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


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.

Remove MediaWiki handbook from MetaWiki[edit]

MediaWiki handbooks has been moved to MediaWiki wiki for years (2011?). There, pages have been updated and translated much more than here.

On MetaWiki, we have many outdated pages. Sometimes some contributors update them, migrate them to use Translate extension to easily maintain translations, or updates translations. This work is painful and mainly useless because it has been made twice (both here and on mw-wiki).

Some pages (like Help:What links here) now only contain an interwiki redirect. I propose to use this trick for all handbook pages. What do you think? -- Pols12 (talk) 13:49, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

According to Matmarex (in 2018), MediaWiki softwares links to MetaWiki instead of MediaWikiWiki at 3 places: “the help links for history action, Special:Import and Special:RecentChanges” (this is not true for the last one which now links to MediaWiki wiki). Pols12 (talk) 14:14, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
@Pols12: If pages are now at MWwiki and **not customised for the Wikimedia wikis** than make the changes with {{interwiki redirect}}. It has never taken any special authority.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes, that has been my conclusion seeing I had not received any comment here. I will apply this way. Thank you for answering! -- Pols12 (talk) 12:32, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Verified accounts on meta?[edit]


I am working with archivists that edit the German and French Wikipedias regularly as part of their job (sometimes also English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons), and they have been encouraged by colleagues to get what is called on de-wikipedia and fr-wikipedia a verified account. To avoid having to go through the process twice, I was wondering if such a process exists on meta. Thanks for your answers! --Flor WMCH (talk) 10:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@Flor WMCH: in general, no. As accounts are global in nature, having an account on a content project will automatically create an account here on the meta-wiki. The Global username policy applies here, including the guidance about "name(s) of a political, military or religious figure or event". — xaosflux Talk 11:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: OK, thanks!--Flor WMCH (talk) 11:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
@Flor WMCH: To remember though that global user pages are here, so these suers should be encouraged to create a user page here. We don't (yet) have a means for a verification stamp here, though I don't think that we would be adverse to something being created to assist.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

+suppressredirect for patrollers[edit]

As suggested by Novak Watchmen, patrollers might benefit from having suppressredirect rights. While patrolling recent changes, it is not uncommon to stumble upon a page created in the wrong namespace or with an implausible typo. Being able to fix these without leaving a redirect would reduce additional work by administrators. Besides, some wikis (such as English WIkibooks or the Serbian projects) already have the right included in the patroller user group. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
12:51, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I rarely see these in the speedy delete queue, which also rarely has any backlog - seems like a solution in search of a problem. — xaosflux Talk 14:28, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: These are two pages from today. --Novak Watchmen (talk) 19:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Support Support This should have been done a long time ago! --Novak Watchmen (talk) 19:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Sure, I don't mind it, though I don't think it's urgent either. Leaderboard (talk) 20:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Support Support – Makes sense. – Aca💬 21:48, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Support Support Don't see any issue with that. — csc-1 23:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Support Support Great idea! Ivi104 (talk) 11:22, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Support Support why not? JavaHurricane 13:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
  • On some wikis, patrollers have the suppressredirect right. Because there may be dozens (or more) of pages opened with the wrong name in the content wikis. I rarely see such errors here. Since there are dozens of admins here, I see that as an admin I/we can detect such errors or other users report to Meta admins. Though, I think that this proposal is positive so it may facilitate the processes. --Uncitoyentalk 14:19, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
  • I agree with Xaosflux, there is no problem, there is not backlog. Mark it for deletion and move on. It is a 5 second job to delete, and I cannot say that I have seen any redirects so marked. Throwing rights at something for small caseload, and little true benefit.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:13, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose, I don't see an actual need here and I think we have enough active admins that speedy requests are handled within few hours. A downside I see is that with ssuppressredirects bundled there will be more scrutiny to patroller applications and it gonna restrict people to give it more freely. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose, per Xaosflux. Not persuaded there's an actual need for this. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:44, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose, per others. --Minoraxtalk 11:06, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
closing this as there is no consensus for the proposed change --Zabe (talk) 21:21, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Zabe (talk) 21:21, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Read only time on 05-May-2021 at 06:00 AM UTC[edit]


Some services will be in read-only for a short time on 2021-05-05 at 06:00 AM UTC.

During the restart time (expected to be around 60 seconds or so) all the components and extensions that use the x1 database will be read-only.

Things that might experience some issues when creating new writes:

  • New short urls cannot be created
  • Email bounces from lists might not get recorded
  • There might be issues with new translations
  • New items on the notification list might fail, some notifications may not be delivered
  • Reading lists might not record new items added to "bookmark" or "read it later" feature

Details: T281212 & T281375

A banner will be displayed on all wikis 30 minutes before this read-only time.

-- Kaartic [talk] 18:07, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I just realized I should've posted this in the WM:FORUM. Just posed it there. -- Kaartic [talk] 18:42, 4 May 2021 (UTC)