Wikimedia Forum

I'll jump straight to the topic - open the door and see the mountain, to use a Chinese phrase. A lot of projects are now a mess. Namely, WB, WN, and (possibly) WV. I'm an active contributor of Wikibooks, and it's been really, really quite these days. After a controversial transwiki discussion, an admin, b:User:Thenub314, has decided to semi-retire. And after that, at Wikinews, n:USer:HJ Mitchell and n:User:Tempodivalse decided to retire. I've heard, in meta, from WB bureaucrat b:User:Adrignola that WV is a mess too. Shouldn't something be done about this? Kayau WP WB WN 11:29, 31 July 2010 (UTC) Reply

...And, considering the WN matters, a global ArbCom probably won't help much. Kayau WP WB WN 11:30, 31 July 2010 (UTC) Reply

I can best provide personal thoughts on the English language Wikibooks. Not that I'm complaining (I like involvement with the community), but I should note that there are times where my talk page at Wikibooks is more active than all the community discussion rooms at the time (such that I archive by month and after a seven day delay). I used to have to view the last 250 recent changes to patrol what's happened during the night; for the past couple months I've only needed 100. Apparently conflicts between editors have been responsible for problems at Wikiversity and Wikinews. Wikibooks has been pretty quiet, so quiet that any evaporation of its community would easily go unnoticed. For more objective analysis, I give you: 3 month admin statistics (I only consider five active—check contributions histories), number of admins over time (Wikibooks removes after 1 year of inactivity), content pages ; stats.wikimedia.org hasn't been updated for Wikibooks since January, so it's not going to provide anything accurate for comparison. I don't know the solution, but I know it's not to be found at (削除) Wikimedia (削除ここまで) Wikipedia Outreach (try to find a page not about Wikipedia there). There is continual concern over Wikipedia growth, but the other projects would love to have even a fraction of the contributions and they have greater potential for growth than a mature platform. Adrignola 14:22, 31 July 2010 (UTC) Reply

I'd hoped the quietness was due in some part to the summer vacation season, although it does seem quieter than last year. Unusual? Quite ^TalkQu 13:53, 25 August 2010 (UTC) Reply

Wikinews is even worse now, it seems. I've just decided to take a stroll through the water cooler and I was surprised at how frank Wikinewsies had been with each other earlier this month. And I finally learnt some stuff I've overlooked before. C628 and Blurpeace left as well. It looks terrible. Wikibooks on the other hand is taking the opposite course. Thenub just came back and became a CU, and the discussion about Kohs is cooling down. Dunno about WV though... Kayau WP WB WN 13:45, 22 August 2010 (UTC) Reply

I can provide a little insight into Wikinews; it's indeed doing badly due to massive internal disputes and incivility. Six active users and admins (including me) retired during the course of the summer, and others, while not officially "retired", have told me they don't want to edit there anymore. That's about half the entire user base, and no new editors have been attracted since to cover the gap. (Never in project history has there been such a mass exodus.) It's taken a toll on article production - en.wn now frequently has the same stories hang around for around a week (削除) or more (削除ここまで) on the front page - not good for a site that's supposed to provide the latest info and always be up-to-date. For WB and WV I can't speak for, although the latter seems strained the last few times I've been there.

I wish there was something that could be done, but I'm not sure what. In wikinews' case, a Foundation staff member actually posted several comments, in an official capacity, saying he condemned what was going on and requested it to stop; nothing changed. Given that the WMF is loathe to interfere in local projects' affairs, looks like things will keep going downhill for the time being. Tempodivalse [talk] 14:34, 21 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Re the current state of Wikinews: My impression, from the inside, is somewhat different, and not so bleak. There are two new reviewers since you retired. I'm also rather dubious of "frequently ... the same stories hang around for a week or more", which though vague sounds like an overstatement (and one that would take an awful lot of time to investigate objectively). I see community spirit, and we continue to grapple with the great puzzle of how to keep frank discussion from overheating. I'm optimistic. --Pi zero 02:41, 22 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Well, I'm inherently somewhat pessimistic. :-) I haven't been following closely, just looking in once in a while, so perhaps my interpretation is not completely accurate. But it certainly doesn't seem as good, or active, as I remember it 3-4 months ago. The two new "reviewers" don't appear to be nearly as active as those that retired. Right now it's better, but the last few times I checked, the "Recent News" list on the main page had week-old stories - a very rare occurrence before. (I've refactored that in my previous comment now.) *shrug* Tempodivalse [talk] 13:13, 22 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Also, I found this. Not sure how to interpret the statistics, but looks like en.wn hit a peak at around early 2007 and has never got past it. Tempodivalse [talk] 13:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Moved from Talk:Requests for comment#GOK god only knows. I added the bold. This message has been on that section since June 1st. 2009:

hello.

I am sure you are not where this message should go but I am also sure that you knot who to get it there. I am legally blind and I ccannot find a "contacht us" link.

I have two concerns. The first is simple. I love lyour printable version,. My conputer talks and is not too good at skipping the stuff I don't want, lke your left hand column. The printable link has stripped off the mechanisms and irrelevancies and leaves me a free field to read you with my JAWS screen reader. I wish you would publicise the way you manage to clean u p the page. Go to the magazine webpage, The Week and look at it as a an over illustrated maze full of irrelevant links. They don't do it on purpose. I think they would probably be willing to offer the printable version. You might want to talk with their bublisher, Henter Joyce, which has a web site to contact them Freedom Scientific / Henter Joyce 1 800 444 4443 while you're at it ask for their demos and have hun. WYNN is for kids and they love it.

My other concern is the Poison Control Centers. They are a reliable source on the dangerousness of various chemicals, etc. [they also identify pills and prescrible treatments for poisonings]They have an extensive database which I suggessst you access and add to articles as a free-standking attachment. I heard the eco-scare of the week -- sodium laureth sulfate causes everything from excema to cancer and homosexuality. It makkes the bubles in shampoos and laundry soaps, some foaming bathoil and other detergents. The Wiki did not addreess the quesstion. I ,ake no otjher concrete suggestions: the poison control centers have the technical expertise and I don't

I Love the Wiki. Never a contributor, no relevant expertise, butmany opinions that might help If I knew how to contact you.

Keep up the good work

Kristine Watkins kwatkins21@nc.rr.com

Hello Boys/girls,

This is my first post on this first. So excuse me if i do something crazy here.

Whats my question? I want to implement a vertical slidemenu within on my Wikimedia:Sidebar. And i want to use this slidemenu http://www.mediawiki.org or http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Does anyone know how to do this? I search everywhere on the net but i cant find it.

I've used Vector as my default Wikimedia skin.

Thanks in advance

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fainaforumboy (talk • contribs) 15:37, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Commons is a central repository for images, and many projects do not allow local uploads. This means that it is very difficult to illustrate one's articles for editors that are blocked on Commons. So it should be a systemwide concern when commons administrators issue arbitrary blocks with false motivations. Some recent example:

• commons:user:Mbz1 was blocked for two weeks for uploading a collage; there was no copyright problem. The block was quickly rescinded, but no measures were taken against the unrepentant blocking admin.
• That same admin had permanently banned commons:user:Hcrepin for unclear reasons. User tried to appeal as an IP number (commons:Special:Contributions/91.178.228.98), but nobody listened. I brought up the problem on the commons IRC channel, Herbythyme was approached, who made this statement, then Huib/Abigor unblocked. No apology, no consequences for the blocking admin.
• And of course the reason for me posting this: I myself have been permbanned on Commons for no good reason. Commons administrators talk about "discipline", intimidating those that feel that my block is undeserved.

The problem is especially severe for contributors that cannot easily express themselves in English. /Pieter Kuiper 09:09, 29 August 2010 (UTC) Reply

Commons is a large enough community that it should consider the formation of an arbitration committee. Regardless, they do have a dispute resolution system in place that should be attempted. If you feel there's enough of an issue that it deserves multiple project scrutiny, you can start a request for comment here, but I would warn you that it's a bit of a drawn-out process and, frankly, only rarely results in any sort of useful change. There are many proposals for a sort of a "global arbcom", but none have reached enough support to be a serious contender in the dispute resolution arena. Kylu 01:24, 3 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

That dispute resolution system is not accessible if one is blocked. A Commons Arbcom would not solve the problem: the crowd is actually quite small, and an arbcom would just be recruited from the small circle of active administrators - the people that look at commons administration first, more than at the other projects. Commons should get an Arbcom with outside representatives. /Pieter Kuiper 13:09, 18 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

A new one: commons:User:Adambro blocked three contributors for a week, on a whim, out of the blue. Just because he felt like it. /Pieter Kuiper 16:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC) Reply

Of course the SUL global user accounts are a major step forward in making us all more connected in one global community, but I think there are also a number of rather negative phenomena associated with it that need to be addressed, because the success of such a community depends very much of the mutual respect we are willing to invest in it. There are global users that insist on having user pages generated on all sites, even the ones they have never visited or never intend to visit and put soft redirects on it in what is not the local language, imposing categories that do not exist locally. In fact they even have so little consideration with the local community that they do not even take the trouble to do that themselves but let e.g. Patoschild do it for them. If they do not even take the trouble to do that should they really be "entitled" to impose a foreign language on a community they don't care to contribute to at all and have no intention to either? They are not users or contributors, why should they be entitled to anything? Wikimedia should be for people who contribute in respect for other users. This is simply disrespectful and rude towards the local community and it needs to end nl:wikt:Gebruiker:Jcwf Jcwf 14:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC) Reply

I agree entirely. The global WMF community is, however, a reflection of our society, so I doubt that this will change. Regards, Guido den Broeder 23:14, 2 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I understand that some people may feel it's disrespectful, but is it functionally disruptive? Wikis aren't paper after all, and they can only possibly be convenient (if the user ever edits then there will be less confusion by the local regulars in case they forget to create the redirect). In case specific wikis opt to not have the script (Pathoschild's, in most cases) running we might set up a list that excludes those domains, which I'm sure won't be a problem. From my observations most wikis don't even tend to notice the creation of the userpages, though. -- Menti fisto 17:41, 3 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I always felt the creation of the page was fairly pointless but I can't agree that it is rude, disrespectful or "imposing" on the particular community. It's just a user page, I suspect nobody cares very much. QU ^TalkQu 20:56, 3 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

In fixing death anomalies I've wound up editing a number of wikipedia's where I don't speak the language. I usually leave a little note on my userpage explaining who I am and why I'm there. I haven't yet had any complaints and I hope most people would support what I'm doing as useful. But sooner or later I'm bound to make a mistake and when someone does want to point that out to me I hope that a softredirect will make that easier. I'm not sure why anyone would want a userpage when they have zero edits, but if the only article I've edited on a pedia is subsequently deleted then that could happen to me. WereSpielChequers 13:25, 4 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I would almost say that every user that edits on other projects, must have on his/her userpage a link to the page where he/she can be contacted where the user also is active and sees his/her messages. I have been searching once for botowner where he was active, and due a missing link it was a hell of a job. Greetings - Romaine 19:14, 4 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Two interesting experiences for your information.

1) http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Information_desk#Deletion_of_user_page

2) Date: 2010年7月18日 03:49 To: * From: "Virgilio A. P. Machado" <vam@fct.unl.pt> Subject: Disclosure of users' real data (addenda)

[...]

After being "banned forever", under the most suspicious circumstances (a mute point), from the Portuguese Wikipedia, on April 3rd, sysop Yanguas (http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio:Yanguas) redirected my user page (http://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio:Vapmachado&diff=19532251&oldid=19375493) to my discussion page. What entitles him to take such action? Or is it vandalism? I'm puzzled by the sysop Yanguas redirect since even user pages of sock puppets banned forever are maintained at the Portuguese Wikipedia (http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio:Bruna228, http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio:LPL, and http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio:Azulinho).

I'm glad to be able to provide you all with real cases to discuss. You are all very welcome to comment. Maybe sometime down the line there will be a new policy that will establish that 1) all user pages in projects where the users have no other edits will be deleted; 2) all user pages in projects where the users do not make an certain number of edits per month will be deleted; 3) all user pages in projects where the users have not make any edits for a number of months will be deleted; 4) all user pages that another user doesn't like will be deleted; 5) all user pages can be subjected to community approval and will only be maintained if they get more than 2/3 of the votes in favor, all others will be deleted; 6) all user pages need to be pre-approved by a censorship board appointed for life. Sincerely, Virgilio A. P. Machado. Vapmachado 19:21, 4 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I suspect you aren't really suggesting these options as sensible alternatives. However, for what it's worth my view is that user pages should only be edited by the user themselves unless they violate a local policy (e.g., by containing spam). This is just a courtesy of course as the licensing allows anyone to edit the page. QU ^TalkQu 20:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Not sensible indeed, but that's what's happening out there (see my two examples) and what the user who started this topic and the next one are advocating. If that is not already a policy, who's going to do anything about what happened in those two cases? Do you see anybody? I sure don't (Yes, that includes whoever is reading this, I'm afraid). You suspected that nobody cared very much diff . No need to suspect any more. There are people who care a great deal (see my two examples) and so much so that the topic is being discussed here. Sincerely, Virgilio A. P. Machado Vapmachado 22:03, 4 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

A related example on nl:Wikipedia is a user creating and editing an archive in someone elses user space, against their wishes, e.g. [1]. Guido den Broeder 08:56, 7 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

A policy that limits edits on user pages to the user themselves would be difficult given the licensing, although in effect this happens already in some circumstances through page protection (where edits are limited to admins). I'd happily support a policy that restricted edits to user pages to the user except where other policies were breached by the user. QU ^TalkQu 11:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Both of you expressed opinions that I subscribe, but action speaks louder than policies. No one here dares to mess with the Wiktionary administrators or those of any other project for that matter, because that's the natural order of things on Wikimedia projects, for reasons that are self evident. On the Portuguese Wikipedia it is stated that although the user page may be edited by anybody, it is agreed that only the user edits it, being responsible by its content. There's at least an administrator from the Portuguese Wikipedia that has been sniffing and snooping around here, waiting for his chance to ask again for the old fart to be blocked here on Meta. He and one of his big buddies already did and FAILED miserably, despite begging for support from others (not much luck there also, I'm afraid.) All that is quite usual, the question is that you don't see any of them writing a word here or righting a wrongdoing, because that's the natural order of things on Wikimedia projects, for reasons that are self evident. Please don't take this personally, because I understand your reasons, but all it takes to undo the redirect of my user page is to go there and undo or revert it. It takes less time then writing nice platitudes. Now please go back to my comment above of 22:03, 4 September 2010 (UTC) Sincerely, Virgilio A. P. Machado. Vapmachado 22:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Perhaps you misunderstand me or think I have some kind of "power" to fix your specific problem. I agree there should be local policies per this discussion, but it's for each local community to agree and define that policy. I am not a member of any of the projects you are having problems with so it's not for me to go and try and dictate to the community there. If you want to propose a global policy (i.e., start with an RFC at Meta) then I'll happily contribute to that debate. However, I am not in a position of "authority" to somehow enforce what you are asking for (reverting the redirect on a specific Wiki). This forum is for discussions not enforcement actions, so you're in the wrong place if you are trying to get a fix - platitudes it is. QU ^TalkQu 23:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

"Please don't take this personally, because I understand your reasons," as stated above. Vapmachado 03:59, 8 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I don't take anything personally, don't worry. QU ^TalkQu 09:01, 8 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

The following is not addressed to the user above but to you, the reader.

On the other hand, you may want to admire the looks of my user page now (Vapmachado) compared to how it used to be (Vapmachado). It was done after my comment above (diff and diff) with the summary: "more understandable then redirecting it to the discussion." You may still compare that to examples of user pages of sock puppets, banned forever, maintained at the Portuguese Wikipedia: Bruna228, LPL, and Azulinho. That is what it means "it is agreed that only the user edits it," in the Portuguese Wikipedia. Please don't forget to compliment the sysop who did this brave and honorable deed. Do you still expect or would like me to propose a global policy? For people that display that kind of understanding of the Principles of Fairness, Integrity, Honesty, Human dignity, Service, Excellence, Potential, Growth, Patience, Nurturance, and Encouragement? These are the platitudes of my human condition, consciousness, and conscience. Sincerely, Virgilio A. P. Machado. Vapmachado 05:19, 8 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

In the absence of a written global policy explicitly disallowing editing userpages, the general concept of the projects being wiki (in that all pages are, by system default (as opposed to policies) editable supersedes an individual's preferences on the matter. If you think that userpages should not be subject to such, you're free to propose a global policy, of course, but I suspect that there will be little in the way of support for it however. Good luck. Kylu 21:09, 9 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I don't think that such an extreme policy is needed. A global policy describing the purpose and proper use of user pages, user talk pages and archives should suffice, and that might actually be a good idea. Regards, Guido den Broeder 22:37, 9 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

*.wikimwdia.org --Mkratz 13:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Ah, thanks, but is there anything we can actually do about it? Kylu 11:46, 7 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

shouldn't think so as it isn't infringing any copyright... if it was, say, "wikimedia.co.ru" you could usurp it, maybe. QU ^TalkQu 11:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Not to be too pedantic, but unless a site is hosting copies of our pages without attribution, copyright wouldn't be an issue anyway. You're probably thinking of trademark violations instead. Kylu 23:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Ah, yes, that's what I meant, thanks! QU ^TalkQu 09:01, 8 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

There is an open meeting scheduled for tomorrow on IRC at 1600 UTC. –SJ · talk | translate 00:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Hello all,

today a steward range-blocked 114.44.128.0/18 and 114.44.112.0/20 on zh-wp with the reason "{{range block}}: Checkuser - Abusing multiple accounts" for six months (http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:%E6%97%A5%E5%BF%97/block ). He happens to have blocked for half a year the biggest ISP of Taiwan from zh-wp. I don't understand how can a steward issue such a range block without consulting local admins. I find this very unresponsible and upsetting.--Wing 17:59, 12 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

My appologize, the block was requested by a zh-wp admin. Though I still think such a range block with such a long period is not proper. It can affect too much other users.--Wing 18:38, 12 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I personally prefer giving a recommendation for a range-block instead of doing it myself, as the local community should decide such an action. Laaknor 18:43, 12 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Hello. I'm Ikatz from the Basque wiktionary. I’m realized that in IPAs icons are missing some ones that are necessary from the Basque pronunciation, so I want to put them. I don't know if this is the right place to speak about this but I thank you if you tell me where I can ask this question. Sorry for my bad English and thanks. EH-Ikatz ^{answer here} 19:47, 12 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Answered at eu.wikt. -Aleator (talk) 19:59, 18 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Not a question but a call for participation. Talk:Wikimania/Committee could really do with active participation for the formation of a committee to assist with the oversight of Wikimania. Many Thanks Seddon 00:45, 13 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I want to say ,and to remind others of how difficult it can be for some people trying to get round the wiki projects and sections ,due to it rapidly turning into a language that is pure computer speak,and if like me you have a head injury and find it very difficult in the normal field of jargon and the like, then there is no need to say any more I suppose what i am saying is that ,Wikipedia and it's off-shoots is an alien concept for large portion of society and the more it becomes computeresque, the more it will put off the general reader or learner. As a child finding my first encyclopedia ,with pictures ,kept me engrossed and the pictures conveyed so much more of what i was reading,to my mind,and believe me i was in need of being taken out of my circumstances,even if it was just into a world created for me by reading loads of facts written in such a way that dragged me up a little more than i ever got in school. With so many little children in Africa and East European countries being given the chance to read and participate in the world of computers,it is imperative that we don't deter them with abbrv's scattered through our language coming from computer jargon. So what i am saying and hoping clearer ,is that my encyclopedia and what i got from it was so important and itf it was'nt for the pictures alongside,that allowed my mind to get interested and take part,as i did with the pictures aiding the process,but where is the pictures with learning computer language. I say that because i am reminded of it everytime i try and get into reading (because i have not got past reading the blurbs) before i am deterred further by so many areas i can't fathom, that is my own disability,through an accident ,but there must be a better way to learn computer ,because there must be children that are locked out,through whatever reason,and if their interest can't be tweeked another way then they will be lost. But maybe there is areas where learning computerspeak is easier,finally we must remember that peoples brains work in different ways,they process things in other ways but sadly with computer learning there only seems one way.
— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Coolpolitealex (talk) 12:27, 13 September 2010

• Minor refactoring by Kylu 16:48, 13 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

While it's not "a kid's encyclopedia" certainly, you may be interested in Simple English Wikipedia, which seems to avoid the overuse of acronyms and technical jargon considerably more than other projects. Best. Kylu 16:48, 13 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I sometimes use wikipedia at work. Occasionally I run on articles than need minor changes, like adding links to other articles etc. For at least 2-3 years it has been impossible to make changes in wikipedia from my workplace, because whole internet connection (for hundreds of people) have been blocked - each time for a year and nobody knows for what reason, because the administrative, who has banned them does not have to give reason??? And I cannot even comment this issue on that wiki - because my comments even have been blocked.

1. I have worked as legal representative of public authority, and if any goverment would do this, they would be crusified immediatly. This is very bad policy indeed.
2. I can understand it is not nice clean up after others, but no respectacle organisation can block hundreds of innosents because of one criminal, whitout even giving them right to complain somewhere against the decissions of this one administrator.
3. A year is a long time to be blocked, especially when I don't know why I am blocked for.
4. There should be somewhere to complain against decissions of individual administrator. Every respectable society needs one. Otherwise it will be despotism - like it now frankly seems to me.
5. This cannot acceptable - and I question, if it is even legal.

Emppu 11:05, 15 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

(I assume you're talking about the English Wikipedia; correct me if I'm wrong). There are actually some things you can do. Usually IP blocks are restricted to anonmyous users only, so logging into your account should enable you to edit in those cases regardless of the IP block. If this is not the case, you can request IP block exemption for editing with your own account. If you feel the block is unjustified, you can normally post on your talk page on Wikipedia and request unblocking (see guide to appealing blocks). This can also be made by emailing unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org and explaining your situation.

Yes, it's completely legal for a private website, even a wiki-based one, to block someone's ability to edit it. Whether it's good administration is another thing, and generally the policy is that blocks should be as narrow as possible to avoid restricting constructive editors. However, there's no way to tell the exact situation without knowing the IP address(es) in question. Jafeluv 11:53, 15 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Dear colleagues,

I remember that there is a standard approach by many Wikimedia projects in different languages to follow Florida Laws AND laws of country when most editors/reusers reside.

However, I tried to find a Board resolution on that, or something like that. But failed. Could you please advise me if the policy above really exists, or it is on discretion of each specifice project's community?

Thanks! Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 20:32, 15 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I think that's something the local communities have to decide for themselves. For example, on German Wikipedia we generally do follow German law. However, I'm quite sure Chinese Wikipedia doesn't strictly obey Chinese law (that's why they have been banned in the past). --Church of emacs talk · contrib 20:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Vladimir, I doubt you'll get an informed opinion here. Ask a lawyer and then get a second opinion. Sincerely, Virgilio A. P. Machado Vapmachado 21:04, 15 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

There is no freedom of choice here, but it depends on the type of law. The location of the WMF determines that corporate issues fall under Florida law. The same is not true, however, for criminal issues. Guido den Broeder 21:10, 15 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

@Drbug I think you are searching for the Exemption Doctrine Policy: foundation:Resolution:Licensing policy Merlissimo 00:39, 16 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Vladimir, Look at the bottom of this page. Click on "Privacy policy". Check section on "Access to and release of personally identifiable information." That may be useful to your lawyer. Sincerely, Virgilio A. P. Machado. Vapmachado 02:28, 16 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I need to split a string that is input as template parameter. The string looks like this: "CZ0523 573868" and I need it to split into "0523" and "573868" (maybe it is called truncate what I need to do, I am not a coder). I need it because I want to use the parameters in an externa link to a governmental site. Someone on IRC told me this is not possible in Wikimedia projects unfortunatelly... is that correct? If I cant split the string is there another option how to get what i need? Maybe ask a bot to edit particular pages and split that parameter into two params which I then can use? Thanks for help. -Kozuch 11:37, 18 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

You can't do it, but here's what you can do: Call the template with the strings already separated, e.g. {{foobar|string1=0523|string2=573868}}. To fix existing uses of the template, you'll need a bot.
Before you do anything like that, make sure there's a consensus in your local community. --Church of emacs talk · contrib 00:02, 19 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Hopefully this isn't the entirely wrong place for this, but how does one enable Special:Import on a wiki such as the Outreach Wiki? Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 19:32, 18 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

I asked for it at bugzilla for Wikisource and Wiktionary. E.g. [2]. -Aleator (talk) 19:59, 18 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

editconflict Normally this tool is within the admin tools. If it is not, you need to get local consensus and after about 7 days, you can fill a bug on bugzilla, so the developers can enable it as an extra tool on the wiki, or just put it in the sysop permission. -Barras 20:00, 18 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Government of the Republic of Korea, Korea Communications Commission, announced new assignments of IPv4 addresses will be halted after June 2011 and will switch to IPv6 address. IPv6 can provide 2¹²⁸×ばつ10³⁸ addresses. (calculated using common logarithm) I think Wikimedia should make a plan to support IPv6 system. I think having both support for IPv4 and IPv6 can be a best option. If the foundation have the plan already, let me know about the issue. Best regards. – Kwj2772 (msg) 08:20, 19 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Hi. MediaWiki supports IPv6 since some time. Deployment on Wikimedia wikis is a bit more difficult and it seems some issues still have to be resolved. From what is publicly available, not much has changed lately; perhaps ask on Wikitech-l? --Church of emacs talk · contrib 12:23, 19 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Hi. Very new new to wikis, and my first post here. I am trying to simplify my wiki before having it go live. This means in part reducing page elements that might be confusing to participants even newer than I am to wikis. I try to follow the instructions on deleting items from the navbar found here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Customize_page_layout#Remove_navigation_link However, while I have found and downloaded language.php (in the Languages folder), I don't find any of the elements that are supposed to be in this file, and that I'm supposed to change: "'portal','currentevents',recentchanges','randompage','help', and 'sitesupport'." Further, when I just go ahead and add the sample bit of code as per instructions to the bottom of the page (//CHANGED PARAMETER $wgAllMessagesEn['portal']='-';), the "portal" link does not disappear. I have a sense that I have misunderstood the instructions in some basic way, for example I feel as if I am working in the entirely wrong file.

What am I doing wrong? Thanks.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.138.64.56 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 22 September 2010 (UTC).Reply

You can edit MediaWiki:Sidebar, see mw:Manual:Interface/Sidebar for details --Church of emacs talk · contrib 20:02, 22 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

Reposting for discussion. –SJ · talk | translate 17:39, 23 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

• it:Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Fourth-largest language edition - it wiki ;) Przykuta 19:25, 28 September 2010 (UTC) Reply

How to setup a server for a certain Wikipedia edition in a certain language? Abdullais4u 10:07, 8 October 2010 (UTC) Reply

• Wikimedia Forum
• Noticeboards
• Communication
• Meta-Wiki organisation
• Multilingualism