User talk:NicoV

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
If you want to drop me a note, you can also use my User page on French Wikipedia. I will probably answer faster.

Letter petitioning WMF to reverse recent decitions[edit]

The Wikimedia Foundation recently created a new feature, "superprotect" status. The purpose is to prevent pages from being edited by elected administrators -- but permitting WMF staff to edit them. It has been put to use in only one case: to protect the deployment of the Media Viewer software on German Wikipedia, in defiance of a clear decision of that community to disable the feature by default, unless users decide to enable it.

If you oppose these actions, please add your name to this letter. If you know non-Wikimedians who support our vision for the free sharing of knowledge, and would like to add their names to the list, please ask them to sign an identical version of the letter on

I'm notifying you because you participated in one of several relevant discussions. -Pete F (talk) 22:16, 20 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Superprotect letter update[edit]

Hi NicoV,

Along with more hundreds of others, you recently signed Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer, which I wrote.

Today, we have 562 signatures here on Meta, and another 61 on, for a total of 623 signatures. Volunteers have fully translated it into 16 languages, and begun other translations. This far exceeds my most optimistic hopes about how many might sign the letter -- I would have been pleased to gain 200 siguatures -- but new signatures continue to come.

I believe this is a significant moment for Wikimedia and Wikipedia. Very rarely have I seen large numbers of people from multiple language and project communities speak with a unified voice. As I understand it, we are unified in a desire for the Wikimedia Foundation to respect -- in actions, in addition to words -- the will of the community who has built the Wikimedia projects for the benefit of all humanity. I strongly believe it is possible to innovate and improve our software tools, together with the Wikimedia Foundation. But substantial changes are necessary in order for us to work together smoothly and productively. I believe this letter identifies important actions that will strongly support those changes.

Have you been discussing these issues in your local community? If so, I think we would all appreciate an update (on the letter's talk page) about how those discussions have gone, and what people are saying. If not, please be bold and start a discussoin on your Village Pump, or in any other venue your project uses -- and then leave a summary of what kind of response you get on the letter's talk page.

Finally, what do you think is the right time, and the right way, to deliver this letter? We could set a date, or establish a threshold of signatures. I have some ideas, but am open to suggestions.

Thank you for your engagement on this issue, and please stay in touch. -Pete F (talk) 18:15, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done :). Matiia (talk) 21:50, 25 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Inactive bot[edit]

Hello. As per policy, bots which are inactive for a period of 14 months shall have their flag removed. Please reply here if you wish to keep the bot flag. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 08:14, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notice of bot inactivity[edit]

Hello NicoV,

I hope that this message finds you well.

This is to inform you that your bot, WikiCleanerBot, is inactive according to Meta-Wiki's local bot policy, because it has not made any edit or logged action for 14 consecutive months.

If you would like to keep the bot flag for that account, please tell us so at Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat § Bot inactivity review (April 2023) before April 20, 2023 and make at least one edit or log action with that bot account afterwards so it does not appear in the list of inactive bots. If a bot flag is no longer required for that account, please let us know too.

In any case, if there is no reply from you by April 20, 2023 the bot flag will be removed from WikiCleanerBot without further notice.

MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:58, 12 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removing Title linked in text[edit]

I undid unlinking from some subpages of List of articles every Wikipedia should have/Expanded. Can your bot detect pages, that transcluded in other pages? Or how to mark pages to deny your bot removing links to itself? Tucvbif (talk) 08:13, 25 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Tucvbif. Sorry for the inconvenience. I can see a few solutions :
  • Include the line where the link is in includeonly or onlyinclude (I forgot which one is doing what we would want) : it seems reasonable, because then the text Transcluded from ... will only appear in the page where it's included, not in the page itself. WPCleaner will ignore links in such tags.
  • Create a template to generate the entire line Transcluded from ... which will take the page name as an argument : display won't change, and WPCleaner won't detect any problem
  • Add a template in the page telling my bot not to do any modification and we can add it to the configuration in User:NicoV/WikiCleanerConfiguration#General configuration in parameter general_nobot_templates : it will prevent all modifications in the pages...
  • I disable automatic fixing of this error on meta : it means my bot won't fix the pages where it's normal to
I prefer the first or second solution, tell me what you think. --NicoV (talk) 14:56, 27 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
>WPCleaner will ignore links in such tags.
Great! Tucvbif (talk) 16:16, 27 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bot on training modules[edit]

Could you please disable your bot on subpages of Training modules? They require special wikitext formatting that WikiCleanerBot breaks. * Pppery * it has begun 18:12, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your bot is also edit warring with CR-FluxxBot on Grants:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/Activating Botswana 23/24, WikiConnect:Building Bridges and Fostering Free Accessible Knowledge For All and other subpages of Grants:Programs. You should probably disable it there too. * Pppery * it has begun 18:15, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi * Pppery *, I've added some templates to the configuration to avoid editing some pages, it should stop the edit warring with CR-FluxxBot. I'm looking at what I can do for the subpages of Training modules. --NicoV (talk) 19:06, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi again * Pppery *, can you be more specific on what subpages of Training modules and what edits I should avoid, because the only edit there I see on last months is on Training modules/Contact list and it doesn't seem to be a problem. --NicoV (talk) 19:11, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problematic edits date to April 2023. See Training modules/dashboard/slides/12311-planning-for-safe-spaces for an example, and in particular the edit notice you see when editing that page. * Pppery * it has begun 19:12, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also cc Sage (Wiki Ed) in case they wish to comment here. * Pppery * it has begun 19:13, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi * Pppery *, I've added the training module templates to the list of templates preventing edit from my bot. Do you think it covers all the problematic subpages or some may be missed? --NicoV (talk) 19:17, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, some have no templates, like Training modules/dashboard/slides/20702-admin-role-overview * Pppery * it has begun 19:18, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, then I see no other option currently to entirely disable fixing #90 (internal links written as external links). --NicoV (talk) 19:24, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]