally solved because it concerns SUL usage, or should that be treated as kind of a bug because it is unique in all wikipedias, or where could I find a Makedonian admin to help me (in a language I can understand)?

Thank you all a lot! -- JøMa 21:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, they seem to have the titleblacklist taken from en.wiki, mk:МедијаВики:Titleblacklist, en:MediaWiki:Titleblacklist. If You wish to talk to the local admins directly, I would recommend to look at the list and pick one who claims to speak Your language on his userpage, imho that titleblacklist on mk is completely overdone on such smaller project compared to en.wiki, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 22:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Spacebirdy, I am overwhealmed how quick a reply came to my - how I felt - complicated quesion! Thank you! :-)
I am going to follow your advice to use the Makedonian admin list. I didn't know this link which is obviously globally existant.
But what makes me wonder: Wy can a copy of the English Titleblacklist to the Makedonian Titleblacklist lead to a restriction on mk while en lets me edit? -- JøMa 22:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello JøMa, I was wondering about that too, maybe it affects only new pages, (I am not an expert with that titleblacklist and leave that to others fit in regex), Your page on en.wiki had been created on 7.oct 2008 and back then the titleblacklist did not contain that string [104], we could test that, I could inicially create Your page on mk.wp and we can see if You can edit it afterwards ~
Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 22:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Spacebirdy, that would be great! Maybe you could use the code of any "left-to-right-typing" language version, for example... this one. Let's see if I can edit it then. By the way: The discussion page should be somehow "initiated" too then. It is blocked as well. -- JøMa 22:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC) EDIT Oh, by the way: Which nice language is this? Is it Icelandic? As I told above, I am collecting languages. This is the page I was talking about. :-) -- JøMa 23:11, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I created mk:Корисник:JøMa, please try if it works to add something, if it works I will create the other pages too, @btw: yes Icelandic, it is from Genesis, Gott sprach:"es werde Licht", etc. [105], the language is most beautiful, more on my user-talk if You are interested Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 23:37, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for testing, but it now just tells "Моментално нема текст на оваа страница. Можете да направите пребарување за овој наслов на страница во други страници, пребарување во дневниците, или да ја уредите оваа страница.", which sounds to me like "Not available at this moment". I asked mk:User:Brest for help as well, let's see what he/she knows to help. Indeed I find Icelandic the most interesting language in the Germanic family. It keeps so many archaic forms which remind me of Gothic an Nordic roots! -- JøMa 23:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It means, in this moment there is no such page, you can create it (new one)--Brest 00:26, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The servers seem to have problems atm, I tried to edit the page while logged out and I could get to the edit window with save page and everything, maybe that is temporary :S (and found another error there in the interface while doing that XD )
:) yes, if You wish to learn it, don't forget to visit is.wikt once in a while, it contains lots of flexions and a nice appendix already Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 23:58, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Try contacting, Brest. (S)he's helpful and speaks English. Cbrown1023 talk 22:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cbrown1023, thank you too for your assistance! I will keep her name in mind! :-) -- JøMa 22:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The account for user JøMa was created on 30 January 2009, long time after mk:МедијаВики:Titleblacklist, and I just make a test on user talk page, and it works fine?--Brest 00:26, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, You can edit it, as You are an admin, I guess JøMa can edit it now too since it is created (try to log out and inicially create a similar page, it won't let You), please rethink this huge titleblacklist, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 07:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose you get this message: The title "Корисник:JøMa" has been banned from creation. It matches the following blacklist entry: (?!(User|Wikipedia|Image|File)( talk)?:|Talk:)\P{Cyrillic}*\p{Cyrillic}.*[^\P{Latin}A-Z].* # Cyrillic + Non-ASCII Latin which is related with mk:МедијаВики:Titleblacklist, and definitly the ø in your user name is in question. But your user account was created? It can be treated as a bug?--77.28.20.3 00:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Afaik it only blocks entries that contain that char, the newuser creation would be blocked only if <newaccountonly> would be added. Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 07:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all very much for your help! It works fine now. -- JøMa 18:28, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can still edit normally, it is just the domain is strange if I follow the link of the first message in this topic. It seems that every link to a page I want to click on that project starts with https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mk/wiki/ <Pagename> instead of the normal http://mk.wikipedia.org/wiki/ . But if I try to reach the page with the normal domain, it works as well. So it can be watched secured and unsecured... Greetings - Romaine 23:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia main page display error

Hello. I don't know if this is happening to everyone, or if it's just me, but the Wikipedia main page (http://www.wikipedia.org/) seems to have the following oddity: in the upper-left corner of the screen there is a tiny letter D. Not sure what's up with that?  ♪ Tempo di Valse ♪  01:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Sorry if this is the wrong forum for this, please feel free to move my question if so. I don't know my way around Meta very well....  ♪ Tempo di Valse ♪  01:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed the problem. Thanks for the note! :-) Cbrown1023 talk 04:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Extension:VariablesExtension

Is it planned to install the extension VariablesExtension to the Wikiprojects? It would be a huge advantage for creating templates, where now the error Expansion depth limit exceeded is often a big problem and variables could help to avoid accumulations of conditions. --Petrus Adamus 12:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Add a request on bugzilla after you get community consensus for it to be enabled. Cbrown1023 talk 16:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And where can I get the community consensus? --Petrus Adamus 10:00, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is bug 7865[106] (links from mw m w), shot down in flames by four Wikimedia developers including the CTO. This is unfortunately Not Going To Happen. Happy‑melon 12:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptian language Wikipedia

It 's possible create a wikipedia in the ancient egyptian language? --MelParlez 14:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this language is so important like the ancient greek or the latin
Visit Requests for new languages and see Meta:Language proposal policy. Cbrown1023 talk 16:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania 2009

Wikimania 2009, this year's global event devoted to Wikimedia projects around the globe, is accepting submissions for presentations, workshops, panels, posters, open space discussions, and artistic works related to the Wikimedia projects or free content topics in general. The conference will be held from August 26-28 in Buenos Aires, Argentina. For more information, check the official Call for Participation. Cbrown1023 talk 17:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tidying developers' user rights

I'm very glad to see that the developers now have their own global group; "system administrators". It seems that this group has been correctly set up to give the developers the ability to temporarily give themselves any permissions they require, but to be minimally-intrusive otherwise. In this context, it no longer makes sense for developers to also be members of the "steward" global group, into which they have been 'grandfathered' for many years. It is also no longer necessary for the developers to retain local groups that relate only to user rights; particularly 'bureaucrat'. Brion is a bureaucrat on eight wikis; still a member of the defunct local "developer" group on three, and an admin on a whopping thirty eight. Tim Starling is a 'crat on three wikis but, bizzarrely, not a local "developer" on any of them.

I'm not trying to make any suggestion to the effect that the devs should not be 'allowed' the technical permissions associated with these groups; indeed it would be the height of folly to suggest that of someone with root access to the servers :D. I'm concerned rather with the distinction between the technical access the groups give, and the expectations of the roles themselves. Just because Tim is a sysop on eight wikis, doesn't mean that he is 'qualified' to close XfDs or protect pages on those wikis. Brion having the 'crat flag in as many places doesn't mean it would be appropriate for him to close RfAs. Just because they have the steward flag, doesn't mean that they should be poked over trivial SUL renames. It is both 'tidier' from a technical perspective, and more transparent from a community perspective, for the developers to be "system administrators", rather than "stewards", "bureaucrats", or local "developers". I propose, therefore, that we politely ask the four developers (Brion, Tim, RobH and Kate) who have large numbers of user rights floating around, to spend a few minutes seeing which user rights they genuinely need, and which are just hangovers from situations that are no longer relevant; and ask the stewards to remove those rights that they do not have a use for.

Thoughts? Happy‑melon 23:37, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why discuss it here? Just go ahead and ask them. If they say no, we can talk about whether it is worth pressuring them to do it, but if they are happy to do so, there is no need for discussion. --Tango 12:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have, in as much as I e-mailed Brion a couple of days ago, but have had no response. I suppose he's a busy guy... Perhaps someone should grab him on IRC? Happy‑melon 16:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I recall, they've repeatedly said that they do not care if you remove their admin/crat/dev permissions. If they require them again for whatever purpose (as has indeed happened) they will simply grant it to themselves for tasks on an as-needed basis. Which is the whole point of having staff and sysadmin global groups. Just Do It.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 20:35, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Go on then :D. As and when the board confirms your nomination, of course. Congrats, by the way! Happy‑melon 00:08, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is good custom for developers to remove their own group rights when they do not need them. Guido den Broeder 00:21, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Where do I file such a request? Brion has made 11 edits on Wikispecies and last edited in July 2006 but an admin & crat?! I think that qualifies for inactive user. OhanaUnitedTalk page 05:42, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Each project wanting the inactive rights removed would want to develop its own discussion on the matter. When you come to a local consensus on the matter and can point at a policy page allowing for removal of inactive rights, point the stewards at both and they'll perform the removals. Kylu 06:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So we need to develop seven hundred and fifty separate policies to govern the rights of four users? What ludicrous bureaucracy. As Mike notes, the devs have carte blanche to do whatever they think they need to on any wiki, regardless of local policy. And remember that we're not actually removing any permissions whatsoever; being members of the global sysadmin group, any permission they need is just two clicks away. Easy come, easy go, even easier 'come again' if necessary. This is a totally different issue to removal of inactive rights in general. Happy‑melon 09:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is probably a good idea to create a central policy of some sort for this. I suppose if local projects want the rights removed, they can form consensus to. If they don't really care then there's not much point in it really. Majorly talk 13:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, if local projects "don't care", then they don't care; ambivalence is not the same as support for the status quo. If anything, the fact that the xx.wiki community "doesn't care" if one of its bureaucrats is removed, is evidence in support of the assertion that these rights really are useless, both to the projects and to the developers who hold them. However, I certainly think that such local communities should be given the opportunity to comment here (as should the devs themselves). I'll draw up a list of which wikis are affected, and we can make an effort to contact them about this discussion.
I'm not sure we need anything as elaborate as a full formal policy; a few words added to System administrators would probably be sufficient - that page needs overhauling anyway to focus more on how the devs' interact with Wikimedia. Happy‑melon 13:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with having this setup as it seems to actually make sense rather then any of the older approaches. Still retaining the ability to move into different groups when needed/appropriate seems to be all that we need. If it makes administration easier and more consistent then I'm for it. If it ends up getting in the way then we can revisit but for now it seems fine. --Tfinc 21:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll just say this: my adminship on the English Wikipedia was granted by due process, long before I became a developer, due to my work on Wikipedia articles. I'm proud to have it, and hope to keep it as long as local policy will allow, whether or not I remain a developer. I'm not concerned about the rest, and don't wish to be involved in any discussions about those rights. -- Tim Starling 02:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for commenting, Tim, and you raise a good point, which is that not all of these flags were set in the course of the devs' work, just most of them. Upon compiling the table of flags that may be affected (there are 88 of them in total amongst seven devs!) I've also come to note that rights on fishbowl wikis and at www.mediawiki.org should be excluded. Barring those, there are flags on 74 wikis that may be affected. Happy‑melon 08:51, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Tim thanks for commenting. What would you say about your bureaucrat right on English Wikipedia? Do you still want/need it? Majorly talk 23:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe Tim's enwiki crat right was granted in the ordinary course of business (as opposed to Brion's enwiki crat right), which would indicate to me that the general rules (crat for life) apply. MBisanz talk 03:31, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if someone could look into it, is enwiki en:user:Jasonr a developer? He was given adminship for technical purposes, I think relating to the April 5, 2003 server crash, but otherwise has made 4 edits ever. Admins no longer can test things (that is why we have testwiki), and if he is a dev, shouldn't his adminship be converted to some sort of SVN/testwiki access? MBisanz talk 01:43, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He already has an SVN account under "jasonr", it's probably fine for his adminship to be removed on the English Wikipedia — he's not active anymore, so he probably won't miss it. Cbrown1023 talk 01:51, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so I've had a request to finish this off. I think there's support to do this, so I'm looking for any further objections at this point. I'll be contacting the users shortly, in case they've got something to add. The list Happy-Melon has provided appears to be accurate. Access which should have been turned off and which is no longer required will be removed. Access which is still likely to be needed, or where the user in question was elected through the normal methods will of course be left in place. Thanks  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:10, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be no objection, other than making sure that users retain all the rights for which they were elected. Conspicuously missing from this discussion has been their steward rights. AFAIK, they should be removed (in fact, should have been removed at the time that staff and/or sysadmin status was granted - those global groups were explicitly intended to replace their steward bits).  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:46, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For clarity, I'm planning to only remove permissions which obviously were intended to be temporary and which are no longer needed. In particular, that means I am not going to remove meta or enwiki permissions unless the community asks for that to be done (or the user, I guess).  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:46, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(From User talk:Mike.lifeguard) As best I can determine, the rights break down as follows:

I'm not even sure if some of the fishbowl wikis at the bottom are accessible through the CentralAuth network, but they might as well be left anyway. Happy‑melon 12:56, 5 March 2009 (UTC) Looks to me like some of these need to be double-checked:[reply]

  • All the enwiki ones
  • All the meta ones

Which I'll do now...  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:18, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As well, some of these are old... All developer rights have already been removed. I imagine this is simply due to replag.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Probably; the s3 cluster was only synced this morning, so many of these data will be from before 5 January when the s3 replication was halted. Shall I recheck the data?
With regards the meta and enwiki rights: I believe the local "steward" group is deprecated even for stewards, although there seems to be some lack of clarity here: I note that your promotion has involved you being given both the global and local "steward" flags; I'm not sure what's going on there. Checking the relevant processes on en.wiki, Kate is the only other dev to have passed a 'normal' RfA (w:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kate); none of the devs have passed an RfB or AFAIK been confirmed as CU/OS by the en.wiki Arbitration Committee. On meta, Tim and Brion's flags have both been removed; see Meta:Administrators/confirm/Archives/2009-01 and Meta:Administrators/confirm/bureaucrat chat/January 2009#Brion VIBBER, leaving them only the local steward group. Happy‑melon 22:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's because they are inactive in terms of admin work on Meta-wiki. Tim and Brion gained sysop rights through other means prior to their involvement as developers. Their removal should only come about if enwiki creates a desysopping policy, and they fail to meet it. Majorly talk 22:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tim and Kate, yes, I can't find any evidence that Brion ever gained +sysop in the 'normal' way. Happy‑melon 23:03, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Where's your evidence against? Majorly talk 23:40, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(End from User talk:Mike.lifeguard)

There are no signatures of his on any RfA page where he could conceivably have been elected; there is no w:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Brion Vibber. There is no rights-log entry for him gaining adminship; so either it was directly hacked into the database tables or it was granted prior to the creation of bureaucrats in 2004. This post to wikipedia-l shows that Brion was given dev access from sometime before September 2002, and this puts a lower limit in April 2002. I have reviewed the entire archives of wikipedia-l around this period, and can find no discussion of Brion's +sysop. Either he got it when Jimbo sysopped a "bunch" of people on 26 March 2002, or it was added unilaterally at some point thereafter. Either way, there was no community discussion. Happy‑melon 11:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He had no RFA, and was granted the rights very early on. The fact he had no discussion is totally irrelevant. Many admins had no/limited discussion for adminship, so why should Brion be exempt. What would be the point in removing him, considering he is active there? Majorly talk 18:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that him having the explicit sysop flat implies that he is 'only' an administrator, if anything. As noted above, it's not a question of "removing him"; that's not something we can even consider enforcing on our CTO. But it's not something I can bring myself to get particularly worked up about; it's not like this is some crusade against the devs. If anything, as I say, removing their 'normal' rights on local projects solidifies their position as having essentially carte blanche to do whatever is necessary to improve Wikimedia. Happy‑melon 22:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In my view, Brion's en.wiki and eo.wiki admin rights should not be removed. If nothing else, consider the Clifford Adams precedent — that is, a user being granted +sysop on the basis of contributions to the Project. Brion has worked tirelessly for the past eight years on MediaWiki and on en.wiki and eo.wiki. The other rights, especially on wikis where he has few edits, I doubt he cares about (and in fact he has said on a number of occasions that he does). --MZMcBride 22:52, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware that Brion was active on eo.wiki, but if it is as you say, then I certainly don't have a problem with him retaining it. Overall the principle should, IMO, be that dev rights should be removed unless the devs wish otherwise, for whatever reason; be that because they still need them for their work, or because like Tim above they have a genuine attachment to them. In neither case should we be making any attempt to 'force' the issue; that really would be playing with fire :D Happy‑melon 11:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Legal enquiry

Hello. I have raised a question about the usage of documents from w:Wikileaks which is a source of unauthorized documents, some of which are confidential government secrets. Obviously there are issues of official secrets laws and also of copyright. I'm not even sure if it would be legal to quote other sources who use the documents. I have been given the advice to contact WMF legal counsel. How would I contact them? Thank you. fr33kman t - c 20:45, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See w:User:MGodwin or wmf:user:Mikegodwin. Cbrown1023 talk 21:53, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! :) fr33kman t - c 23:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Correction: Wikileaks it not affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation. You really need to contact them directly. Kylu 06:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Kylu, I never thought that they were affiliated. I also don't think that Cbrown1023 thought that either. My question was what would be the legal situation if a wikimedian editor used material contained within that site on a wikimedia project. Wikileaks can't answer what the legal exposure of WMF would be as they are not affiliated with WMF (obviously). Wikileaks don't own the copyrights of any leaked documents on their site, they are owned by the original authors. Mr. Mike Godwin (General Legal Counsel for the WMF) has answered my question via email; he said "I wouldn't cite directly to Wikileaks, but I would cite to mainstream news sources that cite or (even better) confirm publications on Wikileaks." I think that this closes the issue and gives anyone wanting to use information that is contained in documents on Wikileaks an answer. fr33kman t - c 15:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It'd be terrifying to think of us as linked to them. Poor Mike and Cary! :D Kylu 03:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And Jay, for that matter :-O -- Avi 05:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hotcat Extension

Could anyone explain why I cannot add a category to pages using the Hotcat extension from the gadget section in the preferences, it was working perfectly fine earlier on - it wouldn't have anything to do with the Meta:Babel#Abuse_Filter_testing which was turned on by User:Werdna would it?. Dark Obsidian 20:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, it's still working fine for me. Regards, Finn Rindahl 20:27, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help for sw-wiki (work around lost password)

Hi I need some advice from someone with experience. I am bureaucrat on sw.wikipedia.org and have a problem I never had to handle. One of our users on sw forgot her password but wants to continue using her identity. How do I get her back to her account?

A) Is it possible just to delete her user account and to tell her just to register anew on the same name? B) could she register under a different name temporarily and I move her temporary account to the original name?

My sw-user-talk-page (would you mind posting there?)

Kind regards --Kipala (talk) 15:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I'll ping you there but perhaps continue this discussion here. First, I assume, for whatever reason, the user cannot use the "mail me a password" link to get her password reset that way. It is ALWAYS the easiest way to go, and everyone should set their email if only for that. Next, it is not possible to delete accounts. Accounts can be renamed, blocked, or locked, but not deleted. Nor is it possible to merge two accounts together. So the answer to your question A)... no. as for B) ... It is possible to register under a different account, and usurp the existing one to a new name, giving her that name. But all the contributions of the old account will be with the usurped name, her new account with the old name will have none. What I would suggest is that if this user is a very long time user in very good standing who has made a lot of contribs, and has ways of proving it is them, ask for developer assistance. The developer can set an email and that would let the user get their pw reset. But this is a difficult task and it needs to be justified... Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 21:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Developers certainly can do that, but I think they are usually reluctant to do so. The easiest way to get the name back, without the contribs, would be to move the old account and then have the person re-register the old name. (One less rename than signing up and then usurping.) --Tango 01:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the person affected is willing to come onto IRC and sort something out with regards to providing evidence of their ownership of the account, we can certainly work something out. Werdna 01:19, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice! I would like to take the shortest way, we are a small wikipedia (just over 10,000 entries) with very few users so I know this one. Many problems have not appeared yet - I have no idea what IRC is and how to get there. I think I try Tangos advice. If some one still has time to write how I as bureaucrat can decide an usurpation I would be grateful (did not find it - only explanations how to apply on other wikis but not what the admins have to do if the agree). --Kipala 05:32, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@IRC: please go to this site select #wikimedia-tech from the second drop down menu (leave the first one as it is), and choose a nickname in the first field, then press "login" and there You are.
(Alternatively You could install a chatclient such as w:ChatZilla and go to #wikimedia-techconnect).
If the user does not want to loose his edits I would recommend to try to contact werdna first via this chat his nickname is "werdnum".
Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 16:44, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys, having some problems with my wiki

I was trying to enable uploads from urls.

All I did was change this line: 

$wgAllowCopyUploads = true

In the Defaultsettings.php file in the Includes folder.

Now I am getting messages like this:

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /serve/www/nietzy/wiki365.info/public_html/wiki365/includes/DefaultSettings.php:1) in /serve/www/nietzy/wiki365.info/public_html/wiki365/includes/WebResponse.php on line 10

On the top and bottom of each page.

Can anyone help with this please?

Email me at nietzy@gmail.com if you can.

Thanks — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.169.141.162 (talk)

Hi, you will likely have to put a semicolon at the end of that line. Anyway, if it still does not work, your best bet is to ask at mw:Project:Support desk, as this is the place where such questions are usually answered. Best regards, --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 23:27, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

English Wikipedia mascot revote

Currently the wikipedia mascot is Wikipede. However, that has been largly forgotten in place of the Wikipe-tan. Therefore I ask for a revote to see if the wikipe-tan should become the official mascot of the English Wikipedia.--Ipatrol 03:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is Meta, not English Wikipedia, so I don't think we have any business being involved with this.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're missing the "Humor" category of the page. :-) Projects do not really have "official mascots" and they don't really need them... that's what logos are for and unofficial mascots are a lot more fun. Cbrown1023 talk 01:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ToC not appearing

Hello

i've just installed wikimedia onto my mac and started to play around with it and i noticed that my ToC does not appear. i did several testings with multiple headings and sub-headings (== 123 == & ===234=== etc etc) , used __FORCETOC__ & __TOC__, checked that the auto ToC option is checked in my perference, but it still doesn't work. Nothing comes out.

anyone encounter similar problems or know how to solve it?

cheers

This page is not for support of the MediaWiki software. Please try #mediawiki on irc.freenode.net or mediawiki-l mailing list which are the appropriate support venues.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also try mw:Project:Support desk. MBisanz talk 09:38, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does the article has any __NOTOC__?--Kwj2772 (論) 05:38, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wiki integration ideas, and a general question

There has been some good editing-related integration work; I know not some of it. Many texts across wikis, particularly the university, books (& dictionary, encyclopedia) are either partly redundant or could benefit from other wikis' info--for readers as well as editors--and unless one is an advanced editor such as an admin, it is hard to know how to improve that, let alone navigate the sites as a reader or editor reading for ref. Wikipedia has articles on the other Wikis instead of linking to their main page, which could be enabled for editing in Wikipedia, while each Wiki could have its own mission statement (if necessary) and TOC (or sitemap.)

I guess I posted most of the above in the main forum and then wrote on my user page; what was not a repetition of that was like:

It would be good if Wikimedia sites had a tabbed menu, or left-hand menu, and image-map interface to navigate Wikimedia sites. If you do not want to make that, I recommend Firefox plugin 'Stylish' (though it is one in my 80+ I have not tried.) Notification of new Wikimedia sites and enabling one to have a single user page for all accounts would be helpful.

Is it right to post cross-wiki integration ideas here instead of the page on that topic? It is clearer now that this is the multi-language forum allowing coordination comments, so I moved my post back here and partly from my userpage.

Wikimedia Foundation founders and Wiki admins, thank you for all projects.--Dchmelik 10:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

antoher efficient layout request

Please, unless Wikimedia workers and most readers of Wikimedia project sites are doing keyboard-only web browsing, give an option to put the editing menus at the

center

on all sites. That is what current [GUIs] do, because it saves the user time and looks less distracting--symmetric. Wikis are not old Apple OS or Windows 3.1--or any newer Windows for that matter. Take a look at [XCFE] or, better yet, [KDE] ([kde.org.) Once I saw the Wiki sites without the left-hand menu--maybe due to a [[http://www.firefox.com Firefox] bug, and for the same reason, I would like to have that option. I prefer tabs for everything (except when I am doing graphics or music, except for each separate image or composition.)

I do not even remember if 1995 websites even had a left-hand menu, though frames may be reasonable now (even some middle-class people, not to mention 3rd world access sites, are on dial-up internet though.) Wikimedia sites main wiki page appearances may be medium-level distracting (ebay is probably highest distracting.)--Dchmelik 12:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am a sysop on the Norwegian Wiktionary project. As we are approaching 20,000 articles, I thought it would be appropriate for us to have our own logo, rather than the English one which we have so far been using. I am not sure how to go about changing the logo, so, so far, I have only uploaded it locally as an SVG-file. (Ideally, it should go onto commons with all the other Witkionary-logos, but, like I said, I don't know how to go about these things, and therefore I haven't uploaded it there yet.) What so I do, in order to change our project's logo? V85 16:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello V85, You need to upload it in a filesize that fits into the upper left corner (e.g. something like 130x150px) and as wikt:no:Image:Wiki.png, protect it and request logo-switch at bugzilla: (don't forget to put "shell" as keyword also).
See also Requests for logos
Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 16:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Birdy, I have now done as you advised me to do. ;-) V85 17:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CPU load at 100% while loading a page. normal?

Hello

when i am loading a page on my owm mediawiki my cpu load is gonig up to 100% during the page is loading. it is the same problem under windows and under linux suse. on my live system this effects the other sites because apache is need als cpu for loading my mediawiki. is this normal? i am the only one whith this problem?

You'll want to contact mediawiki-l or #mediawiki or Project:Support desk.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:48, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And no, you are not the only one with this problem... -- sj | help translate |+ 04:21, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Objectivity????

When I read an article like this:

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91114

It convinces me that those who say that Wikepedia is also a biased source of information are exactly right. You may include me in the list of those who will no longer accept Wikipedia as being any more authoritative than the garbage of the New York Times.

Lifsabsurd

Wikipedia is indeed not a reliable source. But WP itself acknowledges this. Guido den Broeder 11:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, you are convinced by an article that references itself several times as proof its correct. Here's a better article. Noticed how it references other sources besides itself. --MarsRover 01:30, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Problem in printing the PDF created by the Wiki Creat Book feature

Hi, I created a PDF file from 7 pages of Wiki. But while taking printouts it showed a problem. The spaces between words is showing as a box in the printouts. Please let me know if there is any solution for this.

translation

hi, I don't know if this is the right place, I made a translation of the main page into my native language (venetian - veneto). I put it here: Pazina prinzipal. Can someone please link this page from the english main page? thank yu very much bye bye

Changing MediaWiki header and sidebar

Hi all, I am working on a project and am using MediaWiki.

My website currently has a sidebar and header of itself, and I would like to replace the original WikiMedia sidebar and header with my own by using PHP include or something of the sort.

However, I cannot find the file to edit to replace the sidebar and header. I would like all my changes to be made on the MonoBook skin

Does anyone know in which directory the sidebar and header can be changed?

Thank you very much for your help!

You can change MediaWiki:Sidebar and relevant system messages. Good luck!--Kwj2772 (論) 14:08, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You should also be asking this on the site about MediaWiki. They'd be more helpful than us. Cbrown1023 talk 20:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&oldid=1431063"