From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, 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

Discrimination complaint[edit]

At Talk:Wikimania 2016 bids Hammersoft raises points about Wikimania 2016 being inaccessible to people with mobility constraints. This person has gotten no reply. In most nonprofit organizations, concerns about discrimination of this sort would be specially addressed by staff of the organization. Is there someone in the Wikimedia Foundation who would either like to address this concern, or otherwise state clearly the recommended communication channel for voicing concerns of this sort? Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:30, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Generally, questions for specific persons or entities should go on their talk pages. --Nemo 13:46, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
I think the question here is which specific person or entity should receive the complaint. harej (talk) 13:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
It's not hard, comments go on the talk of the page they reference. --Nemo 14:22, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks to Bluerasberry for bringing this here. I do appreciate it. That said, it's post facto now. The bid has been confirmed by the WMF and it will go ahead as planned. I think at this point the WMF needs to figure out a response to media when asked why they chose a location so distinctly against people with mobility constraints. Answering "Well, we supplied a van..." isn't going to cut it. A van isn't capable of driving people into the main meeting hall for the event (and this is just the tip of the iceberg, there's accessibility issues in multiple locations of this event). Without a coherent, previously thought through answer as to why the WMF chose to not provide an accessible event, the WMF will get raked over the coals in the press. For a non-profit that lives on donations, this could be deadly. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:15, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
    Thanks for caring about the WMF's health; OTOH it already survived hundreds of negative press coverages for Wikimania 2011 by Arab press. :) --Nemo 14:22, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Perhaps, but it would be nice if the WMF would care about accessibility issues. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:40, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Hammersoft: matters for the Board can be raised on Meta at the Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard. (Isn't that just the WMF way -- there's always another page to refer you to) It is possible that you may get WMF Board attention there, a Board member replied to something on that page less than a fortnight ago. Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 16:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    • What sort of help is specifically needed? I have just returned from Mexico. One attendee was being pushed around by wheelchair by another. And a blind person was being lead around by an assistant. Both those can be provided in this venue by the looks of it. The best people to answer would likely be the event organizers who now the town very well. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
The specific question being asked here is, who in the WMF takes responsibility for accessibility issues and how do members of the community engage with that person or team. So far that question has not been answered. The context was the decision of the WMF to approve the accessibility arrangements for Wikimania 2016, which they have done: the WMF have thus taken some measure of responsibility as an organisation for the accessibility arrangements at that venue, and the specific question in that context is thus, who specifically in WMF is tasked with ensuring that WMF is able to and does indeed succeed in the responsibility it has taken on? Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 21:56, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
One could ask the organizers what they plan to do to accomodate people with disabilities. For those with disabilities who plan to attend it would be good to make arrangements before hand. I know the organizing team is looking at putting together first aid services. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:11, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

General discussion on allowing or rejecting fair use at Meta[edit]

The consensus is that fair use should not be allowed on Meta. Therefore, there will be no EDP. --MF-W 22:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

@MF-Warburg: Could you please tell where we should host non-free working documents like Wikimania support letters? I see that for 2016 Wikimania bids they were uploaded on Commons under fake licenses (like File:Letter of suppor to Wikimania Esino Lario by the Comunità montana della Valsassina Valvarrone Val d'Esino e Riviera.pdf or File:2016 Wikimania Letter of Support by Mensa Philippines.pdf containing clearly non-free logos), is that what we should do? — NickK (talk) 11:01, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Using fake licenses is of course not a good thing to do (niether here nor on Commons). Maybe some chapter wikis or so can be used. --MF-W 21:35, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Well, the solution would be to put these documents into the scope of Meta fair use. In this very case both Esino Lario and Manila teams would not be able to publish support letters: Wikimedia Italia website is not a wiki, and Manila bid was made by volunteers but not by a chapter. Yes, they have found a turnaround solution (i.e. publishing these documents on Commons under a fake license), as the only other option would be not publishing these documents at all. But I do think we need a more obvious solution — NickK (talk) 23:13, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Proposal to repeal and modify some sections of Meta:Deletion policy[edit]

Pages for WMF teams and departments[edit]

I think it a good principle that WMF teams and departments each have a page here on Meta even if they have their main portal somewhere else, such as I would also suggest that the community-facing teams such as the Community Tech team and the Community Engagement department and its consituent teams should in general have their portals here. However, that leads to an interesting point about page names. Some WMF teams have (modishly) adopted titles which are themselves broader topics that we might wish to have a page on, such as Technology, Communications, Advancement. So I would suggest that the uniform style should be WMF Technology. Or would a uniform title ending "team" or "department" be clearer? Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 11:45, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps something like [[WMF departments/Technology]] so they are linked at the top of the page? Green Giant (talk) 12:25, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
There is no need to create more team pages. Engineering teams already have their pages on, which are linked from mw:Wikimedia Engineering. --Nemo 12:31, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Good point. I've made an interwiki redirect in case someone searches for the term on Meta. Green Giant (talk) 13:18, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
The main reason for having pages here, even if, as I said, the main pages are elsewhere, is so that people can find them. Meta is the site for interproject discussions across projects, and WMF teams are often involved. is the site for development of the Mediawiki software. It is by no means obvious to someone working here to discuss, for example, a grant request, that if they need information about what some WMF team is responsible for, they should go to Hence my suggestion. Meta is used by WF teams for consultations on strategy, major and minor, regularly and frequently. Hence the specific suggestion that community-facing teams should have their principle presence here, where much of their community engagement, and the related community discussions, will be carried out. Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 16:10, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
MediaWiki contains mostly working import and export tools, of course. I think centralizing on Meta-Wiki is a decent idea, but executing it properly will require appropriate planning. We want to make sure we're not making a bigger mess in the process of moving pages from (and and and probably other places) to But as a long-term goal, centralizing here seems reasonable and prudent to me. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:15, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I approve of planning, hence these preliminary discussions. I'm not suggesting copying all the pages lock stock and barrel, but having enough information here on Meta that users, who are perhaps not completely familiar with the internal organisation of the WMF and of the numerous wikis and other sites that they use, can get the information they are most likely to need quickly and pointers to where further information or engagement can be found. Community-facing departments probably should have their main pages and portals here, though. Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 06:20, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Cool. So maybe the next step would be making an index here at Meta-Wiki of all of the current pages across the wikis so that we can evaluate what makes sense to move, what makes sense to use interwiki redirects for, what should stay put, etc. An index might help us make better-informed decisions. It sounds like perhaps a Wikimedia Foundation departments page would be a good start? From there, you could sub-divide into teams, I suppose. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
I agree that page would be a good start and volunteer to help get it started to begin mapping this all out. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 14:05, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
As for "so that people can find them", assuming we're talking of people doing searches here, we have a very simple solution which probably just requires a switch to be turned by the sysadmins: T87632: Enable interwiki search on Meta-Wiki. --Nemo 05:27, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
That would be nice too. After all, this isn't a simple problem with a single technical fix, it's about finding as many ways as possible of improving the community/WMF relationship. Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 06:20, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Upon more closely reading the opening post here, I'd strongly prefer that we avoid abbreviations in page titles. As redirects, titles such as WMF Technology are probably fine, but the full phrase "Wikimedia Foundation" should be used in the content (i.e., non-redirect) page title.

In general, I agree that having clarification about what the "Technology" team does versus the "Engineering and Product" team would be helpful. Pages such as wmf:Staff and contractors don't explain the distinction. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:18, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

A good point. Incidentally, the wmf:Template:Staff and contractors list could usefully link to the department and team pages, which it currently only does in a handful of cases, as could wm:Org chart, which currently links into into wmf:Staff and contractors. Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 06:44, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
I think this is a great idea whose times has more than come. :) It would also be great to get all of the department/team pages setup on Translate and also clear up mix use of "departments" and "team". My understanding is that there are limited "departments" which each have several "teams". I agree if WMF is added to the names, it should be the full Wikimedia Foundation and not WMF. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 14:04, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Update: The main departments page has been set up. It seems most of the Engineering and Technology teams are primarily housed on I believe duplicating those efforts will be unmaintainable over time. However, I agree that something should exist on Meta-Wiki. Perhaps soft redirects? In any case, here are the departments and teams without a Meta-Wiki presence (that I could find when this departments page went up anyway - feel free to add them if you know they exist - obviously).
--Varnent (talk)(COI) 16:39, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for starting this page. I might be wrong but I think you've covered all of the departments. Green Giant (talk) 11:50, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Unable to make a suggestion that spans Wikipedia[edit]

I could not find a way to make suggestions that span everything. I think a Main Page link for 'Suggested Improvements' would be a good Idea even if it's an email link. For example:

  ·I would like to see definitions support a mouse-over brief and a link to the more detail presentation.  
  ·I would also like to hear pronunciations of places and especially names.  The phonetic presentation is good but not as good as an audio voice.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Javaknight3 (talk) 13:46, 30 July 2015‎

@Javaknight3:, assuming you are talking about the English Wikipedia, you can make suggestions at the specific village pump on that wiki. For mouse-over stuff, please log in and go to any page on that Wikipedia. At the top there should be some links such as your user name, talk page etc. Click on the Preferences link and it will take you to a dashboard with several tabs. Here you can change your settings so I would highly recommend testing the different options (click on the Save button at the foot of the page to see the effect). Now if you click on the Gadgets tab near the top right, and then look under the "Browsing" section, you should see an option for navigation popups. Select the radio button next to it and then click the save button at the foot of the page. Now go to any English Wikipedia page that has an internal wikilinks and hover your mouse over it; you should see a popup box with a short overview, and some other links. As for pronunciations, this is a set of ongoing projects, but many articles still don't have a pronunciation file, so if you see one that you'd like to hear, you can make a suggestion on the associated talk page. We can't guarantee that anyone will respond but it is a start. I hope this is the advice you were looking for but if not, please do ask for more help. Green Giant (talk) 11:38, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Question on {{proposed logo}}[edit]

Since Wikimedia logos have been freed, I wonder if {{proposed logo}} should be updated as {{CopyrightByWikimedia}} have been? Best regards. —MarcoAurelio 20:09, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Agree update needs to occur. WRT {{CopyrightByWikimedia}}, why do we have a "requires permission"? The whole point of a CC BY SA license is that it does not require permission for many uses. (p.s. legal says they will clarify for me) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:26, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
So license and trademark are completely different. While it is freely licensed it is not freely reusable due to trademark law. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:36, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Yes it should be updated. The difference between the two is that copyright is about expression and trademark is about identifying a service or a good. Whilst anyone is free to reuse and modify the licensed Wikimedia logo(s), they could not use the logo(s) to identify themselves or their goods/services in a way that customers could confuse them with Wikimedia. So I could set up a website called Trickymedia and offer the same services as WMF but I couldn't have a similar enough logo that could be mistaken for WMF. However, there is nothing to stop me having an article about Wikimedia and using their logo to identify them. The only way that I could be prevented from offering the same services is if, for example, the whole concept of wikis had been patented by someone (highly unlikely as it is). Green Giant (talk) 09:53, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

MediaWiki messages: old translations and outdated stuff[edit]

Hello. I've detected that we have translations of MediaWiki messages, for example. Do people object to deletion of those? Also, it'd be good if we could search for all modified MediaWiki messages so we can have a review of them. Mass deletions have been performed by User:MediaWiki default in the past (IIRC operator has been @Krinkle: or @Legoktm:, I do not remember). Thoughts? —MarcoAurelio 21:22, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Maybe I'm wrong but there doesn't seem to be consistency in these translations. The example given above is the Basque translations but look at the French, German and Spanish lists and they all seem to cover different messages. I'm guessing that they were done ad hoc, so it worth expanding them or would that be creating unnecessary work? Green Giant (talk) 12:00, 10 August 2015 (UTC)


Hello, how can i contact people who unblock names in Wikipedia? I would like to edit one with new real info.

Thank you.

Not sure what you mean? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:58, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Global.js not working?[edit]

My global.js file just stopped working on Meta. Still seems to work elsewhere. StevenJ81 (talk) 02:43, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Same here. —MarcoAurelio 10:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
My global.js is working perfectly at all wikis, Meta included.--Syum90 (talk) 10:25, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
This morning (North American EDT) it's working. Maybe the server had something off to eat last night ... StevenJ81 (talk) 13:15, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
It's working for me again too. —MarcoAurelio 17:51, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor News #4—2015[edit]

Elitre (WMF), 22:28, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Asking for endorsement for “Wikipedia Treks Kalindi Khal”[edit]

Dear my fellow Wikipedians,
Greetings from Kolkata, India.
I am pleased to inform you that we are going to organize a expedition project “Wikipedia Treks Kalindi Khal” under “Wikipedia Treks Mountain “in September 2015.
This is a high-altitude trekking expedition from Gangotri to Badrinath in the Garhwal Himalayan region of India, targeting all language editions of Wikipedia, Commons, Wikspecies, Wikivoyage and other WMF projects. The overall purpose of Wikipedia Treks Kalindi Khal is to increase the material related to Himalayan Range with a free license in Wikimedia Commons and improve the quality and increase the amount of articles about diversifying Himalayan mountain range and other respective variety in different languages in Wikipedia. Reaching out to the majority of Himalayan mountain range during this trekking program will not only raise awareness among various community chapters, but also motivate them to contribute to the Wikimedia projects and organize this kind of trekking expedition in future.
I just need an endorsement from all of you for this unique project
Feel free to discuss about the project in the discussion page.
Thanks in advance,
With warm regards,
Sujay25 (talk) 19:37, 18 August 2015 (UTC)


Yes check.svg Resolved. Feature reverted

Since today I'm seeing aditions and removals of pages in categories in Recent Changes. What's the reason for this? Do you feel this is useful? —MarcoAurelio 19:23, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

See phab:T9148. It's actually one of the most wanted features by users (but as usual there will always be users who do not like some features). --Glaisher (talk) 11:32, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Even bot edits such as those from COIBot are now notified on RC.... Any way to disable this? —MarcoAurelio 19:36, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Found that on Special:Preferences#Recent changes, you can disable this. —MarcoAurelio 19:38, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
I feel this should be optional to show. I don't see much value on notifying all pages added and removed from categories. —MarcoAurelio 20:01, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Now that option to hide this silly changes from watchlists and recentchanges has been removed from preferences. —MarcoAurelio 19:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
The feature was completely reverted for the time being. --Glaisher (talk) 11:32, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! —MarcoAurelio 11:38, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

New Gadgets namespace[edit]

Hi. I notice that new Gadget, Gadget talk, Gadget definition and Gadget definition talk namespaces have been added to the Wikis, but I can not find any instructions on what it is suposed to be there on mw:Extension:Gadgets. Any idea? Thanks. —MarcoAurelio 09:09, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Apparently it's to do with gadget management (whatever that means!). It's surprisingly poorly documented. A bit of extra info (and some links) can be found in the archive of the enwiki Village pump (technical) - New "Gadget:" and "Gadget definition:" namespaces?.
Doesn't look like anyone has access to edit the new namespaces yet. WJBscribe (talk) 14:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, thanks. I've asked here at mediawiki for some info and told me that it's still work in progress. Checking the permissions page, I see that new edit rights are required to edit such namespace. —MarcoAurelio 20:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Being blocked[edit]

Hi Meta Wiki Apparently I have been blocked for long term abuse by a person called Ruy Pugliesi - and I do not understand why. I think it must be a mistake. I have only written two wiki-texts in my life, long time ago, and apart for a few missing notes I have not been accused of abuse. So why now? I hope you can solve this problem, because I have a small correction to the wiki-texts I have created. Best, Mette Olsen —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mette Olsen64 (talk) 13:02 28 ago 2015‎ (UTC)

Hi Mette Olsen64. Your IP address was globally blocked, so you should make a request here, and a Steward will add to your account the global IP block exemption permission :) Matiia (talk) 16:14, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

IP Addresses[edit]

How can one find an IP of another user? --Skyllfully (talk | contribs) 04:01, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Only users with checkuser rights are allowed to check other users IP per CheckUser policy. --Glaisher (talk) 08:25, 29 August 2015 (UTC)