User talk:Martin Urbanec

Welcome to Meta!

Hello, Martin Urbanec. Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum if you need help with something (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

-- Meta-Wiki Welcome (talk) 07:23, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Opinions on Reading List

Hello Martin,

I am a GSoC applicant, and I hope to work on the Reading List[0]. As the phabricator task does not give much description on the project, I am right now trying to collect more information how Reading List should look like. I am guided by Joaquin and we have thought of a few suggestions like, implemrnting as a cross-wiki list, sorting using dates. Could you describe how you would wish the project to be? Would you be interested in desiging Reading List as an Extension or as an external tool? Your suggestions could help us improve our project ideas.
[0]:https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T120756 --Harithaharikumar

Hello,

I think that this software should be as an extension. Pages could be added to this list by single button on the left menu. I think that there should be easy way to convert the reading list to book. Please do not create cross-wiki list simply because other languages. When I will have in reading list on cswiki ten articles in Czech, five in English and two in Slovak I will be...confused. Very confused. So there should be one reading list on each wiki.

Did I help you? --Urbanecm (talk) 09:39, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Hi,

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)

Presenting Community Engagement Insights survey report: Tuesday, October 10, 1600 UTC

Hi Martin Urbanec,
I am reaching out to you because you signed up to receive updates about the Global Wikimedia survey.

We will be hosting a public event online to present the data, a few examples on how teams will be using it for annual planning, and what are next steps for this project. The event will take place on Tuesday, October 10, at 9:00 am PST (1600 UTC), and the presentation will be in English. You can watch the livestream here, and ask question via IRC on #wikimedia-office.

If you are unable attend, you can also find the report on meta, and watch the recording of the event at a later time.

We hope to have you join us online! -- María Cruz 23:28, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

SRP question

Hi Martin. Sorry I've been away. I am not a manager of those accesses and Trijnstel should be able to add you. I see she did already. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:47, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, yes, she did. Thanks anyway! --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:17, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

w:mr logo

Hello Martin,

Thanks one more time for your help with w:mr commemorative logo. I am an admin on w:mr but I wasn't aware of the new procedure to change logos.

I made the change to Commons.css similar to the example you provided and added this -

/* ५०,००० लेखांबद्दलचा लोगो */
#p-logo a {
	background-image: url(//mr.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mrwp_50000.png);
}
@media (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 1.5), (min-resolution: 1.5dppx), (min-resolution: 144dpi) {
	#p-logo a {
		background-image: url(//mr.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mrwp_50000.png);
        }
}
@media (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 2), (min-resolution: 2dppx), (min-resolution: 192dpi) {
	#p-logo a {
		background-image: url(//mr.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mrwp_50000.png);
        }
}

However, I am not able to see the change now the logo has disappeared. Did I make a mistake here? Is there more to be done?

अभय नातू (talk) 19:13, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello there! You must use url on upload.wikimedia.org. In your case, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7f/Mrwp_50000.png . You also should use corret sizes, that means first URL should have size of 135x155, second 202x232 and third 270x310 to match requirements of all possible displays. Otherwise, the logo will be cropped. Best, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:40, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

I think I figured it out :)

As I sometimes say, ignore a problem and people will find a way to fix it....especially if they care about it

In any case, thank you for sending me on the right path.

अभय नातू (talk) 20:22, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Admin, 'crat - w:mr

Logo of Sindhi Wikipedia

Hi, in the end of last month I had asked for the change of logo Sindhi Wikipedia at Phabricator (link. Then we were asked for a community consensus, which was also done here, we got five votes in favor and none in opposition. However, we are still waiting for the logo to get changed. Kindly guide us if anything else is needed on our side. Thank you.--مھتاب احمد (talk) 22:13, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

LFN Wikipedia

Hi! I've already translated the strings into Lingua Franca Nova. Is there anything else that needs to be done in order to speed up the process to create the LFN Wikipedia? --Katxis (talk) 14:07, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Check

Ahoj. Děkuji za žádost o check. Ale nemyslím si, že je Lenka64 nutně jediná podezřelá. Podezření padá minimálně na všechny hlasující, resp. všechny aktivnější uživatele na Wikislovníku. Zvaž prosím rozšíření požadovaných osob. Děkuji. --Martin Kotačka (talk) 20:08, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Ahoj, já se také přidávám k návrhu rozšířit okruh podezřelých, klidně i o mne (neboť podle pravidel sám o sobě hlasovat nemohu, ledaže bych se pokusil to obejít použitím loutky). Spíše bych upozornil na větší pravděpodobnost toho, že tuto loutku použil zkušený (a relativně často editující) uživatel, který dosud nehlasoval, ale je pravděpodobné, že by hlasovat chtěl (takto inkognito). Děkuji za případné zohlednění argumentů. --Kusurija (talk) 20:22, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Ahoj, tak jasně, teoreticky může loutkařit kdokoliv, ovšem check vůči všem obvykle bývá zamítnut ;). Nadto check probíhá tak, že revizor/steward zjistí, že uživatel A má IP 1.2.3.4 a podívá se reverzně na uživatele z IP adresy 1.2.3.4, k odhalení sockmastera by tedy mělo dojít nezávisle na okruhu checkovaných osob, pokud je tedy zjistitelný skrze toto rozhraní. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:25, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Po ek s Kusuriou: Klidně tam kdokoliv z vás přidejte další uživatele, uznáte-li za vhodné, ale prosím, pod mou žádost, ať je zřejmé, že jsem rozšíření neprovedl. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:25, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Pokud je to tedy, jak píšeš, a výsledek (pakliže bude check úspěšný) bude takový, že Ronald Drooler = uživatel XY a nikoliv, že Ronald Drooler je/není Lenka64, pak je to v pořádku a check splní svůj účel. Díky za vysvětlení. --Martin Kotačka (talk) 20:29, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Small translation request

Hello, I see you speak Czech. I was wondering if you can translate "Village in China", "Commune in Morocco", and "village in Indonesia". It is for updating Wikidata. Thanks in advance. --Artix Kreiger (Message Wall) 19:50, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, translations follows: "vesnice v Číně", "komuna v Maroku" and "vesnice v Indonésii". Best, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 19:55, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail

--Alaa :)..! 19:07, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

To jste mě teda překvapili!

Ahoj Urbanče, teda že ta žádost o opatření pro @Awewewe: dopadne takhle, to mě ani ve snu nenapadlo. Už na Wikipedii skoro rok nejsem, a stejně za tu dobu stihnete vytvořit další dvě opatření proti mě. A ještě proti úplně cizímu účtu . Vždycky jsem si říkal, co by se stalo, kdyby podobná situace jednu nastala, kdybych přispíval třeba rok, založil x článků, a pak se na to přišlo. Ale na to jsme nikdy neměl dost času ani chuti, tak jsem se to dověděl teď, když jste omylem udělali Tomu z Aweweweho. Je to opravdu situace vystřižená jak z komedie.

Obzvláště mě zajímala pak ta o smazu článků, o nichž jste přesvědčeni, že jsem je vytvořil já osobně. Velice mě potěšilo, že většina těch, co se tam vyjádřila, byla pro jejich zachování, kromě @Bazi: a @Vlout:, jejichž názory jsou tradičně na úrovni předškolního dítěte. Právě ta podpora jejich zachování mi dala jasný signál, že už opravdu není potřeba, abych se na Wikipedii vracel. Je to jasná známka osvícenství na Wikipedii. Konečně jste dostali rozum, a konečně tedy už nemám důvod podnikat nějaké akce. Tím spíš, že na vrcholu soušasného žebříčku nejvlivnějších wikipedistů jsi ty. Srandě sice nerozumíš, ale jinak jsi dobrý člověk. Takových bylo na wikipedii v dobách, kdy jsem tam aktivně působil naprosté minimum, vzpomínám jen na @Tchoř: a @JAn Dudík:. Jinak to bylo společenství nejrůznějších ztroskotanců, nul, jedinců, kteří si tam chodili hojit svoje komplexy, nejvíce komplexů méněcennosti a konfliktama se vyloženě bavili. Dnes už je naštěstí wikipedie trochu jinde.

Přestože se situace už na wikipedii podstatně zlepšila, a v případě návratu bych možná mohl i působit bez toho, že by mě neustále napadali nějací ubožáci, kterým dělá strašně dobře blokovat, a hlavně pak mazat, tak pořád říkám že se vracet nehodlám. Aspoň né teď, protože mám dost svojí práce, která mě baví a na wikipedii momentálně nemám vůbec čas.

Jenom bych ale nerad, aby za mě někdo něco odnášel neprávem, proto tady otevřeně říkám, že Awewewe nejsem já. Awewewe je sice pěknej pitomec, ale nevzpomínám si, že by jeho aktivita v dlouhodobém horizontu byla nějak vyloženě negativní. Jediné co ho položilo byl ten jeho neskrývavý obdiv k moji osobě. Já mu to řikal, ale on si nedal říct. Ale ne! Já nejsem takovej, abych teď říkal, já jsem Awewewe a smál se tomu, jak jsem vás převez. S pozdravem --TOMA646 (mail | talk) 19:44, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Musím tady potvrdit, že @Toma646: říká pravdu. Já opravdu nejsem jeho loutkou, bylo to pouze vykonstruováno proti mě, aby se mě komunita konečně zbavila, protože jsem tam prostě nepatřil, byl jsem vždy ošklivým káčátkem mezi všemi wikipedisty, a někdo takový prostě na Wikipedii nemá co dělat. Je to evidentní, mohlo by se klidně z toho stát další závazné pravidlo, protože tento princip už prakticky převládá. Prosím též o opravení lživého textu na hlavní straně Wikipedie, Wikipedii nemůže totiž každý upravovat, zní to sice líbivě, ale je to lživé, navrhuji, aby bylo změněno slovo každý na každý, kdo nemá zákaz editace nebo na téměř každý. Jinak, někdo mně prostě hacknul, buďto z nějaké jiné služby, na které jsem měl stejné heslo, nebo na Wikipedii nějak propašoval nějaký automatizovaný program, já tomu nerozumím. Proč by se mě chtěl zbavit? Nu, protože jsem se možná příliš angažoval v boji proti vandalismu a někdy revertnul i neoprávněně, jeho motivaci neznám, ale zřejmě pro pobavení, to, že jsem byl v podstatě neznámý editor, není pravda, ať už ale byla jeho motivace jakákoliv, je evidentní, že se tím skvěle bavil. Jinak velice pochybuji, že by se Toma odněkud z Náchodska kvůli tomu stěhoval až někam do Třebíče. Proto, i já tady prohlašuji, že nejsem Tomovou loutkou, ale samostatným uživatelem, akorát mi byl můj účet zneužit jistým vandalem, který, pokud nebude zastaven, může tuto formu vandalismu použít i na jiného a jiného uživatele, který se mu prostě zrovna bude hodit. Taky o další jeho oběti řeknete, že je to Toma646? A co když to bude např. dlouhodobý správce, byrokrat, checkuser? Jsem opravdu zvědav. Naopak si myslím, že vandala to po tom úsilí vynaloženém k mé diskreditaci a banu rozhodně bavit nepřestane, že ho můj ban jenom povzbudil, aby v tom pokračoval. Mám pocit, že já jsem byl jenom předkrm, že má vandal mnohem dalekosáhlejší plány, jakým dalším uživatelům způsobí ban, a že hlavní chod ještě čeká, pokud s tím někdo nehodlá něco dělat. No, na to si opravdu počkám, je to k popukání... Jinak, Tomo, díky, žes to zde napsal a zastal se mě, ale asi nám stejně nikdo neuvěří... Awewewe (talk) 16:25, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Ahoj @Awewewe:, v tomhle případě si spíš myslim, že jde skutečně spíš o nějakou shodu náhod, protože Urbance znám jako slušného a inteligentního člověka. I v dobách kdy jsem si žádal o odblokování se mnou jednal korektně a objektivně. Takže opravdu bych nečekal, že on by v AV dělal nějaké podvody a manipulace, což byla hlavně doména Baziho, za jeho kralování v AV doslovně platilo „bylo to pouze vykonstruováno proti mě, aby se mě komunita konečně zbavila, protože jsem tam prostě nepatřil, byl jsem vždy ošklivým káčátkem mezi všemi wikipedisty, a někdo takový prostě na Wikipedii nemá co dělat“, což je věta, která se přesně vztahuje na můj ban :-). O tvém případě moc nevim, a tak nemůžu posoudit jestli říkáš pravdu nebo si vymýšlíš, ale každopádně pokud jde o tvoje tvrzení, že ti někdo hacknul účet, tak proč jsem právě ty vandalské editace nenašel v historii tvých příspěvků. Druhá věc je, že, a teď tě nechci z ničeho předem vinit, že ta pohádka o hacknutém účtu je velmi typická pro tyhle případy, sám jsem používal, když jsem se snažil zakrýt stejným způsobem svoje idiotské chování na enwiki. Tenkrát jsem se taky nakazil, a chtěl jsem si vyzkoušet, jaké to je být vandalem, jen jsem to trochu přehnal, a tak jsem nakonec nebyl jen vandalem ale i pitomcem. Nicméně to, že jsi byl zablokován jako moje loutka, to je dost hloupá náhoda. Měl by sis každopádně podat návrh na přezkoumání. Tomuhle AV věřim podstatně víc, než tomu za Baziho s argumentačním stylem typu naprostého demagoga. A když se setká s argumentací založenou na pravdě, tak si myslí že pravdu stačí jen zamést pod koberec.--TOMA646 (mail | talk) 19:00, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

@Toma646: No právě, když to je otázka, jestli se mám opět postavit na pranýř, nechat po sobě kydat lidmi typu OJJ/Vojtasafr/Rosenfeld~cswiki/Hnetubud svoje opovržlivé provokativní poznámky, být opět odsouzen na pouhou e-mailovou komunikaci a doufat, že to vyjde v můj prospěch a že mi neoprávněný zákaz zruší, nebo jestli to mám nechat být. Neustále to tam ale kontroluji a všímám si, jak jsou líní, jak jim tam na stránkách (i na posledních změnách) všude visí vandalismus (např. jsem si všiml, že jisté NUJ udělalo na jedné stránce vandalismus a bylo to revertováno až den poté, a pak ani nebylo zablokováno a dostalo jen "ejedna") a já bych byl jediný "patrolující" online, a taky že jim všude na článcích o zvířatech visí ilustrace, i když fotek na Commons je hafo (sám jsem si na to založil účet 2nactka, jenže jsem je k odstranění všech těch nekvalitních ilustrací, jako je např. tohle, příliš nepobídl). Že jsi nenašel ty editace v mých příspěvcích, to by nebylo podle mě pro vandala vhodné, protože jsem nikdy nezneužíval vlastní účet k vandalizacím a mohl bych tedy říct, že došlo k prolomení hesla a zřejmě by mi uvěřili. Nicméně provokatérů a vandalů je jako much, tak to mohl být v podstatě kdokoliv, jelikož název prvního/ch účtu/ů dosud není z neznámých důvodů znám a ani mi nebyl ani e-mailem prozrazen. Nicméně, jestliže se celý můj zákaz editace opírá o to, že jsem označoval nějaké starší loutky, že jsem napsal pár biologických článků o papouškovi, rodu krabů a pralesničkách (což je mimo tvůj obor, ty ses v oblasti biologie zajímal hlavně o hmyz), nebo o to, že jsem na enwiki něco napsal o uživateli OJJ, nemusí to být zas až tolik průkazné. Žádost o přezkoumání ale asi podám, protože už nemohu chápat, proč se mě všichni snaží zbavit, a taky že si nenechám všechno líbit. Nu což, ať se mi klidně smějí, ať si mě urážejí, je mi to jedno, ale ať to vyjde, jak to vyjde, moc dobře to podle mě nevypadá. Awewewe (talk) 18:09, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

@Awewewe: Pokud to dobře chápu, tak blok z 21. 1. 2018 jsi dostal za podezření ze spojitosti s účtem Kokoro Atari (talk · contribs). Přijde mi opravdu zvláštní, že právě jeho editaci jsi revertoval pouhé dvě minuty potom. To je opravdu velice podezřelé, když jsi se v té době evidentně hlídání posledních změn nevěnoval. S touhle editací bych souhlasil, ale bohužel jde o porušení pravidel, bohužel. Mimoto, v ten den si také smazal svoji userpage kvůli útokům trolla. Ano, to, že jsi byl ve sporu v předchozích dnech lze dohledat. Nicméně, je tady otázka. I kdyby to bylo tak jak říkáš, proč by tedy onen troll vytvořil účet Kokoro Atari, a vybral si zrovna Ojouše, se kterým nebyl v minulosti ve sporu, zatímco ty ho evidentně v oblibě nemáš. Všechny indcie naznačujou, že Kokoro Atari je tvoje loutka, a za tu jsi byl právě i zablokován.

Druhá věc je, proč jsi byl zablokován jakožto moje loutka. Tady je odpověď jednoduchá. Tvoje způsoby chování jsou v určitých směrech dost podobné, já taky kolikrát založil loutky abych řekl ostatním co si o nich myslim hezky od plic, já taky vandalizoval ze zábavy, i když jsem to dělal na druhém projektu. Ale, pak jsou tu mezi náma i zásadní rozdíly. TY JSI NAPŘÍKLAD ZAKLÁDAL NAPROSTO TRIVIÁLNÍ ČLÁNKY, NEBER SI TO NIJAK OSOBNĚ, ALE TY TVOJE ČLÁNKY O ČÍSLECH JSOU Z MÉHO POHLEDU SLUŠNĚ ŘEČENO K HOVNU, ZKRÁTKA SE V NICH NEDOVIM NIC, CO BY PRO MĚ BYLO NĚJAK PŘÍNOSNÉ. POKUD JDE O ČLÁNKY O GRONSKÝCH VESNICÍCH, MNOHÉ Z NICH JSOU I VELICE PĚKNÉ, ALE ZAKLÁDAT NĚCO TAKOVÉHO ROZHODNĚN NENÍ MŮJ STYL. KAŽDOPÁSNĚ V TVÉM STYLU JE VIDĚT, ŽE SPÍŠE SÁZÍŠ NA KVANTITU, NEŽ NA KVALITU zatímco já DÁVÁM PŘEDNOST KVALITĚ PŘED KVANTITOU, KOLIKRAT JSEM SI ŘÍKAL, ŽE KDYŽ SE O NĚČEM NEDÁ NAPSAT POŘÁDNEJ ČLÁNEK, TAK JE LEPŠÍ SE NA TO ROVNOU VYSRAT. TAKY JSEM ZKOUŠEL CHRLIT SPOUSTU KRATIČKÝCH PAHÝLŮ, JAKO TŘEBA O TĚCH SLOVENSKÝCH POTOCÍCH, ALE TO MĚ NEBAVILO, DALEKO VÍCE MĚ POTĚŠILO SEPSAT NĚCO, CO JE DLOUHÝ JAKO ****. JDE I O SAMOTNÉ OBLASTI ZÁJMŮ. JÁ JSEM TŘEBA NAPROSTO ÚCHYLNEJ NA PODNEBÍ A POČASÍ, V TVÝCH EDITYCÍCH SE ŽÁDNÁ TAKOVÁ „PARAFILIE “ NEOBJEVUJE. NAROZDÍL ODE MĚ TAKÉ NEJSEŠ FANOUŠKEM SERIÁLŮ JAKO ŠMOULOVÉ, VČELKA MÁJA, ČI KLUB MIKKI MAUSA. DALŠÍ VĚCÍ JE, ŽE TY SEŠ NA MĚ AŽ MOC SLUŠNEJ :-). KAŽDOPÁDNĚ TĚCH ROZDÍLŮ MEZI NÁMA JE DOST, MYSLIM, ŽE TO BY NEBYL ZAS TAK VELKEJ PROBLÉM DOKÁZAT.

PS: O tobě sem si Urbanče hezky početl na spešl wiki na stránce kyberna.jecool.net (jen tam nikdo nelezte, číhá tam trojan!). Pokud se ti na škole takhle brutálně vysmívali, tak pak se nedivim, že nemůžeš vystát, když si z tebe někdo dělá srandu. kybernawiki mi každopádně připadá jako dost blbej projekt, sranda být může, ale není dobře, když to přeroste už v zájemné urážení, to pak už nedělá dobrou atmosféru, docela by mě zajímalo, jak jste na takovou pitomost přišli. Toto jsem předtím nevěděl, takže sorry, pokud tě někdy urazilo, když jsem si z tebe dělal srandu, v tvém případě jsem to nemyslel ve zlém.--TOMA646 (mail | talk) 14:02, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Question

Hi Martin, I hope you are doing great. I want to ask you something about Gerrit & Phabrictor. I uploaded two patches last month here and here with my account Ahmed123, but when i checked the phabricator repository history like here or here, the patches seem to have been uploaded by the user (Sahjsjjssd) not by Ahmed123. So, Is this normal or am I missing something? Thank --Elbasyouny (talk) 19:12, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello there, well, usually it is assigned to correct user, see [1] for example. Maybe the (in Phabricator) disabled account you linked (Sahjsjjssd) has the same e-mail address you have, or, the e-mail address you used for creating the commit doesn't match the address you have in Phabricator so the system did this. AKlapper (WMF) is a Phabricator admin so he can check. Have a nice day, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 20:11, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

@Martin Urbanec: Thanks for the ping! Hmm, interesting. Not sure what went wrong here. @Elbasyouny: Could you file a task in Phabricator about this? I cannot check but maybe someone else could... Thanks! --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 22:46, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Ok, Thanks all. i'll open a task soon. --Elbasyouny (talk) 23:30, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

The Community Wishlist Survey

Hi,

You get this message because you’ve previously participated in the Community Wishlist Survey. I just wanted to let you know that this year’s survey is now open for proposals. You can suggest technical changes until 11 November: Community Wishlist Survey 2019.

You can vote from November 16 to November 30. To keep the number of messages at a reasonable level, I won’t send out a separate reminder to you about that. /Johan (WMF) 11:24, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Vnitřní chyba

Co to znamená a jak se to tu vzalo? [W@PVRwpAAEYAABwIdf8AAABG] 2018-11-08 06:18:47: Kritická výjimka typu „UnexpectedValueException“ Co to znamená a jak se to tu vzalo? Nemohu editovat = založit kategorii. --Kusurija (talk) 10:01, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kusurija: Zdravím, mě odkazovaná stránka funguje a podařila se mi vytvořit, viz [2]. Jde Vám ji alespoň editovat (tj. nikoliv založit)? Každopádně děkuji za info, pokusím se zjistit, co to bylo. S pozdravem, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:33, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Editovat mohu, děkuji. --Kusurija (talk) 11:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

[Wikipedia & Education User Group] Updates: November 2018

Greetings,

Integrating Wikimedia with education is a powerful strategy for the outreach of Wikimedia projects. Realising this concept, a group of leaders promoted this and formed the Wikipedia Education Collaborative. After some time, this evolved to become a user group, officially recognised by the Affiliations Committee in June 2018. The user group had its first board elections earlier in September. In the process to formalise activities and give a shape the user group for long-term sustainability, we are now revamping our processes. Thanks for supporting us during incubation stages, we are now inviting you to formally join the user group by following the instructions on the members' page. Being a member will allow you to be a part of this wonderful collaboration and also do interesting stuff.

Kind regards
On behalf of Wikipedia and Education UG, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:44, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Mark multiple revisions in a diff as patrolled

Ho Martin, I've tried to apply the script you suggested as follow: it:voy:Utente:Andyrom75/common.js but it seems that it doesn't work. Could you support me? --Andyrom75 (talk) 07:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, it isn't working, because it depends on scripts running on toollabs. The JavaScript is just supporting call to those scripts. It doesn't work, because your code is checking unpatrolled revisions against cswiki's database. You need to copy the code of Czech gadget and on lines where there is URL starting with https://tools.wmflabs.org/urbanecmbot/wikipediamisc, you need to add parameter wiki=itwikivoyage. Hope that helps. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:20, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

@Andyrom75: Or try the other version from Wikidata. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 20:19, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks a lot @Matěj Suchánek:, the Wikidata script works perfectly and without any local patch! --Andyrom75 (talk) 14:33, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

CN Admin

Hi. You're now a central notice administrator. Congratulations. Please note that Meta:Central notice administrators mandates H:2FA for all people in the group. If you do not have it enabled already, please do so at your earliest. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:45, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi User:MarcoAurelio, thank you for promoting me. I had 2FA enabled before, so that's fine. Best regards, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:17, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

CNBanner

How to understand "to improve the depth" in CNBanner:Talk_page_consultation_2019-text1/en? What depth (for discussion pages) does it say? Is this the number of visible topics or is the number of indents in mw:Flow? --Sunpriat (talk) 16:55, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Sunpriat: Hello, that would be a question for Trizek (WMF), who wrote the text. I just copied it from his request. Best, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Martin.

Sunpriat, depth means here reach. How many people would be able to know about a participation, and/or how many people could participate to a discussion are examples of it.

Trizek (WMF) (talk) 17:27, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Improved translation in this way https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=CNBanner:Talk_page_consultation_2019-text1/ru&diff=18899660&oldid=18898742 "expand the coverage of participants" - is this a valid interpretation? --Sunpriat (talk) 18:22, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Trizek (WMF): ping --Sunpriat (talk) 18:22, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Sunpriat it is. Thank you for the translation! Do you plan to create a consultation on Russian wikis?

Martin, thank you for hosting our conversation! :D

Trizek (WMF) (talk) 18:28, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

No problem :D. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 18:39, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Trizek (WMF): I don't know for sure yet. Last time (flow), it seemed to me that the collection of our reviews (local discussion, mediawiki, fabricator) was wasted and went unnoticed by the developers. Now they can read old discussions through a translator (а lot of new on this topic will not be now) [3] [4] . Maybe we will wait for a survey with specific questions to the community. For example, I did not understand why https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk_pages_consultation_2019/Communication/Announce talk about questions here, but https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk_pages_consultation_2019 say that now phase 0 and there will be phase 1 in March with a questions again. --Sunpriat (talk) 18:52, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Sunpriat, phase 0 is over. We are on phase 1, with the 5 question asked on mw:Talk_pages_consultation_2019/Communication/Announce. Concerning the former discussions about Flow, they can be reused, but at the moment a possible trap is to compare discussion systems, instead of making a list of needs (the latter is the purpose of that consultation). Trizek (WMF) (talk) 19:00, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Trizek (WMF): Ok, I will create a topic on our forum. The last clarification was useful, I will use it. --Sunpriat (talk) 19:17, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Trizek (WMF): Сan it be that the depth is about Wikipedia article depth? --Sunpriat (talk) 12:34, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

@Sunpriat: I don't think so. (There are mathematics formulas in your example, which freak out my brain.) The page is apparently about how many users edit the page (diversity and collaboration). For conversations tools, I think depth is about how many people are aware of the conversation and how many would participate, whatever their knowledge of the tools and discussion culture and etiquette. Trizek (WMF) (talk) 13:30, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

CN banner question

Hi, thank you for taking care of CentralNotice/Request/CEE Spring 2019 in ukwiki request. I've just got the CN admin right and tried to make some edits to this banner (there was a last-minute change in project name). It looks fine now, but has no green background as was in the requested example. Well, anyway, the green background isn't needed anymore, but I'm wondering if I did something wrong to the campaign. Can you tell? Thanks --Ата ^(talk) 22:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I didn't simply add the green background, that's all :). --Martin Urbanec (talk) 23:29, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

ZNC IRC Bouncer

Hello, Something went wrong with my account at [5]. My network connection is lost. Will you please check it once? Take your time. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 07:58, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Tulsi, there is an ongoing problem with SSL certificate. I asked Luke (the server admin) to renew it. Best, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 08:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Tulsi Bhagat: Should be resolved. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:19, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

The Affiliate-selected Board seats process welcomes your support

Hello. You are receiving this message because you are active in the field of translations <3 The movement needs you! The Nominations phase has started for the ongoing selection process of two Board members, and the timeline is quite tight.

A Translation Central is available to help translators figure out what's been covered and what's left to do. Over the course of the next few weeks, your attention on candidates' profiles is particularly welcome.

While there are four languages that are especially relevant for multiple affiliates (namely Arabic, French, Russian and Spanish), we are asking your help for Chinese, Ukrainian, Bengali, Czech, Hungarian, Romanian, Italian, Korean, Portuguese, Polish, Farsi, German, Cantonese, Finnish, Hindi, Thai, Dutch, and Greek, as these also matter to affiliates! If you can't help: please see if you know anyone in your circle who could, and spread the word :) Thank you! Elitre (WMF) and Facilitators of ASBS 2019, 21:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

CN Banner 1bib1ref

Hi! I just realized i left the "1bib1ref campaign (1 librarian 1 reference)" banner request at the end and not in the Queued subtitle. Can you review it? Sorry for the mess! cheers! Mauricio V. Genta (talk) 16:22, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, it appeared here. See my comment in the request! --Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:35, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Wikimánie 2019

Ahoj, podal jsem žádost o změnu odkazu správně? --Patriccck (talk) 09:10, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Ahoj, přepsal jsi minulou žádost :). Revertnul jsem tě a odkaz jsem změnil. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 09:44, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Myslel jsem, že je to automaticky předvyplněný formulář :). Díky za opravu! Patriccck (talk) 10:20, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

thank you

for the response regarding sitenotice. Enigmaman (talk) 16:49, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

WLP 2019 CN

Hi,

I have spent an hour examining the background of the !votes in the CN discussion at CentralNotice/Request/Wiki_Loves_Pride_2019. There is a sufficient pattern of effective, probably accidental canvassing that seems to account for the unexpected surge of oppose votes. In particular it should be treated as no coincidence that there were zero comments for 5 weeks after Bluerasberry opened the discussion apart from Yair rand, then critically there was a flood of comments after 20th June, precisely after Yair rand made the effort to criticise the notice in the middle of the highly contentios FRAMBAN discussion. I have added a section to the vote with links to discussions elsewhere that may have influenced the CN !vote.

If you could provide any advice on constructive next steps for Pharos, who has put a hell of a lot of good faith and positive energy into this content drive, that would be much appreciated. Thanks! --Fæ (talk) 19:45, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Fae, we have guidelines for a reason. We require general notification of the community at least seven days in advance, and then, if there's consensus, the banner can be turned on. The link didn't influence the outcome of the discussion, because the discussion period was already over. (The existing page probably should have been archived after being closed as no consensus, incidentally.) There was no consensus in favor of the banner, probably at least partly because no one knew the proposal existed. To prevent things like this from happening in the future, we might want to place links to the guidelines somewhat more prominently, but we can't go back in time and get consensus a week before the start of the campaign now. --Yair rand (talk) 20:07, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi,

thanks for writing here. First of all, let me explain a few of things. 1) I should not be interpreted as someone who blocks the banner forever. I got pinged here and since I saw a lot of oppose and almost no support, I disabled the campaign, so we can all solve if it will or will not be enabled again. Also, see my note for the Stewards, where I explicitly said I don't mind reverting if they think it's warranted. 2) Although I believe you didn't mean it that way, CentralNotice requests aren't votings, but discussions.

Ad the arguments. Please note this is just my personal option and doesn't have to do anything with my CentralNotice adminship. Yes, when the campaign was enabled, only Yair rand opposed. On the other hand, no one reacted on this comment in any way. I believe that on your wiki, if you nominate an article for deletion, a non-newbie opposes, is it wise to close the nomination as "deleted" without even saying anything? I don't think so. The request was commented after the campaign was created simply because more users noticed it, disagreed with it and voiced their opinion in the CN request. It doesn't necessarily have to do anything with canvassing.

Note Wikimedia projects is community-driven and all community-handled permissions doesn't have to do anything with wiki-power. Just the fact I'm a CN admin doesn't allow me to use CN for anything, even the community opposes, just as being a cswiki admin doesn't allow me to delete an article I don't like.

You're raising a suspection about possible canvasing. As I said previously, more comments at one time (closely to the time when campaign was enabled) doesn't have to mean "canvassing". Even I believe some comments shouldn't be taken into account (such as comments from users with 20 edits over ten years), there are comments that makes sense and should be responded in some way. One of said comments is the one written by Blahma.

And about advice? Well, Pharos should respond to the opposes somehow, and wait till campaign is properly discussed and approved by the community before enabling. Ideally, they should let another CN admin to evaluate the discussion.

Best, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:06, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Notifications about T173070

In addition to my note at vi:Wikipedia:Tin nhắn cho bảo quản viên#Few pages needs to be cleaned up after maintenance, I see that the following wikis were not part of User:Martin Urbanec/sand:

• av:
• bh:
• b:mr:
• nrm:
• voy:ps:

Was this intentional? - dcljr (talk) 22:55, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I see all but bh: lack (human) admins. (bh: has them, though.) - dcljr (talk) 23:02, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that's the reason why I didn't ping them - there is simply no one to ping locally. For bhwiki, there's nothing to fix, I've probably made a mistake when generating the list of wikis for the second run of the script somewhere. Also, for mrwikibooks and nrwiki, the pages were a redirect (which is probably not to be kept), so I deleted them. Regarding pswikivoyage, the pages aren't a redirect, and since I don't speak that language, I have no clue what should happen with those two pages. Feel free to forward my message to any place you seem appropriate there :). --Martin Urbanec (talk) 23:14, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Not meaning to be annoying about this, but I've found the following:

• On avwiki there is av:Википедия:ЖамагІаталъул портал, which is listed in d:Q3906916 as their "Project:Village pump (miscellaneous)". (I'd rather have you post your message there.)
• bhwiki does actually have a couple of pages that need dealing with. Both are redundant redirects that can be deleted (and I have tagged them as such).
• voy:ps:ويکيسفر:T173070ټاکنې appears (based on Google Translate) to be a near duplicate of the opening sentences of voy:ps:ويکيسفر:ټاکنې (with the former having no substantive edits after its creation) and so can be deleted. voy:ps:ويکيسفر:T173070پازوالان seems to be about bots, as does voy:ps:ويکيسفر:پازوالان; these two are not so similar, so I have posted a comment at the talk page of the latter page.

So, posting at av:'s VPM is the only thing I'm requesting you to do here (unless you also want to handle the page deletions). - dcljr (talk) 23:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for your help. I always appreciate it.

• Okay, thanks. Will post there. Wondering why phab:P8677 says "0 pages to fix, 0 were resolvable."... Posted, however, since they don't have admins, I'll have a look at the redirects and have them deleted.
• Thank you. As above, wondering why phab:P8677 doesn't say anything about it. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:23, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
• Thanks!

--Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:23, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Confusion about your "clarification" on Classical Chinese wiki

Hi.

You posted a clarification after the message about EDP and local uploads just now ( https://zh-classical.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%B6%AD%E5%9F%BA%E5%A4%A7%E5%85%B8:%E6%9C%83%E9%A4%A8#Local_uploads_on_your_wiki ). There was a link that reads [[Медијавики:Licenses]]， which apparently isn't a page that our wiki should have. Did you actually mean to send that message to another wiki, or did you forget to edit your copy-pasted message before sending?

Thanks,

User670839245 (talk) 11:06, 28 June 2019 (UTC) (ps. I'm just a normal user, not admin or anything)

Hello, I intended to send the message to your wiki, but just forgot to change the link. Fixed. Thanks, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Urgh, hi again. You said "Since this situation doesn't require sysadmins to decide if the EDP is usable for enabling local uploads, I consider those two cases to be the same." May I ask what is "this situation" and what are "those two cases"? I'm still a bit confused. (blame my reading ability :-/) User670839245 (talk) 11:25, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi, let me explain it. Local uploads needs to be enabled by two, more-or-less independent, steps. First step is enable them in site configuration. This can be done only by system administrators (aka sysadmins). The second step is to define licenses in mediawiki:Licenses. This can be done by sysops as well. zh_classicalwiki has uploads enabled in the site configuration as-of now. I thought zh_classicalwiki also enabled local uploads in mediawiki:Licenses, in which case, local uploads would be working. That's "first case". It turned out that zh_classicalwiki doesn't have anything in mediawiki:Licenses, which means local uploads doesn't work (even they are enabled in the configuration), and that they can be enabled by any sysop by just adding the content to the page. Is this more clear now? Feel free to clarify my clarification on your wiki. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 11:34, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Disable local uploads on wuu wikipedia

Hello,

I come from wuu wiki. I think it's better to disable local uploads on this site, since we don't have an Exemption Doctrine Policy.

--Lt2818 (talk) 13:38, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thanks. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:52, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikimania 2019 banner

Hi! All the Wikipedias now have a Wikimania banner on them. Russian translation is wrong. It is specified that Wikimania will be in June, which has already passed.

Can you fix it?

It is necessary on page Special:CentralNoticeBanners/edit/Wikimania_2019_reg_cfp correct the line "Присоединяйтесь к нам в Стокгольме с 14 по 18 июня!" to "Присоединяйтесь к нам в Стокгольме с 14 по 18 августа!". --Ctac (talk) 14:39, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, you can fix it yourself on [6]. Once done, just ping me, I'll approve your translations, so they'll propagate into the notice. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:41, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Ok. Done! :)--Ctac (talk) 14:46, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

 Approved --Martin Urbanec (talk) 15:00, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

New Email

— regards, Revi 11:19, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Global renamer

Welcome! you are now a global renamer, please ask any question you have :). Matiia (talk) 04:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! --Martin Urbanec (talk) 05:17, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

RFH discussion

Hello Martin, there is a discussion at RFH pertaining to an action you took, please see Meta:Requests_for_help_from_a_sysop_or_bureaucrat#CEE_CentralNotice. Best regards, — xaosflux ^Talk 23:46, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for re-pinging me, I must oversaw the echo-based ping. Replied. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:45, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Banner Campaign Stats

Dear Martin,

could you please write me, is there any public statistics regard number of shown banner (preferably divided by territories) for a given banner campaign? Thanks! Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 12:36, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I'm not aware of such statistics. You can use pageview stats through. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:38, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Other review tools - @newiki

Hello, I feel you can help me in this as you do always. So, I am letting you know. Something probably wrong with my account or what. "Other review tools" is not showing there at ne.wiki. See screenshot. I tried resetting the preferences, clearing cache but it's still not appearing. I guess, it happened since last week. Thank you. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 07:56, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Request for Removal from Blacklist

Dear Martin,

Please unblock and revoke from the blacklist the addresses "w012.wordpress.com" and "www.shnorhali.com"

They refer to an independent website, running on a non-profit basis, designated only for religious and educational purposes dedicated to the Armenjan Apostolic Church and especially to the life and work of St. Nerses Shnorhali. This website contains valuable information for all Wikipedia users, and it should not be blocked or blacklisted any more. I intend to edit on articles referring to St. Nerses Shnorhali and the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Armenian illuminated manuscripts, the Eusebian Canon Tables and the Armenian Khachkars. These are all very important aspects of the Armenian Apostolic Church. The address which I wish to include as an external link to those Wikipedia articles, contains valuable information for all Wikipedia users that are interested on the above articles. As I mentioned before, neither me nor this website have any relation with spam, vandalism or commercial activities. This is a benevolent contribution from my side that I kindly request you to accept. I wish to make a contribution to Wikipedia for the life and work of St. Nerses Shnorhali as well as for the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Armenian illuminated manuscripts, the Eusebian Canon Tables and the Armenian Khachkars. I wish to include as an external link this address that you have blacklisted by error.

I have explained you above about the importance of the information that provides this website to Wikipedia readers and regular researchers. It is a pity to deprive these people from this information. I feel sorry that I have been misunderstood from the administrators, and this probably resulted to the blocking and to the blacklisting of the web addresses I mentioned before. It is the first time I contribute to Wikipedia and perhaps I did something wrong unintentionally that caused this misunderstanding. Thank you in advance, Levonoun

Hi, I didn't make the decision to blacklist the URLs, only proposed the blacklisting. As such, I can't personally amend the decision in any way. I disagree with the removing, as I said on Talk:Spam blacklist, see my reasoning there. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 00:16, 24 August 2019 (UTC)