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.

Enabling events calendar gadget for all[edit]

On the page Events calendar there is an embryo for a Wikimedia wide events calendar, which could be really useful. However, in order to get full functionality, one has to enable two user scripts (see How to use it). I suggest that we add those as a gadget, enabled for all by default. That way everyone can easily interact with no hassle, and those who have no interest have a way to turn it off. Besides getting consensus around this, we'll need an interface administrator to turn it on. Ainali (talk) 07:35, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Gadgets should only be added as default ON for compelling reasons. I don't see a compelling reason.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:13, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
The compelling reason is that anyone would be able to both edit and navigate the events calendar which brings this tool up to the usability level of the rest of the wiki. Ainali (talk) 10:56, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
That is not a compelling reason to have a gadget, let alone one turned on by default. How many people do you suspect will use it? I see 82 people have installed it and 2 people have used it in three years. How many IP editors will be among that group of people who will be editing it. I suspect that the group of users will be relatively small for the population of users of metawiki, so a default gadget simply doesn't make sense. I suggest that maybe start the discussion about the addition of the gadget at MediaWiki talk:Gadgets-definition  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:03, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Well, this is of course a chicken and the egg problem. If people are not aware of it, no one will enable it. Now, the calendar has also suffered from the deviation of the calendar that was set up at Space. But the proper place for an all movement calendar is here at meta. Let's get that one working. It has potential to be used by all affiliates, which probably make up quite a fair amount of those active on meta. Ainali (talk) 20:05, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
That makes sense. I support it. --MF-W 00:46, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
@Ainali: instead of making this a default gadget - can't it just be an opt-in gadget? That makes maintaining and the instructions easier. — xaosflux Talk 01:39, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Time for guidance about meta (global) user pages[edit]

It seems that we are needing to give guidance to the broad community about what a global user page (the root page only) should reflect and could utilise to be a good page. It seems that we also need to state that it should not be hosting provocative/hostile/denigatory statements about people or projects (internal or external), though I would not be wishing to inhibit users to be able to have subpages that align with our scope and can explain civilly their experiences at other places and their learning for dealing with other people through the projects.

There have been numbers of discussions about pages for deletion, on user talk pages, and the like in a number of places, and it seems to me that it is time to codify some guidance. I am uncertain whether it exactly belongs, it could be Help:User page or Global user pages at first guess, or maybe if it is coming something closer to policy, then we need it at Meta:User pages. I am tending to think that we are needing to move to stricter instruction, rather than the general information.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:16, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Indeed. Support the codified rules. — regards, Revi 03:10, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Editing news 2020 #2[edit]

20:33, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey Whatamidoing (WMF). Do you or the team managing the "reply tool" feature be willing to enable it on Meta at least as a Beta Feature at some point in the future? Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 20:42, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
MarcoAurelio: I'll put it on the list. I need to talk to the team about getting it enabled in more wikis. In the meantime, if you stalk my global.js file, you may find a line at the top that would make you as happy as it's making me. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
@Whatamidoing (WMF) It works! Thanks so much. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:50, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
MarcoAurelio, please remember that you will (I hope!) want to take that back out someday. Eventually, I hope that everyone will be able to use this, and you wouldn't want it loading twice on every page. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:28, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
@Whatamidoing (WMF): Sure. Once DiscussionTools get enabled here (I guess we need community consensus and the OK from the Editting Team) I'll make sure to deactivate the script. For what is worth, I only enabled it for Meta using my monobook.js user subpage, so there's no risk that it gets loaded twice in, say, where I have the Beta Feature enabled. Best regards, ~~~~ —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:55, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Amending our bot inactivity policy to define when the "periodic reviews" should happen[edit]

Hello. Last year we agreed to approve Meta:Bot inactivity policy. However I feel it'd benefit from improvements. The text mentions that "[r]emovals will be periodically reviewed" but we never defined when those periodic reviews should take place. In order to simplify, can we perhaps use one of either the April or the October Meta:Administrators/Removal windows to do this?

Also, it'd make sense to exempt bots flagged less than 14 months ago before the inactivity check. Policy currently remains silent on that.

Thoughts? —MarcoAurelio (talk) 09:46, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes I agree, it need improvement, we can review in april or october such as admin removal policy. Its be fine if now to finish the silent policy. Syman51 19:12, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Software change[edit]

The mw:New requirements for user signatures will begin on Monday, 6 July 2020. This is a change to MediaWiki software that will prevent editors from accidentally setting certain types of custom signatures, such as a custom signature that creates Special:LintErrors (such as <span>...<span> instead of <span>...</span>) or a signature that does not link to the local account.

Few editors will be affected (only about 40 here at Meta-Wiki). If you want to know whether your signature (or any individual editor) is okay, you can check your signature at You are not required to fix an invalid custom signature immediately. Starting Monday, editors will not be able to create new invalid signatures to Special:Preferences. Later, we will contact affected editors. Eventually, invalid custom signatures will stop working. There will be an announcement in m:Tech/News then. You can subscribe to m:Tech/News. You can also put mw:New requirements for user signatures on your watchlist.

If you have questions, then please ping me or ask questions at mw:Talk:New requirements for user signatures. Please also share this information with your communities. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 03:43, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

There's a specific report for Meta-Wiki at Let's see: Aron Manning and Tony1, it looks like you both have missing HTML end tags in your sigs, but I can't figure out what the alleged problems are. @AntiCompositeNumber, can you help? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:32, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
@Whatamidoing (WMF): In case of Tony, will replacing font tags work? I have seen the error mentioned as unclosed one, but still.. Adithyak1997 (talk) 17:37, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
For Tony I believe removing spaces from </font > should fix it. Majavah talk/contribs/sul 17:42, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
@Whatamidoing (WMF): Thank you for the notification! All good now.Aron Man.🍂 edits🌾 18:05, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
  • This is the syntax for my signature: [[User:Tony1|<b style="color:darkgreen">Tony</b>]] [[User talk:Tony1|<span style="color:darkgreen">(talk)</span>]] I see no use of "font", with or without spacing. Tony (talk) 08:10, 4 July 2020 (UTC) PS I'd love the system not to log me out days after I've logged in and clicked on keep logged in. Tony (talk) 08:10, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
  • All users were logged out due to a security bug earlier in the week. RhinosF1 (talk) 08:57, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback on movement names[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

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