Wikimedia Forum/Archives/2010-06

Hello, I am not sure if this is the correct place to discuss this, so if I am in the wrong place by all means point me elsewhere. I am the holder of the un-unified SUL of User:Woody with the main account being en:User:Woody where I am a sysop. There are 4 wikipedias where I could not usurp the existing editors as they had edits. Now for the problem: some of the edits that I have made on the English Wikipedia have been transwikied across, mainly to the German language Wikipedia, under the username Woody and these are now attributed to the German Woody. This is wrong, on a simple copyright level. Take this edit for example, which was transwikied from this edit on the English Wikipedia. There are various examples of this in de:Spezial:Beiträge/Woody. Does the foundation have a way of rectifying these issues and the issue of non-usurpable accounts across wikimedia projects? Woody 16:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I would like to inform the international community of Wikipedians that fa.wikipedia.org has adopted censorship policy. As censor, acts Admin Mani ماني , Mani ماني interferes in editing process, deletes texts that he does not approve. Offical justification for text deletion is "article too long" or "this text does not belong to this article" . Users who invites the local community to discuss different point of views are blocked immediately and exponentially. Official justification for blocking is "non-encyclopaedic writing " or "insisting". Admin Mani acts as prosecutor, judge, and executor in one person. Admin Mani has a goup of subordiantes who check new articles or change the exisiting articles. The mission of this group is to support Mani in his censorship activities, they insert false information and disinformation in articles. Authors who accidentally correct the false information are identified and blocked with the excuse of "INSISTING".

There is a formal arbiteration committee but answers from this committee comes from Admin Mani. International Stewards do not intervene , but refer to the policy of non interference . Board of Wikipedia does also not intervene.

The policy of non-interference is in fact a policy of supporting censorship.

I appeal to international community of Wikipedians to stop censorship in Wikipedia Farsi. Persian speaking Wikipedians would like to write collaboratively in fa.wikipedia as the Wikipedians do in other local communities of Wikipedia, English, German, etc.. They would like to discuss freely different point of views without being threatened, insulted, blocked or eliminated.

Thank you for your support

--Bellavista1957 09:35, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

- I disagree. These policies are for the benefit of Wikipedia. Never injustice, censorship, etc. has no status. Good work. --Bermanya 20:31, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, user Bellavista1957 insists on adding sentences which praise some political figures and if anybody tries to change the tone of his sentence to fit the encyclpaedia he starts an edit war and calls it "censorship". Huge number of experienced users and moderators have tried to explain this to him but he wouldn't listen.--ماني 11:00, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I am not a moderator on "Wikipedia Farsi" because there exists not such a thing. I am a moderator in Persian Wikipedia.--ماني 11:03, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

The latest article of Bellavista1957 I could find in fa:wp was about the "Crowning of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi". As far as I could see there was no "praising of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi", no edit war, and not a "huge number" of postings on the discussion page of this article. But I could find a posting of an user on the discussion page of Bellavista1957 mentioning that Mani had interfered in the text of the article, and blocked Bellavista1957 (for four weeks), all this in less then one hour. The user who posted on the discussion page of Bellavista1957 had recommended that Mani, who had deleted some sentences of the article, should not have taken the decision to block Bellavista1957. As far as I can see in the logs, Bellavista1957 is not the only case Mani are deleting and blocking. I looked into the case of Bellavista1957 and roughly translated some postings to provide comprehensive information for those who do not speak Persian to support any initiative "to stop censorship in wp:fa"! --Wvk 05:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

The complaining user has a long history of disruption and adding large passages of blatant POV [and sometimes out of context] material. Every attempt to guide the user has been proven to be futile. It seems that the user is a crusader for his POV and considers any modification to his contributions an act of censorship. Admins have lost patience with him. Because of his long history of disruption occasional over-reaction to his behavior may be observed. But there is no doubt that the user, in totality of his actions, has been quite troublesome. If he were a contributor on en.wiki, he would have been banned from editing long ago. Behaafarid 01:41, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

In fact, there exists some sort of misinterpretation about the concept of "Admin" in Farsi Wikipedia. It has been widely accepted in larger wikis, that Admins do not act as "managers" to people in the business sense, but in Fa Wiki, surprisingly admin has been translated into Farsi, using a word which means manager (مدیر)! This has caused many problems which have been said. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi had become the king of Iran since 1942, but his coronation had took place in 1961. . The reason behind this 19-year gap between his coming to throne and his coronation is sth odd and should be explained in the article . User Bellavista1957 only attempted to explain this reason using reliable sources, but dear User:مانی removed all those matters, without enough explanation. Whatever he thought, he had to discuss what he meant clearly and totally. But what he says is vague. He says you should not place issues unrelated to the article but he does not say what is unrelated in his opinion. The reason for that gap should be explained. Whan user bellavista reverts those issues for the 2nd time, Maani uses admin user access to block bellavista for a month. This is not acceptable in my opinion. Unfortunately this has become a common event in Fa Wiki to block in such manner.--Sicaspi 20:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Posting of censorship in Wikipedia Farsi:

در مورد کنوانسیون ژنو هم باید بگویم که ما یک گروه ۴۰-۵۰ نفره‌ایم که هدفمان این است که از نشر هر گونه اطلاعیه درباره این کنوانسیون جلوگیری به عمل آوریم:)--◄حامد/بحث)۲۴ دی ۱۳۸۸-- ‏۱۴ ژانویهٔ ۲۰۱۰، ساعت ۱۹:۴۸ (UTC)

Translation : About Geneva Convention, I have to say that we are a group of 40-50 people and our goal is to prevent publication of any information about this convention , Hamed, 14 January 2010 , 19:48

This posting and all other postings on discussion list of Geneva Convention Discussion Geneva Convention has been deleted by Admins --Bellavista1957 14:39, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

قطع دسترسی چرا؟ سلام آقای مانی من شهرام یزدان‌پناه مدیر وب‌گاه دانش فضایی هستم. امروز در حالی که تلاش داشتم در مقاله ماه لینکهایی به بیرون از وبگاه خود ایجاد کنم که کاملا با محتوای مقاله همسان بودند با مشکل قطع دسترسی از سوی شما مواجه شدم. هر چند می‌دانم که یکی از اصول اولیه نوشتن در ویکی‌پدیا آمادگی برای ویرایش‌های وحشتناک است اما با این بی‌احترامی نمی‌توانم کنار بیایم. از آنجاییکه ویکی‌پدیا زمینی برای یادگیری دموکراسی است و چون دانستن جرم قبل از مجازات یکی از حقوق اولیه هر انسانی است من عمل شما در قطع ناگهانی کاربریم را که می‌توانست به دلیل ناآشنایی بنده با موضوع مورد نظر باشد را نابجا و توهین‌آمیز قلمداد می‌کنم. انتظار می‌رفت که جنابعالی قبل از هر کاری برای من اخطار می‌فرستادید. بی‌شک خودتان مطلع هستید که تمامی کاربرانی که با آدرس آی‌پی مشابه من اقدام به ویرایش نمایندُ با پیامی روبرو می‌شوند که گویا سبزآبی جنایتکار موجب قطع دسترسی همه آنها به ویکیپدیا شده است و این بزرگترین سرافکندگی و توهین به شخصی است که تمام تلاش چند ساله اخیرش تولید محتوای علمی و نشر دانش بین وب‌خوانان فارسی زبان بوده است. من اصرار دارم که شما قوانینی از ویکی‌پدیا که به مدیران اجازه می‌دهد بدون اخطار نسبت به فطع دسترسی کاربران اقدام نمایند را برایم ارسال کنید. همچنین اصرار دارم که شما نسبت به سابقه علمی و نحوه عمل من در این دانش‌نامه تحقیق و در صورتی که متوجه اشتباه خود شدید رسما از من عذرخواهی نمایید. اما در صورتی که من متوجه شوم که اشتباه از طرف من بوده متقابلا عذرخواهی خواهم کرد هرچند حق خود می‌دانم که موضوع تعویض و بازنگری در قانونی که به مدیران اجازه می‌دهد بدون اخطار زندگی مجازی یک کاربر را (هر چند خطاکار) از او بگیرند را دنبال کرده و این مورد را به بنیاد ویکی‌پدیا گزارش کنم. در پایان اضافه می‌کنم که کارها و خدمات شما را در این دانش‌نامه ارج نهاده و منظور از این نوشته تخظئه زحمات علمی و اجتماعی شا نمی‌باشد. منتظر پاسخ شما هستم.

هرچند می دانم که من و شما زاده وطنی هستیم که در آن اول می‌کشند بعد درباره جرم پرس و جو می‌کنند و مدیران و بالادستان همیشه حق دارند هرطور که می‌خواهند تصمیم بگیرند. پس اگر کاری هم نکردید من با کمال تأسف سری تکان خواهم داد و عطای دانش نامه آزاد! فارسی را به لقایش خواهم بخشید. پیروز باشید نشانی آی‌پی فعلی شما 213.207.230.94 است و شماره قطع دسترسی 18473 است. لطفاً این شماره را در هر درخواستی که در این باره مطرح می‌کنید قید کنید.

Why Blocking Mr Mani? Hello Mr Mani: My name is Shahram Yazdanpanah. I am the administrator of Space science Website. Today while I was trying to insert a link to my website (as link to outside) I was blocked by you despite the article and content of the website in link to outside were identical. I am aware that writing for Wikipedia means to be ready for horrifying edits , but I cannot digest this irrespectful behaviour. Since Wikipedia is a ground to learn democracy, and also since knowing the crime before punishment is one of the primary human rights, I interpret blocking me while I was writing as incorrect, and insulting (may be if there was a problem in my work, it could be because I am new). You could have sent me first a warning.

I insist that you send me the rules of Wikipedia which allows the managers block workers without any warning. I insist that based on my scientific history of work for Wikipedia, if you found out that you were wrong, you have to apologize.. If I find out that I have done something wrong I will excuse myself. I know it is my own right to follow up the subject of change and review of Wikipedia rules permitting the administrators without warning to block the cyber life a worker and I will report it to Wikipedia Foundation. From a posting following the first one I know that you and me, we are coming from a country in which first they kill and then they investigate, the managers and those who are sitting on the top are always right to make any decision the way they want. Even if you did nothing , I will shake my head regretfully and will leave this FREE ENCYCLPEDIA .

Shahram Yazdanpanah

Your current IP is 213.207.230.94

I do not know what your case is, but you should know that editing in Wiki is not a right, it is a privilege and it can be devested at any time. But admins should warn first. --Sicaspi 21:56, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

.........................

User Yashar Blocked by Mani Discussion Page Yashar

Obviously, Wikipedia is in ownership of Mani. He takes decisions discretionary.... In discussion of Ashura demonstration, his friends deleted permanently a text with reference written by me, that at the end of discussion it became clear that the text with reference should have been discussed in discussion page. It is interesting to know that Mani has blocked my access indefinitely. I protest strongly against Mani’s illegal actions. I fight to get my rights. Mani with his way of thinking which is known to everybody , practically, does not allow anybody, no matter in which matter, field and discipline to express their opinion if it is not in line with his. The moment Mani feels that it has become dangerous he blocks the user , in order no protest and opposition voice be heard.

Mani misuses the management tools and tries to cleans up all traces of his illegal actions in changing texts and vandalism(like article of killing Armenian generations ) . I request seriously that one of the managers studies the editions made by Mani in last 24 Hours...He has broken the rules of neutrality. I have complained against Mani in Board of Management, in order the behaviour of Mani be judged. Mani deletes my complaints on and on until the matter becomes forgotten. Based on invented excuses by Mani himself, he has blocked me for undetermined period, later Mani has claimed that he has blocked me for only one month. Mani has to prove why he has blocked me, and he is obliged to respond to all my questions. Mani has no right to do whatever he likes. Wikipedia has become Mani’s property . The managers has to stop his illegal actions. Yashar: 20 March 2010, 13:32 (UTC)

ظاهرا ویکی پدیا در تملک جناب مانی است.هر گونه که میخواهند تصمیم گیری مینمایند.ایشان به این دلیل و بدون توجه به صفحه بحث ظاهرا عمل اینجانب را مصداق خرابکاری دانسته اند.همچنین در بحث تظاهرات عاشورا دوستان ایشان مرتبا مطلب منبع دار را حذف مینمودند که در انتهای بحث با دخالت دیگران و همچنین یکی از مدیران معلوم شد که مطلب منبع دار میبایستی در آن بحث قرار میگرفت .در آنجا هم ایشان مرا متهم نموده اند و نکته جالب اینکه قطع دسترسی اینجانب نامعلوم و مدت نامعینی دارد.شدیدا و شدیدا به این اعمال غیر قانونی مانی اعتراض دارم و پیگیر حقوق خودم هستم.ایشان با لحاظ عقاید خودشان که در اینجا بر همه معلوم است عملا اجازه ابراز عقاید مخالف در هیچ زمینه ای را نمیدهند و به محض احساس خطر قطع دسترسی مینمایند نا حتی صدای مخالف و اعتراضش هم شنیده نشود.ایشان همچنین در خصوص بحث با من و جهت موجه جلوه نمودن اعمال خلاف قانونیشان با سواستفاده از ابزار مدیریتی نسبت به پاکسازی ردپایشان در خرابکاری و دست بردن در منابع همانند مطلب ( نسل‌کشی ارامنه) نموده اند.از یکی از مدیران تقاضا دارم حتما وحتما ویرایشات ایشان در 24 ساعت گذشته بازبینی شود.ایشان در مطلب نسل کشی با دست بردن در مطلب منبع دار ،آن را به پان ترکیست ها و غیره مربوط کرده اند.اصل بی طرفی شدیدا نقض گردیده است .. در وپ تام شکایت نموده ام تا مورد داوری قرار بگیرد.مانی اینجا هم شکایت من را حذف کرده اند.بارها حذف کرده اند تا مساله به فراموشی سپرده شود.به دلایل واهی بدون تاریخ مشخصی نامعلوم قطع دسترسی کرده اند.بعدا اعلام کرده اند یک ماه قطع دسترسی شده ام. مانی باید ثابت کند به چه دلیل؟باید به سوالات مطرح شده پاسخ دهد.باید پاسخگو باشد.این شخص حق ندارد هر گونه میخواهد انجام دهد.ویکی پدیا در تملک این شخص قرار گرفته است.مدیران باید جلوی اعمال غیرقانونی و کیفی ایشان را بگیرد.

در بحثتان پاسخی نوشتم.--Yashar ‏۲۰ مارس ۲۰۱۰، ساعت ۱۳:۳۲ (UTC)

....................

User Chevalier banned by Mani:

Discussion page Chevalier

Chevalier wrote a comment about a user who had been banned by Mani:

نه بابا! برای همین دسترسی اش بی پایان بسته شده است؟! ماشاالله ویکیپدیا نگهبانانی چون شما دارد که وضع امروزش چنین است.--شوالیه ‏۲۳ مارس ۲۰۱۰، ساعت ۱۲:۰۲

Is that true! is it the reason that he has been banned? Good that Wikipedia has watchdogs like you that its situation looks like this. Chevalier 23 March 2010 , 12:02 (UTC)

Mani answered after 2 days:

درود. دسترسی شما پیس از این به خاطر مسائل نزاکت توسط مدیران دیگر یک بار به مدت ۱ روز و بار دیگر ۳ روز بسته شده‌بود. این بار در پی مواردی شکایتی که از شما در وپ:تام شده‌است یک هفته جریمه می‌شوید. امید است پس از بازگشت تغییر رویه دهید. جمله‌ای که در صفحه کاربری خود نوشته‌اید هم توهین قومی به‌شمار می‌آید و بنا بر قوانین ویکی‌پدیا جریمه قطع دسترسی دارد. امیدواریم پس از بازگشت با حذف آن از جریمه شدن جلوگیری کنید. سپاس.--ماني ‏۲۵ مارس ۲۰۱۰، ساعت ۱۹:۱۶ (UTC)

You have been blocked for one week because of politeness matters. There has been complaints against you in WEBTOM. I hope we you return you change your manner. The sentence written in your user page is racist and this has to be punished according to Wikipedia rules . I hope when you return with deletion of this sentence prevent punishment. Mani 25 March 2010 , 19:16 (UTC)

Chevalier responded after 6 days:

کاش قبل از این جریمه مسخره با این دلایل مزخرف نگاهی به مشارکت هایم می کردی و میدیدی که من افتخار نمیدهم در جایی که امثال جنابعالی مدیریتش را به عهده داری مشارکتی انجام دهم تا یک هفته بستنم تاثیری در ماجرا داشته باشد. من جدا با ویکیپدیای فارسی تفریح می کنم و از مزاح بودنش لذت میبرم!--شوالیه ‏۱ آوریل ۲۰۱۰، ساعت ۲۱:۲۷ (UTC)

I hoped that before punishing me with this nonsense as reason, you could have looked at my contributions in Wikiedia, you could have seen that it is not an honor for me to work in a place that people like you are its managers. This one week blockage has no effect on happenings in Wikipedia. I really like Wikipeida Farsi and that it is funny I enjoy it as well. Chevalier , 1 April 2010, 21:27 (UTC)

Mani answered after 13 minutes:

به خاطر توهین قومی که در صفحه کاربری‌تان گذاشته‌اید و با وجود تذکرات بر نگه داشتن آن اصرار دارید به طور بی‌پایان قطع دسترسی شدید. بر پایه این سیاست رسمی ویکی‌پدیا: انگ‌ها و تهمت‌های نژادپرستانه، جنسیتی، مذهبی، قومیتی یا دیگر صفت‌ها. هیچگونه تهمت مذهبی‌ای مجاز نیست.--ماني ‏۱ آوریل ۲۰۱۰، ساعت ۲۲:۴۱ (UTC)

Because you have written racial insult in your page, and despite frequent warnings to prevent racial, sexual, religious, slander or other attributes you will be banned. Mani 1 April, 22: 41 (UTC)

...............

Managers Bulletin of Complaints in Wikipedia Farsi

Misuse of Management Privileges I, by User Mani : 13 March 2010

...Please unlock these articles and warn this Manager Mani who misuses his privileges.Ojanfar, 13 March 2010, 14:49 (UTC)

Misuse of Management Privileges II by User Mani: 16 March 2010

..... It is already one month that no one except Mani has written anything in Lori Dialect article. In the discussion page, Mani does not reply to remarks of others. Mani without discussion, changes the editions done by other users and he keeps the article locked. The article Lori Dialect is still locked !! in this article he has deleted 3 important words. .... Why this page is still locked? If you managers control it, you will find out that Mani has deleted texts with reference without discussion, as reason Mani in edit summary has written "frequent deletion of text with reference" . This is another sample of Mani’s management style. This is very strange for me that obviously, this Manager has developed special rights for himself. Please unlock the articles and warn Mani about misuse of the position of manager. With thanks Ojanfar 16 March 2010, 13:24 (UTC)

Misuse of the position of Manager by manager Mani – 27th March 2010

As you can see, Manager Mani still by misusing of management privileges has locked the article Lori Dialect after his own editions based on his own taste and does not unlock it. This action of Manager Mani is illegal. Manager Mani has established for himself special set of rules beside Wikipedia regulations. ....My discussions dated 02 February 2010 have remained unresponded. Moreover, Manager Mani since 8 March unlocks the article for his own edits and then he locks it. Since 3 weeks, instead of writing new articles, I am obliged to deal with Mani’s illegal misuse of management privileges. What is the reason for silence and taking no action of Managers in Wikipedia Farsi against Mani’s irregular activities?? This situation is unique in the history of all wikipedias that a Manager to this extent breaks all rules and regulations. His behaviour has not been punished either. The question is whether Wikipedia Farsi still is being ruled by Wikipedia regulations or by Manager Mani’s arbitrariness?? Ojanfar 27th March 2010, 8:55 (UTC)

سال نو شما شاد باشد. همانطور كه مى بينيد، مدير مانى همچنان با سواستفاده از امكانات مديريتى مقاله گویش‌های لری را پس از ويرايش دلخواه خود بسته و باز نميكند. اين كار مدير مانى همچنان غيرقانونى است و مدير مانى همچنان براى خود حقوق ويژه جدا از قوانين ويكيپديا قايل است، به تذكر به آفريد هم واكنش نشان نداده و مقاله همچنان بسته است. فقط كاربر ALEFBE دو بار در سال جارى در بحث شركت كرده ولى مدير مانى اصلا در بحث:گویش‌های لری تاكنون نبوده است. در صفحه بحث:گویش‌های لری ، بحث هاى مطروحه توسط من از 2.2.10 تاكنون بى جواب مانده است و كسى جوابى ننوشته، عليرغم اين مدير مانى از تاريخ 8 مارچ به بعد مقاله را بسته و فقط براى ويرايش خصوصى خود مقاله را باز كرده، ويرايش نموده و دوباره قفل كرده است. الان 3 هفته است كه به جاى نوشتن مقالات جديد، مجبورم به اين خلاف كارى هاى مديريتى مانى بپردازم. علت سكوت و بى عملى مديران ويكى فارسى درمقابل خلاف كارى هاى مديرمانى چيست ؟؟ اين وضعيت مطمنا در تاريخ همه ويكى ها بى نظير است كه مدير جديدى در اين حد سواستفاده كرده و قوانين را زيرپا بگذارد و رفتار وى هم تا كنون مجازات نشده است! سوال اين است كه آيا ويكى فارسى هنوز هم برمحور قانون مدارى مى چرخد يا بر اساس قوانين دلبخواهى و من درآوردى مدير مانى؟ ojanfar ‏۲۷ مارس ۲۰۱۰، ساعت ۰۸:۵۵ (UTC)

Ojanfar Discussion page

26 April 2010, 22:01 (UTC) Mani blocked Ojanfar for three months

.................

Calak banned by Mani 14 March 2010, 20:37(UTC)

Discussion Page

دسترسی شما به خاطر حذف مطالب منبع‌دار که انجام داده‌بودید و اصرار بر درستی کارتان به طور دائم قطع شد.--ماني ‏۱۴ مارس ۲۰۱۰، ساعت ۲۰:۳۷ (UTC)

Calak, you will be banned because you have deleted texts with reference and insisting that your action has been correct. Mani, 14 March 2010, 20:37 (UTC)

Referring to the discussion page of Calak and Dialect Laki, other users supported the contibution of Calak. There was no need for blocking or banning Calak.

...............

Tabrizlee banned by Mani 27 November 2009, 17:11 (UTC)

Tabrizlee Discussion page

شما به خاطر توهین قومی و بنا بر قانون ویکی‌پدیا:حمله‌های شخصی ممنوع که می‌گوید: «کاربرد انگ‌ها و تهمت‌های نژادپرستانه، جنسیتی، مذهبی، قومیتی یا دیگر صفت‌ها» ممنوع است، به مدت یک سال قطع دسترسی شدید. با وجود بارها تذکر در مورد پرهیز از توهین قومی در این ویرایش بار دیگر نوشتید: «این فقط و فقط و فقط میتواند در ویکی فارسی اتفاق بیافتد». یعنی قوم و مردم فارس‌زبان را تحقیر کرده‌اید. امیدواریم پس از بازگشت بعدی‌تان در رویه خود بازنگری کنید.--ماني ‏۲۴ نوامبر ۲۰۰۹، ساعت ۱۵:۰۳ (UTC)

User Tabrizlee, Your access has been blocked for one year, because you have made racist , sexist , religious defamations, despite warnings. Mani 24 November 2009, 15:03 (UTC)

The user Tabrizlee contributed to the discussion of Iranization Discussion Iranization Tabrizlee contribution. Mani blocked Tabrizlee for one year for expressing his opinion. Tabrizlee criticized Board of Managers then Mani found an excuse to bann him.

قانون ویکی‌پدیا می‌گوید کاربری که قطع دسترسی شده اجازه مشارکت در دانشنامه ندارد. تلاش مکرر شما جهت این قانون‌شکنی باعث شد دسترسی شما و زاپاس‌هایتان به مدت بی‌پایان بسته شود.--ماني ‏۲۷ نوامبر ۲۰۰۹، ساعت ۱۷:۱۱ (UTC)

The Wikipedia rules say that a blocked worker is not permitted to participate in discussions. Your efforts breaking this rule has caused that you will be banned. Mani, 27 November 2009, 17:11 (UTC)

Hi. I'm an admin af af.wikipedia. Do we somehow need to activate a function somewhere to be able to create portals? At the moment a page called "Portal:Afrika", for instance, would simply create an article called "Portal:Afrika". Anrie 09:38, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you have to request on Bugzilla that new namespaces be created. In your bug report, be sure to include:

• link to community consensus supporting the change
• namespace name ("Portal")
• talk namespace name ("Portalbespreking")

I think that's it, and I hope this helps. Cbrown1023 talk 21:28, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I've given it a try - thanks for the help! Anrie 08:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I've noticed that the "Donate" link in the sidebar of almost all Wikimedia projects leads to this page that has "WIKIPEDIA" all over it. This, IMHO, is borderline insulting to all non-Wikipedia projects, especially those struggling to develop a separate identity and differentiate themselves from the encyclopedia, to be implying that they are nothing more than sub-projects of WP. Wouldn't it be possible to have the links go to this project-neutral donation notice, or even just change all instances of "Wikipedia" in the current page to "Wikimedia"? Open to thoughts. Tempodivalse [talk] 16:11, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

To further what Tempodivalse said, It'd be swell if there was a donate page with Wikimedia branding. I recognize that keeping multiple donate pages around might be time consuming, but I can't imagine it would be that hard to have two: one Wikipedia page, and another Wikimedia page. If I click the donate link from another project, I am donating to Wikimedia, not Wikipedia. Bawolff 16:45, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

This was an issue brought up during the last fundraiser campaign when we got WIKIPEDIA FOREVER slapped all over Wikinews. We'd really, really appreciate it if we could have Donation/Fundraisers on non-Wikipedia projects that reflect and respect the local project's identity, or at the very least Wikimedia (which covers all). ---- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) 16:51, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

In future fundraisers, we will be working towards more and better project specific messaging on donations pages. We chose to use the Wikipedia language because most of our traffic comes from there and it is what most of our donors expect. As you know, WMF is committed to making it easy for our supporters to donate time and/or money to the projects but are still refining the donation process. Rand Montoya 22:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Each project can create their own donate page. Non-WMF projects do that too, after all. Guido den Broeder 18:55, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Guido - they can? Cbrown1023 talk 19:20, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

You can create a donate page in your own wiki, see this example. Then edit the MediaWiki:Sidebar and if you wish MediaWiki:Sitesupport so it points to the right location. Guido den Broeder 11:37, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I know it's technically possible, but I don't think it's something that the Wikimedia Foundation wants its projects to do or supports them doing. Cbrown1023 talk 21:25, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

That sample is not a WMF sponsored project. WMF does not encourage outside fundraising for WMF sponsored projects. Rand Montoya 22:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

It isn't, it is fundraising for the outside project. :) Guido den Broeder 10:15, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Can please someone direct me to the right person overlooking non English Wikipedia administrators actions? I have been restricted for 2 weeks for trying to correct, expand articles. I am not truly worried about this particular aspect, just for comparison - vandalism block period is usually 3 days. After further research, I noticed the negativity filled, emotional comments, indicative of admins(some) inability to keep their personal emotions aside when making decisions. For example, for vandalism, user is blocked for few days; whereas, user who is trying to contribute to the article, and who is outspoken, is blocked for 2 weeks. I took an effort to add a comment "please do not delete changes, I will return to further improve the article"

I was blocked. And if you look at the history, among other vandalism accused visitors. Here is the blocked user list, which I hope will provide some insight as to why, prior to becoming administrator, user should pass some standard ethics training.

Recent blocks, bans

Most recently, one of the admins, suggested closing Lithuanian wiki off shoot - Closure_of_Samogitian_Wikipedia I think this stemmed from inner conflicts. And one admin's hatred for such project (as indicated by the use of offensive language by "his roommate"), to which he replied, "it must have been my roommate". Here is the history: abusive language by admin. To summarize, the language includes numerous dirty words.

Comments in regards to the users contributions: "article is full of mistakes, users own interpretations. Such articles hardly have any use. But the main reason for blocking the user, he is the same user, who has been blocked for trolling. (referring to user: Turbo )

My block was explained as:

"Making many mistakes, ignoring notices, such practice is continuing". Instead of marking the article "check needed", my contribs were deleted.

Other admins fight among, with phrases such as:

User:Martynas Patasius 22:06, 9 June, 2010 (EEST)" "I am afraid, that you are just as worth of being a wiki admin as Celestine the forth was worth being a pope. I would advise to consider this decision (which I think was admirable), even though - admin is not a pope, everything is fixable by voting."

I beg you to review my contribs, some deleted, My Contribs. My experience on en.wikipedia was pleasant - if somebody is upset with me editing the content of page too often, I receive a massage in my comment section, urging to act differently. My contribs

I am interested in maintaining Lithuanian language roots, yet, in the comments that explain the deletions of my edits, you can usually find vague, almost personal attacking comments - "explanations" - unsuitable style, errors, attempts to edit the page. One of such pages, I have edited, and left a remark, "please do not delete, it will be reformatted, any possible errors fixed", can be found here: recent attempt to fix errors, expand, and make text more understandable.

Translation is possible via translate.google.com ...

Furthermore, recent users that have been blocked:

User Hugo.arg - blocked for supposed attacks on the members.

user - accused the user of being a clone of similarly named user, although the articles of these users were different in nature - one was strictly focused on biochemistry, other - politics.

Another user, whose contribs are deleted. User Nomad was kind to leave an explanation on the user's page; it said that "if it is not difficult, review random articles (atsitiktiniai straipsniai) and compare the difference. good advise, btw. If this was English wiki, we would have goodhearted volunteers who would be willing to fix new article in five minutes. But this is Lithuanian wiki, not too many people, everyone wants to write their articles, but nobody wants to help fix content of other users, for this reason disorganized and non-wikipedian (articles not adhering to wiki writing standards) are simply deleted."

I wonder if they have any idea who is sponsoring them, and that Wikipedia is supposed to attract members, even if they might lack skills initially, not to distract them. I assure you, recent actions by few admins, are doing just that, at least for me, it appears to be discouraging for new members. If article has errors, there is a comment section, which is not suitable for such insults as "you should at least be able to write cohesively", better yet - "there are doubts about professional competency". - from user Snooker

I am genuinely concerned about the future of the community, and I wish there was some outside review. Whole lt.wiki is becoming a kindergarten-like environment - with some admins, who are either emotionally drained (I hope that's the case), or they just don't bother stopping before going on to express their negative remarks. Even fighting among admins, ex-amins seen in blocks lists for Hugo.org, for example. Hence, my inquiry for the need of some training and some advise for such admins. Psilocin (talk) 18:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi folks, as you may have heard, the dev team at Wikimedia Foundation is releasing the FlaggedRevs extension onto English Wikipedia on 2010年06月14日. The subset of functionality will be called "Pending Changes". As part of the rollout on en.wikipedia.org on 2010年06月14日, we'll need to update the implementation of FlaggedRevs plugin that is in use all production wikis. To be clear, we're not altering any of the other wikis' configuration of FlaggedRevs, merely updating the code that is shared between all of the different sites, which should continue to respect each local wiki's configuration. We don't anticipate any problems or any reduction in functionality, but as with any new software, there may be unanticipated bugs.

We'd like to get the word out to the list of wikis that have the plugin installed, which I've included here: http://flaggedrevs.labs.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia:FlaggedRevs_wikis

I'm going to make an effort to find all of the Village Pumps at each wiki, but I would love some help with this project. Anyone here available to help? -- RobLa 17:57, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

This would be a good thing to ask of the embassy -- something worth reviving with an on-wiki announcement bot that asks ambassadors for help on their home wikis. –SJ · talk | translate 07:22, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I have asked the same question at the help desk, but there was no reply there for some time, so I got impatient and decided to ask here. How should I start an interwiki WikiProject? I hope that different Wikimedians can collaborate and create a single WikiProject across WMF about China, its language etc. (Wikispecies won't be much involved, of course.) FYI I'm a Wikibookian and a Wikipedian. I don't do much on Wikinews except read it, though I do have a few articles. Kayau (talk) 05:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

It would be good to have more regular open meetings for Wikimedia-wide topics. A few times have been suggested for another open meeting next week -- see Wikimedia_meetings#June_2010 and its talk page to weigh in on topics and times. –SJ · talk | translate 07:22, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Update: it's planned for 1700-1830 UTC. Please come or leave your comments on the talk page. –SJ · talk | translate 13:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi.

I'm not sure where to ask but I would like to request a small change in the messages MediaWiki:Centralnotice-VectorNewLook phase3-pitch/pt-br and MediaWiki:Centralnotice-VectorNewLook phase3-pitch/pt. Could you please remove the gender-marked article in the beginning of the message (the "A"): i.e., it would become {{SITENAME}} está a mudar de aparência.? While this works for Wikipedia, which is of feminine gender, it doesn't work for other Wikimedia projects, such as Wiktionary which is masculine in gender. Currently, the message looks "weird" in pt.wiktionary. So, it's preferrable not to have any article at all rather than the wrong one. Thanks, Malafaya 13:18, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I feel it's a little bit strange. I think Wikimedia is an organization, so "this organization is getting a new look"? Liangent 07:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

This is related to the Wikimedia Usability Initiative, and the User Experience Team. See this for more info. --Bsadowski1 07:48, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

But no 'Wikimedia' text is written there. Where should I propose this edit? Liangent 08:07, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

How does one get the VectorNewLook messages translated into other languages? --Redaktor 13:48, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

See user talk:Az1568#Translating CentralNotice; if you're not interested in that discussion simply leave a new request on that user talk page. -AlexSm 15:00, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. They don't exactly make it easy to find!! --Redaktor 15:27, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

• Talk archives