Meta:Babel

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
(Redirected from Babel)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 ← Index of discussion pages Babel archives (latest) →
This is the general discussion forum for Meta (this wiki). Before you post a new comment please note the following:
  • You can comment here in any language.
  • This forum is primarily for discussion of Meta policies and guidelines, and other matters that affect more than one page of the wiki.
  • If your comment only relates to a single page, please post it on the corresponding discussion page (if necessary, you can provide a link and short description here).
  • For notices and discussions related to multilingualism and translation, see Meta:Babylon and its discussion page.
  • For information about how to indicate your language abilities on your user page ("Babel templates"), see User language.
  • To discuss Wikimedia in general, please use the Wikimedia Forum.
  • Consider whether your question or comment would be better addressed at one of the major Wikimedia "content projects" instead of here.
Wikimedia Meta-Wiki
This box: view · talk · edit
Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

Call for insights on ways to better communicate the work of the movement[edit]

The Movement Strategy recommendations published this year made clear the importance of establishing stronger communications within our movement. To this end, the Foundation wants to gather insights from communities on ways we all might more consistently communicate about our collective work, and better highlight community contributions from across the movement. Over the coming months, we will be running focus groups and online discussions to collect these insights. Visit the page on Meta-Wiki to sign up for a focus group or participate in the discussion.

ELappen (WMF) (talk) 18:56, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

LOL. Attempting to really communicate would be a good start, contrary to the Decision... has... been... made... attitude. All of the link being generated from 2020 event is saying something. — regards, Revi 22:23, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
+1. --Base (talk) 15:49, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
Agreed. --Rschen7754 02:35, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
@ELappen (WMF): courtesy ping to make sure you saw the responses DannyS712 (talk) 03:45, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
I did see it, thanks DannyS712. It didn’t feel like anyone was looking for a reply from the team so I didn’t want to butt in, but I will say this work is based on the recognition that we have a lot of room to grow. I totally understand that people are frustrated and disillusioned and may not want to elaborate, but if anyone wants to have a conversation about the specifics of what better, more consistent communication would look like to you, I’d be happy to have it on the project talk page, or here if you prefer. Needless to say, I would also be happy to have any of you sign up for a focus group. --ELappen (WMF) (talk) 18:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
@ELappen (WMF): Okay, I'll bite. In one sentence: When the community tells you no, then listen. For the last several years, the WMF has had a series of colossal failures where they proceeded against the wishes of the community and making excuses as to why they did so ("oh, it was just a vocal minority and the majority really agrees with us", "oh, our TOS requires this" (when it was more a matter of interpretation, for example). Visual Editor? MediaViewer/Superprotect? w:en:WP:FRAM? And now WMF has the temerity to ask us what they are doing wrong (and expect editors to go join a synchronous Google Meet call), as if they can't learn from or understand their mistakes. WMF has since burned all their political capital (and thus not had it when they needed it, such as with global bans) and trust is at an all-time low. I think the fact that all three of us (Revi, Base, and I) are or were stewards, and have almost half a million edits and 34 years of editing experience between the three of us should also say something. --Rschen7754 06:50, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
+1 —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:26, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
@Rschen7754 and others, I think my reply to a similar point applies here as well. Instead of copying it in full, I'll just say here that situations of strong disagreement and massive discussion make one type of communication problems, but there are many more. Of course your perspective as long term Wikipedians and Stewards is very important, it's just that there are many other perspectives in the movement that complement each other. Examples just to illustrate this point include where to find information about what is going on in our movement, how to promote activities to get more participants among Wikimedians or newcomers, how to share community news in multiple languages, how to collaborate effectively in social media outreach, how to collaborate to get more local press coverage, what type of documentation and training the communicators in our movement need, etc. Dozens of volunteers are signing up for the focus groups, some might want to discuss problems like the ones you describe, others might have other priorities. We want to capture everything. Qgil-WMF (talk) 18:17, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
@Qgil-WMF: Quite frankly, the growing divide between the editor base (read: the people who write the content that motivates people to donate) and the WMF is the most pressing of these problems. In other words, I don't think there will be a movement or a WMF to communicate about in 5 years if the WMF proceeds to alienate the most experienced portion of its editor base like it is currently doing. --Rschen7754 18:30, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Noted, and we agree that this relationship is an important problem to address. Qgil-WMF (talk) 22:05, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Ibid. --Rschen7754 05:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Oh, and stop doing so called 'consultation' and pretend as if you listened to us. You did not. — regards, Revi 09:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Proposal to move User:Quentinv57/HideButtonsFromNonGsProjects.js to MediaWiki namespace[edit]

Hello. Unfortunatelly it looks like Quentinv57 is no longer around but script seems to be used by a number of stewards/global sysops. Xaosflux and myself proposed in October and December 2020 respectively that this script be moved to the MediaWiki namespace for easier community maintenance. Thoughts? —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

  • Support as proposer. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:56, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support as well (although not a GS) but this is useful for GS so why not make maintenance easier. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:21, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support --Minorax (talk) 13:39, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support SupportAtcovi (Talk - Contribs) 18:26, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support yea, its niche enough to not need gadgetificiation, and not that many inlcudes to update. — xaosflux Talk 00:06, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Support --Novak Watchmen (talk) 17:34, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Question Question: When the page is moved, would users importing this script still be able to use it or would they need to update their *.js pages? In the long-term I'd bet an update to use non-redirected JS would be okay. I guess we can do as we did for Ladsgroup's script. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:43, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
    Suggest that probably best to not move the page, and instead fork the page (ie. copy the text with attribution) then update around the place for our official pages.  — billinghurst sDrewth
  • I plan to do this in the next few days if no objections arise (unless someone else beats me to it) - copy the current content and then update the uses, but leaving the existing page there in case Quentinv57 returns --DannyS712 (talk) 00:23, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
    Looks good to me. Thanks. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:08, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
    While copying, please remove eswikt & plwikinews. --Minorax (talk) 13:46, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

┌─────────┘
I went ahead and copied the code at MediaWiki:HideButtonsFromNonGsProjects.js. DannyS712 may want to update links to the new page if they're still interested. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Add Wikispecies.org and Wikimediafoundation.org to w.wiki[edit]

Now this sites are unavailable for URL shorting. My proposal is to add them. Фред-Продавец звёзд (talk) 20:19, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

species.wikimedia.org already works. The request for wikimediafoundation.org is filed as phab:T222089. Hope that helps. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:38, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Vietnamese Wikiversity[edit]

See here:Requests for new languages/Wikiversity Vietnamese. Please open this project! It has been supported by the community. Why haven't we opened this project yet? Đức Anh (talk) 02:19, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

@Đức Anh: This is not a metawiki community issue, talk to the Languages committee as they manage consultation around new language wikis.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:42, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

It's time for Timeless ?[edit]

Hello,

I come to you in order to open a debate on the skin. Is the Vector skin still suitable for our time and uses ? Wouldn’t Timeless skin do a better job than Vector skin ? In order to keep a graphical consistency between all Wiki projects and all languages, I think it would be more interesting to start this discussion directly at the meta project. Excuse me for my English. Menthe 555 (talk) 14:54, 15 January 2021 (UTC)