Community noticeboard/Archive 17

__NOINDEX__

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)
 * 4) This is a good idea! We have the community board, but it's very messy, votes and other things go in the same page, making it cluttered. With the community wiki, you can have a page for off-topic, memes, just chatting, etc. and it would most likely work, but as there are a lot of opposes, we most likely won't get the community wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiJS (talk • contribs) 18:04, 15 March 2021 (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)
 * Steward attention requested: This really should be closed. I already posted an updated proposal, and it was closed as a "duplicate" of this discussion. Justarandomliberal (talk) 16:06, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Privacy policy 13+ years refers to editors or readers?
Please help me understand correctly this part of the Privacy Policy:

"Miraheze does not operate Services that are targeted at people under 13 years of age, and does not collect personally identifiable information. If you are a parent or guardian and become aware that your child has been using the Services, please let us know and we will remove your child’s information."

Does it mean that each editor of the wiki must be at least 13 years old, or that the content of the wiki should be written for readers at least 13 years old?

Specifically, I would like to make a wiki that provides links to educational resources for elementary and high schools; for example YouTube videos that explain math. (I found a lot of great resources, and I believe it would be useful to have them at one place, sorted by school curriculum.) Editors of the wiki would be adult people, typically teachers. But the intended audience is the students and/or their parents; in case of elementary school, that would include kids below 13. The expected use case is: "A kid didn't understand the lesson about triangles at school, goes to the wiki, chooses 'Math' + grade + 'Triangles', and hopefully there are a couple of YouTube videos linked." (That is, the kids are definitely not expected to 'edit' the wiki.)

Would such wiki be compatible with the Privacy Policy?

-- Viliam (talk) 23:31, 14 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Viliam Thank you for the question. This refers mainly to editors&mdash;specifically anything that requires collecting personal information from users under 13 years of age. Under UK law, as well as the laws of the European Union, Miraheze Limited is legally prohibited from knowingly collecting personal information from users under that age. In your case, you could still create a fishbowl wiki that was only editable by the  group and you could even take away the   permission from the anonymous user group  and even the   group, so accounts could not be created. So, yeah, to answer your question, it's not a problem for you to create an educational wiki that would be read only by students as the students could not create an account on that wiki. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 02:26, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for explanation; wiki "skola.miraheze.org" created (no content yet). --Viliam (talk) 21:20, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Viliam Oh, that's ✅ to hear. Glad you're all set up. Feel free to join us on IRC in or on Discord if you have any questions regarding building your wiki. Dmehus (talk) 02:28, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

How can I redirect a page?
I have a wiki, and I made a page, but I want to redirect other pages to the specific page, so how can I do that? Wiki JS 19:35, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * WikiJS You can add  on a new page. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 19:39, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks! It worked! Wiki JS  19:42, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * WikiJS Okay, ✅. Dmehus (talk) 19:47, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

How does one request the "confirmed" userright on a wiki?
How does one request the "confirmed" user right on a wiki? Thanks! Firestar464 (talk) 03:20, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅ on Discord. 11:44, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Though this was answered on Discord, which is great, I'm going to provide an answer on community noticeboard as this is a good, basic question others will likely have the same question about. the  user group usually has nearly identifical user rights to the   implicit user group that is not granted by any particular user group and which is granted only upon meeting certain predefined conditions (typically, a locallly attached user account that is at least four days old and which has made at least ten edits). Since there's sometimes a need for trusted users to edit before meeting those conditions or because certain   or alternate accounts that do not edit but otherwise need to update their OAuth consumers, the   user group is available for a user group (typically, administrators) to grant as required. Dmehus (talk) 13:51, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Some features not working on two wikis.
On Loathsome Characters Wiki, adding "voting="Plus"" to comments (so it looks like  ) simply breaks the comments, while on other wikis such as Awful Movies Wiki work perfectly fine. And the Flow extension on Horrible TV Show Episodes Wiki doesn't want to work either no matter what I try to do. Is there anything missing or disabled on those wikis that could be causing this? --DeciduousWater534 (talk) 21:03, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * The Comments part has been ✅ on Phabricator but as for Flow, could you please describe what you mean by "not working" and optionally create a task on Phabricator? Thank you. 11:49, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Even though the Flow extension is enabled, the wiki is still displaying the traditional talk page style rather than what Flow (now called StructuredDiscussions) would display. --DeciduousWater534 (talk) 17:28, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


 * You must enable Flow on the Special:EnableStructuredDiscussions. --Anton (talk) 17:40, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Oh, okay, but is there any way I can enable them on every page at once instead of one at a time? --DeciduousWater534 (talk) 20:01, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DeciduousWater534 There should be an option to set the default content model in Special:ManageWiki/namespaces on your wiki, though this was recently redone by Universal Omega so this may have changed, and I'm not seeing where this has been done on Miraheze Commons (which uses StructuredDiscussions by default in all mainspace and userspace talk namespaces). So, I'm not quite sure why those namespaces aren't displaying to me as using the StructuredDiscussions content model. Anyway, that's something to look into. Hope that helps. Dmehus (talk) 17:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

About the Twinkle options:
How can I import some of the warnings if they don't turn out the way I wanted it to be? I've been trying to import more of these templates for the purpose of having the Twinkle categories be completed as it's barely close to being completed. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 17:10, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Could you please explain further, I'm not really sure what you mean and what you're trying to do. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 13:48, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * DarkMatterMan4500 Twinkle is a very complex, multi-faceted gadget that is really designed for Wikipedia workflow, so it requires a lot of modifications to the code and also a lot of customization in the templates used. I personally find it quite impersonal and prefer not to use it. In fact, I haven't reenabled it on Meta, as the two most useful features I used, the pseudo-rollback functionality, I'm using BrandonXLF's Restorer and actual . Where I used specific templates,   works well for me, and is nearly as quick. Dmehus (talk) 17:30, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * That does simplify things for sure, but I'm hoping the Twinkle feature reaches completion in the future. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 22:19, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

List of wikis
Where do I find the list of wikis to make sure the name I want for my wiki isn't already taken? Blaze The Wolf (talk) 21:58, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * There is a very simple methode: enter the url in your browser's address field, e.g. . Looking for wikis you can here:   and a log of all ever created wikis here:   but is rather difficult to find a specific name there, greetings LilyLilyu - smile.svg (Lilypond Wiki · talk to me · little garden · my wiki of everything) 04:09, 19 March 2021 (UTC)