Afrikaans | العربية | অসমীয়া | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Boarisch | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | བོད་ཡིག | bosanski | català | کوردی | corsu | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | ދިވެހިބަސް | Ελληνικά | emiliàn e rumagnòl | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | Nordfriisk | Frysk | galego | Alemannisch | ગુજરાતી | עברית | हिन्दी | Fiji Hindi | hrvatski | magyar | հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Ido | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | ភាសាខ្មែរ | 한국어 | kar | kurdî | Limburgs | lietuvių | Minangkabau | македонски | മലയാളം | молдовеняскэ | Bahasa Melayu | မြန်မာဘာသာ | مازِرونی | Napulitano | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | Kapampangan | polski | português | português do Brasil | پښتو | Runa Simi | română | русский | संस्कृतम् | sicilianu | سنڌي | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | Soomaaliga | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ślůnski | தமிழ் | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkmençe | Tagalog | Türkçe | татарча/tatarça | ⵜⴰⵎⴰⵣⵉⵖⵜ  | українська | اردو | oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча | Tiếng Việt | 吴语 | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/-

Welcome to Meta!Edit

Hello, Tgr (WMF). Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum if you need help with something (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

-- Meta-Wiki Welcome (talk) 16:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)


Hi. Is confirmed right still needed for this account? AFAICS, this account is autoconfirmed now. Matiia (talk) 02:45, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

No, I probably just needed a test account which could create OAuth consumers. I'm not using it ATM (and as you say it does not need the confirmed group for that now, anyway). --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 04:57, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Okay, could you remove it? Matiia (talk) 02:36, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
No, that ability was removed from the staff group shortly after I created this user. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 04:37, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Ah, true. I've requested its removal to Stewards. Matiia (talk) 05:49, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up! --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 19:41, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

The Community Wishlist SurveyEdit


You get this message because you’ve previously participated in the Community Wishlist Survey. I just wanted to let you know that this year’s survey is now open for proposals. You can suggest technical changes until 11 November: Community Wishlist Survey 2019.

You can vote from November 16 to November 30. To keep the number of messages at a reasonable level, I won’t send out a separate reminder to you about that. /Johan (WMF) 11:24, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Interface administrators and Interface editorsEdit

Hi. Interface administrators and Interface editors. Having the new user group named interface-admin I would assume that the first is the active decision description. But the second is marked as "an official global policy". So how do they actually relay to each other? Is the second like an initial problem approach and the first like an actual implementation, or comething else? --NeoLexx (talk) 17:09, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi @NeoLexx:! Those are two different user groups, interface administrators can edit all MediaWiki: pages, interface editors only the ones which are not dangerous (do not include JS or CSS, more or less). They also have the opposite purpose, in a sense - historically both of these things were done by administrators, and interface-admin is an attempt to restrict the dangerous parts of that task to a smaller group, and interface-editor (which has been around for a couple years) to open up the non-dangerous parts to a larger one. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your promt informative response. One more question if I may: The Interface administrators states: "For legal and security reasons, the Wikimedia Foundation has decided that Two factor authentication is required for this role."
And The 2FA page states: "currently in production testing with administrators (and users with admin-like permissions like interface editors), bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, stewards, edit filter managers and the OATH-testers global group".
So is the WMF intent here that currently (at least) no lesser than a sysop (administrator) may have interface-admin, not a patroller or a closer? - as they currently can not(?) have 2FA, so they cannot have interface-admin? --NeoLexx (talk) 19:40, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
The current proceedure is to ask the user to get 2FA-tester right before applying for IA. Leaderboard (talk) 20:03, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Oh, OK. So the 2FA testing is open for anyone willing to join (it just was not clearly set at the page, my native language is not English). But for members of interface-admin group the oathauth-enable right is a prerequisite requirement. --NeoLexx (talk) 20:22, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

@NeoLexx: interface admins do have 2FA enabled, see for example Special:ListGroupRights#interface-admin. Whether interface admins need to be admins is left to the local communities to decide, the user group should be handled with care though (it is a far more dangerous privilege than patroller or closer, or even admin). --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 02:14, 25 February 2019 (UTC)


Hello Tgr, I think you were recently working on adding this ability to some more "sensitive" type groups (I couldn't find a phab task to link to). It looks like there is a minor gap: it appears to have been added to "transwiki", but left off of the more dangerous "import" group. Generally, all of these people are also admins, but for consistency this should probably be done too. I can open a phab ticket if needed, but thought you may already have something in the works. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 02:27, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, fix is in gerrit 516053. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 11:55, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: took a while (offsites and whatnot) but this should be fixed now. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 11:15, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

OAuth approvalEdit

Hey Tgr, I hope you are well! Please, could you approve my recent request? That'd be great. Many thanks in advance! -- FNDE (talk) 13:44, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi FNDE. It's a test app, does it need to be approved? You can always use a consumer with the same user that has registered it, with or without approval. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 16:56, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh okay, I wasn't aware of this :) In this case it's actually not needed. Thank you! --FNDE (talk) 17:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

OAuth approval for fountain local testEdit

Hi Tgr, could you look into this? Thank you. Viztor (talk) 20:26, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

@Viztor: can you give it a more descriptive name? Although as noted above, generally there's no need to approve consumers used for local development. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 13:38, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi Tgr (WMF), I tried to just use the unapproved consumer key pair, though it was successful going through auth process, the user information is not showing up. The code is the same as, the name is probably descriptive for local test as it seems we can not change endpoint therefore I had to use the address to id them. Viztor (talk) 15:00, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
@Viztor: So you can successfully authorize, make an API request that does not fail, but you don't get the data back? That sounds like a bug (not sure whether in OAuth or the application). Can you provide more details?

SRM approval sectionEdit

Hope that the new section is a little easier. Please feel welcome to edit the text that I cobbled together at the lead of the section.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:25, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: thanks! Prsonally, I mainly use the Echo notifications. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 04:41, 21 October 2019 (UTC)