Talk:Interwiki map/Archives/2015

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

Proposed additions

LocalWiki

The following discussion is closed.


link: https://localwiki.org/$1 prefix:localwiki:

LocalWiki is a grassroots effort to collect, share and open the world’s local knowledge. We're 100% open source, open content, and are often referred to as a Wikipedia "sister project in spirit". Having an Interwiki link would help us give standard instructions to our editor community for how to, when appropriate, add links to Wikipedia. Additionally, it would help us avoid often automated flagging of our link additions under WP:LINKSTOAVOID ("open wikis"), something that's been confusing for LocalWiki editors who contribute to Wikipedia in the past.

  1. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects: Yes! There are currently a number of links to LocalWiki throughout Wikipedia, though some are using the older wikispot: Interwiki prefix. Links currently exist with wikispot:, localwiki.org, and the older domain, localwiki.net. Note: wikispot.org was an old project of ours, and while it's still maintained (and hence retiring the wikispot: prefix would be premature), we've imported all locally-oriented data into the new LocalWiki project.
  2. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: Yup! We have a fairly large editor community that regularly patrols all of our edits.
  3. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license): Yup! All of LocalWiki is licensed under CC-BY, with map data being licensed ODbL for OpenStreetMap compatibility.
  4. be a wiki: Yup.
  5. have reasonable amounts of content: LocalWiki is probably one of the largest wikis, with over 100,000 pages (see https://localwiki.org/_tools/dashboard/)
  6. not contain malware: No malware, and an active editor community to prevent malware and spam.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.198.60.54 (talk)

FWIW I've added an "SVG wanted" tag to LocalWiki logo.png and stripped blank lines in your numbered list here (was 1. 1. 1. instead of 1. 2. 3.). –Be..anyone (talk) 18:53, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, c:File:LocalWiki_Logo.svg created by a commons contributor. –Be..anyone (talk) 02:48, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Support Support, above 100 links in the top 40, proponent AWOL. –Be..anyone (talk) 08:04, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Support Support I'd love it if LocalWiki could be added to the map before the next update!
The old wikispot.org service will be shut down on April 1st - http://wikispot.org/2015_Shutdown_Notice. Most all projects have moved to LocalWiki, and we would like to update the interwiki links. Could the LocalWiki link be added?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 46.165.210.13 (talk)

OWASP

The following discussion is closed.


link: https://www.owasp.org/index.php/$1 prefix:owasp:

Useful programming resource run by a charity and quoted by many; having interwiki links would save me some effort integrating the advice in mediawiki.org pages. --Nemo 11:30, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

owasp:Advertising doesn't sound like a charity, how about an InterWiki for relevant W3C pages? –Be..anyone (talk) 12:32, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Not sure I understand that objection, but in any case, being run by a charity (or otherwise) isn't a huge factor here. If it meets the criteria it should be added.
Support Support This, that and the other (talk) 00:19, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Support Support after seeing 134 links for a click on top 40; {{question}} != {{o}}. –Be..anyone (talk) 13:21, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done: added -- M\A 16:01, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikilivres.ru

The following discussion is closed.


: A spin-off of wikilivres.ca/info. This Russian edition houses texts that have free licenses but which have BY SA-NC-ND requirements. This makes them inappropriate for Wikisource or the Canadian Wikilivres but still useful to WMF projects. Most content is in Russian but he site is multilingual and has over 7,000 pieces of content. For those who don't read Russian (such as myself), there are some inclusion criteria and they keep really crufty or OR-type work at their sister site Soulibre.ru. Thoughts? —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:49, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Just as a matter of curiosity (no opinion either way on inclusion) - is it run by the same people who run the Canadian Wikilivries? – Philosopher Let us reason together. 20:08, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Above, it says that one criterion for an interwiki prefix is that the site should "be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license)". CC's NC and ND licences are not "Commons-acceptable". Therefore, it seems that the site doesn't meet the criteria for getting an interwiki prefix. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:33, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
@Philosopher: No, it was made by a user who had NC/ND content on the Canadian site but they rejected that license and so moved it to his own site. @Stefan2: That's just a guideline but CC BY-NC-ND licenses are free content (just not Commons-compatible) and there is other free-er content on the site as well. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:58, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
@Koavf: CC BY-NC-ND is not a free (libre) license, although perhaps it could be called a "gratis" license. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:47, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
@PiRSquared17: The distinction isn't lost on me but as pointed out above and below, it's only a guideline and CC-NC/ND licenses are free-er than full copyright. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:33, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm not really sure why that guideline is there. Wikis can contain useful content even if that content is not released under a free license. I suppose we prefer freely-licensed wikis, but if a particular wiki is not, I definitely don't consider it a show-stopper. This, that and the other (talk) 01:31, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
+1 for Justin and This, that and the other, otherwise CC-BY-NC OEIS: won't fly, and you couldn't parse the first minute of this video. –Be..anyone (talk) 01:58, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
+1 here too. I have no issue with CC-BY-NC/ND links at some sites, that is about the next use, not the current use, though I am happy to keep the guidance taut and manage edge cases like this through discussion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:50, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Code As an aside, it looks like so far there is an emerging consensus. Assuming that continues to be the case, what should the code be? wikilivresru? —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:12, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I think this should be added. The "free content" rule should be a guideline not a requirement (even RMS supports using verbatim licenses in some cases). wikilivresru is fine. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:47, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
  • @PiRSquared17: I actually wanted to add things to .ru because Stallman licenses his essays with ND licenses (but .ru requires a real name be submitted, so I won't join their site). —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:33, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

mitglieder.wikimedia.at

The following discussion is closed.


Link: https://mitglieder.wikimedia.at/$1 prefix:wmat:
  1. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site: it's the community-wiki in german (mitglieder.wikimedia.at) from WMAT (Wikimedia Austria www.wikimedia.at) - (the subdomain "mitglieder" means "member"). It is used as the central place for organisation of any activity and support of Austrian Wikimedia community (scholarship application, empowering volunteers,... ). Supported Wikimedians add reports about their activities and communicate their desire, purposes and schemes;
  2. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: It is a private wiki, that requires user registration before any edit is permitted. Registration is done by sysops and requires application via email ;
  3. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license): Source of files and pics is simply WikiCommons, see e.g. outcome of foto-project, supported by WMAT;
  4. be a wiki: yes;
  5. have reasonable amounts of content: lots of content already; see main side (german), among others;
  6. not contain malware: of course not.

Thanks a lot, --Agruwie (talk) 15:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, wmat: will work after the next interwiki cache update. - Hoo man (talk) 19:08, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Proposed removals

Buzztard

The following discussion is closed.

No content I don't even know what this was but there's nothing there now. —Justin (koavf)TCM 08:56, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

See the Web Archive: http://web.archive.org/web/20120217095912/http://wiki.buzztard.org/index.php/Main_Page I don't know why this was ever here. It's a documentation wiki for some Open Source software project. It has no non-trivial recorded uses on any WMF wiki. I support the removal. This, that and the other (talk) 09:26, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done [1] -- M\A 11:53, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

corpknowpedia

The following discussion is closed.

Spam Redirects to another domain. —Justin (koavf)TCM 08:58, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

This is another ancient one which I removed from the default MW interwiki map some time ago. I think it can go from here as well. No recorded non-trivial uses on WMF sites. This, that and the other (talk) 09:35, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done [2] -- M\A 11:55, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Bytesmiths

The following discussion is closed.

Perpetually loads I never get any content or an error message. —Justin (koavf)TCM 09:00, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Works for me. This must be from the days when we had lots of personal wikis on here. This, that and the other (talk) 09:53, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done [3] -- M\A 11:58, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

johnabbe.wagn.org/AbbeNormal

The following discussion is closed: Removed

Just a personal blog. Looks like another pet addition that isn't legitimately useful as an interwiki link. Kaldari (talk) 23:36, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

See #Ourpla above ... PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:45, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Kaldari: Some of us have much longer memories than you and don't feel the need to pass judgement on a site's "legitimacy". For what it's worth, I just came here to suggest removing John's wiki from the map. It's an artifact from the origin of the interwiki system, when we were a small family of sites belonging to individual people. Those days are long gone. — Scott talk 15:48, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
@Scott: I just said it wasn't legitimately useful as an interwiki link (which seems fairly accurate). Please excuse me if I caused any offense. Kaldari (talk) 01:27, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes check.svg Done, removed -- M\A 18:56, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Enciclopedia Libre

The following discussion is closed: No action taken from now. Request withdrawn as site is up again.

Remove Site has been down several times that I have checked for the past three months (and it's never been up). The University of Seville's site is up and I can't find an alternate URI. —Justin (koavf)TCM 16:49, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Comment Comment that would be ELibre http://enciclopedia.us.es/index.php/$1  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:54, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
@PiRSquared17: is your tool down? I went to check the i/w status and got no tool response. Plus we so need to template that tool for easier checking here.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:00, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
@Billinghurst and This, that and the other: https://tools.wmflabs.org/pirsquared/iw.php?wikis=&iw=ELibre&hideclosed=on PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:37, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
If this were to be removed, it would need a couple of non-trivial uses replaced with external links, at least. One in particular is a sourcing link at Commons (File:Gran speo.jpg), which we would not want to break. There could possibly be others that predate the introduction of the interwiki table. I would be very hesitant to remove this simply because of its long history and the potential for breaking links. This, that and the other (talk) 09:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
@This, that and the other: I don't see the problem: couldn't these instances of Elibre: be replaced pretty easily with some boilerplate text that reads "formerly hosted at http://us.es/xxx"? —Justin (koavf)TCM 09:36, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Of course, and I would even recommend to do that (or replace them with a link to the Wayback Machine/Web Archive if the content is available there). But "there could possibly be others [other interwiki links] that predate the introduction of the interwiki table", meaning we have no way of knowing where they are. Interwiki links on pages that were last touched (edited, null-edited, etc) before 2010 do not show up in the interwiki table or PiRSquared's tool. This means we have to be careful when removing old sites from this interwiki map. Random crufty sites can usually go without too much concern, but this site is quite important and may well have a lot of old links from places like eswiki (in talk archives and the like) that we don't know about. This, that and the other (talk) 09:43, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
@This, that and the other: Oh this is fascinating. I didn't realize that there was no particular way to have a robot scour the WMF sites for all instances of [[elibre:foo]] and replace it with some template or boilerplate text. Yikes. —Justin (koavf)TCM 09:46, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
It would probably be possible using the insource: feature of the new CirrusSearch engine, but would be very slow, and I doubt anyone is willing to invest the time to make a script that would do this across all wikis.:
There is also the mwgrep tool This only searches the MediaWiki: namespace, so not useful for us. This, that and the other (talk) 10:01, 15 December 2014 (UTC), 10:05, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
@This, that and the other: Couldn't someone just do this with an online database dump? I can't imagine anyone has added many [[elibre:]] links since the last dump. We could probably call that 99% correct and not worry about diminishing returns, right? —Justin (koavf)TCM 10:04, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Could work. I've never interacted with database dumps, though, so wouldn't like to try it myself. This, that and the other (talk) 10:05, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Crisis averted It came back up at the turn of the year. There's some discussion of it going down but I don't see why exactly. They actually installed a new version of MediaWiki in the meantime as well. —Justin (koavf)TCM 18:42, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

No action taken for now. -- M\A 16:15, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

docbook

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Perpetually loads I never get any content or an error message. —Justin (koavf)TCM 09:00, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Uses as of 09:46, 7 January 2015 (UTC) [4]

Database name Page ID Page name Interwiki title Status
enwiki 11088714 User:Marc_Kupper/sandbox docbook:Main_page
enwiki 9846172 Project:Help_desk/Archives/2007_March_2 docbook:The_Definitive_Guide
eswikinews 1155 Help:Cómo_se_edita_un_artículo docbook: Yes check.svg Done, removed. -- M\A 09:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
eswiki 5653038 User:Marval703/Guía_para_wikipedistas docbook: X mark.svg Not done, userspace. -- M\A 09:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Should be easy to migrate. I'm doing the -es projects. -- M\A 09:46, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

@MarcoAurelio: Don't bother with Help:Cómo_se_edita_un_artículo, User:Marc_Kupper/sandbox or User:Marval703/Guía_para_wikipedistas. They simply contain lists of interwiki prefixes. This, that and the other (talk) 09:51, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Didn't saw your comment. I removed one, kept another. I suggested at eswikinews that they remove such listing and use Special:Interwiki instead. -- M\A 09:56, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - removed. -- M\A 15:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Quarry

The following discussion is closed.

Undiscussed addition, quarry.wmflabs.org does not exist / does not work for me. –Be..anyone (talk) 07:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Works for me with http and https.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:31, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Ditto. What exactly is not working? --Glaisher (talk) 11:41, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Works now also for me, maybe I hit the announced down time yesterday, or it was a DNS issue if the record is new. Out of curiosity, what is this, anyway? –Be..anyone (talk) 22:20, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Quarry is a site to run SQL queries of the WMF databases in toollabs. It allows static queries to be written easily at and for the wikis, and the interwiki provides redundancy for renaming of the tool away from labs.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:57, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Request withdrawn, problem solved. –Be..anyone (talk) 13:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Other discussions

InterWiki

I guess this is the right section for this: Can we please change the two instances of "InterWiki" in the notice at the top of the page to "Interwiki" (i.e., title = InterWiki map" and notes = The '''InterWiki map''' charts… in the {{process header}} template call)? - dcljr (talk) 20:19, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Obviously "we" can't, only sysops can.:tongue: No objection, but the vintage 2005 CamelCase is no typo, cf.InterWiki map. –Be..anyone (talk) 20:25, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done I've changed it. (diff). --Glaisher (talk) 04:44, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
On topic nitpick: The script could be also "interwiki linked" as script. –Be..anyone (talk) 22:15, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Done. Glaisher (talk) 05:21, 19 February 2015 (UTC)


Removing interwikis from the table

Billinghurst and MarcoAurelio were of the view that the process for removing dead interwikis needs to be overhauled, because it was taking far too long. In my opinion, there are two reasons for this cautiousness:

  1. Sites that are down one month, may come back up the next month. (See #Enciclopedia Libre above.)
  2. We want to minimize, or if possible avoid, link rot by not breaking existing interwiki links.

So I propose the following rough process/guideline:

  • When proposing that an interwiki prefix be removed from the map because the site is down or inaccessible, the following procedure should be followed:
    • Try to ascertain whether the wiki has moved to a new location.
    • Make a post on this page in the #Proposed removals section, noting the type of error received (for example: blank page; 404 error page; "wiki not configured" error; 403 Forbidden; parked domain/spam page; domain cannot be resolved/DNS error)
    • It may be decided that, because of lack of recorded use, the prefix can be removed immediately. This is often the case when the prefix is of questionable relevance (for example: personal site; Linux users' groups). For other prefixes, remember that Tool Labs tools may not record very early uses of the interwiki prefix. This is a particular concern for interwiki prefixes with a long history or special significance.
    • Otherwise, the request should be put "on hold" for a period of time, in case the site comes back up. It is possible that the wiki administrator is on vacation and unaware that the site is down. Or perhaps they are late paying their hosting fees.
    • Once it is established that the site is down for the long term, interwiki links that use this prefix should be replaced with external links pointing to the same location (or potentially to the Wayback Machine if the wiki's content is still available there). It may be helpful to mention in the edit summary that you are aware that the links are broken/dead, and that you are performing the replacement for posterity's sake.

Also pinging @Nemo bis, PiRSquared17, and Kaldari: What do you think? This, that and the other (talk) 03:58, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like a reasonable proposal for the process. Kaldari (talk) 08:25, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
@This, that and the other: For what it's worth, a lot of my contributions to Meta are this map and I agree with these principles. The extent to which they are enforced should generally be proportional to 1.) how long the code has been on the map, 2.) how widespread its use is, and 3.) how relevant it was in the first place (a personal bliki versus a large and well-maintained free culture site). —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:28, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Archived by SpBot

Migration from Bugzilla to Phabricator

Shouldn't the URL of the interwikis "bugzilla:" and "mediazilla:" be updated, now that all bugs are tracked on Phabricator? This would avoid an unnecessary redirect. Helder 22:05, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

in which way is it unnecessary? compare yourself bugzilla:1 vs. phab:1. --Jeremyb (talk) 22:40, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
[[bugzilla: N ]] is a redirect to [[phab:2000 + N]] (not to [[phab: N ]]), per phab:T857#775826.
So, what I'm proposing is that instead of redirecting (w:HTTP 301) from e.g. meta.wikimedia.org to bugzilla.wikimedia.org and to phabricator.wikimedia.org, the users go directly from meta.wikimedia.org to phabricator.wikimedia.org. Helder 15:24, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
You also need to add the T prefix. In any case I see no proposal for how to implement what you ask for. Also, why is it beneficial to eliminate that redirect? why do you care? --Jeremyb (talk) 15:43, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

PokéWiki



link: //pokewiki,de/$1 prefix:pokewiki and prefix:pokéwiki

PokéWiki is one of the largest German Pokémon fansites and the largest German Pokémon Wiki with more than 19000 content pages. That´s why I think it should get an own interwiki prefix as well as its partner website Bulbapedia, which already has the prefix bulba:. Links to this website are used at dewiki ca. one hundred times. --MGChecker (talk) 21:05, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

After a bit research with Alexa I can say it is the most pouplar German Pokémon fansite at all. --MGChecker (talk) 11:51, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

They are on the dewiki list of other wikis, not too bad. Project:About is empty, not too good.:tongue: But not pw:, that should be reserved for language codes. Apparently https://pokewiki.de doesn't work, http://pokewiki.de/$1 would be okay for now. –Be..anyone (talk) 07:46, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn´ t think about https:// while typing. By the way, our About site is Project:Über PokéWiki, "Über" means "About". By the way, Project:About is an Redirect now. :P --MGChecker (talk) 19:42, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Touhou wiki



link: http://$1.touhouwiki.net/wiki/$2 prefix:touhouwiki:

  • provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects: hundreds of links from Top 40 Wikipedias
  • be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: see how they are currently used among different wikipedia
  • be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license):The site wrote, "Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. unless otherwise noted."
  • be a wiki:Yes
  • have reasonable amounts of content: it is in more than a dozen languages and four of those languages have >1000 articles, with English having >10000
  • not contain malware:no sign for malware included in it

C933103 (talk) 03:03, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

  • @C933103: $2 doesn't work as far as I know - however if we use http://en.touhouwiki.net/wiki/$1 then links like de:foo will still work. Is this OK? (please ping when you reply) PiRSquared17 (talk) 07:05, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose "hundreds of links from Top 40 Wikipedias"—less than 200 by my counting, which converts to less than 5 links per wiki. I don't think this number demonstrate "clear use". whym (talk) 09:16, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Moegirlpedia



link: http://zh.moegirl.org/$1 prefix:moegirl:

  • provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects: 50 limls from Chinese wikipedia which include project pages, article pages, talk pages, planning pages and such.
  • be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: see how they are currently used among wikipedias
  • be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license):The site is labelled with cc-by-nc-sa 3.0
  • be a wiki:Yes
  • have reasonable amounts of content: 13000+ article in Chinese section of the site. Although the site also have English and Japanese department but there isn't much content in those department and thus I reqiest only link to zh.
  • not contain malware:no sign for malware included in it

C933103 (talk) 03:03, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

    • CC-BY-NC-SA is not a Commons-acceptable licence. I note that the English and Japanese editions use CC-BY-SA without NC. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:08, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
      • I don't really know why that is listed as a criterion. Linking to BY-NC-SA content from our wikis seems acceptable to me. This, that and the other (talk) 11:09, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done No consensus to add. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 14:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

NicoNicoPedia

Status:    Not done


link: http://dic.nicovideo.jp/$1/$2 prefix:nicopedia:

  • provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects: ≈600 usage in ja wikipedia and >200 usage in zh wikipedia
  • be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: see how they are currently used among different wikipedia
  • be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license):no. content are copyrighted.
  • be a wiki:Yes
  • have reasonable amounts of content: >370000 articles
  • not contain malware:no sign for malware included in it

C933103 (talk) 03:03, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

@C933103: $2 doesn't work as far as I know - however we could use http://dic.nicovideo.jp/$1 and force editors to put the slash in the link - is this OK? PiRSquared17 (talk) 07:07, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
How about using http://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/$1 which allow only links to word-themed content and let those who want to link descriptions about video/livestream/community/product/userpage/picture fallback to simple URL?C933103 (talk) 12:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Please better explain the site and its purpose  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:46, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: The site record japanese daily and/or network language, info about anime/manga/game/artist/etc., as well as terms, people and background of video found on the niconico main site, and so on.C933103 (talk) 12:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose I don't think this is very useful. Practically the all existing links from ja.wikipedia.org reside on deletion requests and user pages. The only link in content space is on the article about the site itself. [5] Similarly, when limited in content space, zh.wikipedia.org has only a handful. [6] whym (talk) 09:16, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done No consensus to add. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 14:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

wikiwiki

Status:    Not done


link: http://wikiwiki.jp/$1/?$2 prefix:wikiwiki:

  • provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects: hundred of links from Japanese Wikipedia
  • be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: see how they are currently used among different wikipedia
  • be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license): Its edit history are anonymous thus its content would automatically fall into public domain.
  • be a wiki:Yes, wikifarm
  • have reasonable amounts of content: google search for site:wikiwiki.jp found there're around 790,000 pages
  • not contain malware:no sign for malware included in it

C933103 (talk) 03:03, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

@C933103: please provide a better reason for why this should be added beyond "see how it is use at ..." There needs to be a reasoned proposal to how this will benefit the wikis, and how abuse will be avoided.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
It is a Japanese wikifarm just like wikia in the world and I think it can use the same rationale as why wikia is added (despite I haven't check why wikia is added).C933103 (talk) 12:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Oppose Similar to atwiki, this is a wiki farm that hosts multiple wikis managed by different administrators—there is no single level of trustworthiness and spam-freeness on wikiwiki.jp. It doesn't look very useful— most of the existing links (86, not "hundread", as of now) to wikiwiki.jp from ja.wikipedia.org reside on deletion requests and user pages, not content pages. There are 4 links only in content space. [7] Besides, as far as I know, there are few to no free-content wikis on wikiwiki.jp. On the contrary to the statement "Its edit history are anonymous thus its content would automatically fall into public domain", Japanese laws recognize anonymous authors' copyright. As soon as an anonymous author registers to the authority, and unless counter evidence is provided, her copyright becomes effective. [8] whym (talk) 09:16, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not done No consensus to add. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:49, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Steinsplitter (talk) 14:49, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Internet Archive Wayback Machine

Status:    Not done


link: http://web.archive.org/web/*/$1 prefix:Wayback:

  • provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects: massive usage across many Wikipedia
  • be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: see how they are currently used among different wikipedia
  • be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license): Most aren't.
  • be a wiki:Nope
  • have reasonable amounts of content: from what i remembere it achived more than thousands terabytes of content?
  • not contain malware:hard to rule out the possibility that sone sute it archive might cobtain malware?

C933103 (talk) 22:20, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I have nothing against the Internet Archive but I don't see why we need an interwiki prefix for this. On the other hand I don't see why not. @Nemo bis: what do you think? PiRSquared17 (talk) 06:55, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
I'd say absolutely not, because 1) allowed wayback URLs are too complex and not all of them are linkable with an interwiki link; 2) wayback archives anything, therefore it clearly doesn't satisfy the "no spam" requirement which is the most important. --Nemo 07:05, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
better use case required as it can be a means to link to dubious sites, and such links could be subverted by interwiki.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:42, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
with the proposed link scheme, if a user want to link to archive of e.g. http://site.com, he would still have to type [[:wayback:http://site.com]] and I think the spam filter can function normally here. However I see the point of why this kind of link would not be desired to be shown as interwiki and thus I am not going to reopen this proposal.C933103 (talk) 12:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
@C933103: Not a good idea, because with this method, I have to type Captcha under CloudFlare (which IMHO needs VPN or Wujie/GoAgent enabled as per GreatFire.org), and when I typed Captcha, it turns back to the main page of archive.org. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:22, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Pastebin.com

Status:    Not done


link: http://pastebin.com/$1 prefix:pastebin:

  • provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects: post source material, authorization letter, etc.
  • be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: see how they are currently used among different wikipedia
  • be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license):ccbysa3.0
  • be a wiki:no
  • have reasonable amounts of content: breaked 65 million paste in June 2015, announced on official facebook account
  • not contain malware:no sign for malware included in it

C933103 (talk) 22:20, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I do not think that we should. A pastebin does not sound like a tool that we wish to provide clean access to without a demonstrated need. It is too easy to abuse once it is interwiki'd and I cannot see a demonstrated use case put forward. Please reopen only if there is a demonstrated use case, and that would probably need invitations to the wikis to contribute. I just see danger, and once we add one of these scenarios, we would need to open up to many more such sites.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:39, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Rodovid.org

Status:    Done


link: http://en.rodovid.org/wk/$1 prefix:rodovid:

  • provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects: hundred of links from many Wikipedias and provides some structured data. See also Rodovid and Wikimedia genealogy project.
  • be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: They don't appear to be spammy as used in Wikipedias--please correct me if I'm mistaken.
  • be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license): CC-BY 2.5
  • be a wiki: MediaWiki
  • have reasonable amounts of content: Over 800,000 pages
  • not contain malware: None of which I'm aware.

Not also d:Property:P1185. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:12, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good - this should be added unless there are any objections PiRSquared17 (talk) 06:53, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
@Koavf: just the person: namespace? Are the other namespaces likely to be in effect? Nothing in the main namespace? If they possibly will be, I would think that we would either link to the base url, and let them do rodovid:Person:xxxx, etc. or we would be considering a variation per namespace if they are that many links required. I would prefer to not have a namespace extension by preference.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: I guess that does make sense. Adding the Person namespace can be done by hand or by template. A vast majority of the site is person records but there are also lineages and what have you. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:00, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Amending proposed link to be http://en.rodovid.org/wk/$1  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:30, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

fedoraproject.org

Status:    Done


Link: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/$1 prefix:fedora:

  1. provide clear and relevant use to the Wikimedia projects, including the purpose of the site: it's definitely used plenty, see w:Special:LinkSearch/*.fedoraproject.org;
  2. be trusted not to encourage spam links being added to the Wikimedia projects: again, see w:Special:LinkSearch/*.fedoraproject.org; maintained by the Fedora Project, which is quite trusted;
  3. be free content (under a Commons-acceptable license): CC BY-SA 3.0, see [9];
  4. be a wiki: yep;
  5. have reasonable amounts of content: lots of content already; see stats, among others;
  6. not contain malware: duh.

Thanks, --L235 (talk) enwiki 21:41, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

@L235: Done (diff). PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:43, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipapers

Status:    Done


WikiPapers is an academic wiki based on MediaWiki. In its words, it's goal is to produce a "compilation of resources (conference papers, journal articles, theses, books, datasets and tools) focused on the research of wikis. It aims to create the most comprehensive literature compilation for this research area." [10]

This makes it particularly relevant to Wikimedia sites, and it is indeed linked to from Meta and several Wikipedias. Its limited scope (academic publications about wikis) makes it an unlikely target for spam or malware. The content is under CC-BY-SA 3.0.

Because WikiPapers uses Semantic MediaWiki, this makes it possible to organize metadata about those publications in a structured format. In the future, WikiPapers might be made obsolete by something like LibraryBase, but in the meantime WikiPapers is a great complement to templated citations. Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 21:08, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Any thoughts? Maybe PiRSquared17, Hoo man or Glaisher, since you weighed in on the last few requests? Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 20:42, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
@Guillaume (WMF): Looks good to me. I suggest adding it. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:37, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Looks good to me too. I have added it. diff. Sorry for the delay in response. --Glaisher (talk) 03:38, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you both! :) Guillaume (WMF) (talk) 17:31, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Sector001

Non-functional, not used anywhere (according to SQL queries on ten large wikis, since the tool seems to be down), and redirects to spam. — Earwig talk 00:52, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Concur. Prodego talk 00:58, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, let's get that out. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 11:06, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
Removed Removed --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:35, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:44, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

DOI

dx.doi.org now has https support. The interwiki should be made protocol-relative. Per [11], better not make it https-only for now, as the secure version is slightly slower. I'm told they'll tell us if/when they are read to receive all traffic to https. --Nemo 08:17, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done -Barras talk 12:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Great! Reedy sync'ed it yesterday at 22 UTC and I already got all the templates [12] updated (except ar, ru), as well as some modules.[13] [14] --Nemo 07:35, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:44, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Wipipedia

The following discussion is closed: See #londonfetishscene.com/Wipipedia.

Should be changed from "http://www.londonfetishscene.com/wipi/index.php/$1" to "http://wipipedia.org/index.php/$1" , I think. AnonMoos (talk) 14:53, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

See the section above requesting its removal #londonfetishscene.com/Wipipedia. --Glaisher (talk) 04:48, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:45, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Arborwiki

Change Arborwiki entries are now at https://localwiki.org/ann-arbor/$1 rather than http://arborwiki.org/city/$1. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:47, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Status:    updated

 — billinghurst sDrewth 04:54, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:45, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

creativecommonswiki

creativecommonswiki: is now forcing HTTPS. change our map to use https for protocol.

$ echo; curl -vs http://wiki.creativecommons.org/ 2>&1 >/dev/null | \
> egrep -e '^< HTTP/1' -e '^< Location: '

< HTTP/1.1 302 https://wiki.creativecommons.org/
< Location: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/

Mindspillage, is your varnish config in git? --Jeremyb (talk) 01:17, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Status:    updated to be https for creativecommonswiki
 — billinghurst sDrewth 01:40, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
thanks --Jeremyb (talk) 01:58, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Jeremyb: FWIW, I don't work there anymore; any config publicly available would be found by poking around on Github: [15] (and generally you can ask questions in #creativecommons-dev also). Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 02:52, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

ISO639-3

The following discussion is closed: Updated.

URL format has changed from

http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=$1

to

http://www-01.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=$1

Please update it. --Fryed-peach (talk) 17:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Done, but it'll take some days before the change goes live on the Projects, since Krenair just updated it a couple of days ago. —MarcoAurelio 20:59, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Multiple URLs with support for protocol-relative URLs

Please consider using protocol-relative URLs for the following:

  • http://www.dmoz.org/$1 -> //www.dmoz.org/$1
  • http://releases.wikimedia.org/$1 -> //releases.wikimedia.org/$1
  • http://download.wikimedia.org/$1/latest/ -> //dumps.wikimedia.org/$1/latest/
  • http://foldoc.org/$1 -> //foldoc.org/$1
  • http://fox.wikis.com/wc.dll?Wiki~$1 -> //fox.wikis.com/wc.dll?Wiki~$1
  • http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?apropos=1&query=$1 -> //www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?apropos=1&query=$1
  • http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/$1 -> //www.gutenberg.org/etext/$1
  • http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/$1 -> //www.gutenberg.org/wiki/$1
  • http://www.worldcat.org/issn/$1 -> //www.worldcat.org/issn/$1
  • http://www.mineralienatlas.de/lexikon/index.php/$1 -> //www.mineralienatlas.de/lexikon/index.php/$1
  • http://moinmo.in/$1 -> //moinmo.in/$1
  • http://musicbrainz.org/doc/$1 -> //musicbrainz.org/doc/$1
  • http://research.archives.gov/description/$1 -> //research.archives.gov/description/$1
  • http://www.organicdesign.co.nz/$1 -> //www.organicdesign.co.nz/$1
  • http://www.personaltelco.net/$1 -> //www.personaltelco.net/$1
  • http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=$1 -> //scholar.google.com/scholar?q=$1
  • http://stats.wikimedia.org/$1 -> //stats.wikimedia.org/$1
  • http://www.theopedia.com/$1 -> //www.theopedia.com/$1
  • http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=$1 -> //www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=$1
  • http://wg.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$1 -> //wg-en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$1
  • http://www.wikimedia.ch/$1 -> //www.wikimedia.ch/$1
  • http://www.wikimedia.or.id/wiki/$1 -> //www.wikimedia.or.id/wiki/$1
  • http://wikimedia.org.ph/wmph/index.php?title=$1 -> //wikimedia.org.ph/wmph/index.php?title=$1
  • http://viaf.org/viaf/$1 -> //viaf.org/viaf/$1

--Elegie (talk) 19:33, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - diff for WMF-hosted sites. --Glaisher (talk) 08:46, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
diff HTTPS for wg-en.wikipedia.org. --Glaisher (talk) 08:49, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

tswiki

This can now be pointed to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Toolserver:$1 , as the wiki was imported there. --Nemo 14:38, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done diff PiRSquared17 (talk) 13:45, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

KomicaWiki

Change from http://brea.komica.org/wiki/?$1 to http://wiki.komica.org/wiki3/?$1

as the brea link seem no longer accessible.

C933103 (talk) 22:33, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Thanks for the report.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:13, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

HTTPS for WMES

Please change [[wmes:~]] from http://www.wikimedia.es/wiki/$1 to https://www.wikimedia.es/wiki/$1. Protocol-relative URL would be useless, WMES is now forcing HTTPS for navigation.

Thanks in advance. --abián 14:18, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Matiia (talk) 14:33, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Kontuwiki

Please change [[kontuwiki:]] from http://kontu.merri.net/wiki/$1 to http://kontu.wiki/$1. --Geohakkeri (talk) 21:30, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Done. Matiia (talk) 21:36, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Broken links for python.org, swin.edu.au, and tibia.erig.net

Status:    Done

The following changes would be useful:

  • http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/moinmoin/$1 (which appears to redirect to https://wiki.python.org/moin ) should be changed to //wiki.python.org/moin/$1
  • http://mercury.it.swin.edu.au/swinbrain/index.php/$1 (which leads to a "Not Found" error page) should be changed to //swinbrain.ict.swin.edu.au/wiki/$1
  • http://tibia.erig.net/$1 should be changed to http://tibia.wikia.org/wiki/$1

--Elegie (talk) 19:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Note that some of the previous URLs are protocol-relative: this should help facilitate both HTTP and HTTPS access. --Elegie (talk) 19:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:51, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

http://tibia.wikia.org/wiki/$1 should be http://tibia.wikia.com/wiki/$1. http://tibia.wikia.org/wiki/Main_Page fails. http://tibia.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page works. It was originally added in 2005 by an IP.[16] http://tools.wmflabs.org/pirsquared/iw.php?wikis=&iw=tibiawiki only finds 13 uses: 5 in English talk pages and a sandbox, 8 in the same Portuguese article pt:Demon (Tibia). Now that it's a Wikia wiki with a working wikia:Tibia:Main Page, maybe it should just be removed instead of fixed. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:39, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Bot archival

I think that we should be adding {{status}} to each component and getting a bot to archive the respective sections a few days after they are set to done/not done.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:55, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

That's for Steinsplitter to program if he's interested. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio 17:03, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio 14:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Mobile version of WMF wikis

Could we have some interwiki for the mobile version of the current wiki (the one where the interwiki is inserted)? E.g. [[something:here]] would point to https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/here, and on Portuguese Wikipedia it would point to https://pt.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/here. Helder 22:47, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

What would the purpose be? As far as I know, we also don't have interwiki links for e.g. the monobook or modern skin, and use "?useskin=monobook" resp. "?useskin=modern" when linking instead (the same way you can link to the mobile skin minerva using "?useskin=minerva"). Vogone (talk) 07:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Apparently the table can only do //some.thing.example/$1 for the current scheme (http: or https:) and other://some.thing.example/$1 for other schemes (ftp:, irc:, http:, https: at the moment), but not something else depending on the current URL. Maybe that could be handled as phabricator: request, I'm not aware of any "mobile URL of current URL" magic word. On Wikia somebody created a "skinswitch" button (=tab on monobook, a script) to flip from monobook to oasis or mobile for quick tests, doing what Vogone said. –Be..anyone (talk) 12:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Well, I wanted to link to <someCodeForMobile>:Special:PermaLink/40773227#Solução em Rn on the edit summary for this change. Helder 18:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I think we should be moving away from these relative interwiki links. They already caused issues even with global user page. Glaisher (talk) 04:50, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done no evidence that it will function, and no consensus to underake and seems more appropriate as a phabricator ticket where the techheads can properly discuss.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:11, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:11, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

WMF Vote Wiki



link: //vote.wikimedia.org/wiki/$1 prefix:votewiki:

  • Proposed link: //vote.wikimedia.org/wiki/$1
  • Proposed prefix: votewiki:

I think it would be helpful to add the WMF's Vote Wiki, since it is one of the few WMF wikis not yet on the list. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 21:29, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

What makes you think so? Is there any need to link it? As far as I remember, Special:SecurePoll already fulfills the purpose of directing to votewiki in case of ongoing elections. Vogone (talk) 07:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
In the top 40 (see above) two 2013 links from w:id:, two 2014 links from w:en:, and one user page link to the votewiki main page explaining that there should be no need to edit votewiki, and that Special:Securepoll on local wikis is supposed to handle votes on votewiki. 26 users including you and 12 blocked users contributed to 38 pages. –Be..anyone (talk) 12:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
It is possible that the elections committees will be using it more to archive things - but it is a fair point that as of this moment, the usage is low. --Varnent (talk)(COI) 14:14, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Just used "votewiki" on Wikimedia Forum and was shocked that it didn't work. Shocked more that we don't have any prefix for the wiki. Went here in order to request one but as there's already a request I endorse it. To be forced to link to a wikimedia wiki in external link style is mildly speaking weird. Even if it won't be highly used prefix it should exist IMHO. --Base (talk) 16:48, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Agreed -- it should be added if only for consistency PiRSquared17 (talk) 07:09, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
@Base: For what purpose did you need to link it? --Vogone (talk) 18:23, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
@Vogone: for pointing to a file in there which very badly violates WMF licensing policy. --Base (talk) 06:04, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
I also support a votewiki prefix. Usage will be low but it's natural to assume there will be a prefix and spend time looking for it. I wanted it for two links at w:Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015#Arbcom elections (permanent link). I wrote: Pages like https://vote.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:SecurePoll/vote/560 will sometimes display https://vote.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Securepoll-not-logged-in which only says "You must log in to vote in this election". PrimeHunter (talk) 17:38, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
I will add my voice to Support Support this. Any chance it could be added? This, that and the other (talk) 01:38, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg enough informed request to put it through  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:05, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by:  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:05, 9 October 2016 (UTC)