Jump to content

User talk:Bináris

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Off-topic page for the WCI[edit]

Dear Bináris, off-topic pages that are submissions to the WikiConference India 2011 are placed in the corresponding category and will be deleted after the WCI (see this talk page). Kind regards, Mathonius 09:30, 23 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, then there should be restored some similar pages that have recently been deleted. Or not? See the deletion log. Bináris tell me 09:32, 23 August 2011 (UTC)Reply
I've moved your response here to keep it organized. ;) You're right about those deleted off-topic pages: I made some mistakes when I deleted those... I've now restored and deleted those pages again but for the right reasons. Those pages were off-topic as well as empty preloads. Thanks, Mathonius 09:58, 23 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your help with board election translations[edit]

For your help with board election translations.

Hi! As member of this year's board election committe I would like to give you this barnstar for your help with the translations of the board election pages into Hungarian. It was very much appreciated! Jon Harald Søby 13:27, 1 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you :-))) Bináris tell me 13:34, 1 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Move to mediawiki[edit]

Yes, though the discussion is splattered about and is impacted by an abandoned move. The Pywikipediabot is maintained on mw and the code is on the mw svn repository. Several of the basic pages were moved in 2010 by a mw admin but he stopped and did not complete the job which made a worse mess than before, particularly as he did not tag the pages as moved. At least one page was moved and tagged in 2010 by a developer, Pywikipediabot/add_text.py, which made for inconsistent locations for the scripts. Based on my review of the talk page history of Talk:Pywikipediabot and subsidiary pages, comments on mw, and off-wiki (IRC) discussion, it is agreed that the bot is a MediaWiki tool, not a Wikimedia tool (the bot is generally available for use on any mediawiki wiki) and was in part developed at Botwiki (which until recently had gone dormant), a non-WMF project. Tools that are for use on any instance of the MediaWiki software belong at MW not meta. In fact, when I first noticed this issue, I asked on #mediawiki, "Hey, shouldn't PWB documentation be at meta if it's kept in the svn?" and the answer was, "It is!", the responding developer was completely unaware that the pages on meta were still up and had been substantially edited since their import to mw. I requested transwiki importer rights on mw expressly for this purpose. I have reimported to mw all of the pages that were previously imported and am in the process of resolving conflicts on those pages caused by editing at both sites and importing the balance of the pages.--Doug.(talk contribs) 13:21, 5 December 2011 (UTC)Reply


I've added some methods from here, by now. Also a simple Config class for configuration. As soon as some real API is developed, I'll start filling those methods. Regarding integration with pywikipedia, right now it's not part of it; if it were to be added (is this necessary? I don't mind), I'd rather do it when the API is ready and the code does actually something. It does not have dependences within pywikipedia, but it fits inside the project's aim (I suppose). By the way, lots of thanks for your collaboration! --Joancreus (talk) 16:12, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

translating Wikidata[edit]

Heya Bináris :)

You probably know this already but I wanted to make sure... You signed up on the Wikidata volunteers page saying you're interested in translations. Wikidata is now in a state where it's probably ok to translate. Translations are happening on http://translatewiki.net. Let me know if you have any issues/questions. Thanks for helping with that!

Cheers LydiaPintscher (talk) 15:39, 24 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Oh yes, it was already in my mind, but I will probably have problems with time in the next days. :-( Bináris tell me 15:48, 24 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

No problem. It's not super urgent. I'm just reaching out to everyone who said they want to help with translations :) --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 15:55, 24 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

All right, in the first week of August I can work on it. Bináris tell me 16:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Superprotect status[edit]

Dear Bináris, since you are an administrator on a wiki from which no user participated in this discussion, I'd like to make sure you are aware of some recent events which may alter what the Wikimedia Foundation lets you do on your wiki: Superprotect.

Peteforsyth 09:07, 12 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Cross-wiki watchlist[edit]

Hi! You voted for the cross-wiki watchlist as an important suggestions in the community wishlist survey last year. I'm pinging editors who showed interest in that task to tell them we have some suggestions for how things could look, if you'd like to glance at them and give us some feedback. You can find them on the project page on Meta. If you'd like to share any comments, you're very welcome to do so on the talk page. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 01:06, 21 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

2016 Community Wishlist Survey[edit]


You’re getting this message because you participated in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey and we want to make sure you don't miss it this year – or at least can make the conscious choice to ignore if it you want to. The 2015 survey decided what the Community Tech team should work on during 2016. It was also the focus of Wikimedia hackathons and work by other developers. You can see the status of wishes from the 2015 wishlist at 2015 Community Wishlist Survey/Results.

The 2016 Community Wishlist Survey is now open for wishes. You can create proposals until November 20. You will be able to vote on which wishes you think are best or most important between November 28 and December 12. /Johan (WMF) (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Invitation to discussion about Per-user page blocking[edit]

Hi there,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input about building a Per user page (or category) blocking feature.

We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you voted or commented in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey about Enhanced per-user / per-article protection / blocking vote.

You can leave comments on this discussion page or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 17:03, 4 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

Help us design granular blocks![edit]

Hello :-) The Anti-Harassment Tools team at the Wikimedia Foundation will start building these granular blocking tools in a few weeks and we've asked WMF designer Alex Hollender to help us make some wireframes so the tools are intuitive to MediaWiki users.

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T190350

We have a first draft of how we think this tool should work. You can read the full proposed implementation here but here are the significant parts:

  • Granular blocks (page, category, namespace, and file uploading) will be built on top of Special:Block. These blocks will function as if they were regular blocks and allow for the same options, but only take effect on specific pages.
  • We will add a new checkbox for "Block this user from the whole site" which will be checked by default. When it is unchecked the admin will be able to specify which pages, categories, and/or namespaces the user should be blocked from editing.
  • Granular blocks can be combined and/or overlap. (For example, a user could be simultaneously blocked from editing the articles Rain, Thunder, Lightning, and all pages inside the Category:Weather.)
  • Only one block is set at a time, to adjust what the user is blocked from the administrator would have to modify the existing block.
  • Block logs should display information about the granular block
  • When a blocked user attempts to edit an applicable page, they should see a block warning message which include information on their block (reason, expiration, what they are blocked from, etc.)
  • If a category is provided, the blocked user cannot edit either the category page itself and all pages within the category.
  • If the File: namespace is blocked, the user should not be allowed to upload files.

We like this direction because it builds on top of the existing block system, both a technical and usability wise. Before we get too far along with designs and development we'd like to hear from you about our prosposal:

  1. What do you think of the proposed implementation?
  2. We believe this should be an expansion of Special:Block, but it has been suggested that this be a new special page. What are your thoughts?
  3. Should uploading files be combined with a File namespace block, or as a separate option? (For example, if combined, when a user is blocked from the File namespace, they would neither be able to edit any existing pages in the File namespace nor upload new files.)
  4. Should there be a maximum number of things to be blocked from? Or should we leave it up to admin discretion?

We appreciate your feedback on this project's talk page or by email. For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Trust and Safety Specialist, Community health initiative (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

This is a reminder to acknowledge and sign the new Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information. As you know, your volunteer role in Wikimedia projects gives you access to secure and sensitive information.

The new version includes one major change.

  • There is a change regarding the way personal data may be released. Accordingly, functionaries must notify the Wikimedia Foundation at check-disclosure(_AT_)wikimedia.org before releasing data, in order to obtain a written approval for doing so. The Foundation will respond within 10 days. However, for emergencies, such as cases involving threats of violence, functionaries may release the personal data without such explicit permission, but they should notify the Foundation immediately following the disclosure. If they choose not to disclose the data, the request for disclosure should be forwarded to the Foundation's emergency email address (emergency(_AT_)wikimedia.org).

There are also some wording changes that were made to more closely align the language with evolving industry norms, best practices and laws. The most notable of these has been the change of the term "nonpublic information" to "nonpublic personal data". None of these changes are intended to make fundamental changes to the scope or practice of the policy but we know they could appear as such, hence wanted to flag them.

The aforementioned changes require users that have already signed the previous version of the policy to sign the new version as well.

We therefore ask that you to sign the updated version. Signing the agreement is tracked on Phabricator's Legalpad. An online guide is available to help you with signing the agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign. If you wish you can sign it directly at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/L37. The exact policy is located here: Access to nonpublic personal data policy. The text of the confidentiality agreement is located here: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information

If you have already received this message and signed the updated agreement, you need not sign it again. Once is sufficient. In this case, we ask that you respond to Samuel (WMF) letting him know when (date) and how (method/process of signing) you have signed it so that we can update our own records.

Note: please bear in mind that if you still haven’t signed the updated version of the Confidentiality Agreement by February 13, 2019 your rights will be removed.

Thank you for your understanding,

Samuel Guebo (User:Samuel (WMF)), Wikimedia Foundation

Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery - 15:15, 11 January 2019 (UTC)