Open main menu

Contents

April 17: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC + April 4 and 5: LaGuardia Community College Translatathon 2019Edit

April 17, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Metropolitan New York Library Council in Midtown Manhattan. Is there a project you'd like to share? A question you'd like answered? A Wiki* skill you'd like to learn? Let us know by adding it to the agenda.

We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming edit-a-thons, museum and library projects, education initiatives, and other outreach activities.

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Metropolitan New York Library Council (8th floor) at 599 11th Avenue, Manhattan
(note this month we will be meeting in Midtown Manhattan, not at Babycastles)

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Wikimedia New York City Team 21:05, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Thursday April 4 and Friday April 5: Translat-a-thon NYC 2019 @ LaGuardia Community College

Translat-a-thon NYC 2019 @ LaGuardia Community College is hosting the second annual Wikipedia Translatathon! At this event on Thursday evening and during the day Friday this week, anyone from the public is invited to LaGuardia to join students, professors, and CUNY faculty in translating Wikipedia articles among any languages which attendees understand. Themes for this event include public health and the history of New York City.

New York City has a large immigrant population and great diversity of speakers of various languages. Among all schools in New York City, LaGuardia has the highest percentage of immigrant students, the highest percentage of students who speak a language other than English as their first language, and the greatest representation of language diversity. It is a strength of LaGuardia that it can present "Wikipedia translatathons", which are Wikipedia translation events.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

User:Enterprisey/easy-brfaEdit

Hi Enterprisey, it looks like several people are using your script - however it does not make use of the standard Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/InputInit values (namely it does not include namespace). Can you fix this (or better make use of the actual InputInit page dynamically)? — xaosflux Talk 22:18, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Yup, can do. Probably will get to this tomorrow (TM). Enterprisey (talk!) 06:49, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

XfD statsEdit

Doesn't seem to be working for me. CoolSkittle (talk) 21:57, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Croatian WikipediaEdit

Please hide this personal attack on adminstrator Kubura on the page of Croatia Wikipedia. Bye. Uspjeh je ključ života (talk) 09:05, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

AfD statsEdit

Do you have any idea why my vote at Articles for deletion/2019–20 Eredivisie is not being parsed? --qedk (t c) 18:05, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

@QEDK: It's the line breaks in the AFD !vote, I had a similar challenge with my !vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shania (given name). The workaround for now is to state or repeat the bolded !vote on the same line as your signature. On a related note, there's an editor, I forgot who it is, who will end nominations with something like: "Therefor I believe this is a delete. ~~~~" AfD Stats parses that as a delete !vote, not a nomination. Sam Sailor 18:49, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 5Edit

ArbCom 2019 special circularEdit

 
Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)Edit

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


Administrators' newsletter – May 2019Edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

  Arbitration

  • In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
  • Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

  Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

May 22: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYCEdit

May 22, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Metropolitan New York Library Council in Midtown Manhattan. Is there a project you'd like to share? A question you'd like answered? A Wiki* skill you'd like to learn? Let us know by adding it to the agenda.

Featuring this month a presentation by Interference Archive guests, and a group discussion on the role of activist archives and building wiki content based on ephemeral publications and oral histories.

To close off the night, we'll also have Wikidojo - a group collaborative writing activity / vaudeville!

We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming edit-a-thons, museum and library projects, education initiatives, and other outreach activities.

7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Metropolitan New York Library Council (8th floor) at 599 11th Avenue, Manhattan
(note this month we will be meeting in Midtown Manhattan, not at Babycastles)

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Wikimedia New York City Team 17:10, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Talk Page ConsultationEdit

Hi Enterprisey,

Just thought I'd drop you a note that part of the phase-2 talk page discussions involves discussion on easier replying. While this was originally in the form of finding out details on if something should be created, it has unsurprisingly occurred to editors that this sounds rather like re-inventing the wheel Nosebagbear (talk) 13:38, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Nosebagbear: For what it's worth, I did post a notice to User talk:Enterprisey/reply-link before I noticed your comment here.
To some degree, I am a little worried that I might be way out of my depth in discussing all these hypothetical software changes, but for this particular topic, I think there are fairly good reasons that creating a new interface altogether wouldn't be reinventing the wheel with respect to reply-link.
For starters, reply-link is heavily customized specifically to suit the community processes of the English Wikipedia, and contains several hard-coded page names and even some section headers. A lot of text is matched solely using regular expressions, which would be problematic for things that change significantly between wikis like date formats and templates. Even if it were to to be generalized, it would probably take a fair amount of work to adapt it to the 700 other Wikimedia projects. Something developed as a full MediaWiki extension by the WMF would also normally have to go through the bureaucracy involved (e.g. security audits) and would have to be usable on any MediaWiki installation right from the outset, including in right-to-left languages.
You also have the issue of having to adapt this somewhat fragile user script over hundreds or thousands of different wikis' conversational conventions. Even on the English Wikipedia, there are quite a lot of experienced users who seem to be completely unaware that they're not indenting comments correctly and that the little bullet doesn't really affect how anyone reads their comments. This is mainly relevant because reply-link easily fails if users don't format their comments correctly (and might even fail for some values of "correctly"). With a complete interface, you would be able to circumvent this due to users being encouraged to reply inline (in contrast to the current situation of users having to find the user script and choose to opt-in), as well as errors being either glaringly visible or smoothed over by the software in most cases.
These two reasons alone would make a new extension much more attractive to the WMF and possibly more convenient to implement, because an interface that has to be re-customized for deployment on each site and only works 95% of the time is not a very good interface, particularly if the intention is that users shouldn't have to learn to use an alternative. I could go on about accessibility, design, the visual editor and adding new sections (though some of these are flaws of the core software, not reply-link). Reply-link is ultimately a band-aid that serves to lessen some of the glaring flaws of a part of MediaWiki that wasn't designed properly (if at all) from the outset. This doesn't mean that reply-link isn't any good – in fact, I think it's surprisingly good given the limitations that it has to work around – but it's still a band-aid, and it would be better if it weren't necessary at all. Jc86035 (talk) 23:38, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Enterprisey".