Wikimedia Forum

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
(Redirected from Metapub)
Jump to: navigation, search
← Discussion pages Wikimedia Forums Archives →
QA icon clr.svg

The Wikimedia Forum is a central place for questions and discussions about the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. (For discussion about the Meta wiki, see Meta:Babel.)
This is not the place to make technical queries regarding the MediaWiki software; please ask such questions at the MediaWiki support desk; technical questions about Wikimedia wikis, however, can be placed on Tech page.

You can reply to a topic by clicking the "[edit]" link beside that section, or you can start a new discussion.
Wikimedia Meta-Wiki
This box: view · talk · edit
Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} and sections whose oldest comment is older than 30 days.

Changes to WMF Non-discrimination policy[edit]

Regarding this edit to WMF's Non-discrimination policy, made in March this year, changing "The Wikimedia Foundation prohibits discrimination against current or prospective users and employees on the basis of ..." to "The Wikimedia Foundation prohibits discrimination against staff or contractors on the basis of..." (changes emboldened for clarity); does this mean that WMF now allows discrimination against volunteers and readers?

Where was this announced, or discussed? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:18, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

I would welcome some clarification too. --Nemo 15:04, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi all. I helped work on this policy update and can offer some clarification. The policy was not being applied to users even before the change, and the interpretation had been consistent that it applied only to Wikimedia Foundation staff. When we were going through to update the categories to bring it in line with modern standards, we felt that it should be clarified as a staff-focused policy (again, the way it already had been even before the change) so we updated the wording per the edit you link. Note that this doesn't mean that suddenly wikis are allowed to unfairly discriminate against people. Doing so might constitute a violation of the Terms of Use (such as harassing or abusing others, or violating their privacy in some cases), and there are a number of community policies on different wikis that likely prohibit discriminatory behavior in different contexts. We just clarified that this specific policy is one focused on Foundation staff. -Jrogers (WMF) (talk) 18:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
"modern standards" which standards would these be? "doesn't mean that suddenly wikis are allowed to unfairly discriminate ..." Wikis are inanimate. "community policies" - such policies do not apply to staff, in their off-wiki roles. Frankly, I'm less than reassured by your response. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:48, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
  • In the Category:Cooler heads, it seems on the surface there is no way to interpret this other than a possible error. I suspect the Board of Trustees was not consulted on this rather small change to a WMF-wide policy, because this edit really does exactly what the template at the top of the page says it must not: It may not be circumvented, eroded, or ignored by Wikimedia Foundation officers or staff nor local policies of any Wikimedia project, emphasis added. Although this NDP may not appear (to staff) to be in use within the community, it has in fact been cited multiple times in disputes, particularly certain cases where community administrators were acting in concert in opposition to this policy. This policy, like many WMF policies, are used as authority by community internal governance structures, undergirding local implementations and guiding community actions. It is part of our Soft Security - a guide post in that context.

    Saying there is one set of policies for staff and a different set for the community will likely have negative effects. - Amgine/meta wikt 18:34, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

I was surprised to see this here, but I was previously aware of some confusion. Please see the English Wikipedia version of this at [1] which retains the old wording (but seems to interpret it away). BTW, this was created by a then-Arb on EnWiki @Roger Davies:. See my reaction (similar to @Pigsonthewing:) at [2]. The posting there was apparently prompted by this discussion which goes back to the bad old days when it was possible to openly bait women editors with foul language, and a woman proposed a place where only women editors could edit. I've got mixed feelings all around, but

  • It looks like we'll have to modify the EnWiki version somehow, and
  • The WMF board should do something to encourage all projects to come up with an anti-discrimination policy that applies to users.

@Slaporte (WMF), Jrogers (WMF), and EHershenov (WMF):

Smallbones (talk) 15:36, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

@Jrogers (WMF): Are you willing to revert your edit? If not, what is the path for appealing this within WMF? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 07:02, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

@Jrogers (WMF): hello ??? Are you going to discuss any of this ? I mean the policy is even categorised under "wikimedia wiki policies", if you no longer consider it to be so (which is my current reading), then you should recategorise it. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 17:02, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Apologies all that I haven't gotten back to this. That is a good catch on the sidebar category, we had missed that and should move it to the board and staff section, so we'll update that accordingly. With regard to the request to change or revert the edit, I'm not able to help with that. This change was reviewed by several WMF staff including the ED and was approved by the board, so although I was asked to make the update, I can't undo it or change it without their permission. -Jrogers (WMF) (talk) 01:14, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Adjusted in this edit. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:30, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Why I do not make a financial contribution to Wikipedia.[edit]

The way Wikipedia took sides in the copyright case of the Monkey selfie photos taken by British nature photographer David Slater was disgraceful.

I thought Wikipedia was supposed to take a "neutral point of view". How is this compatible with your stance of taking sides against the photographer in this dispute? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ad1mt (talk)

Note that there is no [incorporated] entity named "Wikipedia". Wikipedia doesn't receive any donations. Nemo 16:17, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia asks for neutrally written encyclopaedic articles. Wikimedia Foundation has a range of neutral and activist positions on a range of topics. Please feel free to read more about the Foundation at their website. Also differentiate the Foundation from the volunteers.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:02, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Unresolved issue of Wikimedia servers changing gamma value in grayscale PNG images[edit]

See unresolved (or any other reaction) issue: Wikimedia_Forum/Archives/2017-08#Different_rendering_of_the_same_PNG_image. —Mykhal (talk) 12:26, 28 October 2017 (UTC)


Wikipedia changing some Unicode characters[edit]

Hi, I have noticed that during editation (after preview or save), some Unicode characters are without any obvious reason and warning, replaced with others by the server.

For instance ʹ (U+0374 GREEK NUMERAL SIGN) → ʹ (U+02B9 MODIFIER LETTER PRIME).

(So the first character had to be represented as its HTML entity to prevent the conversion.)

Is it intentional?

Mykhal (talk) 12:37, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Can you point to a page where this happens? Ruslik (talk) 08:26, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
Any page, including this one, as implied. I am not 100.00% sure it's a server problem, but verified that it behaves consistently in different browsers and platforms, on several different wikimedia servers. Just copy both symbols from the rendered text (not source) from my initial post, paste here in the textarea when editing, make preview, and verify that they became the same. (If they looked the same before as well, you have to use more sophisticated char comparison/determination method, like using Character Identifier (FF) or Unicode Analyzer (Cr) browser extension. —Mykhal (talk) 01:47, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Text in MediaWiki is converted to Unicode Normalization Form Canonical Composition (NFC), which specifies that replacement among many others. See also the normalization FAQ at unicode.org. Anomie (talk) 13:33, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, this is satisfactory explanation, performing of the normalization is reasonable, and I should probably challenge this particular canonization rule at very different place. —Mykhal (talk) 18:05, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Wanted Pages[edit]

Is there any way to solve a big and ancient issue in the Wanted Pages special page in every single Wikipedia? In every wiki there are files listed as a wanted page with a huge number of articles linking to it, as you can see in the english page for example: However, when this wanted file pages are created, they are not deleted from the wanted page list, and they have remained there month, after month, after month, and I guess that even for years, without a way of replacing them. This is absurd one, because there is a special page for Wanted Files in every wiki, and second, because this problem turns what would be an useful page to improve every wiki into an annoyance that makes it less useful for everyone. Other similar special pages don't have this problem, in my case, for examle, I have created dozens of wanted categories in the Spanish wiki thanks to a feature that works the way it is supposed to. I am sure this is an issue that could be solved easily with someone that nows about codes, and I think that, being a widespread issue in every wikipedia, it should be a priority to have it sorted out. --Pencho15 (talk) 21:26, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Participate in Dispute Resolution Focus Group[edit]

The Harvard Negotiation & Mediation Clinical Program is working with the Wikimedia Foundation to help communities develop tools to resolve disputes. You are invited to participate in a focus group aimed at identifying needs and developing possible solutions through collaborative design thinking.

If you are interested in participating, please add your name to the signup list on the Meta-Wiki page.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to learn from the Wikimedia community. We value your opinions and look forward to hearing from you. JosephNegotiation (talk) 21:56, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

typo in userbox content[edit]

Category:User hi the 'hi-N' userbox have right now 'सामान', which should be 'समान'. Please fix it! Thanks – 1997kB (talk) 05:55, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

@1997kB: the relevant template is Template:User language/hi. Probably better that a native speaker reviews and fixes it.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:35, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Thanks for reply, but the output of hi-N in Category:User hi is different than Template:User language/hi. How is that possible? – 1997kB (talk) 07:45, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
(facepalm) All the text for the language templates now comes from mw:Extension:Babel which stores the text at http://translatewiki.net It will need to be edited there, and that is outside my area of expertise. I suggest that you start that conversation at translatewiki:support, and mention Extension:Babel.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:29, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
@Billinghurst:Ok, I will raise this issue on translatewiki:support. Thanks for help! – 1997kB (talk) 09:57, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

What's differences between "Wikimedia Hackathon" and "Wikimania Hackathon"?[edit]

--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:40, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

They're two different events. The "Wikimedia Hackathon" is a standalone event held annually, usually somewhere in Europe. The "Wikimania Hackathon" is associated with Wikimania, in the same place, for people who want to show up a few days early and have a hackathon. Anomie (talk) 14:45, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
See also mw:Hackathons/FAQ#Explain_the_differences_between_the_Wikimedia_Hackathon_and_the_Wikimania_Hackathon? --Base (talk) 16:55, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Strategy banner on outreach[edit]

On outreach.wikimedia I had a banner asking me to discuss the movement strategy right now. That's too late now. Either somebody forgot to turn off the banner on outreach or the text should be changed from discussing to endorsement. --Gereon K. (talk) 16:09, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Might it be some ancient tab you had open for ages and only now got to view it? Or perhaps a direct link with &banner=whatever in it? I do not see any Strategy related campaigns, the Cycle 3 campaign has ended on 2017-09-15 23:59 and there are no new ones. --Base (talk) 16:52, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
On https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page I have a greybrown bar saying "Join us for discussing the future of the Wikimedia movement through 2030." which links to Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017, right under "Translate this page" at the top of the page - even after purging. --Gereon K. (talk) 16:56, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Oh, lol. Indeed. That is just a directly included into the Main page block: outreach:Special:Diff/120911/161058. I will remove it now. --Base (talk) 16:59, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Дякую --Gereon K. (talk) 17:12, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

question on wikinews license compatibility.[edit]

According to Wikinews/License, wikinews switched to cc-by 2.5 license to facilitate one-way compatibility with GFDL and maximize distribution. Does that mean nowadays wikinews content can be reused on wikipedia directly and not the other way round? Would it be possible to import wikipedia content into wikinews via for example saying explicitly it require sharealike? C933103 (talk) 18:27, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

There is no problem in importing content both ways. See en:License_compatibility#Creative_Commons_license_compatibility. Ruslik (talk) 20:02, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
That chart seems to be for combining, not for migration, is it not? On some Wikinews content under CC BY-SA is allowed given that it is explicitly marked by a template. Otherwise it is not allowed. --Base (talk) 19:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Correct - someone changed that chart from image-based to table-based, wrongly added "From" and "To" to it in the process (now removed). --Moonian (talk) 05:12, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Read more: https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i-combine-material-under-different-creative-commons-licenses-in-my-work --Moonian (talk) 05:17, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

So, is it possible to mixing cc-by-sa content into wikinews using methods like declaring the license on the page being different from rest of the content? Or is there any motion to further change wikinews' license? As it seems like one of the reason why wikinews adopted cc-by 2.5 is because of compatbility with wikipedia.C933103 (talk) 05:38, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

@C933103 and Moonian: I am crying (with tears) to request you two: could you please do not do any Transwiki things from any CC BY-SA sites to Wikinews (at least until a legal team member says yes)? By such Transwiki services we can also transwiki them to MediaWiki Help namespace WHICH IS UNDER PUBLIC DOMAIN! --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:34, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226:...Where did you see I've done something like that? All I've done was correcting someone's edit in an en.wiki article... --Moonian (talk) 17:04, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
And, on the contrary, I was actually discouraging others to do such transwiki stuff... --Moonian (talk) 17:28, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
@Moonian: You restored both zh:Template:移动到维基新闻 and zh:Template:Vmn, which both are aim to transwiki contents to Wikinews. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:12, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: Again, where did you see that? I'm not a sysop there (as well as anywhere) and so I don't have the rights to restore those (or any other) pages. Also, I'm not the one who applied to restore those pages; on the contrary, I applied to revoke that decision. --Moonian (talk) 00:59, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Looks like the actual sysop that restored both templates is @Techyan:. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:39, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: Both of them were restored because of my request for undeletion, based on early respond in this discussion. C933103 (talk) 13:39, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
@C933103: So please, please, and please cancel your past wrong decision. %>_<% --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:13, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
How can I "cancel" an undeletion? C933103 (talk) 21:20, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
You can re-submit deletions for both templates. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:43, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
@EHershenov (WMF): Since this discussion does affecting legal. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:35, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
The switch to CC-BY-2.5 happened when Wikipedia was still under GFDL. Since then Wikipedia switched to CC-BY-SA-3.0. So, the some arguments for the Wikinews switch to CC-BY-2.5 does not apply anymore. Ruslik (talk) 18:35, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Is it possible to ask Wikinews community about would they want to switch the license once again? Since cc-by content can be reused as cc-by-sa content, it would probably only need majority agreement instead of universal agreement? C933103 (talk) 03:00, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
For what it's worth, license discussion has come up in the past year and there was no consensus to change. —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:54, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
@C933103: I Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose using CC BY-SA for Wikinews, since the CC BY license can also allow the terminal users to publish to e.g. MIT, 2-clause or 3-clause BSD (not 4-clause or original BSD, since both are allowing some BY-NC-SA stuffs which can create orphan works), CC BY-NC, CC BY-ND or CC BY-NC-ND, which CC BY-SA can't. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:04, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
@Koavf: Could you link me some of these discussions? C933103 (talk) 05:08, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
@C933103: Here are a few discussions where the license was explicitly discussed (if not was the topic of the discussion as such): n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/proposals/archives/2017/May, n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/policy/archives/2017/September, n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/miscellaneous/archives/2017/January#OTRS, n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/proposals/archives/2017/January, n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/assistance/archives/2017/January, n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/miscellaneous/archives/2017/May#Wikitribune_is_launched, n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/technical/archives/2017/January. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:23, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
@Koavf: As far as I understand,
n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/proposals/archives/2017/May and n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/policy/archives/2017/September talk about porting content to wikinews is problematic in term of license, and it is not efficient to reuse wikipedia content for wikinews due to the difference between "Encyclopedia" and "News".
n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/miscellaneous/archives/2017/January#OTRS is about some templates that apparently doesn't make sense to remain on wikinews due to license different
n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/proposals/archives/2017/January is about collaborating with third party content creator
n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/assistance/archives/2017/January - which section is supposed to be related?
n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/miscellaneous/archives/2017/May#Wikitribune_is_launched is about a wikinews competitor site and subsequent question on the model of wikinews
n:en:Wikinews:Water_cooler/technical/archives/2017/January is about reusing wikinews content in wikinews.
As such, it doesn't seems like the question on what license should wikinews use have really been resurfaced recently at least among these discussions. There are concerns about if that is allowed then there might be a flood of non-news entries in wikinews among the first two linked discussions and that it might be easier to restart from starch, but that is not about the license itself. C933103 (talk) 11:17, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
I understand that there are a number reasons why BY licences are preferable over BY-SA licenses for Wikinews. However the version should be at least updated to 3.0 to harmonize licenses across Wikimedia projects. Ruslik (talk) 14:18, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
@C933103: Correct: changing the license was not proposed but I'm saying that the license was discussed without any proposal to modify it, so it was tacitly accepted. And the section "Using The Independent" discusses licensing. —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:12, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
A small correction, Wikinews was originally published under Public Domain, which is not internationally compatible. Further, while the topic has come up on the English Wikinews, that is only one of many languages in the project; I do not believe the question has be raised project-wide. - Amgine/meta wikt wnews 16:53, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Changes to the global ban policy[edit]

Hello. Some changes to the community global ban policy have been proposed. Your comments are welcome at m:Requests for comment/Improvement of global ban policy. Please translate this message to your language, if needed. Cordially. Matiia (Matiia) 00:34, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Luchii astigarraga[edit]

Luchii [redactado] --Luchiiara (talk) 21:26, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

@Luchiiara: Si tienes solo [redactado], puedes ser un editor per es una idea buena ver ese guía primero: w:es:Wikipedia:Guía para los más pequeños. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:46, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
@Koavf: Justin, if you would be so kind, please further explain that at minimum she should not be sharing personal information about her friends (without their permission, but there is really no way to prove their permission here). StevenJ81 (talk) 22:03, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
@Luchiiara: Tambien es muchisimo importante no dar informacio'n personal de ti o tus amigos. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Everipedia violating wikipedia copyright?[edit]

According to w:User:Leprof_7272/Everipedia, Everipedia:

  • require users to waive ownership on all content submitted to the site
  • import more than 5 million articles from wikipedia.

That would mean Everipedia have been massively violating the "Share alike" clause in wikipedia's term of use?

  • Note: On 2017 Jan, they updated their terms page, which claim they their content are available under cc-by-sa, however,
    • In the section for "License to User Content" in their term, it still say "Everipedia owns all right and title in and to the collective content of the Service,".
    • They also claims content on their site cannot be use for commercial user unless expressly authorized by them which is incompatible with cc-by-sa.

Additionally, in the reference link, although the bot being used to import page from wikipedia into everipedia have noted in its user description that it is an "Official Wikipedia Import Bot", however, when the bot is being used to import pages from wikipedia, it does not say it is imported from wikipedia on anywhere on the page itself, nor in the edit history. That would mean they have also violated the attribution requirment in wikipedia's term of use?

Can WMF do something about it?C933103 (talk) 19:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

@C933103: This definitely violates the Terms of Use. I recommend Contacting legal. (I have done this previously with a trademark infringement.) —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
MailedC933103 (talk) 19:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
@C933103: Thanks. If you think of it, let me know what they say--I'm curious. —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:37, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Interaction Timeline alpha demo is ready for testing[edit]

Hello all,

The Interaction Timeline alpha version is ready for testing. The Anti-Harassment Tools team appreciates you spending a few minutes to try out the tool and let us know if there is value in displaying the interactions in a vertical timeline instead of the approach used with the existing interaction analysis tools.

Also we interested in learning about which additional functionality or information we should prioritize developing.

Comments can be left on the discussion page on meta. or you can share your ideas by email.

Thank you,

For the Anti-Harassment Tools Team, SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:39, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Newby question[edit]

I've been a contributing editor for only 2 months so there's still a whole lot I don't yet know about Wikimedia (meta) and the different projects. I have taken the time to get up to speed with the Strategic Direction 2017 which I fully support. The one advantage of only 2 months experience is that I still have the perspective of an 'outsider looking in'. I have very little history with Wikimedia or any of its projects.

I have two very basic questions: 1. The various Wikimedia projects supply information that people can use to expand their knowledge. My question is how the 'demand' (and the priorities, audiences, etc.) for information is determined across the Wikimedia projects. 2. The second question is related to the first one. There is great wealth of freely accessible and and trustworthy information available via the Internet. How does Wikimedia and its projects decide which gaps it should fill (with 'own content') and to which existing resources it should redirect? 16:31, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

All contents of the Wikimedia projects have been written by volunteers who write about subjects that they are interested in. So, we do not determine demand and we do not purposefully fill in any knowledge gaps. Ruslik (talk) 18:23, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Mostly, that's true. But there is List of articles every Wikipedia should have. That page suggests that there is a kernel of information we'd like to encourage people to create. But ultimately each project, and each volunteer, decides what to create. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:25, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

My thanks to @Ruslik0: and @StevenJ81: for your helpful replies!

New print to pdf feature for mobile web readers[edit]

Just curious (talk) 17:18, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 22:07, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Activating Wikimedians on net neutrality in the U.S.[edit]

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai just announced that he will gut net neutrality in a December 14th vote, with the draft order expected to be circulated on November 22nd. In terms of what to expect, people inside the FCC (speaking on condition of anonymity to reporters) have confirmed our worst fears: this is a full-throated repeal of the rules. The no blocking, no throttling, and no paid prioritization provisions are expected to be toast, as is as the general conduct standard. If the FCC is not stopped, every website and Internet user could be vulnerable to the new gatekeeper powers gifted to Internet service providers like Comcast and AT&T.

In response, Fight for the Future, Demand Progress, Free Press and others have announced a nationwide protest on December 7th, with in-person demonstrations at Verizon stores, and an online campaign to drive calls and emails to Congress through the BattleForTheNet.com campaign – which has seen a huge explosion of traffic today following Pai's announcement. The day of action will take place one week before the vote, with a simple message: Tell Congress to stop the FCC's plan to end net neutrality.

The question I find myself asking is: How can Wikimedians and the broader Wikimedia community get involved in the fight to save net neutrality? We know there's major energy for saving the open Internet, and we could really need your help to direct it as productively as possible. We have a clear goal: convince Congress to stop the FCC. But it's going to take everything we've got to stop this before the 14th of December.

Thanks, and I look forward to hearing what you think and, specifically, how the Wikimedia community can help stop the FCC from destroying net neutrality.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 159.89.143.64 (talk) 12:14, 22 November 2017

We are doing everything we can to make sure Wikipedia and her sister projects reach as many people as possible. This includes partnerships with ISPs to be included in all package levels. Additionally, we have incredible support from launching and running the zero rated Wikipedia Zero initiative from users. In many places where Wikipedia Zero operates Internet access is expensive, generally costing in PPP$ 50% of an equivalent US plan. (ITU 2015)

We are looking forward to bringing Wikipedia to more people in the coming years. Cheers, Dispenser (talk) 16:05, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Visual Editor on projectpages[edit]

Does someone know why the Visual Editor doesn't work on projectpages with prefixs, like this example. Livenws (talk) 17:25, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Because it is not enabled on Wikipedia namespace. Stryn (talk) 17:44, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

And is it possible to enable it? Livenws (talk) 18:26, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Technically yes, but it needs local community approval. We asked to enable it on the Finnish Wikipedia (see phab:T154678) but we discussed more about it and then decided not to enable it as project namespace has many pages meant for discussion (like village pumps), so VE is not working so well there. Stryn (talk) 18:45, 22 November 2017 (UTC)