Project:Village Pump

This page is only for discussing issues related to MediaWiki.org site.

To get help with MediaWiki software, ask on Project:Support desk.

Deletion proposal for Toolserver:Account pricing

There is no page to discuss controversial deletion on this wiki, so i thought i'd open a thread here. Basically this page shows up when you google "mediawiki consulting prices" which i think is confusing. I'm not sure the joke is funny enough to bother keeping, and would suggest deleting. Or maybe blanking the way we do for archived extensions, with a link to see old version. I don't know, if __NOINDEX__ works in that namespace maybe that. Perhaps just a really big banner on top indicated that the page is sarcastic would be sufficient. Anyways, I was wondering what other people thought about this. Bawolff (talk) 19:27, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Fine with NOINDEXing or blanking. I really don't see a good reason to delete, though. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 19:31, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

I think it's OK to keep, but a clear notice should be provided saying that it is a joke and retained only for humourous purposes (the category at the bottom won't work). Leaderboard (talk) 13:29, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Is there anything similar in any other wiki projects? I mean, the ability to attach at least some kind of interwiki via Wikidata. captain Ben Richards (talk) 09:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

I've noindexed the page, and also added a note explaining it's an April Fools joke. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 03:07, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Flow cleanup bot supervised run nearing completion

Just a heads up to the community - I've basically finished my manual testing of User:Flow cleanup bot. A bunch of quirks are documented on the user page, but I'm at this point satisfied that it does everything that is practical to do, even though it isn't a perfect representation.

I intend to run the bot in unsupervised mode to convert all ~8500 Flow boards to wikitext some time in late February or early March. This is your last chance to comment on the matter. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 03:34, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

@Pppery: Sounds good! Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 16:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

How do you manage link to Flow topics (for instance this link:Topic:Yhej89rb95p69aei)? They were used to quote previous comments, sometimes with an anchor equivalent to a permalink (like this). Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 09:51, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

I don't right now. It's on my queue to wrangle those later, but not something I've coded yet, or will code in the immediate future. While for the supervised bits I've often been deleting the Flow board my plan for the main bot run is to let Flow talk page manager move to page to "Pagename/Flow" and then overwrite the stub it leaves behind with the export so the links will continue to work until Flow is fully uninstalled. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 18:20, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Keeping links working was part of the feedback I collected from community members. I think it is important to respond to this request, as we have 10 years of hyperlinked conversations to convert. Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 16:48, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Timing update: I'm going to do the full run as soon as the second FlowMoveBoardsToSubpages run is done, and T385132 (patches already in review) is resolved and deployed. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 22:32, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Things are happening slower than I expected. It's now looking like this will happen mid to late March (and I'm going to extend the temporary rights on Flow cleanup bot, which will expire before then). * Pppery * _{it has begun} 03:07, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

I am going to run this next Tuesday (or as soon as the next MediaWiki version with the Parsoid fix is deployed). * Pppery * _{it has begun} 20:56, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

IMPORTANT: Admin activity review

Hello. A policy regarding the removal of "advanced rights" (administrator, bureaucrat, interface administrator, etc.) was adopted by global community consensus in 2013. According to this policy, the stewards are reviewing administrators' activity on all Wikimedia Foundation wikis with no inactivity policy. To the best of our knowledge, your wiki does not have a formal process for removing "advanced rights" from inactive accounts. This means that the stewards will take care of this according to the admin activity review.

We have determined that the following users meet the inactivity criteria (no edits and no logged actions for more than 2 years):

1. User:ATDT (administrator)
2. User:Az1568 (administrator)
3. User:Catrope (administrator)
4. User:Florianschmidtwelzow (administrator)
5. User:Matanya (administrator)
6. User:MaxSem (administrator)
7. User:Rogerhc (administrator)
8. User:Shanmugamp7 (administrator)
9. User:Wugapodes (administrator)
10. User:Yair rand (administrator)
11. User:😂 (administrator)

These users will receive a notification soon, asking them to start a community discussion if they want to retain some or all of their rights. If the users do not respond, then their advanced rights will be removed by the stewards.

However, if you as a community would like to create your own activity review process superseding the global one, want to make another decision about these inactive rights holders, or already have a policy that we missed, then please notify the stewards on Meta-Wiki so that we know not to proceed with the rights review on your wiki. Thanks, EPIC (talk) 16:49, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

In the previous AAR round we kept Catrope since his staff account wasn't inactive. It still isn't. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 20:14, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Extension:CodeMirror/5 - documentation translations

When the new documentation for CodeMirror was introduced at the end of last year, it looks like the documentation for CodeMirror 5 was deleted after a copy-and-paste move to Extension:CodeMirror/5. However, while the history of the page was undeleted and merged to the new title, it looks like the previous page's translations are still deleted.

Is it possible (and/or desirable) for these translations to be restored & moved to the new title for the CodeMirror 5 documentation? IMO it would be best if this could happen, due to the work that will have been put into translating the previous page, & to preserve the internationalization of the previous documentation. I admit that I don't know exactly how this would be done, though -- would all the old Translations:Extension:CodeMirror-pages have to be undeleted & moved to match the new title? Or could the old translated pages (e.g. Extension:CodeMirror/fr) be restored & moved to (e.g.) Extension:CodeMirror/5/fr, the translation units on Extension:CodeMirror/5 restored, and the page re-marked for translation?

Courtesy pings MusikAnimal & Pppery. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 21:29, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

It is possible technically but they needs to share the same divisions. The more different, the more work to do this. The page itself must be marked for translation. wargo (talk) 22:08, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Based on what I can see, it seems like Special:Permalink/6856129 (in the history of Extension:CodeMirror/5) might be the version of the page immediately before the translations were deleted. If this is the case, would restoring this version of the page (until the translations are restored) resolve the issue around needing to have the same divisions? Best, ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 14:43, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Ideally they should be - I didn't at the time because I didn't care enough to undelete and move over 800 pages. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 22:23, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

My thoughts are there's not much value in continuing to translate outdated docs. Yes, CodeMirror 5 is still being used in WMF production, but no one should be building any integrations against it at this point. I should have preserved the revision history, though… I know better than that. Sorry. If there's enough demand (it sounds like there is) I can write a script to get the translations back, but ideally we'd prevent new translations from being added. — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:36, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

I don't think there is any need to prevent translations - just discouraging (a standard translation admin concept) should be sufficient. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 22:53, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I thought there was a feature for this. Thank you. Okay, I will get the translations restored ;) I have a similar script from some time ago that hopefully still works. If not, please bear with me as I'm quite busy with other matters.

I don't recall exactly, but could it be that I was unable to move the page due to the volume of translations and/or combined revision count? I know I must have tried moving the page, first… Anyway, I'll get this cleaned up. Belated thank you to Pppery for restoring the history, and to all here for bringing this to my attention. — MusikAnimal ^talk 00:32, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

IIRC you would have needed sysadmin rights to move the page since it had more than 500 parts - but you appear to be a sysadmin which makes you omnipotent. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 01:58, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

I do not have deployer rights so I can't run maintenance scripts :-P — MusikAnimal ^talk 04:58, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

This is a stupid argument to have, but puppet says you're in restricted, which I had thought was sufficient (although it would have put you in the T378429 situation). Anyway, not knowing what you were doing well enough to carry out the move the proper way is a satisfactory historical answer, so I'll not continue this line further. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 05:17, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

I don't think we need to even "discourage" translations - there's value in ensuring that people not proficient in English can read "outdated" information. Leaderboard (talk) 03:31, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Bump to prevent this from being archived unfinished. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 20:13, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Universal Code of Conduct annual review: proposed changes are available for comment

Please help translate to your language.

I am writing to you to let you know that proposed changes to the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) Enforcement Guidelines and Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) Charter are open for review. You can provide feedback on suggested changes through the end of day on Tuesday, 18 March 2025. This is the second step in the annual review process, the final step will be community voting on the proposed changes. Read more information and find relevant links about the process on the UCoC annual review page on Meta.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. This annual review was planned and implemented by the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, you may review the U4C Charter.

Please share this information with other members in your community wherever else might be appropriate.

-- In cooperation with the U4C, Keegan (WMF) 18:50, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Report concerning User:92.255.57.53

• 92.255.57.53 (talk • contribs • logs • rights • global account) — Reasons: Vandalism XReport --Aqurs1 (talk) 19:01, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Done. --Clump (talk) 19:54, 8 March 2025 (UTC)