Meta:Babel
- 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.
 |
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.
|
ipinfo permission for autoconfirmed
[edit]On other sites, ipinfo and ipinfo-view-basic are granted to all autoconfirmed user; but on meta-wiki it's not. Is this intentionally or just a configuration bug? Stang 10:06, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- These are being worked on along with the temporary account rollouts, merging some of these together. Autoconfirm will not be sufficient, see Meta:Temporary account IP viewers for the upcomign thresholds. — xaosflux Talk 12:59, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- See example of a site that has completed temp account rollouts: w:no:Spesial:Grupperettigheter. — xaosflux Talk 13:07, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- It looks like some global groups now have
ipinfo-view-fullnow. Codename Noreste (talk · contribs) 06:11, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
Yorubamensman
[edit]I'm noticing that Special:Centralauth/Yorubamensman is automatically translating a lot of articles into different languages. I doubt they actually know all these languages. I think this is a problem; what do non-stewards think? 2607:F140:6000:8032:BCBB:B163:6762:E311 21:07, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
Vote now in the 2025 U4C Election
[edit]Please help translate to your language
Eligible voters are asked to participate in the 2025 Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee election. More information–including an eligibility check, voting process information, candidate information, and a link to the vote–are available on Meta at the 2025 Election information page. The vote closes on 17 June 2025 at 12:00 UTC.
Please vote if your account is eligible. Results will be available by 1 July 2025. -- In cooperation with the U4C, Keegan (WMF) (talk) 23:00, 13 June 2025 (UTC)Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees 2025 - Call for Candidates
[edit]Hello all,
The call for candidates for the 2025 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees selection is now open from June 17, 2025 – July 2, 2025 at 11:59 UTC [1]. The Board of Trustees oversees the Wikimedia Foundation's work, and each Trustee serves a three-year term [2]. This is a volunteer position.
This year, the Wikimedia community will vote in late August through September 2025 to fill two (2) seats on the Foundation Board. Could you – or someone you know – be a good fit to join the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees? [3]
Learn more about what it takes to stand for these leadership positions and how to submit your candidacy on this Meta-wiki page or encourage someone else to run in this year's election.
Best regards,
Abhishek Suryawanshi
Chair of the Elections Committee
On behalf of the Elections Committee and Governance Committee
[2] https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal:Bylaws#(B)_Term.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:43, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
RFC FYI
[edit]A RFC to opt meta-wiki in to the globalsysop set has been opened at Meta:Requests for comment/Allow global sysops on Meta. Interested contributors are invited to comment there. — xaosflux Talk 15:15, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Ready for translation: Education Newsletter June 2025
[edit]June 2025 education newsletter released for translation. Please help our readers to read education newsletter in their native language. The latest education newsletter is ready for translation: here Newsletter headlines link for translation: here, to read individual articles check out: Category:Education/Newsletter/June 2025. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 07:19, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
Sister Projects Task Force reviews Wikispore and Wikinews
[edit]Dear Wikimedia Community,
The Community Affairs Committee (CAC) of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees assigned the Sister Projects Task Force (SPTF) to update and implement a procedure for assessing the lifecycle of Sister Projects – wiki projects supported by Wikimedia Foundation (WMF).
A vision of relevant, accessible, and impactful free knowledge has always guided the Wikimedia Movement. As the ecosystem of Wikimedia projects continues to evolve, it is crucial that we periodically review existing projects to ensure they still align with our goals and community capacity.
Despite their noble intent, some projects may no longer effectively serve their original purpose. Reviewing such projects is not about giving up – it's about responsible stewardship of shared resources. Volunteer time, staff support, infrastructure, and community attention are finite, and the non-technical costs tend to grow significantly as our ecosystem has entered a different age of the internet than the one we were founded in. Supporting inactive projects or projects that didn't meet our ambitions can unintentionally divert these resources from areas with more potential impact.
Moreover, maintaining projects that no longer reflect the quality and reliability of the Wikimedia name stands for, involves a reputational risk. An abandoned or less reliable project affects trust in the Wikimedia movement.
Lastly, failing to sunset or reimagine projects that are no longer working can make it much harder to start new ones. When the community feels bound to every past decision – no matter how outdated – we risk stagnation. A healthy ecosystem must allow for evolution, adaptation, and, when necessary, letting go. If we create the expectation that every project must exist indefinitely, we limit our ability to experiment and innovate.
Because of this, SPTF reviewed two requests concerning the lifecycle of the Sister Projects to work through and demonstrate the review process. We chose Wikispore as a case study for a possible new Sister Project opening and Wikinews as a case study for a review of an existing project. Preliminary findings were discussed with the CAC, and a community consultation on both proposals was recommended.
Wikispore
[edit]The application to consider Wikispore was submitted in 2019. SPTF decided to review this request in more depth because rather than being concentrated on a specific topic, as most of the proposals for the new Sister Projects are, Wikispore has the potential to nurture multiple start-up Sister Projects.
After careful consideration, the SPTF has decided not to recommend Wikispore as a Wikimedia Sister Project. Considering the current activity level, the current arrangement allows better flexibility and experimentation while WMF provides core infrastructural support.
We acknowledge the initiative's potential and seek community input on what would constitute a sufficient level of activity and engagement to reconsider its status in the future.
As part of the process, we shared the decision with the Wikispore community and invited one of its leaders, Pharos, to an SPTF meeting.
Currently, we especially invite feedback on measurable criteria indicating the project's readiness, such as contributor numbers, content volume, and sustained community support. This would clarify the criteria sufficient for opening a new Sister Project, including possible future Wikispore re-application. However, the numbers will always be a guide because any number can be gamed.
Wikinews
[edit]We chose to review Wikinews among existing Sister Projects because it is the one for which we have observed the highest level of concern in multiple ways.
Since the SPTF was convened in 2023, its members have asked for the community's opinions during conferences and community calls about Sister Projects that did not fulfil their promise in the Wikimedia movement.[1][2][3] Wikinews was the leading candidate for an evaluation because people from multiple language communities proposed it. Additionally, by most measures, it is the least active Sister Project, with the greatest drop in activity over the years.
While the Language Committee routinely opens and closes language versions of the Sister Projects in small languages, there has never been a valid proposal to close Wikipedia in major languages or any project in English. This is not true for Wikinews, where there was a proposal to close English Wikinews, which gained some traction but did not result in any action[4][5], see section 5 as well as a draft proposal to close all languages of Wikinews[6].
Initial metrics compiled by WMF staff also support the community's concerns about Wikinews.
Based on this report, SPTF recommends a community reevaluation of Wikinews. We conclude that its current structure and activity levels are the lowest among the existing sister projects. SPTF also recommends pausing the opening of new language editions while the consultation runs.
SPTF brings this analysis to a discussion and welcomes discussions of alternative outcomes, including potential restructuring efforts or integration with other Wikimedia initiatives.
Options mentioned so far (which might be applied to just low-activity languages or all languages) include but are not limited to:
- Restructure how Wikinews works and is linked to other current events efforts on the projects,
- Merge the content of Wikinews into the relevant language Wikipedias, possibly in a new namespace,
- Merge content into compatibly licensed external projects,
- Archive Wikinews projects.
Your insights and perspectives are invaluable in shaping the future of these projects. We encourage all interested community members to share their thoughts on the relevant discussion pages or through other designated feedback channels.
Feedback and next steps
[edit]We'd be grateful if you want to take part in a conversation on the future of these projects and the review process. We are setting up two different project pages: Public consultation about Wikispore and Public consultation about Wikinews. Please participate between 27 June 2025 and 27 July 2025, after which we will summarize the discussion to move forward. You can write in your own language.
I will also host a community conversation 16th July Wednesday 11.00 UTC and 17th July Thursday 17.00 UTC (call links to follow shortly) and will be around at Wikimania for more discussions.
-- Victoria on behalf of the Sister Project Task Force, 20:56, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
New Central Notice admins
[edit]Together with WMF, a small group of current CentralNotice admins has been working to streamline and improve the processes behind CentralNotice. Our work is still ongoing, and after the two trainings for requesting and administering CN's in the past 4 months, we see new users are starting to apply for the right, and sign up to become CN admins.
We would like your advice on how future participants in the training should be selected. The current process, like many on-wiki election processes, includes both formal and informal expectations for this role. We could use your feedback on the following questions:
- What are the typical characteristics you are looking for when voting for this role?
- What are “must have” experiences for folks you would expect to see when selecting new CN admins?
- What else should we be paying attention to as we continue iterating on such a project?
Please join the conversation and give your feedback at Meta talk:Requests for adminship#Feedback on identifying future Central Notice Admins. Ciell (talk) 06:51, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
- And in that regard: should we agree to some basic requirements for new Central Notice admins? Please join @ Meta talk:Central notice administrators#'Requirements for Central Notice admins'? Ciell (talk) 08:14, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
Email notifications, confusion with the Meta company
[edit]Should email notifications be rephrased to avoid confusion with Facebook's parent company, which I assume the wording pre-dates? I had an email from "Meta" today announcing that a user had "left you a message on Meta" and didn't expect it to relate to a Wikimedia project, from that. Belbury (talk) 12:07, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
- Would be better to call it "Meta-wiki" or something. —— Eric Liu（Talk） 12:08, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not exactly sure which message this is coming from, is this the mail notification if you opt in to "Edit to my talk page" email notifications? — xaosflux Talk 12:47, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- I think it is coming from Echo's translations (use the "filter list" box to search for "sitename" within that listing). 'Sitename' itself is defined in InitialiseSettings. I forget and can't find where 'sitename' is translated (unless it always just displays the canonical name?). HTH. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:12, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not exactly sure which message this is coming from, is this the mail notification if you opt in to "Edit to my talk page" email notifications? — xaosflux Talk 12:47, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
A global prohibition to edit in languages that one doesn't know
[edit]I've been thinking about making a more comprehensive RFC about it, but before that, I'd like to ask here quickly:
Is there an explicit written global prohibition to edit pages in a language that someone doesn't actually know?
I cannot find anything quite like this. I couldn't find an explicit prohibition of this kind in the Universal Code of Conduct or in the Terms of Use at all.
The page Global locks talks about "abuse on multiple wikis", and the page Global blocks talks about "widespread cross-wiki vandalism", "Cross-wiki promotional editing", and "Cross-wiki disruptive editing that may be in good faith". All of these examples have quite a lot of overlap with editing in languages that a user doesn't know. However, I believe that there should be a more explicit prohibition of this.
There is something like this in the Incubator (see incubator:Help:Manual). It was proposed by me and supported by other users there. I believe that it should be global, however.
So, before even discussing whether this idea of mine is good or bad, I'd like to verify: is there really no such global prohibition now?
Thanks! Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 10:18, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- A global blanket prohibition? No. As a global sysop you likely run in to the need to make contributions to many pages on projects you don't know the language for - for anything from reverting vandalism, making technical improvements, etc. — xaosflux Talk 11:42, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- Indeed, there are a lot of gray areas in which editing wikis whose main content language you don't know is acceptable. Defining these gray areas more clearly would be the topic of a more comprehensive RFC.
- My current question is whether there is anything at all about it except what I've already mentioned. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 12:55, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- There's not. Quite the opposite, our general default behavior is to welcome anyone to contribute to any of our projects - so long as they are doing so constructively. — xaosflux Talk 14:37, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- As in doing unverified machine translation and/or content creation abuse on cross-wiki projects? Yes. Otherwise, not really, or one could simply not remove hoaxes and other byproducts of xwiki vandalism. I'd be interested in a RfC – in fact this is needed as the proposal impacts areas far beyond of what we can do here – and can bring additional brainstorming in as well. A09|(pogovor) 13:22, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
As in doing unverified machine translation and/or content creation abuse on cross-wiki projects? Yes.
- @A09, do you mean that you agree that it should be prohibited? Or that there is already a written explicit rule against it? Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 13:30, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- I agree it should be prohibited. Sorry for that linguistic fallacy. While we do have some precedent on deleting xwiki machine translation abuse there is no formal rule to protect endangered languages and their respective Wikimedia projects via deleting such pages, so I support a RfC going forward. A09|(pogovor) 13:38, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- Well that is a completely different question from a completely barring someone from making any contribution to a project where they don't have a language skill. However the statement above predisposes that it is about abusive contributions, even furthering narrowing the scope. — xaosflux Talk 18:00, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- That's why I intentionally said "language" and not "project". But yet again, the debate itself can wait until an RFC. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:29, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- Well sure, but almost all of our projects are single-language. — xaosflux Talk 19:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- That's why I intentionally said "language" and not "project". But yet again, the debate itself can wait until an RFC. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 18:29, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- Why in principle can I not replace a PNG with an SVG in a Hungarian wiki? Why is that a good rule? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:56, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- I didn't say that you shouldn't be able to do it. As I already wrote above, that's why I wrote "language" and not "wiki" or "project". If it's a technical edit that doesn't require the knowledge of the language, it's okay in my book (I have more things to say there about such edits, but not here). When I write the detailed proposal, I'll make sure that it's addressed clearly.
- I didn't even want to discuss the merits of the idea here, and I only wanted to know whether there is already a written rule about it. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 10:15, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- I appreciate that you're trying to discuss a hypothetical and you're interested in the form not the content of the proposal, but it's hard to ignore the content entirely. If I said, "I want to propos a ban on anyone editing while winking, how do I do that?", of course other users will respond to the proposal itself. So, I'm sorry if this was a tangent, but it's hard to answer the question in principle without understanding what it is you're even looking to propose. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:32, 7 July 2025 (UTC)