Meta:Requests for help from a sysop or bureaucrat/Archives/2014-04

Request for CentralNotice banner to chilean contest

Hi all!, I need some help to create a CentralNotice banner for a planned contest in Chile related with Wikivoyage and Commons (WikiTour). This contest is organizated by Wikimedia Chile. I don't know how to be the banner, but as I see in the WMAR request, the banner should be the same. We have only one campaign:

• link: http://wikitour.cl
• from April 5th to May 4th
• logged-in and anonymous users.
• only in Chile, only in Wikipedia, Wikivoyage and Commons.
• text1: Concursa con las fotografías de tus viajes y ayúdanos a preservar los paisajes y tradiciones de nuestro país
• text2: Participa en Wiki Tour, desde el 5 de abril al 4 de mayo.

Thanks in advance. Superzerocool (talk) 01:34, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

@Superzerocool: Created banner (preview), added to CentralNotice/Calendar (diff), created campaign. Thanks for asking well in advance. I can also change/remove the image from the banner if you want. If this logo is under a free license, maybe you could upload it to Commons so it could be used. Regards, PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:50, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

@PiRSquared17: wow... thanks a lot. The logo is under free license in WIKI TOUR LOGO PATH.svg, but I don't know if it sizes in the banner. So, we can try it!. The Board of Wikimedia Chile said Thanks! :) — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Superzerocool (talk)

@Superzerocool: preview with WikiTour logo, do you prefer Wikimedia Chile logo? Also, you're welcome. :) PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:07, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

@PiRSquared17: we like it with the Wiki Tour logo!. Thanks a lot :) Superzerocool (talk) 01:19, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

No problem. :-) If you need anything else, don't hesitate to ask. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

@Superzerocool: Has this worked well so far? PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:10, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

@PiRSquared17:, Yes, the contest has > 750 new photos in Commons and > 300 photos in Flickr with CC licenses. 3 weeks remain and we have a really good participation!. Thanks a lot! Superzerocool (talk) 21:23, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Please remove external embedded image

On MediaWiki:Centralnotice-template-WMNL WarMemorialsNetherlands 2014 the image at http://www.4en5mei.nl/afbeeldingen/logos/4en5mei.png is included. I noticed this because nl: is throwing mixed content warnings. This is makes it possible for an external sites to track what page I and other users of the Dutch Wikipedia are looking at. I asked user:Romaine on irc to remove it, but he didn't want to do that. Multichill (talk) 20:51, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

It starts with a proper explanation what you mean. You expect with little words that I understand it immediately, which was clearly not the case. As result of what an other user said about it, it clarified what was meant. I do not jump, purely because of someone says jump, I like to understand something first. As the result of the clarification of another user, I understand it now, the code is removed. Romaine (talk) 21:01, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing this Romaine. Multichill (talk) 10:25, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Request for Upload rights

Hi,

I would like to upload images to meta in order to extend and update the Wikidata documentation (esp. the data model which I am the main author of). These will be example screenshots from Wikidata.org or illustrations like the one at Wikidata/Notes/Data_model_primer. This material is closely linked to the technical documentation that we maintain here and thus does not really belong into Commons. Many thanks. --Markus Krötzsch (talk) 18:03, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Would they be under a free license? I don't see a reason not to upload them to Commons... PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:10, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Licenses will not be a problem here. But all other images that are part of the Wikidata documentation are on meta. I just want to continue working on this content. --Markus Krötzsch (talk) 19:14, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, but all the images on Commons can also be used on Meta. Do you really think the benefit of having all files for the Wikidata documentation on Meta outweighs the benefit that also other projects (e.g. Wikidata?) might want to use these files? --MF-W 21:06, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

I am sure the folks at Wikimedia Germany have considered this when uploading all the rest of the files here. I have no intention to revisit this decision. The number of images we are talking about is very small. A prolonged discussion won't be serving anyone. --Markus Krötzsch (talk) 07:25, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Giving the Upload right to someone who doesn't want to explain the need, refuses to discuss the reasons and won't discuss alternatives is an excellent reason to oppose. Meta has historically been a real problem for unlicensed and inappropriately licensed content. If the content in question is suitable for Commons it should be there where it can be managed better. QuiteUnusual (talk) 07:59, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I see that this thing is really much more complicated than I would have hoped. The reason I do not want to have further discussion about this is that I think that neither side has very significant arguments (I could upload on commons and change all existing links; and you could tolerate two more images that do not violate any rule, and that could easily be copied to commons if anybody should ever need them elsewhere). The whole issue is so minor that it should not use up more than 5min of anyone's time. It would just have made my life a little easier if I could simply work with the images that are here, that's all.

I made my request here because that is what is suggested on Meta:Uploaders. The text there says that the upload privilege was introduced "to reduce the increasing amount of junk and copyright violations present in Meta files" hence I expected that there is no problem in my case. I understand that one could make a decision for Commons as well, but since the decision in my specific case has been made already in the past, I don't see how this helps us now. At the very least, I should be able to modify the existing images, for which I would also need the privilege anyway. To me this seems to be a "legitimate interest" in the sense of Meta:Uploaders.

Please understand that I am trying to accomplish a task here that I have been asked to do by Wikimedia Germany. I am trying my best to create documentation that will be useful to many of our users and developers, and I am doing this in my spare time. My naive idea was that this is the wiki for the Wikimedia movement and that activities that are directly relevant to one of the major Wikimedia projects would naturally be supported (in the sense of "be welcomed"). I would not even have asked if I'd had the slightest concern that there could be any objection to uploading one or two images here, given that we already have many others on the same topic. Does the Meta community generally object to all Meta uploads that could legally be placed on Commons? Your above comments seem to suggest this, but you don't really spell it out. If this is the case, you should update Meta:Uploaders to say this clearly and provide guidelines for updating existing content accordingly. I still need some solution for working with the existing images. --Markus Krötzsch (talk) 09:56, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't see a different between Uploading here on meta or on Commons. Pleas upload free content on commons and not on meta... --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:04, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I already understood this, and I started to do this for all new content. But I also want to edit content that is already here, and I will need the right for this. --Markus Krötzsch (talk) 07:04, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

@Markus Krötzsch: See this discussion where the upload restrictions to this wiki were decided. In case you see any need to modify/reword Meta:Uploaders in order to avoid further confusion, feel free to do so. Also Meta-Wiki is a wiki. :-) Vogone talk 11:49, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

IPBE for AbderrahmanNajjar

Hi, please grant the above user local IPBE. They need to use VPN to edit sometimes, and have already been exempted globally, but the range is locally blocked on meta as well. Thanks, Ajraddatz (talk) 16:41, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

@Ajraddatz and AbderrahmanNajjar: Done PiRSquared17 (talk) 16:46, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Also, I'm leaving for the weekend, and won't be around for when my RfA closes :P Ajraddatz (talk) 16:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

My limited adminship was removed, please restore

My limited adminship was accidentally removed yesterday during the regular adminship inactivity process. Please refer to my RfA, and specifically the last comment:

Limited adminship specifically does not go through confirmation, because it's a specialised task that does not necessarily require n edits over x months of activity. Majorly ^talk 13:45, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your consideration. The access to the WikiMiniAtlas scripts which are transcluded in many many projects is crucial for me. I need to be able to react quickly if modifications become necessary. I have been very busy with backend work on the WMA, transferring the server to Wikimedia Labs. Activity on the client side script here on meta will have to resume shortly when I actually switch over the active service to Labs. I have left a similar message on User:Barras discussion page as he was the one who performed the removal. But he seems not to have been online since I posted the message yesterday. --Dschwen (talk) 17:38, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

There is some irony to the inactivity around my request here... ;-) --Dschwen (talk) 17:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I think your adminship should be restored, but I didn't comment since there's nothing I can do about it. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:30, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello and sorry for my late reply. Please see my comment on my talk page about that issue. Would other crats please weigh in on the issue? I don't actually think the right should be restored, however, I will do it if other people think it should be restored. (@MF-Warburg, Matanya, and Thehelpfulone: to ping some of them.) -Barras talk 07:33, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I agree with barras here, i don't think the rights should be restored. Matanya (talk) 10:16, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Obviously the closure as "indefinite temporary" of the RFA was quite a nonsensical contradictio in adiecto. However it also said "will be confirmed in the normal way after one year". I don't remember what rules for a confirmation of meta sysops 'after a year' existed back then, but if they did exist, I reckon they were at some point in time replaced by the semiannual inactivity check; so that one should apply to Dschwen as well (as it was done). --MF-W 14:16, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, then check. I was extremely busy IRL in the week of the inactivity poll (moving to a new house). I would appreciate it if I could get acces to my global Javascript as soon as possible. I'm switching the server backend over to Wikimedia labs soon, as the Toolserver will be decommisioned shortly, and this will result in service interruptions if I don't have edit access. Thanks. --Dschwen (talk) 02:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, here we go:

Temporary adminship: If you need temporary sysop access for a particular reason (such as ability to edit protected pages), you may request temporary adminship on meta. In this case, adminship shall be granted with no requirements and approval, but the user will promise to limit their activity to the necessity of what they asked for. Temporary sysop access will normally be valid for one month.

So, please restore the sysop bit with no requirements and approval. I promise only to edit the Wikiminiatlas script page! Should I go ahead and write a bot to post this to this page every 30 days? Don't you see that in cases where policy does not cover application requirements it might be worth thinking about being a bit more flexible? I don't want to go digging through contribution histories, but I have a suspicion that most of you aren't active long enough here (or maybe memory is volatile), to remember me going through multiple RfAs (i.e. jump through the sampe hoop multiple times) for no good reason. I'm here to stay. There is no reason I won't need access to that page in half a year. I have maintained that script on meta since August 2007(!!!). And for most of the time this worked very well. I hasd no regrets having moved the script here from where it could conviniently be included on many wikipedias. Meta has been a convenient place to centrally administer this script... ...until now. So now I don't have access to a project I have spent over 8 years of work on (it started well before it was moved to meta), and a project to which I've probably contribyted >98% of all effort (I'm reluctant to call it my project, but the fact of the matter is that I am the maintainer/developer). Is it hard to inderstand why this would irk me? --Dschwen (talk) 02:57, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

I'd really love to continue working on my project, and right now I'm at a point where I could use access to my script to start direction a small fraction of traffic to the new Wikimedia labs instance hosting the new Wikiminiatlas, and analyze how it is holding up. So a response would be nice. --Dschwen (talk) 17:31, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

I think it might be best to start a new RFA. --MF-W 09:20, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Rather than just stonewalling me, could you please address my points above? How about temp adminship now and then an rfa. Everything else is a waste of time. Especially if I have to wait days after each post to get a reaction. --Dschwen (talk) 12:58, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Dschwen, you've come here asking for a specific outcome that crats on this project are hesitant to actually do; this isn't Commons where crats are able to do as they please in terms of handing out adminships. If crats are taking days to react to you, then perhaps you could look inward to see if your unreasonable demands (in their mind) may not be responsible for that. But at the end of the day, if they are taking days, just RfA and if successful you will likely have the bit sooner than you will as a result of your requests/demands above. Keep calm and carry on. Russavia (talk) 14:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I dont think that my demands are "unreasonable" at all.

• Why would anyone think that it is reasonable to hold someone with a limited adminship that only has the scope of one single page to the same activity standards as any other admin?
• Is it really in the spirit of policy to deny a restoration request to someone who was a mere 12h late? Ask yourself what the inactivity policy is about, please. I make edits to that one sigle page when they are necessary. They haven't been necessary for a while, and I have spent my time working on the server side backend due to the neccessary move to Wikimedia Labs. I am anything but inactive!
• The renewal week happened to overlap with a time of me being very busy IRL. I moved to a new place for crying out loud! Barras left a message on my talk page on April 1st, 9:58am. He removed my adminship 6 days, 20 hours, and 4 minutes after that announcement. And I happened to protest the removal 7 days, 2 hours and 50 minutes after the warning message received. That is less than 3 hours over the 7 days mark.
• With response times of crats of up to thee and a half days, does it seem "reasonable" to fuss about 12h (or less than 3h if a customary 7 days are granted)?
• Why was my adminship not immediately restored und ther the temporary adminship rules? We are getting into week two of wated time for me here. I can appreciate the sentiment of closing ranks against the outsider, but what you are doing does not help this project, it hurts multiple other projects that are depending on meta as teh place for the Wikiminiatlas script to be hosted and maintained at.
• Is the policy in place to keep contributors from contributing?
• Is it unreasonable to expect an Iota of accomodation and goodwill after having had the limited adminship for seven years and having been in full compliance with its terms? You are quick to dismiss a contributor that has had the pleasure of using meta with a limited adminship to host his project for longer than most of you have been active on this project.
• Am i being made an exemple for the stricktness of policy application? If so I would like to know about this.

Thanks. --Dschwen (talk) 15:03, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Please check Meta:Requests for adminship/Dschwen 5, thanks. --Dschwen (talk) 15:20, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Request for massmessagesender right

Hi, I would like to request the status of MassMessage sender for about 2 months. I am one of the organizers of Wiki Loves Earth in The Netherlands and would like to send massmessages to interested users on nlwiki and wmnlwiki. Thanks in advance. JurgenNL (talk) 17:26, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Done. --MF-W 09:11, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Request for CentralNotice banner

Howdy, I need some assistance to create a CentralNotice banner for a running photo contest organized by Wikimedia Venezuela. Taking some guidance with the chilean request, ours should be something like this:

• link: http://viajes.wikimedia.org.ve/
• from: As soon as possible, since it already begins, to May 31th
• logged-in and anonymous users.
• only in Venezuela, only in Wikipedia, Wikivoyage and Commons.
• text1: Concursa con las fotografías de tus viajes y ayúdanos a preservar los paisajes y tradiciones de Venezuela
• text2: Participa en Wiki Viajes, tienes oportunidad hasta el 31 de mayo.
• logo: [1]

Thanks for your help, --Oscar (t) · @ 18:24, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

@Oscar .: campaign, banner, preview. Please check and add to CentralNotice/Calendar. In the future, it would be great if you could ask in advance. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

@PiRSquared17: It looks great, many thanks, --Oscar (t) · @ 01:32, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Cantonese Wikipedia

Hello, I'm Cantonese Wikipedia Admin.We had changed name From"粵語"to"粵文" .DannyChan (talk) 06:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

@DannyChan: Hi, I assume you want the name of Cantonese Wikipedia at wikipedia.org to be changed. However, "粵文" translates to "Guangdong Wen" but even the Main Page's title contains a 粵文, so you must be right. Is this a translation of en:Written Cantonese? If it was changed per community consensus, could you link to such a discussion? Thanks, --Glaisher [talk] 09:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

There's also what appears as interwiki links on the sidebar on the various wikis, would that be something for bugzilla and sysadmin? 語 implies more spoken language, whereas 文 in this context the written form. Anyhow, if there was a community consensus, then a link would helps yeah. -- KTC (talk) 11:47, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Urgent: getting "Ad by Vidx" banners on Meta

Top of pages in display mode, top and under edit-box on edit mode. Mostly sexual in theme (AsianWomenDates.com etc). Some shaking, flashing, making it almost impossibly distracting. Using Safari on Mac. Tony (talk) 09:03, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

It's all good on my end. You may want to check for malwares on your computer. Elfix 09:06, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Malware/Adware related, please have your PC checked. here you'll find some hints. --M/ (talk) 09:09, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Nasty thing called vidx I found the "extension" on my browser after advice from a help-thread online. Looks like thousands of people are asking the same question today. Fixed, finally. Thanks for your quick responses! Tony (talk) 09:44, 26 April 2014 (UTC)