Gryllida, that can already be done:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/No_open_proxies , updated only a few
days ago.
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42231 was also just fixed
to inform users better, thanks to Tyler and Reedy.
Nemo
___
W
Forwarded to wikitech-l
-- Forwarded message --
From: Amir E. Aharoni
Date: Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 10:38 AM
Subject: [WikimediaMobile] webfonts in mobile frontend
To: "mobil...@lists.wikimedia.org"
Hi,
So today I worked with Kaldari (thanks for the help!!) and committed a
very
On 28 September 2013 00:54, Petr Bena wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:38 PM, Risker wrote:
> > I think a few different concepts are being muddled here.
> >
> > Flagged revisions (and its variant, pending changes, on enwiki) is
> applied
> > to individual articles to hold *all* edits from cer
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:38 PM, Risker wrote:
> I think a few different concepts are being muddled here.
>
> Flagged revisions (and its variant, pending changes, on enwiki) is applied
> to individual articles to hold *all* edits from certain user classes for
> review.
>
> What Petr is looking fo
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
> From talking to Eleanor Saitta: could we do FlaggedRevs by IP space,
> and/or by the intersection of IPs and topic space? Basically, let people
> edit from Tor IPs (and/or whitelist or blacklist categories) as long as
> those go throu
On Sat, 28 Sep 2013, at 10:17, Arcane 21 wrote:
> I like this idea. Not every Tor user is vandal or troll, and assuming that
> all of them are by default is not assuming good faith.
To avoid endless abuse some services ask people to register from a non-TOR IP,
and allow them to connect from TOR
Hmm, I can see your point. Flagged Revs would be as much of hindrances on
regular users as it would be on Tor users. I still think it should be
permissable for Tor editors to submit legitimate edits in some way, but your
points about the AGF policy and the purpose of Flagged Revs are duly noted.
On 27 September 2013 19:40, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
> This is a quick followup to
> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/wikitech/323006 and partly in
> keeping with the anti-vandalism discussion at
> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/wikitech/392727 as well.
>
> On 12/27/2012 0
Good luck and have fun, Sumana! :)
> Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 20:31:37 -0400
> From: suma...@wikimedia.org
> To: wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Advance notice: I'm taking a sabbatical
> October-December
>
> Well, off I go. I'm about to unsubscribe from this list for
I like this idea. Not every Tor user is vandal or troll, and assuming that all
of them are by default is not assuming good faith. Some people are just really
paranoid about their internet anonymity or live in restrictive countries (both
of which I sympathize with), so this idea would let them ed
Well, off I go. I'm about to unsubscribe from this list for the first
time in years. Looking forward to returning in January with MORE POWERS.
-Sumana
P.S. I'm sure you can find my personal email address if you need to. :)
On 09/04/2013 09:47 PM, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
> Thanks, Oren! If I a
This is a quick followup to
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/wikitech/323006 and partly in
keeping with the anti-vandalism discussion at
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/wikitech/392727 as well.
On 12/27/2012 07:26 PM, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
> TL;DR: A few ideas follow on
I think a few different concepts are being muddled here.
Flagged revisions (and its variant, pending changes, on enwiki) is applied
to individual articles to hold *all* edits from certain user classes for
review.
What Petr is looking for is a way to flag *individual edits* to an article
(not the
> If you use Huggle and see something ok (= not to be reverted), Huggle
must mark it patrolled; if you're unsure, you should be able to tell so to
Huggle and it will be left unpatrolled.
This is not the same. Surely, most edits would appear in such an
"unpatrolled" list. Most edits are not seen
Hello and here's your latest edition of the deployment highlights email!
Full schedule here:
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Deployments#Week_of_September_30th
== Monday ==
* VisualEditor will be enabled by default for Logged-in users on the
following wikis:
Bulgarian (bg), Catalan (ca),
All this is unnecessary complication. If you use Huggle and see
something ok (= not to be reverted), Huggle must mark it patrolled; if
you're unsure, you should be able to tell so to Huggle and it will be
left unpatrolled.
If you're emotionally attached to the idea of doing the opposite, you
Hello everyone!
Google Summer of Code 2013 came to an official end today with final reviews
and code submissions.
I wrote a blog post summarizing the summer internship, the deliverables,
and the thank-yous:
http://moriel.smarterthanthat.com/tips/google-summer-of-code-2013-summary/
I'd like to th
On 09/27/2013 04:04 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> ... and now starts another fascinating phase: encouraging these 21
> interns to stay with us, becoming regular contributors and, eventually,
> future mentors for new generations of interns. Everybody can help to
> achieve this. A good start: congratulat
Hi, we have the final results of our Summer internship programs:
GSoC: 18 pass - 2 pending
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Summer_of_Code_2013
OPW: 1 pass - 0 pending
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreach_Program_for_Women/Round_6
First of all: THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO ALL INTERNS AND MENTORS FO
What should I do if a number of etherpads seem to be completely gone?
Can someone click on any of the pad links on
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2013/Schedule/Saturday
and tell me if they are able to see some content? Thanks.
Nemo
___
We've come up with another document for interested people to review: the
Backport policy[1].
Just as a process for reviewing RFPs was introduced this year, we've
also set up a way to review requested backports. The first meeting to
review these requests is in 2 weeks. In the meantime, have a l
Hi,
I think you perfectly summarized this issue. I like the first solution
(3rd provider on wikimedia labs with some well documented api
interface) but I must admit that identity sharing might be little
problem (if some troll figured out this system and we weren't using
any identification at all,
I've got to say that this problem seems pretty straightforward.
Essentially, we need something lighter than 'revert' for edits that need a
second set of eyes.
What we really want is a queue of suspect revisions that allows Wikipedians
to flag new revisions, query current flagged revisions and rem
Yes, having https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1189 would
be definitely a solution. But question is if it's ever going to happen
on production.
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Bartosz Dziewoński wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 15:18:01 +0200, Derric Atzrott
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I thought F
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 15:18:01 +0200, Derric Atzrott
wrote:
I thought FlaggedRevs prevented the newest version of the page from being shown
until it has been approved?
"Flagged Revisions allows for Editor and Reviewer users to rate revisions of
articles and set those revisions as the default
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Petr Bena wrote:
> Not really, I can't see how tags help at all in here. We are talking
> about any kind of edit (nothing that can be matched by regex) which
> seems suspicious to vandal-fighter (human) but who can't make sure if
> it's vandalism or not. Nothing li
Not really, I can't see how tags help at all in here. We are talking
about any kind of edit (nothing that can be matched by regex) which
seems suspicious to vandal-fighter (human) but who can't make sure if
it's vandalism or not. Nothing like abuse filter nor patrolled edits
can help here (unless w
On Sep 27, 2013 8:18 PM, "Derric Atzrott"
wrote:
>
> >> Is it possible to
> >>> enable them in reverse-mode so that all edits are flagged as good, but
> >>> editors can flag them as bad? If not, I can't see how it could be
> >>> useful for this purpose...
> >>>
> >>
> >> "flagging as bad"? Do you
>> Is it possible to
>>> enable them in reverse-mode so that all edits are flagged as good, but
>>> editors can flag them as bad? If not, I can't see how it could be
>>> useful for this purpose...
>>>
>>
>> "flagging as bad"? Do you mean reverting?
>>
>> I just don't see what you are trying to acc
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Bartosz Dziewoński wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:39:46 +0200, Petr Bena wrote:
>
> Is it possible to
>> enable them in reverse-mode so that all edits are flagged as good, but
>> editors can flag them as bad? If not, I can't see how it could be
>> useful for thi
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:39:46 +0200, Petr Bena wrote:
Is it possible to
enable them in reverse-mode so that all edits are flagged as good, but
editors can flag them as bad? If not, I can't see how it could be
useful for this purpose...
"flagging as bad"? Do you mean reverting?
I just don't se
On 09/27/2013 06:03 AM, Gryllida wrote:
I would be concerned about proper work of this feature in wikilinks. [[Main
Page?action=history|Foo]] makes a red broken link.
So does:
[[/w/index.php?title=Main Page|Foo]]
Neither would be expected to work. Anything to the left of the pipe in
your e
Thanks, Alex!
--Ken.
> On Sep 27, 2013, at 6:29 AM, Alexandros Kosiaris
> wrote:
>
> FYI
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Core operations via RT
> Date: Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:01 PM
> Subject: [wikimedia #5841] etherpad.wikimedia.org downtime due to upgrade
> To: akosia...
The granularity of my project is down to an open number (they will
probably span on multiple servers) of small groups (mainly of one
individual) of protected, *wiki pages* of which the presentation may
be associated under various thematic gateways.
I am interested in community advices concerni
On Sep 27, 2013 5:06 PM, "Bartosz Dziewoński" wrote:
>
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 11:51:34 +0200, Petr Bena wrote:
>
>> We are getting somewhere else than I wanted... I didn't want to
>> discuss what should be reverted on sight or not. Problem is that right
>> now lot of vandal-fighters see certain am
What I described are flagged revs the other way. Is it possible to
enable them in reverse-mode so that all edits are flagged as good, but
editors can flag them as bad? If not, I can't see how it could be
useful for this purpose...
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Bartosz Dziewoński
wrote:
> On F
FYI
-- Forwarded message --
From: Core operations via RT
Date: Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:01 PM
Subject: [wikimedia #5841] etherpad.wikimedia.org downtime due to upgrade
To: akosia...@wikimedia.org
I am scheduling a downtime for etherpad.wikimedia.org on Monday 30/09/2013 in
order t
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 11:51:34 +0200, Petr Bena wrote:
We are getting somewhere else than I wanted... I didn't want to
discuss what should be reverted on sight or not. Problem is that right
now lot of vandal-fighters see certain amount of dubious edits they
skip because they can't verify if they
On Tue, 17 Sep 2013, at 7:51, Tyler Romeo wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Gabriel Wicke wrote:
>
> > * use simple action urls
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/Foo?action=history instead of
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foo&action=history
> >
>
> This already works.
>
We are getting somewhere else than I wanted... I didn't want to
discuss what should be reverted on sight or not. Problem is that right
now lot of vandal-fighters see certain amount of dubious edits they
skip because they can't verify if they are correct or not, which are
then ignored and get lost i
On 2013-09-27 2:34 AM, Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> On 09/26/2013 02:46 PM, Juliusz Gonera wrote:
>> I think the best way to proceed right now is to use the `code` key to
>> determine what to do and we should figure out how to make it better in
>> future. Is there any way I can get notified when your
On 09/26/2013 02:46 PM, Juliusz Gonera wrote:
I think the best way to proceed right now is to use the `code` key to
determine what to do and we should figure out how to make it better in
future. Is there any way I can get notified when your patch gets merged?
Not sure if there is such an option s
42 matches
Mail list logo