Wikimedia:Village pump

From Outreach Wiki
(Redirected from Village pump)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page contains changes which are not marked for translation.
Village pump

Welcome to the Outreach Wiki's village pump. This page has two functions:

  • This is where general outreach-related discussions can be held. Click here to open up a new topic.
  • You can also use this page to request administrator assistance with vandalism or other incidents needing action. Please be as specific as possible, including the name of the user or IP causing problems, the page name, and your signature.


  • Requests for suppression of private information can be made to the stewards at this page on meta. Do not post in public to request suppression.
  • Requests for permissions should be made on the respective page.

Please sign and date your post (by typing ~~~~ or clicking the signature icon: in the edit toolbar). Please add new topics to the bottom of this page.

« Older discussions | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Outreach wiki shutting down?[edit]

I've seen it stated on an email list that this wiki's days are numbered. Is this true? And if so, what is the recommended approach for migrating important pages to Meta Wiki or elsewhere? -Pete (talk) 17:15, 20 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Peteforsyth: This has been discussed and rejected by the community. What is the list? Koavf (talk) 07:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Koavf: March 19 on Wikimedia-L, re: Wikipedia & Education User Group. -Pete (talk) 17:21, 26 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thread. Odd. I don't recall a consensus for this. Maybe I'll have to attend. Thanks, Pete. Koavf (talk) 19:30, 26 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For future reference: this e-mail mentions it. To me this feels a bit weird, as I am editing this wiki many times and got no request to join in the meeting. Something that will be needed as the infrastructure of thousands of pages I maintain needs to be moved to Meta. Romaine (talk) 23:18, 11 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Recently there have been some talks about moving the contents of this wiki to meta, starting with the GLAM and Education newsletters. See also: GLAM/Newsletter/October 2021/Contents/WMF GLAM report. Romaine (talk) 05:49, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I totally support them doing what they think is best but I don't know why you can't cross-post the content to both wikis. If the point is visibility, then surely that would be desirable. For that matter, it's easy to be a small fish in a big pond and not get as many eyes elsewhere. Koavf (talk) 07:14, 11 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Making Outreach content another thing "that is somewhere on Meta" is an opposite of visibility :( Now it is very easy to point new people to this very specific wiki. --Base (talk) 20:29, 25 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recent edits by TMenang[edit]

Can an admin please take a look at Special:Contributions/TMenang, specifically the creation of pages about user groups that aren't used here on outreachwiki? I left them a note on their talk page, but they have continued. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 22:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TMenang: Some of these creations seem confusing at best. E.g. you made Category:Pages using RFC magic links, which is something that is automatically generated via MediaWiki if someone uses a certain syntax. So I can see the value in it not being a redlink, just in case someone actually does make an RFC magic link. I do not see the value in making it a subcategory of Category:Stewards (???), particularly since that is a usergroup at Meta. Nor do I see the value in linking to the equivalent category on Commons. Can you explain more of what your goal is here with these page creations? Koavf (talk) 00:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(edit conflcited) @TMenang: I can't see why these pages would be needed, any local descriptions for global or non-standard groups can point to interwiki links if needed - is there another good reason these are needed before we just speedy delete them as G7 (irrelevant here)? Xaosflux (talk) 00:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No response, I'm deleting any of these that broadly meet the criterion described above. Xaosflux (talk) 12:03, 11 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
YesY Done @DannyS712: if there are any others outside of TMenang's userspace meeting the criteria above feel free to tag for speedy deletion per this discussion. Best regards, Xaosflux (talk) 12:13, 11 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for helping me, best regard. TMenang(talk) 21:40, 11 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Xaosflux, Koavf: still continuing, eg Edu-portaal is an unneeded redirect to Education (unlikely search term), as well as more interwiki redirects for user groups - Wikimedia:Account creators and Wikimedia:Importers, both of which were previously deleted per this discussion. --DannyS712 (talk) 16:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I deleted the recreations and have no strong feelings on the redirect as redirects are cheap and maybe this is a term that means something in his language. Koavf (talk) 16:47, 14 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Update: account globally locked as an LTA, so no more edits to come, just cleaning up the old ones --DannyS712 (talk) 06:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I've moved most of the threads (which were fairly old) to Wikimedia:Village pump/Archive 7 --DannyS712 (talk) 08:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Partnership proposal between Kindle and Wikipedia and its affiliated projects[edit]

ATTENTION: This proposal aims to improve Wikipedia as a whole, on the recommendation of members of the Portuguese-speaking Wikipedia I moved this request to this section. Therefore any terms used here are mainly intended for Wikipedia, but, due to this, the nature of the request requires it to be proposed here. NOTE: Sorry if the English is a little bad. I come by means of this proposal that we move to create a partnership between Kindle (Amazon's library) and Wikipedia Lusophone. Benefits: Access to thousands of books, which could help reference thousands of Lusophone Wikipedia articles (Nazism, Mao Tse Tung etc.) and makes it easier to find sources for articles from any wikipedia. Like any proposal, this one also has some flaws, they are: Possible deviation from the end (ie users can use the Kindle for their own benefit, reading books but not using them as a quote). To correct this, we could give administrators, self-reviewers and bureaucrats access to books. But we created another problem with this, we would be "barring" non-users, self-reviewers, bureaucrats and administrators from having access to books. Solution: create a tab to request access to the Kindle. Administrators / bureaucrats can evaluate requests with "support" and "not support" (just as is done with self-review requests). Below is a summary of what I propose for better understanding.

Proposal: Create a partnership between Kindle (Amazon's subscription library) and Wikipedia.

Proposal 2: Grant free access to Kindle for Administrators, Self-Reviewers and Bureaucrats.

Proposal 3: Create a tab for requests for access to the Kindle for those "outside" these groups (exactly as it is done to obtain self-review status).

Purpose of the proposal: To use the books available on Kindle to reference Wikipedia articles.

OBS: I emphasize that this proposal is mainly aimed at Wikipedia, but as this request is of a more complex nature I had to do it here.

OBS 2: I understand that it can be very complicated to achieve this, but it is easy to try. If it works out we can expand our reliability and reliability even more, and we can reference many contents of this wonderful project, which is Wikipedia: The free encyclopedia.

OBS 3: If this place is not the right place to make this proposal, I ask you to guide me.

Graciously, --Editor Master Plus (talk) 21:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Universal Code of Conduct News – Issue 1[edit]

Universal Code of Conduct News
Issue 1, June 2021Read the full newsletter

Welcome to the first issue of Universal Code of Conduct News! This newsletter will help Wikimedians stay involved with the development of the new code, and will distribute relevant news, research, and upcoming events related to the UCoC.

Please note, this is the first issue of UCoC Newsletter which is delivered to all subscribers and projects as an announcement of the initiative. If you want the future issues delivered to your talk page, village pumps, or any specific pages you find appropriate, you need to subscribe here.

You can help us by translating the newsletter issues in your languages to spread the news and create awareness of the new conduct to keep our beloved community safe for all of us. Please add your name here if you want to be informed of the draft issue to translate beforehand. Your participation is valued and appreciated.

  • Affiliate consultations – Wikimedia affiliates of all sizes and types were invited to participate in the UCoC affiliate consultation throughout March and April 2021. (continue reading)
  • 2021 key consultations – The Wikimedia Foundation held enforcement key questions consultations in April and May 2021 to request input about UCoC enforcement from the broader Wikimedia community. (continue reading)
  • Roundtable discussions – The UCoC facilitation team hosted two 90-minute-long public roundtable discussions in May 2021 to discuss UCoC key enforcement questions. More conversations are scheduled. (continue reading)
  • Phase 2 drafting committee – The drafting committee for the phase 2 of the UCoC started their work on 12 May 2021. Read more about their work. (continue reading)
  • Diff blogs – The UCoC facilitators wrote several blog posts based on interesting findings and insights from each community during local project consultation that took place in the 1st quarter of 2021. (continue reading)

Server switch[edit]

SGrabarczuk (WMF) 01:19, 27 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for comment notification[edit]

Here is a link to a RFC on Meta concerning all Wikimedia projects. Lionel Scheepmans (talk) 23:21, 16 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The 2022 Community Wishlist Survey will happen in January[edit]

SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 00:22, 7 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Server switch[edit]

SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 00:45, 11 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Talk to the Community Tech[edit]

Read this message in another languagePlease help translate to your language


As we have recently announced, we, the team working on the Community Wishlist Survey, would like to invite you to an online meeting with us. It will take place on September 15th, 23:00 UTC on Zoom, and will last an hour. Click here to join.



The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes without attribution will be taken and published on Meta-Wiki. The presentation (first three points in the agenda) will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Polish, and Spanish. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the Community Wishlist Survey talk page or send to

Natalia Rodriguez (the Community Tech manager) will be hosting this meeting.

Invitation link

See you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 03:03, 11 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Let's talk about the Desktop Improvements[edit]


Have you noticed that some wikis have a different desktop interface? Are you curious about the next steps? Maybe you have questions or ideas regarding the design or technical matters?

Join an online meeting with the team working on the Desktop Improvements! It will take place on October 12th, 16:00 UTC on Zoom. It will last an hour. Click here to join.


  • Update on the recent developments
  • Sticky header - presentation of the demo version
  • Questions and answers, discussion


The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes will be taken in a Google Docs file. The presentation part (first two points in the agenda) will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Polish, and Spanish. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the talk page or send them to

Olga Vasileva (the team manager) will be hosting this meeting.

Invitation link

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) 15:09, 4 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Talk to the Community Tech[edit]

Read this message in another language


We, the team working on the Community Wishlist Survey, would like to invite you to an online meeting with us. It will begin on 27 October (Wednesday) at 14:30 UTC on Zoom, and will last an hour. Click here to join.


  • Become a Community Wishlist Survey Ambassador. Help us spread the word about the CWS in your community.
  • Update on the disambiguation and the real-time preview wishes
  • Questions and answers


The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes without attribution will be taken and published on Meta-Wiki. The presentation (all points in the agenda except for the questions and answers) will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Polish, Spanish, German, and Italian. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the Community Wishlist Survey talk page or send to

Natalia Rodriguez (the Community Tech manager) will be hosting this meeting.

Invitation link

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 23:00, 22 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Inactivity policy[edit]

There are several inactive admins and bureaucrats that could be removed per Wikimedia:Inactivity policy once given the proper notifications. [1]

Also, since there is a possibility that there could be only 1 bureaucrat left after this - maybe more should be elected? --Rschen7754 07:04, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for this. As you may know, it used to be much easier to become a bureaucrat here but the community decided on more restrictions on those rights and it used to be that bureaucrats could assign the bureaucrat user rights but no longer. I can do the notifications to admins. Koavf (talk) 07:36, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Meet the new Movement Charter Drafting Committee members[edit]

The Movement Charter Drafting Committee election and selection processes are complete.

The committee will convene soon to start its work. The committee can appoint up to three more members to bridge diversity and expertise gaps.

If you are interested in engaging with Movement Charter drafting process, follow the updates on Meta and join the Telegram group.

With thanks from the Movement Strategy and Governance team

15:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Nouveau livre sur le mouvement Wikimédia[edit]

Bonjour, comme à mon habitude, je reviens vers vous pour vous communiquer l'avancement de mes travaux et vous les soumettre à relecture, critique et commentaire. Il s'agit cette fois d'un livre intitulé Le mouvement Wikimédia dont je viens de terminer la mise en page sur Wikilivres dans le but d'en produire un éventuel ouvrage papier. Une belle fin de journée à tous et merci d'avance pour ceux qui cliquerons sur le lien. Lionel Scheepmans (talk) 21:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merci, Lionel. Tres interresant. Koavf (talk) 21:41, 14 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This month in GLAM newsletter migration[edit]

Hi everyone,

I'm here to announce an important project that the GLAM and Culture team at the Wikimedia Foundation is taking part in during the next few weeks.

Due to Outreach having limited readership and visibility within the movement, our community newsletters don’t always receive the attention they deserve. To address this, we’re working with our colleagues in the Movement Communications team to migrate the This month in GLAM newsletter from Outreach to Meta-Wiki.

Both teams are working on this task in the next few weeks in order to:

  1. Increase visibility and participation in the GLAM newsletter.
  2. Ensure the GLAM community has a place (Meta-Wiki) where they feel seen, engaged, and supported by the Wikimedia community, partners, and Foundation.
  3. Increase the amount of multilingual (or translatable) content to engage contributors from other languages and more regions.

This activity already has the support of the newsletter’s main editors. It was also already announced in this October report in the newsletter, on social media, and on some mailing lists.

The migration of the report pages, talk pages, categories, and templates will happen from November 19th to 30th. This period is important to accommodate the migration before the reports from next month. Any other modifications or corrections will be made before December 15th.

If you have any questions or ideas about the migration, please contact the GLAM & Culture team at glam﹫ and the community editors at thismonthinglam﹫ --GFontenelle (WMF) (talk) 19:04, 17 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GFontenelle (WMF), Romaine, Wittylama, Missvain, Rock drum, Carriearchdale: Well, this is not done the wiki way. The GLAM newsletter is, and I quote from the About section: "a community-driven, monthly newsletter written by the Wikimedia movement about activities with cultural institutions broadly defined". This is not a WMF-led initiative, and important decisions should not be handled top-down by the WMF and without consultation to contributors.
I do not disagree with moving the newsletter to a project with more visibility, BUT this simply cannot happen so fast. This is an impactful change, and I see no plan --or to be even more modest, no concern-- about how this impacts negatively Wikimedians on the ground and how negative impacts will be mitigated. From our perspective, moving from outreach.wikimedia means we will need to review dozens of content pages and even printed resources that link directly to the GLAM newsletter on outreach.wikimedia. What kind of support is provided for reviewing content? Will there be automated redirects? Is this a change in editorial lead and the GLAM newsletter is now being managed by the WMF? Why was there no on-wiki consultation with editors and contributors?
I have been a newsletter editor for Brazil for years now, and I can definitely say I have not been consulted about this speed change, and I am really confused about what is happening here and the impact this will have on our work. I strongly oppose this change as is, and I am pinging editors for the newsletter (as listed here) to also understand from their perspective why this change is happening in such a pace and with no broader consultation to the community. Thanks. --Joalpe (talk) 11:06, 19 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Joalpe, Thank you for your commitment to the GLAM newsletter! As usual WMF is not so good in describing the full perspective that is needed for community members to understand what is happening, but let me try to give some answers.
Basically there are two communities active on Outreach wiki: education and GLAM. A few years ago many of the GLAM program leaders of the affiliates had a meeting in Paris where this topic already was discussed. The conclusion was that moving to Meta would not be an issue and is fine. In March of 2021 there was also a discussion among the Wikipedia & Education User Group. So within the GLAM and education communities there seems to be some agreement on moving. Now WMF takes this move in hand and has decided to go for it.
Last week me and Liam had a meeting with WMF about this topic, in what WMF told us about the plan. In this meeting (and afterwards) I have tried to look at all the risks and possible problems, and I have indicated that if the move takes place what in my opinion should happen. All the things I mentioned seemed to be part of their plan and/or have been adopted into it. I have multiple experiences with moving content from one wiki to another, so I think I can foresee for a large part what risks and possible problems can occur. However, I would be happy to learn from you and others what risks you possible foresee, so those risks can be mitigated.
One of the things that I indicated to be needed is that, after all content has been moved to meta, is that outreach becomes an alias that redirects to Meta. Maybe you don't know, but this has been done before. Originally Wikipedia started not on but on So if you link to you automatically end up on . The same should happen to Outreach, if someone links to, you automatically will get to (not yet there, with the import it will come there). So all the links made in offline publications, websites, etc should still be working after the move has been completed.
Another thing that is important is that the full history of all the pages is moved with the pages. This is possible thanks to the import function. This makes sure that all the editors in the page history are also still their in the history on Meta.
The GLAM newsletter is written by the community and published by me. I have no signals that this would change. To be more clear: all the content from Outreach wiki is going to be moved to Meta. So for example also the Education newsletter will be moved to Meta too. (I am was also the publisher of the Education newsletter, and thanks to miscommunication by WMF I am kicked out of the publishing team which is now published by other volunteers. But that has nothing to do with the move from Outreach to Meta.)
Based on the first message here above I understand that it raises concerns, but I hope that with this background information you get a better picture of what is upcoming. I also can say that I am following the process with all the steps by WMF very carefully in close details, as I want to avoid any problems and want to make sure the impact on the community is as limited as possible.
If there are any concerns or questions, please raise them! Romaine (talk) 00:56, 20 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Romaine: Thank you for your response. This makes more sense, and the initial communication about the migration was indeed very misleading. To mitigate risks about breaking all links in our outreach materials I request a pilot is done under community supervision. This means that only part of the content would be migrated initially and then we check if the redirects are working. Is this possible? I am told by a Wikimedia friend who is tech savvy it is not so easy to crosswiki redirect if the whole page domain is not shut down. And of course thanks you for all you do for the movement; it gives me more trust in the process knowing that you and Liam are involved. --Joalpe (talk) 12:29, 20 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Joalpe, I suspect that is not technically possible as the full domain gets redirected. A full domain redirecting is easy, only redirecting a group of pages would mean that somehow it is programmed that only those pages get redirected, which does not seem easy to be done. Romaine (talk) 19:58, 20 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Romaine, Joalpe, GFontenelle (WMF): There is also the matter of differences in user group memberships between projects.   — Jeff G. ツ 12:21, 21 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Joalpe:, @Romaine:, @Jeff G.: Hello!
First, I would like to thank you for sharing your concerns and giving us the opportunity to address them and make things clearer.
I will be answering some concerns regarding the GLAM newsletter migration.

“This is not a WMF-led initiative, and important decisions should not be handled top-down by the WMF and without consultation to contributors.”

I agree. This is not a WMF-led initiative, we’re helping with the migration of the pages only. And as Romaine said below, this was discussed and agreed years ago and has the support of the community. In the last few weeks, we have contacted and met with the newsletter editors because we wanted to help with the migration, especially as we wanted to help turn the newsletter more accessible, read, and edited by a broader number of contributors. And this seemed like a good moment to finally do that, as we now have the support capacity at the Foundation to respond to the request and the community has had an agreement on the subject for years.

“this simply cannot happen so fast”

It has been happening for a while if you consider the fact that this is something the community has been looking forward to for years. However, especially, we have contacted the GLAM newsletter editors (Romaine, Wittylama, Missvain, Rock drum, Carriearchdale) in October and, since then, have been in conversations with them to understand the best way to accomplish this migration.
The GLAM team also announced it in the GLAM newsletter in October and, per another suggestion, we also let the Meta community know on Babel.

"This is an impactful change, and I see no plan --or to be even more modest, no concern-- about how this impacts negatively Wikimedians on the ground and how negative impacts will be mitigated.”

The plan has been discussed with the newsletter editors and we have shared our concerns, questions, and doubts about the migration in that process.
More than that, this effort is to ensure that the workflow of the authors of the newsletter is not affected. It is important to notice that this also gives the community more optional features, most notably translation, and visual editor support.
We want to move everything in the newsletter over and set up redirects to Meta. We're also making sure the page history is moved as well so we can keep that alive. The focus is moving over the pages and templates so we can publish the next edition of the newsletter on Meta, while we work on moving over the archives and redirects too. Romaine has asked for a bot flag to help with this. CKoerner (WMF) created a phabricator task for input from our technical community for good measure.
As editors and contributors of the GLAM newsletter, you can rest easy that everything will be moved properly, with the right redirects. No one in the community will lose content, no page or link will be erased, nothing will be lost. No content will be inaccessible for any amount of time. The content should be accessible at all times.
While this migration will move a substantial amount of information and activity from Outreach to Meta, the deprecation of Outreach wiki is not in the scope of this work.

“From our perspective, moving from outreach.wikimedia means we will need to review dozens of content pages and even printed resources that link directly to the GLAM newsletter on outreach.wikimedia. What kind of support is provided for reviewing content? Will there be automated redirects? Is this a change in editorial lead and the GLAM newsletter is now being managed by the WMF?”

It won’t be necessary to review content pages. The redirects will happen. And lastly, as this is very important to highlight, there won’t be a change in the editorial lead of the newsletter and WMF will not manage the newsletter’s content in any way. This was never implied in any way or form.
In the GLAM newsletter migration, we have been working with Romaine since the start, with his supervision, to make this entire process right and all our efforts are specifically to ensure that the workflows of the authors of the newsletter are not affected.
Lastly, I would like to make Romaine’s words above mine: I would also be happy to learn from you and others what risks you possibly foresee, so those risks can be mitigated. We are ready to make this migration as smooth as possible for everyone.--GFontenelle (WMF) (talk) 03:20, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Romaine: As I implicitly mentioned above, when was this discussed with the community here? How was a consensus reached to shut down and redirect Outreach? Koavf (talk) 18:22, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Koavf, What I know I wrote down in my earlier message. I think WMF has seen agreement within the group of GLAM program leaders and this has been spoken about in the Education group. I think WMF has considered that to be sufficient consensus and high in the hierarchy they have decided to close Outreach Wiki and centralise all the GLAM and Education materials on one wiki: Meta. As from various websites, social media and offline materials Outreach pages have been linked directly, it would be highly problematic to simply close Outreach wiki as this has been done with many other wikis. Therefore the obvious conclusion to keep materials reachable and editable without any extra effort for the readers and users is to setup domain redirecting. I also think WMF has decided to take this step because the "Communications Department at the Foundation conducted research in January 2021 to understand how the Foundation can help make stronger movement communications a reality."source and published this report. One of the recommendations is to "Invest more in centralizing and storing movement information"source. What I understand is that among the movement content is spread over various wikis, which results in that the documentation is hard to find, less used, resulting in a lot of potential not being used because it is so fragmented. This I already concluded myself a decade ago, GLAM program leaders have come to that same conclusion a few years ago, and finally WMF has come to that conclusion as well.
You ask if the decision was "discussed with the community here". That is a contradictio in terminis and a tricky question as the largest part of the users that edit this wiki, Education program leaders and GLAM program leaders, which I consider to be the core of the community that use this wiki, do not follow what is going on on this wiki. So discussing it "here" would mean that the few editors on Outreach are asked, but not the majority of the people involved is asked.
I am not so happy about how the process is going, nor the communication, but to me it is clear WMF has made this decision, just as WMF has taken many decisions in the past decade without asking for community input. Even the founding of Outreach Wiki was by a stand alone decision of WMF and bypassing the community. Romaine (talk) 23:39, 25 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Romaine: You think it is a "contradiction in terms" to ask the community who edits here for their feedback about shutting down the wiki? That speaks volumes. Koavf (talk) 01:33, 26 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Koavf, Can you please try to read what I tried to say, instead of your interpretation of what I said? What I tried to say is that only a very small portion of the people who create the Educational and GLAM content actual reads the village pump, etc, so suggesting that creating a discussion here so the Education and GLAM community, who use this wiki, can have a discussion is hardly going to work to get a representative input. Romaine (talk) 01:49, 26 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Romaine: Okay, can you do the same and appreciate the point that I am making? Koavf (talk) 05:21, 26 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Koavf, I think I understand your point, but you may correct me if I am wrong. I believe you try to say that the community needs to make such a decision. I believe in the strengths of the community, but that is I think not the full situation. The question is who has the right to make big decisions. In think there are two parties who can: 1. WMF as they own the platforms, 2. the community who maintains the content on the wiki. So far I know there has been no agreement in the movement who has the right to decide on what. This causes frequently troubles when WMF decides things that the community claims or when WMF communicates terribly. I personally would favour the community to decide on this subject. Romaine (talk) 06:54, 3 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@GFontenelle (WMF): "this was discussed and agreed years ago": when? When was the community here engaged in this? What Romaine mentions is an email thread from this year which says that it was decided but not discussed, not years ago, and not with any input from this community. Where is any of this documented? Koavf (talk) 18:22, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GFontenelle (WMF): Thank you for echoing what Romaine has just said above. Knowing he and others from the community are supervising this process, not just supporting or being consulted, is a really relevant piece of information that was not accurately provided in the misleading initial message. Furthermore, IMHO, the WMF should not take the lead in communicating this kind of changes in a community-driven activity, as it is not its role, and on-wiki deliberative processes should be preferred over decision-making procedures that are not as participatory, like an onsite event in Europe some years ago, and communication over community-driven processes should not have happened exclusively in a WMF report of low visibility. Finally, the initial post was lacking a lot of information that was now provided by Romaine and echoed by you. Thanks. --Joalpe (talk) 11:34, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For what it's worth, as the person who originally created the newsletter when I had a "GLAM Fellowship" more than a decade ago (but have not been active in its production for a while) - the only reason that this newsletter exists here, not Meta, is because I was specifically instructed to do so. There was an attempt at that time to make the outreach wiki as a separate 'breakaway' from Meta - with different policies, community, tone. However, it has merely 'forked' the community and results in double-handing of templates among other things (at least, in the interim time, Single-user-login has made that less annoying). I don't think anyone, at any point, explicitly preferred outreach wiki, it just became the de-facto because of inertia. The effort of moving something already in place became too much effort to contemplate - even though people like myself and Romaine had been preferring for it to live on Meta. Now, finally, after all these years - there are staff resources at the WMF who are actively willing to invest the time to do the annoying work of shifting the content and cleaning up the redirects, templates etc. The lack of "hard" redirects between two wikis is annoying but this is significantly outweighed by the advantages of being on Meta (including translation software, enabling this to become a multilingual newsletter if we wish). Wittylama (talk) 11:24, 26 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for comment[edit]

As this in some places already has been pointed out, before a large change can taken place like a move of contents from Outreach Wiki to Meta Wiki, a solid ground must be present. To use the momentum and to move forward and to come to a decision about moving contents to Meta, I have created a request for comment with a clear proposal that hopefully tackles all the concerns from the community. The proposal can be found on m:Requests for comment/Outreach migration. Romaine (talk) 13:07, 9 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have seen the RfC has been closed with the following conclusion: "There's no consensus for migrating Outreachwiki to Metawiki". --Joalpe (talk) 17:36, 21 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Joalpe: #Migration to Meta proposal. Koavf (talk) 17:48, 21 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Talk to the Community Tech: The future of the Community Wishlist Survey[edit]


We, the team working on the Community Wishlist Survey, would like to invite you to an online meeting with us. It will take place on 30 November (Tuesday), 17:00 UTC on Zoom, and will last an hour. Click here to join.


  • Changes to the Community Wishlist Survey 2022. Help us decide.
  • Become a Community Wishlist Survey Ambassador. Help us spread the word about the CWS in your community.
  • Questions and answers


The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes without attribution will be taken and published on Meta-Wiki. The presentation (all points in the agenda except for the questions and answers) will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Polish, Spanish, German, and Italian. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the Community Wishlist Survey talk page or send to

Natalia Rodriguez (the Community Tech manager) will be hosting this meeting.

Invitation link

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 20:03, 26 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The discussion vote about the licenses for Abstract content and Function Implementations[edit]

“Event”:The discussion vote about the licences for Abstract content and Function Implementations
When:Until 2021-12-15 09:59:59 UTC guaranteed.
Links:Discussion voteConceptConcept as the practical example
The vote questions
What Licence
Abstract content CC-BY-SA vs CC0? Or anothers?
Function Implementations Apache vs GPL? Or anothers?

✍️ Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 17:00, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for comment about closing Outreach wiki[edit]

Hello, There is a request for comment about closing this wiki, please see: m:Requests for comment/Outreach migration Regards --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:03, 14 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How we will see unregistered users[edit]


You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:18, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Leadership Development Task Force: Your feedback is appreciated[edit]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

The Community Development team at the Wikimedia Foundation is supporting the creation of a global, community-driven Leadership Development Task Force. The purpose of the task force is to advise leadership development work.

The team is looking for feedback about the responsibilities of the Leadership Development Task Force. This Meta page shares the proposal for a Leadership Development Task Force and how you can help. Feedback on the proposal will be collected from 7 to 25 February 2022.

Xeno (WMF) (talk) 03:07, 9 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wiki Loves Folklore is extended till 15th March[edit]

Please help translate to your language

Greetings from Wiki Loves Folklore International Team,

We are pleased to inform you that Wiki Loves Folklore an international photographic contest on Wikimedia Commons has been extended till the 15th of March 2022. The scope of the contest is focused on folk culture of different regions on categories, such as, but not limited to, folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, folk activities, etc.

We would like to have your immense participation in the photographic contest to document your local Folk culture on Wikipedia. You can also help with the translation of project pages and share a word in your local language.

Best wishes,

International Team
Wiki Loves Folklore

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:50, 22 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Remember to Participate in the UCoC Conversations and Ratification Vote![edit]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

Hello everyone,

A vote in SecurePoll from 7 to 21 March 2022 is scheduled as part of the ratification process for the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) Enforcement guidelines. Eligible voters are invited to answer a poll question and share comments. Read voter information and eligibility details. During the poll, voters will be asked if they support the enforcement of the Universal Code of Conduct based on the proposed guidelines.

The Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) provides a baseline of acceptable behavior for the entire movement. The revised enforcement guidelines were published 24 January 2022 as a proposed way to apply the policy across the movement. A Wikimedia Foundation Board statement calls for a ratification process where eligible voters will have an opportunity to support or oppose the adoption of the UCoC Enforcement guidelines in a vote. Wikimedians are invited to translate and share important information. For more information about the UCoC, please see the project page and frequently asked questions on Meta-wiki.

There are events scheduled to learn more and discuss:

  • A community panel recorded on 18 February 2022 shares perspectives from small- and medium-sized community participants.
  • The Movement Strategy and Governance (MSG) team is hosting Conversation Hours on 4 March 2022 at 15:00 UTC. Please sign-up to interact with the project team and the drafting committee about the updated enforcement guidelines and the ratification process. See the Conversation Hour summaries for notes from 4 February 2022 and 25 February 2022.

You can comment on Meta-wiki talk pages in any language. You may also contact either team by email: msg(_AT_) or ucocproject(_AT_)


Movement Strategy and Governance
Wikimedia Foundation

Xeno (WMF) 02:17, 2 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 ends tomorrow[edit]

International photographic contest Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 ends on 15th March 2022 23:59:59 UTC. This is the last chance of the year to upload images about local folk culture, festival, cuisine, costume, folklore etc on Wikimedia Commons. Watch out our social media handles for regular updates and declaration of Winners.

(Facebook , Twitter , Instagram)

The writing competition Feminism and Folklore will run till 31st of March 2022 23:59:59 UTC. Write about your local folk tradition, women, folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, folk activities, folk games, folk cuisine, folk wear, folklore, and tradition, including ballads, folktales, fairy tales, legends, traditional song and dance, folk plays, games, seasonal events, calendar customs, folk arts, folk religion, mythology etc. on your local Wikipedia. Check if your local Wikipedia is participating

A special competition called Wiki Loves Falles is organised in Spain and the world during 15th March 2022 till 15th April 2022 to document local folk culture and Falles in Valencia, Spain. Learn more about it on Catalan Wikipedia project page.

We look forward for your immense co-operation.

Thanks Wiki Loves Folklore international Team MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:40, 14 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Migration to Meta proposal[edit]

m:Requests for comment/Outreach migration was closed as unsuccessful. Koavf (talk) 04:07, 1 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MF-Warburg: Do you have any perspective on if this in any way relates to a plan on the part of the WMF to shutter Outreach? Koavf (talk) 04:21, 1 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


While looking for maintenance tasks in need of attention I stumbled upon: Special:WhatLinksHere/$1, Special:WhatLinksHere/$2, Special:WhatLinksHere/$3, and Special:WhatLinksHere/$4 which contain a few hundred broken links to page titles of the pattern $#. Does anyone know why these were created and are there any opinions on keeping these broken links? --mikeu talk 22:30, 2 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

These are no broken links. They are translation variables. It is normal that the link looks broken at the translation page, but as long as these "broken" links just appear in translation namespace everything is okay. --Ameisenigel (talk) 13:12, 3 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Missing license disclaimer[edit]

Hi Outreach VP, way back in 2011 a WMF staffer removed the standard license disclosure on this project, saying per WMF legal. This seems wrong, and I'll follow up with legal on this. The "fix" would be to just default MediaWiki:wikimedia-copyrightwarning to put it back. (This appears when using discussion tools, but not when using the wikieditor). Before I go track down legal, does anyone have any backgruond on why this should be missing here? Xaosflux (talk) 18:28, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There was a warning in 2012 that this may be an issue as well. Xaosflux (talk) 18:30, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
She immediately reverted herself, so I don't think I understand what the problem is. Koavf (talk) 18:31, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problem is that when pages are edited on this project using the wiki editor, the agree to our Terms of Use and agree to irrevocably release your text under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and GFDL.. disclaimer is missing. Xaosflux (talk) 18:34, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, we should be able to ignore that legal thing then, this was removed by User:Mono in 2011 with no notes as to why. Xaosflux (talk) 18:35, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The "fix" should be to delete that page, allowing the default text and its translations to show. Xaosflux (talk) 18:37, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hmm, actually this is only a problem for users that have their interface sent to standard english 'en'; as that is the default language for this project -- only users in en don't get this disclaimer now. Xaosflux (talk) 18:41, 27 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I defaulted that message, if it breaks something please revert! Xaosflux (talk) 18:13, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Xaosflux: Thanks.   — Jeff G. ツ 07:24, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Vector 2022 skin as the default in two weeks?[edit]

The slides for our presentation at Wikimania 2022

Hello. I'm writing on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Web team. In two weeks, we would like to make the Vector 2022 skin the default on this wiki.

We have been working on it for the past three years. So far, it has been the default on more than 30 wikis, including sister projects, all accounting for more than 1 billion pageviews per month. On average 87% of active logged-in users of those wikis use Vector 2022.

It would become the default for all logged-out users, and also all logged-in users who currently use Vector legacy. Logged-in users can at any time switch to any other skins. No changes are expected for users of these skins.

About the skin[edit]

[Why is a change necessary] The current default skin meets the needs of the readers and editors as these were 13 years ago. Since then, new users have begun using Wikimedia projects. The old Vector doesn't meet their needs.

[Objective] The objective for the new skin is to make the interface more welcoming and comfortable for readers and useful for advanced users. It draws inspiration from previous requests, the Community Wishlist Surveys, and gadgets and scripts. The work helped our code follow the standards and improve all other skins. We reduced PHP code in Wikimedia deployed skins by 75%. The project has also focused on making it easier to support gadgets and use APIs.

[Changes and test results] The skin introduces a series of changes that improve readability and usability. The new skin does not remove any functionality currently available on the Vector skin.

  • The sticky header makes it easier to find tools that editors use often. It decreases scrolling to the top of the page by 16%.
  • The new table of contents makes it easier to navigate to different sections. Readers and editors jumped to different sections of the page 50% more than with the old table of contents. It also looks a bit different on talk pages.
  • The new search bar is easier to find and makes it easier to find the correct search result from the list. This increased the amount of searches started by 30% on the wikis we tested on.
  • The skin does not negatively affect pageviews, edit rates, or account creation. There is evidence of increases in pageviews and account creation across partner communities.

[Try it out] Try out the new skin by going to the appearance tab in your preferences and selecting Vector 2022 from the list of skins.

How can editors change and customize this skin?[edit]

It's possible to configure and personalize our changes. We support volunteers who create new gadgets and user scripts. Check out our repository for a list of currently available customizations, or add your own.

Our plan[edit]

If no large concerns are raised, we plan on deploying in the week of October 3, 2022. If your community would like to request more time to discuss the changes, hit the button and write to us. We can adjust the calendar.

If you'd like ask our team anything, if you have questions, concerns, or additional thoughts, please ping me here or write on the talk page of the project. We will gladly answer! Also, see our FAQ. Thank you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 04:14, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Would there be any interest in bringing User:InternetArchiveBot to this wiki? Given how old some of the content on this wiki is, there may be some broken links. Since the wiki doesn't have dead link tags, web archive, or web-citation templates (that I know of), the bot would be primarily replacing dead links with archival ones, so it would not be hard to set up. Harej (talk) 00:24, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Harej:  Support.   — Jeff G. ツ 09:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your wiki will be in read only soon[edit]

Trizek (WMF) (Discussion) 21:20, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


This user has made a sequence of vandalisms on the main page (Canadian English version). I have tried to rollback their edits, yet I get a message that I "do not have permission to quickly rollback the edits". Could please someone adjust the page back to its non-vandalized version? Thanks. Joalpe (talk) 04:03, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

YesY Done merci. Koavf (talk) 04:06, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikimania 2023 Welcoming Program Submissions[edit]

Do you want to host an in-person or virtual session at Wikimania 2023? Maybe a hands-on workshop, a lively discussion, a fun performance, a catchy poster, or a memorable lightning talk? Submissions are open until March 28. The event will have dedicated hybrid blocks, so virtual submissions and pre-recorded content are also welcome. If you have any questions, please join us at an upcoming conversation on March 12 or 19, or reach out by email at or on Telegram. More information on-wiki.

Seeking volunteers for the next step in the Universal Code of Conduct process[edit]


As follow-up to the message about the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines by Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees Vice Chair, Shani Evenstein Sigalov, I am reaching out about the next steps. I want to bring your attention to the next stage of the Universal Code of Conduct process, which is forming a building committee for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C). I invite community members with experience and deep interest in community health and governance to nominate themselves to be part of the U4C building committee, which needs people who are:

  • Community members in good standing
  • Knowledgeable about movement community processes, such as, but not limited to, policy drafting, participatory decision making, and application of existing rules and policies on Wikimedia projects
  • Aware and appreciative of the diversity of the movement, such as, but not limited to, languages spoken, identity, geography, and project type
  • Committed to participate for the entire U4C Building Committee period from mid-May - December 2023
  • Comfortable with engaging in difficult, but productive conversations
  • Confidently able to communicate in English

The Building Committee shall consist of volunteer community members, affiliate board or staff, and Wikimedia Foundation staff.

The Universal Code of Conduct has been a process strengthened by the skills and knowledge of the community and I look forward to what the U4C Building Committee creates. If you are interested in joining the Building Committee, please either sign up on the Meta-Wiki page, or contact ucocproject(_AT_) by May 12, 2023. Read more on Meta-Wiki.

Best regards,

Xeno (WMF) 19:00, 26 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Selection of the U4C Building Committee[edit]

The next stage in the Universal Code of Conduct process is establishing a Building Committee to create the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C). The Building Committee has been selected. Read about the members and the work ahead on Meta-wiki.

-- UCoC Project Team, 04:20, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Announcing the new Elections Committee members[edit]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

Hello there,

We are glad to announce the new members and advisors of the Elections Committee. The Elections Committee assists with the design and implementation of the process to select Community- and Affiliate-Selected trustees for the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. After an open nomination process, the strongest candidates spoke with the Board and four candidates were asked to join the Elections Committee. Four other candidates were asked to participate as advisors.

Thank you to all the community members who submitted their names for consideration. We look forward to working with the Elections Committee in the near future.

On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees,

RamzyM (WMF) 17:59, 28 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikidata support available here[edit]

See phab:T171140, it's resolved for one month, but I don't know why there's no notification? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:44, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Weird. I thought I posted here about it, but I didn't. And I've even added outreach links to Wikidata. Thanks for informing us, where I failed. Koavf (talk) 11:19, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deploying the Phonos in-line audio player to your Wiki[edit]


Apologies if this message is not in your language, ⧼Please help translate⧽ to your language.

This wiki will soon be able to use the inline audio player implemented by the Phonos extension. This is part of fulfilling a wishlist proposal of providing audio links that play on click.

With the inline audio player, you can add text-to-speech audio snippets to wiki pages by simply using a tag:

<phonos file="audio file" label="Listen"/>

The above tag will show the text next to a speaker icon, and clicking on it will play the audio instantly without taking you to another page. A common example where you can use this feature is in adding pronunciation to words as illustrated on the English Wiktionary below.

{{audio|en|En-uk-English.oga|Audio (UK)}}

Could become:

<phonos file="En-uk-English.oga" label="Audio (UK)"/>

The inline audio player will be available in your wiki in 2 weeks time; in the meantime, we would like you to read about the features and give us feedback or ask questions about it in this talk page.

Thank you!

UOzurumba (WMF), on behalf of the Foundation's Language team

02:26, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Review the Charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee[edit]

Hello all,

I am pleased to share the next step in the Universal Code of Conduct work. The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) draft charter is now ready for your review.

The Enforcement Guidelines require a Building Committee form to draft a charter that outlines procedures and details for a global committee to be called the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C). Over the past few months, the U4C Building Committee worked together as a group to discuss and draft the U4C charter. The U4C Building Committee welcomes feedback about the draft charter now through 22 September 2023. After that date, the U4C Building Committee will revise the charter as needed and a community vote will open shortly afterward.

Join the conversation during the conversation hours or on Meta-wiki.


RamzyM (WMF), on behalf of the U4C Building Committee, 15:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Opportunities open for the Affiliations Committee, Ombuds commission, and the Case Review Committee[edit]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

More languagesPlease help translate to your language

Hi everyone! The Affiliations Committee (AffCom), Ombuds commission (OC), and the Case Review Committee (CRC) are looking for new members. These volunteer groups provide important structural and oversight support for the community and movement. People are encouraged to nominate themselves or encourage others they feel would contribute to these groups to apply. There is more information about the roles of the groups, the skills needed, and the opportunity to apply on the Meta-wiki page.

On behalf of the Committee Support team,

~ Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:40, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Review and comment on the 2024 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees selection rules package[edit]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

Dear all,

Please review and comment on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees selection rules package from now until 29 October 2023. The selection rules package was based on older versions by the Elections Committee and will be used in the 2024 Board of Trustees selection. Providing your comments now will help them provide a smoother, better Board selection process. More on the Meta-wiki page.


Katie Chan
Chair of the Elections Committee

01:12, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

xwiki translation issues by Special:Contributions/2604:3D08:9476:BE00:D893:23D3:605:80B8[edit]

Dear Outreach admins, I would like to alert that an IP range including this one has been blocked at several multilingual projects for problematic translations. Please have a look at their edits. Thank you for your attention. MathXplore (talk) 06:19, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

YesY Done We don't need simple translations and they really shouldn't even be an option. MX, you are on fire lately cross-wiki. Koavf (talk) 06:51, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reactivation of translation issues (Special:Contributions/2604:3D08:9476:BE00:8936:EB22:A003:D01)[edit]

This IP is repeating similar translation issues just like my previous report. MathXplore (talk) 09:47, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is already YesY Done by GS action. MathXplore (talk) 03:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Restrictions to "simple" translations[edit]

We are seeing "simple" translations again (Special:Contributions/2604:3D08:9476:BE00:B93D:ED39:5C53:5714). Can we restrict "simple" translations by abuse filter? Similar discussions can be seen at m:Meta_talk:Babylon#Simple_language_translations. Thank you for your attention. MathXplore (talk) 08:42, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Imported the MediaWiki message and deleted the translations. Unfortunately, I cannot import m:Special:AbuseFilter/328, as the option to export is very confusing to me, but I am manually copying and pasting and providing attribution here and there in the notes. Koavf (talk) 10:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MathewTownsend and Koavf: I blocked the range for 3 months. This is sockpuppetry by أحمدمحمدرمضانسعيد, who was doing the same thing, so I blocked them as well. I deleted the bad translations.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:26, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. If there's more I can do, let me know. Koavf (talk) 02:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]