This page contains discussions that have been archived from Village pump (miscellaneous). Please do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to revive any of these discussions, either start a new thread or use the talk page associated with that topic.
< Older discussions · Archives: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X · 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79
I'm not sure that I'm asking the question, below, in the correct forum. If there is a better place for the question to be asked then please point me there.
This is a question that bears on the way disputes should be conducted on talk pages, on DRN, and at Wikipedia in general.
Should these disputes be conducted via logical argumentation? I claim the the answer to this question is "YES, of course! User:Deicas, why would you need to ask such a stupid question?"
If the answer to the question, above, is "YES" then would someone please point me to the applicable guild-line(s)/policy(s) that require this use of logical argumentation?
If the answer to the question, above, is anything other than an emphatic "YES" then I'll go back and re-write this query. Deicas ( talk) 22:18, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
I am looking for either: 1) A metaphoric hammer marked "Use logical argumentation and respond dispositively to good faith questions" with which to hit certain people. OR: 2) A authoritative answer (From who? The Arbcom?) that " User:Deicas's expectations, that Wikipedia editors, in the course of disputes, *must* use logical argumentation and dispositively respond to a good faith questions, are contrary to Wikipedia policy.
Either answer will improve the quality of my life. Deicas ( talk) 02:19, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Why I cant do edit this page Communism ? سلامت ( talk) 08:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Do Wikipedia have enough contributors to Undid not true contributions? when Wikipedia do protect pages so readers can not for example Undid false revisions. I think that protection idea should be just for a little among of time. Thanks for the help. سلامت ( talk) 13:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I've made a proposal of a new wiki project for open source codes, here. I invite wikipedians to edit that page, in order to debate the proposal. E. Feld talk 20:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I've made a proposal of a new wiki project for articles that may not fit into an encyclopedia, here. I invite wikipedians to edit that page in order to debate the proposal. All input is welcome! ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 00:26, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Another section deletion, either mistake or vandalism, done last October and never noticed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Minerva&diff=518099555&oldid=517126284
Supposedly 73 page watchers, so how is it that such obvious bad edits are not spotted? If there was some log of doubtful edits for people to check then I would be happy to do a few from time to time. I expect other people would too, and then perhaps these things would be noticed. To be honest, section blanking with no edit summary probably should be automatically reverted. 86.160.213.0 ( talk) 04:20, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Excuse me if my question doesn't related to this topic but I should ask that if a user can't write properly, what should we do? Can he/she contribute in all articles? Can we block him/her? Regards -- Arjanizary ( talk) 13:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
See Talk:Group_3_element#Requested_move I proposed. I am having difficulty explaining grammar and WP:TITLE guidelines in an older jargon area. Can someone help? Of course, I could be wrong myself - in that case I need help too ;-) - DePiep ( talk) 03:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! I will be awarding a cash prize to the winners of the February 2013 monthly disambiguation contest. The first place prize will equal one cent for every fix over 2,500, up to a maximum of $100 for 12,500 links fixed. Therefore, if the winner fixes 3,675 links, they would get $11.75; and if the winner fixes 12,500 links, they would get the full $100. The second place finisher will receive a prize calculated the same way, but cut in half, so a second place finisher who fixed 10,000 links would receive $37.50. The third place finisher will receive a prize calculated the same way, but cut in half again, so a third place finisher who fixed 8,500 links would receive $15. Finally, the fourth place finisher will receive a prize calculated the same way, but cut in half again, so a fourth place finisher who fixed 7,300 links would receive $6, which is better than nothing. As usual, careless or incorrect edits will not be counted, and a pattern of such edits will result in the disqualification of the contestant. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Why are there so many useless WP-Namespace pages, like Wikipedia:WikiHobbit? -- 93.82.7.108 ( talk) 10:56, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
I have created a new page called WP:Rolling Ball. It shall be a friendly place where experienced as well as new editors can freely discuss topics on Wiki. Everyone is invited and welcome to join the Group. You presence shall also be much appreciated.
You may join by adding your name to the list here. We are currently trying to hold all discussions on the Hang Out Zone. We would love to have some feedback from you at the talk page. Should you join, please also watchlist/keep an eye on the Hang Out Zone, so you can be aware of all the discussions that are going on.
Cheers, TheOriginalSoni ( talk) 07:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
When adding a {{ stub}} template to an article with a navigational box, should one put the stub template above or below the box? For example, see Caetano Calil (and countless others). Since I've seen both cases, I was curious if either was "more correct"—i.e., if a guideline/MOS was every formed about it. — Theopolisme ( talk) 22:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Dear Wikimedians,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.
For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.
To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons.
Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.
Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
This message was delivered based on m:Distribution list/Global message delivery. Translation fetched from: commons:Commons:Picture of the Year/2012/Translations/Village Pump/en -- Rillke ( talk) 04:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Good morning to all! Italian Wikipedia reaches one million articles today, come party with us, and leave here a message to support our community! Have a nice day! -- Patafisik ( talk) 07:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Click download to see the cost to buy text directly copied from en:wp. Is this allowed?-- Canoe1967 ( talk) 18:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
WP:NOTINHERITED is wikilink to a section of the highly regarded essay WP:Arguments to avoid. I am not forum shopping, so I won′t name the discussion where this came up, but I was recently concerned by participants in a discussion who I thought were calling upon WP:NOTINHERITED in a completely backward manner.
Most individuals who have standalone articles written about them have notability based on a number of factors. WP:BLP1E allows for exceptional individuals, who are notable for just a single event, to nevertheless have a standalone article written about them, if the single event is compelling notable -- like being awarded their nation′s highest medal. But for most individuals their notability is based on evaluating various factors that build towards notability.
For individuals who have had a book, or a chapter of a book, or a couple of paragraphs of a book, written about them, this is a strong factor for their notability. Similarly, having an interview published in an WP:RS, being quoted, or appearing in a documentary would be a strong factor adding to their notability.
In this discussion I have argued that when an individual has their courage recognized by having a ship named after them, this too is a factor adding to their notability.
Other participants claim this does not add to their notability, because notability is not inherited.
I reminded them that yesterday was Martin Luther King Day, and pointed to List of streets named after Martin Luther King Jr., as a correct application of NOTINHERITED. No one should argue that a street, or a park, or a bridge is notable because it is named after Martin Luther King.
But Martin Luther King′s already very considerable notability is further enhanced by having streets named after him. I suggested namesakes derive further notability by having something significant named after them, as I see it as a further recognition from their peers of how remarkable they were.
I′d appreciate comments on this general principle. Geo Swan ( talk) 20:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
From a status update from The Geek Group's president, Wikipedia (or, more probably, WMF) have donated a load of servers to The Geek Group. On behalf of The Geek Group, I'd like to say thank you. Osarius - Want a chat? 18:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
I want to update cite error messages for the top used languages. Can anyone translate "see the help page" for these languages? I need "help page" to be linked, so I have shown it underlined. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 02:45, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
code | language | see the help page | |
es | español | consulta la página de ayuda | |
fr | français | vous pouvez consulter la page d'aide pour plus d'informations | |
pt-br | português do Brasil | veja a página de ajuda para mais informações | |
ru | русский | подробнее см. справочную страницу | |
de | Deutsch | siehe die Hilfeseite für weitere Informationen | |
id | Bahasa Indonesia | lihat halaman bantuan untuk informasi lebih lanjut | |
ar | العربية | انظر في صفحة المساعدة للمزيد من المعلومات | |
nl | Nederlands | meer informatie staat op de hulppagina | |
zh-cn | 中文(中国大陆) | 详情参见 帮助页 | |
ro | română | vedeți pagina de ajutor pentru mai multe informații | |
it | italiano | vedi la pagina di aiuto per maggiori informazioni | |
tr | Türkçe | yardım sayfasına bakınız |
I would like to draw attention to the work of Jean-Pierre Hombach. Seemingly prolific he just copies content from Wikipedia and make it "his" books, — if my investigations are correct! I have made a blog post about the case. There are two problems with this issue:
IANAL, but possibly Wikipedia contributors could take legal action, that might put a bit attention to this issue. Perhaps a word of warning should be issued for Google Books when using it for quick "citation needed" fix: It is not easy to get an overview of the entire book. It was not immediately clear to me whether Hombach had copied Wikipedia. The copyright pages on Google Books for Holmbach books say in many cases "2010", while the books seem to be published in 2012 (see links in blog post. — fnielsen ( talk) 10:47, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
There are some complicated issues present at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 January 22#Mannam Volunteer Association. Given the fairly low traffic at RfD, I was hoping we could get some more experienced editors to look over things and weigh in. Thanks in advance!-- Fyre2387 ( talk • contribs) 16:31, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I need help for WDNG new article review.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 20:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
If someone is interested, I post what most of the active de:WP-user think about en:WP (I am active at de:WP)
-- 93.82.1.22 ( talk) 20:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
I found Liberal_plt, 1 edit in French, copy-past of a political party manifest on his userpage. Coeur ( talk) 23:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
I have deleted this one as a G12. Lectonar ( talk) 12:04, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi all! I am looking for opinions - preferably with a good argument - on external links, because I don't know if I was right or wrong removing them. Could you please shine your light here? Thank you!
Per WP:GRATUITOUS: "Offensive material should be used only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available." I found a crime scene image in Barry Seal that does not appear to be particularly "informative"or "relevant" to the article. Is there a particular forum or noticeboard to which I should bring this for a second opinion? Thanks! Location ( talk) 01:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
About trying to get the element names in the Periodic table. At WP:VPT I have started a question about layout problems. Since it is not only Tech, but also about good UI design, I'd invite you at VPM to take a look. - DePiep ( talk) 18:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
An un-registered Wikipedian went to Template talk:MOS-TW and they want the template changed. Please go to the talk page and see what to say in response. (This morning, I wrote this on Joe Decker's talk page, but he hasn't made any response.) Georgia guy ( talk) 20:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
How often are the lists created on the toolserver updated? I just went through a lot of articles listed in the Metalworking WikiProject cleanup listing, and I want to see my progress. -- Kierkkadon talk/ contribs 03:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
The edition is this. Which page did I supposedly change its English style to? And the bot ends its message inviting me to ask questions in my own talk page! I am absolutely puzzled. Thank you in advance. -- Canyq ( talk) 01:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Please help find sources for my article Edwige Avice. Thank You. Scymso ( talk) 16:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
I apologize if this message is not in your language. Please help translate it.
Please join us in the IdeaLab, an incubator for project ideas and Individual Engagement Grant proposals.
The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking new ideas and proposals for Individual Engagement Grants. These grants fund individuals or small groups to complete projects that help improve this community. If interested, please submit a completed proposal by February 15, 2013. Please visit https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG for more information.
Thanks! -- Siko Bouterse, Head of Individual Engagement Grants, Wikimedia Foundation 20:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Distributed via Global message delivery. (Wrong page? Correct it here.)
We have some WP:RECENTISM going on over at Adairsville, Georgia. Can someone evaluate whether protection or expansion is needed? Thanks. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:01, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I realize we don't have any control over how Google populates their version of infoboxes, but I thought someone here might have some insights.
This Google search lists Nicola Peltz as being 5 feet even, which is incorrect. (The photo is also outdated, but I trust that will get updated shortly). I don't see any evidence that her height was ever in the article.
I considered adding it, in the hope that if the field is filled out, it would override whatever other source they are using, however, the infobox discourages the entry of height unless they are notable for it.
Again, I fully understand it isn't under our control, but if I knew where it came from, it would help me respond to an OTRS request about this issue.-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 16:19, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I understand that this might be off-topic here, but I would like to garner some attention to a proposal for a new Q&A website just for wikis hosted by the StackExchange Network. This new proposal allows new editors of Wikipedia to post their question on how to edit or other relevant questions. Experienced editors with the coding bit in them can also use the site to know about contributing to MediaWiki, which is the software behind Wikipedia. Not only this, the site is also relevant for other wiki systems like DokuWiki.
I am currently on the call for people to follow the proposal and support the creation of such a Q&A website. If you don't mind, please create an account on the Area51 site, confirm your email address and follow it! If you are interested, you can also create some example questions for the site and upvote existing questions too. Thank you! -- Hydriz ( talk) 10:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I have stated on my page that I did not want to get anymore messages and yet this request has continued to be ignored.
I would appreciate people abide by my wishes and not sent me anymore messages. I don't care what it is about as I will not be reading them.
That is all.
The Shadow Treasurer (not TST)
I just started Wikipedia:WMF noticeboard. Biosthmors ( talk) 04:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
A third-party opinion is needed about a typesetting disagreement at talk: Eigenvalues and eigenvectors #Destruction of .26nbsp; (knowledge of the subject is not required, only basic ability to understand the grammar of a mathematical text). Possibly, my point will eventually be rejected, but were these s really so inappropriate that one may remove them in the absence of any discussion? Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 17:32, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
someone put wrong information on the candy man page, things such as actors who were not in the film, and the film being a comedy have been added to the page. its not a big deal but its a good movie, and people should be able to get correct info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.111.222.140 ( talk) 00:10, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Vandalism by Special:Contributions/128.205.167.236 was reverted. Peter James ( talk) 23:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I have noticed WP information quoted elsewhere, but during a recent Google search I found an entire web site (Alternapedia) which mirrors all of WP except for those articles that it has written from their POV, which is alternative medical treatment. In order to edit Alternapedia, one has to join and provide credentials as an expert. (?)
I suppose this is the Catch-22 of public domain, anyone can use anything edited by volunteers here for their own purpose: a complete, alternate encyclopedia? (The unaltered WP articles are clearly marked.)
FigureArtist ( talk) 23:11, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
When I try to fix an article's intro (per WP:DATE) from Born in Year; Died in Year to Year–Year (for example), the editing process goes beserk, when a hebrew or arabic translation is invovled. Why is this? GoodDay ( talk) 18:21, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Due to a number of huge batch uploads, the number of uncategorized images on Wikimedia Commons has exploded in the past month. If you want to help categorize images, your effort is appreciated. You find the uncategorized images at All media needing categories as of 2013 and help with categorizing at Commons:Categories -- Jonund ( talk) 18:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Hallo, I am not familiar with the policies here and need some help. Is this Linkspam? And what to do? Thanks for the help. -- PigeonIP ( talk) 19:29, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
To clarify the usage of physical determinism, I have posted a request for comment. Brews ohare ( talk) 17:00, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello! I found in this article a section which is completely copied from this page. I did not find the right place to report this kind of offense.
Thanks for your help! -- Bigbossfarin ( talk) 18:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
I've got my own troubles with Hebrew but I don't know where I can ask these questions as they involve the Hebrew wiki also. Is this the place for pan-Wiki help? Based on the code of my user and talk pages I tried to produce Hebrew versions here and here. To begin with, when I pasted into the right to left Hebrew editor on the Hebrew Wikipedia text copied in my English files it messed up the whole file. The code looks now like goat vomit. Anyway, the source is not pretty but it sort of works at the result end. But then when I try to modify those files inside the Hebrew editor, changing tags and so on, everything goes crazy, tags jump all around instead of being inserted where I want them. It's gotta be seen to be believed. Is there anything special about Hebrew HTML? It doesn't look like it's only a matter of inverting the syntax from left to right to right to left (e.g. changing <span...> ... </span> into </span> ... <span...> and stuff like that). There seems to be some more involved. What's going on? Signed: Basemetal (write to me here) 21:41, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Would like more eyes on this as I suspect the discussion is being affected by selection bias. Please review the userbox and give your opinions at the MFD. Thanks. Beeblebrox ( talk) 16:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
My question has to do with the fairly stylized language of operas from the early 20th C and earlier, rather than either formal or colloquial speech or writing:
Thanks for any advice. Milkunderwood ( talk) 06:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Does such a list exist? And a list of articles without a talk page yet? Thanks. Biosthmors ( talk) 20:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
I've been analyzing the presence and consistency of certain types of metadata on Wikipedia pages. I think Wikipedians would find it useful (especially the list of internally inconsistent pages). Any suggestions where I could publish/post this work? I can't make it to Wikimania. Espertus ( talk) 21:39, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
A discussion has started at Wikipedia talk:Emailing users about user customized edit notices when using the "Email this user" functionality. Please feel free to discuss and provide feedback. Hasteur ( talk) 20:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
I have just accepted a contractual position with the Wikimedia Foundation, and posted a full disclosure with details and an invitation for community comments here. — Coren (talk) 21:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia has a lot of links to WebCite (webcitation.org). I often add such links myself. (There's even a page about using the website.) I'd rate the site as "invaluable". (I also appreciate its lack of advertising, its lack of fancy Javascript that won't work with half the browsers I use, and its general no-nonsense approach.)
WebCite now tells the world:
They want fifty grand, and at the time I type this they're only 0.946% successful.
Come on, peoples. -- Hoary ( talk) 08:50, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
This needs to go up as a Watchlist Notice. Our citations are part of our critical infrastructure. They are the basis for valid content and critically important to our readers. Without them, our content is no more valid than any random website on the net. This conversation needs to put on a Watchlist Notice in order to get input from the wider community. Can some knowledgeable Admin please set up a Watchlist Notice? Thanks in advance. 64.40.54.47 ( talk) 10:48, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
<ul id="watchlist-message"> {{Display/watchlist |until=2013-2-21 |cookie=142 |text=Editors are invited to '''[[meta:WebCite|comment]]''' on a proposal to start a new sister project to take over the [[WebCite]] archiving service used to archive citations on Wikipedia. }} <!--{{Display/watchlist |until= |cookie=143 |text= }}--> </ul> You have '''$1''' {{PLURAL:$1|page|pages}} on your [[Help:Watching pages|watchlist]] (excluding [[Help:Using talk pages|talk pages]]).
His dad Bo Xilai is a chinese communist criminal, and his mother is a murderer. there is no known report that he has gone back to china. he is most likely still living in the usa. therefore, either he is an illegal immigrant or he has a US passport or something else.
you wikipedia simply can NOT verify his real nationality. and why did you put the un-verified nationality on Bo Guagua?
I changed it from nationality to ethnicity, but your stupid admins called it "vandalism", therefore, it was reverted, and put under protection due to "vandalism".
therefore, I demand you to explain it to me, how you got "confirmed" that he has a chinese passport, but not other foreign countries' passport? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.198.182.185 ( talk) 03:56, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
This was reported to us via OTRS. I'm sure it's not uncommon, but anyone doing page curation or patrol might want to be on the lookout for these titles - assuming the content turns out to be unwanted, of course. § FreeRangeFrog croak 21:37, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I am proposing that the temporary restrictions on Gibraltar-related Did You Know? articles, which were imposed in September 2012, should be lifted and have set out a case for doing so at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs. If you have a view on this, please comment at that page. Prioryman ( talk) 21:54, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, This message is to inform you that I have submitted an Individual Engagement Grant (personal grants for projects that benefit the Wikimedia movement) to the Wikimedia Foundation that would allow me push the initiative wikiArS in the coming months, between spring and autumn.
Since last academic year (see Llotja and Serra i Abella) we are collaborating with Schools of Art and Design to generate missing images for Wikipedia (and publish it to Commmons) or outreach materials (and publish it to Outreach wiki). This year there are already seven schools contacted, 4 of which have already begun to work. With this Grant I could increase my time commitment to coordination and support to volunteers, consolidating the project. The idea is also to produce a travelling exhibition and supporting materials.
You can read the proposal here:
Any comments or suggestions are welcome in this Village Pump or on the discussion page of the proposal. In addition, to the IEG succeed it needs the support of the community, so I ask you, if you find it interesting, to give your support in the Endorsements section.
Greetings. -- Dvdgmz ( talk) 12:42, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Harlem Shake (meme) should be a huge priority for updates. Baauer should probably be updated as a result too. Both articles have maintenance tags, and both inadequately describe the subject. Harlem shake when adding the old and new titles has gotten well over one million views in the past week. 165.123.233.168 ( talk) 00:19, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
How about a userbox or something like that to show support for Aaron Swartz, Open access and #pdftribute? I put a line on my userpage — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshua Jonathan ( talk • contribs) 103:23, January 16, 2013 (UTC)
Hey :)
As already announced in the Signpost we currently plan to deploy the first phase of Wikidata here on Monday. (We're still waiting for a performance review so worst case we'll have to push the date back some more.) We've already deployed the first phase on the Hungarian, Hebrew and Italian Wikipedias and things there went rather smoothly. We hope this is the case here too.
What is going to happen exactly?
Please let me know if you have any questions. -- Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) ( talk) 11:54, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
We unfortunately ran into issues. We'll have to reschedule the deployment. Currently it looks like we'll do this on Wednesday. Sorry folks. -- Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) ( talk) 22:03, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Third time's a charm, right? ;-) We're live now. More details are in this blog post. An FAQ is here. I'm happy to answer questions at Wikipedia:Village_pump (technical). Please also let me know about any issues there. -- Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) ( talk) 21:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I started a description page at WP:Wikidata. Editors are welcome to expand it. -- Izno ( talk) 16:24, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Don't know where to ask about this but the current set-up (on EN, at least) is confusing. The current sidebar makes it seem like if you click on this you will get a translation of this article, which is entirely untrue. Alanscottwalker ( talk) 14:26, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
I've noticed this problem in several articles which is why I'm posting here instead of on each articles talk page. Where the article lists the area of a region in square kilometers, the number is often listed with the comma changed to a decimal so that a number like 109,467 becomes 109.467. This further becomes a problem because when the square kilometers is converted into square miles, the smaller, inaccurate number is used in the calculation.
The worst case I've seen of this is in the article for the Victoria Daly region in the Northern Territory of Australia. The region is 64,972 square miles in area but the article lists it as 65 square miles because of the decimal error.
I could fix this myself in some of the articles but I've seen this in so many articles that it would be good to have a bot that double checks these numbers and makes sure the decimal is supposed to be a decimal instead of a comma. -- Bejjinks ( talk) 23:47, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
|num_employees=
parameter - see
Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BattyBot 17, and would be happy to help out with another scenario. Is the scenario just in the {{
Infobox Australian place}} |area=
parameter, or is it more widespread than that?
GoingBatty (
talk)
03:10, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Do we have a list of the articles that do not exist that get the most hits? I just happened to create #4999 on the WP:5000 ( Kevin Gates). It had been one of the most viewed articles, despite not existing. Biosthmors ( talk) 22:07, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
User:West.andrew.g/Popular redlinks has now been created. Shortcuts WP:TOPRED and WP:REDTOP. A weekly summary along the lines of WP:5000 (which now has article assessment icons). Biosthmors ( talk) 19:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
In cleaning up an article that has an excessive amount of quoted text in its references, I have begun to remove a few of those quotes, with the eventual goal of getting rid of as many as I can. What I would like to know is if what I am doing is appropriate, and how and when it is a good idea to use quotes of the source in references. I have seen reference quotes challenged in FACs before, so I assumed there was some unwritten rule that they are not necessary, and that citing the source alone is enough to verify the information. Does anyone have any input on this? Evanh2008 ( talk| contribs) 04:57, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Backlog pages for all WikiProjects is a proposal I put at meta. Summary: The Category:Wikipedia backlog page quantifies cleanup templates for English Wikipedia, but WikiProjects don't have similar pages to know what needs improvement. Community input desired at part 3. Thanks. Biosthmors ( talk) 02:05, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
http://pastebin.com/EQxh2dJi Enjoy.
Also, does anybody know what happened to the TypoScan project? 930913( Congratulate) 23:57, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Are articles like Gallery of coats of arms of the United Kingdom and dependencies against any policies, since galleries, in my opinion, are more suitable at Commons? -- Wylve ( talk) 19:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
I just noted that in the featured picture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yamato1945.png the view from above has different crane than the side view. I am not sure but I think above view is correct because it has the crane as it was when Yamato was built. At least I haven't seen any text which would mention that there was a modification of the crane. It is a truth that some photos taken during operation Ten-Go hasn't the high crane as in earlier photos, but the crane may be destroyed in aerial attacks. And what comes to the article Japanese battleship Yamato, there is also a discrepancy between this picture and the article: in picture there is 152 25 mm AA-guns, but in text 162. -- 84.249.89.206 ( talk) 14:47, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
{{ rfc}} Should wikitravel: pseudo namespace offsite redirect remain? The Wikimedia Foundation has forked Wikitravel to Wikivoyage, where most contributors have also migrated to, and has a new pseudo namespace offsite redirect wikivoyage:. Wikitravel is not a Wikimedia Foundation website. -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 02:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, could anyone please point me to the bit of policy that explains the rationale why edit summaries are not mandatory?
I have some 5,000 pages in my watchlist, and it's very difficult to follow everything up when so many people are not leaving edit summaries.
I am sure this is the kind of thing that must have been discussed 498134598 times before, so if you could please point me to the discussion, that'd be great.
I believe that edit summaries should be mandatory.
Cheers, Azylber ( talk) 18:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm horrible about this. What about not requiring them if you tick the edit as 'minor'? And not in talk space. — kwami ( talk) 08:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Note: Please see also the recent discussion at the policy pump, Behavioral guideline for minor edits (now archived). — Hex (❝?!❞) 18:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Is there any redirect category for abbreviations or acronyms or does {{ R from alternative name}} cover them? (As a side question, if there isn't, should there be one?) Novangelis ( talk) 17:01, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
In this wired interview from May 2010 Clay Shirky says "All the articles, edits, and arguments about articles and edits represent around 100 million hours of human labor. That’s a lot of time. But remember: Americans watch about 200 billion hours of TV every year.". Anyone know how he did that calculation? How many articles were there in early 2010? With 4M today the 100M figure sounds really low to me, 25 hours per article? I guess there are a ton of stubs, but is that enough to make up for the vast number of hours put into GA and FA articles? Plus is he really considering how long it takes to chase down some references, that could be looong time for what ends up being a tiny edit? Any thoughts?
I think even if he is off by a factor of 10, so it's 1B hours, that's still tiny compared to TV, which I think was his point. But I'm just wondering if he exaggerated his point by low-balling the number of hours people have put into Wikipedia. Silas Ropac ( talk) 00:23, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
"So the average is pulled down by the sheer number of stubs?"I would say yes. More than 2 million of our 4 million articles are stubs acording to Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Statistics. That's over 50%, so that would have a large influence on the total. As for the number of hours spent editing Wikipedia, the Signpost recently reported that it was "a total of 102,673,683 total labor-hours" according to a paper here. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-02-18/News and notes for more. Cheers. 64.40.54.147 ( talk) 00:28, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
There has been limited discussion and edit reverts on the list of "modern gifts" on Wedding anniversary. The modern list appears to have a verifiable source listed as Complied by librarians at the Chicago Public Library in 2000 with a link. Despite it being a reputable source I am of the suspicion that the list is spurious with no rhyme or reason to the gifts chosen or additional notes on the existence of such traditions in the real world. From where did this list originate prior to the compliation by the librarians concerned? There might well be a credible explanation or we could all be looking at the results of a coffee break hoax by an employee of the aforementioned institution. I would be please to find evidence in support or against it. It is not so much of a problem mentioning it in the article from the verifiable source, but perhaps a little more evidence than what we have at the moment to be in the main table (links that are clearly clones of the source or wikipedia articles should obviously not count as evidence here) Dainamo ( talk) 19:40, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of curiosity I performed a transclusion count of the first few sections under Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup. Counts higher than three digits are in bold:
Note that there is a high proportion that only show light or moderate usage. Perhaps this indicates an opportunity for consolidation and simplification? Praemonitus ( talk) 02:09, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for writing in English. I hope someone can translate this locally.
Wikidata has been in development for a few months now. It is now time for the roll-out of the first part of it on your Wikipedia. Phase 1 is the support for the management of language links. It is already being used on the Hungarian, Hebrew, Italian and English Wikipedias. The next step is to enable the extension on all other Wikipedias. We have currently planned this for March 6.
Wikidata is a central place to store data that you can usually find in infoboxes. Think of it as something like Wikimedia Commons but for data (like the number of inhabitants of a country or the length of a river) instead of multimedia. The first part of this project (centralizing language links) is being rolled out now. The more fancy things will follow later.
Language links in the sidebar are going to come from Wikidata in addition to the ones in the wiki text. To edit them, scroll to the bottom of the language links, and click edit. You no longer need to maintain these links by hand in the wiki text of the article.
Editors on en:wp have created a great page with all the necessary information for editors and there is also an FAQ for this deployment. Please ask questions you might have on the FAQ’s discussion page.
To stay up-to-date on everything happening around Wikidata please subscribe to the newsletter that is delivered weekly to subscribed user’s talk pages. You can see previous editions here.
-- Lydia Pintscher 16:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Distributed via Global message delivery. (Wrong page? Fix here.)
I recently passed 1,000 edits and I wanted to jokingly tell my friends their are only X people nerdier that I in the world where X would be the number who have 1,000 edits. Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits only lists you once you have 11,000+ edits which I won't have any time soon. I don't need my exact place but some kind of idea for how many have 500, 1000, 200 and 5000 edits. Thanks. >> Jesus Loves You! M.P.Schneider,LC ( parlemus • feci) 14:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Today is my eighth Wikiversary. Fittingly, sometime in the night I passed 400,000 Wikipedia edits. Yay me. :-) bd2412 T 19:55, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi there - I posted a Request for Comment on Talk:Water_fluoridation related to how we report findings of scientific studies - so far only people already involved in the discussion have commented, and it would be great to have some more eyes on the issue - appreciate your time, Tilapidated ( talk) 03:36, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
I've just seen this today as a new thing when searching for an article. I was just wondering what it was. Simply south.... .. catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 15:58, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Remove this to somewhere if this isn't a right place for this, but I need to write here because there is discrepancies in articles Japanese battleship Yamato and Yamato-class battleships which are both featured articles, and because it looks like nobody notes my comments from talk pages of these articles.
The discrepancies are:
1. In the article Yamato-class battleship thickness of the thicker part of the armoured deck is 230 mm (9 in) but in the article Japanese battleship Yamato it is 226.5 mm (8.92 in)
2. both articles stand for information that Yamato had 162 25 mm AA-guns in spring 1944 onwards as her final maximum amount. But there is also mentions that amount of the guns was increased twice after spring, which was not possible if Yamato had her final AA-complement already in spring 1944. Featured picture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yamato1945.png, http://www.combinedfleet.com/yamato.htm and German Wikipedia all stands for 152 AA-guns as maximum. German Wikipedia also informs that amount of the guns was 98 in spring 1944 and 113 in summer 1944. Over all there is only one reference for 162 guns mentioned in articles. Besides there is a foto, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yamato_hit_by_bomb.jpg, wich shows to them who are familiarize themselves with Yamato that there wasn't 162 guns at least in 1944.
3. Both articles inform that Yamato's 15.5 cm wing turrets were removed in 1943, but again http://www.combinedfleet.com/yamato.htm and German Wikipedia inform that they were not removed before 1944, at the same time when 127 mm guns were added.
4. In Yamato-class battleship it is mentioned that Yamatos's AA-armament was upgraded in March 1945. Reference of this information is http://www.combinedfleet.com/yamato.htm. A problem is that this website don't have the information.
These are both featured articles so please, do something to these problems. -- 84.249.89.206 ( talk) 17:28, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
How do we handle those on the verge of leaving wikipedia? Ive been heee for a certain ammount of years and attempted my very best to improve wikipedia, but wikipedia isnt good to me in the sense that there is always one or two editors blocking my progress and never a group to give a good answer or any attention at all.
Similar to gaming the system, i find constant ammount of editors game the system/discussion by treating wikipedia as a vote count and as much wikipedia attempts to deny this, it still leans with vote over reason. So editors game the system by posting once and once asked for elaboration, they ignore it knowing fullwell its their advantage in a discussion.
And attempting to draw more editors gets me. And thats the sad thing, these editors care more about winning the discussion rather than helping the other editor with reasoning. Im exhausted and i know wikibreaks wont help me here. I think we should find a way so that multiple editors cant game the system and for wikipedia to also make sure reason triumphs over vote. SORRY if this is at the wrong place, but im tired and dont know where else to propose and get taken seriously. Lucia Black ( talk) 22:09, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
"but I like to think that someone else's day was improved as a result."I can say, without fear of contradiction, that you have succeeded wonderfully in that, WAID. As our resident expert on policy, you have helped thousand of people understand how Wikipedia works and your efforts have been a great help to the project. I have seen many times that others have made life difficult for you, and I thank you kindly for hanging in there. Your help with the project has been of immense value and I am glad you are part of our community, WAID. Best regards. 64.40.54.22 ( talk) 05:42, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I hope I have found the proper board for this issue.
On January 18, I decided to ask a question that had been eating me for a while. Over on the NYRA board, there was a thread where we were discussing nerds and one poster there said, "They sing in a grindcore band where the lyrics to all of their songs consist of them screaming the word 'penis'". I didn't see why screaming the word "penis" was particularly nerdy, so I puzzled over it. Then I came across a few more comments linking nerds to an obsession with penises over the next few months. Then I remembered the movie Superbad with its nerd main character, who is fixated on the human phallus. It hit me: society has a stereotype that nerds are obsessed with penises. I didn't see why this should be particularly nerdy, unlike, say, astrophysics. I also noticed that people link nerdiness to Mountain Dew around the same time, and had no idea about the reasons behind that stereotype either. So I asked a question on Wikipedia's Reference Desk here: "How did the stereotype that nerds are obsessed with penises come about?"
The first responder asked me if I was trolling, so I explained. The responder, Jayron32, then wrote: "No, I think you're cherrypicking a few examples to make some point, which I don't know what it is, but there isn't any such sterotype at all. If you want to read about the stereotype, there's a Wikipedia article titled Nerd. While the characterization of 'nerds' does have many well known sterotypes (grooming habits, social awkwardness, obsessive interest in obscure pursuits, intellectualism), being overly intrested in penises simply isn't one of them. It just isn't. To claim that there is reads like pure trolling, and yes, I know, you've sucked me in to the debate, so you've won. Congrats." I wasn't cherrypicking examples -- I came across the examples first and then drew my conclusion. Jayron said, "to make some point, which I don't know what it is". I wasn't trying to make a clever point. I just observed a pervasive stereotype, at least in the online community, and I posted here because I wanted to know why. Instead of feeding my need for an explanation, I was falsely accused of trolling -- Jayron even said "To claim that there is reads like pure trolling, and yes, I know, you've sucked me in to the debate, so you've won" -- and even had my question locked before I could receive a satisfactory answer. Wikipedia has assumed bad faith about an honest question. How can I get this answered? Jeremy Jigglypuff Jones ( talk) 08:00, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
When Wikidia first opened, pages were printed with the links automatically in Blue. I would like to again print my pages with the links in Blue. Is there anyway it could be done within Wikipedia without having to go through Word or its equivalent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ALEX GARTLAN ( talk • contribs) 07:48, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Light-foot ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Sirs: I wish to dearly avoid an edit war. There is an article that has one source, and I am looking for other sources, as I have read the other source, and seen the other source, neither of which I can document now, but easily more noteworthy than the current source. ( the primary source is dead, but it has been documented twice outside the web, ( unfortunately before I was born )).
I made the changes, but was reverted without discussion or notice.
Article: Light-Foot. Source: Time Life Books on computers. Source: Computer History Museum.
Would you suggest, I got to the museum, take a picture of the wire ( that predates me. ), and post it? Would that be original research?
The email I got back from the museum: "Oh those idiots[ Wikipedia ]? The wouldn't know the truth if it was drilling into their thick skulls.", personal email.
What to do next? I reverted my changes, then re-reverted them, so the page is as [Erroneous] as stands. 67.180.156.92 ( talk) 00:46, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
{{
expert-subject|Measurement}}
, {{
refimprove}}
, {{
measurement-stub}}
to the article, and {{
WikiProject Measurement}}
to the talk page.
GoingBatty (
talk)
17:35, 27 February 2013 (UTC)I have made my decision. I hold this so-called committee responsible for the events that transpired that led to my permanent ban. I have waited long enough to let cooler heads prevail. You are ultimately responsible for the actions of the CheckUser, although DeltaQuad certainly shares the blame. I definitely intend on making this precedent, giving everyone else, and I assume there are many, who has been arbitrary banned for no good reason but were unable to make it so obvious as to give you no room for maneuver. I will be doing this for them as much as for myself. I will be their voice.
You should strip DeltaQuad of his CheckUser permissions immediately for, at a minimum, incompetence. I did and still do consider his actions malicious, but even assuming good faith, it is plain incompetence. There are plenty of individuals who can take his place. Out of all the administrative positions, there simply should not be any question about the motives or competence of a CheckUser.
Thereafter, you should step down from your positions on this board, for even letting this outrageous incident happen, and re-run or -apply or whatever it is you did to get this job. I will not necessarily oppose your renewed application, but at least it will give pause for a review of your performance.
YOU, this board, are the biggest threat to Wikimedia Foundation projects I have yet come across. Your incompetence cannot be reverted, unlike the common vandal or troll. Your incompetence cannot be countered or contained, and with the CheckUser it knows no bounds. This whole affair is a stain on this project, and I, we, all of those who are your past or next victims, are here to see the stain removed.
I will not stop. Years from now you will tire of this, but I will still be there, here, wherever, clamoring for your fall. I will not stop. Ban me if you will, but I will see this through. You will step down or I will spend every ounce of skill I have to see you are forced to do so. You will step down or ... I am not even sure yet. If it means having your administrative right revoked, so be it. If it means a letter writing campaign to the Wikimedia Foundation board, so be it. If it means wearing a bright red t-shirt at the WikiMania con or otherwise causing a ruckus, then so be it. I will see this through.
Int21h ( talk) 00:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)}}
Ok so let me get this straight (as a non admin non involved editor that has never seen you before)- your not banned anymore because it was determined to be a mistake and you recived an apology - correct? Your now saying that all even those not involved in a simple human mistake by a human volunteer that has been corrected should step down - correct? Ultimately ending with threats of long term plans to disrupt the project - correct? Just one question - is this the only thing that has happened to bring you to this point? Sounds a little crazy that this one mistake that you received an apology for is the only reason to be flipping-out - are we missing something?. Moxy ( talk) 05:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
"Years from now you will tire of this, but I will still be there, here, wherever, clamoring for your fall" Now here's some hardcore bikeshedding. For your sanity and blood pressure, maybe another you should take up a calming hobby. Like biking? Or painting sheds? -- Golbez ( talk) 06:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity. Any idea what the minimum number of links a person should follow from a specific article to reach any other article? Actuall that's an odd way of putting it. What I'm trying to ask is: Anyone knows what the six degrees of separation is for articles on the English Wikipedia? Is there any current tool that can find that out? Reh man 14:09, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Which Wikipedia projects/pages/etc. do you see as the biggest flops of all time? There have been quite a few of them I suppose. Zaminamina Eh Eh Waka Waka Eh Eh 20:09, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
I noticed a Facebook page [7] which is a real time mirror of an article Native American mascot controversy. I was wondering how this was done? (a Facebook app?) As a contributor to the article, I am only glad to have it widely available. FigureArtist ( talk) 00:34, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
The following file titled File:Flag of Ontario (Green Ensign).svg that I designed, I wish to be deleted from Wikimedia Commons. How can this be done? And can someone here do this?-- R-41 ( talk) 20:25, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
The Irish Passport picture has the following text:
That to should be too, but I can't work out how to change it. TRiG ( talk) 03:11, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
commons:Category:Chris Hadfield has lots of images by Chris Hadfield that have the NASA public domain tag, so does that apply to all the photos of Earth he posts on Tumblr? Commons has just some crew photos.-- occono ( talk) 01:42, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Anyone have a few spare hours and is familiar with the timeline extension? I would like to create a timeline but am clueless about it. Werieth ( talk) 20:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
Can anyone help by reading an article i have translated from greek to english? I want someone who speaks greek. Xaris333 ( talk) 13:50, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Νο. Thx! Xaris333 ( talk) 20:32, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Are collapsed/ hidden infoboxes acceptable? Please comment at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#Hidden infoboxes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:17, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
http://logan43000.tumblr.com/post/42298850969/some-common-logical-fallacies-very-interesting
Just sharing for fun/reference. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:43, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Is Accuracy Dispute an essay or a guideline? It can't be both! -- Ypnypn ( talk) 15:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
I noticed the category Category:Rape in video games, which turns out to be part of a larger categorization scheme ( Category:Rape in fiction). There aren't any categories like Category:Songs about murder, Category:Racism in fiction, Category:Poems about science, Category:Religion in anime and manga, Category:Adoption in video games. I did find a few other categories that mirror this, such as Category:Incest in fiction, Category:Twins in fiction, Category:Dreams in fiction, Category:Alien visitations in fiction and similar subcategories, though. Why are some topics subject to strangely obsessive overcategorization? There are a few similar ones like Category:Mafias in fiction and Category:Cannibalism in fiction, but they is not subdivided into a million things like "plays" "television" "film" "video games" "songs" "anime and manga" "poems" "comics" "novels". Is this an example of Wikipedia:Overcategorization? Or are such hyperspecific categories welcomed? If they are welcome, then there should be guidelines, e.g. If there are twins in an anime but they are minor characters does it fall into "Twins in anime and manga"? Should every video game with the option for the player to kill or take items from people go in "Murder in video games"/"Theft in video games"?
I found
a CFD discussion that seems relevant: "either categorizing or listifying films by the sort of scenes they contain is overcategorization"
"I don't think it makes sense to start a convention of categorizing films based on specific scenes. There's thousands of possible things that happen in films, and I don't want to see Films which include a kidnapping, Films which contain nude scenes, Films which contain gun violence, etc."
"Categories are for defining characteristics, which "contains scenes depicting X" is generally not."
"If we created categories for every possible ... topic, most articles would have more categories than content."
In my opinion, Category:Fiction by topic is fine. No need to get so specific with everything. -- Atlantima ( talk) 23:35, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
The ' Casualty of war' article doesn't seem particularly useful, especially when compared to ' List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll'. What do you think should be done with it? Praemonitus ( talk) 00:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi! There is a problem with footnote 46 in Princess Beatrice of the United Kingdom (featured article). It says "Hibbert, p. 94" but there is no Hibbert's book in the bibliography. Can someone correct this point ? Thank you. 31.39.53.205 ( talk) 07:46, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Please read my message to the ArbCom. This concerns my permanent ban a few months ago. I would love to tell you all about it, but I really have no idea what happened. Still. I was banned, then unbanned, and all I got was a stupid apology and a wall of silence. They would like to pretend this is all over and done with, but with this, let it be known it is far from over. Other than that, you will have to look to the logs for details... Here it is:
{{quote|
Hello,
Is it possible to download the application that wiki runs on to use in an non-profit organization? If so, I would be interested to know:
a) how to go about doing this b) what system requirements are required c) any costing information (one time and ongoing) or other information you would deem of value to provide
Thank you,
Aaron — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nelson.m.aaron ( talk • contribs) 15:28, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
For those who may be interested, I have boldly created a WikiProject to collaboratively recognize Wikipedia's finest editors, which can be found at the link above. Please feel free to add your name to the list of members. Automatic Strikeout ( T • C) 17:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Inappropriate forum. dci | TALK 21:09, 16 March 2013 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
People had been putting pages in the aforementioned category even though it is stated to be a container category, including user pages. I had removed pages, but not user pages. I think This person did it. Please deal with this IssueNadav Bronicki 03:05, 14 March 2013 (UTC) |
I've created a second five thousand featured article pool at WP:5KFA2. The first one closed four years ago, so it's high time for a second. - Ypnypn ( talk) 21:30, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
I am planning to create an essay, such as " wp:Editor activity levels" to describe patterns of Wikipedia editing activity. In particular, after 2007, the activity levels dropped and later stabilized (in recent years) for several languages (but not Russian, Latvian, or Persian Wikipedia). Compare charts for stability of other-language wikipedias:
I was wondering which "population-control factors" (or " crowd control") would cause a worldwide population of editors to edit at the same even-keel levels for years, with only slight +/-7% variation in monthly edit-count levels. What does that stability indicate about the general population of editors, or the methods of counting? Is there a specific area of " Internet psychology" or " cyberspace psychology" which describes patterns of online user activities? Thanks. - Wikid77 ( talk) 15:38, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
An objection has been raised to the recent introduction of graphical elements to the Wikipedia:Community portal page. Please see the discussion here. Thank you. Praemonitus ( talk) 02:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedians,
I am conducting a research on contribution behaviour regarding social media platforms such as Wikipedia. I developed a questionairre with the intention to reveal different motives in contributing to different social media websites. I would much appreciate it if you could help me out by filling out the following survey: www.thesistools.com/web/?id=329391. It will only take two minutes of your time!
Thank you in advance,
Lester — Preceding unsigned comment added by LJJvanKlink ( talk • contribs) 13:34, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Hmm. But Wikipedia is not a social media website. -- œ ™ 06:21, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
I answered your survey, but I vehemently disagree with the idea that Wikipedia is a social medium or should come to resemble one more closely. I find the comparison to YouTube odious. -- Orange Mike | Talk 17:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm looking for two concepts in English Wikipedia in order to relate them to the equivalent pages in Persian Wikipedia. First, it seems that in English Wikipedia, there is no article about having a baby or having a child as an event or process in one's life (like marriage). Such an article would have information about reasons for reproduction, preparation, psychological situation or problems of parenting, the ethical issues concerning this etc. Second, I found no article about the act of making up, apart from cosmetics. Does English Wikipedia have an article for the act of applying cosmetics to body? -- Ali Pirhayati ( talk) 00:07, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
"I found no article about the act of making up, apart from cosmetics. Does English Wikipedia have an article for the act of applying cosmetics to body?" Wow, you are right the English Wikipedia is seriously lacking an article (or section in Cosmetics) that deals about the cultural aspects of makeup. Thanks for pointing it out! -- NaBUru38 ( talk) 18:56, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I have made some remarks at Talk:Stow,_Lincolnshire#Etymolgy_of_Stow and would welcome contributions there from those more learned on English place name elements than myself.-- Robert EA Harvey ( talk) 14:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I've been doing a bit of number crunching: in the 24 hours since Jorge Bergoglio became Pope there were 1,307 edits to Pope Francis [8]. Is this a record for the number of edits in a 24 hour period? An optimist on the run! 21:38, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
[10] - This user is importing only the last revision of lots of articles from Wikipedia, violating the license. Is this legitimate? I've heard about users using wikia for testing, so I'm not sure. -- 88.13.91.252 ( talk) 20:59, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello everyone, I'm DeltaQuad (also known as DQ), an account creation interface administrator and developer. Recently, our project has had an increased backlog in getting accounts for new users. Our numbers are currently above 250 people waiting for accounts on the English Wikipedia. If you could even spare a moment to do a few requests a day to help us clear this backlog. If this interests you and your willing to help, and you match the following description, then please do apply! Ideal users are:
We have a very friendly team to help you get started and we also have an IRC channel. If you have any questions for us or about the process, feel free to ask at the talkpage. If you can help out, we would greatly appreciate it. For the ACC Administration and Development Team, -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 23:20, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
As wikipedia is increasingly being used even in the scientific community, we are starting to see articles that actually cite or link to wikipedia. See here for a nice example which is filled with links to wikipedia. It is quite feasible that the here-mentioned article would actually end up as a cited reference on the Bayesian statistics page; that would then constitute a form of recursive citing. Is this behavior desirable? In such a way, wikipedia would theoretically be referring to itself, while seemingly citing others. Would this not somehow violate the principle described here? Tenth Plague ( talk) 11:33, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I have started a list of these at
List of public domain resources behind a paywall. It could use some expansion.
Rich
Farmbrough,
01:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC).
External links usually have a little arrow next them, sample. It is possible to suppress that little arrow like this, either by use of Template:plain link or by using span class="plainlinks" This suppression obviously has its place. Is there a guideline or policy covering the suppression of the arrows for templates intended for inline and in-article use, such as Template:Mtgcard, which produces links such as Tezzeret the Seeker (taken from Magic: The Gathering duel decks)? Mr Stephen ( talk) 13:12, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Doc James has started a discussion about the ban, topic ban and desysop of Will BeBack here: User:Jmh649/Will_Beback. More input welcome. IRWolfie- ( talk) 16:39, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
not sure if this is the right location to post my comment. {{ Location map}} only has {{ Location map Afro-Eurasia}}, but I just need Eurasia. I am not an expert and fear that I might make mistakes. If anyone has interest in doing that task: it would eliminate many issues and improve readability. Regards.-- Tomcat ( 7) 12:00, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Something must have changed with the Wikipedia interface. The Search input box (upper right) no longer shows a guess list and the edit panel no longer displays the graphical bar along the top. Praemonitus ( talk) 00:17, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Do we have some listing of article set that should each country have? Like Transport in XXX, Economy of XXX, Energy in XXX, Agriculture in XXX, Culture of XXX, etc? Do we have some complete list of those? And with default names? I wanted to create that, but do we have it already? -- WhiteWriter speaks 14:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
This closed discussion is my idea of a beautifully designed request for comment. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 15:23, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
..is on again - 1 April to 13 May. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 10:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Is there any Wikipedia-namespace page that lists all the arbitrators, current and former, on the English Wikipedia? AutomaticStrikeout ( T • C • AAPT) 04:08, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Please help add references to my new article Louis Besson. Thank you. Scymso ( talk) 19:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Maybe someone can do a translation of fr:Louis Besson. -- œ ™ 08:16, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
There seems to be a column aligning problem with the 'Studio albums' table in the 'Discography' section on the article. As I'm rather inexperienced when it comes to wikicoding, I would be very grateful for help with this issue. -- Half past formerly SUFCboy 14:08, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
Please add the age of Francisco Javier Lopez Pena. Thank you. Scymso ( talk) 21:08, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello! I have posted a request for community input at WT:Video_and_Interactive_Tutorials#Phase_II:_RfC_on_Subjects and would greatly appreciate input on this valuable project! It is funded by the Wikimedia Foundation, and the details of that grant are visible from the project page. Thank you in advance! -- Jackson Peebles ( talk) 05:50, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee is seeking to appoint three non-arbitrator members to the Audit Subcommittee ("AUSC"). The Committee is comprised of six members and is tasked with investigations concerning the use of CheckUser and Oversight privileges on the English Wikipedia. The AUSC also monitors CheckUser and Oversight activity and use of the applicable tools. The current non-arbitrator members are Avraham, MBisanz, and Ponyo, whose terms were to expire on February 28 but were extended with their agreement until April 30 by the Committee.
Matters brought before the subcommittee may be time-sensitive and subcommittee members should be prepared and available to discuss cases promptly so they may be resolved in a timely manner. Sitting subcommittee members are expected to actively participate in AUSC proceedings and may be replaced should they become inactive. All subcommittee members are given both CheckUser and Oversight access but are expected to not make regular use of them unless needed. They are subject to the relevant local and global policies and guidelines concerning CheckUser and Oversight.
If you think you may be suitably qualified, please email arbcom-en-clists.wikimedia.org to start the application procedure for an appointment ending 30 June 2014. The application period will close at 23:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC). Further information is also available here.
For the Arbitration Committee,
NW (
Talk)
18:20, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
This is a reminder that the application period for the three non-arbitrator seats on the Audit Subcommittee will close at 23:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC), less than 36 hours from now.
The Audit Subcommittee ("AUSC") is comprised of six members and is tasked with investigations concerning the use of CheckUser and Oversight privileges on the English Wikipedia. The AUSC also monitors CheckUser and Oversight activity and use of the applicable tools. The current non-arbitrator members are Avraham, MBisanz, and Ponyo, whose terms were to expire on February 28 but were extended with their agreement until April 30 by the Committee.
Matters brought before the subcommittee may be time-sensitive and subcommittee members should be prepared and available to discuss cases promptly so they may be resolved in a timely manner. Sitting subcommittee members are expected to actively participate in AUSC proceedings and may be replaced should they become inactive. All subcommittee members are given both CheckUser and Oversight access but are expected to not make regular use of them unless needed. They are subject to the relevant local and global policies and guidelines concerning CheckUser and Oversight.
Please note that due to Wikimedia Foundation rules governing access to deleted material, only applications from administrators will be accepted.
If you think you may be suitably qualified, please email arbcom-en-clists.wikimedia.org to start the application procedure for an appointment ending 30 June 2014. Once again, the application period will close at 23:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC). Further information is also available here.
For the Arbitration Committee, T. Canens ( talk) 14:57, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey, today's XKCD contains a great "hover-over" donation beg for the WMF. Just thought you folks might like to know. Give him some love. :) Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation ( talk) 08:37, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
... it also contains an incentive to (at least temporarily) vandalize different pages - is that being discussed centrally anywhere? -- Jonasbinding ( talk) 13:01, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Where do you see anything even remotely related to vandalism in this? All I see is an unfunny (IMO) comic, the last panel of which links to a Wikimedia donation page-- Atlantima ( talk) 01:44, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
List of second-level domain/participate ???? -- Atlantima ( talk) 01:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Several Wikipedia articles mention something called the "Jeremy Nicholson Negro Achievement Award." I suspect this may be a hoax. Can someone please look into it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.29.132.240 ( talk) 02:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Please check out information located at Talk:Christine Jorgensen (the lowest section of the talk page) and User talk:JanetWand. Also, please check the history of Christine Jorgensen; JanetWand appears to think I'm the vandal, but I'm not. Georgia guy ( talk) 15:16, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
I have just edited an article with a new external link, for which I had to enter a captcha. The only problem is the words the captcha came up with were "dyinghmong". I find this very objectionable since the Hmong are a persecuted minority in eastern Asia. Is it possible to find a way to avoid potentially objectionable terms coming together like this, before we get a captcha that says "shootkids" or something equally offensive. Before anybody points it out, yes I know it is just mean't to filter out human users and yes I know Wikipedia is mean't to be neutral, but I just do not like the idea of typing in "dying" "hmong". 90.218.98.130 ( talk) 11:55, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello. The Wikimedia Foundation has received a request from Drugs.com for the removal of some of the content in the article List_of_largest_selling_pharmaceutical_products. The WMF does not believe there is a legal reason under U.S. law to remove the complained-of content and thus believes it is a decision that rests with the community, as all content issues do. The WMF has informed them of this and indicated that they would put the decision to you. We will simply communicate the community decision to the company after the community has come to a consensus for or against removal.
Their request has been placed at Talk:List of largest selling pharmaceutical products in courtesy to them. If you have time and interest, please stop by to comment so that we can let them know the community's stance on the matter. Thank you! -- Maggie Dennis (WMF) ( talk) 19:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
The WMF has posted a statement at the French Wikipedia regarding the situation in France. Those who are interested may wish to read it. Philippe (WMF) ( talk) 02:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
This is certainly one reason to not use your real name on Wikipedia. 64.40.54.111 ( talk) 20:33, 6 April 2013 (UTC)the DCRI summoned a Wikipedia volunteer in their offices on April 4th. This volunteer, which was one of those having access to the tools that allow the deletion of pages, was forced to delete the article while in the DCRI offices, on the understanding that he would have been held in custody and prosecuted if he did not comply. Under pressure, he had no other choice than to delete the article, despite explaining to the DCRI this is not how Wikipedia works. He warned the other sysops that trying to undelete the article would engage their responsability before the law.
This volunteer had no link with that article, having never edited it and not even knowing of its existence before entering the DCRI offices. He was chosen and summoned because he was easily identifiable, given his regular promotional actions of Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects in France.
— Christophe Henner, Wikimedia France
Is there some way we can show our support of this French SysOp? I'm not sure how to go about doing that - on his French talk page, or something? I just think maybe it'd be nice if he knew that lots of us support his voluntary efforts in trying to maintain Wikipedia, and that we're concerned about his treatment. 88.104.27.58 ( talk) 23:52, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
If you want to show some support, you may leave a message on the sysop user page: fr:Discussion_utilisateur:Remi_Mathis#Soutien. Regards, Comte0 ( talk) 10:40, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
frwiki editors are compiling a centralized list of media stories and blogs (in all languages) on what they call l' Affaire Pierre-sur-Haute. Feel free to add links to stories and blogs related to the controversy. Thank you for your support. Bouchecl ( talk) 21:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Looking at the bottom of that thread ( fr:Wikipédia:Bulletin des administrateurs/2013/Semaine 14#Secret défense), I note the following text:
Following the "Conditions d’utilisation" link, I find the following statement:
“ | Vous consentez également à ce que les lois de Californie et, le cas échéant, les lois des États-Unis d’Amérique régissent les présentes Conditions d’utilisation, de même que tout litige d’ordre légal se produisant éventuellement entre vous et nous (nonobstant les principes sur les conflits de lois). | ” |
The English translation is as follows:
I read that quite clearly. This administrator knew the rules when he signed up: French law does not reach Wikipedia. This administrator, fr:Utilisateur:Remi Mathis, should be reprimanded for willingly violating Wikipedia policy. It is quite straightforward: the Foundation already ruled the request to delete the article invalid. If the French police want a page deleted, and the Foundation refuses, their rights are clear: the San Francisco Superior Court and the United States District Court for the Northern District of California are always open to them. Other than that, Remi's duty was clear:
He should have resigned his position rather than violate his agreement with the Wikimedia Foundation.
Since he did not, and since he decided to either not read the Conditions d’utilisation or ignored them, he should be reprimanded by the Foundation for abusing his administrative rights.
Wikipedia, nor any of the projects, can survive if they are subject to the tyranny of French law and its "Interior" Ministry run rampant. Keep the French Police off Wikipedia. If the French want to live in fear of their own government, that's their problem, but keep it off Wikipedia. Resign. That being said, I look forward to the day when French law is actually available on Wikisource for the world to see so I can actually blame the editor. (Blame or no blame, Remi clearly violated policy and should still be reprimanded.) Int21h ( talk) 22:00, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
This page contains discussions that have been archived from Village pump (miscellaneous). Please do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to revive any of these discussions, either start a new thread or use the talk page associated with that topic.
< Older discussions · Archives: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X · 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79
I'm not sure that I'm asking the question, below, in the correct forum. If there is a better place for the question to be asked then please point me there.
This is a question that bears on the way disputes should be conducted on talk pages, on DRN, and at Wikipedia in general.
Should these disputes be conducted via logical argumentation? I claim the the answer to this question is "YES, of course! User:Deicas, why would you need to ask such a stupid question?"
If the answer to the question, above, is "YES" then would someone please point me to the applicable guild-line(s)/policy(s) that require this use of logical argumentation?
If the answer to the question, above, is anything other than an emphatic "YES" then I'll go back and re-write this query. Deicas ( talk) 22:18, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
I am looking for either: 1) A metaphoric hammer marked "Use logical argumentation and respond dispositively to good faith questions" with which to hit certain people. OR: 2) A authoritative answer (From who? The Arbcom?) that " User:Deicas's expectations, that Wikipedia editors, in the course of disputes, *must* use logical argumentation and dispositively respond to a good faith questions, are contrary to Wikipedia policy.
Either answer will improve the quality of my life. Deicas ( talk) 02:19, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Why I cant do edit this page Communism ? سلامت ( talk) 08:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Do Wikipedia have enough contributors to Undid not true contributions? when Wikipedia do protect pages so readers can not for example Undid false revisions. I think that protection idea should be just for a little among of time. Thanks for the help. سلامت ( talk) 13:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I've made a proposal of a new wiki project for open source codes, here. I invite wikipedians to edit that page, in order to debate the proposal. E. Feld talk 20:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I've made a proposal of a new wiki project for articles that may not fit into an encyclopedia, here. I invite wikipedians to edit that page in order to debate the proposal. All input is welcome! ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 00:26, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Another section deletion, either mistake or vandalism, done last October and never noticed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Minerva&diff=518099555&oldid=517126284
Supposedly 73 page watchers, so how is it that such obvious bad edits are not spotted? If there was some log of doubtful edits for people to check then I would be happy to do a few from time to time. I expect other people would too, and then perhaps these things would be noticed. To be honest, section blanking with no edit summary probably should be automatically reverted. 86.160.213.0 ( talk) 04:20, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Excuse me if my question doesn't related to this topic but I should ask that if a user can't write properly, what should we do? Can he/she contribute in all articles? Can we block him/her? Regards -- Arjanizary ( talk) 13:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
See Talk:Group_3_element#Requested_move I proposed. I am having difficulty explaining grammar and WP:TITLE guidelines in an older jargon area. Can someone help? Of course, I could be wrong myself - in that case I need help too ;-) - DePiep ( talk) 03:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! I will be awarding a cash prize to the winners of the February 2013 monthly disambiguation contest. The first place prize will equal one cent for every fix over 2,500, up to a maximum of $100 for 12,500 links fixed. Therefore, if the winner fixes 3,675 links, they would get $11.75; and if the winner fixes 12,500 links, they would get the full $100. The second place finisher will receive a prize calculated the same way, but cut in half, so a second place finisher who fixed 10,000 links would receive $37.50. The third place finisher will receive a prize calculated the same way, but cut in half again, so a third place finisher who fixed 8,500 links would receive $15. Finally, the fourth place finisher will receive a prize calculated the same way, but cut in half again, so a fourth place finisher who fixed 7,300 links would receive $6, which is better than nothing. As usual, careless or incorrect edits will not be counted, and a pattern of such edits will result in the disqualification of the contestant. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Why are there so many useless WP-Namespace pages, like Wikipedia:WikiHobbit? -- 93.82.7.108 ( talk) 10:56, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
I have created a new page called WP:Rolling Ball. It shall be a friendly place where experienced as well as new editors can freely discuss topics on Wiki. Everyone is invited and welcome to join the Group. You presence shall also be much appreciated.
You may join by adding your name to the list here. We are currently trying to hold all discussions on the Hang Out Zone. We would love to have some feedback from you at the talk page. Should you join, please also watchlist/keep an eye on the Hang Out Zone, so you can be aware of all the discussions that are going on.
Cheers, TheOriginalSoni ( talk) 07:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
When adding a {{ stub}} template to an article with a navigational box, should one put the stub template above or below the box? For example, see Caetano Calil (and countless others). Since I've seen both cases, I was curious if either was "more correct"—i.e., if a guideline/MOS was every formed about it. — Theopolisme ( talk) 22:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Dear Wikimedians,
Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2012 Picture of the Year competition is now open. We're interested in your opinion as to which images qualify to be the Picture of the Year for 2012. Voting is open to established Wikimedia users who meet the following criteria:
Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. From professional animal and plant shots to breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historically relevant images, images portraying the world's best architecture, maps, emblems, diagrams created with the most modern technology, and impressive human portraits, Commons features pictures of all flavors.
For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topic categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you can vote for as many images as you like. The first round category winners and the top ten overall will then make it to the final. In the final round, when a limited number of images are left, you must decide on the one image that you want to become the Picture of the Year.
To see the candidate images just go to the POTY 2012 page on Wikimedia Commons.
Wikimedia Commons celebrates our featured images of 2012 with this contest. Your votes decide the Picture of the Year, so remember to vote in the first round by January 30, 2013.
Thanks,
the Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee
This message was delivered based on m:Distribution list/Global message delivery. Translation fetched from: commons:Commons:Picture of the Year/2012/Translations/Village Pump/en -- Rillke ( talk) 04:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Good morning to all! Italian Wikipedia reaches one million articles today, come party with us, and leave here a message to support our community! Have a nice day! -- Patafisik ( talk) 07:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Click download to see the cost to buy text directly copied from en:wp. Is this allowed?-- Canoe1967 ( talk) 18:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
WP:NOTINHERITED is wikilink to a section of the highly regarded essay WP:Arguments to avoid. I am not forum shopping, so I won′t name the discussion where this came up, but I was recently concerned by participants in a discussion who I thought were calling upon WP:NOTINHERITED in a completely backward manner.
Most individuals who have standalone articles written about them have notability based on a number of factors. WP:BLP1E allows for exceptional individuals, who are notable for just a single event, to nevertheless have a standalone article written about them, if the single event is compelling notable -- like being awarded their nation′s highest medal. But for most individuals their notability is based on evaluating various factors that build towards notability.
For individuals who have had a book, or a chapter of a book, or a couple of paragraphs of a book, written about them, this is a strong factor for their notability. Similarly, having an interview published in an WP:RS, being quoted, or appearing in a documentary would be a strong factor adding to their notability.
In this discussion I have argued that when an individual has their courage recognized by having a ship named after them, this too is a factor adding to their notability.
Other participants claim this does not add to their notability, because notability is not inherited.
I reminded them that yesterday was Martin Luther King Day, and pointed to List of streets named after Martin Luther King Jr., as a correct application of NOTINHERITED. No one should argue that a street, or a park, or a bridge is notable because it is named after Martin Luther King.
But Martin Luther King′s already very considerable notability is further enhanced by having streets named after him. I suggested namesakes derive further notability by having something significant named after them, as I see it as a further recognition from their peers of how remarkable they were.
I′d appreciate comments on this general principle. Geo Swan ( talk) 20:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
From a status update from The Geek Group's president, Wikipedia (or, more probably, WMF) have donated a load of servers to The Geek Group. On behalf of The Geek Group, I'd like to say thank you. Osarius - Want a chat? 18:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
I want to update cite error messages for the top used languages. Can anyone translate "see the help page" for these languages? I need "help page" to be linked, so I have shown it underlined. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 02:45, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
code | language | see the help page | |
es | español | consulta la página de ayuda | |
fr | français | vous pouvez consulter la page d'aide pour plus d'informations | |
pt-br | português do Brasil | veja a página de ajuda para mais informações | |
ru | русский | подробнее см. справочную страницу | |
de | Deutsch | siehe die Hilfeseite für weitere Informationen | |
id | Bahasa Indonesia | lihat halaman bantuan untuk informasi lebih lanjut | |
ar | العربية | انظر في صفحة المساعدة للمزيد من المعلومات | |
nl | Nederlands | meer informatie staat op de hulppagina | |
zh-cn | 中文(中国大陆) | 详情参见 帮助页 | |
ro | română | vedeți pagina de ajutor pentru mai multe informații | |
it | italiano | vedi la pagina di aiuto per maggiori informazioni | |
tr | Türkçe | yardım sayfasına bakınız |
I would like to draw attention to the work of Jean-Pierre Hombach. Seemingly prolific he just copies content from Wikipedia and make it "his" books, — if my investigations are correct! I have made a blog post about the case. There are two problems with this issue:
IANAL, but possibly Wikipedia contributors could take legal action, that might put a bit attention to this issue. Perhaps a word of warning should be issued for Google Books when using it for quick "citation needed" fix: It is not easy to get an overview of the entire book. It was not immediately clear to me whether Hombach had copied Wikipedia. The copyright pages on Google Books for Holmbach books say in many cases "2010", while the books seem to be published in 2012 (see links in blog post. — fnielsen ( talk) 10:47, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
There are some complicated issues present at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 January 22#Mannam Volunteer Association. Given the fairly low traffic at RfD, I was hoping we could get some more experienced editors to look over things and weigh in. Thanks in advance!-- Fyre2387 ( talk • contribs) 16:31, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I need help for WDNG new article review.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 20:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
If someone is interested, I post what most of the active de:WP-user think about en:WP (I am active at de:WP)
-- 93.82.1.22 ( talk) 20:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
I found Liberal_plt, 1 edit in French, copy-past of a political party manifest on his userpage. Coeur ( talk) 23:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
I have deleted this one as a G12. Lectonar ( talk) 12:04, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi all! I am looking for opinions - preferably with a good argument - on external links, because I don't know if I was right or wrong removing them. Could you please shine your light here? Thank you!
Per WP:GRATUITOUS: "Offensive material should be used only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available." I found a crime scene image in Barry Seal that does not appear to be particularly "informative"or "relevant" to the article. Is there a particular forum or noticeboard to which I should bring this for a second opinion? Thanks! Location ( talk) 01:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
About trying to get the element names in the Periodic table. At WP:VPT I have started a question about layout problems. Since it is not only Tech, but also about good UI design, I'd invite you at VPM to take a look. - DePiep ( talk) 18:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
An un-registered Wikipedian went to Template talk:MOS-TW and they want the template changed. Please go to the talk page and see what to say in response. (This morning, I wrote this on Joe Decker's talk page, but he hasn't made any response.) Georgia guy ( talk) 20:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
How often are the lists created on the toolserver updated? I just went through a lot of articles listed in the Metalworking WikiProject cleanup listing, and I want to see my progress. -- Kierkkadon talk/ contribs 03:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
The edition is this. Which page did I supposedly change its English style to? And the bot ends its message inviting me to ask questions in my own talk page! I am absolutely puzzled. Thank you in advance. -- Canyq ( talk) 01:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Please help find sources for my article Edwige Avice. Thank You. Scymso ( talk) 16:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
I apologize if this message is not in your language. Please help translate it.
Please join us in the IdeaLab, an incubator for project ideas and Individual Engagement Grant proposals.
The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking new ideas and proposals for Individual Engagement Grants. These grants fund individuals or small groups to complete projects that help improve this community. If interested, please submit a completed proposal by February 15, 2013. Please visit https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG for more information.
Thanks! -- Siko Bouterse, Head of Individual Engagement Grants, Wikimedia Foundation 20:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Distributed via Global message delivery. (Wrong page? Correct it here.)
We have some WP:RECENTISM going on over at Adairsville, Georgia. Can someone evaluate whether protection or expansion is needed? Thanks. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:01, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I realize we don't have any control over how Google populates their version of infoboxes, but I thought someone here might have some insights.
This Google search lists Nicola Peltz as being 5 feet even, which is incorrect. (The photo is also outdated, but I trust that will get updated shortly). I don't see any evidence that her height was ever in the article.
I considered adding it, in the hope that if the field is filled out, it would override whatever other source they are using, however, the infobox discourages the entry of height unless they are notable for it.
Again, I fully understand it isn't under our control, but if I knew where it came from, it would help me respond to an OTRS request about this issue.-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 16:19, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I understand that this might be off-topic here, but I would like to garner some attention to a proposal for a new Q&A website just for wikis hosted by the StackExchange Network. This new proposal allows new editors of Wikipedia to post their question on how to edit or other relevant questions. Experienced editors with the coding bit in them can also use the site to know about contributing to MediaWiki, which is the software behind Wikipedia. Not only this, the site is also relevant for other wiki systems like DokuWiki.
I am currently on the call for people to follow the proposal and support the creation of such a Q&A website. If you don't mind, please create an account on the Area51 site, confirm your email address and follow it! If you are interested, you can also create some example questions for the site and upvote existing questions too. Thank you! -- Hydriz ( talk) 10:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I have stated on my page that I did not want to get anymore messages and yet this request has continued to be ignored.
I would appreciate people abide by my wishes and not sent me anymore messages. I don't care what it is about as I will not be reading them.
That is all.
The Shadow Treasurer (not TST)
I just started Wikipedia:WMF noticeboard. Biosthmors ( talk) 04:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
A third-party opinion is needed about a typesetting disagreement at talk: Eigenvalues and eigenvectors #Destruction of .26nbsp; (knowledge of the subject is not required, only basic ability to understand the grammar of a mathematical text). Possibly, my point will eventually be rejected, but were these s really so inappropriate that one may remove them in the absence of any discussion? Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 17:32, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
someone put wrong information on the candy man page, things such as actors who were not in the film, and the film being a comedy have been added to the page. its not a big deal but its a good movie, and people should be able to get correct info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.111.222.140 ( talk) 00:10, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Vandalism by Special:Contributions/128.205.167.236 was reverted. Peter James ( talk) 23:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I have noticed WP information quoted elsewhere, but during a recent Google search I found an entire web site (Alternapedia) which mirrors all of WP except for those articles that it has written from their POV, which is alternative medical treatment. In order to edit Alternapedia, one has to join and provide credentials as an expert. (?)
I suppose this is the Catch-22 of public domain, anyone can use anything edited by volunteers here for their own purpose: a complete, alternate encyclopedia? (The unaltered WP articles are clearly marked.)
FigureArtist ( talk) 23:11, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
When I try to fix an article's intro (per WP:DATE) from Born in Year; Died in Year to Year–Year (for example), the editing process goes beserk, when a hebrew or arabic translation is invovled. Why is this? GoodDay ( talk) 18:21, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Due to a number of huge batch uploads, the number of uncategorized images on Wikimedia Commons has exploded in the past month. If you want to help categorize images, your effort is appreciated. You find the uncategorized images at All media needing categories as of 2013 and help with categorizing at Commons:Categories -- Jonund ( talk) 18:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Hallo, I am not familiar with the policies here and need some help. Is this Linkspam? And what to do? Thanks for the help. -- PigeonIP ( talk) 19:29, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
To clarify the usage of physical determinism, I have posted a request for comment. Brews ohare ( talk) 17:00, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello! I found in this article a section which is completely copied from this page. I did not find the right place to report this kind of offense.
Thanks for your help! -- Bigbossfarin ( talk) 18:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
I've got my own troubles with Hebrew but I don't know where I can ask these questions as they involve the Hebrew wiki also. Is this the place for pan-Wiki help? Based on the code of my user and talk pages I tried to produce Hebrew versions here and here. To begin with, when I pasted into the right to left Hebrew editor on the Hebrew Wikipedia text copied in my English files it messed up the whole file. The code looks now like goat vomit. Anyway, the source is not pretty but it sort of works at the result end. But then when I try to modify those files inside the Hebrew editor, changing tags and so on, everything goes crazy, tags jump all around instead of being inserted where I want them. It's gotta be seen to be believed. Is there anything special about Hebrew HTML? It doesn't look like it's only a matter of inverting the syntax from left to right to right to left (e.g. changing <span...> ... </span> into </span> ... <span...> and stuff like that). There seems to be some more involved. What's going on? Signed: Basemetal (write to me here) 21:41, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Would like more eyes on this as I suspect the discussion is being affected by selection bias. Please review the userbox and give your opinions at the MFD. Thanks. Beeblebrox ( talk) 16:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
My question has to do with the fairly stylized language of operas from the early 20th C and earlier, rather than either formal or colloquial speech or writing:
Thanks for any advice. Milkunderwood ( talk) 06:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Does such a list exist? And a list of articles without a talk page yet? Thanks. Biosthmors ( talk) 20:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
I've been analyzing the presence and consistency of certain types of metadata on Wikipedia pages. I think Wikipedians would find it useful (especially the list of internally inconsistent pages). Any suggestions where I could publish/post this work? I can't make it to Wikimania. Espertus ( talk) 21:39, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
A discussion has started at Wikipedia talk:Emailing users about user customized edit notices when using the "Email this user" functionality. Please feel free to discuss and provide feedback. Hasteur ( talk) 20:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
I have just accepted a contractual position with the Wikimedia Foundation, and posted a full disclosure with details and an invitation for community comments here. — Coren (talk) 21:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia has a lot of links to WebCite (webcitation.org). I often add such links myself. (There's even a page about using the website.) I'd rate the site as "invaluable". (I also appreciate its lack of advertising, its lack of fancy Javascript that won't work with half the browsers I use, and its general no-nonsense approach.)
WebCite now tells the world:
They want fifty grand, and at the time I type this they're only 0.946% successful.
Come on, peoples. -- Hoary ( talk) 08:50, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
This needs to go up as a Watchlist Notice. Our citations are part of our critical infrastructure. They are the basis for valid content and critically important to our readers. Without them, our content is no more valid than any random website on the net. This conversation needs to put on a Watchlist Notice in order to get input from the wider community. Can some knowledgeable Admin please set up a Watchlist Notice? Thanks in advance. 64.40.54.47 ( talk) 10:48, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
<ul id="watchlist-message"> {{Display/watchlist |until=2013-2-21 |cookie=142 |text=Editors are invited to '''[[meta:WebCite|comment]]''' on a proposal to start a new sister project to take over the [[WebCite]] archiving service used to archive citations on Wikipedia. }} <!--{{Display/watchlist |until= |cookie=143 |text= }}--> </ul> You have '''$1''' {{PLURAL:$1|page|pages}} on your [[Help:Watching pages|watchlist]] (excluding [[Help:Using talk pages|talk pages]]).
His dad Bo Xilai is a chinese communist criminal, and his mother is a murderer. there is no known report that he has gone back to china. he is most likely still living in the usa. therefore, either he is an illegal immigrant or he has a US passport or something else.
you wikipedia simply can NOT verify his real nationality. and why did you put the un-verified nationality on Bo Guagua?
I changed it from nationality to ethnicity, but your stupid admins called it "vandalism", therefore, it was reverted, and put under protection due to "vandalism".
therefore, I demand you to explain it to me, how you got "confirmed" that he has a chinese passport, but not other foreign countries' passport? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.198.182.185 ( talk) 03:56, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
This was reported to us via OTRS. I'm sure it's not uncommon, but anyone doing page curation or patrol might want to be on the lookout for these titles - assuming the content turns out to be unwanted, of course. § FreeRangeFrog croak 21:37, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I am proposing that the temporary restrictions on Gibraltar-related Did You Know? articles, which were imposed in September 2012, should be lifted and have set out a case for doing so at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Gibraltar-related DYKs. If you have a view on this, please comment at that page. Prioryman ( talk) 21:54, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, This message is to inform you that I have submitted an Individual Engagement Grant (personal grants for projects that benefit the Wikimedia movement) to the Wikimedia Foundation that would allow me push the initiative wikiArS in the coming months, between spring and autumn.
Since last academic year (see Llotja and Serra i Abella) we are collaborating with Schools of Art and Design to generate missing images for Wikipedia (and publish it to Commmons) or outreach materials (and publish it to Outreach wiki). This year there are already seven schools contacted, 4 of which have already begun to work. With this Grant I could increase my time commitment to coordination and support to volunteers, consolidating the project. The idea is also to produce a travelling exhibition and supporting materials.
You can read the proposal here:
Any comments or suggestions are welcome in this Village Pump or on the discussion page of the proposal. In addition, to the IEG succeed it needs the support of the community, so I ask you, if you find it interesting, to give your support in the Endorsements section.
Greetings. -- Dvdgmz ( talk) 12:42, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Harlem Shake (meme) should be a huge priority for updates. Baauer should probably be updated as a result too. Both articles have maintenance tags, and both inadequately describe the subject. Harlem shake when adding the old and new titles has gotten well over one million views in the past week. 165.123.233.168 ( talk) 00:19, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
How about a userbox or something like that to show support for Aaron Swartz, Open access and #pdftribute? I put a line on my userpage — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshua Jonathan ( talk • contribs) 103:23, January 16, 2013 (UTC)
Hey :)
As already announced in the Signpost we currently plan to deploy the first phase of Wikidata here on Monday. (We're still waiting for a performance review so worst case we'll have to push the date back some more.) We've already deployed the first phase on the Hungarian, Hebrew and Italian Wikipedias and things there went rather smoothly. We hope this is the case here too.
What is going to happen exactly?
Please let me know if you have any questions. -- Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) ( talk) 11:54, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
We unfortunately ran into issues. We'll have to reschedule the deployment. Currently it looks like we'll do this on Wednesday. Sorry folks. -- Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) ( talk) 22:03, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Third time's a charm, right? ;-) We're live now. More details are in this blog post. An FAQ is here. I'm happy to answer questions at Wikipedia:Village_pump (technical). Please also let me know about any issues there. -- Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) ( talk) 21:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I started a description page at WP:Wikidata. Editors are welcome to expand it. -- Izno ( talk) 16:24, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Don't know where to ask about this but the current set-up (on EN, at least) is confusing. The current sidebar makes it seem like if you click on this you will get a translation of this article, which is entirely untrue. Alanscottwalker ( talk) 14:26, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
I've noticed this problem in several articles which is why I'm posting here instead of on each articles talk page. Where the article lists the area of a region in square kilometers, the number is often listed with the comma changed to a decimal so that a number like 109,467 becomes 109.467. This further becomes a problem because when the square kilometers is converted into square miles, the smaller, inaccurate number is used in the calculation.
The worst case I've seen of this is in the article for the Victoria Daly region in the Northern Territory of Australia. The region is 64,972 square miles in area but the article lists it as 65 square miles because of the decimal error.
I could fix this myself in some of the articles but I've seen this in so many articles that it would be good to have a bot that double checks these numbers and makes sure the decimal is supposed to be a decimal instead of a comma. -- Bejjinks ( talk) 23:47, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
|num_employees=
parameter - see
Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BattyBot 17, and would be happy to help out with another scenario. Is the scenario just in the {{
Infobox Australian place}} |area=
parameter, or is it more widespread than that?
GoingBatty (
talk)
03:10, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Do we have a list of the articles that do not exist that get the most hits? I just happened to create #4999 on the WP:5000 ( Kevin Gates). It had been one of the most viewed articles, despite not existing. Biosthmors ( talk) 22:07, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
User:West.andrew.g/Popular redlinks has now been created. Shortcuts WP:TOPRED and WP:REDTOP. A weekly summary along the lines of WP:5000 (which now has article assessment icons). Biosthmors ( talk) 19:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
In cleaning up an article that has an excessive amount of quoted text in its references, I have begun to remove a few of those quotes, with the eventual goal of getting rid of as many as I can. What I would like to know is if what I am doing is appropriate, and how and when it is a good idea to use quotes of the source in references. I have seen reference quotes challenged in FACs before, so I assumed there was some unwritten rule that they are not necessary, and that citing the source alone is enough to verify the information. Does anyone have any input on this? Evanh2008 ( talk| contribs) 04:57, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Backlog pages for all WikiProjects is a proposal I put at meta. Summary: The Category:Wikipedia backlog page quantifies cleanup templates for English Wikipedia, but WikiProjects don't have similar pages to know what needs improvement. Community input desired at part 3. Thanks. Biosthmors ( talk) 02:05, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
http://pastebin.com/EQxh2dJi Enjoy.
Also, does anybody know what happened to the TypoScan project? 930913( Congratulate) 23:57, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Are articles like Gallery of coats of arms of the United Kingdom and dependencies against any policies, since galleries, in my opinion, are more suitable at Commons? -- Wylve ( talk) 19:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
I just noted that in the featured picture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yamato1945.png the view from above has different crane than the side view. I am not sure but I think above view is correct because it has the crane as it was when Yamato was built. At least I haven't seen any text which would mention that there was a modification of the crane. It is a truth that some photos taken during operation Ten-Go hasn't the high crane as in earlier photos, but the crane may be destroyed in aerial attacks. And what comes to the article Japanese battleship Yamato, there is also a discrepancy between this picture and the article: in picture there is 152 25 mm AA-guns, but in text 162. -- 84.249.89.206 ( talk) 14:47, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
{{ rfc}} Should wikitravel: pseudo namespace offsite redirect remain? The Wikimedia Foundation has forked Wikitravel to Wikivoyage, where most contributors have also migrated to, and has a new pseudo namespace offsite redirect wikivoyage:. Wikitravel is not a Wikimedia Foundation website. -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 02:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, could anyone please point me to the bit of policy that explains the rationale why edit summaries are not mandatory?
I have some 5,000 pages in my watchlist, and it's very difficult to follow everything up when so many people are not leaving edit summaries.
I am sure this is the kind of thing that must have been discussed 498134598 times before, so if you could please point me to the discussion, that'd be great.
I believe that edit summaries should be mandatory.
Cheers, Azylber ( talk) 18:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm horrible about this. What about not requiring them if you tick the edit as 'minor'? And not in talk space. — kwami ( talk) 08:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Note: Please see also the recent discussion at the policy pump, Behavioral guideline for minor edits (now archived). — Hex (❝?!❞) 18:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Is there any redirect category for abbreviations or acronyms or does {{ R from alternative name}} cover them? (As a side question, if there isn't, should there be one?) Novangelis ( talk) 17:01, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
In this wired interview from May 2010 Clay Shirky says "All the articles, edits, and arguments about articles and edits represent around 100 million hours of human labor. That’s a lot of time. But remember: Americans watch about 200 billion hours of TV every year.". Anyone know how he did that calculation? How many articles were there in early 2010? With 4M today the 100M figure sounds really low to me, 25 hours per article? I guess there are a ton of stubs, but is that enough to make up for the vast number of hours put into GA and FA articles? Plus is he really considering how long it takes to chase down some references, that could be looong time for what ends up being a tiny edit? Any thoughts?
I think even if he is off by a factor of 10, so it's 1B hours, that's still tiny compared to TV, which I think was his point. But I'm just wondering if he exaggerated his point by low-balling the number of hours people have put into Wikipedia. Silas Ropac ( talk) 00:23, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
"So the average is pulled down by the sheer number of stubs?"I would say yes. More than 2 million of our 4 million articles are stubs acording to Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Statistics. That's over 50%, so that would have a large influence on the total. As for the number of hours spent editing Wikipedia, the Signpost recently reported that it was "a total of 102,673,683 total labor-hours" according to a paper here. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-02-18/News and notes for more. Cheers. 64.40.54.147 ( talk) 00:28, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
There has been limited discussion and edit reverts on the list of "modern gifts" on Wedding anniversary. The modern list appears to have a verifiable source listed as Complied by librarians at the Chicago Public Library in 2000 with a link. Despite it being a reputable source I am of the suspicion that the list is spurious with no rhyme or reason to the gifts chosen or additional notes on the existence of such traditions in the real world. From where did this list originate prior to the compliation by the librarians concerned? There might well be a credible explanation or we could all be looking at the results of a coffee break hoax by an employee of the aforementioned institution. I would be please to find evidence in support or against it. It is not so much of a problem mentioning it in the article from the verifiable source, but perhaps a little more evidence than what we have at the moment to be in the main table (links that are clearly clones of the source or wikipedia articles should obviously not count as evidence here) Dainamo ( talk) 19:40, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of curiosity I performed a transclusion count of the first few sections under Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup. Counts higher than three digits are in bold:
Note that there is a high proportion that only show light or moderate usage. Perhaps this indicates an opportunity for consolidation and simplification? Praemonitus ( talk) 02:09, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for writing in English. I hope someone can translate this locally.
Wikidata has been in development for a few months now. It is now time for the roll-out of the first part of it on your Wikipedia. Phase 1 is the support for the management of language links. It is already being used on the Hungarian, Hebrew, Italian and English Wikipedias. The next step is to enable the extension on all other Wikipedias. We have currently planned this for March 6.
Wikidata is a central place to store data that you can usually find in infoboxes. Think of it as something like Wikimedia Commons but for data (like the number of inhabitants of a country or the length of a river) instead of multimedia. The first part of this project (centralizing language links) is being rolled out now. The more fancy things will follow later.
Language links in the sidebar are going to come from Wikidata in addition to the ones in the wiki text. To edit them, scroll to the bottom of the language links, and click edit. You no longer need to maintain these links by hand in the wiki text of the article.
Editors on en:wp have created a great page with all the necessary information for editors and there is also an FAQ for this deployment. Please ask questions you might have on the FAQ’s discussion page.
To stay up-to-date on everything happening around Wikidata please subscribe to the newsletter that is delivered weekly to subscribed user’s talk pages. You can see previous editions here.
-- Lydia Pintscher 16:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Distributed via Global message delivery. (Wrong page? Fix here.)
I recently passed 1,000 edits and I wanted to jokingly tell my friends their are only X people nerdier that I in the world where X would be the number who have 1,000 edits. Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits only lists you once you have 11,000+ edits which I won't have any time soon. I don't need my exact place but some kind of idea for how many have 500, 1000, 200 and 5000 edits. Thanks. >> Jesus Loves You! M.P.Schneider,LC ( parlemus • feci) 14:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Today is my eighth Wikiversary. Fittingly, sometime in the night I passed 400,000 Wikipedia edits. Yay me. :-) bd2412 T 19:55, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi there - I posted a Request for Comment on Talk:Water_fluoridation related to how we report findings of scientific studies - so far only people already involved in the discussion have commented, and it would be great to have some more eyes on the issue - appreciate your time, Tilapidated ( talk) 03:36, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
I've just seen this today as a new thing when searching for an article. I was just wondering what it was. Simply south.... .. catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 15:58, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Remove this to somewhere if this isn't a right place for this, but I need to write here because there is discrepancies in articles Japanese battleship Yamato and Yamato-class battleships which are both featured articles, and because it looks like nobody notes my comments from talk pages of these articles.
The discrepancies are:
1. In the article Yamato-class battleship thickness of the thicker part of the armoured deck is 230 mm (9 in) but in the article Japanese battleship Yamato it is 226.5 mm (8.92 in)
2. both articles stand for information that Yamato had 162 25 mm AA-guns in spring 1944 onwards as her final maximum amount. But there is also mentions that amount of the guns was increased twice after spring, which was not possible if Yamato had her final AA-complement already in spring 1944. Featured picture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yamato1945.png, http://www.combinedfleet.com/yamato.htm and German Wikipedia all stands for 152 AA-guns as maximum. German Wikipedia also informs that amount of the guns was 98 in spring 1944 and 113 in summer 1944. Over all there is only one reference for 162 guns mentioned in articles. Besides there is a foto, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yamato_hit_by_bomb.jpg, wich shows to them who are familiarize themselves with Yamato that there wasn't 162 guns at least in 1944.
3. Both articles inform that Yamato's 15.5 cm wing turrets were removed in 1943, but again http://www.combinedfleet.com/yamato.htm and German Wikipedia inform that they were not removed before 1944, at the same time when 127 mm guns were added.
4. In Yamato-class battleship it is mentioned that Yamatos's AA-armament was upgraded in March 1945. Reference of this information is http://www.combinedfleet.com/yamato.htm. A problem is that this website don't have the information.
These are both featured articles so please, do something to these problems. -- 84.249.89.206 ( talk) 17:28, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
How do we handle those on the verge of leaving wikipedia? Ive been heee for a certain ammount of years and attempted my very best to improve wikipedia, but wikipedia isnt good to me in the sense that there is always one or two editors blocking my progress and never a group to give a good answer or any attention at all.
Similar to gaming the system, i find constant ammount of editors game the system/discussion by treating wikipedia as a vote count and as much wikipedia attempts to deny this, it still leans with vote over reason. So editors game the system by posting once and once asked for elaboration, they ignore it knowing fullwell its their advantage in a discussion.
And attempting to draw more editors gets me. And thats the sad thing, these editors care more about winning the discussion rather than helping the other editor with reasoning. Im exhausted and i know wikibreaks wont help me here. I think we should find a way so that multiple editors cant game the system and for wikipedia to also make sure reason triumphs over vote. SORRY if this is at the wrong place, but im tired and dont know where else to propose and get taken seriously. Lucia Black ( talk) 22:09, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
"but I like to think that someone else's day was improved as a result."I can say, without fear of contradiction, that you have succeeded wonderfully in that, WAID. As our resident expert on policy, you have helped thousand of people understand how Wikipedia works and your efforts have been a great help to the project. I have seen many times that others have made life difficult for you, and I thank you kindly for hanging in there. Your help with the project has been of immense value and I am glad you are part of our community, WAID. Best regards. 64.40.54.22 ( talk) 05:42, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I hope I have found the proper board for this issue.
On January 18, I decided to ask a question that had been eating me for a while. Over on the NYRA board, there was a thread where we were discussing nerds and one poster there said, "They sing in a grindcore band where the lyrics to all of their songs consist of them screaming the word 'penis'". I didn't see why screaming the word "penis" was particularly nerdy, so I puzzled over it. Then I came across a few more comments linking nerds to an obsession with penises over the next few months. Then I remembered the movie Superbad with its nerd main character, who is fixated on the human phallus. It hit me: society has a stereotype that nerds are obsessed with penises. I didn't see why this should be particularly nerdy, unlike, say, astrophysics. I also noticed that people link nerdiness to Mountain Dew around the same time, and had no idea about the reasons behind that stereotype either. So I asked a question on Wikipedia's Reference Desk here: "How did the stereotype that nerds are obsessed with penises come about?"
The first responder asked me if I was trolling, so I explained. The responder, Jayron32, then wrote: "No, I think you're cherrypicking a few examples to make some point, which I don't know what it is, but there isn't any such sterotype at all. If you want to read about the stereotype, there's a Wikipedia article titled Nerd. While the characterization of 'nerds' does have many well known sterotypes (grooming habits, social awkwardness, obsessive interest in obscure pursuits, intellectualism), being overly intrested in penises simply isn't one of them. It just isn't. To claim that there is reads like pure trolling, and yes, I know, you've sucked me in to the debate, so you've won. Congrats." I wasn't cherrypicking examples -- I came across the examples first and then drew my conclusion. Jayron said, "to make some point, which I don't know what it is". I wasn't trying to make a clever point. I just observed a pervasive stereotype, at least in the online community, and I posted here because I wanted to know why. Instead of feeding my need for an explanation, I was falsely accused of trolling -- Jayron even said "To claim that there is reads like pure trolling, and yes, I know, you've sucked me in to the debate, so you've won" -- and even had my question locked before I could receive a satisfactory answer. Wikipedia has assumed bad faith about an honest question. How can I get this answered? Jeremy Jigglypuff Jones ( talk) 08:00, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
When Wikidia first opened, pages were printed with the links automatically in Blue. I would like to again print my pages with the links in Blue. Is there anyway it could be done within Wikipedia without having to go through Word or its equivalent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ALEX GARTLAN ( talk • contribs) 07:48, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Light-foot ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Sirs: I wish to dearly avoid an edit war. There is an article that has one source, and I am looking for other sources, as I have read the other source, and seen the other source, neither of which I can document now, but easily more noteworthy than the current source. ( the primary source is dead, but it has been documented twice outside the web, ( unfortunately before I was born )).
I made the changes, but was reverted without discussion or notice.
Article: Light-Foot. Source: Time Life Books on computers. Source: Computer History Museum.
Would you suggest, I got to the museum, take a picture of the wire ( that predates me. ), and post it? Would that be original research?
The email I got back from the museum: "Oh those idiots[ Wikipedia ]? The wouldn't know the truth if it was drilling into their thick skulls.", personal email.
What to do next? I reverted my changes, then re-reverted them, so the page is as [Erroneous] as stands. 67.180.156.92 ( talk) 00:46, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
{{
expert-subject|Measurement}}
, {{
refimprove}}
, {{
measurement-stub}}
to the article, and {{
WikiProject Measurement}}
to the talk page.
GoingBatty (
talk)
17:35, 27 February 2013 (UTC)I have made my decision. I hold this so-called committee responsible for the events that transpired that led to my permanent ban. I have waited long enough to let cooler heads prevail. You are ultimately responsible for the actions of the CheckUser, although DeltaQuad certainly shares the blame. I definitely intend on making this precedent, giving everyone else, and I assume there are many, who has been arbitrary banned for no good reason but were unable to make it so obvious as to give you no room for maneuver. I will be doing this for them as much as for myself. I will be their voice.
You should strip DeltaQuad of his CheckUser permissions immediately for, at a minimum, incompetence. I did and still do consider his actions malicious, but even assuming good faith, it is plain incompetence. There are plenty of individuals who can take his place. Out of all the administrative positions, there simply should not be any question about the motives or competence of a CheckUser.
Thereafter, you should step down from your positions on this board, for even letting this outrageous incident happen, and re-run or -apply or whatever it is you did to get this job. I will not necessarily oppose your renewed application, but at least it will give pause for a review of your performance.
YOU, this board, are the biggest threat to Wikimedia Foundation projects I have yet come across. Your incompetence cannot be reverted, unlike the common vandal or troll. Your incompetence cannot be countered or contained, and with the CheckUser it knows no bounds. This whole affair is a stain on this project, and I, we, all of those who are your past or next victims, are here to see the stain removed.
I will not stop. Years from now you will tire of this, but I will still be there, here, wherever, clamoring for your fall. I will not stop. Ban me if you will, but I will see this through. You will step down or I will spend every ounce of skill I have to see you are forced to do so. You will step down or ... I am not even sure yet. If it means having your administrative right revoked, so be it. If it means a letter writing campaign to the Wikimedia Foundation board, so be it. If it means wearing a bright red t-shirt at the WikiMania con or otherwise causing a ruckus, then so be it. I will see this through.
Int21h ( talk) 00:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)}}
Ok so let me get this straight (as a non admin non involved editor that has never seen you before)- your not banned anymore because it was determined to be a mistake and you recived an apology - correct? Your now saying that all even those not involved in a simple human mistake by a human volunteer that has been corrected should step down - correct? Ultimately ending with threats of long term plans to disrupt the project - correct? Just one question - is this the only thing that has happened to bring you to this point? Sounds a little crazy that this one mistake that you received an apology for is the only reason to be flipping-out - are we missing something?. Moxy ( talk) 05:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
"Years from now you will tire of this, but I will still be there, here, wherever, clamoring for your fall" Now here's some hardcore bikeshedding. For your sanity and blood pressure, maybe another you should take up a calming hobby. Like biking? Or painting sheds? -- Golbez ( talk) 06:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity. Any idea what the minimum number of links a person should follow from a specific article to reach any other article? Actuall that's an odd way of putting it. What I'm trying to ask is: Anyone knows what the six degrees of separation is for articles on the English Wikipedia? Is there any current tool that can find that out? Reh man 14:09, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Which Wikipedia projects/pages/etc. do you see as the biggest flops of all time? There have been quite a few of them I suppose. Zaminamina Eh Eh Waka Waka Eh Eh 20:09, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
I noticed a Facebook page [7] which is a real time mirror of an article Native American mascot controversy. I was wondering how this was done? (a Facebook app?) As a contributor to the article, I am only glad to have it widely available. FigureArtist ( talk) 00:34, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
The following file titled File:Flag of Ontario (Green Ensign).svg that I designed, I wish to be deleted from Wikimedia Commons. How can this be done? And can someone here do this?-- R-41 ( talk) 20:25, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
The Irish Passport picture has the following text:
That to should be too, but I can't work out how to change it. TRiG ( talk) 03:11, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
commons:Category:Chris Hadfield has lots of images by Chris Hadfield that have the NASA public domain tag, so does that apply to all the photos of Earth he posts on Tumblr? Commons has just some crew photos.-- occono ( talk) 01:42, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Anyone have a few spare hours and is familiar with the timeline extension? I would like to create a timeline but am clueless about it. Werieth ( talk) 20:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
Can anyone help by reading an article i have translated from greek to english? I want someone who speaks greek. Xaris333 ( talk) 13:50, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Νο. Thx! Xaris333 ( talk) 20:32, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Are collapsed/ hidden infoboxes acceptable? Please comment at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#Hidden infoboxes. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:17, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
http://logan43000.tumblr.com/post/42298850969/some-common-logical-fallacies-very-interesting
Just sharing for fun/reference. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:43, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Is Accuracy Dispute an essay or a guideline? It can't be both! -- Ypnypn ( talk) 15:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
I noticed the category Category:Rape in video games, which turns out to be part of a larger categorization scheme ( Category:Rape in fiction). There aren't any categories like Category:Songs about murder, Category:Racism in fiction, Category:Poems about science, Category:Religion in anime and manga, Category:Adoption in video games. I did find a few other categories that mirror this, such as Category:Incest in fiction, Category:Twins in fiction, Category:Dreams in fiction, Category:Alien visitations in fiction and similar subcategories, though. Why are some topics subject to strangely obsessive overcategorization? There are a few similar ones like Category:Mafias in fiction and Category:Cannibalism in fiction, but they is not subdivided into a million things like "plays" "television" "film" "video games" "songs" "anime and manga" "poems" "comics" "novels". Is this an example of Wikipedia:Overcategorization? Or are such hyperspecific categories welcomed? If they are welcome, then there should be guidelines, e.g. If there are twins in an anime but they are minor characters does it fall into "Twins in anime and manga"? Should every video game with the option for the player to kill or take items from people go in "Murder in video games"/"Theft in video games"?
I found
a CFD discussion that seems relevant: "either categorizing or listifying films by the sort of scenes they contain is overcategorization"
"I don't think it makes sense to start a convention of categorizing films based on specific scenes. There's thousands of possible things that happen in films, and I don't want to see Films which include a kidnapping, Films which contain nude scenes, Films which contain gun violence, etc."
"Categories are for defining characteristics, which "contains scenes depicting X" is generally not."
"If we created categories for every possible ... topic, most articles would have more categories than content."
In my opinion, Category:Fiction by topic is fine. No need to get so specific with everything. -- Atlantima ( talk) 23:35, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
The ' Casualty of war' article doesn't seem particularly useful, especially when compared to ' List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll'. What do you think should be done with it? Praemonitus ( talk) 00:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi! There is a problem with footnote 46 in Princess Beatrice of the United Kingdom (featured article). It says "Hibbert, p. 94" but there is no Hibbert's book in the bibliography. Can someone correct this point ? Thank you. 31.39.53.205 ( talk) 07:46, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Please read my message to the ArbCom. This concerns my permanent ban a few months ago. I would love to tell you all about it, but I really have no idea what happened. Still. I was banned, then unbanned, and all I got was a stupid apology and a wall of silence. They would like to pretend this is all over and done with, but with this, let it be known it is far from over. Other than that, you will have to look to the logs for details... Here it is:
{{quote|
Hello,
Is it possible to download the application that wiki runs on to use in an non-profit organization? If so, I would be interested to know:
a) how to go about doing this b) what system requirements are required c) any costing information (one time and ongoing) or other information you would deem of value to provide
Thank you,
Aaron — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nelson.m.aaron ( talk • contribs) 15:28, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
For those who may be interested, I have boldly created a WikiProject to collaboratively recognize Wikipedia's finest editors, which can be found at the link above. Please feel free to add your name to the list of members. Automatic Strikeout ( T • C) 17:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Inappropriate forum. dci | TALK 21:09, 16 March 2013 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
People had been putting pages in the aforementioned category even though it is stated to be a container category, including user pages. I had removed pages, but not user pages. I think This person did it. Please deal with this IssueNadav Bronicki 03:05, 14 March 2013 (UTC) |
I've created a second five thousand featured article pool at WP:5KFA2. The first one closed four years ago, so it's high time for a second. - Ypnypn ( talk) 21:30, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
I am planning to create an essay, such as " wp:Editor activity levels" to describe patterns of Wikipedia editing activity. In particular, after 2007, the activity levels dropped and later stabilized (in recent years) for several languages (but not Russian, Latvian, or Persian Wikipedia). Compare charts for stability of other-language wikipedias:
I was wondering which "population-control factors" (or " crowd control") would cause a worldwide population of editors to edit at the same even-keel levels for years, with only slight +/-7% variation in monthly edit-count levels. What does that stability indicate about the general population of editors, or the methods of counting? Is there a specific area of " Internet psychology" or " cyberspace psychology" which describes patterns of online user activities? Thanks. - Wikid77 ( talk) 15:38, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
An objection has been raised to the recent introduction of graphical elements to the Wikipedia:Community portal page. Please see the discussion here. Thank you. Praemonitus ( talk) 02:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedians,
I am conducting a research on contribution behaviour regarding social media platforms such as Wikipedia. I developed a questionairre with the intention to reveal different motives in contributing to different social media websites. I would much appreciate it if you could help me out by filling out the following survey: www.thesistools.com/web/?id=329391. It will only take two minutes of your time!
Thank you in advance,
Lester — Preceding unsigned comment added by LJJvanKlink ( talk • contribs) 13:34, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Hmm. But Wikipedia is not a social media website. -- œ ™ 06:21, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
I answered your survey, but I vehemently disagree with the idea that Wikipedia is a social medium or should come to resemble one more closely. I find the comparison to YouTube odious. -- Orange Mike | Talk 17:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm looking for two concepts in English Wikipedia in order to relate them to the equivalent pages in Persian Wikipedia. First, it seems that in English Wikipedia, there is no article about having a baby or having a child as an event or process in one's life (like marriage). Such an article would have information about reasons for reproduction, preparation, psychological situation or problems of parenting, the ethical issues concerning this etc. Second, I found no article about the act of making up, apart from cosmetics. Does English Wikipedia have an article for the act of applying cosmetics to body? -- Ali Pirhayati ( talk) 00:07, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
"I found no article about the act of making up, apart from cosmetics. Does English Wikipedia have an article for the act of applying cosmetics to body?" Wow, you are right the English Wikipedia is seriously lacking an article (or section in Cosmetics) that deals about the cultural aspects of makeup. Thanks for pointing it out! -- NaBUru38 ( talk) 18:56, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I have made some remarks at Talk:Stow,_Lincolnshire#Etymolgy_of_Stow and would welcome contributions there from those more learned on English place name elements than myself.-- Robert EA Harvey ( talk) 14:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I've been doing a bit of number crunching: in the 24 hours since Jorge Bergoglio became Pope there were 1,307 edits to Pope Francis [8]. Is this a record for the number of edits in a 24 hour period? An optimist on the run! 21:38, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
[10] - This user is importing only the last revision of lots of articles from Wikipedia, violating the license. Is this legitimate? I've heard about users using wikia for testing, so I'm not sure. -- 88.13.91.252 ( talk) 20:59, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello everyone, I'm DeltaQuad (also known as DQ), an account creation interface administrator and developer. Recently, our project has had an increased backlog in getting accounts for new users. Our numbers are currently above 250 people waiting for accounts on the English Wikipedia. If you could even spare a moment to do a few requests a day to help us clear this backlog. If this interests you and your willing to help, and you match the following description, then please do apply! Ideal users are:
We have a very friendly team to help you get started and we also have an IRC channel. If you have any questions for us or about the process, feel free to ask at the talkpage. If you can help out, we would greatly appreciate it. For the ACC Administration and Development Team, -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 23:20, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
As wikipedia is increasingly being used even in the scientific community, we are starting to see articles that actually cite or link to wikipedia. See here for a nice example which is filled with links to wikipedia. It is quite feasible that the here-mentioned article would actually end up as a cited reference on the Bayesian statistics page; that would then constitute a form of recursive citing. Is this behavior desirable? In such a way, wikipedia would theoretically be referring to itself, while seemingly citing others. Would this not somehow violate the principle described here? Tenth Plague ( talk) 11:33, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I have started a list of these at
List of public domain resources behind a paywall. It could use some expansion.
Rich
Farmbrough,
01:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC).
External links usually have a little arrow next them, sample. It is possible to suppress that little arrow like this, either by use of Template:plain link or by using span class="plainlinks" This suppression obviously has its place. Is there a guideline or policy covering the suppression of the arrows for templates intended for inline and in-article use, such as Template:Mtgcard, which produces links such as Tezzeret the Seeker (taken from Magic: The Gathering duel decks)? Mr Stephen ( talk) 13:12, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Doc James has started a discussion about the ban, topic ban and desysop of Will BeBack here: User:Jmh649/Will_Beback. More input welcome. IRWolfie- ( talk) 16:39, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
not sure if this is the right location to post my comment. {{ Location map}} only has {{ Location map Afro-Eurasia}}, but I just need Eurasia. I am not an expert and fear that I might make mistakes. If anyone has interest in doing that task: it would eliminate many issues and improve readability. Regards.-- Tomcat ( 7) 12:00, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Something must have changed with the Wikipedia interface. The Search input box (upper right) no longer shows a guess list and the edit panel no longer displays the graphical bar along the top. Praemonitus ( talk) 00:17, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Do we have some listing of article set that should each country have? Like Transport in XXX, Economy of XXX, Energy in XXX, Agriculture in XXX, Culture of XXX, etc? Do we have some complete list of those? And with default names? I wanted to create that, but do we have it already? -- WhiteWriter speaks 14:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
This closed discussion is my idea of a beautifully designed request for comment. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk · contribs · email) 15:23, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
..is on again - 1 April to 13 May. Casliber ( talk · contribs) 10:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Is there any Wikipedia-namespace page that lists all the arbitrators, current and former, on the English Wikipedia? AutomaticStrikeout ( T • C • AAPT) 04:08, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Please help add references to my new article Louis Besson. Thank you. Scymso ( talk) 19:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Maybe someone can do a translation of fr:Louis Besson. -- œ ™ 08:16, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
There seems to be a column aligning problem with the 'Studio albums' table in the 'Discography' section on the article. As I'm rather inexperienced when it comes to wikicoding, I would be very grateful for help with this issue. -- Half past formerly SUFCboy 14:08, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
Please add the age of Francisco Javier Lopez Pena. Thank you. Scymso ( talk) 21:08, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello! I have posted a request for community input at WT:Video_and_Interactive_Tutorials#Phase_II:_RfC_on_Subjects and would greatly appreciate input on this valuable project! It is funded by the Wikimedia Foundation, and the details of that grant are visible from the project page. Thank you in advance! -- Jackson Peebles ( talk) 05:50, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee is seeking to appoint three non-arbitrator members to the Audit Subcommittee ("AUSC"). The Committee is comprised of six members and is tasked with investigations concerning the use of CheckUser and Oversight privileges on the English Wikipedia. The AUSC also monitors CheckUser and Oversight activity and use of the applicable tools. The current non-arbitrator members are Avraham, MBisanz, and Ponyo, whose terms were to expire on February 28 but were extended with their agreement until April 30 by the Committee.
Matters brought before the subcommittee may be time-sensitive and subcommittee members should be prepared and available to discuss cases promptly so they may be resolved in a timely manner. Sitting subcommittee members are expected to actively participate in AUSC proceedings and may be replaced should they become inactive. All subcommittee members are given both CheckUser and Oversight access but are expected to not make regular use of them unless needed. They are subject to the relevant local and global policies and guidelines concerning CheckUser and Oversight.
If you think you may be suitably qualified, please email arbcom-en-clists.wikimedia.org to start the application procedure for an appointment ending 30 June 2014. The application period will close at 23:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC). Further information is also available here.
For the Arbitration Committee,
NW (
Talk)
18:20, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
This is a reminder that the application period for the three non-arbitrator seats on the Audit Subcommittee will close at 23:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC), less than 36 hours from now.
The Audit Subcommittee ("AUSC") is comprised of six members and is tasked with investigations concerning the use of CheckUser and Oversight privileges on the English Wikipedia. The AUSC also monitors CheckUser and Oversight activity and use of the applicable tools. The current non-arbitrator members are Avraham, MBisanz, and Ponyo, whose terms were to expire on February 28 but were extended with their agreement until April 30 by the Committee.
Matters brought before the subcommittee may be time-sensitive and subcommittee members should be prepared and available to discuss cases promptly so they may be resolved in a timely manner. Sitting subcommittee members are expected to actively participate in AUSC proceedings and may be replaced should they become inactive. All subcommittee members are given both CheckUser and Oversight access but are expected to not make regular use of them unless needed. They are subject to the relevant local and global policies and guidelines concerning CheckUser and Oversight.
Please note that due to Wikimedia Foundation rules governing access to deleted material, only applications from administrators will be accepted.
If you think you may be suitably qualified, please email arbcom-en-clists.wikimedia.org to start the application procedure for an appointment ending 30 June 2014. Once again, the application period will close at 23:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC). Further information is also available here.
For the Arbitration Committee, T. Canens ( talk) 14:57, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey, today's XKCD contains a great "hover-over" donation beg for the WMF. Just thought you folks might like to know. Give him some love. :) Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation ( talk) 08:37, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
... it also contains an incentive to (at least temporarily) vandalize different pages - is that being discussed centrally anywhere? -- Jonasbinding ( talk) 13:01, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Where do you see anything even remotely related to vandalism in this? All I see is an unfunny (IMO) comic, the last panel of which links to a Wikimedia donation page-- Atlantima ( talk) 01:44, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
List of second-level domain/participate ???? -- Atlantima ( talk) 01:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Several Wikipedia articles mention something called the "Jeremy Nicholson Negro Achievement Award." I suspect this may be a hoax. Can someone please look into it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.29.132.240 ( talk) 02:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Please check out information located at Talk:Christine Jorgensen (the lowest section of the talk page) and User talk:JanetWand. Also, please check the history of Christine Jorgensen; JanetWand appears to think I'm the vandal, but I'm not. Georgia guy ( talk) 15:16, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
I have just edited an article with a new external link, for which I had to enter a captcha. The only problem is the words the captcha came up with were "dyinghmong". I find this very objectionable since the Hmong are a persecuted minority in eastern Asia. Is it possible to find a way to avoid potentially objectionable terms coming together like this, before we get a captcha that says "shootkids" or something equally offensive. Before anybody points it out, yes I know it is just mean't to filter out human users and yes I know Wikipedia is mean't to be neutral, but I just do not like the idea of typing in "dying" "hmong". 90.218.98.130 ( talk) 11:55, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello. The Wikimedia Foundation has received a request from Drugs.com for the removal of some of the content in the article List_of_largest_selling_pharmaceutical_products. The WMF does not believe there is a legal reason under U.S. law to remove the complained-of content and thus believes it is a decision that rests with the community, as all content issues do. The WMF has informed them of this and indicated that they would put the decision to you. We will simply communicate the community decision to the company after the community has come to a consensus for or against removal.
Their request has been placed at Talk:List of largest selling pharmaceutical products in courtesy to them. If you have time and interest, please stop by to comment so that we can let them know the community's stance on the matter. Thank you! -- Maggie Dennis (WMF) ( talk) 19:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
The WMF has posted a statement at the French Wikipedia regarding the situation in France. Those who are interested may wish to read it. Philippe (WMF) ( talk) 02:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
This is certainly one reason to not use your real name on Wikipedia. 64.40.54.111 ( talk) 20:33, 6 April 2013 (UTC)the DCRI summoned a Wikipedia volunteer in their offices on April 4th. This volunteer, which was one of those having access to the tools that allow the deletion of pages, was forced to delete the article while in the DCRI offices, on the understanding that he would have been held in custody and prosecuted if he did not comply. Under pressure, he had no other choice than to delete the article, despite explaining to the DCRI this is not how Wikipedia works. He warned the other sysops that trying to undelete the article would engage their responsability before the law.
This volunteer had no link with that article, having never edited it and not even knowing of its existence before entering the DCRI offices. He was chosen and summoned because he was easily identifiable, given his regular promotional actions of Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects in France.
— Christophe Henner, Wikimedia France
Is there some way we can show our support of this French SysOp? I'm not sure how to go about doing that - on his French talk page, or something? I just think maybe it'd be nice if he knew that lots of us support his voluntary efforts in trying to maintain Wikipedia, and that we're concerned about his treatment. 88.104.27.58 ( talk) 23:52, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
If you want to show some support, you may leave a message on the sysop user page: fr:Discussion_utilisateur:Remi_Mathis#Soutien. Regards, Comte0 ( talk) 10:40, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
frwiki editors are compiling a centralized list of media stories and blogs (in all languages) on what they call l' Affaire Pierre-sur-Haute. Feel free to add links to stories and blogs related to the controversy. Thank you for your support. Bouchecl ( talk) 21:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Looking at the bottom of that thread ( fr:Wikipédia:Bulletin des administrateurs/2013/Semaine 14#Secret défense), I note the following text:
Following the "Conditions d’utilisation" link, I find the following statement:
“ | Vous consentez également à ce que les lois de Californie et, le cas échéant, les lois des États-Unis d’Amérique régissent les présentes Conditions d’utilisation, de même que tout litige d’ordre légal se produisant éventuellement entre vous et nous (nonobstant les principes sur les conflits de lois). | ” |
The English translation is as follows:
I read that quite clearly. This administrator knew the rules when he signed up: French law does not reach Wikipedia. This administrator, fr:Utilisateur:Remi Mathis, should be reprimanded for willingly violating Wikipedia policy. It is quite straightforward: the Foundation already ruled the request to delete the article invalid. If the French police want a page deleted, and the Foundation refuses, their rights are clear: the San Francisco Superior Court and the United States District Court for the Northern District of California are always open to them. Other than that, Remi's duty was clear:
He should have resigned his position rather than violate his agreement with the Wikimedia Foundation.
Since he did not, and since he decided to either not read the Conditions d’utilisation or ignored them, he should be reprimanded by the Foundation for abusing his administrative rights.
Wikipedia, nor any of the projects, can survive if they are subject to the tyranny of French law and its "Interior" Ministry run rampant. Keep the French Police off Wikipedia. If the French want to live in fear of their own government, that's their problem, but keep it off Wikipedia. Resign. That being said, I look forward to the day when French law is actually available on Wikisource for the world to see so I can actually blame the editor. (Blame or no blame, Remi clearly violated policy and should still be reprimanded.) Int21h ( talk) 22:00, 8 April 2013 (UTC)