Wikimedia Forum

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

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

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


SNI block from China has been applied to all Wikipedias (and even the https://www.wikipedia.org/)[edit]

zh:Wikipedia:互助客栈/消息#全部语言维基百科疑似被封 --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:55, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Therefore WMF staffs must continue discussing with PRC Governments' staffs within China-US economical discussions, to find a way to win-win each other. --117.14.243.223 03:14, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
And now, to all WMF wikis. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:47, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't get the IP's comment -- discussion to make PRC censorship authority happy? LOL nope. — regards, Revi 17:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Sad news. Knowing the trends on PRC censorship, they're unlikely to go back on it. Leefeniaures audiendi audiat 20:11, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Talk pages consultation: Phase 2[edit]

"icon depicting two speech Bubbles"

The Wikimedia Foundation is currently conducting a global consultation about communication. The goal is to bring Wikimedians and wiki-minded people together to improve tools for communication.

Phase 1 of the consultation is over – thank you to everyone who participated! – and we've published the Phase 1 report. The report summarizes what people have said and what we've learned, proposes a direction for the project, and asks specific questions to explore in Phase 2.

Very briefly, the proposed direction is that wikitext talk pages should be improved, and not replaced. We propose building a new design on top of talk pages that changes the page's default appearance, and offers key tools like replying, indenting and signing posts. To keep consistency with existing tools, the new design will be a default experience that existing users can opt out of. We also propose building features that experienced contributors want, including the ability to watchlist a single discussion, and the ability to move, archive and search for threads. Building these features may require some loss of flexibility, or small-to-medium changes in wikitext conventions. The goal is to only make changes that directly enable functionality that users really want.

You can see more information and discussion about the proposed direction in the Phase 1 report, including the results of new user tests and some of the quotations from Phase 1 discussions that led to this proposal.

Now it's time to start Phase 2!

We have six questions to discuss in Phase 2, asking for reactions to the proposed direction, and pros and cons for specific changes that we could make.

You can help by hosting a discussion at your wiki. Here's what to do:

  1. First, sign up your group here.
  2. Next, create a page (or a section on a Village pump, or an e-mail thread – whatever is natural for your group) to collect information from other people in your group.
  3. Then start the conversation with the six questions listed in the Questions for Phase 2 section of the report.
  4. When the conversation is concluded, the host should write a summary of the discussion on the Phase 2 community discussion summaries page, and report what you learned from your group. Please include links if the discussion is available to the public.

You can read more about the overall process on MediaWiki.org. If you have questions or ideas, you can leave feedback about the consultation process in the language you prefer.

Thank you! We're looking forward to talking with you. DannyH (WMF) (talk) 17:40, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

As long as I can opt out of things via GlobalPreferences, I'm fine with any changes (so that I can continue to use the old behaviors without worrying about disabling it on +700 wikis) — regards, Revi 17:56, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
-revi at the beginning of the process all options were on the table, including Flow. At the end of phase 1 the Foundation reached a finding: we propose that wikitext talk pages should be improved, and not replaced. So we'll likely still have editable wikipages. However it's not yet clear whether a full opt-out will remain possible. For example it appears some of the Foundation's ideas would require a software-generated-code in order to create a new section. You might want to read and respond to this phase 2 process. Alsee (talk) 09:33, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't care that much to comment on that. I also have enough things to do, which doesn't give me time to invest my time in side-project for now. It still has a possibility to be a good change unlike WMF past failures like Flow, MediaViewer, etc. I can just accept the unfortunate result if it turns out to be such. — regards, Revi 09:37, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Whenever the WMF operates a site that cannot be accessed, the front page should clearly explain what the site is, who qualifies for access, and how to request access.[edit]

I have been looking at various WMF-owned pages as part of a series of tests that I am doing to see how many barriers we have put up for blind people using screen readers.

While doing this I ran into a project page that should be fixed, but I cannot request that is be fixed on that page because the problem that should be fixed prevents me from reporting the problem on that page.

Whenever the WMF operates a site that cannot be accessed, the front page should clearly explain what the site is, who qualifies for access, and how to request access.

[ https://advisory.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page ] says

"This wiki has moved to Meta:Advisory Board and has been closed."

...which leads to [ https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Advisory_Board ], which is fine.

On the other hand, [ https://advisors.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page ] says:

Welcome! For more information, visit the Community Portal.

...but the Community Portal that it tells you to visit doesn't contain any information other than a "Login required" page. Again, whenever the WMF operates a site that cannot be accessed, the front page should clearly explain what the site is, who qualifies for access, and how to request access.

If advisors.wikimedia.org is active (I can't tell because I cannot access it) then that page needs a better explanation about what it is and why an ordinary user cannot access it.

If advisors.wikimedia.org is not active, then it should be closed in the same manner that advisory.wikimedia.org was. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:18, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Not 100% sure I assume it's board advisors? — regards, Revi 19:30, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Could be, but what goes on inside a private WMF wiki doesn't concern me. Having the page that faces the public say "Welcome! For more information, visit the Community Portal." without any scrap of information on the page you are sent to for "more information" does. Are we a professional non-profit organization that brings in $250,000 USD in donations every single day[1] or are we a bunch of amateurs working out of a garage? We need to fix all of the small, easy-to-fix problems with our user interface. This is a good place to start. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:01, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
@Guy Macon: suggest that you ping Maggie or one of her team to address; or be bold and put in a phabricator: ticket. It should be part of the setup to a wiki, and that belongs with the sites teams.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:33, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Global Search[edit]

Hello! Sorry to use this venue for advertising, but I don't know of a better place to get the word out. I'd like to present to you a new tool: Global Search. This tool allows you to do keyword and source regular expression searches across all WMF wikis, using the new CloudElastic service. For the time being, you must login with a Wikimedia account to use it. It may be opened to everyone in the future. This is still an experimental service so you may encounter issues. You can report bugs on Phabricator, or just comment here. Thanks and hope you find this useful, MusikAnimal talk 02:01, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: Thanks. I am looking forward to seeing how it works with anti-spam efforts.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:41, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Some thoughts. A regex search, is that case sensitive or not, here I am doing phrase searches quickly. If it is case sensitive, can one easily flick between the two? Might be worth adding a note that main ns is ns:0 or simple adding that as a tick box for where someone wants to quickly check that space.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:03, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback, billinghurst! I have replied at phab:T224358. Best, MusikAnimal talk 23:15, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Joint project[edit]

Please indicate the procedure for organizing a joint project between the Wikimedia Foundation (https://ru.wikibooks.org/) and the Ural Federal University. A project like Wikinews: Become a private correspondent!. (We will write joint wikibooks) --Леонид Макаров (talk) 07:08, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Леонид Макаров, you might want to contact User:Jami (Wiki Ed), or talk to that community directly by leaving a message at b:ru:Викиучебник:Общий форум. b:ru:Участник:Леонид Макаров could tell you what kind of contributions would be helpful. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 14:46, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Now I make the Wikibooks (Economics of enterprise, Budgeting). I think that it turns out something interesting.--Леонид Макаров (talk) 15:03, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

A proposal for WikiJournals to become a new sister project[edit]

Over the last few years, the WikiJournal User Group has been building and testing a set of peer reviewed academic journals on a mediawiki platform. The main types of articles are:

  • Existing Wikipedia articles submitted for external review and feedback (example)
  • From-scratch articles that, after review, are imported to Wikipedia (example)
  • Original research articles that are not imported to Wikipedia (example)

Proposal: WikiJournals as a new sister project

From a Wikipedian point of view, this is a complementary system to Featured article review, but bridging the gap with external experts, implementing established scholarly practices, and generating citable, doi-linked publications.

Please take a look and support/oppose/comment! T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 06:07, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Why has this page gotten so much attention lately? —Justin (koavf)TCM 01:33, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
    • It was heavily advertised on several mailing lists and many are eager to jump on the bandwagon of Plan S even without having the capabilities to do so. Nemo 05:20, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

BugMeNot shared logins[edit]

Bugmenot have disabled sharing logins for a few Wikipedias. This is good: sharing accounts is not allowed. However, they have not disabled:

  • meta
  • ar
  • ba
  • be
  • cz
  • hi
  • ja
  • no
  • pt
  • simple (simple English)
  • zh

...and those are just the ones I checked. For at least two I found shared accounts listed, and one that I tested was a functioning login. With SUL, these compromised accounts have access to any wikpedia project. Will someone from the Foundation please contact BugMeNot and make certain that sharing login information for all Wikipedias is disabled, and get a record from them of all wikipedia.org accounts which have been listed so that they can be globally locked? Thank you. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 00:14, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Blocking of T-Mobile[edit]

Using T-Mobile US as a phone hotspot in US to Windows PC. Message leaky colo + open proxy at 199.189.108.73. IP adress 199.189.106.246, and intervall blocked 199.189.104.0/21. Why is the US carrier T-Moble blocked? Maundwiki (talk) 15:08, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Maundwiki see the WHOIS data: [2]. It is a hosting provider, and the various proxychecking services say so and the WHOIS data agrees. It does not appear to be T-mobile. Could you have a VPN active on your phone? TonyBallioni (talk) 23:02, 7 June 2019 (UTC)