Meta:Administrators' noticeboard

From Meta
Jump to: navigation, search
Administrators' noticeboard
This page is for matters that need administrators' attention on Meta Wiki only (anything global should be discussed at the Community noticeboard!) Please visit Community noticeboard for matters regarding other wikis, Phabricator for technical requests and Stewards' noticeboard for something that requires a steward.

Here you can:

  • Ask an admin to block a user who is disruptive, vandalizing, or spamming
  • Request user rights that can be assigned by administrators (autoconfirmed, confirmed, rollbacker, skipcaptcha)
  • Bring up other things that need administrators' attention. (on meta)


  • To request permissions that can't be assigned by an administrator, please see Meta:Requests for permissions
  • To bring up matters that don't apply to this wiki or to request something for another wiki (or can't be handled by administrators), please use Stewards' noticeboard.
  • To ask a question or start a discussion with the Miraheze community please use Community noticeboard
To add your request, type in a title and click the "Add Topic" button below.


Lack of general disclaimer[edit source]

I noticed that the Meta wiki has a lack of a general disclaimer, I apologise if this is the wrong place for this but I imagine that the creation of such policy would be in the hand of administrators only. My wiki is lacking a general disclaimer and I was going to use what I thought Miraheze would have however it does not have one, it might be useful for a lot more wiki owners if such a one was created. Apologies for any inconvenience. LulzKiller (talk) 15:48, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Is this a valid edit?[edit source]

Is this a valid edit to somebody's User page other than one's own?

--Robkelk (talk) 13:18, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@Robkelk: No, it is not a valid edit. I have told Amanda on IRC that doing that is unacceptable and it should not repeated. 14:11, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Should the page have been deleted, then? --Robkelk (talk) 15:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The page was not deleted because of Amanda's request, it was deleted because 1) the user blanked the page which indicates that they want deletion 2) the content before wasn't really userpage content and it should be wiki content. Reception123 (talk) (contribs) 15:46, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
So then it was a valid action and request then? Nothing stipulates certain people have to request deletion neither only certain accounts can edit user pages. Validity is in the action not the person to me. John (talk) 15:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Was it the user who blanked the page? Since the page has been deleted, I cannot double-check, but I thought that the Recent Changes list indicated that it was Amanda who blanked the change. Could an admin verify this, please? --Robkelk (talk) 16:49, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The page was blanked by the user. -- Void Whispers 17:06, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Meta policy[edit source]

As there are a lot of issues with recent actions on Meta made either by Stewards, by non-stewards or by Meta administrators I think that a policy is required to ensure that the rules on Meta are clear. I have created User:Reception123/Meta policy (draft) and anyone is invited to edit it and/or comment on it. After the version is seen by users a vote would be required to decide if this should be the Meta policy, but for now I think we should just leave it to comments.

Comments[edit source]

There's some sloppy wording in there that will be likely twisted to malefactors' benefit if it's left as-is. I've left specific comments in the document. --Robkelk (talk) 16:50, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The sentence regarding removing comments at RFC should be removed from the draft, or excluded in a final policy. This contradicts the previous sentence about disallowing incivility and insults. Users should have the right to remove derogatory comments from RFC or other discussions. Amanda (talk) 17:50, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
That was added back as it was removed without the consent of the person that wrote it, removal can be discussed here or on the specific talkpage. Reception123 (talk) (contribs) 17:59, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
As I already said on the talkpage, removing someone else's comments from an RfC is the ultimate incivility. I'm repeating this here for emphasis. --Robkelk (talk) 01:03, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Bumping this as there is no recent activity. Please feel free to contribute to the policy! Reception123 (talk) (contribs) 13:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

No personal attacks[edit source]

Please share your thoughts on my draft NPA policy for Miraheze. Amanda (talk) 20:53, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Far too over-reaching - applying that to "all Miraheze" would mean that some stranger could remove text from a wiki other than Meta if that stranger found the text offensive, or if it was determined that the earlier wiki editor referred to himself with the wrong pronoun, no matter what that wiki's individual Terms of Use and that wiki's Content Policy might be. Also, it doesn't guarantee that disagreements of opinion will not qualify as personal attacks simply because they are disagreements of opinion. --Robkelk (talk) 01:09, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Can't login[edit source]

Just bringing to your attention not being able to login on Meta (and, therefore, no logged in access to own website). Probably just a temporary and/or minor issue but this is the message I get after I have entered my login credentials:

(Cannot access the database: Cannot access the database: Unknown database 'zgradetenniswiki' ( – 22:46, 19 April 2017 (UTC) (Borderman)
Yes check.svg Resolved this was caused by miscommunication in that I was told the database was okay to drop so I presumed it had been deleted correctly several months ago. John (talk) 22:49, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks @John: Working again. Borderman  talk | contribs | email 23:15, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Merge Histories of Images[edit source]

Hi, I wanted to upload an improved version of File:Miraheze admin.png, however for a strange reason I did not want to save the file and I had to upload a new one. I request that the histories of the 2 files be merged to preserve the authorship of the same ones. Thanks. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 07:50, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

The original file has been updated, I think you just had to wait. I deleted the newer one as it was identical. Reception123 (talk) (contribs) 07:58, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

CheckUser group[edit source]

Would it be possible to chang the check user group display name to read checkuser? This is the form that is used on Wikimedia globally and it looks better IMHO to not have the space. This would require:

-- Amanda (talk) 22:13, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg No-admin comment This should be done in MirahezeMagic, I have already requested the change in GitHub. What of the page I think should be discussed before being renamed. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 23:00, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg No-admin comment I forgot that the extensions are hosted on Wikimedia, so the request was denied. A request will have to be made in since only the administrators of that site can edit the original versions in English of the MediaWiki system messages. I'll open a thread on the support page to do the modification, but that can take weeks because almost nobody cares about that page there. For now I think you can close this since the administrators can not do anything in this case. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 05:32, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
No, you can edit the MediaWiki pages linked above to change the group name only on Miraheze Meta Wiki. -- Amanda (talk) 11:17, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
You can, but I see no valid reason to do so personally. Reception123 (talk) (contribs) 15:46, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Addition of Interwikis in Special:Interwiki[edit source]

Hi, I would like to know if it is possible for an administrator to add the following link in the "Interwiki prefixes" section of Special:Interwiki:

  • Prefix: "test" or "testwiki" / URL:$1

And add the following links in the "Interlanguage prefixes" section:

  • Prefix: "es" / URL:$1

This would allow generating the section "In other languages" in both wikis and would allow the users of the primary wiki to know that there is a Spanish version, besides it would facilitate the theme of the links between both wikis. I do not know if this is possible, but from my point of view I do not see it as controversial. I hope you consider yourself. Thanks. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 13:16, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

I could add testwiki, but for the Spanish PublicTestWiki I'd rather at esttest, estest or pruebawiki rather than jsut "es", if that's okay with you. Reception123 (talk) (contribs) 14:22, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
It could be, but I fear that the original goal I had raised would not result. Do the same as you suggest (with "pruebawiki") to see if it works. —Alvaro Molina ( - ) 14:24, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Translate available languages top or bottom[edit source]

The box that shows what translated languages of a page are available is either placed on the bottom of a page (for example Miraheze or Help center) or the top (CheckUser). For consistency reasons I think we need to decide whether it goes on the top for all pages or on the bottom for all pages, or else users will be confused. Please leave your comments and opinions below. Reception123 (talk) (contribs) 07:57, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Comments[edit source]

I think it looks better at the bottom of the page, but that is purely based on aesthetics rather than function. However, on long pages it's not always apparent there's other languages available unless you scroll all the way down. With that in mind it might be better at the top. Depends what is more important: aesthetics over function or the other way round. Borderman  talk | contribs | email 10:50, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

I think that some users aren't necessarily aware that we have several languages, so maybe having it on the top would be a better idea. Though I will point out that on the WMF Wikimedia, they have it on the bottom for their Main page, and at the top for other pages. Reception123 (talk) (contribs) 18:49, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Having had a look at Wikimedia Meta's main page and several random pages afterwards I'm inclined to agree with you. Keeping the languages at the top certainly makes it obvious that some pages have more than one language. I'm not particularly keen on the language boxes that have 30 or 40+ languages in them as the box becomes quite large and somewhat of a distraction from the article. But, that's just me and I guess function over aesthetics, in this particular case, is probably more important. Borderman  talk | contribs | email 20:23, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
I agree that when there's 25-30 languages+ it already becomes something that we don't want on a Main Page. I just want there to be some obvious indication that we have multiple languages, even though it will not look as nice, even a "Scroll to the bottom to change language" would be a more effective than now, in my opinion. Reception123 (talk) (contribs) 06:34, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

My two cents are that I like how it is at Wikimedia. Bottom of main page and top of all other pages. If it really hurts the ascethics that much then we can put it on the bottom of every page, but then I'd like some indication it's there. Maybe a small box in the top right corner listing subpages or a box saying scroll down for translated pages. Kind of like the position and size of {{RightTOC}} -- Cheers, NDKilla ( TalkContribs ) 11:22, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I like NDKilla's idea. We can have small box that says "This page is translated! Scroll down.", and that wouldn't ruin the aesthetics of the page. We also need to find a suitable place on the Main page (as that is my main concern for people not knowing there are multiple languages). Reception123 (talk) (contribs) 11:29, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
That would work and it catches the eye. What about having it clickable instead of scrolling down. I know it's not a major thing to scroll but on long pages it might be better to have a link to the bottom of the page. Maybe word it similar to Reception's suggestion: "This page has been translated! Click here to see all available languages." or words to that effect. Borderman  talk | contribs | email 12:56, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

No MP3s?[edit source]

MP3 is not a valid file type at Special:Upload? Is this farm-wide or can I enable it on TheMirror? Spıke (talk)05:20 12-Oct-2017

Hi, while that can be done, we ask that you please direct all feature requests to phabricator. The page is for contacting local metawiki admins. MacFan4000 (talk) 11:42, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Sorry; will do. Spıke (talk)15:15 12-Oct-2017

About Sidebar[edit source]

On Sidebar, About Miraheze is linked on help page. Is there not any page which describing about Miraheze? If it is, Please, Add help and about Miraheze page link on sidebar "differently". And if not, Please, Create it to know Miraheze perfectly. I think, It will be more better.
আ হ ম সাকিব
TALK CONTRIBUTION 07:59, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

"About Miraheze" redirects to "Help center". Reception123 (talk) (C) 16:28, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Olivebuilder[edit source]

User "Olivebuilder" seems to be here solely to plant advertisements and not to advance the goals of the wiki farm. Spıke (talk)04:34 13-Oct-2017

Thanks for spotting that. I have blocked the user. Reception123 (talk) (C) 13:36, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Update the list of administrators of Meta[edit source]

I recently tried to get some changes done on meta and I received this response:

It happens that some sysadmins are also Meta administrators (like myself), in that case they would be acting in their capacity as a Meta administrator and not a sysadmin. Reception123 (talk) (C) 15:35, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Please update this page:

to make that more clear.

Can you point me to the page that describes how someone becomes a meta administrator and how you challenge their decisions?

Rsterbal (talk) 11:09, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

There's no formal policy on administrators on meta. Users can gain permissions at Meta:Requests for permissions. Challenging decisions is done the same way as everything else - discussing. Administrators have no rule of law, their comments are opinions and carry the same weight as everyone elses unless they're enforcing one of the relatively few policies that exist on Meta. John (talk) 11:22, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
In addition, I think that we should discuss having some guidelines for what pages should exist on Meta, so that we stay consistent. This should be discussed by the users. To clarify again, my comments about the page were just my opinion as a user, not as an administrator, and they were just suggestions. I make these suggestions, because as I said above I'm trying to keep pages on Meta consistent with each other, and their style. If we have different pages set up differently and named differently, it can become confusing for users to find them. Reception123 (talk) (C) 05:26, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Rewritten FAQs[edit source]

I had wanted FAQ to reference the new Gazetteer of wikis (inspired by Community noticeboard#Wiki Creation Collaboration Idea) but FAQ is protected against editing. I took a copy, at User:Spike the Dog/FAQ, fleshed out some sections, eliminated duplication, and provided new material, such as:

  • What a wiki is
  • Overview of CSS/JS
  • How MediaWiki extensions work.

Would you please evaluate these edits and, if suitable, install this version? Spıke (talk)11:36 19-Oct-2017

I've gone ahead and done a major update to FAQ, largely using your work. You could probably diff your FAQ and the current FAQ to see that I've made a couple of small edits. Mostly just replacing a little bit of odd wording, the thing about nobody knowing how to pronounce Miraheze (I also changed that to a permlink), and I replaced several instances of Stewards with sysadmin since they're different. -- Cheers, NDKilla ( TalkContribs ) 15:49, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much! It might look better to use __TOC__ so that the Intro is what the reader sees first, rather than the entire Table of Contents. And to be really nitpicky, the Main Page does nothing hopefully. You may delete the version in my userspace if you like. Spıke (talk)16:06 19-Oct-2017

I have made a few minor edits to the FAQ. I think it's great that we now have a more detailed version of the FAQ. Reception123 (talk) (C) 16:44, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Okay, but if dismissable site notices are only available globally, then you want to delete the paragraph after that one too. Also, you changed "More complicated changes" to "Other changes not listed" (for changes that require a request). But they are listed, further on down the page. My strategy was to have a section of the things a wiki owner could do himself, followed by the things that have to be done for him. That we hope, for the future, to move items from the second group into the first won't be relevant to the reader of this page. Spıke (talk)16:50 19-Oct-2017

Thanks for noticing. I have modified both. Reception123 (talk) (C) 16:17, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Rename Part-up wiki[edit source]

Hi, can you rename wiki: to I already discussed this with Laurens Waling. He agreed. Regards, Tim, Timboliu999 (talk) 19:16, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Can you make this request on phabricator? This noticeboard is for matters involving metawiki only (and your request should be tracked properly anyway). -- Void Whispers 20:50, 20 October 2017 (UTC)