Wikimedia:Village pump

Village pump

Skip to: Table of contents • First discussion • Bottom of page • New post

---

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.

Important:

• 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

Auto-updating WiR table

Main discussion at Talk:Wikipedian_in_Residence

I'm in the process of writing some templates to be able to make the Wikipedian_in_Residence table easier to maintain using wikidata. Evolution and evolvability (talk) 00:40, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Import request

In order to implement w:Template:WiR_table_row here, could I request the import of:

1. w:module:WikidataIB/sandbox to module:WikidataIB
2. w:Template:WiR_table_row to Template:WiR_table_row
3. w:Template:WiR_table_start to Template:WiR_table_start

Thank you! Evolution and evolvability (talk) 23:55, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• Evolution and evolvability thanks for your request. I haven't previously imported a module. I'll ping active Outreach bureaucrat User:Koavf to ask what he thinks about this request. ↠Pine (✉) 00:31, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
• @Pine: Thanks. @Evolution and evolvability: I'll do this but man, importing is a huge pain, since there is always a cascading set of hundreds of modules/templates that are dependencies for anything. :/ Koavf (talk) 00:35, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Evolution and evolvability: Importing keeps on failing, likely due to exactly what I mentioned above. Do you really need these locally and at en.wp? Why are they in two places? Koavf (talk) 00:39, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
    • Realistically, they're more useful either here or on metawiki. I was only using wikipedia to develop them to test whether I could get the templates work before asking for imports. I've made the import request at meta as well (import request; location suggestion). It mainly depends on where it's best to centralise WiR info to. Evolution and evolvability (talk) 03:23, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
      • @Evolution and evolvability: Let's see if m: can do it: there are many more resources there to support it. If they won't do it, then I will. The overlap between Meta and Outreach is still not really sussed out, so for now, it seems like Meta can work as a host for this material. Thanks for editing here, tho and I hope you stick around here. Koavf (talk) 04:12, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

@Koavf, Evolution and evolvability: have these requests been completed? ↠Pine (✉) 06:15, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

@Pine, Koavf: I don't think so yet. The module:WikidataIB is still the old version. (test page). Evolution and evolvability (talk) 06:28, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

@Pine, Evolution and evolvability: I still have not done this because of the sheer headache I mentioned above. Do we really need to import dozens (hundreds?) of templates and modules for several hours for this? If the answer is yes, I'll do it but if not, I a do not want to deal with the headache of all this importing (nor do I want someone else to do it unless he is committed to ensuring that there are not a bunch of red links). Koavf (talk) 00:01, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

@Koavf, Pine: My understanding was that because module:WikidataIB is already present locally, it'd only be necessary to update the local version to the most current version from en.wp. I thought that importing the large number of additional templates and modules was only necessary for creating the initial local version of the module. Alternatives would be either A) import meta:User:ListeriaBot in stead, or B) Just redirect the Wikipedian in Residence page over to meta:Wikipedian in Residence to avoid duplication. What're people's thoughts? Evolution and evolvability (talk) 01:29, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

@Evolution and evolvability: I tried and had it just sit there without finishing for awhile, then tried again and got "Import failed: A database query error has occurred. Did you forget to run your application's database schema updater after upgrading? Query: UPDATE `page` SET page_latest = '207189',page_touched = '20191028012806',page_is_new = '0',page_is_redirect = '0',page_len = '130489',page_content_model = 'Scribunto' WHERE page_id = '52276' AND page_latest = '204412' Function: WikiPage::updateRevisionOn Error: 1205 Lock wait timeout exceeded; try restarting transaction ([IP address redacted])", then tried again and got a database error: "To avoid creating high replication lag, this transaction was aborted because the write duration (10.47375202179) exceeded the 3 second limit. If you are changing many items at once, try doing multiple smaller operations instead. [XdndPApAAEIAAEzMqe8AAACH] 2019-11-24 01:30:50: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBTransactionSizeError" This is why I don't like doing this. I tried a fourth time and a single revision was imported. Is that all that was needed? Koavf (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

@Koavf, Evolution and evolvability: I don't know how the import process works. Could scripting or a bot be used to automate the process? Also, would it be worth asking in IRC or Wikitech-l for advice regarding how to make import process be less time consuming? ↠Pine (✉) 01:35, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

This is definitely something a bot could do but I am too ignorant to be able to actually write one that does it. Koavf (talk) 01:39, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

@Koavf: Thank you for all your efforts on this. Sadly it's still not fully functional (test page), but does clarify what the best solution probably is for the Wikipedian in Residence page. Evolution and evolvability (talk) 02:13, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Koavf and Evolution and evolvability how about creating a request on Phabricator for someone to create a bot that does the job? Perhaps someone would be willing to work on this for a Google Summer of Code or Outreachy internship. Also, I'll ping User:Astinson (WMF) to ask him for ideas. ↠Pine (✉) 02:53, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Actually, there might also be an additional option for that one page: mw:Extension:InterwikiExtracts might allow it to be possible to transclude the whole meta:Wikimedian in residence across from meta to outreachwiki to keep them synchronised (ping Template:U to check if I've misunderstood its capabilities). Evolution and evolvability (talk) 06:40, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

I can try to make this page and see what happens. Koavf (talk) 07:43, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
@Pine, Evolution and evolvability: phab:T239010 Koavf (talk) 07:54, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

The consultation on partial and temporary Foundation bans just started

Hello,

In a recent statement, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees requested that staff hold a consultation to "re-evaluat[e] or add community input to the two new office action policy tools (temporary and partial Foundation bans)".

Accordingly, the Foundation's Trust & Safety team invites all Wikimedians to join this consultation and give their feedback from 30 September to 30 October.

How can you help?

• Suggest how partial and temporary Foundation bans should be used, if they should (eg: On all projects, or only on a subset);

• Give ideas about how partial and temporary Foundation bans should ideally implemented, if they should be; and/or

• Propose changes to the existing Office Actions policy on partial and temporary bans.

We offer our thanks in advance for your contributions, and we hope to get as much input as possible from community members during this consultation!

-- Kbrown (WMF) 17:13, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

• Kbrown (WMF): Thanks for the message. ↠Pine (✉) 00:34, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Feedback wanted on Desktop Improvements project

Please help translate to your language

Hello. The Readers Web team at the WMF will work on some improvements to the desktop interface over the next couple of years. The goal is to increase usability without removing any functionality. We have been inspired by changes made by volunteers, but that currently only exist as local gadgets and user scripts, prototypes, and volunteer-led skins. We would like to begin the process of bringing some of these changes into the default experience on all Wikimedia projects.

We are currently in the research stage of this project and are looking for ideas for improvements, as well as feedback on our current ideas and mockups. So far, we have performed interviews with community members at Wikimania. We have gathered lists of previous volunteer and WMF work in this area. We are examining possible technical approaches for such changes.

We would like individual feedback on the following:

• Identifying focus areas for the project we have not yet discovered
• Expanding the list of existing gadgets and user scripts that are related to providing a better desktop experience. If you can think of some of these from your wiki, please let us know
• Feedback on the ideas and mockups we have collected so far

We would also like to gather a list of wikis that would be interested in being test wikis for this project - these wikis would be the first to receive the updates once we’re ready to start building.

When giving feedback, please consider the following goals of the project:

• Make it easier for readers to focus on the content
• Provide easier access to everyday actions (e.g. search, language switching, editing)
• Put things in logical and useful places
• Increase consistency in the interface with other platforms - mobile web and the apps
• Eliminate clutter
• Plan for future growth

As well as the following constraints:

• Not touching the content - no work will be done in terms of styling templates or to the structure of page contents themselves
• Not removing any functionality - things might move around, but all navigational items and other functionality currently available by default will remain
• No drastic changes to the layout - we're taking an evolutionary approach to the changes and want the site to continue feeling familiar to readers and editors

Please give all feedback (in any language) at mw:Talk:Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements

After this round of feedback, we plan on building a prototype of suggested changes based on the feedback we receive. You’ll hear from us again asking for feedback on this prototype.

Thank you! Quiddity (WMF) (talk)

06:53, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Junk pages

I've deleted four junk pages which were created in a relatively short time span. Note to admins to keep an eye out for junk pages. Non-admins can tag these for deletion, following the directions at Wikimedia:Deletion policy. ↠Pine (✉) 20:44, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Village pump archiving

I archived several threads from this page to Wikimedia:Village pump/Archive 6. ↠Pine (✉) 06:14, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Appointments of local checkusers and oversighters for Outreach wiki

Enough junk pages are being created here that I am becoming increasingly open to the idea of having local checkusers so that they can look at IP ranges where junk accounts are created and create rangeblocks if appropirate. Also, occasionally there are needs for suppression of information here, and we don't have local oversighters, so when incidents happen, local admins usually apply revdel and then request suppression from a steward. What do others think about the idea of starting appointment processes for local checkusers and oversighters for Outreach wiki? I am not planning to request these permissions for myself in the near future, but I would be willing to assist with the appointment processes. ↠Pine (✉) 06:23, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposal to start an appointments process for local checkusers

Yes

• Agree We should have locals who can do steward activity because this is a particularly outward-facing wiki and having to wait on stewards (whose attention should be focused on large-spread abuse and abuse on smaller wikis) introduces overhead that we shouldn't have here. There are several long-term editors who are trusted and can perform this in this role if they are willing. Koavf (talk) 23:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Agree Per nom and above. This sounds reasonable. --mikeu ^talk 06:10, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

No

• Oppose Honestly, i don't think this is necessary. It can be handled by Stewards. --Steinsplitter (talk) 07:33, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
• The only need for CU here is for spambots. And when that happens the actions (rangeblocks) should really be global and not local, so you would need a steward anyway. --Rschen7754 23:25, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Proposal to start an appointments process for local oversighters

Yes

• Agree We should have locals who can do steward activity because this is a particularly outward-facing wiki and having to wait on stewards (whose attention should be focused on large-spread abuse and abuse on smaller wikis) introduces overhead that we shouldn't have here. There are several long-term editors who are trusted and can perform this in this role if they are willing. Koavf (talk) 23:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
• Agree Per nom and above. Another reasonable suggestion. --mikeu ^talk 06:10, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

No

• Oppose Honestly, i don't think this is necessary. It can be handled by Stewards. --Steinsplitter (talk) 07:33, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
• Not really convinced, there are several larger wikis that don't have OS and have way more suppression requests (nlwiki for example). 3 requests in 2019 does not justify having local oversighters. --Rschen7754 23:30, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Discuss

• Hi @Koavf: I would like to see more participation in this discussion. What do you think about the possibility of using MassMessage to place talk page notices on the Outreach talk pages of all unblocked users who have made an edit to Outreach in the past 90 days? ↠Pine (✉) 20:15, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

• @Pine: Good idea to me. Koavf (talk) 20:32, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

• @Koavf: OK. Do you know how to get the list of contributors from the past 90 days who aren't blocked? I can get a list of recently active users from Special:ActiveUsers, but that list is for the past 30 days and I think that it includes blocked users. ↠Pine (✉) 21:38, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

• @Pine: No, I don't. I've made one for the past 30 days with blocked users removed here: Active_users. (We should also reconfigure it so that this is at Mass message/Active_users or somesuch). Koavf (talk) 22:47, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

• I can make a list of all users who have made an edit in the last 90 days, excluding those currently blocked - is that what you want? --DannyS712 (talk) 23:44, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

  Its actually pretty easy to filter those that are blocked - all of their edits have been deleted, so they don't show up in the revision table. I'll tweak the query to remove bots, and provide the list momentarily --DannyS712 (talk) 23:55, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

The following users have made edits since September first:

1997kB 94rain AVasanth (WMF) Aamrs Aguzanotti Ah3kal Ainali Alicia Fagerving (WMSE) Ambrosiani Amire80 Andrews Lartey Anthere Anup Sadi Ash Crow Astinson (WMF) Astrid Carlsen (WMNO) Avery Jensen Avicenno Awangba Mangang Axel Pettersson (WMSE) B.jars Base Beat Estermann Bsadowski1 Catherine Laurence Cbderbylib CelStrzel Celina Strzelecka (WMPL) Chongkian CptViraj Czar Céréales Killer Daniel Mietchen DannyS712 DavidL Djordjes Dominik Theis (WMDE) Douglaskmccarthy Ebe123 Envlh Evolution and evolvability FULBERT Florencia Guastavino (WMAR) Fuzheado Fæ Gamaliel Gampe Gunay M.E. Gytha Hansmuller Hasley Hiperterminal ITskandɹos ITskandɾos Iluvatar Info-farmer Ixocactus Jagseer S Sidhu Jianhui67 Joalpe Joy Agyepong KCVelaga Karolina0089 Kbshah6p Killarnee Klara Sielicka-Baryłka (WMPL) Koavf Krinkle Kruusamägi Kwanele22 La Mantis Lacbug Lentokonefani Ludo29 Luisina Ferrante (WMAR) MGuadalupe (WMF) MMiller (WMF) MacedonianBoy Marco Chemello (BEIC) Mari Avetisyan WMAM Marta Arosio (WMIT) Martin Urbanec MartinPoulter Mary Mark Ockerbloom Masssly Mathglot Melissamarzo Meno25 Merrilee MichellevL (WMNL) Modjou Mohammad Mu301 NGC 54 NSaad (WMF) Naga sai sravanth Nawaraj Ghimire Neboysha87 Nirmal Dulal Nur Rahmi Nailah (WMID) OlafJanssen Omotecho PDiazR (WMCL) Pathoschild Pigsonthewing Pine Praxidicae Pru.mitchell RSharma (WMF) Rachmat04 RaymondSutanto Reosarevok RexxS Romaine Ruti-WMIL Rzuwig S.ann.adams SGill (WMF) SPatnaik (WMF) Sabine Rønsen (WMNO) Sadads Safi-iren Saileshpat SakhileMbatha2 SandraF (WMF) Slowking4 Sms2sms SuperHamster Susannaanas Tar Lócesilion Tofeiku Tore Danielsson (WMSE) Trizek (WMF) TrudiJ VHargyono (WMF) VIGNERON Valereee Verdy p Vlad5250 Vysotsky WereSpielChequers WikiBayer Wikinade Will (Wiki Ed) Worrida XXBlackburnXx Xavier Cailleau WMFr Xiplus Yupik ZI Jony Zache Åsa Paaske Gulbrandsen (WMNO) Виолетова আফতাবুজ্জামান 夢蝶葬花 魔法少女静樹

• Hi @DannyS712: thanks for your work, but I don't think that every edit has been deleted from every user that was blocked in the past 90 days. There is one editor in that I recall blocking for making junk edits, probably advertising, but I left one of their pages alone because at least that one page wasn't clearly junk. There is probably a way to filter specifically for blocked editors. Can you look into that, please? ↠Pine (✉) 19:02, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Blocked users are included (Kbshah6p) and some users (ITskandɹos, ITskandɾos, Karolina0089, SakhileMbatha) had their contributions deleted just now but I didn't bother blocking them. Koavf (talk) 20:30, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

• I would prefer that sending notices to unblocked users who have at least 1 edit in the past 90 days be a simple job. There is probably a way to create a query for this. @DannyS712: how did you create your list? Thank you, ↠Pine (✉) 06:51, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

• I think a wiki like this would really struggle with getting 25 support votes (as required by the CU/OS policies) in a reasonable enough timeframe to be accepted by stewards. --Rschen7754 23:27, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Page Wikimedia:Request an account

The page Wikimedia:Request an account has been created and deleted on numerous occasions. Instead of having this annoyance continue, I added some useful content to the page. There doesn't appear to be a page on Meta for requesting an account, but if there is one then I would link to the Meta page from the Outreach page. Is anyone aware of such a Meta page? ↠Pine (✉) 07:23, 9 December 2019 (UTC)