Meta:Babel/Archives/2021-11

Meet the new Movement Charter Drafting Committee members

The Movement Charter Drafting Committee election and selection processes are complete.

The committee will convene soon to start its work. The committee can appoint up to three more members to bridge diversity and expertise gaps.

If you are interested in engaging with Movement Charter drafting process, follow the updates on Meta and join the Telegram group.

With thanks from the Movement Strategy and Governance team

15:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Mi Wikimedia no envía correos de resetear contraseña

Hola, tengo Wikimedia sobre Raspberry Pi 4. Funciona perfectamente. La tengo privada, es decir con clave de acceso para poder entrar. El problema está que he creado usuarios nuevos y le he agregado su correo yen la contraseña le he puesto que la genere automáticamente y se la envíe al nuevo usuario. Sorpresa que no envía correo al usuario nuevo. El usuario pone su nombre de user y le da a olvide su contraseña y el sistema le dice que le ha enviado un correo con el restablecimiento de la contraseña, pero no recibe nada. He probado a olvidar mi contraseña (admin) y si me la envía a mi correo. Que hago mal? A alguien le ocurre esto? El Localsetting.php he agregado SMTP con mis datos del correo del admin. No sé qué hacer más.

— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rubicop (talk) 4 November 2021 (UTC)

@Rubicop: Hola. Desde esta página no podemos ayudarte con tu pregunta. Quizás tengas más suerte preguntando en mw:Project:Support desk (en inglés, preferentmente, dado que la mayoría de los desarrolladores que responden allí son angloparlantes). En esa página hay una caja a la derecha con más enlaces donde se puede obtener asistencia en relación con las instalaciones MediaWiki en otros sitios web. Un saludo, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:18, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Help in regard to local admins/crats revocations

Hello there! I'm a bureaucrat from SqWiki. Can someone inform me a bit about the steps that would need to be taken if we'd want to change the time needed for admins/crats to have their privileges removed automatically? Where we can see the needed time? How does the overall procedure work in general? Our list of admins has started to become a bit large de jure but de facto we only have 1-2 admins active while others just do 1 edit only in some months/years just so they can keep their status and disappear for the rest of the time. (Maybe the same can be said about the crats list.) We'd like for things to be a bit more flexible, easier to become one (that part is on us) and easier to lose your privileges automatically if you're not active (and maybe easier to regain them once you become active again). For that I plan to open a discussion with my community but I want to be well-informed before so I can be clear with them, given that the topic might be of a delicate nature. I of course know that we can remove them locally (at least the admins) but I'd like for a system a bit "automatized" set upon certain criteria so it feels fair and it doesn't leave much place for complains, which can arise if the removal is let on local crats' hands. - Klein Muçi (talk) 21:48, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

@Klein Muçi: This is not really a question for this form as this is meant to be metawiki only conversation. The global policy for admin removals is AAR, and wikis are able to have their specific policies for the removal of accounts with any advanced right. There are a list from AAR of wikis that have policies different from the global. If the stewards were addressing a matter at a wiki they would want to see that there has been a discussion and a consensus of the community for them to act. So if you are looking for an automated process outside of AAR then have a community discussion and set your criteria. You can see English Wikisource's policy and processes for appointment and removal at s:en:Wikisource:Adminship and you can see the list of wikis that do something at d:Q4039395.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:54, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst, thanks a lot for your explanation! I found this page. I'll try to ask at the talk page there for further details. If you want to move the conversation you are free to do so. :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 00:07, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
@Klein Muçi: That is the page that identifies local policies as mentioned above. If you develop a local policy for de-admin then it should be listed there after you have had your local discussion and it has reached a consensus.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:16, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst, assuming local consensus was reached, would it need any extra step or can we just put our project there together with the limits and they're guaranteed to be taken into consideration? - Klein Muçi (talk) 00:21, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
It is my understanding that if your community reaches a reasonable consensus around administrator term, and the process for appointing and removing they are seen as your process. If you have a removal component for inactivity then that should be noted on the AAR subpage, if there is no activity component in your process then the global AAR process will apply for activity. If your community has a stricter process then usually the 'crats at a wiki will eityher remove per that community's rules where they have that right, or where they do not then they would put a removal request at SRP for the stewards to undertake.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:01, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst, no, we're talking exactly for an inactivity removal component only. We want, for example, to switch it from 1 edit in 2 years to, let's say just for an example, 50 edits in 1 year. If that quota isn't met, you get removed for inactivity. Is that possible if we are able to reach a consensus locally? - Klein Muçi (talk) 06:23, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst, sorry for the disturb. Maybe my last message has gone unnoticed. I need an answer so I can start the procedures at my local community. If I'm not asking the right person, can you direct me to the right place/user? - Klein Muçi (talk) 10:59, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Klein Muçi: AAR is the default removal for inactivity (please read the corresponding RFC for full background), it is the minimalistic approach while trying to leave decision making in local communities. Anything else is a variation and has to be a community consensus and noted on the AAR subpage. Have your discussion, and reach your preference, then update the AAR subpage with your new policy and a permalink.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:10, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst, yes. I fully understand what you wrote. My question is if there is needed any extra steps beside that or not. If we have our discussion, reach our preference and then update the AAR subpage with our new policy and a permalink, is it guaranteed to be followed? Whatever it is that we agreed on our discussion? Or are there limits we can't cross? That's what I was asking. Because I need to state these limits, if they exist, in the beginning of the discussion. - Klein Muçi (talk) 11:37, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
@Klein Muçi: I can only tell you to what the global community has agreed as their minimum standard for activity, and that is why I pointed to the RfC and the process that it set (yes, I was one of the architects of the original draft, the community amended through discussion). Stewards generally wish to see a community consensus for community's standards, and as I am no longer a steward so it is not my place to tell you the thinking of the current batch of steward's and how that discussion may occur and circumstance around which it occurs.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:44, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst, I understand. So at least there is not any known limits stated somewhere or any extra steps needed beside reaching an agreement and stating it there after the policy is done. Anything else I believe will be communicated to me by stewards if something is wrong after we get through with it, (if we do get through with it). Thanks a lot! :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 11:47, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Policy is not particularly negotiable, and where it is not followed your process and decision can be challenged. Convention is negotiable. Interpretation is negotiable.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:51, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM newsletter migration from Outreach to Meta

 

Hi everyone,

I'm here to announce and discuss an important project that the GLAM and Culture team at the Wikimedia Foundation is taking part in during the next few weeks.

Due to Outreach having a limited readership and visibility within the movement, our community newsletters (GLAM and Education) don’t always receive the attention they deserve. To address this, we’re working to facilitate with our colleagues in the Movement Communications team the migration of the This Month in GLAM newsletter from Outreach to Meta-Wiki.

Both teams are working on this task in the next few weeks in order to:

  1. Increase visibility and participation in the GLAM newsletter.
  2. Ensure the GLAM community has a place (Meta-Wiki) where they feel seen, engaged, and supported by the Wikimedia community, partners, and Foundation.
  3. Increase the amount of multilingual (or translatable) content to engage contributors from other languages and more regions.

This activity already has the support of the active newsletter’s main editors and it will also be accomplished by the newsletter main editor. It was also already announced in this October report in the newsletter, on Outreach's Village Pump, on social media, and on several mailing lists.

The migration of the report pages, talk pages, categories, and templates is planned to happen from November 19th to 30th, 2021. This period is important to accommodate the migration before the reports from next month. Any other modifications or corrections will be made before December 15th, 2021.

It is also important to notice that, as this is a migration, the pages from the newsletter on Outreach will move with their entire history and they will receive a redirect. For that reason, of course, that no content will be lost, forgotten, nor any page will be deleted or have its link erased.

If you have any other questions or ideas about the migration, please share your thoughts here or feel free to contact the GLAM & Culture team at glam wikimedia.org and the community editors at thismonthinglam gmail.com. --GFontenelle (WMF) (talk) 23:16, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

What does this mean in clear, understandable terms? Which pages will be imported (surely they will be imported as in Special:Import or equivalent mechanisms?), and under which titles? By whom? And what are "any other modifications or corrections" that will be made before December 15? Will outreachwiki be closed on December 15? --MF-W 00:46, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Hey @MF-Warburg, the conversation on Outreach's Village Pump mentioned above has more context that might be helpful. As for what will be imported and how, there's a phab task tracking that work. It sounds like an import/export should work with some redirects and cleanup on Outreach (via a bot). Modifications or corrections is just a way of saying anything we've missed or hadn't considered before the next newsletter is published. There are no plans to close outreach on the 15th. We're working to move just the newsletters for now. The folks at the WMF helping with this process, myself included, are excited to be part of this change and know that it's an important one. Appreciate the thoughts and questions. Chris Koerner (Wikimedia Foundation) [he/him] (talk) 18:47, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Request for comment

As this in some places already has been pointed out, before a large change can taken place like a move of contents from Outreach Wiki to Meta Wiki, a solid ground must be present. To use the momentum and to move forward and to come to a decision about moving contents to Meta, I have created a request for comment with a clear proposal that hopefully tackles all the concerns from the community. The proposal can be found on Requests for comment/Outreach migration. Romaine (talk) 13:09, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

PS: Just moving the GLAM newsletter is not possible because of technical limitations and because it is not a good idea to split the community and having them work on two platforms at the same time. Romaine (talk) 13:10, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Talk to the Community Tech: The future of the Community Wishlist Survey

 

Hello!

We, the team working on the Community Wishlist Survey, would like to invite you to an online meeting with us. It will take place on 30 November (Tuesday), 17:00 UTC on Zoom, and will last an hour. Click here to join.

Agenda

  • Changes to the Community Wishlist Survey 2022. Help us decide.
  • Become a Community Wishlist Survey Ambassador. Help us spread the word about the CWS in your community.
  • Questions and answers

Format

The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes without attribution will be taken and published on Meta-Wiki. The presentation (all points in the agenda except for the questions and answers) will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Polish, Spanish, German, and Italian. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the Community Wishlist Survey talk page or send to sgrabarczuk@wikimedia.org.

Natalia Rodriguez (the Community Tech manager) will be hosting this meeting.

Invitation link

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 20:03, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

With all due respect, I doubt holding Zoom meetings for stuff that happens on wiki (as the Community Wishlist does) is a good idea. Nobody should be forced to use third-party software and out themselves (totally or partially) just for their opinions to be heard. What happened to talk pages? This trend of outsourcing discussion of onwiki processes to offwiki platforms is most concerning to me. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 11:26, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Inactive importers

Daniel Kinzler (WMDE) (talk · contribs) and Thehelpfulone (talk · contribs) have been inactive on this wiki since 2018 and 2020, respectively. Daniel has also concluded employment with WMDE. Should importer rights be removed? --Rschen7754 23:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC)