Community noticeboard

Archives:
 * Archive 1 (23 July 2017 - 25 November 2017)
 * Archive 2 (1 December 2017 - )

Is this a game changer for Wikiversity/Miraheze?
Let me be bold and suggest that this development on Wikiversity has important implications for Miraheze. My contention is that in many ways Miraheze is configured the way Wikiversity and Wikibooks should have been configured. While the Great Wikipedia has dominated Google searches, and deserves its primary spot, something is missing. And that "something" is diversity. There needs to be more than one wiki article per subject. Wikiversity and Wikibooks were attempts to fix that problem. Both failed because they lacked the ability to partition diverse points of view. An article was either on Wikiversity or off Wikiversity. If it was on, it was muddled with all the other efforts from the perspective of a Google search. Miraheze realized that the various "viewpoints" of human thought needed to be placed on separate wikis so that Google could treat them differently.

The extermal link above refers to Wikiversity's decision to create a Draft space that apparently hides all its pages from Google. I don't know the details, but try to find "Wikipedia Draft:Miraheze" using Google. This page on Miraheze is invisible to Google. So is that page. The format of "this" and "that" represent the two extremes Wikiversity might use to display Wikiversity's low quality articles in Draft space. But, while "Draft" space seems to be invisible to Google, all of the Miraheze wikis are independent, and (I hope) will be treated differently by Google.

Miraheze has wisely chosen not to be the judge of a wiki; not to distinguish between the sublime and the ridiculous (that is Google's job.) If this decision to create a Draft space on Wikiversity goes as I hope, then the authors of low quality Wikiversity articles will be faced  with a delima:  either (1) stay on Wikiversity in draft space and be "invisible" to Google, or  (2) put their crap on Miraheze.

But Miraheze should not be offended by this because Miraheze can also host our best work. Miraheze can host the coordination of educational private student wikis wright.miraheze, as well as private collaboration by scholars on wikis like wikiversity.miraheze. The significant feature of both links is not their quality, but the prospect that others will use Miraheze in the same fashion. At least that is my hope and my dream. --Guy vandegrift (talk) 01:12, 16 January 2018 (UTC)


 * COMMENT: For evidence that Draft space is invisible to Google, see this screencapture of a Google search for (Wikipedia Miraheze). It is possible that enough attempts to find the page in Wikipedia draftspace will "train" Google to find it.  But at the time of writing, Google did not know about wikipedia:Draft:Miraheze.--Guy vandegrift (talk) 01:13, 16 January 2018 (UTC)


 * It is not surprising that Google can't or won't find the Wikipedia Draft namespace, as it is formally not a part of Wikipedia. Google could do its job better if its searches extended to Drafts; also if it knew MediaWiki and combed through the history so you could search for something that used to be on a page.  But it doesn't, I guess.  If that's the case, then being consigned to Draft space is comparable to getting your page deleted, in terms of search hits.  Sure, Miraheze remains an option for those treated badly elsewhere.  But moving to Miraheze won't, by itself, result in your page getting read.
 * Separately, I reject the false dichotomy above, as https://TheMirror.miraheze.org is both sublime and ridiculous.  04:55 16-Jan-2018
 * The issue is, it still would be hard for users on Wikiversity to find out about Miraheze. So unless someone makes a proposal that says if they need a place to write their articles, etc. they can use Miraheze, I'm not sure many users will find it. Reception123 (talk) ('C' ) 06:20, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree that the obscurity of Mirhaheze is a major impediment to my proposal. Apparently that will take time to fix.  I hope you folks stay healthy in the meantime. One thing is certain, as I see it:  We need the kind of diversity that Miraheze is trying to offer. Top-down organizations like the WMF can't handle too much diversity, not because they are rigid or closed minded, but because the way their wikis are configured.--Guy vandegrift (talk) 13:48, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * We are back to the chicken-and-egg problem on view at any American baseball stadium: You don't draw fans until there is word of mouth, nor signs on the outfield wall, to pay for the word of mouth, until there are fans to view them.  Again, the usual solution is to pay to advertise the institution, but that is money on a much larger scale than we are used to, plus dealing with specialists in false claims, plus no guarantees of good results.
 * By the way, Guy, the lesson I take from your pointers to Wikiversity — that they too are creating a Draft namespace — suggests that, in the long term, their rulemongers will want to harmonize their Draft policy with that of Wikipedia, and their article on Miraheze (which again, is a copy of an old draft from Wikipedia) will be moved to Draft too, one more reference site where, officially, we are not mentioned.  14:24 16-Jan-2018
 * As one of the rulemongers I can assure you that the Miraheze article will stay out of draft space. But there was a Volleyball site that didn't bother me on Wikiversity, but some of the others thought it was not sufficiently academic for Wikiversity.  Simply by writing policy guidelines that  direct authors to Miraheze would bring in business.  Also, I would pin more of my hopes on seeing the Wikiversity WikiJournals thrive, because that would encourage people to compose their work in wikitext, often on Miraheze where they can work free from prying eyes.  --Guy vandegrift (talk) 22:17, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * In that case, Wikiversity may want to grab the updated text from the Wikipedia draft.  22:47 16-Jan-2018
 * Goo idea, Miraheze could use a makeover.--Guy vandegrift (talk) 04:24, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * PS: WMF config is explicitly telling search engines 'not to crawl' Draft: and Draft_talk: namespaces. It cannot be changed by using . Thank spammers and SEO people for it. &mdash;  revi  11:43, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Here is why this might be a game-changer for Miraheze: Look at the bottom of this permalink: wikiversity:special:permalink/1806926--Guy vandegrift (talk) 17:47, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I told Coolie Coolster his recent efforts to aggregate podcast websites at his Podpedia likewise make us more of a go-to site than individual efforts would. Synergy.   19:12 18-Jan-2018

Bordering the ridiculous
Having read this I can see why the draft submission was declined but at the same time it's just another kick in the teeth for minorities wanting to get information published on the Holy Grail that it Wikipedia. To be honest I hadn't done a search for Miraheze on Wikipedia but to have a draft declined simply because there isn't enough public visibility of the subject that can be readily verified is bordering the ridiculous. Again, I understand the need for visibility and for sources, but conversely, what about the multitude of pitifully small (one short sentence or so), non-referenced articles that have made it through the submission process. I am sure some of the really obscure subjects that do crop up as an official article have little-to-no immediately verifiable sources, otherwise someone would have included them. So, what separates those crappy little articles from the Miraheze draft? I like Wikipedia but at the same time I find it extremely overburdened with policies, guidelines and conventions and quite frankly many of the users are full of infallibility and self importance.

But I digress. I think the Miraheze draft certainly has issues and could be improved. If staff and members want to get Miraheze "out there" more the issues in the draft need to be addressed otherwise it will never be accepted. Spreading the word seems to be key here and how that is done is limited only by imagination. I was once interviewed on radio once for an old website of mine (which is now the current version of my Lonsdale Battalion site) as a radio boss found a poster in a local library and thought it interesting to speak to me about it. I chatted on forums as well and word got out. But I am sure collectively between the community there are many other ways Miraheze can be published in solid, verifiable sources that can be used to strengthen it's visibility in the world.

All regular users who actually have a workable website could also write a piece about it in the project page space and link back here. It would be a shame for everyone who has worked hard over the last two or three years in getting Miraheze into a well-oiled machine only to have it hindered by lack of global visibility other than its community of websites. 02:10, 19 January 2018 (UTC)


 * As far as visibility is concerned, advertising Miraheze might help. I noticed that Google has an offer that they sometimes give to people that if you spend $25 you can get another $100 in advertising credit. If four people each spend $25, that would be $600 in advertising value for Miraheze. CoolieCoolster (talk) 03:24, 19 January 2018 (UTC)


 * It isn't ridiculous, it is their rules, meant to resist vanity articles. And Borderman's main argument is essentially two-wrongs-make-a-right.  In fact, in my experience, I have run into tons of rulebook lawyers, most recently when one of those charming people who go around slapping templates on articles for other people to do work hit my Violation (basketball), which does nothing more than guide the reader to other articles, but he had several rules that allegedly proved it needed footnotes, and which I did not care to read.


 * Borderman, please follow the links to our previous discussions on this, one of which is archived. There is a difference between notable wikis being hosted on Miraheze, and Miraheze being notable.  To repeat an analogy I gave Reception123 by email last week:  Someone posts something on a bulletin board at Walmart, and the press carries a photo of that thing, by which you can tell it was at a Walmart.  That doesn't necessarily say anything about Walmart nor necessarily make Walmart notable.


 * Assuming our wikis became notable, I think a sentence in the Intro that said, "Miraheze is the site that hosts wikis such as Lonsdale Battalion (wiki), The Great War (wiki), and The Mirror (wiki)." would go a long way toward convincing the reader he wasn't merely reading a vanity article. But it would make no headway against the notability rule.   03:55 19-Jan-2018


 * PS--Regarding "write a piece about your wiki," we have Gazetteer of wikis, though I have tried to ensure that people merely write one line about their wikis. One thing Uncyclopedia does to encourage community, cross-pollination, and awareness about what's been written, is "feature" an article on the main page; formerly, one a day but lately less than one a week and sometimes poring through the archives.  They use a voting process, which has been a huge magnet for drama; during the years when you could not nominate your own article, it also led to cliques.


 * Surely the Stewards are aware of what is being done throughout Miraheze; if such an additional use of the Meta Main Page appeals to them, they should periodically grab a copy of part or all of an attractive page on one of the wikis, pointing the reader there to finish the page.  04:04 19-Jan-2018


 * PPS--Related: Trump snubs The Mirror on Fake News awards   04:32 19-Jan-2018

Another effort to "advertise" for a Miraheze-Wikiversity connection
I am uploading OpenStax slide presentations to Wikiversity and calling for collaborators in an effort create materials for OpenStax Astronomy. See Wikiversity:Category:Openstax file/Astronomy --Guy vandegrift (talk) 15:14, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I checked it out, looks good :) Hopefully it gets attention from people. Reception123 (talk) ('C' ) 18:58, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Suggestions for Miraheze
I had two ideas that could potentially improve Miraheze:

Suggestion #1: Use Patreon as a source of monthly income. Currently Miraheze only receives funding whenever someone makes a one-time donation, however Miraheze pays monthly costs, which are only increasing. Having people make monthly donations would offset the monthly costs, and people could be given rewards for supporting Miraheze. One possible reward for donating could be someone's name or the name of their wiki on a "donor board" depending on how much they donate to Miraheze per month.

Suggestion #2: Switch Miraheze's real-time chat system from IRC to Discord. IRC is more outdated and complicated to manage than Discord. Discord has features such as multiple chat channels, voice chatting, and a chat moderation system that makes Discord better than IRC. To connect to my first idea, you can also give Patreon donators "donor ranks" in the Discord chat to encourage more people to donate.

CoolieCoolster (talk) 23:29, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No comment for idea one, but if we do create a Discord server, I don't think we'd just get rid of/stop using IRC. I had been thinking about creating a server (but it would require cleanup on my end). It would also mean that we'd have another service to keep an eye on, but whatever. -- Void  Whispers 23:39, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I personally love discord and would love to make a server for miraheze but it requires account registration (even with no protection on the server) unlike ITS, which allows chatting without signup. Discord could be used but I'd still want to keep something that allows anonymous chat, or login with a miraheze global account. -- Cheers, NDKilla ( Talk • Contribs ) 01:12, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I also personally like Discord, but we won’t stop using IRC overnight (since all of ops stuff is done @ irc). And it’s not Free Software, which is another -1. &mdash; revi  08:23, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I love discord but I perfer IRC over discord for Miraheze. Patreon is not open source either. Zppix (Meta | CVT Member | talk to me) 15:17, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No veo que sea más útil Discord que IRC. Desde que me registré, he estado utilizando el IRC y siempre que preguntado, me han ayudado. También en el IRC estoy en otros canales que no forman parte del IRC, en el caso de que se cambiarán a Discord. Yo no podría seguirlos debido a que Discord tiene algunas funcionalidades que violarían mi privacidad. Además también se deben tener en cuenta: (1) que no todos los usuarios quieren registrarse, (2) Discord podría ser incompatible con el navegador y la PC de algunos usuarios (3) Discord sería lento para algunos (4) Privacidad (5) Y el más importante, se tarda más en descargar instalar y registrarse en Discord que entrar en el IRC anonimamente y ser atendido. Wiki1776 (talk) 16:29, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not an IRC user, it's just a habit that I never got into. When I start up my computer Discord is like the first application I open to check messages and I would absolutely love a Miraheze discord server. I still believe we should keep IRC unless demand for that falls. My friends who I play PC games with have quit Teamspeak entirely and now use Discord exclusively. &#32; Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs  18:06, 29 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I find it worth noting that although discord technically requires registration I found it quick and painless to join a server via discordapp.com by choosing an available name and doing nothing else. So we could allow anonymous chatting via browser. However to be eligible for discord partnership (maybe something we want?) I think we need email verification. Also even if we use discord we probably won't deprecate IRC (for a long time / ever). -- Cheers, NDKilla ( Talk • Contribs ) 17:37, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * First of all, I think this vote should be re-grouped for the two suggestions. The suggestions are pretty different, so I don't think getting people to either oppose both or support both is a good idea.

For Patreon, I personally wouldn't be opposed to setting it up, if anyone wants to send donations that way. As for Discord, it could perhaps be set up as complementary to IRC, but I would certainly be opposed to deprecating IRC, as it is easier to join, etc. and it is compatible with our feed services, and other IRC functions such as GitHub notifications and Icinga alerts. So, for both options presented I would be okay for them to be set up complementary to what we already have now, but certainly not replace anything. Reception123 (talk) ('C' ) 19:58, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * related -- Cheers, NDKilla ( Talk • Contribs ) 22:15, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The IRC will remain the best and simplest option for a user to request help, Discord could be something complementary or an additional option, but replacing the IRC is definitely not an option since users would take longer to register than to make a consult the Miraheze Staff. —Alvaro Molina (✉ - ✔ ) 02:12, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Votes (Discord in addition to IRC)

 * Sounds like a good idea. MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 22:57, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * as written, because the question as written portrays it as replacing IRC rather than adding to it. If amended as an addition to IRC, I'd abstain.  I am on IRC rarely, to report bugs or just to hang out; it is straightforward except for the Captcha.  I would pick an Admin and use talk pages or email rather than learn a new system or especially make disclosures to a stranger website.  (Was even skittish about using Phabricator.)   23:39 29-Jan-2018
 * The section title reads as "In addition to". &mdash; revi  01:50, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I added "in addition to IRC" after they voted due to the general consensus that Discord and IRC would be preferable to Discord alone. CoolieCoolster (talk) 10:31, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. However, I don't vote on the section heading, day's weather, or other context, but on the text submitted to a vote, as you would not want me fighting consensus by pointing out that the section heading said something different at some point in time.  If votes are taken seriously around here, the thing voted on must not be changed after votes are cast; for example, how do you know that the first voter agrees with this change?  If we learn something through the process of voting, it is fine with me to scratch the vote and start over with a better question.
 * However, in this case, there are problems even with the better question. You don't just endorse a new communication channel "in addition to IRC" without effectively deprecating IRC, as it is no longer possible to monitor IRC to find out what's going on (unless word comes over).  One ought not have to research the most popular forum in order to get the best real-time contact with other Mirahezians.
 * In addition, I object that my state compels me to do business with Adobe in order to read court decisions or obtain tax forms. No matter that it is "free."  Acrobat, nagging me to upgrade and making it look like it's coming from Windows, is essentially a virus.  And I would object if I had to subscribe to a third-party private service to communicate with y'all.  (Anything you can guarantee me about Discord, you cannot guarantee about a new owner if they sell the business.)  As I object to having to take at least two rounds of a megabyte-heavy test administered by Google in order to even get on IRC.   14:15 30-Jan-2018
 * I wasn't the one who started the vote, and it is clear that most people who commented believe that having IRC is necessary even if Discord is used. The discussion implied that using Discord would not replace IRC. I just added "in addition to IRC" to make that point clear to people who want to keep IRC. Perhaps MacFan4000 wants to change their vote now, however I assumed that keeping IRC wouldn't matter to people voting to add Discord as a mode of communication. CoolieCoolster (talk) 14:47, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * TBH, I don't really think this needs a vote (unless you wanted to depreciate IRC completely, which ain't gonna happen). Anyway, I'm rather inclined to make a server tonight. If I do, I'll drop the invite link off on a dedicated page or something. -- Void  Whispers 23:47, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * IRC won't be deprecated, for various reasons (We don't want to make a icinga to discord relay, sysadmin logger bot, etc, are we?) but having it just +1 is... I think we can try. &mdash; revi  01:50, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not a fan of IRC and Discord would make my communication with the community far, far easier. &#32; Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs  10:13, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * A discord as been created. (http://discord.is/miraheze). MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 17:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * As noted in Discord, we are operating our discord server in an experimental basis. If we decide not to use it, we may close the server at short notice. &mdash; revi</tt>  13:59, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Votes (Patreon)

 * MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 22:57, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Establishing another alternative for contributions is a good thing. I plan not to use it but to continue contributing, roughly annually, by smurfing someone to use PayPal on my behalf or even writing a check.  That expenses are monthly is not an issue; last I checked, Miraheze runs a surplus and can receive contributions annually/quarterly/sporadically and pay expenses monthly.  Acknowledgement on Finance is gentlemanly; I don't need to be in any Donor Hall of Fame, but if it works, go for it.  Failure of either of these proposals should not dissuade anyone from bringing refinements or new proposals forward.   23:39 29-Jan-2018
 * No reason why not, but it's really up to the man in control of finances. -- Void  Whispers 23:47, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * &#32; Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs  10:12, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Templates library
How about Miraheze provides a library of templates for Miraheze wikis to make use of? --Rob Kam (talk) 08:37, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thats a very good idea. I would be in full support of such a library being created &#32; Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs  18:11, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It could be forked from en.wikipedia. --Rob Kam (talk) 19:53, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I presume there is still no need for separate Miraheze wikis to look similar or to use similar code. Typically, an author wants to do something, looks around for someone who has done the same thing, and steals the code.  Or asks here for help, as Borderman recently asked me for help at The Great War, though that initiative went nowhere.  The wider question is not better libraries of code but better ways to identify fellow Mirahezians who have solved a given problem.   23:47 29-Jan-2018

There is no need for Miraheze wikis to look similar, except that they already share the default look and feel of MediaWiki wikis. If it's important wikis can change this with style sheets. For full functionality MW wikis should ship with templates bundled in or there could be a central repository (like commons does for images) but there is no sign of this happening any time soon. Miraheze wiki admins either write their own templates or export them from elsewhere e.g. en. This must mean much duplication of effort. Templates are a headache to understand, install and maintain. Miraheze already makes life considerably easier for wiki admins, allowing them to focus on adding content instead of diverting time and energy to keeping up with the upgrade-debug race - template inclusion would enhance this. --Rob Kam (talk) 10:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The infobox template should definitely be in this database. CoolieCoolster (talk) 14:48, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I think Spike makes a good point. Stealing code is a harsh word but borrow would be more ideal. Anyway, I do believe problems may arise with a wikis Common.css and Common.js. These pages decide how templates are displayed and many templates can come out looking funny for people if they import them from a different wiki. That will have to be taken into account. &#32; Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs  10:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Over at Wikia they have implemented a "Templates Wiki" --Rob Kam (talk) 16:34, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Requested at T2673. --Rob Kam (talk) 09:28, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Wiki requested by me. I am willing to let community members administer it/hand over reins if the community requests it --Sau226 (talk) 11:13, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Rob Kam (talk) 11:38, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

It's now at template.miraheze.org. Discussions about the template wiki can move to its talk page. --Rob Kam (talk) 15:45, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, I was late. I had wanted to ask if they also thought about templates with the user's local language (in my case Spanish)? It is a very good proposal for the benefit of all. I ask only out of curiosity. Wiki1776 (talk) 17:35, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I've requested extension:translate to be enabled on template wiki. --Rob Kam (talk) 18:17, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Where to discuss policy, etc. about the template wiki itself? Talk pages are more about the associated page. --Rob Kam (talk) 18:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * @Wiki1776 you'll have to guide us here, I know nothing about having a wiki multilingual. --Rob Kam (talk) 14:37, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Rob Kam in Template:Community noticeboard? or in Village pump? Wiki1776 (talk) 19:40, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay in Community noticeboard then. --Rob Kam (talk) 20:08, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Rob Kam (I had not seen your mention) hmm, my comment was if Template Wiki was going to have the Meta Translate (Custom_domains/es) or / and the templates would have names like Template:Icon, Template:Icon/es or Template:Icono (or better Plantilla:Icono in Spanish) I do not know if I make myself understood. There is a multilingual wiki that can serve as a guide Wiki1776 (talk) 00:05, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand what you mean but I can't tell what the best solution might be. --Rob Kam (talk) 00:21, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Creator access request
I am now formally requesting/asking for wiki creator access. I understand that the sitename should not contain any dashes, wiki DB name should be the sitename then wiki all in one word and that custom sitenamed wikis should be made with a miraheze sitename first and sysadmins then take care of the rest. I also understand that I have access to ManageWiki where I can enter a DB name to change wiki settings on here. As far as I know all this should be used for is opening closed wikis if an adoption request is filed or if a bureaucrat needs help doing so. I also understand that I need to be concise in my reasons on there e.g. "Opening wiki per adoption request" instead of "Adoption request". I enclose my wikipedia user page as proof that I may be trusted/considered with these rights. Thank you in advance --Sau226 (talk) 11:19, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Dynamic image sizing - is this possible?
As the heading suggests, is this possible? I would like this for single images. As we know dynamic browsers and templates are really handy when window sizes are constantly changing depending on the size of monitor and device being used as well as using side by side applications etc. It would be really handy to have images dynamically change size based on browser size. If anyone knows of a way to do this I'd be interested to use it. Thanks. 15:09, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * There is no way in vanilla MediaWiki for the  syntax to specify a percentage of available width, though this is a common desire and someone may have written an extension.  However, JavaScript can change the dimensions of any element on the screen.   21:35 2-Feb-2018
 * I don't know what vanilla Mediawiki is but I am sure having dynamic image sizing is a common desire for many Mediawiki users. You'd think something like that would be built-in to the Mediawiki core but hey, what do I know? If I could write in Javascript the issue would most likely be solved, unfortunately for me the only thing I can do is dabble with css. 20:23, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Install GlobalUserPage
I propose that we install the GlobalUserPage extension. It is used by the WMF and would be very useful on miraheze. Those who would not want a GlobalUserPage can use or __NOGLOBAL__ on their user page. MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 17:52, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Votes

 * 1)  as proposer. MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 19:44, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 2)  as long as abusefilters are setup to prevent global userpages to be used as an advertising place. Zppix (Meta | CVT Member | talk to me) 17:56, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 3)  (as it is currently) My issue with this is the fact that you need to "opt-out" if you don't want it, not that you need to "opt-in" if you do. I would definitely support this if it's disabled by default, as then users decide whether they want a global userpage or not. Reception123  (talk) (<font color="#FF0000">'C' ) 18:03, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 4)  See my previous comments on T1681. —<b style="color: #1406D0;">AlvaroMolina</b> (<b style="color: #137500;">✉</b> -  ✔ ) 18:06, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 5)  Esta función me parece perfecta. La he probado en Wikimedia y la veo útil. Así no tienes que actualizar cada wiki con nueva información o modificar el existente. Solo tienes que ir a Meta y actualizarlo. Wiki1776 (talk) 18:13, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 6)  There is only one of me, and Mirahezians wanting to write to me ought not have to research which wiki has the busier talk page (though there is a hint in my signature).  If users want project-specific user pages, this is easily done and the global user page is an ideal directory of them.  Reception123 is right to be concerned about users getting opted-in involuntarily, but in this case, reacting to it is simple.  I support it with either opt-in or opt-out.   18:47 3-Feb-2018
 * 7)  Would change vote to support if it were opt-in and not opt-out. CoolieCoolster (talk) 19:44, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 8)  I have no problem with this and the caveat isn't an issue for me either as I trust Miraheze admins.  20:28, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 9) I also think this should be opt-in (  opposed to current NOGLOBAL opt-out). &mdash;  revi</tt>  03:07, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 10) For the betterment of the community, I believe that it should be opt-in not opt-out. I thoroughly believe only people interested in using such a feature will actually use it, so there is no need to make it opt-out. I fully support this motion if it is opt-in. &#32;  Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs  12:20, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Problems with creating accounts
I was trying to create an alternate account for imports on the Harry Potter Wiki, and it wouldn't let me. An hour ago someone who was trying to join my wiki also said that they couldn't create an account. Here is what it says after I tried creating an account:

Sorry! This site is experiencing technical difficulties. Try waiting a few minutes and reloading. For more information on this error please check out our twitter page (Twitter.com/Miraheze) or contact the system administrators by connecting to #miraheze on irc.freenode.net

(Cannot access the database: Cannot access the database: Unknown database 'mistralcupwiki' (81.4.125.112))

You can try searching via Google in the meantime. Note that their indexes of our content may be out of date.

Search Harry Potter Wiki WWW

CoolieCoolster (talk) 13:10, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi is this still occuring? If so, could hop onto irc or discord if possible and I can talk to you there! Zppix (Meta | CVT Member | talk to me) 20:01, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * This was due to a wrong database move done yesterday, I have corrected it earlier today, so the error no longer exists. Reception123 (talk) (<font color="#FF0000">'C' ) 20:08, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Alright. Thanks! CoolieCoolster (talk) 20:13, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Extension reviewing
Extension reviews seem to be the biggest backlog as far as Phabricator requests are concerned. Perhaps Miraheze should hire someone to help review them? CoolieCoolster (talk) 00:50, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, extension reviews are a big issue currently as the two reviewers are both busy. Unfortunately, I do not think we have enough budget to actually hire someone to do these reviews. Reception123 (talk) (<font color="#FF0000">'C' ) 06:04, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * How much time does it take to review an extension? Depending on how much it would cost, perhaps I could hire someone to review several extensions for Miraheze. CoolieCoolster (talk) 11:57, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not personally sure about how much time it would take to review an extension, but I imagine it does take a while. A reviewer must make sure that there are no security vulnerabilities in the code, and thoroughly analyse it. Reception123 (talk) (<font color="#FF0000">'C' ) 20:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Alright. I will ask a PHP developer how long they think it would take to properly review an extension and will compile a list of the unreviewed extensions on Phabricator, and will then see whether or not it is economically worth paying a PHP developer to review the extensions. CoolieCoolster (talk) 20:56, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

$30 an hour
Here is the list of extensions under review: https://podpedia.org/wiki/User:CoolieCoolster/Miraheze_List_of_Extensions_Under_Review There are quite a few of them, and the PVP Dev charges $30 an hour and said that it would take them about an hour on average to review each extension so we need to pick and choose which ones should be reviewed. I can probably pay for three or four extensions to be reviewed. The extension being made for my wiki will be done in about a week and a half and I want it reviewed ASAP so I can use it, so two or three other extensions should be picked for the dev to review. It seems like some of the Phabricator requests for extensions are for unmaintained wikis, so perhaps some requests should be declined. CoolieCoolster (talk) 18:43, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 30$ is quite a high price tag. I would not be in support of this unless the review of these extensions are absolutely necessary to the smooth running of a community. &#32; Miraheze Logo.svg CnocBride | Talk | Contribs  18:52, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * In this case it would just be me paying for it, although perhaps I should look for someone who is willing to do it for cheaper. Cheaper might also mean not as good of a review though, since the person $30/hour person is a MediaWiki expert. CoolieCoolster (talk) 19:11, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think $30 per hour (£22 for those in the UK) isn't overly expensive for something specialist such as PHP developer fees. Of course it would cost a small fortune to get all the extensions/skins reviewed so realistically I can't see that happening but I guess if people are willing to pay or make additional donations to get their requested extensions reviewed sooner it's not a bad idea. I would pay to get my requested skin (Pivot) checked if it meant having it sooner, but sometimes you just have to be a little patient for a service that's free. 21:59, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * No, $30/hour is a bargain for consulting by a MediaWiki expert. However, where we left it last episode (Archive 2 § 27) is that certain extensions are not vital for the community (which can certainly "run smoothly" without them) but only for Coolie to induce authors of podcast wikis to come to his Podpedia.  There are many questions languishing in Phabricator and Coolie is welcome to pay to expedite any of them, but this is not a compelling case to use Treasury money.  It would be nice if Stewards review Coolie's choice of developer before he invests any money.
 * In detail: As well as paying a MediaWiki expert to review a technical question (namely, does a given MediaWiki extension jeopardize the health and security of the system?), it is also easy to pay a fake expert to deliver such an opinion as favors the person paying for it.  I read above that we have two Mirahezians who could do such an evaluation and they are busy.  The rest of us presumably do not know how to evaluate an extension.  The consultant will have to do more than report that "This extension is safe"; he would have to enumerate possible threats to Miraheze and explain to those without his skills why the extension does not deliver any of the threats.  If there are technical credentials a professional could provide to certify expertise with MediaWiki, which would people accept?  An agency with a reputation to preserve would be less likely to bang out an opinion to satisfy the payor, but it will charge much more than $30 an hour.   03:33 10-Feb-2018
 * Small correction: Extension decision is up to Labster and his delegates (currently Samwilson). &mdash; revi</tt>  05:39, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I am willing to donate to Miraheze or pay Labster or Samwilson for faster extension reviewing if that is at all possible. In a week and a half my extension will be ready and I will need it for my wiki to grow. CoolieCoolster (talk) 06:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Load times, previews and saves very hit and miss
Is anyone else experience issues with load times? For about the last week I have had multiple problems with page load times, previews and saves not working and periodically, nothing loading at all. This is getting somewhat difficult to work on my wiki at the moment as everything is taking so much longer. Am I an isolated case or has anyone else been experiencing similar issues? Currently none of my pages are loading; they're just stuck on a blank screens, yet I can post here on Meta. Can someone enlighten me as to the problem and if there will be a resolution soon? Many thanks. 11:51, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I blame most slowness on my own affection for Walmart-cobranded no-contract Internet service; but yes, in the last week, I have been staring at "Waiting for meta.miraheze.org" for up to ten seconds. No complete inability to load, though, and it seems all right just now.   13:14 11-Feb-2018
 * Yes here too, over a week now getting 504 Gateway Time-out. There ought to be something on @miraheze but there is no info there. --Rob Kam (talk) 13:22, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Rob Kam, Borbeman, Spike, a mi siempre me ha salido el 504 Gateway Time-out en todas las wikis que he creado. Nunca he podido saber el porqué, aparentemente es la conexión pero... Me funcionan otras páginas como Wikipedia, Wikia, y otros. Recuerdo que lo he comentado en el IRC pero no he recibido respuesta o han sido "vagas". Espero que se pueda solucionar para poder realizar mis proyectos sin problemas. Wiki1776 (talk) 14:28, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It's good to know it's not just me but I'm sorry to hear others have experienced the same or similar problems. I know there have been no issues with my ISP to date as I have been streaming films and episodes on Netflix with no issues whatsoever, and other websites load properly and speedily. Just like  and, I also get 504s, but when pages just stops to load entirely (loads about ⅓ of the way then stops dead) this is really frustrating. The twitter feed / facebook page would certainly benefit users if they were updated more regularly even if to say they acknowledge they are aware of service issues and identify them if known. Having checked again, none of the pages I have just refreshed are loading at all, not a single one, and I had planned a fair bit of work for today. Staff are usually on the ball at sorting issues like this out but I hope it doesn't last another week.  15:37, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Update: Pages seem to be loading properly again at the moment. All those that previous froze have now refresh (some pages took well over an hour). If staff have fixed it, thanks. 17:14, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * PS — Sometimes, even after a page renders, the little dial keeps spinning (as Miraheze fishes for style and JavaScript to apply to it). Sometimes my browser gives up.   19:34 11-Feb-2018