Jump to content

Wikimedia Forum/Archives/2008-11

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Wikipedia portal page clarification?

Hi! The new face of the portal page of wikipedia.org needs some clarification. How can the visitor (new or returning) understand the new logic behind the sorting of the ten Wikipedias around the globe? There is no text on the page explaining it, not even a link (through the globe?) directing to the visiting stats behing this resorting. I write this here, following a link from this page.--Paracel63 17:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree that it's absurd because they declare to switch from alexa's stats to the stats generated by a Wikipedia after the whole poll was closed. Not to mention the fact that the stats are made available since February and the poll took place in July but nobody bothered to correct it until after the poll. This move was quite unilateral and doesn't reflect the global community consensus. OhanaUnitedTalk page 18:28, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, it's a mess. But if I remember correctly, that was one of the arguments against switching to a pagehit-based ordering: it's not as obvious. We could, of course, list the number of pageviews per month below each link, but that'd look narcissistic.
The latest change had consensus among the Meta users paying attention, but that was admittedly only a handful of users. I overlooked the fact that we should have gone to the Village Pump of each affected Wikipedia to ask for feedback, before making the change. I'm sorry for that. Unfortunately, changing things back to the Alexa ordering will cause even more confusion – the Top 10 ring already looks like a game of "musical chairs". I'm in favor of ultimately (in a year or two) scrapping this page's design for something. Not sure what yet, but something.
We really need some HCI specialists to help us out, because a good language-selection interface is hard to create. With all the languages we offer, Wikipedia suffers from that problem more than any other website.
 – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 00:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Regardless, changing the rules after the !vote finished is a bad bad idea. It should be reverted back to consensus, then put up a new !vote to see if people wish to keep the old way or try the new way. OhanaUnitedTalk page 04:52, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Concepts for a dedicated "MediaWiki" client application with live update and patrolling tools

Lots of new ideas just made by me that may interest you, and those interested in the project of creation of Wikipedia CD/DVD, and the need to better patrol the contents, work better in teams with supervizors, and enforce the copyright and national legal restrictions.

These new concepts concerns ALL Mediawiki projects, not just those hosted by the Fundation and not just Wikipedia.

See the discussion just started here:
Wikipedia on CD/DVD#Concepts for a dedicated "MediaWiki" client application with live update and patrolling tools.

Most probably a new great project to build.

verdy_p 12:10, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Three (Four) new ideas for the Wikimedia System

I thought abot 3 (4) new ideas

1) Blocking files by copyright status

All images which got deleted for bbeing a copyright violation could be collected somewhere. If a new file gets upladed the image will be comapred to the current stock of copyright violations. You shouldn't be able to upload the images. That would save lot of time, because admins wouldn't have to delete the same copyvio file again and again. Moreover it would save a lot of space which could be used for other projects.
You should be able to remove files from the list incase you included the wrong picture. To avaid that one bad admin blocks all your images, you only should be able to include a file on a request page where at least one other admin checks the request. Maybe some kind of timer should be integrated (for example a book which is copyrighted right know but in 2.5,10 years it won't be any more and could be uploaded)

See "Allow Special:FileDuplicateSearch to match against previously deleted images"  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 20:45, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Special:FileDuplicateSearch searches only for existing duplicates not for deleted ones. Moreover fe. copyviofiles files don't get blocked if somebody wants to upload them again. Blocking files maybe wouldn't save a lot of space, but would save a lot of time for admins if logos etc. don't get uploaded several times (Currently I'm talking about Commons where you find 1 copyviofile in 20-50 files (depending on time of day, day of the week and so on)). Maybe there is something different.
--D-Kuru 12:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

2) Blocking files by file name

Instead of the friendly "You might choose a different filename" that appears when you want a filename like IMG_#### you just shouldn't be able to upload a file with such filenames. I don't know how often, but such images get renamed on Commons (which takes a lot of time). Also 2-letter-filenames shouldn't be allowed, because most of them don't say anything about the imagecontent.

There could be a list of all filenames which aren't allowed as my suggestion above. So that you can supersede Image:Dsc 2044.jpg and all it's duplicates so that you don't have to upload that image from Image:IMG 0001 till Image:IMG 9999 (or any other no-use combination)
--D-Kuru 17:59, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
We have approximated this using Title blacklist already.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 20:46, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Does the image blacklist suggest to use different filenames or do the list block the filenames? Some may say that it's no good idea to block any filename because user wouldn't upload the file, but I don't think so. I think that they choose a different one, if they see that IMG_#### is not allowed.
--D-Kuru 12:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
As I understand it, if IMG_#### is added to the title blacklist people shouldn't be able to upload files to that name. This problem would also be made a lot easier to deal with if it were possible to rename images, rather than have to delete them and then upload them again to the preferred title. WJBscribe (talk) 23:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

3) Shortcuts

Because it's really boring to tip in „Category”, „Template”, „Image”,... every time when you (for example) try to clean up a Category on Commons I suggest a common Shortcut which could be used without creating a redirect. For example: You have to tip in http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Whatever to get to an arbitrarily Template. I suggest that you also should be able to tip in http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/T:Whatever to get to that template.
After five hours of cleaning up categories I was fat up with tipping „Category“.

How about CAT for Category and IMG for Image. These are straightforward and used in every day life. I am a little bit concerned with T = Template because it's easily confused with talk page. OhanaUnitedTalk page 18:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I know that the „T” would match for talk pages and templates and maybe the talk page is the better one, because it would may be used more often. If it's possible it would may be better if the the Shortcuts are as short as possible. F.e.: „C” could be kept for „Category”. „CAT” could be added as additional shortcut.
It should also be possible to just write small letters.
--D-Kuru 11:04, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
...it... it's boring? Seriously? I've seen arguments for similar requests that were a lot more compelling than "it's boring". It isn't hard to type it at all... EVula // talk // // 22:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
maybe "it's boring" are not the right words to says what I actually wanted to say.
I don't know how should I explain it, but you can have the same experience: Clean up a category where you have to write ~200 times category (the change of the category in different images not included). Boring is harmless to the word that would describe what you think about writing category after 5 hours of categorising.
--D-Kuru 13:43, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
I don't see why you're writing it 200 times to begin with; most categories can be navigated via their parent categories. If you use tabbed browsing, you could just go to the parent category and open all children categories in separate tabs. At the very least, you can always copy and paste... EVula // talk // // 17:40, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I see that you haven't categorised many pictures so far. I'm using tabs, but if you want to clean up a category you would have ~10-20 Tabs only with categories. If you go click through to a single category you get mad if you do this for 5 hours. Moreover it's much faster if you tip in Category: or whatever instead for searching for a single category in the "parent category". I'm not talikng about small categories which can be cleaned up in one hour. I'm talking about categories like Commons:Category:Fractals and bigger. It would take a lot of time just to open all subcategories and you would have to search for the category where you want to put the pictures in.
However, such shortcuts aren't limited only to categories. There could also be shortcuts for User talk (UT*|), Template (TE*|), Image (I(MG)*|), Special:Contributions (C(ON)*|), ... *| just a suggestion
I'm sure that there are some more Wikipedians who would support my idea. There are some more advantages that you may not see.
--D-Kuru 12:00, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, still not seeing the benefit, but that doesn't affect anyone but me. :)
Really, this sounds more like a proposal for Commons specifically; the MediaWiki system already supports creating shortcuts like this (for example, there's a "WP:" namespace that automatically redirects to "Wikipedia:" on enwiki). You'd be better off asking the community to enable them for what you have in mind than in trying to get Meta to enable it everywhere (which would be a bit over the line, especially when non-English projects have different words for "category"; a "C:" namespace could be downright confusing on some sites). EVula // talk // // 22:11, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

( 4) A fair use Commons )

It's a bit absurd that you have to upload all fair-use-images/logos/pictures-of-builddings-and-sculptures-in-countries-which-don't-support-the-Freedom-of-Panorma several times in different wikis. It could be a lot of space and time saved if there would be something like Commons but where only for fair use images. You could tag the images with different taggs and the different wikis know which taggs they are allowed to include. So you could upload a screenshot tagged with a fair use template and all wikis which don't allow fair use wouldn't include it. Another big advantage would be that you only would have to move the picture from Commons to fair use-Commons instead of deleting the image and reuploading it. Something like en:Non-free use rationale could be included and every image where this template isn't included gets deleted automatically after one day.
What I haven't solved so far: 1) How to manage that there will be uploaded hundred and thousands of unused logos, screenshots etc. 2) How to kick out all user created images licenced under a fair use (The keynote of wikipedia is still that it is free. So It wouldn't make so much sence if you would be able to upload your images (taken with your own camera) under the fair use clause. 3) As said: The keynote of wikipedia is that it's free (I think that's the reason why it's called "The free encyclopedia") and it would be dissembling if you create something like a fair use-commons. Even the advantage should be highlight again. One solution could be that only trusted users are allowed to contribute to fair use-commons.

The definition of fair use precludes this from ever happening. Fair use, by definition, applies to a particular use. Thus, one can never have a repository of fair use content as one can for free content.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 20:43, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

May there should be a different section for every idea.
Tell what you think about my ideas. --D-Kuru 19:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


What's the status on this. The current topic line in the news reads as a question, and, if only to make things more clear there, could someone provide a status update in regards to where we are with the new version of the license? Cheers, —Anonymous DissidentTalk 11:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm preparing making a page that shows license status.--Kwj2772 12:48, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
I created Licensing status. Please change this document if your project have changed copyright policy. Thanks.--Kwj2772 13:15, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
They can't. Only the Wikimedia Foundation can do so, and that decision will be made after a referendum. So, your page serves no purpose.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 00:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Default language in Special:Preferences across all WMF projects?

Is there a way, if you have a SUL account, to have your language setting defaulted to the same language in Special:Preferences, no matter what language wiki you go to? For example, my language preference is set for English here and at English Wikipedia, but if I had never visited Spanish Wikipedia before, I would have to figure out how, in Spanish, to get to Special:Preferences, and change the language setting there to English. Cirt (talk) 21:31, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh yes, while we know where the preference button is across all projects, it's a pain in the butt to try figure out which gadget is for "suppress banner ads" in Polish or French or German. OhanaUnitedTalk page
I think Pathoschild is working on something similar, I'll poke him about this discussion, a Global preference has always been his top priority ^_^..--Cometstyles 00:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
My intention is to use SynchCrosswiki to set the desired preferences on each wiki individually. This isn't an optimal solution. —Pathoschild 02:47:20, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Cirt: Not yet. —Pathoschild 02:47:20, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Oh well. Thanks for the replies, good to know there are other people thinking about this problem. :( Cirt (talk) 04:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
It would indeed be nifty if this could be provided one way or another. ++Lar: t/c 13:19, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. Anything that makes cross-wiki collaboration easier is a plus.--Aervanath 17:19, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Канопус Киля

I'm propose to unblock global account Канопус Киля. He is nod vandalized Meta since October. 14:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

How can you know this? --Thogo (talk) 19:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
The person behind the unified account Канопус Киля has 'vandalized' with dozens of sock-puppets on French Wikipedia. See:
Strong opposed; any action of unblock this global account should be seen, by many pattrollers on wp-FR, as a hostile action, because of the huge perturbations made by this user, not only on wp-FR. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 19:16, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Hegesippe has forgotten this → [1]. − Elfix × talk (fr) 19:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
It is indeed very nice of him not to have changed our userpages with penis and/or hitler images for at least... 2 weeks ?
DarkoNeko 19:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
For Your information, Meta:Requests_for_CheckUser_information/Archives/2008/11#Drone.40meta, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 19:31, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
ru:user talk: : it is said to be a NAT IP and the name of our little vandal appears on it (but I don't undertsand russian, so...) DarkoNeko 21:17, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm user Arben for Russian Wikipedia. 17:37, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
No. Actions on other WMF sites should have repercussions globally, and that's exactly what this is. EVula // talk // // 22:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
No. Constant vandalism on ru-wiki, last instance 2 days ago ru:Википедия:Проверка участников/Тяжёлый рок. EvgenyGenkin 18:55, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Last time it was yesterday: ru:Википедия:Проверка участников/Hi Jell и другие :-) --DmRodionov 19:00, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Strong opposed, this user - a serial move-vandal from Russian Wikipedia — Ferrer 12:11, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Канопус Киля has restart to vandalize fr.wikipedia : [2] (4 accounts blocked since 25 november). − Elfix × talk (fr) 18:50, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Blocking batch "ultra-stubs" creation?

Recently we on be@wiki have got a user (or several users, possibly) who insist on creation of literally thousands of quite empty and uninformative stubs on subjects like supernovas, pulsars, asteroids etc., also invent their own rules for orthography. This user(s) communicates tersely and abruptly and completely ignores the protests of community. When blocked, this person creates a new account, often differing only with a number (Test, Test2, Test3, Test4), often waiting for a late hours (like 2 am).

Is there an option to rollback the complete contribution of a user? Programmatically, possibly?

Also, the groups' ACLs in the Mediawiki mention the "ratelimit" but I couldn't find any control for throttling the rate of articles creation and/or edits. Is there actually such a "knob"?

Generally, what an administrators could/should do in such sutuation? Excepting the complain to provider, which is slim chance anyway. Talking proved ineffective. Yury Tarasievich 07:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

A checkuser may shed some light on whether a block or rangeblock might do good or not. There is a way to revert all edits a user makes but I don't know about creates. ++Lar: t/c 19:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately, rangeblock isn't especially good. This guy actually creates a new account, launches a script which creates tons of crap, one of admins blocks him; then another account is created and the story repeats itself. Mockery. Yury Tarasievich 20:42, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, if his ip or ip range is blocked, he cannot make a new account, nor edit with an existing account from that ip or range. The only problem would be if he has a dynamic ip or proxy that is also used by other, innocent editors, or if he is rapidly switching ip without staying in the same range (which usually means he uses open proxies). - Andre Engels 09:05, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Seems like this doesn't work that way. Have a look at be@wiki recent changes for yourself. Yury Tarasievich 13:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
I can't see there whether there has been a CU or what has been the outcome... - Andre Engels 18:55, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
There is a mw:Extension:Nuke for cases like this, but it is not activated on be.wikipedia. --::Slomox:: >< 19:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Darkoneko delted most of the articles by bot and a few I myself. The local block only is not good because of an old bug 11148.
The other sysop contacted me today (permalink) and I think most mess had been cleaned up. SWMT had been informed about this incident and will help if locals are not available.
Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 20:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

FYI, there is an open shell request for activating Nuke on small wikis (#15685) specifically for this purpose.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 00:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

  • I don't know which settings are enabled on the be wiki, but en Wikipedia has an option to stop account creation and/or only block the IP (and one to exempt people like admins from IP blocks...- 12:56, 27 November 2008 (UTC)


Please somebody may help me in wiki commons bacause they block me forever!!!!--Vitor mazuco 16:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

They gave you many warnings about uploading copyrighted materials. You probably should not have kept doing that. --Arctic.gnome 20:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposing a new MediaWiki extension : Global Context Variables

This discussion has just started on French Wiktionary, but is more general. I copy here my proposal and come comments (in French) for a specification (before writing code).
Don't modify this message here. This is a copy of a discussion on French Wiktionary. Please translate to English below and comment it there verdy_p 19:28, 12 November 2008 (UTC). Note: I completed the translation to English myself, there may remain some typos. verdy_p 20:53, 12 November 2008 (UTC).

Most of this large discussion is now included in another page, Meta:GlobalContextVariables Extension, for longer term (if the Wikimedia Forum needs to be purged), whose content is included just below. verdy_p 20:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

This is perhaps something best discussed on mediawiki-l, thanks.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:35, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

nl-Wikipedia reaches 500.000 articles

Greetings from the Dutch Wikipedia!! - Romaine 12:56, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

And for who wishes to have a drink and toast with us, the bar can be found on: w:nl:WP:K. Romaine 18:10, 30 November 2008 (UTC)