Community noticeboard/Archive 16

__NOINDEX__

Header Footer Extension
I need help on using Header Footer extension. I followed instructions as appear on MediaWiki.org website. Still, I cannot display them on my wiki. Emad4ald (talk) 09:29, 24 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi, what is your wiki's URL and have you followed this? 11:48, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

How I change blockquote css?
In Editor I put blockquote tag, "" and I want to change this style. Any idea? Bimagv (talk) 07:32, 23 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Can you provide more information, such as a link to where the issue is? Some more details on what you are looking for exactly would be nice too. Thanks, Integer talk 19:38, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I want to change css for this html tag:  "Mempelajari proses query" . I can't find whereis file css in miraheze. Can you help me? Bimagv (talk) 11:51, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * You can add styling for the  tag in your wiki's   page. I hope this helps!  19:30, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Every page has "From "
My wiki (https://dawn.miraheze.org) is showing "From Dawn Project" in every single page since I imported several modules and templates from Wikipedia. I'm not sure how to troubleshoot/solve this. Any guidance is appreciated. Isagani (talk) 17:17, 25 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Isagani This set by an interface message, and can be ✅ by blanking your MediaWiki:Tagline interface message. Hope this helps. Dmehus (talk) 18:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Request to change the forwarding destination of interwiki links
About usopedia interwiki links The "cw" interwiki link was https://wiki.chakuriki.net/index.php/, but since the site has moved, I want a "cw" interwiki link to change for https://chakuwiki.miraheze.org/. Thank you.

I'm sorry that the English text is difficult to understand because it was machine translated.--虎之介 (talk) 08:22, 24 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello, what is your wiki's URL? I can see three wikis which have the word "usopedia" in your global accounts list, one of which is private. Could you please clarify which one you are talking about? Private wikis need Stewards but public wikis' interwiki data can be changed by Interwiki Administrators. Thank you. 08:43, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok. I will do soon.--虎之介 (talk) 11:44, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It is https://newusopedia.miraheze.org. Please deal with it. I'm sorry to late. --虎之介 (talk) 12:13, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * 虎之介 This is now ✅. Dmehus (talk) 13:01, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

What does "interwiki prefix" on special:import refer to?
Pinsplash (talk) 13:08, 28 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi, what is the URL of the wiki you are importing from? 13:19, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It's http://src-ents.shoutwiki.com Pinsplash (talk) 14:24, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Pinsplash The interwiki prefix is a critically important field when importing pages or templates with Special:Import on wikis. When specified correctly per your wiki's Special:Interwiki table, which includes the global interwiki table from this wiki, it will provide a link to the external wiki's user pages of each of contributors of the revisions from which imported. That wiki isn't in the global interwiki table, so any interwiki administrator or steward can add that to your wiki's interwiki table prior to you importing, if you wish. Dmehus (talk) 15:25, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Requests for interwiki
We need some new prefixes for using. Here are they.

On [//nmfwiki.miraheze.org NMFWiki]:
 * touid
 * fid
 * gid
 * nmfl

On [//mets.miraheze.org NMFLWiki]: (It was for MediaWiki Extensions' Chinese translations before, but we give up building and turn it into another sister project.)
 * nmf
 * dic
 * sou

Thanks, 开炸弹车 (talk) 14:39, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

✅ these for you. Separately, I noticed that your wiki doesn't use the GlobalUserPage extension; however, my user page link was blue. Would you mind deleting the good-faith local user page for me? In practical terms, it becomes very difficult for me to manage my local user pages, so, other than  and , I generally prefer just to have a redlink on wikis without the GlobalUserPage extension enabled. Thanks! Dmehus (talk) 16:27, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * 15:25, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I have ✅ all interwiki prefixes with the exception of  prefixes which I am not too confident about. I am waiting for someone else to go through these links. In the meantime, could you please check if the prefixes I added are working properly? Please note that I have not checked the   and   flags. Please let me know if you want me to change that. Thank you.  16:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * 开炸弹车 I've added the  prefixes above, as NetEase is a major Chinese web portal akin to Sina.com and Sohu.com. It's essentially like the Naver of China. So, I've
 * Thanks a lot. I have deleted the page and enabled the GlobalUserPage extension. --开炸弹车 (talk) 01:50, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * 开炸弹车 Oh, ✅. Thank you very much! Dmehus (talk) 01:55, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Issue with the Page Creator source code on the Viva Piñata Gameplay Page Creator.
You see, just days ago, my new wiki was recently created, but I seem to be having an issue with the Page Creator source code. It's not giving me the result I wanted. Is there any way that I could fix this issue? Please feel free to contact me as soon as you can. Thank you. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 15:07, 29 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Enable the "InputBox" extension in the following location: Special:ManageWiki/extensions. --Anton (talk) 15:16, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, that's right. I totally forgot about that. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 15:17, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * And it has been ✅. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 15:18, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Great! Now it seems to be working. It was nice to be helpful :) Anton (talk) 15:19, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ I'm glad you could help. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 15:37, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Redirect failure in Risapedia
Risapedia has suffered a failure in the redirects that change the title of the links. For example: If Link 1 were a redirect to Link 2, the title of Link 1 would be "Link 1" and clicking on it sends you to Link 2. But the failure makes Link 1 have the title of "Link 2", as if  had been entered, but only   was entered. Hope someone helps me, because I still can't locate the bug. --Anthony8IA (talk) 22:36, 31 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Anthony8IA I assume you're talking about wiki redirects. Looking at Special:DoubleRedirects and Special:BrokenRedirects on your wiki, I see that you have only three of the former and none of the latter. So, that's great news. If you link to redirects, rather than the actual name of the pages, on your wiki's pages, and you have optional displayed (piped) text, then yes, you will need to also update the piped text when you update the link. This is not a bug, though; rather, it is intended and by design. You can save a bit of typing by using a pipe trick to automatically insert optional displayed (piped) text into the wikilink. Note that pipe tricks only work on wiki pages; not in edit and log summaries. Hope that helps. If I've misunderstood you, please clarify. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 23:23, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Dmehus Thank you for answering my message. And no, that's not what I meant. What I meant to say is that redirects change the link title. If you browse the wiki pages a bit, you will notice some strange links. Taking what I said earlier, redirects cause links to act as if  has been placed, when it is actually  . This problem damages shortcuts and hinders the writing of articles. To put it more clearly, if "PS5" were a redirect to "PlayStation 5", when placing in an article , instead of simply showing "PS5", it shows "PlayStation 5". I hope I have explained myself better. Anthony8IA (talk) 00:13, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Anthony8IA I'm not aware of this being a bug, but I'm still not quite clear on what the problem it is you're trying to report. Can you link to a specific page on Risapedia, and point out a specific redirect where the problem occurs, please? Dmehus (talk) 00:21, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Dmehus On the main page, in the section "¿Sabias Qué..." In the part where "República de Hisqáida" appears it should only say "Hisqáida" . Anthony8IA (talk) 00:44, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Anthony8IA . I do see this bug, and indeed, the displayed text of the first linked page is to the actual name of the page, not the linked redirect. I'm unsure if this is a Miraheze-specific configuration issue or an upstream MediaWiki core or extension bug. Given that this bug doesn't apparently occur on the Wikimedia wikis, I'm inclined to believe it is the former. So, could you please create a Phabricator task, clearly defining the problem, linking to the above example page(s)/redirect(s), and highlighting any step(s) to reproduce the issue? Assign the,  , and   projects, and triage the task as normal priority. When you're finished, returned to this thread, and link to the Phabricator ticket number. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 01:02, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Ready Phabricator # T6803 Anthony8IA (talk) 01:40, 1 February 2021 (UTC) Amended to convert external link to an interwiki link and add clarity by Dmehus (talk) on 01:59, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Anthony8IA ✅. We can follow that task there now. Dmehus (talk) 02:05, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Upload migration
Good thing that you are migrating to new hardware: happy to hear.

But how we ended up disabling upload that I am not really happy with.

Three questions:


 * 1) Why did Miraheze have to perform this this suddenly, unannounced?
 * 2) Devil's advocate: Universal Omega claimed "emergency" @ Discord (ref) but what kind of emergency?
 * 3) When will it finish? Tonight? Tomorrow? Next Week? Next decade? "as soon as possible" can be next century. You probably need to be more explicit about the ETA.

Communication is even more critical in emergency. If everyone doesn't have full insight on what is going on, it causes frustration for all parties involved.

Users don't know wtf is going on, so they ask the question, and sysadmins are unhappy because they keep getting same questions, and not really everybody reads the previous discussions. &mdash; revi  02:48, 2 February 2021 (UTC)


 * –revi I agree it could've been better announced. As far as our deadline goes, our existing server commitment is up on 3 February 2021, thus the urgency. However, Southparkfan is looking into whether we can possibly renew the existing cloud server on a no commitment basis for another month, if we need it. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 02:59, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

I have been blocked
I have been blocked on the wiki Schule der drei Meister. This wiki is private, I can't even read it (except the main page) and have not made a single edit, obviously. So why on earth did they block me? Lily (Lilypond Wiki · talk to me · little garden · my wiki of everything) 07:57, 2 February 2021 (UTC)


 * People sometimes do it to accounts they don't recognise. I wouldn't worry. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  11:00, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Lily Thank you for this request. While it doesn't require attention of global functionaries, largely this is the result of new wiki bureaucrats not being familiar with the fact that users cannot view private wikis unless added to the  group and also not realizing accounts are auto-added by CentralAuth. We could do well to better explain this in FAQ. Nevertheless, I'll try and reach out to the local wiki bureaucrat(s)' via their Meta user talk page and educate them on how private wikis work and that blocking users from private wikis, particularly when the public Main Page is   protected is rather useless. Dmehus (talk) 14:02, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your answers. Afaik blocking does not even prevent a user from reading a wiki, am I right? Is there even a possibility in the MediaWiki software to block a specific user from reading? And even if so, they could just logout, LilyLilyu - smile.svg (Lilypond Wiki · talk to me · little garden · my wiki of everything) 05:26, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If you're wiki was not part of a farm, you could make reading require an account and then use $wgBlockDisablesLogin to make it so blocking made the account unusable. For us, the account would have to be locked and the wiki marked as private but 'read' given to users. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  07:52, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

I want to check which feature can I add from this template to tuscriaturas.miraheze.org
I wrote a Phabricator ticket about a Wikipedia template I found, #T6768

The template provides some features for Wikipedia, but is customized. If we change the calls to Wikipedia for calls to Miraheze, maybe we could adapt some of that features to Miraheze? Some are already available. Category tree, Special:AllPages, and Random page are already possible in Miraheze, but category intersection and graphic I think need more work. What do you think? Is it possible to adapt some of these features to Miraheze? Avengium (talk) 19:52, 24 January 2021 (UTC)


 * and, do you think putting features like category intersection or graphic is doable or should I forget about it? Avengium (talk) 11:12, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Could you please share a specific example? Wikipedia can be using templates, interface messages, extensions etc. all of which can be used on Miraheze unless they rely on any (yet-to-be-released) MediaWiki version 1.36 feature. 12:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Avengium I don't know what you mean by "category intersection and graphic," so can't really comment at this point on whether it's perhaps requesting either a local Miraheze configuration change or an upstream feature request, as applicable. Can you clarify this just a bit? Dmehus (talk) 16:35, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * ,, the names are names of features used and written on the template at https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Category-article-count. and MediaWiki:Category-subcat-count.
 * Category intersection is what this wiki is using: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/ one of the fields of that form is a "radio button" that says "Intersection" or "Union". That web is accesed automatically with the link on the template named "Intersección". That link is autocompleted to: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=catscan2/quick_intersection.php&language=es&project=wikipedia&categories=CATEGORYNAME&depth=3&format=html&interface_language=es&norun That gives a feature.
 * Graphic is another feature, this time by: https://iw.toolforge.org/vcat/catgraphRedirect?wiki=eswiki&title=Category:CATEGORYNAME&links=graph. Graphic is a slow page so i think it spends more or make more actions. The graph is like an internet diagram, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Internet_diagrams.
 * In the Miraheze task https://phabricator.miraheze.org/T6768 i tried to explain myself about the features on the template i saw at: MediaWiki:Category-article-count. Avengium (talk) 18:03, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I have not checked PetScan's code but it seems to be using the MediaWiki API. This is possible with JavaScript on wiki pages if you do not want to make an external website (which I would not recommend unless you are familiar with how APIs work). There are examples on MediaWiki.org that you can follow. If they do not help or you think I am misunderstanding your question, could you please post a more specific question? Thank you. 08:59, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If you do end up deciding you want an external website like PetScan, you could do something like this. 09:05, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * hi, I think Petscan does a "category intersection", but I don't know how the original website works. Avengium (talk) 10:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Custom/fictional language script
I'm currently working on a fictional nation and a conlang with it. I would like to use a custom script (conscript) on my wiki, like in line with normal text. Is there any way to do this currently? Any help would be appreciated. Dread (talk) 13:52, 1 February 2021 (UTC)


 * You could do this by creating a font file, hosting it on an external server, and then applying it to the text using CSS. You could also use images if that works for you. Which script do you want to use? ~ El Komodos Drago (talk to me) 14:29, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

A problem with blogs
Every time a user makes a blog on the wikis I manage, they get an error message stating a blog with the same name already exists (when really one doesn't) rather than letting them know that the blog was created successfully like when making normal pages. Is there any way I can fix this? --DeciduousWater534 (talk) 21:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Hey! I noticed this in your question and I will try to help. Is this a MediaWiki extension? If so, what? --Anton (talk) 12:26, 29 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The extension the wikis use for blogs is called "BlogPage". --DeciduousWater534 (talk) 00:18, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * DeciduousWater534 Can you link to a blog post on one of your wikis where this problem/error occurs? This should help diagnose this a bit. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 00:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Here’s a link to a recent blog post on Crappy Games Wiki. —DeciduousWater534 (talk) 23:46, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Risapedia templates bug
Hi. The Risapedia has suffered another failure. This time it is in the templates. I thought that the wiki is Spanish language, the namespace "Plantilla:" changed to "Template:", which affects the wiki. Greetings. Anthony8IA (talk) 21:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)


 * This may be related to #T6826. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 21:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Please join IRC/Discord and let us know or leave a comment on the task if it's still affecting your wiki. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  08:23, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

How to solve Template loop detected
Lukeseaver (talk) 06:30, 9 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Remove the template that causes it to try and display itself. If you link to the page then we can advise. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  08:24, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It'll always happen if you call a template into the same template. Make use of and to solve this issue. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 12:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Requests for help regarding マイン乾布's massive vandalism on chakuwiki
Hi,

chakuwiki was vandalized by マイン乾布 last night, and I'm here to request for help on several ways. Thanks in advance, Bakaba (talk) 22:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) The vandal has moved over 100 pages in a complicated way, and as it's hard to restore all by ourselves, we would like to request CVT members to help us recover the wiki.
 * 2) There have been several cases of spoofed admin accounts on chakuwiki, taking advantage of difficulty for confirming their identity because of recent migration and closure of the original wiki. Thus I'd like to request for globally locking such spoofing and vandalism-only accounts. They are:
 * 3) *マイン乾布
 * 4) *アイレヴォ
 * 5) *Amberangel


 * Bakaba Yeah, this should've been requested at stewards' noticeboard, but I can move this thread there afterward. In the mean time, looking at Special:Nuke for マイン乾布 on the given wiki, it looks like the page and redirect creations have been deleted already, unless the  needs to be manually removed/blanked first? Can you clarify a bit what, exactly, you would like done in terms of the vandalism remediation? In terms of the global locks, I can indeed handle that right now. Dmehus (talk) 22:58, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for locking.
 * As for the recovery, please check out their move log. This time, they have acted as a mass-and-random mover.--Bakaba (talk) 23:32, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * As a further note, I'd like to point out that アイレヴォ and Amberangel have acted as a seemingly good-faith account, and reverting their edits might be improper, unlike マイン乾布's obvious vandalism. Bakaba (talk) 23:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Bakaba Ah, okay. I'm a bit confused, though, with regard to edits by アイレヴォ and Amberangel. If they're being locked as vandalism only accounts, for which we obviously have to rely on your judgment due to your speaking Japanese fluently, why are they reverting vandalism by マイン乾布? I'll take a look at the move logs for マイン乾布, though. Dmehus (talk) 23:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think they are reverting マイン乾布's edit, because they had been blocked locally before マイン乾布 vandalized the wiki. Those who are reverting now should be admins whose identities are confirmed. Bakaba (talk) 02:02, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I tried to revert a couple things that Amberangel left behind, but I noticed you reverted my edit on one of them, realizing I may have done an overkill at that point. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 02:40, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I see that Dmehus has dealt with some parts of this request already. We would like to help out with the rest of your request, but we have some reservations as it is quite tricky to understand with the machine translation in order to see what is vandalism and what isn't, and we wouldn't want to revert something that isn't actually vandalism and create more work for you. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 17:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * What do you guys think should happen to the rest of those LTAs targeting the  still going after the Japanese admins of that said wiki, if it helps with the investigation? DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 18:03, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Concern
Is there any protection on Miraheze against hacking or similar behavior?

I am a little worried about someone, whom may or may not attempt to illegally get into my account. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 21:25, 12 February 2021 (UTC)


 * MarioSuperStar77 I mean, it's users responsibilities to ensure their account(s) are secure. You should ensure you have a very strong password, at minimum, and a confirmed e-mail address associated to your account. You should also consider setting your preferences or global preferences to include notifications, via e-mail and on-wiki, of logins from unfamiliar devices. Finally, you may wish to consider enabling two-factor authentication; however, do not lose your scratch codes and ensure your e-mail address is kept up to date. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 21:29, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

I would like to add a bureaucrat in my wiki.
How can I add other bureaucrats ? I want to add my friend to manage this wiki. ItsKandar (talk) 14:55, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * ItsKandar ✅! You can do this in Special:UserRights on your wiki. Hope that helps. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 15:12, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks! ItsKandar (talk) 15:34, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅! Dmehus (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

ManageWiki/Settings broken?
I was setting up my wiki, and after making several changes, I found out that somehow I can no longer save changes made on mh:nanon334:Special:ManageWiki/settings.

I can still submit the changes, but nothing happens.

I need to fix my logo URL to, but I have no idea what to do because I can't manage my wiki through ManageWiki/settings.

Can anyone help me solve this issue? Thanks. なのん団名誉顧問 (talk) 16:30, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * なのん団名誉顧問 Note that due to the ManageWiki UI's design, changes made will not show within the ManageWiki UI until you exit the UI and go back in to the given page. Also, check to see in your Special:Log/managewiki if the changes were saved. If they were, then there should be no issue here. Additionally, note that logo changes can take up to 24 hours sometimes to be fully changed as it is either a MediaWiki or a Varnish cache issue. You should also try to use  +   to force refresh your page. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 16:36, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Dmehus I've already checked RecentChanges and Log/managewiki only to find that no logs were made.--なのん団名誉顧問 (talk) 16:42, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Let me try testing for you then. Dmehus (talk) 16:45, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I hope it will work fine.--なのん団名誉顧問 (talk) 16:48, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * なのん団名誉顧問 Okay, I tried to make the change, and nothing happened. So I wonder if this is a ManageWiki cache issue? I will ping Reception123 to this request and see if there's a maintenance script they can run on your wiki. Also, I noticed you had  preceding the filename. Note that won't work, as you need to use the   URL you posted above, ensuring your files are 135x135px. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 16:51, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Dmehus Thanks for trying. Indeed I found out it didn't when I logged out (I suppose it's because the wiki is private), which is why I need to fix it to the correct URL above.--なのん団名誉顧問 (talk) 16:55, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * なのん団名誉顧問 I've asked in . Paladox and Universal Omega responded, the latter of whom has seen the issue. It is an apparent upstream bug with regard to the data input validation used in the  field. He will be temporarily enabling the SocialProfile extension, making the change needed, then disabling the SocialProfile extension and any extension-added user rights/groups. Dmehus (talk) 17:11, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Dmehus Thanks for the investigation. I have confirmed that it is now fixed.--なのん団名誉顧問 (talk) 21:41, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Japanese translation
Soon, we'll finish translating Meta content into Japanese! All that's left is Template:Mental Health Resources. I would like to thank the User:開拓者 and everyone else who translated many pages before I started the translation process. Thank you 01:37, 18 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Waki285 Wow, ✅! I know you've certainly been active as a translator, but didn't realize you were this close to finishing the Japanese translations. Though we're not ready to prepare any new pages for translation, please do let me know if you're interested in doing Japanese translations on Miraheze Commons or Miraheze Template Wiki. Dmehus (talk) 01:46, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Great work! claps 04:51, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Indeed, that's great work! I think a round of applause is in order. applauds Sabelöga (talk) 06:12, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Question about wiki creators creating this own wikis
Hello. I am wondering if it is usually okay or encouraged that wiki creators create and approve their own wikis. In my personal opinion, I do not think it is really a problem even though I do think it would be encouraged that wiki creators have another one peer review their request for impartiality reasons. However, I do have to say that when I was looking at wiki creator activity, I came across this request and find it a bit unjust that a wiki creator can request/have their wiki created with such a short description that I imagine would in other circumstances mean that a wiki would get rejected. DeeM28 (talk) 12:17, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, I saw this request specifically and thought about it. Personally, if I request a wiki, I will have it approved by another wiki creator (because my COI rules) - excluding one request, I created wiki myself. Technically, wiki creators should be able to approve their own wiki requests, because they should know all rules, etc.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 12:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * DeeM28 Two things. First, yes, it's perfectly acceptable for wiki creators to approve or create, as applicable, their own wikis; however, they should define a clear purpose and scope for their wiki. I'm not sure whether I noticed that specific request by that wiki creator you mentioned, but I have noticed several approved wikis from that wiki creator with descriptions that aren't meeting our requirements, and have planned to engage with the wiki creator to remind them to ensure each wiki they approve had a clear purpose and scope per Content Policy. It's also worth noting that wiki creators can create their wiki directly, but convention or custom is such that it's recommended they still use Special:RequestWiki in most cases. Second, with regard to wiki creator activity, note that for the purposes of inactivity, the policy is three months of global community activity on all platforms, so one cannot merely assess wiki creating activity or even other activity on Meta, but rather, they must examine all activity (i.e., on all attached wikis, on GitHub, on Phabricator, and on Discord and IRC&mdash;some flexibility is allowed on the latter two platforms as not all channels are publicly logged). Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 16:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , Thank you for both of your answers, they were helpful. It would be useful to engage with that wiki creator as I think wiki creators do need to follow the same standards whether it is their own wiki or it is not. If I was a wiki creator I would do the same as MrJaroslavik and prefer that someone else created it in order for the process to be completely impartial. I have looked once again at Msnhinet8's wiki creations and something else that does concern me as well is that they are mostly creating their own wikis and not other requested wikis. Will this be part of your message to him? DeeM28 (talk) 16:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * DeeM28 I probably won't include this message, no, but I will likely or may link to this discussion and mentioned that others have shared similar concerns. In terms of whether a wiki creator approves their own wiki, I'm reluctant to endorse the idea that they should not approve their own wikis as I agree with MrJaroslavik above that they should understand Content Policy fully and define a clear purpose and scope for their wikis; rather, they should be certain that their description meets, or ideally exceeds, what we expect in terms of a defined purpose and scope for the wiki. I'll try and get to my note for the wiki creator in the next several days, though. Dmehus (talk) 16:39, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If I am not mistaken, in the past 6 months every approved request was for Msnhinet8's own wikis. I understand if some wiki creators want to approve their own requests; I do not think that is a terrible thing to do, but this wiki creator seems to only be approving his/her/their own requests and I do not think that is an adequate use of the tools and I also do not think that that was mentioned in the original wiki request. DeeM28 (talk) 16:45, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * DeeM28 Yes, I'm not sure if it was every request or not, but I have definitely noticed that most of their approved wikis have been apparently their own wikis. That's not great, to be perfectly honest, and something that I will address. The downside to them giving up the bit, though, is they are not fluent in English, and Google Translate is, well, not great, to say the least, with the Asian languages (especially Mandarin or Cantonese). Their wikis haven't been problematic from a Content Policy perspective, but my concern is just that if the bit were removed (either by them resigning or because it was later removed by a Steward), is that they may have difficulty articulating the purpose for their wiki. We really could use a wiki creator who speaks both fluent Mandarin, Cantonese, and English, in my opinion. Dmehus (talk) 16:53, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response and I am glad that you will address it. I fully agree that wiki creators who understand and can speak more languages are very much necessary. There is a little irony with the last part however as they are not currently articulating the purposes clearly in either language 😉. DeeM28 (talk) 16:58, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed, and I do see the irony there. Dmehus (talk) 17:30, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

ログインできません
タイトルにも書かせていただきましたが、ログインできません. その為ipになっていますが、自称噓つきです. 自称嘘つき 06:57, 19 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Above question translates using Google Translate as, "I wrote it in the title, but I can't log in. Therefore, it is an ip, but it has a self-proclaimed lie." Title translates as, "I can't login." 自称嘘つき, what's the error message you are receiving? Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 15:18, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Can you please try clearing your cookies for ?  15:21, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, I didn't recommend that, as I didn't want to potentially confuse the issue, if that's not the reason for why they can't login. Additionally, if it is the reason, and it's related to session hijacking, there's a few additional steps required. So, let's just wait a bit for the requestor to comment with the specific error message received. Dmehus (talk) 15:27, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I will post my English translation.
 * title:I can't log in
 * description:As I wrote in the title, I can't log in. Therefore, although it is posted with an IP address, the real account name is '自称嘘つき'.
 * If its helpful then im happy.
 * -- 08:46, 20 February 2021 (UTC) I inserted a line break for clarity-- 08:51, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

I tried it again and was able to log in. Excuse me. --自称嘘つき (talk) 05:18, 21 February 2021 (UTC)


 * 自称嘘つき Oh, this is ✅ news. I'm glad to hear it. Thanks for updating us! Dmehus (talk) 07:24, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Weird request...
The wiki I made here, https://thesciencearchives.miraheze.org/wiki/, was based on a FANDOM/Wikia site I made that was essentially the same thing but had many pages protected so that it would be more reliable. The site was eventually pulled down due to breaking FANDOM's TOU. So would it be okay if I do the same thing to my wiki and protect all main namespace pages? (I'm not very good at HTML). Thanks. Joey717 (talk) 02:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Joey717 Yes, you can protect all pages in your wiki's  namespace individually or protect your   namespace at a given restriction level, but it's not obvious what you're trying to avoid or why the Fandom version of the wiki was dropped for breaking Fandom's Terms of Service, so I can't really comment on whether it's good or not. Can you clarify that a bit? But yes, as to your first question, you can definitely protect pages or namespace at a certain level. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 02:48, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I want it to be more reliable than Wikipedia. Joey717 (talk) 03:19, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Joey717 Oh, that makes sense then, and yes, you absolutely can go into Special:ManageWiki/namespaces on your wiki and protect your wiki's  namespace at whatever protection/restriction level you wish. You might also look into enabling the Moderation extension in Special:ManageWiki/extensions. Dmehus (talk) 03:23, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Joey717 (talk) 07:56, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem. Glad we were able to help. :) Dmehus (talk) 07:57, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Infobox needed - help
If a steward or admin would be so kind as to help me create an infobox for my wiki - this is the page that's got the problem:

https://altuniverseuk1182.miraheze.org/wiki/Holden_Reihi

I'm trying to create a vehicle infobox like the one seen at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Civic_(eighth_generation)

I can create templates, but getting infoboxes to work is a nightmare.

I'll give someone temp sysop privileges to do this if you need. Would really appreciate the help to expand this! --KingstonuHull-h1986 (talk) 12:44, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You are right, those templates on Wikipedia are a nightmare to copy because there are so many other templates included which include other templates and so on. Besides that there are Lua procedures which are hard to look through. Therefore I recommend to design a much simpler template which could have the same parameters as in the Wikipedia and look nearly the same, LilyLilyu - smile.svg (Lilypond Wiki · talk to me · little garden · my wiki of everything) 05:52, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Infobox
I need help with editing infoboxes, what's the default for infoboxes and if there is none how can I set it up Caker18 (talk) 22:40, 24 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Caker18 Thank you for your question. Please see this frequently asked question and this help page for this commonly asked question. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 22:59, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Resetting a wiki
I created a wiki today (gwangsi.miraheze.org), and I tried to import a template from Wikipedia. It imported Module:TNT, and now it keeps throwing errors on template pages. As I didn't add very much info, I would like to know if I would be able to reset / format my wiki due to the mess I've accidentally created. C.antczak (talk) 22:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC)


 * C.antczak You can request to have your wiki deleted, your database dropped, and your wiki recreated on Phabricator; however, I don't think that would be needed for a bad import of Module:TNT. You could just delete Module:TNT, or restore to an earlier, correct revision of Module:TNT. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 22:36, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

How to patrol recent changes effectively
In Special:RecentChanges, unpatrolled edits will have a “ ! ” mark (if you have the permission to patrol). But patrolling recent changes seems inconvenient and time-consuming.

For example, if there is an array of edits from one person on one page, these edits will be collapsed in RecentChanges. I can look at the changes made by these couple of edits in one page, but it seems I cannot patrol these edits directly — I have to patrol these edits respectively, which takes much time.

Besides, for Flow discussions, it seems I have to patrol the comments in respective pages, which is quite inconvenient.

I'm not familiar with patrolling. Is there any method to improve the efficiency of patrolling? Thanks. SolidBlock (talk) 13:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * SolidBlock, thank for the question, which is a good one for which I think there is no one right answer. I'll attempt to answer it with my patrolling strategies. Firstly, I usually use mainly the Special:NewPages page for patrolling, though this will only patrol new page creations across namespaces within a given timeframe (last 180 days, as far as I am aware), as I find Special:RecentChanges cumbersome from a workflow perspective for similar reasons to the ones you cited. That won't catch all recent changes, of course. So, when I do do RC patrolling, I'll usually either expand the arrow (where there are multiple changes by the same user(s)), and right-click and open the diff in a new tab, closing it once patrolled, or I'll actually open the link to the revision(s) in a new tab, then patrol all related revisions via the page history, beginning from the beginning. There are also some user scripts, which can also be gadgets if you prefer, related to patrolling, which you may find useful. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 14:40, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll try finding the user scripts through the link you gave. --SolidBlock (talk) 03:00, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, great. :) Dmehus (talk) 03:16, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I found no one that can effectively mark page as patrolled within the user script list. The script 'RC Patrol' can view recent changes effectively, but it cannot mark page as patrolled at present. --SolidBlock (talk) 12:03, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Proposal to enable Extension Labeled Section Transclusion
Hello, i propose enabling of Labeled Section Transclusion extension on Meta-Wiki. I doing some template work and want to create for example page "Meta:Templates", then insert sections (like "Social media userboxes" or "Inline talk templates") using section transclusion into documentation subpages of templates. Also i propose enabling this extension on LoginWiki, because when i will be done here, i plan to import some templates (like 90% are userboxes) and i dont see problem in creating of one page in project/main namespace. So what are your thoughts? Thank you,--MrJaroslavik (talk) 12:29, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that per what I said about a month ago, since this extension doesn't ultimately change the workflow of this wiki and just provides a small extra feature it should be fine to enable without a full formal discussion, as I can't see why it would be opposed. For the record, in the future it would be preferable to use Administrators' noticeboard for Meta-specific extension requests. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 19:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I personally (while i am not crat or steward) refuse to enable anything on this central wiki without any discussion. Also this page has more watchers and proposal is including proposal for LoginWiki. Sorry, I will not change my opinions/procedures for proposals.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 19:20, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, stewards' noticeboard would be where we'd handle requests for configuration changes to Loginwiki; any request or discussion wouldn't actually occur on Loginwiki itself. Community noticeboard is mainly for technical questions about users' wikis, or for pan-Miraheze proposals. I agree with Reception123 above that Administrators' noticeboard would be the best venue to request this, as Stewards monitor that noticeboard as well. I personally also think this extension is quite non-controversial, and you've articulated a good use for enabling it on Meta. Enabling on Loginwiki also makes sense for the same reasons. Dmehus (talk) 19:25, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * No objection, if this can help you (and maybe others) for doing templates, why not? HeartsDo (Talk / Global / Wiki Creator) 07:33, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I do not really get what the extension does. Could you please describe that in a few sentences for me and anybody else who may be confused? Thank you. 07:52, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure. You have PageA that have 9 sections and is updated + you have PageZ where you want transclude 1 of 9 sections from PageA. You will do it by adding to PageZ. It is not only about templates, can be used for many things, but i want it for templates. Right now we have/i created Template:Template list with subpage for every category of templates. When this enabled i can create one central template/page, then include only one section in template docs. It is my use case.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 08:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Or there is help page on Wikipedia .--MrJaroslavik (talk) 08:05, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Why not if someone finds this useful in that case? :) 08:16, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I first thought about whether opening a new thread for my observation was necessary but decided that it would make sense to add it here. My observation is more focused on the topic of the procedure more than on the merits of enabling this desired extension. I think this is an issue of direct democracy versus representative democracy. Do we want users and the community to have to have a discussion and a vote for every single minor modification to this wiki's settings, or do we want to trust the elected people (Meta administrators and bureaucrats) to make these decisions for the community where the change is minor and uncontroversial? My personal view is that for extensions and settings that do not make any major modifications to the functioning of the wiki and add a very minor feature to the wiki, there is not necessarily a need for a complete discussion and a vote. Instead, a short period of time could be left for any (unlikely) opposes. However, it is clear that there are differing views on the matter, some seem to believe that most extensions and settings could be enabled without a serious discussion while others are apparently of the opinion that no extensions or settings, no matter how minor can be enabled without discussion. As I have made clear, I do not agree with any of these two radical views and wish to take a more balanced approach. Owing to this fact, I believe that the only way forward is to hold a local Meta Request for Comment and have the community decide on this matter and create a policy to regulate which type of extensions and settings can be enabled without a major discussion, and which types require a discussion. The lack of policy and disagreement between administrators themselves (as shown in the Report extension discussion) is clearly disadvantageous and confusing, and the only way to repair that is by having a clear rule. DeeM28 (talk) 09:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * If there is no opposition to my idea to create a policy, I will create a draft to propose to the Meta community. Even if there is opposition to the creation of a policy itself, that can probably be expressed on the proposal itself. DeeM28 (talk) 10:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * There's one more aspect - I don't trust every steward. Also Stewards will work with communities.. in steward policy. Reason why i created this thread is because i wanted give space for possible oppose inputs from community and not request enabling because i want it. And no, this is not vote.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 10:24, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I have now created a draft proposal which I will soon propose as a local Meta RfC. DeeM28 (talk) 17:22, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DeeM28 Meta Wiki is a special wiki with regard to extensions and configuration changes, as it controls certain global configurations. So, Meta bureaucrats do not have ManageWiki permissions. While they close local RfCs and permissions requests requiring a community election, so your draft proposal would need further revision over the next several weeks. Additionally, it may actually be better as a community-endorsed guideline, by way of RfC, to account for unforeseen circumstances requiring an extension or configuration be made by Stewards. Your point above about direct democracy and representative democracy was entirely on point, so really, all this needs is codifying what were previously non-codified conventions and customs. Dmehus (talk) 17:32, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Regarding bureaucrats not being able to change ManageWiki directly via Meta, could Proposal 1 not exist and instead say that Stewards must have a bureaucrat's permission before changing a extension or setting? Even though Stewards would be doing these changes, they would only be doing them if bureaucrats have requested it (or if bureaucrats have evaluated consensus). And of course, if you disagree with my proposed proposal 1, you are free to vote for Proposal 2 instead, but I think the revised Proposal 1 can exist. DeeM28 (talk) 18:09, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DeeM28 I've made some changes to your your proposal, so please review those changes, and let me know any feedback at User talk:DeeM28/Meta extensions and settings policy. What I don't know how to revise, following these changes to the draft proposal, is Proposal 3. With regard to your question, though, yes, we can definitely do that for Proposal 1, and to be clear, Stewards have always requested a Meta bureaucrat review and assent to the change, if it's a Meta-specific configuration change. What we really need to codify, I think, is that this request and bureaucrat assent be made on-wiki and also to clarifying what requires a discussion and what does not. What do you think? Dmehus (talk) 18:16, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I think perhaps my ideas were confusing. My main idea was: if the change is trivial, 24 hours should be left for any possible opposes, if the change is not trivial the date would've been 5 days (as specified in my original Proposal 3). I will also edit Proposal 1 to clarify that Stewards must have a bureaucrat's assent. DeeM28 (talk) 18:28, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I am also confused regarding your modifications to "the location for Stewards to provide notification". Does that imply that if there is no discussion needed for a trivial extension, bureaucrats would not be involved in assenting? If that is so, then that is not what my original proposal intended, and you should create a separate one for that. DeeM28 (talk) 18:31, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DeeM28 No, that's not what I meant by that. What I meant is if the configuration change or extension has potential global impacts, the steward should provide the same 24 hour notification to the community that a Meta bureaucrat would except in a different venue, specified by Proposal 1.2. Feel free to modify/clarify that as well. Dmehus (talk) 18:34, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DeeM28 Yeah...perhaps it was just a bit confusing. I think my modified Proposal 1 has the same aims of your original Proposal 1; essentially, unless it has global impacts, bureaucrats on Meta should (a) determine whether a community discussion is required, for which those exceptions could be modified to that proposal and (b) close said community discussion. If the configuration change is Meta only, yes, I would have no issues with Stewards requesting that at Administrators' noticeboard. Feel free to further modify my suggested modifications to Proposal 1 (and other proposals) that incorporates this feedback. Dmehus (talk) 18:32, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I think perhaps I am confused by the wording. Do you mean in Proposal 1 that while Stewards are responsible for enabling the extensions and settings, bureaucrats are the ones responsible for actually approving and giving assent to these changes? So Stewards would not directly be able to make modifications without bureaucrats agreeing? If so that is the original intention for my Proposal 1, if not, then it would be a different proposal that can be voted on. DeeM28 (talk) 18:40, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Proposal 1.2 also seems to say that, that Stewards are the ones who provide notification which is implying that they are the ones making the decision, where my original intention was that Stewards just effect the changes as requested by bureaucrats. DeeM28 (talk) 18:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No, Proposal 1.2 is meant just to give the community a choice in notification/discussion venue for configuration changes/extension requests with global impacts. Proposal 1.1 is the procedures Meta bureaucrats would follow in notification/discussion venue. Dmehus (talk) 18:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep in mind, too, that any user (including an administrator) can request an extension or configuration change, so it's not Meta bureaucrats that would be requesting Stewards effect the change. It would just be the Meta bureaucrat that gives their on-wiki assessment that the change (a) is within their scope, (b) does not require a community discussion, and (c) has passed the applicable/relevant notification and discussion period, so a Steward can enable/effect the change. Dmehus (talk) 18:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DeeM28 Yeah, essentially, I just clarified your Proposal 1, though we probably should have a Proposal 2 that could be voted on as well, and Proposal 3 will need to be clarified to incorporate the updates. We may also want to articulate some guidelines, either in Proposal 3 or a new proposal, that provide additional guidance to Meta bureaucrats in determining whether the 24 hour or 5 day holding period applies. Dmehus (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I am unfortunately still confused by the fact that Proposal 1.2 and Proposal 1 I understand are saying that there are some situations where bureaucrats are not involved at all and it is Stewards who do everything. Maybe you could edit and clarify those for me? I understand them as saying "In circumstances where there doesn't have to be a discussion, bureaucrats are not involved and Stewards are the ones who advertise the change". DeeM28 (talk) 18:53, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Proposal 1.1 and Proposal 1.2 are just supplementary proposals, with the former applicable to Meta bureaucrats and the latter applicable to stewards, that specify the respective notification/discussion venues that the respective groups are to use. Meta bureaucrats would use the venue specified in Proposal 1.1 for Meta only configuration/extension changes and Stewards would use the venue specified in Proposal 1.2 for Meta ManageWiki configuration/extension changes having global or pan-Miraheze impacts. I'll see if I can tweak that some, though. Dmehus (talk) 18:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it will be useful if you clarify it more, but now I think I understand: Proposal 1.2 only applies to global configuration changes that apply to the whole of Miraheze and are not under the control of the Meta community only and bureaucrats. Maybe that can be made a bit more clear in Proposal 1 as well, that Stewards only have jurisdiction for that. DeeM28 (talk) 19:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Essentially, yeah. This is why it's always been far from clear, due to the shared jurisdiction and because Meta isn't exclusively a local wiki. For example, in normal circumstances, even on Miraheze Template Wiki or Miraheze Commons, each wiki has local bureaucrats, so Stewards simply would not act there, unless it's in the course of performing counter-vandalism activities for which local administration has not acted in a reasonable period of time or it's to perform an action which the local bureaucrats cannot effect (i.e., removing a local  following consensus to do so). It would be simpler, certainly, if, say, Meta Wiki was like those wikis and all global configuration was done, say, on Loginwiki, but Loginwiki is not as actively monitored by the global community, so it wouldn't be as transparent. Dmehus (talk) 20:15, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

不正利用フィルターのエクスポートについて
不正利用フィルターを他wikiからエクスポートする方法が分かりません--自称嘘つき (talk) 06:08, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * If the machine translation is accurate, it appears that you want to "export" abuse filters from other wikis. The only way that can be done is by copying the content from wiki X and pasting it on wiki Y. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 19:05, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * 日本語で欲しかった場合: 機械翻訳が正確であれば、他のWikiから不正利用フィルタを「エクスポート」したいようです. そのための唯一の方法は、wiki Xからコンテンツをコピーしてwiki Yに貼り付けることです. (Reception123さんの回答を直訳したものです）. Integer  talk 03:03, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Is it possible to unattach my account on wikis?
I'm wanting to see if I could remove some wikis from my global account info. --DeciduousWater534 (talk) 00:43, 2 March 2021 (UTC)


 * DeciduousWater534 While we cannot simply detach accounts from a global user account, they could be detached and merged into & reattached to another user account which you've either (a) already created or would (b) later create, I would think. Both global accounts would need to be confirmed to be owned and operated by you. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 00:47, 2 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Sounds interesting, so how exactly does that work? I'm thinking that the merged account will only display the wikis that both accounts attached themselves to? --DeciduousWater534 (talk) 01:28, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, it's important to remember there is both a global account containing the attached, or unattached, local wiki user accounts. Global accounts cannot be merged, as far as I'm aware, so it's a bit of a time-consuming process we wouldn't likely want to make a habit of, but I believe it would involve unattaching selected local user accounts then merging them into the unattached local wiki user accounts of one's other username. When this process had concluded, the merged local wiki user accounts would then be reattached to the user's alternate global account. Hope that makes sense. Dmehus (talk) 01:33, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * We'd need a very good reason to be detaching, renaming and reattaching accounts. It's possible but untested and I'd be inclined to decline doing it. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  10:43, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Well yes, there'd need to be a good reason; however, I wouldn't say it's fair to say it's untested. Wikimedia and other wiki farms/hosting servers have used it, and it's a production quality extension. The main issue is that it's not really scalable for due to the time involved, hence the need for there to be a good reason. Dmehus (talk) 14:10, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, makes sense. So how do I merge the accounts, or where do I go to request a merge? And am I able to pick out which wikis I want to merge the accounts with? --DeciduousWater534 (talk) 02:16, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You can merge 2 global accounts but we're not going to detach accounts from existing wikis without a very good reason. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  10:44, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The reason why I’m wanting to unattach some wikis is because they’re either closed wikis or wikis I have no plans to ever revisit, so that way those wikis don’t clutter my global account info and make it a bit easier to navigate. Is that a good enough reason? —DeciduousWater534 (talk) 15:48, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, anyone there? I still haven't got a response about my reasons for wanting to merge. --DeciduousWater534 (talk) 02:06, 5 March 2021 (UTC)