Meta:Babel/Archives/2011-06

Add (abusefilter-log-detail) right to all users

Hi,

I was looking at the edit filters and noticed that when I try to the specific pages which a filter has caught, I was unable to view the pages. This is because on http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AbuseLog&wpSearchFilter= for example, in the "Search the abuse log" box, there is no option for Filter ID:. On the same page on enwiki, any user, including users that are no logged in are able to view this information.

Therefore, to fix this, can you please add the abusefilter-log-detail right to all users as on enwiki, instead of just admin only as on meta?

Thanks,

The Helpful One 18:30, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Note, bug filed. The Helpful One 18:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

• Sounds fine. PeterSymonds (talk) 18:48, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
•  Support. Nemo 07:33, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
• Okay for me -- Quentinv57 ^(talk) 14:07, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
• Fine. ~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 22:17, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
•  Support It would be better if this right is given to users with Autopatrolled and Admin rights on meta as Vandals may misuse it. Vibhijain 08:41, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
• Strong oppose - because of abusive behaviour in the past, vandals that have triggered non-private logs in the past had left private info of others there. It's been cleaned from time to time, but it hasn't been completed yet and since another oversighter and me found yesterday another "wonderful" big oversight failure I think this is is not appropiate and must be reversed as soon as possible. There was a reason to leave it for admins-only. -- Dferg ^{☎ talk} 07:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

  I understand that there's bugzilla:28633, but I don't see the point of making all logs private: if a filter is designed to disallow disclosure of private information, it will be private; if it's not, it won't most likely disallow the edit and an oversight is needed anyway, so we only have to oversight in both places. Is this problem so frequent? Do we really lack oversighters on Meta (it would be very surprising)? Being able to revdelete them would be nice, but if something is not oversighted this means that it's not so private anyway. Nemo 08:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

  Actually very few are what can be called really active. -- Dferg ^{☎ talk} 10:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

  This does not seem to be a problem in enwiki, where there are lots of such stuff. Ruslik 08:53, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

  That there are problems in another place is not a reason to extend the problem over and over. The English Wikipedia is not the center of the world. We're talking about the private data of fellow users that malicious users have disclosed, and until we can be sure there's no private data still exposed there, this should have not been done. Anyway, the bug is fixed and my comment seems irrelevant right now. -- Dferg ^{☎ talk} 10:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Text for nl needs to be changed

As an 'ordinary' user I am not allowed to change the text of the BabelTemplate. Succeeded to change the somewhat insulting text for the level-0 users.

• The complete text in English for category nl is the opposite of the Dutch version and -0 is absent.

Please a correction by someone with the right privileges for said Template. Thx, Patio 15:18, 6 June 2011 (UTC) P.S. I am not there myself...

Hello. What needs to be done? - Would you be able to do it if I temporary reduce the protection level of the template? Regards, -- Dferg ^{☎ talk} 12:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Corrected the category description (5=native, ..., 1=basic; not the other way around). Is there still a problem with the babel template? Jafeluv 13:40, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

It was right before, so I undid your edit. The categories are organized differently than the babel templates. If someone speaks a basic level of Dutch, they would be "nl-1", but they would be organized in the category under "5". The reason for this is because we want to order the people in the category by decreasing fluency, i.e., native speakers should come first. The category description is correct then, since it's supposed to explain how the category is setup rather than how the templates are. Cbrown1023 talk 14:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see -- it was the Dutch version which was incorrect, not the English one. Thanks for the correction. I have to say it's confusing to use the same numbering differently for two purposes, though. Are we the only wiki that does that? Jafeluv 14:42, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I just reversed the Dutch one to hopefully fix the issue—can a Dutch speaker check that for me? :-) It is a little weird if you're expecting it to be the opposite, but it makes sense once you read the category description (well, hopefully!) and there's really no other way to do it. All wikis that use this babel system do that, so it's not just us. Other wikis like enwiki who use the "old babel boxes" do not run into this issue because they use a bajillion categories for every language, something that this system tried to avoid. Cbrown1023 talk 14:47, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Special:Import not available in eu:wp

Hello everybody! In eu:wp we have been working with automatic taxobox in order to create faster taxoboxes. We have seen that in English Wikipedia they have this bunch of pages and we wanted to make an export/import. But our Special:Import is not working as it says no one has permissions to do it. I opened an issue at bugzilla but the answers point that there's not a bug but a permission problem. Does anyone know what do we have to do? Or maybe... is there an easy way to make an export/import of all this templates? -Theklan 11:26, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

As euwiki admins already have the 'import' userright, all you need to do is request adding enwiki as a transwiki import source. Example here. Jafeluv 11:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Done!. I hope it'll work! -Theklan 12:05, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Status of SUL

Hi, I've been searching around and I can't find specifics on the current status of SUL. There are a few questions I have:

1. Is SUL now default for new accounts, or must it still be done manually like legacy users?
2. If it is not default, can users still create new accounts with names taken on other wikis, or is this prevented?
3. How many accounts are unified vs not? This is assuming such data is easily accessible.

If there is a page that holds this information, please point me to it, otherwise I'd appreciate any answers you can give. Thanks! ▫ JohnnyMrNinja (talk / en) 03:46, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

You can find more info in Help:Unified login. Per default all new user accounts are unified.

Regarding your second point: if a global account exists with the name you want to register in a project it does not matter the account does not exist locally, because you will be prevented from doing so. An example: if you wanted to register User:Dferg in a wiki my account don't exist, the SUL system will prevent you from doing so since my account is global and my username is reserved only for me wikimedia-wide, at all public projects.

I do not know if there are any statistics regarding unified accounts vs. non-unified accounts I'm afraid, but others certainly might have.

Regards, -- Dferg ^{☎ talk} 10:57, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I've added some text to Help:Unified login to clarify a few points. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja (talk / en) 23:31, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Translation problem (crosspost)

Please see Template_talk:Ombudsmen. Regards, -- Dferg ^{☎ talk} 15:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Chef de projet fundraising

Si vous êtes candidat au poste de chef de projet fundraising à Wikimedia France, merci de laisser un court message ci dessous :) Anthere 08:03, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Surtout... n'hésitez pas ! ;-) --Edhral 19:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Bonsoir,

Je suis candidat au poste de chef de projet levée de fond chez Wikimédia France. Cordialement, Candidat 52 18:38, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Bonsoir ! (ou 'Bonjour', je suis un peu entre les deux...)

Je suis également candidat au poste de Chef de Projet "Levée de fonds 2011", chez Wikimedia France !

I hope you're all having a good night's sleep ! Hoping to meet you soon ;)

Cordialement, Candidat 85 3:14, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Bonjour,

Je suis également candidat au poste de Chef de projet "levée de fonds 2011".

Au plaisir, --Candidat 96 11:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Bonjour, et voilà un message rapide ?:^]. A bientôt j'espère. Candidat 14 11:10, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Bonsoir à vous tous ! Je suis le candidat 34 prêt à devenir votre chef de projet, et votre partenaire pour collecter des fonds pour Wikimédia France.

A très vite ! Wikipédiennement ! Candidat 34 18:20, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Faut avouer quand même que notre échange doit paraitre un peu mystérieux :) pas un candidat