Wikimedia Forum/Archives/2008-08

Globally hidden usernames should be hidden locally too, and local hiding of usernames should be possible

The following discussion is closed: There is a consensus to implement the feature proposed.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 22:23, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear all,
hiding global accountnames from the global userlist is possible and makes much sense for very insulting accountnames. (eg. containing realnames or accountnames of respected users and living or dead people)
Renaming them only moves the problem to the renamelog (of course better than the userlist).

In bugzilla:14476 the hiding of accountnames had been requested as feature for local projects too. Imho the local hiding should be assigned to local bureaucrats. Also if an accountname is hidden globally it should be hidden in both userlists, not only in the global one.

Please express Your opinion here.

  • I do support such a feature. --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 13:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I totally agree with birdy :) ..--Cometstyles 14:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I agree completely with both these fine people above :) --Herby talk thyme 14:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes. Cbrown1023 talk 14:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Agreed, seems like an excellent suggestion. --MiCkEdb 17:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Agree. —DerHexer (Talk) 18:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • fully support, -jkb- (cs.source) 18:39, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes, absolutely. WjBscribe 19:41, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Good and agree --Mardetanha talk 19:43, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support good idea! --Kanonkas 21:23, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I also agree Huji 21:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support -Jorunn 22:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support  – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 00:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Would be very welcome. On nlwiki we often have to rename users stalking German sysops. Hiding the names would be better. --Erwin(85) 09:18, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes please. giggy (:O) 09:28, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support - no doubt about it. --FiliP × 13:41, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Absolutely no reason to oppose this. Majorly talk 14:19, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   SupportVasilievV 2 17:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support ++Lar: t/c 18:05, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support it makes a sense. --Aphaia 18:44, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Would be useful on EN:WQ.--Cato 22:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Sounds good. Soxred93 22:57, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support --Meno25 11:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support --Millosh 12:11, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support I have a list handy :) -- lucasbfr talk 06:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Good idea. Cenarium (talk) 12:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support common sense--Werdan7T @ 23:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support MBisanz talk 01:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Monobi (talk) 01:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Very useful. Firefoxman 01:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Nakon 01:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Oppose This implementation, at least. Hiding accounts, especially ones that have contributions, is deceptive and unnecessary. If there's an issue with the account names, they shouldn't simply be swept under the rug, they should be dealt with -- permanently. --MZMcBride 03:10, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
    "Dealt with permanently" how? I fail to see how this is sweeping anything under the rug, or how it is not desirable, but I'm sure you can clarify.  – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
    By reassigning the edits and deleting the account entirely. Currently, two people have the power to do this. Bureaucrats can essentially do this using the RenameUser extension. And sysadmins can do this using their magic powers (a maintenance script, I believe). "Sweeping them under the rug" refers to simply hiding them, which makes the problem go away, in a sense, but doesn't really do so cleanly, and doesn't truly resolve the issue (the accounts still exist). --MZMcBride 03:35, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
    The problem with renaming them is that it simply moves the problem content from the list of users to the rename log. A developer would still be needed to completely remove the data. I think you will find most such accounts have no contributions (or at least only deleted ones). Given that the issue is to some extent a cosmetic one - people unhappy with having insulting names in publicly accessible logs (some are BLP vios in their own right) - "hiding" the names seems to actually resolve the problem without needing developers to deal with every instance. WjBscribe 03:55, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
    As I understand it, hiding the accounts would still leave a log entry. (At least, hiding global accounts currently does.) So, really these bad entries would be moving from one Special: page to another. ; - ) While I understand and sympathize with those wanting to remove the unsightly names from the list, the reality is that this part of the software (Special:ListUsers) functions to list all users in the database, not just certain ones. If the accounts exist, they should be listed (in my personal view, of course). Otherwise, it's revisionistic, in a sense. And yes, while the logs are publicly accessible, they are not indexed by search engines (no Special: pages are). If we want to avoid developer intervention, an extension or some other type of software feature could be written / implemented. There's an extension currently called mw:Extension:User Merge and Delete that could be used, I suppose. Though it also has a log. --MZMcBride 04:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
    The comment about logs is a good one. The utility of this feature is considerably lessened if the action is logged unless access to the log is restricted, say to admins only. WjBscribe 23:54, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
    If the devs can device this to work similar to the "oversight logs" or "checkuser logs", it will be better so only crats can remove from userlist, and will only be available for them..--Cometstyles 04:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Makes sense to me, tools rock. Until(1 == 2) 03:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Ayuh. -- Avi 04:42, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support SynergeticMaggot 09:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Support and I have a list, too; many on my various watchlists and user/talk page histories.
    Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
    I've struck my support; tentatively. If another solution such as outright deleting abusive accounts can work with the edits reasigned somehow and all licensing issues addressed, then great. The trolls have created a great many accounts that should be put out of the sunshine. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:31, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support User names may be offensive ("Johnsmith stinks") and may release personal information ("Anoneditor is John Smith and lives in London"); such names should be hidden.--Poetlister 11:45, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Good idea. Acalamari 17:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Hiding doesn't solve the problem, and for accounts with contribs just makes the WP data confusing. MZMcBride's position above is good. Listen to him. --Gmaxwell 23:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per MZMcBride. I'm not sure what simply hiding them solves. Can active accounts be hidden? Accounts with contribs that aren't deleted? I don't think that's a very good idea. What would happen to file histories? Can you even do that without violating the GFDL? I agree those user lists need a good cleaning but this does not sound like the way to do it. What about just restricting the list to admins? Or better yet, deleteaccount. Rocket000 08:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
    Hello, please take a look at this and read the introduction of the page, where it says, 'very insulting accountnames', before talking about GFDL and contributions, thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 09:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
    That doesn't mention what happens to accounts with contribs. People with "very insulting" accountnames can edit constructively too. The GFDL can apply to people with any kind of name. "Very insulting" varies from person to person, language to language, culture to culture, etc. (Even if it's underlined.) How does hiding certain contributers names help anything? It's simply deceptive, non transparent, and unfair. For what benefit? Rocket000 10:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
    Nothing happens to them, the ones with contributions should be renamed because of the history. Please have a look at that list I gave You, it is real names, usernames and then You get a idea about what is very insulting and why those can't contribute normally, it has nothing to do with useful contributions. The aibility to hide accountnames already is technically implemented, but only for global ones. If there is something better than that, please go for it, but until then, this should be done. The deletion of accounts will be implementet, uhm, let me guess... never? --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 10:31, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
    P.S. It is really frustrating that it even has to be discussed that we need the aibility to protect people from such. Talking about useful contributions in that context, to me, sorry to say, sounds rather ridiculous. On some projects they had to modify the MediaWiki messages to hide the old name when they renamed to protect the people, that can't be the solution. --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 10:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
    Ok then, as long as accounts with contribs are not hidden, I support. Looking at the names in that log, would this be considered "very insulting": User:Persian Poet Gal blocks innocent n00bs for no reason!@global. I would hope not. But should it be hidden? If anything is, yes. This doesn't address stuff like that. Or am I missing something? This just seems like censorship for the sake of it rather than doing something useful like cleaning out the user lists. Rocket000 10:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
    All right, this is sounding better. Should all accounts that are hidden also be indefinitely blocked? What happens when a non-global accountname is hidden locally and then someone creates the global account elsewhere? Rocket000 10:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
    It can't be censorship because it would not affect the version history (so no need to fear license issues), because of that it is unfortunately not a solution for accounts with edits at all. Now there is sul for all, but nothing to prevent those with mailicous intention to bypass local protections. Happy to hear other, better, realizable, ideas, suggestions and solutions, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 12:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
    That addresses my all concerns then.   Support. The only suggestion I would make is to have broader definition of what names should be hidden (like I pointed out above it would serve us well to hide some non-offensive names too). Rocket000 12:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Support --Michail 11:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support if you have a look at these nick's i'll think my support for at least hiding could be unterstood.
The list with 4 offending NOT-nicknames has been commented out and can be seen in the history

--Joergens.mi 20:31, 22 June 2008 (UTC) --Joergens.mi 04:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

  •   Support Masterpiece2000 09:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support That's a very good idea. --Thogo (talk) 10:13, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Definitely needed in certain situations. Spiritia 22:10, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support It would be very useful. --Kaaveh Ahangar 02:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support - but if it is fully neccesairy I do not know, because on several wiki's accountnames are changed when they are insulting, like to User:Vandal080705a. Romaine 13:29, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support For obvious reasons - also, I don't think the GFDL is contravened if the account has never edited (which a lot of insult-only accounts tend to do).

We also need a feature for hiding block logs too (e.g. if a sysop posted an offensive edit summary in his block log, e.g. F*** OFF YOU N*****!") --Kelsington 18:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

  •   Support. Chinese Wikipedia and Wiktionary has too many insulting usernames against one specific person. Showing them to ordinary users is too offensive.--Jusjih 03:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  •   Tacaíocht - absolutely! This has been a perennial problem on enwiki, especially because of 'you-know-who' - Alison 17:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Very handy in certain circumstances. EVula // talk // // 20:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support - Seems like a sensible and responsible idea. Cirt 16:47, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support Seems helpful Alexfusco5 20:46, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support - I personally have had people mock and spoof my username on the en, and I have seen some users that have had literally over 10-20 offensive spoofs of there names (Just take a look here [1] and thats not even the worst of em). Frankly I think that this would be a great idea :). All the Best, --Mifter 15:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  •   Support This would be very useful Dark Mage 18:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


This GFDL image is used on the main page (and all the equivalents for other projects) without any form of attribution or mention of the GFDL. Is this a GFDL violation or am I missing something? Anonymous101 19:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

You appear to be. I can see a GFDL template.--Cato 21:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC) does not mention GFDL and has no link to the image description with the GFDL template. /Ö 15:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
I created the original (somewhat simple and crude) image while designing the current layout, and I confirm that it is GFDL (and am fine releasing to public domain or placing under Wikimedia copyright if desired). I also don't have any issue if someone would like to design a more refined "bookshelf" type image in its place -- the original considerations were fast loading, having a visual shorthand for the size of the wikis without the need for translations, and recognizability as "books" or "pages". I tried it with books of all the same size, to look more like a shelf of encyclopedias, but for most viewers it was less recognizable as books and not as an abstract rectangle. Catherine 16:03, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I changed the license on the image description page to public domain. —{admin} Pathoschild 13:26:39, 05 July 2008 (UTC)

data mining in Special:Recent changes

Hi, I'd like to aggregate the data in Special:RecentChanges and do a data-mining on it. For example, it may show the hottest topics(like what wikirage is doing), new articles with most edits, users that contribute most contents, etc.

It seems possible to write a small php program to fetch the Special:RecentChanges into SQL, but there's over 240,000 changes in English wikipedia per day, the page can be extremely big[2]. Before I start to do this, I'm wondering if there's a wise way to aggregate these data. Thanks a lot! --Dulldull 07:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Any sort of aggregation will lose some information. If you know that what you lose is irrelevant, then it is safe to aggregate; otherwise, it isn't. For your purposes, you would need to retain the distinction between different editors and different articles, which allows very little scope for compression. You could convert multiple edits of the same article by the same editor to one line, but that would probably not give you a vast saving.--Poetlister 12:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
In any case you should use the API (recentchanges) and not Special:Recentchanges. Check the list=recentchanges (rc) section on api.php for documentation. --Erwin(85) 14:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Luckily I can hear this before i fetched the Special:RecentChange page. It's a great source to explore. Thanks for all the advices. --Dulldull 20:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


I finished the basic variant of the set of programs which deal with Wikimedia statistics. You may see the first results at Template:Wikipedia statistics, Template:Wiktionary statistics, Template:Wikibooks statistics, Template:Wikinews statistics, Template:Wikisource statistics, Template:Wikiversity statistics, Template:Wikiquote statistics and Template:Wikimedia statistics. --Millosh 13:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Here is the short description of the programs (I'll upload the code at Meta in the next couple of days): --Millosh 13:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Program "" is updating projects list once per week:
    • The main purpose of that program is to dump data with codes (and languages) and language names of the main content projects. It is testing every week do we have some new language at the projects other than Wikipedia. Wikipedia codes and language names are taken from Language names page. --Millosh 13:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
    • It can't guess new languages or the names of multilingual projects (Meta, Commons, Labs...), so I should be poked when some of such projects become to exist (or I should find a way how to inform myself about that). Optionally, I may get all codes from Incubator (as I have some of them). --Millosh 13:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Program "" is getting data at 00 and 30 minutes every hour (which means something like 5 and 30 minutes in reality). It is using raw statistics page (like All statistics, with date and time information is stored (I'll find a way how to put those data somewhere online). So, from yesterday, it is possible to make hourly statistics. --Millosh 13:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Program "" and its modules are generating statistics and, run by cron, it updates statistics at 02:20 CET/CEST (which means 0:20 or 1:20 UTC). --Millosh 13:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Output is localized (User:Millbot/ is the main page for bot-specific issues; Language names is the main page for language names translations). It may include multilingual templates, too. Actually, Meta "language" code is "multi", so there is the place for multilingual templates. --Millosh 13:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

As I mentioned, it is possible to make very detailed statistics: average edits per hour, changes at the daily level and so on. I am asking here for ideas and help in statistics implementation. I may make some SVG images from time to time. Also, in the future it would be possible to merge those data with not so precise statistics and generate long-term statistics; as well as it is possible to make queries at Toolsever and get precise data from the past (I hope so). --Millosh 13:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Global deleted image review

How to create new section/topic in Wikipedia


I would like to begin the process of creating a new section/topic for ThwartPoker.

ThwartPoker is a new *patented* class of card games that follow the rules of poker, but completely eliminates the random aspects of normal poker. Because the random elements have been eliminated, ThwartPoker is legal to play for money and prizes as it is not properly classified as a gambling game.

ThwartPoker Inc. is a developer, publisher, and distributor of interactive strategy card games. The company made gaming history in 2004 when it introduced the next evolution of traditional poker, made possible by patented software that replaces the random aspects of poker with skill and strategy. Because ThwartPoker games are 100% skill-based, they do not violate U.S. federal gaming law. A mobile version of ThwartPoker titled “Hold’em Poker+ For PrizesTM is available on Verizon Wireless, T-Mobile, and AT&T - made possible through a licensing deal with Twistbox Entertainment. The company is headquartered in San Francisco, California.

Disclaimer. I am the Co-Founder of ThwartPoker.

Its spam. I hope they do not try and create an en wp. --Herby talk thyme 11:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Please try creating the page at this website. Thank you. Majorly talk 00:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

As you are from the company you should probably not create an article on it (See [[w:WP:COI|the relevant Wikipedia policy)> Also note that futute questions like tis should be asked at the help desk, not here. Anonymous101 09:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Global rights policy proposal for discussion

Please see Global rights for a proposed policy governing the establishment, implementation and use of new global user rights. Avruch 01:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Puntori as a bureaucrat

Puntori has been voted by the sq.wikt community to be a bureaucrat: here. Could anybody give him the bureaucrat status, please? Thanks. I know this place may not be the best for this request but I could not find the proper page to do it and I do not have much time. --Piolinfax (@es.wikt) 17:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Go request it here OhanaUnitedTalk page 21:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Nope, already done 2 weeks ago--Nick1915 - all you want 09:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
OhanaUnited, Nick1915, thanks :) There was no change in Wiktionary:Administrues when I looked so I wrongly assumed Puntori was not a bureaucrat yet. My mistake. I should have checked his status first. Regards. - 0 º 13:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)


As you probably noticed CommonsDelinker removed a lot of images that were deleted and SHOULD NOT of been deleted by me. If you have a toolserver account, could you please run a query on all of the wikis and get the links to undo any changes made by CommonsDelinker on June 27th with "Monobi" and "OTRS" in the edit summary? Also, could the admins on their wikis check and make sure that the edits are rolled back? Thank you, Monobi (talk) 04:15, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll poke at it. OverlordQ 04:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedias: de, es, en, fr, it
Wiktionaries: none
Wikinews: none
Wikiversities: none
Wikibooks: none
I've checked all of the bot's edits on the toolserver's cross-wiki contribs page and have undone all of the ones with "Monobi" and "OTRS" in the edit summary from the past week. Nakon 05:27, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Hrm, some got missed, like on the polish wikipedia. Monobi (talk) 05:29, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
All edits on the 27th
Same, but ignoring lang = (it|fr|en|es|de). OverlordQ 05:53, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
CD reverted on pl-wiki. Beau (talk) 06:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Reverted on nlwiki using Special:Contributions. Didn't know you already had a list of diffs. --Erwin(85) 08:01, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  Done: Disputed edits on have been reverted this morning. →Christian 09:53, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  Done, Nakon has done all on ar.wikipedia!--OsamaK 16:04, 30 June 2008 (UTC) — ”Monobi” and ”OTRS” by CommonsDelinker from s2 (20 June – 29 June). — str4nd 17:01, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Done in Russian Wikipedia, thanks User:Beau. Sister projects were not affected. — Kalan ? 11:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

  Done in dewikipedia, according to [4] --Church of emacs 11:33, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Sysop out of control

What can be done against a sysop on the rampage, if the local Arbcom is disfunctional as on nl:Wikipedia? Regards, Guido den Broeder 07:44, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

The problem needs to be addressed by the local community. Discuss the local situation there and determine what the community would like done, then implement that decision as a community. Meta can't make the decisions of a community for them, only assist in implementing those decisions when needed. Kylu 07:50, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Tried to, the sysop blocked me, as well as my IP address, and took away my email privileges. Guido den Broeder 08:01, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
The Dutch ArbCom assigned Oscar as Guido's mentor as the result of a request for arbitration. Guido has made clear that he doesn't agree with this. One of his friends even organized a poll about stopping the mentorship, which didn't succeed and received a lot of resistance. In short, the mentorship has been assigned by the Dutch ArbCom and has sort of been confirmed by nlwiki's community. As his mentor Oscar has blocked Guido. Apparently the Dutch community agrees, so please don't come to Meta complaining about this. Oscar is not a sysop on rampage! Please don't misuse Meta for what appears to be your own rampage. The Dutch Wikipedia should deal with it and if you don't like how they do it, please don't come complaining here. --Erwin(85) 08:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC) (nlwiki and meta user)
The above information is entirely incorrect. Guido den Broeder 09:22, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
What I am talking about here is a sysop who:
  • Deals out long, random blocks to numerous users without any ground whatsoever
  • Vandalizes user space, including the deletion of his own talk page, thereby hiding information relevant to current Arbcom cases against him
  • Has caused the Arbcom to withdraw
  • Refuses all discussion
  • Makes slenderous remarks and constantly insults other users
  • Falsely accuses various users of sockpuppetry
  • Insults users on the IRC channel and then blocks them from it (today the Wikizine connection was even closed altogether, not sure if he caused this but the effect is obvious) connection is working again today Guido den Broeder 14:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Thinks he can unilaterally decide to be someones mentor using this only to ensure that a block cannot be undone by admins. These blocks were undone when the nl:Arbcom was still functioning, but he keeps adding new ones
  • Thinks he can unilaterally decide that no user on nl:Wikipedia is allowed to refer to a user's scientific publications (even though the same publications can be found on e.g. en:Wikipedia)
  • Etc.
  • Has been under heavy criticism from the community for months Guido den Broeder 09:36, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
The fact that a couple of admins on nl:Wikipedia cheer him on, and delete Arbcom cases, unblock requests etc. within seconds, is only grounds for more concern. Guido den Broeder 09:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
So what you're saying is basically that Oscar is the downfall of the Dutch Wikipedia. How is that, in the above words, not a personal attack? Please don't give me another reason to block you here. I don't think any of us would benefit from that. Besides that it is still a case for the Dutch Wikipedia. A Dutch user requested arbitration which he says is on your behalf. That's the last resort. Meta can't overrule that. --Erwin(85) 09:51, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I am saying what I am saying, nothing more. Don't accuse me of a PA that I did not make. No, Oscar doesn't cause the downfall of nl:Wikipedia. That is done by those who let him get away with all of the above.
Please note that User:Erwin has removed my nl:Arbcom request and protected the nl:Arbcom talk page. Guido den Broeder 09:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
True, as a sysop it's my job to stop edit wars. You forgot to mention though that I informed this user that you should mail your request directly to the committee, edit. Like it should be done according to w:nl:Wikipedia:Arbitragecommissie/Zaken itself. However, I'll stop commenting now as I myself appear to be giving you a stage for what still seems to me as a rampage. --Erwin(85) 10:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Please don't try and distort history. The email was sent directly to the Arbcom. Because the Arbcom is currently disfunctional, I then asked others to put the case on the page, which is perfectly allowed. Guido den Broeder 10:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Erwin's actions on the nl:Arbcom pages have been undone. That is something, at least. Guido den Broeder 11:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Would you please stop all these lies. This is not productive for wikipedia and its related projects. Annabel 12:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

yawn aleichem 15:27, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

There may be grounds for the description "the local Arbcom is disfunctional as on nl:Wikipedia", but this case is a happy exception. The ArbCom roused itself to deal with the matter: it slapped an indefinite block on Guido den Broeder (for threatening to sue, a major infraction; see here). - Brya 16:58, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
I have not threatened to sue anyone, thanks. The hibernating Arbcom has made a grave error here. That said, an indefinite block is the normal way to proceed when legal action has been announced. It will be lifted when the procedure has been completed. [5] We also should not discuss my complaints any further here now for the same reason. Guido den Broeder 19:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, you started this. I am sure everybody will be relieved to drop it. - Brya 06:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Yawn A recent desysop procedure against this "sysop on the rampage" (ended 2008-07-01) was rejected (14 in favour, 111 against). Apparently the nl-community does not fully agree with Guido den Broeder. Wammes Waggel 14:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The desysop procedure only dealt with Oscar's removal of his talk page. Guido den Broeder 09:12, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Top 10 Wikipedias (poll)

This is a poll about a rearrangement of the top ten wikipedias that are displayed on the main wikipedia portal ( The poll will start on July 6, 2008 at 00:00 UTC and will end on July 31, 2008 at 23:59 UTC


This topic has been wandering around for a long time on template, coming to surface in many occasions, especially on the times around the milestone of 100.000 articles of the Chinese and Russian Wikipedias.

After a tentative wrap-up of all the proposals made in that page throughout the months in template#rethinking the top ten, a discussion was launched in Top Ten Wikipedias, to which all the major Wikipedias have been invited to in their village pump.

A lot of good opinions have been collected and discussed, and a vote proposal has been made and received some feedback. That proposal is now being implemented (see link below).

Vote requirements

Any Wikimedian may vote, provided that they (1) Have a user account created at least 3 months before the start of the vote (i.e. 5 March 2008) on any Wikipedia; (2) Have a user account on Meta, with links in the user page to the other project(s) userpage(s) and (4) Have a minimum 500 edits (across all projects) total.

How to vote

Voters should choose only one of each option for the questions below. If an option has sub-options, the parent option shouldn't be voted on, but rather one of the sub-options. The most voted option of a question will be chosenThe sub-options will count individually against the top-level options.


Note that "The Wikimedia Foundation prohibits discrimination against current or prospective users and employees on the basis of race, color, gender, religion, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, or any other legally protected characteristics." However there is an age limit for CheckUser, Oversight, Stewardship, and OTRS access, anyone care to comment? Mww113 23:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Certain aspects of those roles makes being of age a legal requirement. Majorly talk 23:59, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, in the USA, age discrimination protection doesn't kick in until someone is at least 40 years old, so the WM can do whatever it wants to people under that age, especially when there are other laws, like privacy laws, that come into play. MBisanz talk 00:17, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
... and there isn't an age restriction for general OTRS access, just the CU/OS privs (and thus consequently Stewards).
James F. (talk) 06:21, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Additional permissions such as those you mentioned have nothing to do with being a user or employee. The Foundation is well within their rights to restrict those access levels however they want. EVula // talk // // 03:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
How does one proceed when discriminaton occurs? Guido den Broeder 07:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
It would depend on the discrimination. If you see an admin blocking a user explicitly because of one of the criterions listed above, that would be something handled on-wiki wherever it happened, versus someone applying for a job and being discriminated against, which you'd have to report to.. well, I'm not entirely sure, since I don't float around the Foundation-level stuff. EVula // talk // // 14:45, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
What if the wiki where it happened doesn't handle it? Guido den Broeder 22:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Ignores it completely or doesn't handle it in accordance with one or more parties' wishes? -- Avi 04:15, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
The former. Guido den Broeder 07:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Global sysops#Deleted pages - issues concerning them

Please take a look at my suggestion regarding this proposal - it is a discussion regarding social conventions rather than policy. All input welcomed. Thanks, AP aka --Kelsington 18:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

It's a long page; I put the section name in your heading. EVula // talk // // 18:57, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Blend files uploadable

Where would be the appropriate location to bring this forward for wider discussion? Commons? Meta? Bugzilla? Thanks. Emesee 07:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I would think discussion on Commons, then a bugzilla request would be the proper course.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Mike would be correct. Cbrown1023 talk 18:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
commons:Commons:Village pump would be the place. —Giggy 05:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)


I don't know if this is the right place about this comment, but can someone help me on by adding me as an admin so that I can start working on it more easier, because it needs a large update.. thanks Chrisportelli 13:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

You may wish to post here: Steward requests/Permissions -- Avi 14:19, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation's Resolution:Licensing policy

Hello to any Board of Trustees members who find the time to read this. Concerning the Wikimedia Foundation's Resolution:Licensing policy, and the section therein called "Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP)" I don't think the Foundation has clarified the simple question of whether one non-free image of a living notable person can be used on their bio page if there are no free images available.

There are 2 ongoing discussions concerning this:

I think an encyclopedia without enough images and illustrations is gray, old, and boring like the Encyclopedia Britannica.

I am a member of

I also participate in

To save you some time I suggest reading the pithier of the discussions above. I emphasized the link. Here is an excerpt from it that summarizes my question concerning the English Wikipedia interpretation of the Foundation policy:

How so? w:WP:NFCC#1 says (emphasis added):
"No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. Where possible, non-free content is transformed into free material instead of using a fair-use defense, or replaced with a freer alternative if one of acceptable quality is available; "acceptable quality" means a quality sufficient to serve the encyclopedic purpose. (As a quick test, before adding an image requiring a rationale, ask yourself: "Can this image be replaced by a free one that has the same effect?" and "Could the subject be adequately conveyed by text without using the image at all?" If the answer to either is yes, the image probably does not meet this criterion.)"
That leaves only one subclause (probably added later), "or could be created", that backs up what you are saying. How can a free photo be taken by the average user of Wikipedia? Do we have sqaudrons of paparazzi that work for free for Wikipedia/Wikimedia? Do we remotely have enough of them to cover all notable people not having free images on Wikipedia?

That about covers it. --Timeshifter 01:43, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

In an ideal world we would have squadrons of paparazzi - in this one, we have several photographers who are do this sort of thing. Of course we do not have enough, but the only solution to that is to get more people involved - not to use non-free media.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:14, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
It's not an ideal world, and we do not have squadrons of Wikimedia paparazzi. The current solution is not working, and the likelihood (after a couple years without success) of getting enough Wikimedia paparazzi is small. And people are getting older, not younger. Also, photos of aging notable people oftentimes bear little resemblance to photos of them when they were truly notable. We allow non-free photos for dead notables, but not live ones. Makes no sense. Maybe this policy made sense when Wikimedia decided to only allow free images in the Commons. As an incentive for people to get out there and find images to replace all the deleted non-free images. But now we have around 3 million images in the commons, and still do not have images for many notable people. Especially, recognizable images of them when they were most notable. I don't believe we can turn back time yet and send back those squadrons, like my name implies. :)
Also, one thing that makes Wikipedia truly extraordinary is its international coverage, and its efforts to encourage more coverage of notable topics and people worldwide. See w:Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias. I am a member of that. I resurrected the page on w:Systemic bias after someone tried to bury it. We are effectively burying coverage of notable people, and historians in the future may fault Wikipedia for not showing these historic photos of notable people. It is hard enough to remember some notable people in the English-speaking world without their photos. It is even harder, and more important to world understanding, to recognize notable people outside the English world. I want to SEE the notable politicians, culture-shakers, activists, etc. in other nations, not just read about them. Images help greatly in remembering what I read, and tying together what little good world coverage I see in the English press and media. --Timeshifter 10:13, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Policy had nothing to do with commons. Policy has everything to do with 1)"because I want to" is not a valid fair use case. The fair use case on your average image of a liveing person is between poor and dreadful. 2)Failing to enforce this policy resulted in the abuse of "fair use" on a massive scale in the past. 3)your notable politicians will for the most part have come into contact with the US gov at some point and if you want free photos of activists try asking them.Geni 12:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
The "or could be created" line dates from 4 October 2005 hardly a latter addition.12:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Let me illustrate a point. Someone tried to merge w:Systemic bias with w:Systematic bias and in doing so completely eliminate the cultural meaning of the term, systemic bias, by replacing it with a technical term having do with measurement. It just shows how many people in Wikipedia just don't understand bias in all its forms.
Showing lots of aging photos of international notable people is not encyclopedic. It can even be considered disrespectful and insulting, especially by people of the same nationality. We should also include some photos of them when they were most notable (even non-free images if that is all that is available for them then). We almost all become less recognizable in our forties and beyond. Gravity melds us together in anonymity. This is an image world today, not just a text world. Facial recognition is one of the earliest skills of infants. Let's use it. See also: w:Ethnocentrism. --Timeshifter 13:17, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
So in order to represent people from ah non US backgrounds we must not only go against their cultural copyright norms (US Philippines and Israel have fair use everyone else not so much) but probably beyond what US law allows as well? I admit that I'm not an expert on ethnocentrism but well it was my understanding that most countries do contain people who can operate cameras. If you feel a country is under represented photo wise try contacting their government or tourist board. Or if you have not faith in the locals nab the students going there on gap years and get them to take some photos. Indeed instead of encouraging a situation where a country's photographic heritage is going to be owned by Getty, Corbis and AP look for ways to change that.Geni 13:32, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Please stop, you are stooping to hyperbole. As for the rest please see my previous replies. By the way, I have thousands of edits on the Commons, so I am hardly encouraging only fair-use images. --Timeshifter 13:49, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Hyperbole? and how would you describe "We are effectively burying coverage of notable people, and historians in the future may fault Wikipedia for not showing these historic photos of notable people"?Geni 14:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
"So in order to represent people from ah non US backgrounds ..." - attempted satire or sarcasm. "Or if you have not faith in the locals" - More straw man arguments. --Timeshifter 14:35, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Well then clarify your arguments.Geni 15:20, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


Hi, I would like to ask for some help undestanding a few things about the abovementioned, and how I can adapt it to the needs of a slightly different FA policy of the Romanian wikipedia.

First tell me if I understood correctly: W:Template:Historyoutput is for producing the full name of the reviewing process, from given abbreviations, right?

On this other Wikipedia, after a FAC, or FAR process, the page is immeditelly archived, and moved to Wikipedia:featured article candidates/ArticleName/Archive X, and the (now blank) Wikipedia:featured article candidates/ArticleName page is deleted. This is so that it would be easier for unexperienced users to create a new nomination, by using {{FAC}} template. This is done on WP:en too actually, but by bots.

Is there anyway to alter this code below, so that when I click on identified, I would be directed to the right page (Wikipedia:featured article candidates/ArticleName/Archive X, and not just Wikipedia:featured article candidates/ArticleName)? I though maybe this could be done either by creating a new parameter: currectstatuslink, but I don't know how to make the template use that instead of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/{{ARTICLEPAGENAME}}.

Or simpler, it could be done by using actionXlink, where X is the number of the most current process that took place, which is extracted using the code below. But again, i don't know how to make the template use it. Please help me with this.

<td>[[Image:Featured article star.svg|{{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|30px|48px}}|Featured article star]]</td>
<td> '''{{ARTICLEPAGENAME}}''' is a [[Wikipedia:Featured articles|featured article]]; it (or a previous version of it) has been 
'''''[[{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action15|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action15link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action14|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action14link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action13|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action13link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action12|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action12link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action11|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action11link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action10|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action10link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action9|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action9link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action8|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action8link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action7|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action7link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action6|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action6link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action5|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action5link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action4|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action4link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action3|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action3link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action2|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action2link}}} |
{{#ifeq: {{uc:{{{action1|}}}}} | FAC | {{{action1link}}} |
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/{{ARTICLEPAGENAME}} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }}|identified]]''''' 
as one of the best articles produced by the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|Wikipedia community]]. Even so, if you can update or improve it, 
[[Wikipedia:Be bold|please do so]].<includeonly>[[Category:Wikipedia featured articles|{{ARTICLEPAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:Wikimedia Forum Archives]]</includeonly></td></tr>

Also, can you tell me where to find these, so that I could translate them. I have used [Ctrl] + F for both {{ArticleHistory}}, and {{Historyoutput}}, and couldn't find them:

  • Article milestones
  • Process
  • Result
  • Date (also how can I modify the date format, so that it would show D,M,Y and not M,D,Y?) diego_pmc (talk) 08:36, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
re. your third paragraph; On the English Wikipedia, when an FAC (I'm not overly familiar with FAR, sorry) is archived, the page is not moved if the FAC is successful, but it is moved if the FAC is unsuccessful. The "identified" link only shows up for a successful FAC, where the nomination page has not been moved. Hence there's no currectstatuslink paramter, the template (as far as I can guess from working with it) just points to the oldest successful action relevant to the currentstatus. Eg if currentstatus=FA and action7=FAC, the "identified" link points to the action7link target.
The "Article milestones" actually depends on list/portal/article status, and can be found about three quarters down ArticleHistory. Do a Ctrl+F for "milestones</span>", then look at the line that this is on and you'll see it.
The process, result, and date are all produced using Historyoutput. I presume you can change the way the date is displayed inside that template.
The best place to ask questions about this template would be at w:User talk:Gimmetrow; he coded the entire thing and is a whiz at template stuff in general. Hope this helps. —Giggy 09:54, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

proposal for e-mail, talk pages

Moved from Meta:Babel

Hello, I wasn't sure where to suggest this, because it would affect multiple projects, not just Meta. Would it be possible to add an "E-mail me when my user talk page is changed" preference to all Wikimedia projects? I know that the option exists here at Meta and some other projects. I think this would be helpful for anyone who has multiple accounts. Thank you. --Kyoko 13:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the developers would agree to that, it would put too much load on the servers to do such a thing. (It would need to be enabled on all projects, including enwiki which would cause a lot of e-mails.) There's also no way to get the necessary global community agreement. All that being said, I've definitely wished for such a thing many times but I don't think it will be possible to implement. Cbrown1023 talk 18:39, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I think the greatest benefit of this would be if it were implemented on the smaller, lesser-known wikis. With 50+ Wikimedia projects, it is very easy to overlook a message on a wiki that you rarely visit. All that being said, I completely understand your point about the difficulty in implementing this idea. --Kyoko 21:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
A different idea would be some form of inter-wiki transclusion. Then you could transclude rarely visited talk pages to your home wiki talk page, and see when something is changed. Don't know the technical ramifications though. MBisanz talk 04:36, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure if that'd be technically possible; the server issues would probably be as significant as with the original proposal (per Casey). —Giggy 05:08, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
This is bugzilla:4547/bugzilla:9890 - IIRC, the issues are 1) coding it to be reliable and fast 2) caching to avoid killing server kittehs.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 12:39, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Wow, JeLuF managed to do it: bugzilla:15031 (all but the large projects). Cbrown1023 talk 14:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Navigation: Sisterprojects in same language

On the nl-wiki the subject of the several projects in the nl-language is discussed these days, and several possibilities are talked about about what we would like. The core problem which is drawn is that we form one community as nl-talking people, which work together on the different projects. While we form one nl-community on these projects together, the navigation between the projects is terrible. We link to them on the main pages, we have some sisterlinks on articles/categories, and that's it. We now discuss the possibilities of integrating the several nl-projects and improving the navigation between them. It is a good idea to seperate content by type (news, books, encyclopedia, dictionary, etc) (including transfers where it belongs better), but dividing them in seperate parts make parts invisible to visitors/users, often because of they come into Wikipedia by google, and miss the sisterlinks on the frontpage. Communities in a language that maintain several projects can improve the navigation between the projects by adding general links (which lead to the frontpages of the projects in that language) on the place where the community would like it (what says what projects are maintained by this community). Perhaps this is interesting mostly for relative small communities to show where information in that language is available on Wikimedia-projects. - Earlier this month it became easier to add the sisterlinks for example below the searchbox in the sidebar, see: here. Otherwise it could be an idea, which is mentioned on our wiki, to add a line at the bottom of every page, above/below were now are "Privacy policy About Meta Disclaimers" (on Meta, likewise on other wikis), to mention which sisterprojects there are in that language. This last idea could perhaps be made easier with a page in the MediaWiki namespace, like Footer or something, within the software, instead of creating it by javascript/codework. - Talking with other people from different projects in different languages, this navigation-problem seemed to occur in many languages too. That is why I post this idea here, to let know that the navigation between the projects in the same language can be much better. Greetings - Romaine 19:08, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Only a small fraction of all topics has a sister article in a sister project, so I suggest a template. Guido den Broeder 22:26, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
See what we do on enwiki: w:Category:Interwiki link templates and what we do here: Meta:SisterProjects. Cbrown1023 talk 22:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
This is not the way I had in mind. These links are specific links, but I talked about general links on every projectpage which says that this page is part of a xx-language community and that the other projects in this language are... (the ones which does exist). This to underline the cohesion of the projects maintained by (in many languages) mostly one community. Romaine 17:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
PS: See for example on: Wikibooks where they have added general links to the sisterprojects in the sidebar. Another possibility which is mentioned on nl-wiki and here above is at the bottom of a page just above the disclaimers. Romaine 17:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, that is something else, you are just adding more links to each other's main pages; it doesn't help users to navigate. It would be nice if they linked to the pages with the same name as the current page instead. Guido den Broeder 07:13, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
That is as I said something else. It does help users to navigate, and above all to make users and visitors aware of content in this same language on a different project (which is actually in a way the same project, but divided into parts, but maintained by the same community). The problem on which I point here is the navigational problems between the different projects in a same language which occur on many wiki's as I talked with people of other languages. Romaine 09:39, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Huge copyvio on de-WP

We're facing a huge copyvio-problem on the german wikipedia. The site is just a live-mirror of the german wikipedia, but it lacks any links to article histories and most other special functions are not working too. Besides that this could cause confusion of the readers (and have an impact on our reputation - see the "layout" of the main page there) they're also re-using the wikipedia-logo which is copyrighted. I think some intervention from wikimedia is necessary here. --PaterMcFly 09:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

It's been added to Live mirrors (by MichaelFrey); I'm not sure what happens next but presumably someone does something about it. —Giggy 09:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Usually someone yells at them - maybe a sysadmin since they are eating resources? If not, I can do it later today (if I remember)  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 15:03, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
We don't do anything about them, apparently. I'm going to request that they comply with the licensing requirements though.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 20:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be technically possible to block any traffic from such sites to the wikipedia-servers? I mean we can block write access for any IP quite easily, I suspect it would also be possible to block reading, I mean as ultimate measure if they fail to comply to the licensing requirements. --PaterMcFly 20:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
The ultimate measure is legal action, which hopefully won't be necessary. TimVickers 16:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


The topic keeps coming up, so I've taken a step in creating the body that people keep thinking "would be a good idea". Comments and implementation steps welcome. Kylu 21:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

More power to a small group of people to micro-manage? Not a good idea. Guido den Broeder 09:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
The idea is that it's opt-in and globally elected. Term limits would be a good idea IMO. Arbitration seems to be a growing need, and I'd like to implement it with plenty of forethought so we don't get stuck with a half-done solution. Kylu 04:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
The need grows, IMHO, because too many people get involved with any individual dispute in a hit-and-run manner without actually resolving anything. Guido den Broeder 09:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

PD art on the Commons

There is currently a discussion and straw poll on whether or not to bring the Commons' PD-Art policy into agreement with the English wikipedia's PD-Art policy. If enacted, this means we will no longer have the problem of photos of historic paintings (which are public domain in the U.S.) being moved to Commons and then deleted. If you support this (or don't), please visit the straw poll and add your opinion. JohnnyMrNinja 18:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Stewards intervened?

Hello there, while I am not sure, there is a concern on English Wikiquote raised by the local bureaucrats, stewards intervened and usurped the account not following its local policy (while still in a draft stage). It seems to me rather automatic actions but I have no good knowledge to tell what happened. A relevant incident may be found at WQ:RENAME].

Dear stewards, would you like to give a look to our discussion and tell how you think about it? Thanks! --Aphaia 05:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


Hi I need help,How can edit a class? Amir 02:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, what do you mean exactly? Majorly talk 00:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Class names are references to a project's style sheet; without more information, I can't help you any more than that, but you'll probably find the class defined in your wiki's MediaWiki:Monobook.css or MediaWiki:Common.css pages. EVula // talk // // 18:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Usurpt nick on meta

Hi, i want to usurpt nick Myst on meta but i can't found where is the place to make the request. Thanks. Sorry for my bad english :s. I'm Myst on fr:User:Myst. 10:39, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Try Meta:Changing username or Steward requests/SUL requests, regards, -jkb- (cs.source) 11:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Interactive animation

It seems to me that interactive animations would be a very useful feature in many Wikimedia projects for helping readers to understand how things work. It would add greatly to the richness of the user experience. This is technically possible using scripted SVG, which is supported by most modern browsers (Firefox, Opera and Safari and Internet Explorer with the Adobe plugin). SVG as a static format is encouraged in Wikimedia but that exploits only a small part of its potential. Animations using SMIL can be uploaded and accessed from the image page, but this type of animation is not interactive, and is not practicable where complex motion needs to be calculated. Currently, security concerns mean that SVG images containing script cannot be uploaded.

Where do I go to explain and advocate, without wasting my breath, the desirability of aiming towards support for this format? (Copied, on advice, from Babel)

Globbet 00:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I am not in the field and I don't quite understand the wikipedia article w:Synchronized_Multimedia_Integration_Language. It would be great if you could provide links to live examples to illustrate what you mean. Interactive animations would find use in wikiversity. Recently a wikiversitian has suggested a javascript [6], which would allow one to view page history dynamically - I couldn't make it work, but as I understand it it could show successive revisions like a sequence of slides. That, used in conjunction with recursive conversions, would provide a (albeit somewhat primitive) "interactive" learning experience. Perhaps your suggestion is bolder.Hillgentleman 07:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
OK. To view these examples with Internet explorer you will need to have installed the Adobe SVG plugin. As Firefox and Safari do not yet do SMIL animation, you will need to use IE or Opera to see it explained here. The demonstrations of SVG with Javascript here and here should work with any of these browsers.
Here are some examples of stuff I am working on, and would like to be able to upload to illustrate articles in this field. This is a simple SMIL animation I have uploaded (click the link immediately below the image). Even that requires the positions of the connecting-rod to be explicitly hard-coded into the SVG file. When the animation is more complicated, hard coding every step of the animation would become impracticable. Javascript allows the steps to be calculated in real time like this. I think you will agree that this static SVG file is far less instructive than the animated version. Notice that the slide at top right of the image gradually changes its angle of tilt. My next stage in developing this animation is to arrange for the user to be able to alter the tilt angle interactively to explore the effect that has on the system.
Scripted animation of SVG
  • is more widely supported at present than SMIL
  • enables more complicated animation
  • enables user interaction
Globbet 12:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Hillgentleman 03:30, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
This is a great idea! It's used in HowStuffWorks. The only problem is that it requires viewers to install a plugin before able to fully use it, unlike Ogg where everyone can use it right away. (P.S. Adobe has announced that it will discontinue support for Adobe SVG Viewer on January 1, 2009. Better grab it before it's too late. And to my surprise, Firefox doesn't have this kind of plugin.) OhanaUnitedTalk page 06:10, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Firefox does not need a plugin for scripted animation - it works now. It just does not do SMIL animation yet. The Adobe plugin may not be supported in the future, but I don't think Adobe has said that it will not be available. Globbet 07:50, 7 August 2008 (UTC) Afterthought: And no, the problem is that even the thought of uploading files containing Javascript to Wikimedia projects seems to be a total no-no at the moment. I just want to get the idea going that it would be good if a way could be found to change that. Globbet 08:02, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Utilisateur SUL

Hi all, I'm french from fr: and also one of the creators of fr:Modèle:utilisateur SUL (I translate this template here), the idea is about putting this template on your user's page. It's to inform readers where is your main wiki. Do you think that we could make this a "meta/general" template like babel ones ? Otourly 20:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC) Question also asked on en:Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Utilisateur SUL

You could see it on my user page on meta. Otourly 19:31, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Bot under user account

Is it allowed to use your own account also as a regular bot? See . Can I run bot under my regular account? --Jiří Fábora 13:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Why do you think it is a bot??? -jkb- (cs.source) 15:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Running a bot under your own user name is normally not a good idea, since it will flood the Recent Changes page. So if you would like to run it on a normal user, I would reccommend slow speed. However, I think this is something you should ask your local community (and especially the local admins and 'crats) about, to see what they say. --EivindJ 15:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Arbcom member disclosing private information

What can be done about an Arbcom member that repeatedly discloses private, confidential information? Guido den Broeder 07:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

An Arbcom is a product of a community. Consequently it is the community that should be the judge of this.. What is not clear is what project you are talking about... Thanks, GerardM 09:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
What if the community does nothing? Guido den Broeder 11:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Which community? --Thogo (talk) 11:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Obviously, a community without any info on how this should be handled, or I would not have asked. Guido den Broeder 12:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
If everything is so obvious for you, why do you ask then? tsts. --Thogo (talk) 12:40, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I suggest Wikitrial for the misbehaving ArbCom member. Seriously, though, if the community doesn't want to do anything about it, then I don't see much of a choice: live with it. If the community doesn't do anything because it doesn't know anything about it, then it should be informed. But maybe it would be better if we talked specifics. --FiliP × 12:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
That is the one thing that we should not do, because of the nature of the problem. Guido den Broeder 13:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Contact the Ombudsman commission? Mr.Z-man 00:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Mr.Z-man, that seems to be an option. Guido den Broeder 08:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Only if the information at issue is protected by the privacy policy (i.e. IP information obtained using the checkuser tool, or other information obtained by technical means). "Outing" using information obtained via e-mail or some other way not enabled by a Foundation function is not part of the policy, or the remit of the Ombudsman commission. Avruch 22:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
So, what can be done if private, confidential information obtained by email and IRC is disclosed on Wikipedia? Guido den Broeder 07:09, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Bring it to the attention of other arbcom members. But I'm not clear why this is being discussed here, instead of on the wiki in question. ++Lar: t/c 10:09, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
All available roads at the wiki in question have been tried. There is zero response. Guido den Broeder 06:58, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Control over the content my user and talk pages...

What are the rules regarding choosing what exists on my user pages and talk pages. Does this apply to other wikis? Thank you. Emesee 22:54, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not aware of a userpage policy/guideline on Meta however certainly some projects do have them, the English Wikipedia for example has w:Wikipedia:User page. I think it general it is reasonable to say that although it is your userpage it isn't simply yours to do as you wish and the content allowed is simply what the community tolerates and this is likely to depend on your standing within the community. As a very basic rule any content should be reasonably relevant to your work on that project. With user talk pages it seems generally accepted that the user shouldn't delete comments, especially warnings, from others and instead archive these. Adambro 12:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Coming from a "spammy" perspective :). Basically I agree with Adambro. However I think we need to distinguish between real contributors and "drive by" folk who set up myspace/facebook/advert type user pages some across wikis. I think that these should be deleted (I do delete them) and they should be reminded that there is a purpose to all this which is not solely about them. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 13:06, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Many wikis have, see User page or follow the interwikilinks on the linked pages. Also I agree with Herby, if someone misuses his userpage to advertise a webpage across wikis he might end in this section, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 13:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
An example maybe. I am not judging this one at all. SUL activated and obviously a pt user. However the user page here is pretty much the same as Commons (& maybe they will go elsewhere & create the same pages. Given the pt contribs we could argue that they are good contributors however what level of personal linkage is ok I wonder. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 15:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Global blocking enabled

I'm pleased to announce that Tim has just enabled the Global Blocking extension on all Wikimedia projects.

The global blocking extension allows stewards to block IP addresses and ranges on all of Wikimedia's projects, a tool which has been much-needed to deal with cross-wiki vandalism and spam. Policies for use of global blocking were discussed on meta, and are presently located at <>. Global blocks are not currently applied on meta, so that they may be appealed there.

While the code has been quite thoroughly checked, any bugs should be reported at bugzilla - a 'GlobalBlocking' component exists under the 'Extensions' product.

Werdna 12:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Since this feature has been implemented, it seems imperative that the 'Global blocking' page, currently tagged as a draft, should be finalised and reviewed, hopefully prior to the mainstream and proper usage of the function. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 13:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
It's no longer tagged draft, and IMO looks pretty complete. —Giggy 10:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Usage documentation is at Steward handbook#Global_access_restriction. —{admin} Pathoschild 09:55:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Werdna thanks this is very a good news and will help us --Mardetanha talk 13:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Unable to leave info in the main page of my.wikt

I have just tried to leave this message in the main page of

|style="background-color:#FF9900;"|<Big><big>'''This project has been proposed for closure since 16 August 2007 [ here]'''</big></big>

that displays this:

This project has been proposed for closure since 16 August 2007 here

but I cannot do it. It says: "You do not have permission to edit pages, for the following reason: This page has been locked to prevent editing. You can view and copy the source of this page:". Can somebody here do it? Thanks. -- 01:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Done Cbrown1023 talk 03:20, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, Cbrown1023. :) Regards. -- 08:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Tell is about your Wikipedia

Are you an editor of your Wikipedia langauge edition who knows well about it? Please Tell us about your Wikipedia answering to a questionare.--Ziko-W 09:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Interwiki contributions

I'd like to make a proposal for a MediaWiki tool that allows you to view the contributions of a user with an SUL account that integrates all their contributions on one page. I'm not sure of the best place for the tool, but it would be along the lines of Special:Contributions, but for all projects. It would be of good use tracking interwiki vandals, and whilst evaluating positions of trust, such as requests for global rollback, or during the steward elections. I suspect that if we get a consensus here, the developers will work on it. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at the footer of your contribs listing. There's a link to a tool which provides something like that. (I'm not sure what checks if any are made for SUL status though; that information is certainly available to and could be integrated into that tool) What do you think about that tool? Does it meet your needs? What enhancements would you like? --Jeremyb 03:25, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, that's fantastic really, but it would be good to have something like that written into WikiMedia code. Ryan Postlethwaite 03:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Why would you prefer it be integrated into core (or even extension) MediaWiki code? FWIW, my instinct says this does not belong there, but the devs would be better suited to entertain that question. Where do you suggest it be located if it is implemented on wiki itself? (both where within the wiki and on which wiki(s)) A new special page? On all wikis? Just meta? Cheers --Jeremyb 05:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Ah Ryan, I already added the 2 most important interwiki links you will ever need a long time ago, 1 is the SUL:Ryan Postlethwaite ([[SUL:Ryan Postlethwaite]]) and the other being Luxo:Ryan Postlethwaite ([[Luxo:Ryan Postlethwaite]]) . :) ...--Cometstyles 05:44, 29 August 2008 (UTC)