User talk:TheSandDoctor/Archives/2019/January
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:TheSandDoctor. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Happy New Year, TheSandDoctor!
TheSandDoctor,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 23:45, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Happy New Year, SandDoctor!
Happy New Year, !
Some celestial fireworks to herald another year of progress for mankind and Wikipedia. All the very best , SandDoctor,
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:22, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you Kudpung and the same to you! I hope that all is well
. --TheSandDoctor Talk 02:51, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Happy New Year
Happy New Year!
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.
- Thank you CAPTAIN RAJU! I hope 2019 is a great year for you as well . --TheSandDoctor Talk 08:58, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- There are a number of new or changed speedy deletion criteria, each previously part of WP:CSD#G6:
- G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
- R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
- G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.
- The Wikimedia Foundation now requires all interface administrators to enable two-factor authentication.
- Members of the Bot Approvals Group (BAG) are now subject to an activity requirement. After two years without any bot-related activity (e.g. operating a bot, posting on a bot-related talk page), BAG members will be retired from BAG following a one-week notice.
Technical news
- Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:
- At least 8 characters in length
- Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
- Different from their username
- User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on MediaWiki.org.
- Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
- {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.
Arbitration
- Following the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: AGK, Courcelles, GorillaWarfare, Joe Roe, Mkdw, SilkTork.
Miscellaneous
- Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
- Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
Your GA nomination of Keith Richards
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Keith Richards you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 12george1 -- 12george1 (talk) 23:00, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Requesting Undeletion of "List of Xbox games with alternate display modes"
I am requesting the restoration of the page List of Xbox games with alternate display modes. This page provided useful information for anyone looking for a deeper understanding of the Xbox's video output capabilities. Out of all of the 6th generation video game consoles, the original Xbox's more powerful hardware allowed it to have one of the largest libraries of games supporting alternate display modes beyond 480i in 4:3 aspect ratio, and this list is extremely useful for informing users about the full extent of support their games provide, as long as they meet the necessary hardware requirements to display them.
The main Xbox article does not provide this information, and the page surely must have been made with the intention of not weighing down that article with this abundance of additional information.
Please note that similar articles for the PS2 and GameCube also existed and were recently deleted as well by users RoySmith and Patar knight respectively, and I am making restoration requests for those articles on their respective talk pages as well.
Thank you for your time. --2601:440:C07F:77A1:B47F:491B:3E34:CEC1 (talk) 05:35, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
- I am not going to unilaterally overturn consensus as that is simply not how Wikipedia works. Please see my response to an identical request here as it goes into detail. Other mirrors of this exist and another copy is available on a reddit wiki. --TheSandDoctor Talk 09:52, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Tech News writers, editors and translators wish you a pleasant 2019 year.
Recent changes
- RelatedSites extension has been undeployed. It was used to create interwiki links on Wikivoyage, now handled by Wikidata. [1]
MediaWiki logstash logging is moving to a new infrastructure. This is an ongoing deployment. [2]- codesearch.wmflabs.org has been updated, with new and updated repositories and a new search options for code. [3]
- On several wikis, an account named "Edit filter" has been created on December 17 to perform some technical maintenance on AbuseFilter. This account has sysop rights but it's a system user and no human can use it. The account already existed on wikis where AbuseFilter can perform blocks, which are issued using this account. See T212268 for more information and future plans.
Problems
- In AbuseFilter, the "Throttle" action takes three parameters: count, period and groups. They must now strictly respect the requirements listed on mediawiki.org. A list of broken filters is on Phabricator. If you're familiar with AbuseFilter, please take a look and fix them. [4]
Changes later this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from January 8. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from January 9. It will be on all wikis from January 10 (calendar).
Meetings
- Search Platform Office Hours is rescheduled to January 9. Check the details for time and date.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
18:29, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Happy Adminship Anniversary!
Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!
Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 11:09, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you CAPTAIN RAJU! It's hard for me to believe its been 2 years now. --TheSandDoctor Talk 15:57, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- @CAPTAIN RAJU: I just realized I misread that. It is the anniversary of my first edit, not adminship. The latter is in June and that will be the first anniversary. --TheSandDoctor Talk 16:02, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for correcting that, I have added my adminship anniversary where it belongs, June 16th. Either way, thank you for the early message . --TheSandDoctor Talk 17:34, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for correcting that, I have added my adminship anniversary where it belongs, June 16th. Either way, thank you for the early message
- @CAPTAIN RAJU: I just realized I misread that. It is the anniversary of my first edit, not adminship. The latter is in June and that will be the first anniversary. --TheSandDoctor Talk 16:02, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
On the RfD for Push (Marvel Comics), I think you meant to retarget to Spider-Girl (Mayday Parker)#Supporting cast, not Spider-Girl#Supporting cast. I thought about making the fix myself, but I hate editing other's comments. Thanks! -- Tavix (talk) 14:20, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- Fixed. Thanks for the catch Tavix. --TheSandDoctor Talk 15:56, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
First Edit!
|
Hey, TheSandDoctor. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! A 10 fireplane Imform me 17:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC) |
|
- Thank you A 10 fireplane! . --TheSandDoctor Talk 17:35, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- No problem A 10 fireplane Imform me 17:38, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- No problem
Decision to make Perryprog rollback
Hi TheSandDoctor, I just wanted to discuss whether User:Perryprog is experienced enough for rollback. First of all, I respect both him and your decision. Both of you guys have contributed greatly to Wikipedia.I am also not saying how experienced I am(I am not) or trying to bribe you into making me a rollbacker, but if you really take a look at their edits, a majority of them were made this month. And it's only been around a week so far. Plus, just two days ago, I told him how to sign their posts on a talk page-the same day his request was approved. So, my suggestion is to maybe wait a couple of weeks then return the rights to him. --It's Boothsift 03:47, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Boothsift. I understand your concern and I'm not going to try to butt into this conversation too much, but I would like to point out I feel it's slightly misleading to say you only just told me how to sign my posts recently. I had already known how to sign my before then, I just happened to forget once on your talk page. Other than that I think this is a very fair concern and you are absolutely right that the majority (I think about all but 10) of my edits are within the last 7 days. Thanks, and happy editing. Perryprog (talk) 11:37, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Boothsift: While that does indeed sound concerning on the surface, Perryprog has shown previously to know how to sign posts, so I assume that to be a mistake. It is an easy one to make and I am not afraid to admit to having done it more than once, even as an administrator. As for the concern regarding Perryprog having rollback, I believe them to be a net benefit to the project and they did meet the granting criteria. I cannot unilaterally remove it without either A: A request from the user, by their own accord or B: demonstrable misuse in violation of WP:ROLLBACKUSE. I have spot-checked several rollbacks done (just now) and have yet to see what appears to be misuse. If you disagree and have diffs which prove it, please let me know. --TheSandDoctor Talk 16:17, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Perryprog:, @TheSandDoctor: I apologize for being mistaken, I should have looked at his edits more deeply. Like I said, I don't think Perryprog has really abused his right so far and his contributions would indeed be valuable to the encyclopedia, I just wanted to point it out, not to shame him or anything like that. Thus, once again I apologize for not looking more closely at your previous contributions. Sincerely--It's Boothsift 23:37, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Boothsift: While that does indeed sound concerning on the surface, Perryprog has shown previously to know how to sign posts, so I assume that to be a mistake. It is an easy one to make and I am not afraid to admit to having done it more than once, even as an administrator. As for the concern regarding Perryprog having rollback, I believe them to be a net benefit to the project and they did meet the granting criteria. I cannot unilaterally remove it without either A: A request from the user, by their own accord or B: demonstrable misuse in violation of WP:ROLLBACKUSE. I have spot-checked several rollbacks done (just now) and have yet to see what appears to be misuse. If you disagree and have diffs which prove it, please let me know. --TheSandDoctor Talk 16:17, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Boothsift. I understand your concern and I'm not going to try to butt into this conversation too much, but I would like to point out I feel it's slightly misleading to say you only just told me how to sign my posts recently. I had already known how to sign my before then, I just happened to forget once on your talk page. Other than that I think this is a very fair concern and you are absolutely right that the majority (I think about all but 10) of my edits are within the last 7 days. Thanks, and happy editing. Perryprog (talk) 11:37, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
SPI tips
Hi TSD, given that you seem to be more and more interested in quasi-clerking at SPI, I thought I'd start commenting on your actions. Although I think of this as constructive feedback, you might find that it leans toward the negative, but that's only because I am more likely to point out something you shouldn't have done or should have done differently than tell you when you did something right.
- Don't use {{checkuserblock-account}} in your blocks, even in the very recent instance where I neglected to block one of 80+ socks, all of the others of which I CU-blocked. You can block normally but only a CU should use that template in a block.
- There was no need to block Lawmander as a duck. They haven't edited in a very long time. There are many instances of technically proven or unproven masters who are never blocked because they stopped editing.
- In general, you're getting too close to clerking. We have, fortunately, many admins who patrol SPI and who, like you, help out with blocks, etc., but you seem to going a little beyond the norm. I can't give you a lot of evidence in support of that. It's just something that feels wrong to me. One example is the Lawmander case where you blocked the master and closed the case. I would have preferred a clerk decide what to do, and my guess is they would have closed it with no further action. I wish I could give you more guidance on this issue, but perhaps I'll bring them up as they happen (if I notice).
I don't want to discourage you from continuing helping out at SPI. We need all the help we can get with some of our backlogs.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:45, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tips Bbb23, I do appreciate them and shall keep them in mind going forward. {{checkuserblock-account}} seemed logical in those instances, that is why it was used. With that said, I will not use it in the future. I will back off on SPI (excluding own reports ofc) and edit it with less frequency. Overall, you have my apologies. I do not intend to make anyone uncomfortable and merely wish to help out to the best of my ability where able. --TheSandDoctor Talk 17:59, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
- That sounds like you didn't take my comment about not wanting to discourage you at face value. I don't want you to "back off". I think your wish to help out is great. My feedback is to help you improve your efforts.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
- Here's some positive feedback to get you to back off backing off. Your request for a CU at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/90Xray was reasonable and helpful (I'm about to run the check). Just so you know, I'm more receptive to CU requests, even where it's ducky, on new cases than some CheckUsers. Once a master is more established, I'm a little harder unless there's some doubt or a history of finding other accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:20, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Bbb23: I didn't intend to come across as such and your feedback definitely will help me improve. If something feels wrong than it probably is. I figured that was due to editing frequency (at SPI) and that I am "clerking" to much without actually being one. (That said, I am not applying for clerk or anything at this time as I feel I need more experience than I already have.) I am good at just observing and might do that a bit more instead for the time being, in addition to helping clean up where blocks were accidentally missed (this time, without {{checkuserblock-account}}
) and requesting CU where I feel it is appropriate. I am always actively learning from my experiences and looking to improve my editing and abilities. You have not discouraged me by any means. --TheSandDoctor Talk 18:22, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Bbb23: I didn't intend to come across as such and your feedback definitely will help me improve. If something feels wrong than it probably is. I figured that was due to editing frequency (at SPI) and that I am "clerking" to much without actually being one. (That said, I am not applying for clerk or anything at this time as I feel I need more experience than I already have.) I am good at just observing and might do that a bit more instead for the time being, in addition to helping clean up where blocks were accidentally missed (this time, without {{checkuserblock-account}}
- Here's some positive feedback to get you to back off backing off. Your request for a CU at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/90Xray was reasonable and helpful (I'm about to run the check). Just so you know, I'm more receptive to CU requests, even where it's ducky, on new cases than some CheckUsers. Once a master is more established, I'm a little harder unless there's some doubt or a history of finding other accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:20, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
- That sounds like you didn't take my comment about not wanting to discourage you at face value. I don't want you to "back off". I think your wish to help out is great. My feedback is to help you improve your efforts.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- You can now use Google Translate in the content translation tool. [5][6]
- You can now add captions to files on Commons. Captions are short descriptions of the file. They can be translated to all languages we use. They can't use wikitext markup.
- Earlier a quoted HTML attribute had to be followed by a space. Now it doesn't. This means that some pages could look different when you save them even if you didn't edit that part of the text. [7][8]
- Templates with <templatestyles> could not show the difference between the live template and the sandbox version when they were tested. This has now been fixed. <templatestyles> has a new
wrapperparameter now. You can use it for selectors like.mw-parser-output <wrapper parameter value> <selector from CSS page>. [9]
Problems
- When you see an edit in the recent changes feed or in the history of a page some of them have tags. Some tags are added automatically. You can also add tags manually. Tags for edits that have been added manually can be edited. This didn't work for a little while. This has now been fixed. [10]
Changes later this week
- You can move files from your wiki to Wikimedia Commons and keep the file history with the new FileExporter. It will be a beta feature on all wikis from 16 January. If you want to test it you activate it and check your wiki's configuration file.
- Users who could cause more damage to the wikis if someone took over their account have to have more secure passwords. This includes administrators and other user groups. They can't use passwords that are in a list of common passwords. Accounts with common passwords are easy to take over. The list of common passwords was made longer a few weeks ago and has a different error message. Some user groups have been added to those who can't use common passwords. This is to protect all accounts with user rights that could cause damage. [11]
- The AbuseFilter variable
minor_edithas been removed. It was deprecated in 2016. Now you can't use it. You can fix the filters using it. You can find them if you use the search bar on Special:AbuseFilter. - The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from January 15
17:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Dear
Dear The Sand Doctor When You Add New The Essential Albums On Wikipedia Can Add The Running Length For Each Track Number And Please Add The Writer To See Who Write What Song For The Essential Babyface. Thanks Anyway You Did A Great Work Thanks Add Writers And Length Times For The Essential Albums In The Future. Thanks Ben. Ben2719941 (talk) 12:41, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
P.S. Also You Forgot To Add Running Length On Each Track Number For The Essential Jacksons And The Composer For Each Song. Ben2719941 (talk) 12:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Ben2719941: I am not sure that I understand your question? The edits I think you are referring to were done by my bot account, DeprecatedFixerBot, as part of a task affecting over 149,000 articles. I have reviewed the edits I think you are talking about (The Essential Babyface edit, The Essential Jacksons edit) and no information was removed by the bot's actions? If you are suggesting the addition of content, that is not what the task was capable of. Wikipedia is editable by (almost) anyone, if that is the case and you have a reliable source to back it up, then feel free to add the information yourself. If I am totally misunderstanding the intent of what you wrote, please feel free to clarify it - just please write it in a clearer manner. --TheSandDoctor Talk 05:57, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
- @TheSandDoctor: What I Was Supposed To Say Was You Forgot To Put The Running Time On Each Track For The Essential Jacksons And You Forgot To Put Writers Down For Each Track. Like For Example Can You Feel It Was Written By Michael Jackson, Jackie Jackson. You Forgot To Put That On The Essential Jacksons.
- From Ben. Ben2719941 (talk) 9:18, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for clarifying Ben2719941. It appears that my response was not read in full, so could you please read it in full? In short though, I didn't/don't have a reliable source to do so, but you're welcome to add one and cite a reliable source if you feel the need to do so. --TheSandDoctor Talk 19:33, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
- Ben2719941, This is an automated task performed by a bot. It was only making a technical change to the parameters of a template (details of the task can be found here. I don't know how one could possibly expect that the bot add the running time - it can only do what it's programmed to do. SQLQuery me! 20:27, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Sockpuppet investigation Block
Hi TheSandDoctor,
I was curious if I could understand the block a bit better coming from the MarkAGuinn investigation. The argument seems to primarily rely on the fact that he came in an mimicked the reason I and Otr500 had made. I honestly have no idea who that account is (though I recognize you have no reason to take my word for it). I'm a bit concerned because an account that has had a significant role in fighting to keep a merge from happening nominated a block for two accounts he had disagreements with.
So I was hoping to get a better insight into the reasoning from your point of view to better understand what happened. Any insight you could offer would be appreciated. Squatch347 (talk) 14:27, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Squatch347: Thank you for reaching out and I apologize for not responding sooner, I just got home. You are correct that I cannot verify your word, but for the purposes of this response and per WP:AGF it will be at face value.
- I understand that Sockpuppet Investigations can be a bit opaque and do apologize that I did not elaborate further. I analyzed the evidence provided by Orientls, the comments at the SPI, reviewed the interaction timeline, and did my own review. Using the comment from Courcelles that a VPN was involved and based on the timeline being within 4 and 14 minutes apart I figured it was quite possible that the two editors (yourself and MarkAGuinn) were one and the same. It seemed reasonable that 4-14 minutes would be all that would be necessary to either log out or open another browser, boot up a VPN, and then log in and write a comment. Or, in the case of 14 minutes, do something else and come back. The comments being eerily similar was also a concerning factor leading to my view of this as a probable DUCK scenario. In a first time suspected socking offense not proven by check user (ie either declined or inconclusive, like this one) where no other blocking reason would apply, it is generally considered appropriate to indefinitely block any suspected sock account (where there is a probable behavioural link, as demonstrated at SPI or via own review) and give the suspected "master" a temporary block. If a checkuser were to confirm, then it would be indefinite. I chose 31 hours for your account due to the fact that it is the default for sock master (non-CU) blocks. Taking this at face value and assuming that this was just unfortunate circumstance and complete innocence on your part, you have my sincerest apologies for the block and that the evidence presented implicated otherwise. While SPIs generally are correct in their outcome (especially when a check user check is done - one was, but was inconclusive in this case, relying moreso on behavioural evidence and interpretation), they are unfortunately not infallible. Either way, I am happy to elaborate or clarify further as necessary. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask away. --Regards, TheSandDoctor Talk 00:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- First, let me say that you have absolutely nothing to apologize for on any count. Taking a few hours on a Sunday is hardly a dereliction of duty for a volunteer role :-). Nor for any opaqueness or rush. Even a quick perusal of your contributions show you are doing some yoeman's work on reducing the backlog. So thank you for responding.
- I think your explanation of the VPN and timing makes good sense. That does seem like a likely time to reset stuff and kick in a VPN.
- My guess is that the Guinn account was mimicking my language (he seemed somewhat driveby like). Still, I can understand from a quick look and from usual sock puppet behavior why this would be suspicious.
- I hope some of the explanation I offered in the sock puppet investigation page helped a bit to alay concerns given the interactions and why I was involved in the AFD page. If there are any additional questions I can answer to help resolve this please let me know.
- Again, thank you for your time and help here to review my case.
- Hi TheSandDoctor, I know you are pretty busy, but I wanted to follow up on this and see if, given the discussion, you would be willing to update the findings on the original investigation. My primary interest is to keep "my name clear" going forward. I appreciate your time and attention to my case. Hope this finds you well, Squatch347 (talk) 16:09, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
La Jolla move
Please revert your recent move of La Jolla to La Jolla, San Diego. This should not have been approved per a technical request considering the history including a strong consensus support for the La Jolla title. See, for example, Talk:La_Jolla,_San_Diego#Suggest_renaming_to_La_Jolla,_California. Thanks. --В²C ☎ 18:15, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Born2cycle:
Done. --TheSandDoctor Talk 18:20, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you. --В²C ☎ 18:26, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Tech News
- Some people did not get last week's issue of Tech News. This was because of a problem with MassMessage. If you did not get last week's issue, you can read it on Meta. [12]
Recent changes
- The content translation tool can now use version 2 as the default version for users who turned on the beta feature. For example it adds the tracking category
Pages with unreviewed translationsto translations that might have used machine translations without fixing the problems. This is so others can find them. You can find this category inSpecial:TrackingCategorieson Wikipedias. - https://mediawiki2latex-large.wmflabs.org can now convert collects of up to 800 pages to PDF, EPUB or ODT. Previously this was 200 pages.
Problems
- When a template was edited with the visual editor, it would sometimes put all information on one line. This makes it difficult to read for editors who use the wikitext editor. It also makes it more difficult to see what happened in a diff. This problem affected edits made between 8 and 17 January and is now fixed. [13]
- MassMessage is used to post a message to many pages. It has not been working reliably. Some messages have not been posted to everyone. [14][15]
- Because of a database problem that had to be fixed immediately you could not edit most wikis for a couple of minutes on 17 January (UTC). This has now been fixed. [16]
Changes later this week
- You will be able to use template styles in the
Modulenamespace. [17] - The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 22 January. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 23 January. It will be on all wikis from 24 January (calendar).
Meetings
- You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 23 January at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
20:33, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
A barnstar for you!
|
The Technical Barnstar |
| Thanks for all your work with my bot. It's just ran for the first time properly. Have a great new year. RhinosF1 (talk) 17:31, 28 December 2018 (UTC) |
@TheSandDoctor: What would need to be done for the bot to request manual permission to override a page if it already exists? There's also a message about config.read() being deprecated could you fix this? RhinosF1 (talk) 20:40, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
- Just joined github issues also on there with more info. RhinosF1 (talk) 21:39, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
- It's been blocked, now unblocked but a BRfA has been recommended so I've gone through one at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/RF1_Bot RhinosF1 (talk) 12:56, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- The Wikimedia servers use HHVM to run the PHP code. They are going to use PHP7 and stop using HHVM. You can test PHP7 with a new beta feature. That way you can help find and report problems.
Problems
- When someone moves a page to a name that already exists that page that had the name the article is moved to is deleted. For a couple of months this didn't always work. Some users saw an error message instead. This has now been fixed. [18]
Changes later this week
- There is no new MediaWiki version this week.
Meetings
- You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 30 January at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
18:15, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Happy New Year, TheSandDoctor!
TheSandDoctor,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 10:53, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
- Thank you! I wish the same to you Davey2010 --TheSandDoctor Talk 11:01, 1 January 2019 (UTC)