Wikimedia Forum/Archives/2018-06

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 on 01 June 2018, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

TUSC

Are TUSC tokens still used at all? - Jmabel (talk) 03:22, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jmabel. Probably not. The link at w:en:Wikipedia:TUSC no longer works. Why do you ask? --MZMcBride (talk) 03:40, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Wondered if there was any reason for me still to keep track of my token and leave it posted on my user page on Commons. - Jmabel (talk) 03:47, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Tool server is reported to be shut down in 2014, cant imagine there is a use for that still. — xaosflux Talk 03:56, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Categories on Wikimedian

It looks like the categories on Wikimedian are broken. I'm not involved enough in meta to know the intent here, could someone else please sort this out? Thanks. - Jmabel (talk) 02:56, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

  • There also seems to be other malformed stuff on the page. - Jmabel (talk) 02:58, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
  • @Jmabel: I think I fixed the categories. I didn't see other malformed stuff on the page.--Micru (talk) 06:53, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

How can the Interaction Timeline be useful in reporting to noticeboards?

The Anti-Harassment Tools team built the Interaction Timeline to make it easier to understand how two people interact and converse across multiple pages on a wiki. The tool shows a chronological list of edits made by two users, only on pages where they have both made edits within the provided time range. Our goals are to assist users to make well informed decisions in incidents of user misconduct and to keep on-wiki discussions civil and focused on evidence.

We're looking to add a feature to the Interaction Timeline that makes it easy to post statistics and information to an on-wiki discussion about user misconduct. We're discussing possible wikitext output on the project talk page, and we invite you to participate! Thank you, For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Trust and Safety Specialist, Community health initiative (talk) 21:50, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

How to know the importance of translation work

When people open the page of translation requirement, all works need to be done are listed. We can sort it by name of the message group, number of the messages, number of completed and needed updating. However, for some language such as Chinese, there is a lot of work to do. But I don't know to begin at where could make more contribution. Is there any way, to indicate which message is the most important or emergent one?--Sances tb (talk) 15:27, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

An aggregate group exists for the high priority translations, but I'm not sure translation admins are keeping it up to date. You could provide suggestions on what is most important for you and ask that the translation admins add it to the group.
Apart from time-sensitive requests (which are usually advertised on translators-l), the most important translations are generally those which are useful for many years ahead, mostly the global policies and the user manual (which should mostly be on MediaWiki.org by now). --Nemo 19:14, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Project-wide protests for the copyright directive

Some Wikimedia projects are discussing ways to raise awareness about the consequences of the copyright directive before July 5 (see also WMF Board Statement Opposing the EU Copyright Package, How the EU copyright proposal will hurt the web and Wikipedia). The German Wikipedia had already run a banner earlier.

Are there other ongoing discussions? Is some other project interested in reusing either the "neutral" discussion page target (EU policy/2018 European Parliament vote) or the call to action (EU policy/European Parliament vote in 2018)?

Note, I would expect the countries without freedom of panorama to be most interested, since the July 5th plenary is our last chance to get the Parliament to follow the lead of the Internal Market Committee and recommend EU-wide FOP. These countries/languages usually also have the MEPs who are most attached to traditional copyright models. --Nemo 19:09, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

See also EU policy/2018 European Parliament vote and translations in

--Atlasowa (talk) 07:38, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

--Atlasowa (talk) 09:03, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Hi, any ideas, on how can a non-EU language Wikipedia express support?--Abiyoyo (talk) 09:09, 4 July 2018 (UTC)