Wikimedia Forum

Shortcut:
WM:FORUM

The Wikimedia Forum is a central place for questions, announcements and other discussions about the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. (For discussion about the Meta wiki, see Meta:Babel.)
This is not the place to make technical queries regarding the MediaWiki software; please ask such questions at the MediaWiki support desk; technical questions about Wikimedia wikis, however, can be placed on Tech page.

You can reply to a topic by clicking the "[edit]" link beside that section, or you can start a new discussion.

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

Hello meta admins, I found this site while patrolling in vi wiki. I tried accessing it and thought the site was trying to impersonate Wikimedia. That's just my personal speculation and could be wrong! I hope an administrator can answer my question! Sincerely thank you.
@Johannnes89 @M7 @Billinghurst @MathXplore @Mykola7 Do Tri ✓ 💬 05:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, MTRIProd. Reading the home page they state to be an alternative project that will allow articles to be kept even if non notable. You can find out more information about mirrors and forks. Those projects are not run by the Wikimedia Foundation, nor any sysop and/or Steward is qualified for acting on those separate projects. --M/ (talk) 07:40, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@M7 So as I mentioned above, that website might be impersonating Wikimedia. I think this needs intervention by Wikimedia's legal department. Do Tri ✓ 💬 11:54, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please don't randomly ping people at this page, especially when you start a conversation about offwiki issues. Uncool. Nothing to do with me or any administrators that you saw something. If we have an interest we will see it and comment.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:21, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Billinghurst Okay! Thank you for the reminder! Do Tri ✓ 💬 12:49, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello everybody. I wrote about problems on the Russian Wikipedia to Jimbo Wales, but this turned out to be the wrong place. Where is here the right place to discuss the problems on ruwiki? Asorev (talk) 07:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Asorev: Hello, it is recommended discussing with the local community and the local Arbitration Committee first. Thanks. SCP-2000 07:54, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, SCP-2000. I do not know where on the Russian Wikipedia I am able to discuss this problem because I am blocked in the Wikipedia namespace where is the page where I have to appeal against the block before filing a claim with the local Arbitration Committee. Asorev (talk) 09:14, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion regarding the proposed Sister Projects Committee, a body to review requests for creating, significantly modifying, and closing Wikimedia projects, here. — Frostly (talk) 01:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there,

I did request in Phabricator to add a code and to change some names. But I do not have enough knowledge to change them. Does somebody have a knowledge to do it? Zolgoyo (talk) 20:00, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A user at w:en:Wikipedia:Bot_requests#Automatic_NOGALLERY_keyword_for_categories_containing_non-free_files suggested requesting a new feature to disable category thumbnails by default at the project level, in particular to enforce the enwiki policy on non-free content. Has this been proposed before in Wikimedia Phabricator? LaundryPizza03 (talk) 07:20, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• https://archive.org/details/2023-daily_user_pageviews
• https://archive.org/details/2023-top_2k_user_pageviews

Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 20:40, 2 January 2024 (UTC), --Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 00:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is a discussion ^{(oldid link)} on the English Wikinews about moving to either CC-BY 4.0 or CC-BY-SA 4.0 (we currently use CC-BY 2.5). Because of translations between the projects, it would make sense if all WN projects would change simultaneously, if at all - therefore I would move the discussion/vote over to Meta. WN projects are small, I don't expect more than a 100 votes, but still: is there a precedence for doing something like this on Meta? Or should we stick to a project-by-project system?

I have been thinking that maybe 3 votes from a project (language variant) could make the vote binding for that project, and each voter should indicate which project they are coming from. Could we make a decision binding, if within a certain period (let's say, 4 months) no votes come from a language branch?

We would also need help with summarizing the differences/changes between CC-BY 2.5 and CC-BY 4.0. Could you point to a good resource in this regard?

Any feedback would be welcome. - Xbspiro (talk) 02:26, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In my opinion, there should be a global Requests for comment to discuss the proposal of Wikinews license update and notify all language Wikinews communities to participate in that RFC. Thanks. SCP-2000 06:42, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

FYI: the legal note of the difference between CC 3.0 and 4.0 license by WMF legal team and the comparison table of different CC licenses by Creative Commons. SCP-2000 06:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To compare the differences between the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) licenses version 2.5 and version 4.0, you can visit the official Creative Commons website. They provide the full legal text and license deeds for both versions, allowing you to examine the specific changes and improvements made from CC-BY 2.5 to CC-BY 4.0. Additionally, the website may offer documentation or guides that highlight key distinctions between the two versions, aiding in a comprehensive understanding of the modifications introduced in the newer license. Jasper Awaizeee (talk) 15:50, 5 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In relation to a question I raised in a grant discussion, I would like to know how advisory boards of affiliates are selected and operate. Is it normal for an advisory board member 1) to be a member of the affiliate they advise, 2) to receive compensation from the affiliate they advise?, 3) to sign a non-disclosure agreement with the affiliate (or its representative, if the affiliate is not a legal entity)? Plus, I would be happy to learn if there is any relevant documentation, besides the points above. The original discussion was in the user group context, not other kinds of affiliate, if that makes a difference. I suppose the answer might be "every organization do it differently according to their needs" but I would like to know there is a general expectation. whym (talk) 10:49, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Supposedly, there are supposed to be updates for the Movement Strategy 2030. Somehow, I don't see an update since January or February of last year. I suppose the WMF should give us reasons for lack of progress. George Ho (talk) 00:52, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Apologies for writing in English.

The Technical Wishes team at Wikimedia Deutschland is planning to make reusing references easier. For our research, we are looking for wiki contributors willing to show us how they are interacting with references.

• The format will be a 1-hour video call, where you would share your screen. More information here.
• Interviews can be conducted in English, German or Dutch.
• Compensation is available.
• Sessions will be held in January and February.
• Sign up here if you are interested.
• Please note that we probably won’t be able to have sessions with everyone who is interested. Our UX researcher will try to create a good balance of wiki contributors, e.g. in terms of wiki experience, tech experience, editing preferences, gender, disability and more. If you’re a fit, she will reach out to you to schedule an appointment.

We’re looking forward to seeing you, Thereza Mengs (WMDE)