commenting here see template
creators/curators as the end user - but they aren't in any conventional
sense. The end user is the person who actually uses the template.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https
problems come from scribunto or from
the template writer's work.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
to
prospective developers, and make sure the landing page is welcoming and
useful, before you send anyone there.
Best,
Risker
On 19 September 2012 20:12, Tomasz Finc tf...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I really wish I could just got to http://developer.wikimedia.org/
and/or http://developer.wikipedia.org
on this request until after there has
been discussion amongst checkusers, the list administrators, and likely WMF
staff as well. Thanks
Risker/Anne
(English Wikipedia checkuser and one of the Checkuser-L list administrators)
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l
been Tim
Starling's, and I thank him for it.
Risker
(who is coincidentally an enwp Arbitration Committee member but is in no way
an Arbcom representative on this list)
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org
if required.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 18 January 2012 16:40, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 January 2012 19:32, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18/01/2012, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
I was rather concerned by people thinking we need to allow emergency
access - what kind
]
Risker/Anne
[1]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/English_Wikipedia_anti-SOPA_blackout/Post-mortem
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
a clarification?
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
of the upgrade.
I know there's still much to do, both in resolving issues from this upgrade
and in addressing other issues for the next upgrade. But I thought the tech
team might appreciate knowing that it went pretty smoothly from this
non-techie's point of view.
Best,
Risker
(Administrator
in at the time of viewing?
Risker/Anne
On 2 November 2011 12:43, Petr Bena benap...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, I checked only its mediawiki extension wikipage it doesn't tell
about this permission, I will inform them about it, cool
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com
Petr, I mean the number of times [[Special:FeedbackDashboard]] is viewed;
thanks for asking me to clarify.
Risker/Anne
On 2 November 2011 18:05, Petr Bena benap...@gmail.com wrote:
That's something what I'd like to improve too there should be an option to
fill in the reason why it got hidden
vector that is similarly problematic, and it would boggle the
minds of most users to discover that developers are more interested in
enabling another of these vectors rather than thinking about how to prevent
problems from the ones that are currently not systemically shut down.
Risker/Anne
[1
- or philosophically-driven problem editors.
Unfortunately, with our limited human resources (what with everyone being
volunteers, and most editors just editing), it doesn't take a lot of
problem editors to overwhelm our resources.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l
; Tor's blocking is a technical solution to a genuine
policy/behaviour problem.
Risker/Anne
On 1 October 2014 09:05, Derric Atzrott datzr...@alizeepathology.com
wrote:
If, as it seems right now, the problem is technical (weed out the bots
and vandals) rather than ideological (as we allow
Advocacy doorstep, but I don't
think we should expect a formal legal response about this.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Umm. No. If ever you want major pushback from the broad international
community, requiring any kind of documentation to open an account will
probably work very well. I certainly would never have signed up for an
account on Wikipedia if I'd had to supply an email address.
Risker/Anne
On 9
On 9 November 2014 02:51, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
We're talking about a test, not a broad rollout (:
I'm curious, Risker: if you don't mind my asking, what about being
required to supply a throwaway email address would have discouraged you
from opening a Wikimedia account?
Pine
It's a cool idea. Also not usable by those who are visually impaired, as
best I can tell.
I'm going to be honest, I think svetlana may be on to something.
Risker/Anne
On 3 December 2014 at 18:17, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Ryan Kaldari rkald
with people actively harassing oversighters because of legitimate
suppressions they've carried out, and perhaps this is exactly how they've
found out it was Oversighter A who did that particular suppression.
Risker/Anne
On 9 December 2014 at 14:01, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Speaking
, in particular, so that signatures by
the new owner of the username won't be changed.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
no longer be up to date
when there is no correlating action plan for updating the same information
is probably not good use of anyone's time or effort.
Risker/Anne
On 13 February 2015 at 07:57, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:
Brian Wolff wrote:
Have you run this by Wikipedians? ... since
out-of-date information. There is
no indication at all that there is any interest on the part of Wikipedians
to review data identified in the manner you propose.
Risker/Anne
On 13 February 2015 at 12:58, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:
Risker wrote:
... relying on suggestions from
On 13 February 2015 at 17:25, Max Semenik maxsem.w...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
Help me out here. Why does anyone care that the article was last edited
13
days ago by Omeganian? And even if they do, why is that the very first
was last edited 13
days ago by Omeganian? And even if they do, why is that the very first
thing that someone sees?
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 16 March 2015 at 21:20, Ryan Lane rlan...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
How about just converting those threads back to Wikitext, instead? That
script already exists, I've seen it used on Mediawiki. Will it mess up
the
pages
/observations on Mediawiki, the use of Flow will
become a barrier for participation.
Risker/Anne
On 16 March 2015 at 20:51, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) nwil...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
LiquidThreads (LQT) has not been well-supported in a long time. Flow
is in active development, and more real-world use
of conditions where the access
would be withdrawn.
Risker/Anne
On 16 March 2015 at 01:29, Arlo Breault abrea...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I share Risker’s concerns here and limiting the anonymity
set to the intersection of Tor users and established wiki
contributors seems problematic. Also
On 19 March 2015 at 13:28, Ryan Lane rlan...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
The dogfooding has been happening for a while on WMF's own office-wiki.
We
haven't heard any results about that. Is the system being used more than
leads to miscommunication, confusion and difficulty
figuring out who is saying what to whom.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
that, and simplification of the indentation
system/process would be desirable no matter what underlying software is
used for discussion. What is being said in this thread is that Flow does
not do this now, and in fact is currently designed to prevent this from
happening.
Risker/Anne
the
same indent level.
There's also the huge waste of screen real estate - I knew it was bad on
desktop, but I was surprised to see it looks almost as bad on a tablet when
I had an opportunity to take a look.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l
On 17 March 2015 at 10:49, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjor...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 March 2015 at 09:45, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjor...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Ricordisamoa
ricordisa
that sure it's an overall improvement in safety.
Risker/Anne
On 10 March 2015 at 20:40, Chris Steipp cste...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
AlsoI'm a little unclear about something. If a Tor-enabled
account
creates
less control than the project has now, particularly in the ability to
address socking and POV/COI editing. Am I missing something?
Risker/Anne
On 10 March 2015 at 13:16, Giuseppe Lavagetto glavage...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Hi Chris,
I like the idea in general, in particular the fact
through that
service.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
having multiple accounts that were used inappropriately, including
administrator accounts, so that raises the bar even higher.
AlsoI'm a little unclear about something. If a Tor-enabled account
creates new accounts, will those accounts be able to edit through Tor,
too?
Risker/Anne
On 10
and the
proposed process is the addition of the third party and the deliberate
separation of the two accounts. (I'm trying to put this into plain
language so that it can be explained to a broader audience on a project.)
Do I have this right?
Risker/Anne
groups of staff have pretty much
abandoned talk pages on office-wiki and are now reverting to emails
instead) but without any documentary evidence or analysis it's unreasonable
to think that it is either a net positive OR a net negative.
Risker/Anne
On 24 April 2015 at 09:21, Alex Cella alexandre.wikime...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
Registration ends on the 8th of March.
I'm pretty sure that's not right.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https
existing accounts every single
month just on mobile? Or does that include accounts that already existed
on a WMF site?
Risker/Anne
On 28 April 2015 at 20:00, Jon Robson jrob...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Anonymous editing was enabled on mobile web on 30th March 2015 to all users
(previous
, those are some suggestions for English.
Risker/Anne
On 4 April 2015 at 12:37, Brian Wolff bawo...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh look, we go full circle ;)
I haven't checked but given its implemented as a special page i doubt
Risker's cu concerns are addressed. Edits to lists do not appear
(and the execution) is
fine.
RIsker/Anne
On 2 April 2015 at 18:19, Jon Robson jrob...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I am writing to invite you to preview and hopefully contribute to
Gather [1], a new MediaWiki extension that allows users to create,
share, and discover lists of articles. Gather is currently
-written, robust,
heavily tested and used code now.
I would have thought that having to constantly write new extension-specific
code for these basic admin functions would have gotten tiresome for the
developers by now.
Risker/Anne
On 8 April 2015 at 13:58, Jon Robson jdlrob...@gmail.com wrote
eyes
on a situation. Thank you for your work on this, it was quite
enlightening.
Risker/Anne
On 7 June 2015 at 00:09, Neil P. Quinn nqu...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hey Greg!
Yes, this is meant to be a one-time process. We've been spending a
significant proportion of our time on it ever since we
-solve downtimes on big
projects.
Risker/Anne
On 28 May 2015 at 07:51, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Awesome! This will make many teams very happy since they'll be moving
faster.
What's the criteria by which you will evaluate the success of this?
Thanks,
Dan
On 27 May 2015 10:19
this kind of tracking; none of them will be perfect.
(You're engineers, you know that.) It's really important that the left hand
know what the right hand is doing.
Good luck in your choices.
Risker/Anne
On 3 July 2015 at 13:30, Arthur Richards aricha...@wikimedia.org wrote:
+teampractices
, the conferences I go to are usually full of
conservative businesswomen, and alcohol is rarely involved.
So yeah...you need a code of conduct. Because if I was even 15 years
younger, I'd never go to a Wikimedia conference.
Risker/Anne
On 22 August 2015 at 20:03, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
I
in the event documentation.
A policy that exists but has no clear or visible support isn't worth the
bytes it's written with.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I've posted a link to your message at what looks like the proper page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Freedom_of_Panorama_2015#Problem_with_banner_.22breaking.22_mobile
Risker/Anne
On 30 June 2015 at 17:49, Jon Robson jrob...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I noticed a banner on the mobile
have seen with past examples; it's
vanishingly unlikely they'd even get blocked, let alone banned.
Risker/Anne
On 11 August 2015 at 14:17, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, the same thought crossed my mind. Unfortunately, superprotect has
such a well-earned negative reputation
as well).
This would require very diplomatic discussion. And given that this is the
'anniversary' of the introduction of Superprotect, it might be better to
wait for a while to really have that conversation.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
by an *internal* error rather
than an external attack, is a very, very big deal, but I'm not getting that
impression from anything written here, on phabricator, or in the report
itself. That disappoints me far more than that an error was made in the
first place.
Risker/Anne
On 26 October 2015 at 23:04
On 27 October 2015 at 09:57, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) <bjor...@wikimedia.org>
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The incident report does not go far enough back into the history of the
> > incident. It does not explai
2487
-Twinkle 7
Are the negative numbers the number of users who had previously enabled the
gadget and then subsequently disabled it? If not, what are they?
Thanks for targeting the cleanup and broader distribution of those high-use
tools and gadgets.
Risker/Anne
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S
On 28 August 2015 at 06:05, Quim Gil q...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 1:52 AM, Matthew Flaschen mflasc...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
On 08/22/2015 10:52 PM, Risker wrote:
Perhaps more importantlywho were the local contacts at Hackathon
2015?
I can't even dig that one
Pine, given the questions at this point seem to be directed to the
Collaboration team, with the intention of clarifying what their plans are,
perhaps it would be best to encourage them to answer the questions rather
than continue the speculation.
Danny, perhaps you could take the lead on
wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_the_United_States_Fighting_Force
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
ent draft of the code of conduct would
> allow you to send it here or not.
>
> On 6 September 2015 at 01:42, Risker <risker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 5 September 2015 at 19:11, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > It seems weird
k as they go
forward.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Well, bluntly put, since LDAP is how most non-WMF staff sign into
phabricator, I'd say it's become an essential extension.
So yeah, this one should be taken over by WMF staff.
Risker/Anne
On 18 September 2015 at 12:54, Greg Grossmeier <g...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi mayb
Agree with everyone else - this looks pretty cool. Just as importantly,
it's pretty straightforward - I could figure out all of the options quickly
and intuitively. Thank you for working on it.
Risker/Anne
On 9 December 2015 at 01:02, Jnanaranjan Sahu <gyana...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
tes rearrange themselves periodically - and replacing
a bad link with a more secure bad link is not really helpful.
Risker/Anne
On 13 January 2016 at 13:32, Max Semenik <maxsem.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fix them with a bot, for example AWB
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiped
time trying to figure
out how to create a message to new users I encounter when I'm oversighting
their personal information...without templating or linking to complex
policies, but pointing them to the Teahouse. I'm pretty sure it's not going
to be very easy, but I'm going to try.
Thank you for
Just noting that 1700-1800 PDT on Wednesday May 11 is -0100 UTC on
Thursday May 12. Based on the link given, this seems to be when the meeting
will be held. Please verify.
Risker/Anne
On 4 May 2016 at 21:28, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Forwarding.
>
> Pine
> --
- until
they stop working. These tools are one of the hidden underpinnings that
help make the Wikimedia family of projects successful - and it's great to
see someone who is so passionate about this taking on the role.
Risker/Anne
On 15 April 2016 at 20:04, Magnus Manske <magnusman...@googlemail.
o see how this
could be accommodated.
Thanks Brion for raising the topic - and thanks to everyone in this thread,
you've all taken this idea to heart and recognized the value of user
input.
Risker/Anne
On 1 September 2016 at 13:12, Brion Vibber <bvib...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> The last couple yea
ld go a long way to
resolving that problem. That's not to deprecate the hard work and
investment of all of the staff and volunteer developers that keeps the
place functional and brings new and desirable features to the users - thank
you all.
Risker/Anne
___
designers are using the same textbooks. And #ac6600 is not a colour I
really want to see on my screen; ask any parent to think back to those
first six months, and they'll explain...
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https
A minor suggestion from someone who is just a reader here - It would be
helpful if the same thread title is not used every week. In particular,
adding a date of the meeting will aid in searchability.
Thanks,
Risker/Anne
On 17 March 2017 at 09:52, Daniel Kinzler <daniel.kinz...@wikimedia
owser.
So no, I do not think it would be a good idea for anyone, let alone the
Wikimedia Foundation, to advocate on behalf of this software.
Risker/Anne
On 3 September 2017 at 03:22, Stas Malyshev <smalys...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > After Firefox and Chromium, there'
ewhere. These historical tidbits,
especially one that shows such a lovely human side to the practice of
coding and software development, can become even more meaningful over
time. Thanks, Magnus - and thanks MusikAnimal for asking the question.
Risker/Anne
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 02:51, Kunal Mehta
put a lot
of effort into coming up with solutions that will help to stop the current
onslaught and prevent similar incidents in the future. There has been
exceptional vigilance to this situation, and it is noted and appreciated.
Risker/Anne
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 at 15:58, Derick N. Alangi
wrote:
>
to notice,
until we're trying to edit logged-in from remote areas.
Risker/Anne
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias
On Sat, 9 Mar 2019 at 10:12, Eran Rosenthal wrote:
> Hi,
> Wiki communities can ask to override their default configurations
> (following
to expanding the list of what could be
included in a Friday backport. Limiting it to essentially "breaks the site"
or "major impact to accessibility of the content" doesn't really include
most of the noticeable user experience issues (for either edito
Mike's suggestion is good. You would likely get better responses by asking
this question to the Wikimedia developers, so I am forwarding to that list.
Risker
On Thu, 16 Sept 2021 at 14:04, Gava, Cristina via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hello
(in a positive
way). I'm pleased and perhaps a bit relieved to see that the research has
borne out my impression of how it has made such a big difference in the
deployment process.
Risker/Anne
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 at 06:01, Tyler Cipriani
wrote:
> *tl;dr:* We have open data on Wikimedia product
whether Tor-exempt should be an entirely separate right, because
the number of IPB-exempt editors who need Tor-exempt could probably be
counted on the fingers of one hand. Perhaps it is time to reconsider this?
Risker/Anne
On Sun, 19 Jun 2022 at 09:23, Tomy Anggara wrote:
> Open main m
ok more like Twitter
and Facebook; that is, they'll be opportunities for disinformation.
Risker/Anne
On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 05:43, Kosta Harlan wrote:
> There is an extension
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:InlineComments
>
> There's some past discussion of this type
101 - 179 of 179 matches
Mail list logo
