Wikimedia:Village pump/Archive 5

From Outreach Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Service credit letter request[edit]

I was wondering if I could get a service credit letter for editing Wikipedia. (That is, for edits that I'll make in the near future on global health articles, not past edits.) Because, my school requires me to do 75 hours of community service before graduating. It isn't one of the schools participating in the Wikimedia Education program though. The letter would require a short description of the service work I performed, and the contact information and signature of the volunteer supervisor. —Enervation (talk) 02:29, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@Enervation: I'm not familiar with what a service credit letter entails. Can you not just show the person in question your edit history? Koavf (talk) 13:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
In general at my school, getting credit for volunteer hours requires a community service credit letter, though I suppose I could try to ask my school's community service office to make an exception in this case.
According to my school's guidelines, a service credit letter is supposed to include:
  • the organization’s letterhead
  • a description of the service work performed
  • the date or range of dates when I volunteered
  • the exact number of hours worked
  • contact information (phone or email) of the volunteer supervisor and signature (no scans) [I'll probably have to ask them to make an exception re: "no scans"]
And here's a sample letter
Enervation (talk) 22:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
@Enervation: For official letterhead, you may need to contact someone at the Foundation. Koavf (talk) 13:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Flow as Beta Feature[edit]

Hello, I suggest to add Flow to beta features at the user talk namespace. That mean that every user can decide to have his talk page under Flow or normal page system.

Short explanation – what is Flow?
  • Flow is a project for building a modern discussion and collaboration system for Wikimedia projects.
  • It provides features that are present on most modern websites, but which are not possible to implement in wikitext. For example, Flow automatically signs users' posts on talk pages, threads replies, and permits per-topic notifications.
  • The main goals for the Flow project are:
  1. to make the wiki discussion system more accessible for new users
  2. to make the wiki discussion system more efficient for experienced users
  3. to encourage meaningful conversations that support collaboration
The main interest is that Flow improve notifications system, and it's really important on this Wiki with mostly occasional users.
Archi38 (talk) 15:10, 13 May 2016 (UTC)


  1. Symbol support vote.svg Support as proposant, much better Archi38 (talk) 15:10, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
  2. Symbol support vote.svg Support I have been using it since a while on fr.Wikipedia. I find it rather intuitive, and useful as a transparent tool for driving discussed exchanges. I guess new users will be less reluctant entering discussions than having to step up with the wiki-code interface ; wiki-code-native power users will probably forget it for a while, since the pleasure of building a house brick by brick is so enjoyable… Whatever it's long ago since castles and palaces were done like this… :-) However, since it's a "gadget" tool, it's each one's choice to get and try it, then adopt or discard it. I profoundly support giving the opportunity to everyone to test it. Last word : since it's a new tool, it's probably still perfectible. As far as I have practiced them, remarks, criticisms and suggestions have always been responded and eventually taken into account very quickly. Thanks to the team behind the curtain.--Eric.LEWIN (talk) 22:46, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Enabled now[edit]

I've just enabled this. You can turn switch your user talk page to Flow by going here and enabling "Flow on user talk". The result will look like this. --Roan Kattouw (WMF) (talk) 23:24, 18 May 2016 (UTC)


Hi. I can see that this project has old JavaScript that needs to be updated. I would happily make the required updates myself, but I would have to – at least temporarily – become an admin here to do that (because the relevant pages are in the MediaWiki namespace). I have already made these updates on a number of other projects, so it would be very easy for me to do this. If no one does anything, some JavaScript-related tools will break later this year. If you want me to make these updates, you can grant me admin rights and I will make the updates as soon as I can. Nirmos (talk) 22:41, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
@Nirmos: Done. Thanks for offering. Koavf (talk) 23:37, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Copyright violation discussion[edit]

Please see here I have alerted everyone of this discussion on Commons about Outreach. Please respond there. Koavf (talk) 04:18, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Recommend blocking User:PCruiser[edit]

Recommend blocking User:PCruiser. See contribs here. Do other users agree that this user is problematic? Do other admins agree that this user should be blocked? Thanks, Msannakoval (talk) 04:08, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

@Msannakoval: Agreed that the user's edits are at the very least bizarre... I have made an attempt at reaching out in the hopes that we can hash out something here. If not, then I agree that blocking will at least stop some of the bizarre edits. Koavf (talk) 04:15, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
@Koavf: I noticed more edits by this user in recent changes, so I did some investigating, and I'm confused. This user was blocked indefinitely because of sockpuppetry on, yet the user managed to post to his/her user talk page on yesterday. How is that possible? The user continues to edit here yet said edits are, as you say, "inscrutable" and are not contributing meaningfully to GLAM, education, library or other outreach work here on this project. Plus the user has not replied to a direct talk page inquiry about his/her purpose here. Recommending again to block this user. Msannakoval (talk) 01:40, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
@Msannakoval: Blocking in MediaWiki allows the person performing the action several options for how to block including duration and whether or not he can send email through the web interface. One of those options is to allow someone to edit his talk page (e.g. to explain himself or appeal for an unblock). I am blocking him here as he is not valuable to this project. Are you willing to look through his edits to roll back as well or should I? Koavf (talk) 02:31, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
@Koavf: Thanks for explaining that talk page editing is allowable even after a block. That makes sense. I wish I could help with the rollbacking. I'm under a deadline to finish copyediting the education newsletter today. So thank you for offering to do so. I will review your process in the recent changes. I've honestly never done it before as part of a block, so I'm eager to learn. Again, thanks for being another pair of eyes and hands on this. I was relieved when you responded to this post. It's very helpful having you here on Outreach wiki, and I'm grateful to you, Koavf. All the best, Msannakoval (talk) 04:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
@Msannakoval: No problem. Happy to help Koavf (talk) 04:35, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

How do I become a translation admin on this wiki?[edit]

Recently I started translating our (Wikimedia Polska) educational materials to English. I would love to use the MediaWiki mw:Extension:Translate for that. Take a look at Education/Ideal workshop/pl and it's almost-ready translation at Education/Ideal workshop. Instead of translating the two from scratch, I would like to use Special:PageMigration, but it seems only TranslationAdmins can use that tool. So, how do I become one? Halibutt (talk) 09:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

@Halibutt: I did it. Sorry for the drive-by edit but I was busy. Koavf (talk) 21:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
@Koavf: I noticed, I already made my first mistakes in the new role :) Thanks a lot! Halibutt (talk) 22:00, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Hindi Version of Wikipedia (Bookshelf)[edit]

Namaste! I have finished translation of Wikipedia (Bookshelf) in Hindi. Now I want some guidance to publish that. Please guide me to do so. Thank you. NehalDaveND (talk) 03:43, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I have done three brochures' translation in two languages Sanskrit and Hindi. I want to publish those brochures for Education programs. I want guidance from you.
  • Hindi

  • Sanskrit

  • @NehalDaveND: Sorry--somehow I missed this. Do you still need help? Koavf (talk) 23:40, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
@Koavf: Yes. Please guide me. NehalDaveND (talk) 04:55, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
@NehalDaveND: Do you want to publish them in print or online? Koavf (talk) 05:41, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
@Koavf: I want to print. Because I want to go for Education program to several Universities. Many other wikipedians also waiting for this print too. NehalDaveND (talk) 06:17, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
@NehalDaveND: You can use the "Create a book" link to the left to use our PDF maker. Koavf (talk) 15:03, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
@Koavf: I didn't understand you point. I want to print this as booklet or guide book for Students and Teachers. I want to print and distribute it among them. I don't know how to make printable file Corale, Photoshop and other printing related work. I need guidance too about grant for printing cost. NehalDaveND (talk) 19:01, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
@NehalDaveND: On the left hand side of every page are "Print/Export" options, including rendering pages as PDFs. The Book tool allows you to choose several pages that you want to print together as well--you can start and stop a book that is made up of all the pages you want to print. Koavf (talk) 21:15, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Problem concerning Flow activation on user talk pages[edit]

At the moment it is not possible to activate and deactivate Flow on a user talk page. Activate or deactivate Flow will lead to an empty page, with an error message.

Developers are fixing it. I'll post news when some updates will be available.

Please share that information with other users. Trizek (WMF) (talk) 14:25, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Update : activation of Flow as a Beta feature will be available again on Monday December 5 at 19:00 UTC. Trizek (WMF) (talk) 10:37, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
@Trizek (WMF): Thanks. Do you need persons to test it or do you think it's fine? This wiki doesn't have a lot of custom content. Koavf (talk) 16:53, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your proposal! That's a global deployment, so it will work on all wikis. I'll do some individual checkings too, on various wikis. If you want to try it, be bold; I'll be very happy to have your feedback! :) Trizek (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

I have some ideas/suggestions for helping WMF project contributors:[edit]

  • We should set up a WikiProject on User Forgiveness to help sanctioned users who believe that those sanctions are unjust. Some sanctioned Wikimediholics who want to contribute again may be considering suicide or revenge if they aren't able to contribute to the WMF projects soon. We should help them, especially those too impatient for the Standard Offer or those who have extreme rage whenever they get a surprise block or who believe that what they are doing or planning on doing is compliant to WMF project rules.
  • I think we should get rid of anti-proxy rules because those rules have prevented many people from countries such as Iran and China from editing Wikipedia or other projects. But Iran matters just as much as China. Blocking Wikimedians for using open proxies just because some proxy users abuse their editing privileges is the same as throwing Americans in jail for following Islam just because some Muslims are terrorists. I saw a denied unblock request on English Wikipedia that said that some people have to use proxies because of strict laws in Iran.
  • We should revise the WMF projects' rules so that they are easier to understand, more agreeable, less confusing, more clearly defined, more efficient to learn about, and easier to obey. Such revisions could save many puzzled Wikimedians from getting sanctioned due to violating some specific rules that they didn't know so well about. Of course we should keep some important rules such as neutral point of view, citation, no original research, the copyright and civility policies.

These are ideas that I think could help the WMF projects become more free and open than it is. PS. I think that the Wikipedia people came up with the notability guidelines because they were worried about their servers not being able to hold that much stuff. 12:58, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
  • @ The Ombudsman may be competent to handle user forgiveness issues. For what it's worth, if you are caught in a hard range IP block, it is fairly easy to get out of it by requesting exemption--I have it myself. If you have any suggestions on the language for WMF rules, we could probably look at them here or on Meta. I'm not sure of the exact process for revising those, since they sometimes have legal implications. Koavf (talk) 23:18, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
I think a Wiki user forgiveness project would be convenient for those too impatient for the standard offer, or who do not use or read email. I think the idea may be favored by some utilitarians, parents of young Wikipedians, blocked users saying their blocks are unjust, and former vandals who keep getting rejected. Repealing the anti-proxy rules would be very convenient for people in Iran, China, and other countries with strict laws.
We shouldn't mess with the rules that have anything to do with legal things. I'm just talking about the general editorial and behaviorial policies and guidelines of Wikipedia.
When I was Turkeybutt JC, my main focus was to make Wikipedia more neutral, but I was being disruptive by disputing the neutrality of articles and taking the Manual of Style's Words to Watch page too seriously and taking other peoples' criticism about my editing for granted. I got indef blocked and so I kept making new accounts, with each one teaching me a lesson.
When I was AI RPer and UnforgivablyPotatoes, I focused on vandal-fighting instead, since I thought everyone agreed that vandalism was bad. But still, Floquenbeam caught me whenever I was trying to come back in new accounts, and vandal fighting didn't seem to cut it to him. He kept telling me that when I created new accounts to 'continue my disruption' that I get indef blocked. But I wasn't trying to continue my disruption.
But I think it's nearly settled, and I think I'm close to breaking the "you cannot edit Wikipedia" curse for sure, I just hope the curse doesn't come back to me in the form of Floquenbeam's blocking abilities. -- 22:02, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
@ What would you like to do on Wikipedia? Koavf (talk) 00:16, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
I'm already doing what I've been wanting to do; copy edit, neutralize the tone of articles, fight vandalism, and treat problem users with civility rather than aggression. So far it's going fine. -- 12:00, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

@Koavf: Floquenbeam has blocked me from editing Wikipedia for six months for block evasion. (I hope to still be able to edit my talk page)

The block forgiveness program I proposed could really be a handy way to break what I think is the curse that seems to have been quietly placed on me to keep me from contributing to Wikipedia effectively. -- 00:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

  • @ What I recommend is waiting it out--contribute to other WMF projects, including simple.wp, and maybe even other online communities--Project Gutenburg/LibriVox/Distributed Proofreaders, DMOZ, OpenStreetMap, etc. Take some time to ride it out and it will be fine. I'm glad that you're eager to edit again and I think you could be a valued contributor in a few months. Koavf (talk) 03:57, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I can't contribute to simple.wp anymore as I am blocked from there until November 25 because of 'block evasion'. I don't think there's any other WMF project that gets vandalized as much as Wikipedia. (I'm saying it because I like to fight vandalism)
I can still edit my talk page. Floquenbeam told me "If you start editing with this IP in 6 months, without having your account unblocked, I'll reblock for another 6 months." I think he assumed that I was taking the Standard Offer to get Turkeybutt JC unblocked. I'm not sure if he meant 'within six months' or 'six months hence'. So I asked him to clarify.
I wonder why does Wikipedia tell us that their rules are not clear, simple or firm? What about the copyright policy? The copyright policy has to be firm. I wonder why Jimbo and the WMF intended to have confusing and complicated and possibly contradictory rules? On Wikipedia, freedom should not be sacrificed to improve security. -- 11:45, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
@ November 25 is a week from now. You can just hold out until then and it will be okay. I'm surprised that you think that Wikipedia's rules are not clear--can you give me an example? Koavf (talk) 06:01, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
For example, Ignore all rules. That's a policy. But we get blocked if we break the rules. But IAR is a rule. But if we ignore the copyright policy, we'd be in trouble. Some Wikipedia rules have to be firm.
And now they're making me not edit Wikipedia for six months. (I can still edit my talk page) And they told me that I'm still not permitted to edit after six months. (I'm not supposed to edit Wikipedia until Turkeybutt JC is unblocked) I got the first thing ticked off the checklist; convince them that I have learned my lesson. Now I have to start the edit hiatus for six months. I'll still be here at Wikimedia Outreach. -- 11:51, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Hmmm... you seem to have not responded to me in a while. I'll just ping you, @Koavf: PS. I read that the standard offer means 'no socks or evading blocks for six months', but the page didn't tell me I had to stop editing Wikipedia altogether.
@ All I can really tell you is to sit tight through your block. Koavf (talk) 05:18, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps a forgiving Wikipedian who is able to lift global locks and CheckUser blocks may be able to boldly ignore the "make sure to ask the blocking administrator before unblocking" rule so that they can unblock my Turkeybutt JC account. But then there would be lots of arguing and chaos and wheel warring and stuff about the blocking policy and the Ignore All Rules policy. And then I would be contributing constructively and redirect my user page to my contributions list and I could make enough vandal-fighting contributions that anyone going to my userpage would see that I was reformed and would be on my side. I believe that Wikipedia is run on mob rule, communitarianism, oligarchy, and ostracization. Or Anonymous can hack our blocks away... -- (talk) 20:18, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Note to administrators: 2-factor authentication is now available for your Wikimedia accounts[edit]

Administrators: 2-factor authentication is now available on your Special:Preferences page. I highly recommend enabling it. Note that if you lose access to the device that you use for 2-factor authentication and you lose your recovery codes, then your account may be unrecoverable. --Pine 20:54, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Foundation's wikicommunity is the most disruptive community I have ever met and they are incompetent to even have those Wikis in the first place.[edit]

For starters, I think that the ideal wiki-encyclopedia;

  • Has simple, non-contradictory, concise rules.
  • Has verification, source-citing and neutrality rules very similar to Wikipedia's.
  • Allows vandalism and trolling, despite possibly being discouraged or frowned upon.
  • Does not rely on consensus for many things, so mob rule won't mess up the wiki.
  • Does not block or ban anyone from the site, as all disruptivity can be reversed.

The WMF may be anti-utilitarian. They don't care for people that the ruling mob doesn't like.

There are many wiki-problems;

  • If a consensus agrees on a POV bias, then that would justify POV bias in articles, ignoring the NPOV rule so they can "improve" Wikipedia by making the articles reflect that biased consensus.
(The Founding Fathers didn't believe that relying on majority opinion was a good idea, as that would lead to mob rule and lots of fighting and the 80% taking away the other 20% rights if they wanted)
  • Indef blocks and bans have given people an incentive to become suicidal, or terroristic for revenge's sake, or urged to take legal action, or a hacktivist so as to hack their editing privileges back.
(This proves that the Wikicommunity is extremely lazy since us humans have been getting dumber over time, the blocking system was an idea made up by lazy people who didn't like to battle vandalism)
  • Out of Wiki-concern, the Wikicommunity has been setting up an oligarchic pyramid scheme where a minority OF Wikimedians are more powerful than the majority, which has failed to help Wikipedia.
(Every regime that used fear to promise to make things better has been exploited and abused by a lucky minority so as to tyrannize the regime and make people associate the ideology with evil)
  • No Wikimedian "gives a f**k" about ostracized users, and unfortunately, editing privileges weren't hacked back to blocked Wikimedians by Anonymous or other hacktivists yet. I don't know why not.
(I know that Wikipedia is not a democracy or an anarchy, which is a good thing that Wikipedia is neither, but I'd like it if the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects were much more utilitarian)
  • The WMF advertises that it's okay to be disobedient, yet they let sysops block disobedient users from editing and advertise that blocking is not punishment, when only disobedient users get blocked.
(It's a bad idea for a ruler to tell their people that it's okay to break some laws and then have the law enforcement punish people who break those laws and deny that such people are being punished)
  • The community advertises that the Wikis are the best place for autistic people or people with ADHD. I have Autism and I hate the WMFs websites because they have the stupidest philosophies ever.
(Wikipedia good for autistic people? Only for five years or so. Yo Gabba Gabba's lights and colors bad for autistic people? I don't think so. I have autism and I liked to watch that fun TV show)
  • The no open proxies rule is stupid. People from Iran, China and other places that restrict access to Wikipedia need those proxies. Pets shouldn't be banned just because some people are allergic.
(Of course America has been terrorized by some Muslims, but that doesn't mean that there should be a law to put nearly all Muslims in prison just for their religion at any time without warning)

I'm glad I can rant on my sorrow here. If this doesn't get heard, then the WMF's outreach program is a failure and the WMF is lying about how good they are at making the internet "not suck".

-- 13:11, 30 November 2016 (UTC) (darn it I forgot to sign again!)
@ It seems like you have a different set of priorities and values than the ones which make it possible to have these projects. If you decide to change your mind or abide by our guidelines while you edit, we would be happy to have you. Koavf (talk) 16:58, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
@Koavf: That makes sense. I remember being told by someone else on Wikipedia that if many people are saying that I was disruptive or incompetent, that such attacks "are not personal attacks" and that I should change, yet I have stopped disputing articles' neutralities since Turkeybutt JC was globally locked.
I agree with the neutrality and verifiablility guidelines, and I respect the copyright guidelines. But I don't agree with that which conflicts with my never give up or the there is no need to fit in philosophy.
They believe in the essay Competence is required but dismiss the essay Wikipuffery, which is confusing to me, as essays document personal thoughts which may be shared among some Wikipedians, so in my opinion, enforcing an essay such as WP:CIR is just the same thing as a group of antitheists telling me to stop believing in God just because I don't go to church.
I don't believe in Ignore all rules or Wikipedia's fifth pillar "Wikipedia has no firm rules" because Wikimedia has to and does have firm rules, such as rules against copyright violations, personal attacks, vandalism, disruptive editing, and the undoing of the actions of checkusers, stewards, arbitrators, the WMF staff and Jimbo.
Such rules telling us to take the rules for granted give editors in power the excuse to shove their own interpretations of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines down the throats of regular editors, since it is unclear when and where we can obey or disobey certain rules, and thus it can be confusing for us, even contradictory, as we can be forced to change our opinions to match the opinions of the majority or the opinions of the editors in power. I do not tolerate peer pressure or the forcing of others to submit to the will of the consensus or the administrators, unless the purported "disruptive" editor is found to be randomly adding nonsense or removing important content from many articles frequently.
Wikipedia doesn't just have to adapt to a communitarian majority, it also needs to be adaptable to the likings of people who believe in individual liberty (but not anarchy) or nonconformity (against peer pressure) or people who think that rules are a necessity in everyday life or those who believe in amnesty for nonviolent misdemeanors or people who make frequent major mistakes on Wikipedia. -- 13:46, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

New template to replace magic words[edit]

Template:ISBN I have ported over w:Template:ISBN and w:Module:Check isxn from en.wp. Magic words as links are being phased out and although we don't have to replace all instances of them now, they will all be removed from MediaWiki in 2017. See mw:Requests_for_comment/Future_of_magic_links. We have about no entries in Category:Pages using ISBN magic links at the moment. Koavf (talk) 02:49, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Wiki for Coop[edit]

Hello everyone,

I come to you to invite to re-read the submission of a new partnership project between the Wikimedia movement and the Belgian NGOs. The project is titled Wiki 4 Coop and I invite you to discover its submission page on Meta-Wiki. Do not hesitate to endorse the project if you like it and even correct my English if you have a little time. A beautiful end of day for all of you, Lionel Scheepmans (talk) 09:47, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Editing outage on 19 April and 3 May 2017[edit]

The Wikimedia Foundation will be performing some maintenance and testing on the servers. One test will make sure that Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia wikis can stay online even after a disaster.

They will switch all traffic from the main data center to the secondary data center on Wednesday, 19 April 2017. On Wednesday, 3 May 2017, they will switch back to the primary data center. The time has not been finalized; however, the test will probably begin at 14:00 UTC (15:00 BST, 16:00 CEST, 10:00 EDT, 07:00 PDT).

Unfortunately, because of some limitations in MediaWiki, all editing must stop during those two switches. You will be able to read, but not edit, all pages at all wikis for approximately 20 to 30 minutes on Wednesday, 19 April and Wednesday, 3 May 2017. We apologize for this disruption, and we are working to minimize it in the future.

There will also be a code freeze for the weeks of 17 April 2017 and 1 May 2017. No non-essential code deployments will take place.

This project may be postponed if necessary. You can read the schedule at They will post any changes on that schedule. There will be more notifications about this. Please share this information with your community.

If you have scheduled any workshops or edit-a-thons around this time, please leave a message for me on my talk page at the English Wikipedia as soon as possible. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:57, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

The time has been confirmed: 14:00 UTC on both days. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:45, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Undoing my changes[edit]

I've did some temporary fixes, which I would like to undo now. But as my account is not autoconfirmed my actions get throttled. May you please help me and undo all my changes to the Open Access reports?--Tostman (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

@Tostman: YesY Done --Samuele2002 (talk) 19:15, 9 April 2017 (UTC)