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
Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose oldest comment is older than 30 days.

Category:User kjj[edit]

Wiki says "kjj" is for Khinalug language. At the same time, the sample badges at Category:User kjj display "English". "User language" doesn't tell us how to fix that. --Djadjko (talk) 23:40, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Probably something related to the Babel extension or CLDR, not sure. Reported at phab:T158260. —MarcoAurelio 23:54, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Pretty easy, we don't know about this language's name: kjj Nemo 10:33, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
kjj seems added to the extension? —MarcoAurelio 10:40, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
@Nemo bis: I think we do: каьтш мицI. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:50, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
No, see translatewiki:MediaWiki:Babel-N-n/tjj. Localisation for tjj in genreral seems to be missing, we would need Khinalug language speakers to fix this. --Vogone (talk) 07:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
I still have no idea why Djadjko cares about this. If he's a kjj speaker, that would be useful to know. If we don't have any real speaker for this ultra-small language, then it's pointless to talk about it.
Adding language names and adding a locale are completely different matters, but both are documented. See translatewiki:CLDR and languages, plus translatewiki:Portal:kjj for the specific language code. Nemo 08:00, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
@Vogone:--*k*jj, not *t*jj but yes, as User:Nemo bis points out, it's extremely unlikely to be relevant. With very few speakers who are all confined to one small region, plus no long literary and intellectual tradition which survives in other languages (a la Latin or Sanskrit), it's not likely that anyone can really do anything with kjj on Wikimedia projects nor is it plausible that MediaWiki will be translated into it. Since the ultimate fallback for all languages is English, then this is actually expected behavior. —Justin (koavf)TCM 09:41, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, that was obviously a typo. It's the very same with translatewiki:MediaWiki:Babel-N-n/kjj. ;-) --Vogone (talk) 09:49, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

The default fallback should be English, but it's clearly wrong for a Babel message to "fallback" to a false statement that the user has Native level English skills. These Babel messages lacking genuine text should be given a generic text, such as "This user has a native understanding of «OTHER LANGUAGE»." Alsee (talk) 18:52, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

@Alsee: Correct. A better text would be "This user has a native understanding of каьтш мицI". —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:08, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

@Nemo bis: I had seen a user page using that template (I don't remember exactly, but you can check Special:WhatLinksHere/Category:User_kjj), and initially thought it was for another English dialect (or maybe some constructed language, e. g. Klingon). And it turned out to be a real non-Indo-European language. I though it's a bad symptom when templates produce wrong output (see also: Broken windows theory), so I decided to report the issue. Isn't it funny enough? :) --Djadjko (talk) 00:23, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Uninteresting links in maintenance reports[edit]

Hope I am at the right place now: Is it possible to exclude following namespaces from maintenance reports?

  • User
  • Translations
  • Talk all namespaces

additional the section Translation requests, because there are very old pages (2005-2010) with many problems inside, which can only be solved with <nowiki>.

Reason: It is senseless repairing wrong templates (Wanted Templates) or broken links / redirects (see Special Pages) in these sections, because they apply to insignificant content. Especial translation namespace has tons of entries in language subpages, which doesn't exist in English source page. If these pages are listed you have to add a translate tag with the old entry number in source, mark it for translation, correct the wrong language entry, remove the temporary entry from source and mark it additional for translation. Maybe a sysop could delete these pages (i.e. Translations:Grants:Evaluation/Glossary/7/en), because using template TNTN generates a pseudo template with the tvar (i.e. {{Template:$tmplLink}}). If it is possible to set filters for the above named sections, maintenance work would be much more effective. (sorry for this short story) --Plagiat (talk) 21:06, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Allowing to filter namespaces on such query pages is tracked at phabricator:T6204.
Your problem seems to be with partially-parsed wikitext producing links which then get consider as real links even though they are just artifacts. The cleaner solution would be to not produce the links in the first place; we already did something similar with categorylinks in MediaWiki namespace, if I'm not mistaken. Nemo 21:44, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Help on Marathi Wikipedia against admins there[edit]

Hello! I have been indefinitely blocked on Marathi Wikipedia by an admin with no access even to my talk page or of writing an email to the admin. The block is wrongful in various ways and is foul especially when I raised my concerns about admins on that wiki not taking actions against copyrights violations. Images which infringe copyrights have been tagged for deletion since as long as 2013 with that community's admins simply sitting on them. There are more problems which I would elaborate later.
I come here to firstly enquire where I should complain now. I understand that Meta has global admins who could help in the matter. But what venue should I approach? (Kindly ping me when replying as I am not frequent on meta.) Dharmadhyaksha (talk) 03:56, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Speaking candidly, there have been problems at that wiki for years. Stewards are not a global ArbCom and can't really help in this matter, unfortunately. Your best bet is to either try to contact one of the mrwiki admins on Meta, or start a RFC (but the latter may not do anything since RFC is a broken process). --Rschen7754 06:54, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
@Mahitgar: --Rschen7754 06:56, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
@Rschen7754: My local block is a small thing and I don't really care much about it. But should the global sysop community just hopefully pray that no legal actions are raised against Wikimedia Foundation for all the copyvios that blatantly are supported by those local admins? Thankfully, this wiki is not much popular but that does not work as an excuse when laws are concerned. Yesterday i tagged a few images for deletion on Commons which Mahitgar had uploaded and what he did in turn was indef block me on Marathi wiki and upload those images locally. Looks like they know they have everything under control locally and hence are free to twist and turn things and disregard Foundation's licensing resolution.
I understand that we do not have a global Arbcom and if you say I would also believe that RfC is no way out. But I also doubt contacting any local admins through Meta is going to work. But will still give a try. @Kaustubh, Sankalpdravid, V.narsikar, and अभय नातू:. Dharmadhyaksha (talk) 08:58, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
mrwiki is not a global sysop wiki - they explicitly opted out. Sadly I'm sure they're not the only wiki that ignores copyright laws, though copyright isn't the only issue there. There have been successful RFCs that have done something, but they're <10% of the total. --Rschen7754 15:51, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
A few years ago Croatian Wiki fell under control of a group of abusive nationalistic admins. You can see the page on it at Requests for comment/2013 issues on Croatian Wikipedia. All admins where removed, and new ones elected. If there is a serious problem at Marathi Wiki and you want to deal with it, you (and/or other editors) would have to compile extensive documentation of abuses. Alsee (talk) 18:14, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
I think you may be thinking about a different wiki (Hindi?) - the Croatian Wikipedia issues are definitely unsolved. --Rschen7754 19:11, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
@Rahuldeshmukh101:, an admin on mrwiki, has now uploaded many copyvio screenshots of newspapers which unfortunately are now being displayed on the Marathi Wikipedia's main page. Rschen, I am unaware of the process, but how can some wiki get themselves opted out of global sysops? So does that mean no outsider can ever interfere and complete sovereignty is granted to them? Dharmadhyaksha (talk) 03:50, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
They only have to have a vote. RFC may be the best option here, but be clear, concise, and to the point if you go that route, because it's hard enough trying to get people to care about small wikis. --Rschen7754 04:45, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Ping system not working[edit]

I was supposed to be pinged to Talk:OTRS. However, I was not notified about the ping. If someone here can ping me here just for a test, I appreciate it. --George Ho (talk) 22:52, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

@George Ho: I think pings only work when followed by a signature at the end of the comment. --Yair rand (talk) 23:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Hey, it works. :) --George Ho (talk) 23:17, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Button change[edit]

Hello, all,

I wanted to let you know that the buttons are changing in most of the editors tomorrow (Wednesday). There are two unrelated changes happening here: one is that the long-discussed change from "Save page" to say "Publish page" and "Publish changes" is finally reaching Meta. The other is that the button itself is going to become BIG and blue. Both of these changes are being made primarily for the sake of new editors.

If you discover problems with the "Publish page" labels, then please let me know as soon as possible. As with any new label, there may be imperfect translations or other difficulties, and we need to know about these problems. If you want to change the meaning of the label (e.g., to include additional information, which is done at the Chinese Wikipedia), then please talk to me first. Like changes to the copyright notice, changes to this button need to be reviewed by the Legal team in advance.

I believe that the change to the appearance of the button will be more noticeable to established contributors. You can look at a screenshot on Phabricator. Unforunately, because of the technology used, it appears that it will not be possible to restore the old appearance completely via CSS changes.

If you have questions about this, then please {{ping}} me. Thanks, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:24, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Update: The BIG blue button has been delayed. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 14:38, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
User:Whatamidoing (WMF): Isn't it problematic to say "publish changes" on flaggedrevs wikis where edits might not immediately be "published" for the user making the edit (e.g. IPs, non-autoreviewers)? --MF-W 14:17, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
I understand that the date of publication is the date that it's available to the public through any method (e.g., via oldid links and the page history), not the date upon which it becomes the default that's shown to most users who read the page the usual way (or the date that it first gets indexed by the larger search engines, which has also been proposed by a couple of editors as "true" publication). However, I agree that it could be confusing to some editors who don't understand how Flagged Revisions work. If you have any ideas about how to make this clearer to inexperienced editors, then please add your thoughts to Talk:Editing/Publish. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:35, 18 March 2017 (UTC)