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

Local userpage guidelines?[edit]

With the advent of global user pages, it seems one's meta user page is now automatically re-created on every single project where they have not created a local page, including cases where that local page has been deleted. And yet, I have not been able to find any guidance as to what one may or may not have on their meta user page. This is kind of important as if a user has created a spammy user page, or an attack user page, or any other sort of generally unacceptable user page it is now being recrerated all over the place.

So, basically I am asking for pointers to any standards for user pages here on this project (the only page I found was a directory to standards on other projects) and a venue for proposing deletion of these pages should they be problematic. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:35, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Project:About, Meta:Inclusion policy, Meta:Requests for deletion. --Nemo 17:46, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Might want to consider what comes up when one actually searches for the term "user pages" as they are more likely to wind up at Help:User page, which gives advice only in a general way and pointers to specific standards for many other projects, but not this one.
Whether meta wants to be or not, it is now the gatekeeper of auto-generated user pages. So far, the vandals and spammers don't seem to be aware of the incredible potential for abuse of this amazing new feature, but eventually they will and it would be a shame if meta was not ready for it. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:55, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I see no reason to think something's not ready. Also, w:en:WP:BEANS. --Nemo 18:00, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
I see no reason why, every time I post anything here, you are always the first person to come along, and you always manage to degrade whatever I have to say. I was just trying to make sure the community here is aware of the somewhat alarming possibilities of this feature, I have no need or desire to interact with you in any way, ever, anywhere. Please leave me alone. Thanks. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Please, no shouting. --Nemo 18:46, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Based on the preliminary response here, I see no reason to suspect anything's ready. Beeblebrox has brought a potentially serious issue to what is supposed to be a serious place for discussion, and has been told not to worry about it by a single user. Beeblebrox has demonstrated in a few words the possibility for real damage to every associated project if no action is taken. I would like to see a serious response from someone willing to answer substantively. BusterD (talk) 19:51, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Yep. It's as if he has some sort of alert set up that lets him know the minute I do anything here so he can be the first one to comment. Sad, really, but I have learned to live with it and have come to realize that there are others here with cooler heads who will hopefully take this issue seriously and not just be dismissive of it the way he is doing. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:19, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes, one is lacking. Yes, one needs to be created. I thought similarly last week when I searched for a guideline. Killiondude (talk) 20:26, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps [1] as a start? –xeno 20:53, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
We might want to provide slightly more specific information for users. No project accepts copyvios, libel, or blatant spam, so those could be called out as reasons for rapid deletion. Content that might be acceptable at some projects but not others (maybe self-promotional content?) could be dealt with by overriding the global page locally. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
For me, I just want to keep it safe with what I do [on here] and what language I speak and what languages I understand. Tropicalkitty (talk) 00:41, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Anybody faking local user pages to overrule a sound global user page (i.e., no spam or other ToU violations) will hopefully meet one of those WMF global bans. –Be..anyone (talk) 01:33, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Using "what" standard? AFAIK some wikis have their own rules regarding userpages, some wikis don't allow nude images, some wiki prevent user from having "enemy" national flags (for country in conflict or technically still at war with each other), some wikis don't allow English, etc. SO it's hard to set the standard for Global userpages. Simply said, I'm half agreed with what Nemo said, just keep it related to Wikimedia movement activities and as always, keep it simple. Regards.--AldNonymousBicara? 03:51, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia Blog[edit]

Hi! I'll participate in an event of Digital Activism in Indigenous Language (of Colombia). There I'll talk about Wikimedia Projects and how to open a project in the Incubator. I think this could be interesting for the Community. Can I write about that after the event? How? --Sahaquiel9102 (talk) 04:18, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sahaquiel9102, nice to meet you. Please see the instructions at Wikimedia Blog! Ed Erhart (WMF) (talk) 23:10, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! --Sahaquiel9102 (talk) 19:03, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Accidental revision imports to some templates[edit]

Hey guys, I just imported a template from, and I thought it only had a couple subtemplates, but apparently it used some other templates like Template:Mbox (via the documentation). This caused those templates to get some revisions from imported into their history. I'm working on cleaning this up now. Sorry for the mess. Kaldari (talk) 18:16, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

It happened the same to me a some time ago. I asked if they could revert that via Phabricator, and told me that unfortunately they could not. Best regards. —MarcoAurelio 18:24, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
Should be cleaned up now. Kaldari (talk) 19:14, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Let's mirror the list of current WMF board members here[edit]

Please see Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_of_Trustees#Move_this_page_to_History_of_the_Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_of_Trustees. I would appreciate comments. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Nothing stopping you from creating those page, Blue Rasberry.--AldNonymousBicara? 16:02, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor News #3—2015[edit]

10:44, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

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 threw 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)

Meta:Requests for comment/Bureaucrat removal of permissions[edit]

I've opened this RfC to ask if Meta-Wiki bureaucrats should be able to continue removing advanced permissions such as administrator and or bureaucrat. —MarcoAurelio 16:28, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Stalled RfD[edit]

I think this has been on hold long enough: Meta:Requests_for_deletion#All_files_in_Category:Unfree_Wikimania_bid_media_files. —MarcoAurelio 16:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Autopatrol and CN admin[edit]

Is there any particular reason why autopatrol isn't part of central notice administrators other than no one thought to include it when CNA was created? 18 of the 30 CNA are also autopatrolled, the other 12 consists of 11 WMF staff and 1 WMDE staff accounts. If someone can be trusted with putting up banners across all Wikimedia projects, then there's no reason they can't be trusted with autopatrolled as well. (Yes, this is a very minor minor technical thing, but it occurred to me so I thought I'll mention it :) -- KTC (talk) 22:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Instead of changing the config, maybe we can add the right to those ones. Minor change indeed IMHO. —MarcoAurelio 12:04, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Policy (Meta:Autopatrollers; "Any administrator can grant this right at their discretion to trusted users who regularly create pages and have demonstrated they are familiar with Meta's policies and guidelines.") requires familiarity with metawiki content, which is not necessarily given in case of CN admins. Vogone (talk) 23:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)