Wikimedia Forum/Archives/2010-07

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Warning! Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in July 2010, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

Switch back to monobook

Please get rid of Vector on the Wikimedia foundation projects. It is much harder to use, it malfunctions, and I generally dislike it. Immunize 22:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

You can change it back from Special:Preferences. Jafeluv 07:50, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
The change to Vector has created more problems then it has solved. There is no reason (in my opinion) not to switch back to monobook. Immunize 17:39, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Then feel free to do so. Until your argument that the switch has caused more problems then it has solved is based on evidence, there's no point even discussing it. The Wikimedia user experience project will not be derailed because you don't happen to like the skin.  — mikelifeguard@meta:~$  05:26, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
+1 for monobook as default. Hillgentleman 05:16, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
I have already switched (personally) back to monobook. However, anonymous users have no choice but to accept the Vector skin, which is a problem. Immunize 18:44, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
They are generally encouraged to create an account, where they can change their preferred skin. --Diego Grez return fire 18:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
I also like the Monobook and old editing interface more. OhanaUnitedTalk page 13:39, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Portuguese Wikipedia governance issues

Contributions are most welcome to the discussion and search for improvements to a problem which far exceeds a single Wikimedia project.

Suggestions of other ongoing related projects would also be highly appreciated.


Virgilio A. P. Machado

Vapmachado 03:26, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


I am an innocent editor, guilty of nothing but perhaps being a jot uncivil and voicing my concerns at a recent RfA on Simple. I have endeavored to contact the admins on Simple through the mailing list, or through Special:EmailUser, but these attempts were met with no replies until just yesterday, when Barras emailed me only after I emailed him directly. My interpretation of the contents is that my case was discussed, but another CU was neglected to be run, showing that they really don't care. I come to Meta as the last resort. I ask that as you read this request, you keep an open mind, remaining impartial and disregarding my blocks, should they make you regard me differently. On June 23, Fr33kman, an admin and CU on Simple, blocked me for "Bad behaviour/harassment: general attitue, trolling, being blocked on enwiki". On my talk page, he stated that CU evidence established that I am Mythdon, a banned user. He later contacted the admin that blocked me on En, saying that he has only "great suspicions that he may well be a banned user", insinuating that it was not confirmed. As of now, Fr33kman has no evidence to believe I am Mythdon. I feel that Fr33kman has lied and used CU evidence to reinforce the block and exile me. At the aforementioned RfA, Fr33kman nominated a candidate, and I opposed. Conflicts between him and myself ensued, evincing that he is partial and definitely wanted to get rid of me. I suspect that Fr33kman has used his extra tool of CU to make the block be considered indelible because I am a sockpuppet, which probably caused me to be ignored in my email requests. I request that someone CU me again to prove I am not Mythdon, and possibly Fr33kman's CU tools should be revoked, as having a CU who makes specious claims and uses his tools too reinforce that is outrageously dangerous for Wikipedia. I have other diffs to show that Fr33kman is misusing the tools. Furthermore, in my case, after he revealed that CU evidence indicated I was Mythdon, Fr33kman revoked talk page access malapropos. This should only be done if the blocked user is misusing the page. Fr33kman did claim that I used proxies, and I attest to that. Wikipedia servers are blocked where I edit, so I have no other choice. Before a CU is run again, I wish to spell out four fine distinctions between the manner in which I edit and that in which Mythdon edits:

  1. I write edit summaries of about one word; Mythdon writes a sentence.
  2. Mythdon still has talk page access on both Simple and En. I don't know why he isn't discussing the reason of his block on either project. When I got blocked on En, I persisted in my unblock requests until talk page access was revoked.
  3. Mythdon had a custom signature, while I never developed one.
  4. Mythdon has very few content contributions. You can see how much I've added to my draft (User:Codedon/draft) since I created it (diff). In this revision, I made major changes.

I ask that anyone who has interacted with me in the past refrain from reverting or blocking me and otherwise recuse from commenting in this discussion. I see that Fr33kman has a request for global sysop but will not comment there. If he sees this, I welcome him to explain to me what happened. I hope that this issue can be redressed as soon as possible. Codedon 20:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

As it looks like you think that Fr33kman has abused his power as a CU or lies at the result, it may be better for you to contact the ombudsmen commission, as I already said in my mail. They are the more correct instance. -Barras talk 20:39, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I did not contact them because my concerns do not relate to "complaints about violations of the privacy policy", as it says at the page you linked. Is there anywhere else which I am more suited to post? Codedon 20:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
You realize you can be blocked for being a sockpuppet even if CU evidence doesn't prove one way or the other right? This is common. -Djsasso 20:44, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I do realize that, but Fr33kman gave no explanation as to why he believed I was Mythdon. I think I said that I do not want people who have interacted with me before to comment here. Codedon 20:48, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
This is not the correct venue to bring up this issue. It needs to be dealt with on whatever project you are blocked on. No one here has the authority to override a local block. Continuing to forum shop will result in a block. Tiptoety talk 21:27, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
As Tipotety says; noone here will overrule a local block; especially not for a active community like simple. Also, this does not belong at the Ombudsman-commision, but if it's needed a second opinion, other checkusers or a steward will gladly help, but the request has to come from simple (someone from simple, an other admin, checkuser, whatever), and not meta. Laaknor 21:58, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I wasn't aware of that; I believed that Meta is the central place of all wikis. Anyhow, my talk page was revoked inappropriately on Simple, so I couldn't discuss it there. Is there any way I can request for it to be restored? Codedon 22:00, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
That too must be done locally. You can email the blocking administrator, or any administrator for that matter. Tiptoety talk 22:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
The problem is that in revoking talk page access, Fr33kman also removed email access. Can I contact him on his talk page here? Codedon 05:57, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Since I have no other method to contact him, I think it would be all right if I asked him on his talk page here. Codedon 20:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
I will restore your talkpage access at simple, so that it can be discussed there. Meta is the wrong place to discuss these things. The reason who have been ignored, is because the community of admins on simple considers the matter closed. fr33kman t - c 23:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, but the page is still protected. Please unprotect it. Thanks, Codedon 00:07, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Done. --Bsadowski1 00:16, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Law of what country on different projects?

This issue popped up in several discussions on and there were different opinions about it. Does an editor of Polish Wikipedia have to obey the law:

  1. of the US, where the servers are located,
  2. of the country he/she is writing from,
  3. of Poland, because the site is in Polish,
  4. combination of some of the points above?

Polish Wikipedia is just an example I'm the most familiar with but the question concerns other language versions of Wikimedia projects as well. I've tried looking for the answer on Help:Legal issues for editors but it doesn't say anything about this detail. Lampak 10:14, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I would suggest on "best interest" approach used by embassy of X country which they applied in employment terms and condition in whatever country they were in. They use the law of their country (country X) if it is in their best interest (as long as it didn't broke the law the country they were in), and they use the law of the country they were in (and disregard the law of their country, country X) if it is more appealing to do so (i.e. it cost cheaper than using the law of their own country). 11:34, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
It depends entirely on the kind of law: corporate, criminal, copyright, etc. Guido den Broeder 14:07, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Say, copyright. Lampak 22:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Images of minors on user talk pages

Greetings. I was recently involved in proposing for deletion a normal head-and-shoulders photo of a 14-year-old boy on a user's talk page over at the Spanish Wikipedia. My argument was that, even if we could be certain that the person in question was the person uploading the photo, current Spanish legislation would not permit the photo, thereby compromising Wikipedia. Spanish Wikipedia guidelines currently make no mention of whether photos of minors are permitted on talk pages, and English Wikipedia only seems mention it regarding offensive images. An administrator over at Spanish Wikipedia has suggested I raise the matter here as it concerns Wikipedia Foundation, rather than the current guidelines. I don't know the exact situation of Spanish law, but our kids' school recently had a hard time from the authorities because they had allowed a journalist and photographer to do a report on the school without first having obtained written permission from each and every parent. Please look into this, as I fear it could be a potential problem for Wikipedia and one which could easily be prevented by expressly prohibiting - if necessary - such photos on talk pages by including said clause in the guidelines. Cheers! Technopat 22:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC) (Signature in red here, but easily located at both English and Spanish Wikipedias)

Fixed link. Cheers! Technopat 22:31, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Emergency on Wiktionary

See Recent changes, an admin (User:Volants) has just deleted the main page and several other pages, and blocked several admins. Can you desysop him immediately? 12:34, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Laaknor restored the main page and emergency desysopped the account. -Barras talk 12:37, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. It seems he may have been Wonderfool. 12:40, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
You should probably report this stuff on IRC (#wikimedia-stewards on Freenode) or on SRP. Preferably IRC when it's an emergency. Laaknor 13:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Violations by local admins

What need to do in this cases? Often this is violations of blocking policy. For example, today user:Alex_Smotrov block my account ru:user:Викификатор at And reason: user name is inappropriate / неприемлемое имя участника (нецензурное, оскорбительное, рекламное или провокационное). See also: ru:Википедия:Проверка участников/Викификатор. There are no any such in my username. And then. This block is reason for emergency desysop ru:user:Alex_Smotrov (use admin tools for personal wars with Wikipedia users)?

That's what we have ArbComs for... And a single block isn't reason for emergency desysop. Laaknor 15:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Ваш IP-адрес автоматически заблокирован в связи с тем, что он недавно использовался кем-то из заблокированных участников.

Заблокировавший его администратор Alex Smotrov(A) указал следующую причину блокировки: автоблокировка из-за совпадения IP-адреса с Викификатор (причина блокировки — «[[ВП:ПБ#2-7-1|неприемлемое имя участни Идентификатор вашей автоблокировки — 180186. Обязательно указывайте его при обращении к администраторам, в противном случае они не смогут точно определить, какая из автоблокировок относится к вам. Ваша блокировка заканчивается в 14:41, 17 июля 2010 (UTC).--Prima klasy4na 15:47, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Stewards won't block anyone on a large wiki like ruwiki (especially not an admin), and since there exists an ArbCom there, we will not do desysop, without going through ArbCom first. Only reason we could have for intervening without going through ArbCom, would be a compromised account, deleting/blocking *a lot* of pages/users which would require immidiate action, and that clearly hasn't happened here. You'll have to contact ruwikis ArbCom, by the ways that ArbCom has asked to be contacted. Laaknor 16:48, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I mean deleting a lot of pages or blocking users wrongfully. We had one case of this yesterday enwiktionary... Laaknor 18:19, 17 July 2010 (UTC) attacking in the main page because of the depictions of Muhammad

See w:ace:Pola:Lhi gamba peukabeh Nabi Muhammad saw, Laaknor intervention, w:ace:Marit_Ureuëng_Nguy:Si_Gam_Acèh#Don.27t_attack_other_Wikipedias.21, w:ace:Marit_Ureuëng_Nguy:Hercule#Wikipedia_and_Islam. We need to discuss with them and explain them why they can't do such a thing... (The foundation-l thread is already way OT.) Nemo 14:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

See Requests for comment/ace.wikipedia and Prophet Muhammad images. Nemo 15:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
What does this compromise suggestion fail, please tell me. ? --Juhko 15:06, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest a policy page, where the policy against the inclusion of images of the prophet on wp:ace, if that is the local consensus, is explained in neutral terms. Add a friendly warning that such images may exist on other wikis. You could perhaps put a link to that page in the welcome message to new users. Guido den Broeder 09:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

2010 Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content

This is quite important, but wasn't linked anywhere but on list. Nemo 01:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

opting out request from mr wiki and mr wiktionary

Please some one help to communicate SWMT members following decesion of local community level by mr-wiki. Hope & request positive understanding and co-operation in following respect.Mahitgar (He who knows ,wants to know and and loves to keep others informed) 05:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

  • We at mr wiki community has been self sufficient in routin patrol of mr wiki and mr wiktionary,(We would still need meta support to controll only inter wiki spammsters ,as and when that happens), We still need support of steward/global sysop/SWMT at our sister projects namely mr wikibooks ,and mr wikiquote ,We wish steward/global sysop/SWMT team avoid edits at mr wiki and mr wiktionary other than those to control interwiki spammers. Mahitgar (He who knows ,wants to know and and loves to keep others informed) 14:54, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
With reference to above discussion we posted a poll at Marathi Languge Wikipedia in above respect at following page : Poll for Opting out of SWMT and Global Sysop Interferance , Opting out proposal has got 5 votes in support and none opposing.Please do the needfull at your earliestMahitgar (He who knows ,wants to know and and loves to keep others informed) 11:13, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
mrwiki has been added to the list of wikis where global sysops do not have access to the tools. For mrwiktionary you will need to discuss there first and then come back; as Laaknor said. Discussions shall be made on each project. Thank you.
--dferg ☎ talk 07:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
SWMT members are still editing on mr wiki and we need help in communication them that doing so is not favoured by mr wiki community Mahitgar (He who knows ,wants to know and and loves to keep others informed) 11:59, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Ehm, sorry; but we can't (and will not) prevent anybody in good standing from editing the projects. That's not possible and won't be done. What we can do is dissabling global sysops from the wikis they've opted out, which has been done. --dferg ☎ talk 14:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Who are editing, and what are they editing? I can't find any SWMT-members that have done any editing they shouldn't have in recentchanges... Laaknor 14:57, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
It is just a question of respecting and communicating a local level policy decesion and indipendance of local wiki to make and respect such decesions.
Kindly do note , probabably we are one of very few wikipedias which has a support/help page for विकिपीडिया:Marathi language support tools for non Marathi Language Wikipedians.But we want always to be ahead in defending principle of our local level indipendance, and fankly if we need to sustain as local marathi wiki we do not have any other option but to defend our local decesion making indipendance in principle at every wiki forum.

In our view the way present SWMT fuctions has no feature of central way of understanding a local wiki.Present situation of SWMT is very much an organised way to proactively open promotion and no bar licence to individuals to edit without having any depth about local wikipedia policies and intrests and language.
While replying it self I do have an example where as you mention user:Hercule has placed a </nowiki>Template:Delet</nowiki> tag on a page this is a uncontribution in question Truly where he placed delet template is an additional category page, may be still un-used but was created as part of a specific project.
It is not question that page needs to be deleted or not, the question is said user is not aware of a local project to which that category page is related to.Because simply he has neither checked where the page is linked, nor he would understand what is written on related project page in Marathi languge which he simply does not know.As a local decesion tomorrow we decide to delet that page or no, simply the other person was neither aware of our other project nor he can understand our language.
This is one case but am I( or for that matter other local wikipedians) expected to run behind them at their local local languge wikipedia talk page, his english languge user talk page and then at his meta talk page.And again if I am( means any other marathi fellow ) not fluent in english to explain non Marathi fellow, he will end up asking ten other people asking for support and rather than doing furter constructive work in his own wikipedia spends time in un productive activity of explaning in length.
Besides for an example in this case itself I am fighting alone to get a local decesion implemented.Even local wikipedians are not aware that the discussion has come to this page from earlier informed SWMT talk page.I need to go back and explan back at local central discussion page what we are discussing here. In each of furture cases we are going to end up discssing the things at places other than local Marathi Languge Wikipedia,and that is not fun.

All those people who do not have any understang of local community level policies, decesions and langugaes need not interfere even if the things may be done in good standing or any editing they shouldn't have. It is just a question of respecting and communicating this is very much local level decesion and not recent one even for Local mr -wiki has indipendant bot policy.
Besides one of our Indian Sister Languge Hindi has same script as of Marathi Language and even 60% common vocabulory.But still since begining we do have clearcut policies beyond which we do not want edit indulgence from Non Marathi Language wikipedians.
We Marathi Languge people culturally are very sensitive on certain aspects and specialy so about the way languge is written and its grammar, explaning certain cultural aspects which may take another book to be written how would accepting non-Marathi interferance may affect local wikipedia negatively at times.I still remeember a case where people having very brief exposure to devenagari script did inter wiki links and apage of a Indian godess got linked with a pop singer , and fans of popsinger lady kept adding photograph of the pop singer in to the page of a godess, and all that happened because of some one had a poor knowledge of our language.Since Indian Wikipedias are still not that known among local population at large, at local level we (local wikipedians) are in need to go more public explaining benefits of wikipedia, But any small mistake arising out of non understanding of our languge and any mistake happens in content, we local wikipedians do not have capacity to cope up with unnecessary adverse public reaction. So please do leave us alone in the matters of our local intrest.
We are opposed to the fact every now and then we/our editors run behind searching a non local wikipedian and spend time in explaining what was right and what was wrong.
We want and have given indipendance to extarnal wikipedians only upto interwikilinks and controlling spamsters who are spamming all the wikis and clearly not beyond.
If Wikimedia Foundation and Meta can realy take care of all our local language wikimedia needs without bothering about local policies and sentiments then,Please do take such a official decesion that local wikipedians do not have right to define local policies and please communicate the same to us, then onwards let others only develop entire Marathi language wikipedia, we will happily resign.
Thanks and regards
Mahitgar (He who knows ,wants to know and and loves to keep others informed) 06:24, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Deceased anomalies

Hi, I created the Death anomalies table in order to identify anomalies where we have biographies that show someone as dead on one wikipedia and living on others. So far only DE and EN wikis are getting reports out of it, but we are certainly finding the EN report a useful way to improve a bunch of articles on EN wiki. Can anyone suggest how to make other projects aware that this is available? WereSpielChequers 22:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Problems with $IP - Wrong path set - Fatal error: require_once() [function.require]: Failed opening required '/home/content/html/'

Hi there,

I have installed already my second wiki at two different shared webspaces I'm hosting at GoDaddy. The first installation worked without problems. Now I ordered a new webspace and maybe the configuration of this new server deviates from the other one. Also the second installation said: "Finished, without problems", but as soon I try accessing my wiki, the following message appears:

Warning: require_once(/home/content/html/ [function.require-once]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/content/html/wiki/index.php on line 39

Fatal error: require_once() [function.require]: Failed opening required '/home/content/html/' (include_path='.:/usr/local/php5/lib/php') in /home/content/html/wiki/index.php on line 39

As I'm not very familiar with Linux and server administration, I've no idea what the reason is.

I modified the LocalSettings.php file and set the right link manually: $IP = "/home/content/html/wiki";

But it still does not work.

Does anybody can help me or made similar experiences with setting up a wiki?

Messages are greatly appreciated!



Someone on OTRS has asked why we don't have audio CAPTCHAs. I can't seem to find any discussion of the concept on Meta, anyone know whether the idea's been considered, in benefit of the visually impaired? -- Zanimum 00:03, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I think everyone agrees that we want it, but AFAIK, it's just not enabled because there's no free source or something like that. For more information/places where this was discussed:
Cbrown1023 talk 01:17, 30 July 2010 (UTC)