Community noticeboard

Vote
Okay, ladies and gentlemen, I have a question for you: should we have a wiki on here like the Wiki Gazetteer on FANDOM? Put your vote in the headings below! And remember to sign your posts with ~. Tali64³ (talk) 20:33, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes

 * 1) Why not? This would not be a bad idea for someone looking for a specific wiki. --Furricane (talk) 21:57, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) per  InspecterAbdel (talk) 21:16, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) I strongly support this because we can find more specific wikis.  CircleyDoesExtracter  ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud ) 21:31, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 4) I'm not opposed to this idea, in theory, and I do think that we need to rethink Gazetteer of wikis given that we have ~3,800 current wikis (which is too large for a single page). My main concern, which I expressed in declining the wiki request, was that this may suffer from lack of maintenance and timely updates. As well, by siphoning it away from Meta, we now have yet another wiki we have to somehow promote, so that sort of defeats the purpose of a gazetteer of wikis designed to promote customers' public wikis, doesn't it? Secondarily, I honestly think a better way to go about this is to add additional functionality and data output to the automated list, Special:WikiDiscover. That said, it's a good-faith idea, in theory and if well-maintained, so that is why I am expressing some support, albeit weak. Dmehus (talk) 23:18, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 5) I think this will help in finding wikis. Admittedly, there was once a list on Wikia, but we've dropped it. Onmp314 (talk) 16:23, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * There are still two: the Wiki Wiki and the Wiki Gazetteer. Tali64³ (talk) 22:34, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

No

 * 1)  I don't see the need for an entire wiki like this. We already have a page here on meta, Gazetteer of wikis. And in all honesty, a page on meta will most likely be given more notice than another external wiki that some will never visit. As such I am opposing this idea. While a good thought I don't see the need for it. I mean if you want it, go for you, but I don't think it should be a community wiki at all.  15:01, 13 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * There are wikis currently on Miraheze, too big to list on one page. An administrator could put a link to it on the main page. Tali64³ (talk) 16:35, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We also have Special:WikiDiscover which lists every wiki on Miraheze. 14:18, 16 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * 1)  Not needed.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 06:29, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  if there were a lot of people to add entries for wikis with short descriptions that would work for me but right now I think that the Meta gazeteer is enough and is helpful. DeeM28 (talk) 07:33, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) A wiki for this is unnecessary, Gazetteer of wikis on Meta works fine. If there was a way to automate it with Special:WikiDiscover, I might rethink it, but otherwise this would likely get really outdated long-term. K599 (talk) 20:12, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * 4) and I would like to note, wiki creations are at the sole discretion of wiki creators and global policy, and I view this as a way to circumvent a decline of mine. Thus, I also recommend a closure of this as not done. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 05:33, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Neutral/Abstain
I think it's a fair enough idea but there are many ways to approach it and would need lots of maintenance and would probably create some form of conflict -Bayugoon (talk) 19:45, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

 * 1) I'm currently been slowly working on a similar idea over the past month or two just documenting wikis: the Wikiverse. dibbydib 23:38, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) As a Miraheze wiki creator, when this wiki truly passes through us for approval (I have recently accidentally approved this wiki sent in by, which due to the ongoing discussion and the incorrect subdomain is currently pending steward review for deletion), it is important for us to know when to approve the wiki and who will be creating it. Therefore, who will be the founding Bureaucrat of the wiki if it passes community discussion?  14:59, 13 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * I would be the founder. Tali64³ (talk) 23:23, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * When having community discussions like these, who will be the founder is among what should be discussed. I believe who should be the founder should be among what is discussed here. Thanks! 02:10, 15 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * 1) Relisting for another couple of weeks. Dmehus (talk) 05:20, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) Relisting for another several weeks. Dmehus (talk) 11:42, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

A community Developers wiki
I have a proposition for the Miraheze community. For a while now I have been debating whether or not to create a developers wiki for Miraheze. Unlike the template wiki, this wiki will include CSS and JS scripts that anyone can import using, it will allow anyone who wants it to use scripts built by the community in their own wikis and/or in their own personal global or local JavaScript or CSS files. After consulting with on Discord, I decided to get the communities feedback and/or support on this idea, therefore what does the Miraheze community think of this idea? 22:53, 24 July 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * Yeah, though I don't think it's required to have a community discussion in this case, since it's going to be a community wiki for shared CSS and JavaScript files, among other things potentially, I thought it would be a good practice to have the discussion, especially if it proposes to use the name "Miraheze." Plus, I think it would be helpful for the community to (a) define the initial scope and purpose and (b) establish the founding bureaucrats for the wiki. From there, the local community can help to establish its local policies and further refine its purpose. In general terms, I support this as a community wiki as I think it is sufficiently different than the Template and Miraheze Bots + Tools wikis. I also think it could be useful at reducing the page load times of community-imported and -maintained user scripts, as opposed to always loading them from English Wikipedia and other wikis. Dmehus (talk) 23:17, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * yes, some of that is part of my initial thoughts for the reasoning of the wiki. As for using the name Miraheze in it, I think it should be called Miraheze Developers Wiki or something similar. As for bureaucrats of the wiki, any candidate recommendations? And I think a community discussion for this is a good idea. It gives the community a way to give input, and their own unique ideas in it as well. 23:39, 24 July 2020 (UTC) ］ |


 * As proposer I support this, but also because I know JS and CSS pretty well, and would love to have a wiki like this for the Miraheze community. 23:39, 24 July 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * This is a great idea for a new wiki. I think that by doing this, lots of new coding things could be enabled, including possibly global modules and gadgets. Great suggestion. I also have no concerns for this proposal. --Furricane (talk) 23:27, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * yes, I do believe that a wiki like this could be greatly beneficial in the long run, or at least I hope it can be. 23:39, 24 July 2020 (UTC) ］ |


 * I support this idea because not everyone can do custom CSS and (or) custom JS. Onmp314 (talk) 16:57, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good idea for having a central place to import JS and CSS. K599 (talk) 20:39, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * per my comments above. Dmehus (talk) 21:00, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Good. Waldo (talk) 21:56, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * would be a nice place to ask questions with in that area Bayugoon (talk) 19:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Potential rename and/or expanded scope of Dev Wiki
asked me a few days, or perhaps a week, ago if I had posted in this discussion thread about the potential renaming and expanded scope for Dev Wiki yet. Other tasks took priority, but seeing as this thread was due to be archived in the next day or so, I wanted to get this done. So, I'm going to ping those that participated above and those who participated in the discussion on potential name ideas/expanded scope on Discord.

So, the question is...given that the  subdomain implies broader usage by and for developers beyond just CSS and JavaScript scripts,  and I (did I forget anyone, ?) basically toyed around with a number of potential new names and subdomains, the top three of which is identified below:


 * 1) Retain   and expand the scope, or allow the community, via a future community noticeboard discussion to expand the scope at some point in the future;
 * 2) Rename subdomain to , which would be roughly in line with the current purpose and scope, but open to possibilities later (again, the community would retain the right modify the scope via a community noticeboard discussion); or,
 * 3) Rename subdomain to , with a narrow scope; limits us in the future, but entirely accurate; it's not too bad, as we could easily create a separate dev later, though we should reserve that subdomain in the blacklist)

Since didn't participate in the Discord discussion and since this doesn't require any advanced rights to close, I nominate him to assess the consensus and close this discussion in a week or two. --Dmehus (talk) 00:01, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of RhinosF1 as closer
, please indicate if you would be willing to close this discussion after 1-2 weeks (depending on the weather-related impacts to U.S. eastern seaboard residents).

Additionally, can I get a seconder to second this nomination? (Thought we could probably safely skip a full vote on nominating an uninvolved closer.)


 * Accepted:  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  19:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC) (as nominated closer)
 * Moved: Dmehus (talk) 00:01, 7 August 2020 (UTC) (as nominator)
 * Seconded: 02:37, 9 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * Procedural comment: This has been relisted for another two weeks. Dmehus (talk) 12:57, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Procedural comment: This has been relisted for another two weeks. Dmehus (talk) 13:41, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Procedural comment: This has been relisted for another two weeks, plus the duration set by the hidden wikicomment at the end of this thread. Dmehus (talk) 13:59, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Voting and Vote Tabulation Instructions
You are encouraged to express first and second choices in your !vote. Please do so by indicating, in your !vote for each proposal, whether it is your first or second choice. If no proposal achieves more than 50% of the valid !votes cast, the proposal with the least number of first choice !votes will be dropped, and those users' second choices will then be allocated accordingly, and the results retabulated in a second count.

Support

 * 1)   02:41, 9 August 2020 (UTC) ］ |
 * 2)  as first choice, since the community remains overall authority over this wiki in terms of its   removal (as may be required) and in terms of redefining, or broadening, its scope. Dmehus (talk) 11:50, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 3)  I think there is no need to rename. Onmp314 (talk) 16:57, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * 4)  Looks nice, and is easy to understand. K599 (talk) 20:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Neutral/Abstain
This is arguably kind of useless, in this case, since the !votes won't be counted, but I'll nonetheless include it.

Neutral/Abstain
This is arguably kind of useless, in this case, since the !votes won't be counted, but I'll nonetheless include it.
 * 1)  I like this idea as well, but it feels like it has other non-computer science-related use cases (i.e., for an archival- or museum-type wiki). Dmehus (talk) 11:50, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Neutral/Abstain
This is arguably kind of useless, in this case, since the !votes won't be counted, but I'll nonetheless include it.
 * 1)  I also liked 's idea, as it is the most specific and clearly defines this wiki's current purpose, but, at the same time, it really does restrict a future broadening of this wiki's scope to include a broader array of wiki developer resources, for which the community retains the absolute authority to redefine this wiki's purpose via community noticeboard. Dmehus (talk) 11:50, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

A new wiki for the website's community
The Miraheze Community Wiki is a wiki for the community so people can get to know each other and welcome each other. I know Meta does that, but I think we need a wiki for that stuff.

Support

 * 1) I think we need a wiki for this kind of thing InspecterAbdel (talk) 22:44, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) but not per any of the above or below, but because community noticeboard has become a catch-all for technical support questions, community discussions, and really anything. The organization is weak, and we could use a community wiki. I have no objections to it, but the main reason for my oppose  weak support here is because the purpose is somewhat vague and unclear. I appreciate  bringing this for a community discussion, though, and, since this wiki was simultaneously submitted for approval and created already, I think we should probably shift this wiki towards defining a clear purpose and terms of reference for its existence and the parameters by which the local   can be removed (via Community noticeboard) here on Meta. Dmehus (talk) 14:55, 28 July 2020 (UTC)  Amended. Moved from weak oppose to weak support Dmehus (talk) 15:31, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) I think we should have one since fandom has one. Plus it's subdomain is valuable too. AppleCrunchy (talk) 19:16, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1) I really like to have a community wiki for new users to gather, although we have a Community noticeboard.  CircleyDoesExtracter  ( Circley Talk  |  Global   |  Email the Cloud ) 17:09, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) . No, we don't need such a wiki.  This page ("community noticeboard") is exactly for this kind of thing.  I don't want to have to check both this page and a dedicated wiki to find out what is happening on the wiki farm, nor learn how such a wiki is organized.   04:25, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Spike. There is already not enough engagement and usage on Meta, so another wiki is really not what we need. We should focus on Meta. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 06:08, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) . We DO NOT need a community wiki is needed at this time. We already have this page, the community noticeboard, and Requests for Permissions, requests for global rights and requests for stewardship. It seems that it would serve the same service as as most of this meta wiki, and I just see no possible usage for this. I also agree with the comments that has made about having to go back and forth between meta and a community wiki. Sorry, it is just not going to work. --Furricane (talk) 15:10, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm hoping you'll consider amending your !vote, per my comments above, as I really don't think 's goal was for this wiki to replace Meta. The problem with this request is that (a) the wiki shouldn't have been created without a community discussion (not, technically, a requirement, as far as I'm aware, but good practice) and (b) it should've had a clearer purpose, scope, and defined parameters, as we are doing with Dev Wiki and have done with Template Wiki and Miraheze Commons in the past. No community proposals or discussions, or even drafts of such proposals, would've occurred on this wiki. Rather, as I saw it (though vague and unclear), this wiki was meant to be a user collaboration and social connection wiki that would've actually sought to deepen community participation. Participation in this community wiki would've been completely voluntary and not participating would not have meant the user would "miss out" on important community discussions, as I don't think that was ever the intent behind 's good-faith proposal. Dmehus (talk) 15:27, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * 1)  Not needed.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 06:34, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 2)  I do not think another wiki is necessary for the community because for me Meta is the wiki for the community. DeeM28 (talk) 07:30, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 3)  This is unnecessary, Meta already serves essentially the same purpose, and there's not really enough of that kind of "community" activity to need a separate wiki. K599 (talk) 20:27, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * 4)  After reading the first two oppose votes I agree with those users.  We should try to engage the community on Meta and we can be doing community oriented activities here.  Тишина (talk) 17:15, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * 5)  I agree that the noticeboard is enough and if there was a whole wiki about the community it would be under used and it would require moving around instead of just looking at this one page Bayugoon (talk) 19:55, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments

 * I think the subject is not whether we need a community wiki or not, as we already have a community-centric wiki, but whether we need a miraheze-sanctioned community wiki.I think CN is sufficient, but it seems unusual for a topic to be set up for communication purposes, so someone may need to give an example. I found an image on ja.wiktionary.org showing the stroke order of my name, so it might be a good idea to post it, but it takes courage to be the first one. --松•Matsu (talk) 22:53, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Relist to delay archiving. I will be posting an updated proposal on next steps in the next several days. Dmehus (talk) 02:30, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Relist to delay archiving. I will be posting an updated proposal on next steps in the next several days. Dmehus (talk) 01:36, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Relist to delay archiving. I will be posting an updated proposal on next steps in the next several days. Dmehus (talk) 05:21, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Exporting my wiki
Depending on my association request, I may have to move the wiki to a private server. Is it possible to export a whole Miraheze hosted wiki including its pictures (jpg, pdf, svg...)

AMITRAM (talk) 10:00, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry to see you go :( You can export your wiki via Special:DataDump. Good luck with your wiki! Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 10:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't intend to, and I hope I won't have to. But my association may request it.
 * I'm sorry to bother you with this, but all my pictures will be exported along with all the wiki content (pictures and theirs old versions of one file ?) ? And then I can import them into my private server ?
 * AMITRAM (talk) 10:09, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, actually, Reception123 had not too long ago told me what the purpose of each of the three types of dumps was. XML includes all the public, non-suppressed revisions of your wiki, an image backup includes your uploaded files and images, and a ManageWiki backup includes your configuration settings from ManageWiki. I should also add that by "public," I mean the public revisions accessible to your wiki's audience (i.e., for your private wiki). Hope this helps. Dmehus (talk) 10:32, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks to you all for your answers,
 * I have a specific issue, I've added a new member with a read-only permission yet he can still modify existing pages, how can I prevent him from doing so ?
 * AMITRAM (talk) 11:27, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You can modify any permissions by going to Special:ManageWiki/permissions. For example, if you want 'members' not to be allowed to edit, you would uncheck the edit right from their group. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 13:41, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I went to Special:DataDump for this wiki and I didn't find any options for generating the dump. Is this restricted to administrators?  Is the dump compatible with Special:Import? Тишина (talk) 18:12, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, Special:DataDump requires the,  , and   to use. By default, as seen here, it is assigned to the   user group when wikis are created (though local wiki bureaucrats can change this). There are three types of dumps, one contains the wiki's ManageWiki configuration settings, one contains the wiki's locally uploaded files and images, and the final one is a public XML export of all publicly available information (i.e., non-oversighted revisions, no private user settings, no user IP addresses, etc.). This latter dump is compatible with Special:Import, as it generates a similar XML file that Special:Export does. Note, though, that there is a 250 MB file size limit on wiki imports. Larger imports require a Phabricator ticket. As well, if you are importing a large number of templates and modules with a number of revisions, but which are below that threshold, you may time out and receive a 503 backend fetch error, so you should avoid that and request on Phabricator. Also, you can login to Phabricator using the "click here to login with MediaWiki" button, and it'll use your wiki login credentials to create an account for you. Hope this helps. Dmehus (talk) 21:44, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If you want to test the administrator tools, such as Special:DataDump, you can head over to Public Test Wiki, and request permissions, taking care to read its policies and stating a reason for wanting to test the tools. Though less common, you can test the generation of an XML dump of that wiki. Dmehus (talk) 21:46, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Switch default for recent changes to 45 days
When I see a new wiki I didn't know of, I don't know if that wiki is well maintained or not. And at first sight I don't know the level of activity, so I check Special:Recent changes. The dormancy policy makes it easier to know if wikis have more than 45 days of inactivity, but between 30 and 45 is difficult to know if the wiki is active or not. For this reason I propose to switch the default number of days in recent changes from 30 to 45 days, so people can see in an instant if that wiki is active or not without that range of doubt between 30 and 45 days. Avengium (talk) 20:31, 6 October 2020 (UTC) Avengium (talk) 23:46, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * From a Sysadmin side, change is simple but let's leave for 5-7 days to allow comment. Please note that this will affect all wikis that haven't set a custom value. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  20:39, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Can't we just change this on Meta only, and not for all wikis? That would be my preference. I'd have no objection to increasing the RC value on Meta only to 45 days, or even 60 days really. Dmehus (talk) 21:02, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't solve the issue presented to us by doing that. ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  21:55, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I wondered that originally, too, but the issue is only related to Meta. Unless I've misunderstood something, I believe what is referring to is Meta's RecentChanges, and being able to monitor pages like requests for adoption, Gazetteer of wikis, etc., over a 45 day period instead of the current maximum of 30, no? Dmehus (talk) 22:08, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Proposer does say the proposal concerns wikis he has just become aware of (therefore, other than Meta).
 * I welcome a change to 45 or 60. I maintain rfobasic.miraheze.org, a programming reference site, but edit it only when an issue is called to my attention.  It would be helpful to go back further to verify that no vandalism has occurred during an extended absence.  Right now, 30 days is not just the default but the longest interval presented on the form (though you can request a longer interval by composing your own URL).   22:58 6-Oct-2020
 * (and as well, really)...yes, I know that  said this is in regards to "wikis he has just become aware of," but where would Avengium be learning of new wikis from a centralized feed other than on Meta? Thus, I believe changing this setting on Meta is all that's required at this point. Since, as a Consul on TestWiki, I can change this RC maximum setting in this section of ManageWiki, it holds that any   should be able to make this change on the same page on their wiki, such as this section of ManageWiki on  . I just think we should avoid changing something globally unless absolutely required, as I know local control over such things is important. Dmehus (talk) 23:08, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Have just made the change on my wiki, which solves my particular problem. I agree with not changing global things, though local wiki bureaucrats retain ultimate local control.  I continue to believe that what proposer was requesting is an easier way to gauge inactivity on wikis other than Meta.   23:42 6-Oct-2020
 * The question was because they wanted to be able to see how close a wiki was to meeting the inactivity policy and being closed from recent changes which you can't based on the default. Changing the default for what it's worth will not stop any wiki changing it back or to whatever value they want (up to 180 days but we can happily make that higher if I a wiki needed it. It just seemed a sensible number to set it to when I fixed a bug with a wiki having an invalid value). ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  06:35, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * My concern is with the default amount of days on personal wikis that are new to me. And is related with the dormancy policy and with the inactivity period of wikis before they obtain some inactivity banner that makes them available on a request for adoption. Avengium (talk) 09:32, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * What do you think about raising the default number of days in Recent Changes to ease checking wikis for adoption and wikis who are close to inactivity due to dormancy policy? This kind of wikis don't have local admins or are absent. So I can't count on the activity of a local admin to check the manage setting for RC on their side. Is best if sysadmins can view the amount of time left for adoption as global admins or if a common user can check the recent activity in the last 45-60 days. ,  ,.
 * It's a bit confusing on how you are monitoring inactive wikis. Are you monitoring RecentChanges on Meta at requests for adoption, or do you mean that you're monitoring wikis' Special:RecentChanges where the wikis have very low activity to see when they go inactive? If the former, I think we can change this setting on Meta only. If the latter, I'm okay with this as there's a valid use case, but my preference would be for the default maximum RC setting to be set to 60 days (the period by which non-exempt wikis would become closed and thus eligible for adoption, well public wikis that is). I would also like to invite to comment on whether this is setting change is within system administrator or steward purview. Though somewhat technical in nature, in which I can see the former having jurisdiction here, it's also related to procedural setting within the purview of all wiki bureaucrats, so I can also see community-elected stewards having primary jurisdiction here. Dmehus (talk) 23:57, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, why not just check the wikis you monitor and patrol within the thirty day timespan to ensure they have activity within a 30 day timespan? After all, if you perform an edit or log action within that thirty day timeframe, you'll be a bit ahead of the game and prevent the wiki from becoming inactive anyway (i.e., the inactivity "clock" will be reset). Dmehus (talk) 00:01, 8 October 2020 (UTC)


 * A useful proposal is to change the default setting for, the options for number of days that the form in RecentChanges presents, as I did yesterday on   as instructed above (pictured).  Avengium could get what he wants with one additional click, and local sysops would be less perturbed that their procedure was being upended.   00:03 8-Oct-2020
 * Yeah, I tend to agree. I realize Avengium may not be a local  on the wikis he monitors, and said wikis may not have active bureaucrats; however, in such cases,  could also hold a local election requesting   rights on said wikis, consistent with any local wiki policies as may exist (or global customs and conventions where none exist), and a steward would be able to assess the election after a reasonable period of in absence of an active bureaucrat. If we it's still desired to change this globally, I think this warrants a fuller community discussion, either a global RfC or, better yet, a full global community proposal on this noticeboard that articulates clearly both the need and rationale for the change. This would allow others to suggest potential workable alternative proposals for ideas which had not been brought to light. Dmehus (talk) 00:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I think Spike's idea is probably quite good. I think the default max is 30 days but it's slightly less user experience wise intrusive.  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  06:42, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear, Spike's idea is very similar to the idea I expressed above, and involves making no global change to the default max RC age? To add to what Spike and I said above, Avengium can always request a steward change the default maximum RC age setting in any wiki(s) where the bureaucrats are inactive in responding to his request, as it's quite a minor change. So this would have the effect of allowing Avengium to still monitor RCs up to 45-60 days on wikis he monitors while at the same time not making any global change. Dmehus (talk) 14:24, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I love the idea Spike suggested. Putting another number allows people (not just me) to check other time frame, but keeping the same default as before. And local admins continue with their time frames. Is a win-win situation. I think we should keep the default the same and add another value to  that is 180 days (like in the image Spike shared). I suggest putting that new number in all wikis that have $wgRCLinkDays as default. Avengium (talk) 19:07, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

As requested, now see Requests for Comment/Add a link on Special:RecentChanges to see last 180 days. 02:09 9-Oct-2020
 * I have moved your good-faith RfC to this subpage of your userspace, as I feel that your proposal needs some clarification. As well, above, you said that you didn't feel changing the default RC value for all wikis was necessary in this case, since, as I said above, stewards could simply change the default RC value on any wikis monitored and where the local bureaucrats were inactive. Moreover, though global in nature, this is a relatively modest global change, so I'm not sure a full RfC is indeed needed. We could simply utilize this discussion and agree on a proposal to move forward with in a new sub-section of this discussion, on which we'd all vote. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 02:19, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * An update for everyone in this discussion...I have followed up with Spike on his user talk page by way of this discussion, mainly to (a) seek clarification on his original proposal, (b) gain insight as to why 180 days was decided on, (c) obtain clarity on whether more than proposal (an RfC) might make sense, and (d) determine whether it makes the most sense to move forward with the one community proposal in a new sub-section of this community noticeboard discussion. Dmehus (talk) 03:28, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Can't just go to their global preferences and change their default recent changes days just for themselves? I don't see why this would need a change to a global setting. K599 (talk) 14:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I could do it, But I hadn't thought about it until now. About Spike's proposal, I think is useful for everyone, not just me. But I realize that there are several ways to achieve the same result. Part of this is because I am less involved in the wiki environment (and I use user friendly mechanics), and had not thought of the option that my global preferences could overlap and replace the default way of showing recent changes. Avengium (talk) 15:04, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, as mentioned, that's exactly what ended up being suggested in our conversations on the Miraheze Discord server. While I'm not necessarily opposed to changing the default RC setting for everyone as I do agree with Avengium that MediaWiki is not all that intuitive, especially when it comes to one's preferences and global preferences, I think we should be cautious at changing settings globally for everyone, overriding local wikis' discretion and autonomy, where only one or a few users may not be aware of other workarounds. I think what this discussion elucidated for us is that we could do well to create a FAQ question for Avengium's problem described above, and then provide recommended solutions for both wiki users and wiki owners. Dmehus (talk) 20:32, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Like Special:GlobalRenameRequest
I want to make my local wiki like Special:GlobalRenameRequest, Special namespace's request page. How to make? Thanks. Gomdoli4696 (talk) 01:49, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I believe that special page can only be accessed on Meta. Can you clarify how you mean? You want to make a new separate special page? You could possibly try the PageForms extension, but not sure if that's what you're after. Dmehus (talk) 02:33, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I want to make a new separate special page. Gomdoli4696 (talk) 02:56, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That involves some php coding expertise, and would then likely involve you submitting that special page to either Wikimedia's Phabricator or Miraheze's Phabricator, depending on which extension it's related to. This MediaWiki help page provides some instruction on the mechanics involved in creating a special page. Hope this helps. Dmehus (talk) 14:31, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * To add to (and perhaps clarify) what said, you would have to create a MediaWiki extension in order to have your own kind of special page. This does indeed require PHP developing skills. In addition, the extension would have to be secure in order to pass our security review process which is mandatory for every new extension excluding ones used by the Wikimedia Foundation. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 08:26, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

How do I change the theme of my wiki?
So, I want to turn Dream Fiction Wiki green, but how do I do it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlegSlaviraheze (talk • contribs) 08:30, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * First, welcome to Miraheze, and to Meta. Second, (Please sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes like this: .) . Third, to answer your question, your wiki's style and apperance is done through Cascading Style Sheets, principally in your wiki's MediaWiki:Common.css interface file. You want to start with this very basic answer to this question at: FAQ. Beyond that, you could use your Discord account to join our Discord server, where a number of CSS experts exist to provide one-on-one support. You can also ask on IRC, at ; however, I do recommend using IRCCloud as your IRC client, as they provide a complimentary IRCCloud IRC cloak upon registering for an account, as your IP address would otherwise be available in an unmasked format. Hope this helps. Dmehus (talk) 13:36, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

My miraheze
Can I get help I'm new here? Hrvcfr (talk) 01:35, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Firstly, welcome to Miraheze, and to Meta wiki. You're off to a great start by signing your posts with four tildes . Second, what do you need help with? Dmehus (talk) 01:44, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You can start at FAQ. If you have more questions that aren't covered there then you can ask.  Тишина (talk) 01:45, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I need ppl to help my miraheze Hrvcfr (talk) 01:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

My miraheze
Come join criminal world if you are interested in crime topics.

Hrvcfr (talk) 01:58, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You should wait until your wiki has been approved and created. Also, I note you've created two threads with the same section header. Your section header should concisely describe your topic on the noticeboard. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 02:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry Hrvcfr (talk) 02:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem. Dmehus (talk) 02:07, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Scary transclusion is not working as expected
Hi altogether, in this topic I asked for an interwiki prefix. The prefix is working fine, but it seems to me that scary transclusion is ignoring all includeonly/onlyinclude/noinclude tags. Here is a template on my wiki: Transclusion, what it looks like in the same wiki and here an example of scary transclusion in an other wiki. Is this a bug or a feature? Am I missing something? Is there anybody out there who is using scary transclusion? Thank you for your support, Lily (Lilypond Wiki · talk and I will listen · my little garden ) 07:39, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll have to look into whether scary transclusion ignores the  and   tags. It's definitely possible this is either a known issue or a bug. In the mean time, you might try searching Wikimedia Phabricator as if it's a known issue or bug, that's where it would be tracked as it is a so-called upstream issue (outside of Miraheze's own maintained source code). In the mean time, what I might suggest instead is to essentially use it for very basic pages and templates. For example, you might create a "clean code" version as a subpage of the existing page, without such tags or a several levels deep of transcluded templates. As well, it is after all called scary transclusion for a reason. As just one example, see this example revision in my TestWiki sandbox in which I attempted to transclude the Special:GlobalUsers special page (note that this special page does not have local transclusion built into it, although I was able to transclude the page using scary transclusion, with, as you'll see, unexpected results). Hope this helps. Dmehus (talk) 23:10, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Indeed, it seems this is actually a long-standing, and still open, bug, as seen in this Wikimedia Phabricator ticket. Dmehus (talk) 23:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * thank you so much for your support. I had already the idea of adding a subpage with clean code but this does make life not really easier. With this bug scary transclusion is more or less useless for my purposes, Lily (Lilypond Wiki · talk and I will listen · my little garden ) 06:27, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I have tried the method with clean code in a subpage of the template and performed some experiments. I could not find a way to pass parameters; compare "normal" transclusion with parameters with scary transclusion with parameters. This fact restricts the usability of scary transclusion to templates without parameters. Maybe there is a way and I just could not figure it out, Lily (Lilypond Wiki · talk and I will listen · my little garden ) 08:49, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Considering mw:Manual:$wgEnableScaryTranscluding, maybe might work with parameters. K599 (talk) 16:59, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, having done some tests, it seems like using "raw:" works with "noinclude" and "includeonly" tags correctly. K599 (talk) 19:05, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * thank you so much, raw: does the trick! Lily (Lilypond Wiki · talk and I will listen · my little garden ) 07:13, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

TwinkleGlobal
You can test beta Twinkle! Thanks! Gomdoli4696 (talk) 09:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * User:ChipWolf/TwinkleGlobal
 * User:Gomdoli4696/TwinkleGlobal
 * Thank you both for your work in importing that user script version of Twinkle on Miraheze. That will be helpful, and more streamlined, for users than setting up and installing the MediaWiki gadget version. I personally try and avoid the Twinkle templates, as I find them too formulaic and imperfect. However, Twinkle does have some very useful features, notably the pseudo-rollback feature "restore this revision." Dmehus (talk) 22:59, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Cross-wiki contributions
We can view Wikimedia project's cross-wiki contributions, Then how to view miraheze's cross-wiki contributions? Thanks. --Gomdoli4696 (talk) 22:53, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * We would love to be able to offer the global user contributions tool on Miraheze; however, it's very resource intensive in that every query of a user's global contributions is a query of every database for every wiki to which the user has attached their account. Hopefully, we'll be able to offer it in the future, but there's no timeline for such an offering. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 22:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok. --Gomdoli4696 (talk) 23:11, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Gazetteer
Could crimeworld be added to the list??? Ty Hrvcfr (talk) 06:58, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have just reverted last time because your wiki was not created, but you can add it now ! HeartsDo (Talk || Global || Wiki Creator) 07:05, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * How?? And thank you. Hrvcfr (talk) 07:08, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You can add it when you did last time (depends of the category who are your wiki), and for create a link to your wiki, you can use the magic interwiki word  (for example for your wiki, this would be  ) HeartsDo (Talk || Global || Wiki Creator) 07:21, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Ty Hrvcfr (talk) 07:26, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Np, you can maybe a little expand your description, but for the rest is OK :). HeartsDo (Talk || Global || Wiki Creator) 07:33, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Could someone please get the word out for the wiki I created??? Ty Hrvcfr (talk) 00:19, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Wiki community project script
I made a script that will display banners for wikis and provide a list of links at the bottom of the page for other wikis that have interesting topics or already have content on them.


 * https://tishina.miraheze.org/wiki/Wiki_community_script

Тишина (talk) 19:23, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

GlobalPreference
How to set? --Gomdoli4696 (talk) 23:21, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Please use Special:GlobalPreferences. The first column represents whether to set that specific setting globally; the second column, to the first's immediate right, represents whether to enable that specific function or setting. In Special:Preferences, for settings you've set globally, those settings will now be greyed out unless you set a local exception on that wiki. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 01:49, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I was mistaken. Sorry. --Gomdoli4696 (talk) 04:59, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Mywikipedia
Looking for more people to contribute to my wiki. Any ideas? It's https://mywikipedia.miraheze.org -- Iron Sword 22 (talk) 01:18, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Multilingual glossary ?
Hi, I started translating some pages of this Meta wiki into French.

Q: is there any multilingual glossary here that we could use to ensure homogoneous and consistent translations? Example: (en) e-mail address -> (fr) adresse e-mail or adresse courriel ? Gerdami (talk) 07:09, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That is an interesting idea, do you know how the Wikimedia Foundation (for example their Meta wiki) deals with this? Maybe we could also use their method. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 08:22, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I have no idea, sorry Gerdami (talk) 09:51, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually there is one at mediawikiwiki:Manual:Glossary that is currently translated into 3 other languages. Gerdami (talk) 11:51, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for suggesting this, Gerdami, with your question. That latest interwiki link is to the MediaWiki software manual, so wouldn't be a specific Wikimedia standard or practice. I would think the common sense way to handle this would be a Meta Wiki style guide (a Miraheze Meta Manual of Style, if you will), with a specific section focused on translations. Definitely not opposed to such an idea, but would be a rather large undertaking. As well, if it becomes too comprehensive in other areas of writing, it may encourage users to view that as a policy with little flexibility. I do like to follow stylistic conventions in some ways, but moreso for technical reasons than grammatical or vocabulary-type reasons. Even in English, we have some pages that no doubt use certain British or Canadian English spellings intermixed with U.S. English. Ideally, we should use a consistent English variation on a given page, but any WikiGnome can correct these as they see them. So, I would just say, go with whatever you prefer. Someone may prefer something else in the future, so it could get changed. If two French translators disagree on something, they can just discuss it on the talk page (though preferably not the  language subpage of the given talk page). Hope that helps a bit? Dmehus (talk) 14:48, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , the interwiki link I provided was just an example. If you agree I could start making a Help:Glossary page (I think it would be a good location) in English with the terms I find relevant while translating some existing pages into French, for example from the FAQ page. These terms could link to existing pages. Gerdami (talk) 18:15, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I think that's not a bad location for the final page, but I'm not sure what this would look like, so I'd rather suggest using a subpage(s) of your Meta userspace for now, and we can always move the page into Help: namespace and/or history merge in the earlier revisions from your page(s) as required. Dmehus (talk) 18:19, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Good suggestion. I will start that way. Gerdami (talk) 07:45, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Some problems about using out image
Oh, I wanted to show forum users' avatars in the main page automatically. It seems to be easy&mdash;all of forum users' avatars are in mc-uc.netease.com, so I only need to show the image of https://mc-uc.netease.com//data/avatar/userid_avatar_middle.jpg as a out image. Then I looked up mediawiki.org and enabled. I have known the setting will be invalid in Mediawiki 1.35+ so I also enabled.

After that, I used two forms –  and  .But to my surprise, there was only an icon of a damaged image and the avatar was not showed.

I also used widgets, but it was the same end as that two forums. I have tried other image urls, a few of them was success.

I seem to have found a problem - almost every out things such as out images, out js especially hosted in China things (for example China-cdn js) can not work on Miraheze. But in other wiki they can. The same code in zhmoegirlpediain my wiki(NMFWiki)

Why? If some settings are controlling it?

Thanks, --开炸弹车 (talk) 13:25, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Inspecting the console shows CSP blocking "mc-uc.netease.com", so you would need to open a Phabricator task to add that to the CSP whitelist. K599 (talk) 19:41, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Local interwiki request
I'm one of the admins at nssports and I'd like to request this as a local interwiki:

I'd do it myself but I don't think any of our admins has made 500 edits yet. Thanks for the help and I'm happy to address any questions. Kelssek (talk) 22:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The 500 edit requirement for local interwiki administrator, as far as I am aware, doesn't seem to be enforced. All that's required is that you be a local  on your local wiki. Nevertheless, I'll add this for you. Not a problem. Do you need either the   or   flags enabled? Dmehus (talk) 23:04, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ without the   and   flags, but can always be changed should the need change. Dmehus (talk) 23:08, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * This works, thanks! --Kelssek (talk) 23:49, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem. Dmehus (talk) 00:08, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Gadget Cat a lot
Is it possible to have this feature "Cat a lot" in my Wiki ?

AMITRAM (talk) 17:08, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep. Gadgets, unlike extensions, don't require security reviews or approvals by system administrators to install. I'm not that familiar with that gadget's installation procedures, but speaking just generally, it involves importing the JS and CS files into your wiki's MediaWiki: namespace, then updating MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition to reference the gadget and its file, configuration variables, and the like. recently installed it on his wiki, so may be able to offer some assistance. Dmehus (talk) 17:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'm gonna ask him.
 * Do you know where I can't get help for PDF files support ? I can't get thumbnails for this file format.
 * AMITRAM (talk) 17:50, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

My miraheze vanished
Travelguidesworld is gone. Plz fix. Hrvcfr (talk) 17:38, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not gone. just fixed the URL, as I told you in the wiki request. Additionally, I should also note that this was tracked on Phabricator as #T6324. You can now use travelguidesworld as your URL. Dmehus (talk) 17:46, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ty doug. Hrvcfr (talk) 17:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem. Dmehus (talk) 17:54, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Poor SVG preview quality on commons.miraheze.org
Hi, I have recently uploaded two SVG images on commons. The preview files have a very low quality, this is much better in my wiki, compare to. Maybe the reason is that the SVG Converter on Commons is in default position commons settings (click tab Media). I have changed this in my wiki to Inkscape. Is there a specific reason for the setting in commons, maybe server load? Lily (Lilypond Wiki · talk and I will listen · my little garden ) 05:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * This is an interesting problem, and you're right, the uploaded version on Miraheze Commons is of a much lower quality. You've certainly identified one possible explanation, but I must admit as to not being certain as to the exact cause. I am going to, a local  on Miraheze Commons to see if that may be the problem and, if so, to the effect the necessary change on Commons. Even if it's not the problem, as he is very technically inclined with all or most aspects of MediaWiki software, he may be able to identify a solution. Dmehus (talk) 09:31, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I’ve adjusted the setting, not sure if that’s fixed it. MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 11:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The problem seems to be solved. I uploaded another SVG, the quality is nice now. AFAIK the preview images of former uploaded pics stay unchanged Lily (Lilypond Wiki · talk and I will listen · my little garden ) 11:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Advanced mobile edit
How to use to  function on my wiki? I don't know how to. Gomdoli4696 (talk) 07:32, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Inactivity banner while active
Hello

My wiki shows an inactivity banner even though there were recent edits and the Inactive checkbox is unchecked.

How should I fix that problem?

Thanks

Vincent Vinny (talk) 08:06, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for signing your posts on Meta with four tildes, and welcome to Meta. Per Dormancy Policy, wikis with no recent changes edits or log actions in at least 45 days are marked as inactive. At 60 days, the wikis are then marked as closed. In either case, if you are a local  on your wiki, you can go into Special:ManageWiki on your wiki and uncheck in the inactive box. Additionally, you should also make at least one edit or log action as well. If your wiki has a fair number of informational content pages (i.e., recipes) made to be read by real people, then you can apply, at stewards' noticeboard for an exemption to Dormancy Policy. Dmehus (talk) 09:04, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I've just re-read your above post, and you do note that the inactive box is unchecked. Have you tried purging given page(s) where you see the banner by adding  to the end of the URL in address bar? It's possible the page just needs to be purged to clear that banner from displaying. If that doesn't resolve it, I'd suggest e-mailing   as there may be a maintenance script of some sort that needs to be run by system administrators. Dmehus (talk) 09:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply. I tried the  trick, but to no avail. I will send an email to tech. Thanks Vinny (talk) 13:49, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I am looking into it now... Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 13:58, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It appears I have now fixed it so it doesnt show the notices anymore, you may have to clear your cache however. Zppix (Meta &#124; CVT Member &#124; talk to me) 16:56, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Indeed! Thanks a lot for your help and . I'm very happy to use Miraheze, with the power of a community. Free and efficient! Vinny (talk) 18:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Request for evaluation of the wiki rules
In order to cover all my bases, I would like to have people associated with Miraheze's moderation/overview to take a look at SocDemWiki:Rules just to see if there is any disagreement or possible improvements. I just want to avoid any trouble that could get my wiki deleted. Godless Raven (talk) 10:45, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * While I haven't looked at your local wiki's rules, it's excellent that you have established them. As long as your wiki complies with all aspects of Content Policy from a content perspective and your wiki's users comply with, and your local rules don't come into conflict with, Code of Conduct, you should be absolutely fine and need not worry. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 11:04, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi,, I just wanted to be safe. I really appreciate Miraheze and don't want to become persona non-grata. Godless Raven (talk) 15:49, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Infobox
I have problems using the infobox template, I have followed the instructions only to get the infobox and a displaying link saying Label:Template Other that does not go away. What should I do? Marcdmc (talk) 11:36, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Miraheze, and to Meta. Thank you also for signing your posts on the noticeboards with four tildes . You're off to a great start. Please note that I have just procedurally moved your question from stewards' noticeboard to community noticeboard, where it is now in scope. Someone should be able to answer your question shortly. Dmehus (talk) 13:15, 22 October 2020 (UTC)