Difference between revisions of "WikiIndex talk:Community portal/Archive 4"

From WikiIndex
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Criteria for Wiki People pages: Should be on WikiIndex talk:Peoples Pages)
m (fix redirect)
(298 intermediate revisions by 34 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
-> For talk amongst/to [[Sysop|admins]] go here: [[Category_talk:Active_administrators_of_this_wiki]]
+
{{Community portal talk page archives}}
−
{{Community portal talk page archives}} [[WikiIndex talk:Community portal/Archive 3|Archive3 2014]]
+
{{TalkPageArchive}}
 +
=— * 2017 * —=
 +
==Happy New Year!==
 +
'''WikiIndex wishlist''' What would you like to see happen here in 2017? How would you like to see the site change and grow? [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 09:19, 31 December 2016 (PST)
  
−
==[[Template:Size]] broken==
+
==Semantic MediaWiki==
−
'''Please investigate''' I don't know why or how--I can't seem to figure it out and I'm rapidly falling asleep. :-/ [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 06:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
+
Do folks have any ideas on how to show off our [[:Category:Semantic MediaWiki|Semantic MediaWiki]]? ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
−
:That's because of the unexplained(?) disappearance of Semantic MediaWiki. Please see [[User talk:MarkDilley#Back-end changes ???? - confusion in the mad house]]. We could either poke someone with shell access (eg. [[Emufarmers]] or [[Ray King]]) to re-enable that extension or disable the feature completely (pro: can be done immediately & reduce server load; con: no more Semantic Forms :( ). --[[YiFei]] | <small>[[User talk:Zhuyifei1999|talk]]</small> 08:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
+
−
::I quite like the Semantic Forms :ppp.  But yes, follow the discussion on Mark Dilley's talk page as linked above.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 15:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
== Computer // Computers ==
+
:I did not know that we are here to show of. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 07:53, 25 January 2017 (PST)
−
(moved from [[User talk:Koavf]]) (moved to -> [[Category talk:Computers]])
+
  
−
== Logos of [[:Category:Dormant]] Wikis ==
+
:'''Showing off''' What do you have in mind, Mark? From what I've seen, the use of SMW is pretty "under-the-hood" rather than on display as such... Do you want to have tools to query our site like at [[Wikidata]]? [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 08:58, 25 January 2017 (PST)
  
−
I think it would be good practice to upload the logo picture file of any wiki that one categorizes as Dormant or worse. Because from there it is all to likely that the wiki will become inaccessible and so a logo that is only linked to will get lost.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 13:53, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
+
Where are the tools for Semantic wiki here?  It has been a while and I have forgotten.  Best, [[MarkDilley]]25 January 2017
−
:That's an interesting thought.  However, I'd be inclined not to agree – many wikis now automatically get stored by the InternetArchive WaybackMachine at [[Archive.org]].  Even if just the [[main page]] is archived, it will still store its logo, and we can hotlink to the logo on Archive.org.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 20:09, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
== [[:Category:Wiki Status]] / [[Template:WikiStatus]] ==
+
:'''Namespaces''' Mark, you can find them from [[Special:AllPages]] starting [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=102 here]. Namespaces such as "Form" and "Type" (unused) are all SMW namespaces. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 22:31, 24 January 2017 (PST)
  
−
(moved from here: http://wikiindex.org/User_talk:Hoof_Hearted#Category:Wiki_Status_.2F_Template:WikiStatus)--[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 15:39, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
+
=={{u|Manorainjan}}==
 +
It's time to stop this once and for all. Said user has a track record of pestering and at times even insulting other users, in fact [[User:Hoof Hearted|an admin]] left for a while because of him. It seems to me like Manor acts as though he's some sort of "mini-admin" most of the time, and frankly I think he needs to be blocked. What do you guys think? --[[User talk:Rock-O-Jello|This is MY book, and I'm gonna READ IT!!!]] 09:44, 25 January 2017 (PST)
 +
:'''Guidelines''' I have always argued that a large part of the problem is that we don't have many guidelines. I don't like rules generally but if we don't have any kind of documentation to appeal to, someone can always say, "But I didn't know I couldn't do this". (Even if the infraction is pretty obvious social etiquette.) I think that we should be more explicit about what is expected and then when it's transgressed, it's easier to point out ''how'' and ''why'' there would be some consequence. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 11:06, 25 January 2017 (PST)
  
−
The stati 'Dead' and 'Inactive' are the same! What is the use of that? And is there a reason to delete a wiki entry altogether? --[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 19:11, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
+
::I am a known wiki person, but I will not reveal my name to avoid problems with the aforementioned user. I have had several problems with him and came to the conclusion that he is a stupid provocateur. He should be blocked from the whole internet. --[[Special:Contributions/46.166.148.154|46.166.148.154]] 10:33, 26 January 2017 (PST)
  
−
:Dead might mean the wiki is no longer there. Inactive might mean that it is dusty, in that case Needs Love is a better status. Again, you find inconsistencies... please feel free to offer solutions! :-) ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
:::Says someone who is [[wp:Special:Contributions/46.166.148.154|globally blocked over all WikiMedia-projects]] ;-) --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 12:06, 26 January 2017 (PST)
  
−
:: OK, I changed the description of Inactive to something not active for a year or longer. Somebody has to confirm 1 Year and update the rest of languages somehow. I did en, de, es, and fr. sv I can't and the others I do not even know their names ;-)
+
::::You know that I am using open proxies (which is blocked on Wikimedia for obvious reasons) to avoid you to come and stalk me under my house. ;)
−
:: BTW: I changed colour of [[:Category:Dead]] to black B-) --[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 21:00, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
:::IIRC, from the may discussions from many different editors here, that [[:Category:Inactive]] should be depreciated, and we just use [[:Category:Dead]] for those permanently vanished, but use [[:Category:Dormant]].  Whilst dictionary definition for 'inactive' ''might'' describe ''some'' wikis; ie: 'idle' - the literal meaning of 'inactive' is whereby there are short periods of - say downtime.  Dictionary definition for general adjective of 'dormant' has two complimentary meanings - 1. "quiet and inactive, as in sleep", 2. "latent or inoperative".  A further biological definition of 'dormant' means: "alive but in a resting torpid condition with no growth".  So 'dormant' basically means a lack of any activity for longer periods of time - hence why I personally prefer Dormant over Inactive for wikis which are still reachable, but havn't been edited for a long time. [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 12:27, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
+
{{U|Manorainjan}} - do you really think it is appropriate to accuse people of behaving like Nazis - as you did in your edit summary of this edit - http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk:Community_portal&oldid=194882.  Frankly, that is truly despicable behaviour, and you, as a German should know better.
  
−
:::: Great! Than lets check 850 Wikis and sort them into one of the not depriciated cats ;-)[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 16:11, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
+
As to lack of 'policy' here on WikiIndex - I think this is a red herring.  Let us be very clear here.  Manor has had multiple, repeated WARNINGS over his conduct and behaviour.  When Manor refuses to comply with very specific requests from not only long-term and highly valued editors - and then has the utter arrogance to refuse when told buy Admins and Crats - that, to me, and I would guess the whole of the [[wikisphere]] is ABSOLUTE grounds for banning.  The fact that he was so belligerently arrogant to effectively force a Crat to step away from WikiIndex - that just shows his fundamental character!  And that type of character is NOT helpful in building a wiki community.  And since I took my lengthy sabbatical, I have discovered MANY subsequent editors to ask that Manor be blocked for his repeated abusive behaviour.
−
:::::After you, Sir! :ppp
+
−
:::::I think most of those will have been categorised into Inactive by changing their respective [[:Category:Infobox templates|infobox template]] from {{template|Wiki}} to {{template|Inactive}}.  I could run a [[Special:ReplaceText]] to change the first line (which is what was done previously in reverse, albeit manually on a wiki-by-wiki basis) - but that would then leave the status field open to major errors.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 16:35, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
OK, run the replace for the first line only. Whatever remains in the [[:Category:Inactive]] will have to be checked manually. Actually I expect a resurrection 1 out of 100 ;-)[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 17:29, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
:That isn't the best idea.  If one does run the automated text replacement, they'll be no way of checking which ones are dead and which are dormant.  I honestly think they all need to be done manually :(((  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 19:21, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
+
Quite frankly, if Manor is allowed to continue here on WikiIndex, then WikiIndex will eventually self-destruct.  I am again frankly shocked over the very real STAGNATION which WikiIndex has succumbed to since Manors arrival.  Sure, there are a few dedicated editors here who try to do their bit - but are overwhelmed by constant fire-fighting caused by Manor.  But I have looked at many of arguably the most important entries here on WikiIndex - and I was shocked to find they had NOT been updated for nigh-on THREE YEARS!
−
:: OK [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 19:31, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:: I knew it: Only 19 'inactive' entries checked and already found one active! :-)[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 21:33, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
:::I second what Sean said, manual is the way to go. Regarding "Dead" vs. "Inactive", no consensus was ever established on which to use. We've been using both simultaneously. I again reiterate that we should NOT populate active categories with dead wikis! So, since you are changing these wikis over from the Inactive template to the regular Wiki template with a "Dead" status, please blank the main topic parameter. Thanks! --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 01:35, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
+
In light of the above - and particularly the blatant racist comment by Manor - I will be blocking Manor for a period of 7 days. Manor needs to use these 7 days to honestly consider if he wishes to comply with the views and requests of the remainder of the WikiIndex community. If Manor tries to bypass his 7 day block - I will DOUBLE the duration of his block - and will concurrently double his block for each and every attempt he may use to bypass the block.
  
−
:::: So, You reiterate we should....not...Better You substantiate with arguments. I do not agree with that. To shift from inactive to dead is not a loss of information but a clarification. The 'blanking' of category information is a loss of information. Then one could delete the entries of dead wikis as well. But I understood, that I do not have a licence to kill here. Userpages of spammers get deleted but no wiki entries ever. If an entry should be preserved it should also be traceable. So, cats should remain connected with them. There is no use of not killing the entry if I kill the information that leads to the entry. So, what is so bad about this 'population'?[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 01:52, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
+
To the rest of the WikiIndex community, and especially {{U|MarkDilley}} - I expect you to support my action to block Manor for a short period of time. It would be nice if we put the interests of WikiIndex first, rather than letting someone stay who not only has destroyed the friendly community we once had here, but who has also failed to grasp the fundamental ethos of WikiIndex.
  
−
:::::The problem is that an index of dead wikis is about as useful as a phone book from 1965. It's of historical interest, but little practical use. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 02:10, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
+
Comments, please.  :-)  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 09:53, 27 January 2017 (PST)
  
−
::::: I do keep old phone books. ;-) In fact it is a speciality of my home town to issue an address book. I collect those of different years and I use them once in a while. I'm paying prices for really old ones. I'm afraid Your phone-book allegory did not serve Your purpose very well because real phone books take real space which kept category tags do not take at all.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 11:06, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
+
{{Support}} ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
  
−
::::::That said, I am in favor of keeping listings for dead wikis. It shows how hard it is to keep one going, how many fall by the wayside, and what topics have sprung up over time. I'm just not in favor of including dead wikis in categories. This has been status quo here for years. That's not to say that we can't change it, but should we? --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 02:16, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
+
{{Support}} I'll be honest, I'm shocked Manor was unblocked the first time Hoof tried to ban him. He is truly pugnacious, as evidenced by the aforementioned racist comment and his post on my talk page. --[[User talk:Rock-O-Jello|This is MY book, and I'm gonna READ IT!!!]] 15:34, 27 January 2017 (PST)
  
−
:::::: So again You iterate Your distaste for leaving the dead wikis in their categories. But where is the argument to act upon? In order to delete or hide information in a wiki one needs quite a good argument. That should be more than "I do not see the use". You need to explain the specific danger or burden of relatively high weight. A distaste will not do.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 11:06, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
+
{{Support}} Obviously. And I will definitely support any further action you take on this. Maybe I'm too naive or too much of a nice guy but I've experienced this on another wiki as well where someone makes what are definitely constructive and useful edits (and so is not ''solely'' a troll or vandal) but ''additionally'' is so consistently rude and off-putting that he has to go. Simply put, wikis are built around communities and if we have to lose one prolific and generally knowledgeable user because he pushes away everyone else through a combination of logical fallacies, abrasiveness, and martyrdom syndrome, then it's clear which one is preferable. I honestly don't want to lose him as an editor nor did I want to lose the valuable contributions of the other person at the other wiki I mentioned but for the well-being of the ''community'' even at the risk of a small set-back in the creation of content, it has to happen. I have been too rosy-eyed in the past and I still am--I sincerely hope that Manorainjan just cools off and looks at this objectively to see that his behavior is (willfully) off-putting and that others are not ganging up on him. Too many olive branches and too much pleading--please grow up and just be a decent person. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 22:49, 27 January 2017 (PST)
  
−
[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] – I've got other work to do right now, so I'll try and answer your concerns later today.  Prod me if I forget!  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 11:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
+
{{Support}} --[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 00:40, 28 January 2017 (PST)
  
−
===[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]]s concerns===
+
{{support|Strong support}} I've had issues with this user while I was editing as an [[IP editor|IP]]. I'll point to just a few out of a whole string of examples. The user [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Wiki.Wiki&diff=prev&oldid=194099 refused] to allow me to change the [[Wiki.Wiki]] article to "inactive" after no wiki requests had been answered for over three months, and, even after I explained my reasoning, did the same thing [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Wiki.Wiki&diff=next&oldid=194378 again]. In addition, he also refused to let me blank and request deletion of my own static IP talk page [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=User_talk:73.47.71.127&diff=193967&oldid=193964 not once], [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=User_talk:73.47.71.127&diff=next&oldid=193976 not twice], but [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=User_talk:73.47.71.127&diff=prev&oldid=194018 three times]. He also [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiBridge&diff=prev&oldid=193990 reverted] my edits to the [[WikiBridge]] article that classified the wiki "dead" - my reason being that despite technically still existing, a message was left on the Main page saying "This wiki no longer exists" and the supposed replacement site archived in the page history also has been closed. I could probably find more examples, but I think I've made my point. Users like this should not be allowed to contribute to any community-based environment, especially when they don't explain half of their edit reverts! I do agree though that more policy documentation is needed. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 16:41, 2 February 2017 (PST)
−
You may well be right that no 'formal' concensus has ever been reached over the Dead vs Inactive debate (but then we arn't Wikipedia!).  However, even going back to 2006 I noticed some of the founding editors of WikiIndex questioning the wisdom of using the term 'inactive' (and the categorisation of the same) for genuinely dead wiki. I have had MANY other editors question me (either on my or their talk page, or maybe on the category or template talk page) over the same issue.  It seems very clear to me that this issue needs to be answered one way or the other. I would have to say that there is maybe a kind of 'organic' concensus to support much more clarity over this; and being as Mark tells everyone to [[BeBold]] (and indeed, above in this very conversation, he states NeedsLove is more appropriate than Inactive) — I have done just that!
+
  
−
Re the 'Dead' issue — I have never found any previous concensus on the need to basically obliterate all identifying features of a dead wiki – such as its wiki engine, language, etc.  I am especially concerned that the present way also assigns both its logo and its subject matter into Room 101!!!!  Our current way of identifying 'Inactive' wikis (which use [[Template:Inactive]]) is about as useful as an ashtray on a MotoGP motorbike!  The name of the wiki, with NO other identifying features – what use is that?  It is also massively biased towards [[:Category:Wikia|Wikia]] wikis – those never die, they just fester and rot into eternity – but are (now) being categorised into [[:Category:Dormant]].  Whereas, other smaller wiki farms might not have the resources to keep abandoned wiki alive are forced to delete them – hence [[:Category:Dead]].
+
'''Give him a warning''' and see if that suffices. If not, revisit the issue later. He might not play well with others, but he puts in a lot of work on the project. With regard to racist remarks that may or may not have been made, bear in mind that with the election of Donald Trump, the era of political correctness is over. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 22:44, 2 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
I also have very deep concerns about deleting the subject matter from dead wiki – what is the rationale for that?????  BTW, I'm not having a personal attack at you MarvelZuvembie – I'm just tired and frustrated on why we seem to keep going back to the lowest common, historical denominator!  I have massive respect for your input here. :))))  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 11:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
+
:'''Comment''' According to the users above, he has already had multiple warnings and temporary blocks, yet has refused to listen. Also, please keep politics out of community discussions. Many people, myself included, will disagree with your point of view. Thank you. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 04:19, 3 February 2017 (PST)
 +
::Was he given an official warning, or was it just a bunch of people coming up to him at various times and saying, "I find your behavior objectionable; cut that out" which led to him saying, "Who are YOU to tell me what to do" or "I did nothing wrong" or whatever? I don't recall there being a situation where MarkDilley told him, "Hey, knock it off or I'm gonna block you." Had that happened a long time ago, maybe Sean wouldn't have gone on his hiatus.
  
−
:No worries. I didn't take it as a personal attack. :-) I was being fairly blunt in my statement of my concerns. This is a small enough group and we've been around each other for a while, so I didn't feel a particular need to sugarcoat it.
+
::Anyway, if someone got offended by a racist remark, that means politics already got injected into the discussion, because racism is very political (what with all the white nationalist movements coming out of the shadows these days). I'm not saying we have any people like that around here, but entryist SJWs have been known to go around the Internet [https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/3fr5d2/one_way_to_fight_back_against_entryist_sjw_codes/ trying] to get codes of conduct enacted (formally or informally) banning racist remarks, so that they can censor their opponents. To the extent this is an opinion poll of the users, I'm registering my dissent with norms of political correctness.
  
−
:As far as the previous practice of removing all categories from dead wikis, I assure you that it is there. When I started doing that, I was imitating what had gone on before. In fact, it is intrinsic to the very template. Switching to the ''Inactive'' template will remove these wikis from most categories, except for "dead wikis."
+
::Having said that, if someone called me a honky, I'd be offended, but no more than if he called me an idiot or some other insult. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 06:50, 3 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:::It was an official warning - from a crat, no less - and he was blocked after refusing to listen and then he [[Sockpuppetry|socked]] over said block. --[[User talk:Rock-O-Jello|This is MY book, and I'm gonna READ IT!!!]] 08:35, 3 February 2017 (PST)
 +
::::'''Official warnings''' Yes, I have warned him on multiple instances in the time that I have been an admin/bureaucrat/staff member. There isn't a process for "official" warnings but it's also clear that if you're harassing and annoying multiple users over the course of years and driving them away from the project, then something has to give: either you get blocked or everyone else concedes defeat and makes this your personal playground. Not having many official rules is nice in a way but it also ends up being a problem at times. Lacking that, common sense is a decent rule of thumb (which is also imperfect). We also don't have a particular rule about offensive speech and I generally think that's a good thing as well but there is also speech that serves no purpose other than to irritate or harass and the community stands nothing to gain by having someone be provocative without repercussions. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 08:55, 3 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:::::I consider any warning from a sysop to be an official warning. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 17:57, 3 February 2017 (PST)
 +
'''Comment''' I do note that the user being discussed is currently blocked, which I don't think is very fair. Assuming that I am not mistaken, I believe what is being discussed here is an indefinite block or even a permanent ban from WikiIndex. In either case, the user in question should be allowed to defend themselves or otherwise comment before the discussion is closed. If the user makes disruptive comments to the discussion, then they should be blocked. But not before they'd had a chance to defend their actions. Just my personal opinion, but I think that it is important to consider. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 09:04, 3 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:As other users stated, he has been warned multiple times. When his block expires, he will be able to explain and defend his actions. --[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 09:12, 3 February 2017 (PST)
 +
::'''Ban''' You are mistaken, Jamie--he is blocked for seven days (expiring soon) and I am certainly willing to let him contribute if all he wants to do is contribute. Someone who is simply trolling will be blocked indefinitely, no problem. Someone who has many demonstrably constructive edits but who is also abrasive is a lot trickier and that's why I hope that he can come back and play nice. He's had plenty of opportunities to defend himself which mainly amount to tu quoque fallacies and mind-games ("yeah but ''you'' did [x]" or "how can you prove that I intended [y]"). It's inarguable that his behavior is inappropriate and lacking a clear policy, the ''repeated'' warnings over the course of ''years'' should be sufficient. I sincerely hope that it's onwards and upwards once his block expires if he chooses to return. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 09:17, 3 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
:For me, the more important question is, what do we want to do going forward? Again, to reiterate the joke for those who haven't seen it, including dead wikis in category lists is about as useful as keeping around a phone book from 1965. How frustrating is it, when looking for a particular topic, to click on several category members and find that none the wikis in that category are currently active. I don't object to changing our minds (or, if you prefer, settling our minds), but I thought before we go about doing a massive overhaul of WikiIndex, we might want to talk about it. I know, too late, it's already begun. ;-)
+
==Request for Comments==
 +
'''[[User:HAL-9000]]''' This user emailed me personally asking for an unblock. I explained in email and via [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=User_talk:HAL-9000&diff=prev&oldid=195631 his talk] that I will be holding him to extra scrutiny and may have to consult IP logs due to the [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?oldid=189751#HAL-9000_and_related_IPs_are_a_global_vandal.2C_there_was_no_hack nature of prior disruption]. His unblock was adjusted from "indefinite" to a few days from now to solicit community feedback. I'm a believer in second chances and I remember him being a productive member of the community. Thoughts? [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 13:24, 4 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
:In practical terms, it wouldn't be so bad to include dead wikis in categories. At least it shows in the infobox that they are dead. (It might be good to highlight that fact a little more clearly, perhaps with a bold header or footer?) And it does give a sense of historical interest in a topic when you included the dead wikis along with the live ones. Also, most categories here aren't so huge that you would have to click through several dead wikis to find a live one. So, I can see arguments for both ways of doing things. Previously, there had been some question as to whether or not to keep dead wikis on the index at all, but most of us (myself included) favor keeping them around.
+
:As I saw from his profile that he made some productive edits, {{Support}}, but the community should keep in mind that I didn't know him before, so I'm not aware of his previous actions. [[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 13:37, 4 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
:So for me the question becomes what we see as the more important purpose of WikiIndex: is it a directory or is it a reference guide? I believe using the ''Inactive'' template furthers the first purpose, while merely changing the status to ''Dead'' favors the second. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 19:57, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
+
:Also, I received a private e-mail from him asking to remove his personal information on Community Portal. For the admin team: I have removed it, please revert my edit if you think it's not okay. I have unblocked him assuming good faith, but will be monitoring his edits. --[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 04:49, 5 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
=== [[:Template:Inactive]] ===
+
==Lift infinite blocks for IP-spammers?==
−
(moved from http://wikiindex.org/User_talk:Hoof_Hearted#Template:Inactive) [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 15:43, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
+
I think that IP-[[spam]]mers should not be blocked for infinite, because they use proxies or dynamic [[IP address|IPs]]. I think a 1-year block is enough. Comment with your ideas below :-) --[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 04:34, 5 February 2017 (PST)
 +
*{{support}} — Indefinitely blocking IP's is never a good thing except in the most serious circumstances, and it is not allowed on [[WMF]] unless deemed absolutely necessary (and any indefinitely blocked IP's are subject to review). Regardless of the reason, I'd say 365 days should be the maximum block for any IP address. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 09:15, 5 February 2017 (PST)
 +
*{{support}} — A long block on an IP is frequently unnecessary as someone is likely to just move on after [x] days/weeks. There are about 700 IPs which are indefinitely blocked and I'm removing them for the ones that are a decade old--very unlikely they will cause any problems. And if they do, we have several active admins here. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 10:50, 5 February 2017 (PST)
 +
*{{support}} — I agree about the one-year maximum. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:41, 5 February 2017 (PST)
 +
*{{support}} — I fundamentally agree with the one-year maximum block for spammers from a single [[IP address]], but with the added proviso that should the IP user return to spam again after the expiry of their previous block, they <u>will</u> be blocked indefinitely.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 06:45, 6 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
[[Template:Inactive boilerplate]] is not marked as depreciated.
+
==Category:Inactive==
−
[[WikiIndex:Community portal]] shows 'Inactive' in the right column under Guidelines.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 10:24, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
+
The Inactive category is deprecated and has been replaced by [[:Category:Dormant|Dormant]]. Using the "inactive" entry returns an error message saying that it's not in the list of possible values, even before I deleted it from the wiki status comparison table just now. I would propose removing all entries from the category and updating them with a different status, but the issue is that there are 777 pages in the category. This would take forever to [[orphan]]. Advice? <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 09:51, 6 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
: I feel strongly that it need not be removed. ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
:Those kind of of edits should be done by a [[bot]]. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 10:06, 6 February 2017 (PST)
 +
::'''Botwork''' I am doing them with [[AWB]] and I have tagged my account as a bot at the moment. There is also [[:Category:Pages that use Template:Inactive]] from [[Template:Inactive]] which should be emptied and all instances of [[Template:Inactive]] should be converted to [[Template:Wiki]] with <code>status=Dormant</code> but in the meantime, this will fix all of the error thrown up by the invalid status. Thanks, Jamie. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 10:14, 6 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:::'''Deprecation''' It looks like [[User:MarkDilley]] had some [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Template_talk%3AInactive&diff=179560&oldid=157960 reservations] about deprecating the template. Mark, if you're viewing this, can you explain more? [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 10:29, 6 February 2017 (PST)
 +
::::It's true that the Inactive category can be considered deprecated, but there wasn't an official community consensus about it. I also agree that the edits should be done with a bot, to avoid obstructing RecentChanges. --[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 10:56, 6 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:::::'''Bot flag''' I amended my user rights so that it would pass through the bot filter but it evidently didn't work--not sure why. Sorry for clogging up the Recent Changes but it's a done deal now. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 11:14, 6 February 2017 (PST)
 +
::::::Not a problem. I wanted to remove "Inactive" status from WikiStatus template, as we don't use it anymore, but I see it was alredy done. Good work. :-)--[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 11:38, 6 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
The problem that [[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] is pointing out is the main problem.  We do not want categories to contain dead/inactive wiki.  For example, adding the inactive template here: [[AgileEdge Wiki]] takes away all the categories from the page except category inactive for those that want a record of wikis that have been.  Having them in active categories doesn't help anyone. Changing the template is a simple edit, rather than removing all the categories.  If we can find a solution to this issue in the framework of getting rid of template inactive, that would be a possible step.  ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
 
  
−
:: You write "Having them in active categories doesn't help anyone."
+
The change is incomplete. It is not sufficient, to change the status. One has to rework the template intro: "Inactive|" must be replaced by "Wiki/n|", 3 SPACE removed, may be more. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 12:15, 6 February 2017 (PST)
−
# For one: What is an active category? I would say, that every category in which one can place an entry is an 'active' category. So, to call an category active does not bring us anywhere.
+
:{{Support}}. This should be done, manually or with a bot. --[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 12:17, 6 February 2017 (PST)
−
# Secondly no one can know what would be helpful for an other. The evidence about the total uselessness can not be supplied. But I can supply evidence for the opposite: Out of about every 20 Entries which I checked in order to remove the inactive tag I found a 'resurrected' wiki. I was never a supporter of the death penalty. I know, that things change. It may take time but it does. To leave informative entries about wikis which are dead for now will increase their chances for new live.
+
::'''Change''' Manorainjan, ''which template'' needs to be changed...? [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 12:28, 6 February 2017 (PST)
−
# It may be a annoyance to some of our visitors if they search trough the index and find every second entry in certain category to be dead. Rather than removing such entries from the category and render them unfindable I suggest to mark them in the list with a '†'. Like that they do not disturbe the ones who are looking for active wikis only.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 19:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
+
::The change towards inactive caused the [[:Category:WikiLogo|logos]] to be disconnected from the wiki page. Therefore we got loads of orphaned logos. We would see their destination only after this rework. Some logos got deleted in the meantime, because someone thought they are not needed. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 12:20, 6 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:::'''Logos''' Can you give an example of one? I can undelete or re-add as necessary. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 12:28, 6 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
For example of what I mean of '''Active''' having [[AgileEdge Wiki]] in [[:Category:Wiki English]] is deceptive if it is a dead wiki.  It is not a wiki any longer and it is not an english wiki. ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that, because HAL has flooded RC with vandal-edits. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 12:35, 6 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:He was just blocked. Thank you for warning us about this user. --[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 12:39, 6 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
So the language of the text in the archive changes from English to something else? ;-) And when my mother dies, she is not my mother any more? And when the Wiki dies, the entry about that Wiki is dead as well? I should remind You of the fact, that most Wikis are not telephone books. Most Wikis keep a lot of information about dead persons like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Friedrich_Gauss Now let us see the 'active' categories he (his entry) is in: {Kategorien:
+
==User HAL-9000: what about his new edit?==
−
1777 births
+
I blocked him because of [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk:Community_portal&curid=2339&diff=196045&oldid=196044 this vandalism edit]. I think we need a strong community support to unblock him. Please reply with {{Support}} or {{Oppose}}.--[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 11:45, 6 February 2017 (PST)
−
1855 deaths
+
−
People from Braunschweig
+
−
Deists
+
−
18th-century German mathematicians
+
−
19th-century German mathematicians
+
−
Mental calculators
+
−
Differential geometers
+
−
German astronomers
+
−
German Lutherans
+
−
German physicists
+
−
Optical physicists
+
−
German scientists
+
−
Number theorists
+
−
People from Brunswick
+
−
Recipients of the Copley Medal
+
−
Recipients of the Pour le Mérite (civil class)
+
−
Braunschweig University of Technology alumni
+
−
University of Helmstedt alumni
+
−
University of Göttingen alumni
+
−
University of Göttingen faculty
+
−
Members of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
+
−
Fellows of the Royal Society
+
−
Corresponding Members of the St Petersburg Academy of Sciences
+
−
Honorary Members of the St Petersburg Academy of Sciences
+
−
Members of the Bavarian Maximilian Order for Science and Art
+
−
Vesta}
+
−
What do we learn from this? That en.wikipedia has the same problems as we have: double categories! (2*People from Braunschweig, my hometown ;-)[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 19:40, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
: I think we have to spend some time thinking about what it is we want here and what is the [[diff]] of our thinking around it.~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
:{{Oppose}}: seems to be a blanking [[vandal]] --[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 11:45, 6 February 2017 (PST)
−
:: Ah, I see you are wanting to bring some Wikipedia thinking here.  An idea of WikiIndex is that it is an active wiki of wiki.  One of the compromises we made earlier on was to keep dead wiki but not put them in categories of active wiki.  (I was on the side of keeping them, not so sure anymore!) That compromise was to put them in their own category (inactive) - dead was added later on and we never solved the duality of the problem that created.  As with any wiki, we can change our mind, which I think would take a few more comments from active people - because we are not in majority agreement with this. :-)  ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
::'''Blanking''' Page blanking can be unintentional. You've allowed the user the ability to edit his talk page so he can explain himself there. Not sure if you're seeing this, HAL but what happened here? [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 11:51, 6 February 2017 (PST)
−
::: Speaking directly to the issue of overlapping categories, I'd like to point out that we are not Wikipedia. There are no overcategorization or duplicate category rules in effect here. The object here is to make Wikis easy to find. With this in mind, some wikis may be included in both a category and its subcategory. While this may be messy from an administrative perspective, it is hopefully useful for navigation. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 20:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
+
:::I have intentionally done it, to have a response from him. However, I have temporarily unblocked his account to let him answer here. --[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 11:52, 6 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
FWIW, if we start tallying numbers of dead wikis here, I'd like to point out that there are currently 132 wikis in the oft-forgotten [[:Category:Cannot connect]]. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]])
+
I have undone almost all his [[vandal]]ism. Please see if I forgot some pages, and rollback them. Best, --[[User:TheTVFan|TheTVFan]] ([[User talk:TheTVFan|talk]]) 13:10, 6 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
:I think it's beneficial to keep the articles about dead wikis. One never knows when they might come to life again. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 21:32, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
+
{{oppose|Weak oppose}} As this does seem to be a vandalism-only account, I would typically oppose an unblock. However, one thing I would like to mention is the possibility of a malicious bot. The page blankings seem to be happening all at once, so I would wonder if either the user is running a bot and is not performing the actions themselves, or, at the worst, their account has been compromised by malicious software. I would recommend a CheckUser to check for spambot IP's before going any further. Depending on the CU results, my opinion may change later. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 13:37, 6 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
I 100% subscribe to that! Therefore I'm still objecting Your deletion request of that Wiki which You (co)founded: [[theshatteredpan.org]]. But this Discussion was not about deleting Wiki entries. It is about the use of the template:Inactive. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 08:53, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
+
:This was to be expected. I did not say anything, because actually everybody had been warned: [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk:Community_portal&diff=189769&oldid=189768 dif]. The claim, that the account had been hacked is old ... who believes such claims? --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 14:19, 6 February 2017 (PST)
 +
::I don't rule anything out until there is evidence either confirming it or discrediting it. Therefore, I will not identify the claim of a hacked account as false unless CU data or other sufficient evidence prove it to be so (in summary: I believe everything in situations like this until evidence discredits options). <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 14:59, 6 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:{{support}} Give the benefit of the doubt; if he's a vandal, he'll mess up again soon enough, and you can reblock him. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 15:35, 6 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
:Back to the actual topic: While trying to find out about the history of this place I hat to come to [[SwitchWiki]] and changed status to Archived because it was. But the preceding Wiki [[WorldWideWiki.net]] which I only found by taking a detour to [[WikiIndex:History]] where it was mentioned, I found buried under the notorious Template:inactive, even though it is archived too and roots for our own history. There You can clearly see the nonsense of this template! This template turns our ambition to preserve Wiki history into a laugh! [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 09:09, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
+
'''Check User''' If the actual person running the account and doing constructive things wants a new account, he can request one. In the meantime, there are long blocks put on IPs associated with this account and an indefinite one for this user. I generally don't like (implicitly) publishing IPs but the user was warned that this would be possible and his IPs have been published here before, so c'est la vie. If his machines are compromised, then he really needs to scrub his hard drives. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 18:46, 6 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
===deleted entry===
+
:I am TheTVFan. The vandal probably shares my IPs because he is my brother and we live in the same house. Please unblock me as I still want to edit here. [[Special:Contributions/103.10.197.194|103.10.197.194]] 06:24, 7 February 2017 (PST)
−
Once upon a time the policy seemed to be to delete inactive Wikis... [[User talk:Peu#File:43 Best Blogs.gif]] and not every sysop knows about the current policy...
+
−
So, before we finalize our thoughts about categories,
+
−
the more fundamental policy regarding deletion or not should be agreed upon and communicated.
+
−
[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 14:02, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
: "Once upon a time the policy seemed to be to delete inactive Wikis... "  -- I don't think that was ever the policy Manorainjian :-) ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
−
::Mark is correct, we've never had a policy to delete dead wikis. What ''might'' have happened in this particular instance is that may have been a casualty of the server crash way back when :-?  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 14:53, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
::: So then, where is this entry, if not deleted? [[User_talk:DavidCary#The_ACC_Bible_Quizzing_Wiki]][[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 15:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
+
==Language conventions==
−
:::: Sean ponders "What ''might'' have happened in this particular instance is that may have been a casualty of the server crash way back when." ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
I noticed that some [[:Category:Wikimedia Foundation|WMF]] entires have varying language titles. For example, the [[French Wikipedia]] has the word "French" written in English. However, others have the English title redirecting to the title in the respective language ([[Spanish Wikipedia]] redirects to [[Español Wikipedia]]). I don't think we should have two different styles of language in page titles. Which one is technically correct? I'm fine with either, as long as it's consistent. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 07:59, 8 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:'''Agreed''' Do we need to even break these up by language? In the case of [[:Category:Wikipedia|Wikipedia]] that may be helpful just because of how large that particular project is but these are really all the same wiki, just in different editions. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 09:07, 8 February 2017 (PST)
 +
::I think it's okay to have separate entries, but I just feel that they all need to follow the same naming conventions. We shouldn't have some of them titled in the language of the project they discuss, and then have some others titled in English. What we have with Wikipedia at least is the opposite. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 19:00, 8 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
:::: May it be, that this Wiki got deleted too? [[File:AWikiLogo.JPG]][[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 19:42, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
+
==Freenode IRC==
 +
Hi, I just wanted to make an announcement that I have created a Freenode IRC channel for WikiIndex. The channel is <code>#wiki-index</code> (note the hyphen!) Please feel free to join and hang out. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 08:08, 9 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:Have you registered the channel? --[[User talk:Rock-O-Jello|This is MY book, and I'm gonna READ IT!!!]] 08:36, 9 February 2017 (PST)
 +
::Indeed I have, I'm just not there right now. <s>I'll log on now.</s> I'm not just going to idle in an empty channel. I'll be around if the channel ever gets active. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 08:49, 9 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:::'''Former channel''' For several years, we had an [[Internet Relay Chat|IRC]] channel at irc://irc.freenode.net/wikiindex but it was [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=MediaWiki%3ASidebar&diff=127434&oldid=126479 removed in 2012] by [[User:Elassint]]. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 09:26, 9 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
::::: Yes, I could imagine that a server crash deleted that wiki as well.  My reasoning is that it was input in May 2006, 4 months after creation of wiki. ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
What about the [http://meetingwords.com/WikiIndex Etherpad]? [[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 09:41, 9 February 2017 (PST)
−
::::: Please be more precise. 'creation of wiki' refers to which Wiki? When was this crash? Was it before or after May 2006? [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 20:15, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
+
::::I like IRC better. I saw the former channel and it appears that the Freenode administration locked it due to inactivity. That's why I created the new channel. <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<font color="#D47C14">itsJamie</font>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 09:51, 9 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
:::::: Can't be more precise.  I do know several years ago (4-5) we had a server crash and once in a while we find things missing. (Creation of the wiki that would use the wiki logo you are referring.) ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
==WikiIndex Twitter account==
 +
See [https://twitter.com/wikiIndex here]. Does anyone think that it would be useful to publish with this? Possibly highlight entries that here that are particularly interesting or fleshed out? Does anyone have any other ideas about social media platforms that would work well with our site? [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 02:31, 11 February 2017 (PST)
 +
:To whom is the account administered by?  Of its total of three tweets, two of them are spam!  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 10:18, 10 May 2017 (PDT)
 +
::{{support|Agreed}} This is clearly not an offical Twitter account created by staff, or even if it was, it has clearly been compromised. Seems like an impersonation to me, but either way, it's not a legitimate account (anymore). Therefore, it should not be used for official publications and I'd consider reporting it to Twitter sysadmins for review. I think that they can delete impersonations and ban compromised accounts. -- [[User:Amanda|<span style="color:white;background-color:#8A2DB8"><b>Amanda</b></span>]] <small>[[User talk:Amanda|(talk)]]</small> 13:35, 24 May 2017 (PDT)
  
−
== Clientèle ==
+
::: It is an official account, the "spam" were tweets that were meant for another account at that time, the Twitter mobile app isn't the best at delineating accounts.  I have credentials for the account if this community wants to work with Twitter in growing. And as far as staff, there really isn't staff per say. There are people who are sometimes paid to do backend work, at least that was the last thing I knew about the site.  Best, [[MarkDilley]]
  
−
It appears to me, that it is not so clear for many for whom this Wiki should be of use.  
+
::::Mark, In which way could a twitter account help WikiIndex growing in quality or quantity? Please outline a scenario. Please share Your vision with us. --[[User_talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 03:08, 30 May 2017 (PDT)
  
−
# People who look for answers in a specific topic and therefore look for a specialized Wiki
+
==Code of Conduct==
−
# Wiki-people from other parts of the [[Wikisphere]] who are looking for new field of activity
+
We've talked around this several times and for the time being, this is our provisional 'Code of Conduct'. The language may be modified before it's published here and the community may have ways to adapt it but this is the policy as it stands now. If you find users who are transgressing it, please refer them to this document: http://citizencodeofconduct.org/ This shouldn't be particularly surprising info but I'd recommend that everyone take a look at it to familiarize yourself with how it may work for us. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 15:07, 13 February 2017 (PST)
−
# [[Wolf Peuker|Wiki-traveler]] on a [[WikiTourBus]]-Stop
+
−
# People with too much time like You an me ;-)
+
−
# Wiki-refugees looking for asylum
+
−
# Sociopath, SPAMer and SCAMer looking for new victims
+
−
# Philanthropist looking for worthy projects
+
−
# Sociologist studying dynamics of the web 2.0
+
−
# ....
+
  
−
In how far can we foresee what will be of use and what not? [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 20:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
+
:{{Support}} --[[User talk:Rock-O-Jello|This is MY book, and I'm gonna READ IT!!!]] 10:40, 14 February 2017 (PST)
  
−
==SourceForge.net Wiki engine?==
+
==A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software.==
−
I assume that on [[:Category:SourceForge.net|SourceForge.net]] a change took place which caused some or all Wikis hosted there to change to other URLs and a sourceforge.net specific engine. http://sourceforge.net/p/backuppc/wiki/browse_pages/?sort=recent But I have no clue what the name of that engine is. [[BackupPC wiki]] is an example for such Wiki. Also I would not know how to find the afflicted pages.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 14:00, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
+
As per subject heading, I have been getting intermittent glitches here on WikiIndex displaying the above error message. If anyone else experiences the same, can you please log it here, thanks.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 05:51, 25 April 2017 (PDT)
−
:The wiki engine is likely a sub-project of [[wp:Apache Allura|Allura]]. I'll work on It. --[[YiFei]] | <small>[[User talk:Zhuyifei1999|talk]]</small> 14:31, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
::Created – [[:Category:Apache Allura]] :) [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 21:46, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
== [[:Category:Private]] ==
+
==Mass creation of [[user page]]s for accounts unused - why?==
−
Moved to -> [[Category talk:Wiki Status]]
+
I have discovered a huge mass creation of otherwise absent [[user page]]s.  They are usually totally devoid of content, and were clearly NOT created by their respective user.  So what is their purpose?  The long established wiki convention is that only the user themselves create their own user page.  The other long established wiki convention is that blank pages should be [[red link]]s.
  
−
==[[Template:Whois]]==
+
Can someone point me to the consensus of where this drastic change was agreed upon please?  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 10:38, 10 May 2017 (PDT)
−
[[Template:Whois]] – Does anybody knows, what this is about and how it works?  [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 21:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
+
:I don't think that such a consensus exists, at least from what I can tell. However, I would {{oppose}} these pages being nuked. I personally like created blank user pages for inactive users rather than dozens of redlinks in the user list. Just looks better in terms of interface IMHO. -- [[User:Amanda|<span style="color:white;background-color:#8A2DB8"><b>Amanda</b></span>]] <small>[[User talk:Amanda|(talk)]]</small> 13:32, 24 May 2017 (PDT)
−
:Looks like it's a link to find where an IP address originates from. Eg. {{whois|123.45.67.89}} --[[YiFei]] | <small>[[User talk:Zhuyifei1999|talk]]</small> 23:54, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
+
::If no [[consensus]] existed, the action should not have been carried out!  WikiIndex is about documenting wikis, the software which makes a wiki, the companies who create and host wikis, and the people who are <u>significant</u> within the wiki-world. We categorically do <u>not</u> create user pages for every prospective spammer who registers a user account here, who then makes zero edits (because their intended spam is blocked by our abuse filters). This has to stop.  By all means, {{tl|welcome}} them on their [[talk page]] once they have made a few constructive edits - once they have engaged in our community here on WikiIndex.
 +
::It has been stated many times previously -- WikiIndex is not <u>[[:Category:Wikipedia|Wikipedia]]</u>, and to clarify further, WikiIndex is not [[:Category:Wikia|Wikia]] either. We do not have the 1,500 sysops that they have on the [[English Wikipedia]]!  And I guess Wikia has sysops and other staff which run into four figures. WikiIndex is lucky if it can count on TWO sysops on 'duty' -- much of the time, there no sysops online at WikiIndex.  We quite simply do not have the workforce here to fix such major, unwanted changes.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 16:59, 24 May 2017 (PDT)
  
−
== Informing the entries ==
+
==AbuseFilters with redundant actions==
 +
There are several abuse filters configured on this project that are currently enabled with redundant actions (there could be more deleted/disabled ones, I didn't check). Out of the ones that are enabled, filter 3 has both "disallow" and "block autopromote" enabled. The disallow is redundant, as block autopromote also disallows the edit. Filters 6 and 8 are set to "disallow" and "tag". The tag in this case is redundant, since the disallow would be processed first a tag would never be added. Filters 19, 21, 26, and 28 have both "disallow" and "block" enabled. Disallow is redundant since block also disallows. This isn't anything urgent, but removing redundant actions could clean up the abuse filter list display a little bit (i.e. make the table of filters take less room on the page). -- [[User:Amanda|<span style="color:white;background-color:#8A2DB8"><b>Amanda</b></span>]] <small>[[User talk:Amanda|(talk)]]</small> 13:21, 24 May 2017 (PDT)
 +
:Why is there a need to trim down the [[Abuse Filter]] log?  Anyway, I am working through your concerns, as follows:
 +
:Filter3 has tested ok, and not returned any errors (nor any hits!).  Filter3 is an extremely robust anti-spam filter, which should be hidden.  How are you able to view it?
 +
:Filter6 tests ok.  The tag warning adds a custom message to the bottom of the existing MW Abuse filter warning message.  Users can over-ride this filter, hence when they trigger the warning message.  This filter could be triggered accidentally by anyone - even your cat walking across your keyboard!
 +
:Filter8 similar to 6.
  
−
Currently I'm adding German Wikis.
+
:Looking at these three, they have been developed, tested, and refined by the geeks at [[MediaWiki.org]].  I'm not too comfortable about undoing their work. [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 17:54, 24 May 2017 (PDT)
−
And in case of new entries I inform the people of that Wiki that their Wiki is now on our Index.
+
::I wasn't able to view them. The consequences thar occur when the filter is hit are publicly visible at [[Special:AbuseFilter]], regardless of privacy. -- [[User:Amanda|<span style="color:white;background-color:#8A2DB8"><b>Amanda</b></span>]] <small>[[User talk:Amanda|(talk)]]</small> 04:56, 25 May 2017 (PDT)
−
I think that should be the general rule to tell them they are indexed here.
+
−
Not only because maybe they do not want to be indexed ;-)
+
−
Rather because they got a chance to update their entry themselves.
+
−
This could also generate new users, active ones.
+
−
[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 23:19, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
I'm a bit disappointed about the total lack if feedback on this idea. Was such discussed any time before?
+
==Gibberish accounts==
−
[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 22:46, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
+
Would it be possible to suppress the usernames and/or delete the twenty or so usernames that are just long strings of 0's, 1's, or other numbers? I've noticed the same types of accounts in the ShoutWiki global users list and they all appear to be one or two spambots just making a mess. Suppression of the usernames via Oversight is probably easier, but deleting the accounts altogether would work too. (the latter requires a db change without [[mw:Extension:UserMerge|UserMerge]].) -- [[User:Amanda|<span style="color:white;background-color:#8A2DB8"><b>Amanda</b></span>]] <small>[[User talk:Amanda|(talk)]]</small> 14:07, 24 May 2017 (PDT)
−
: [[Welcoming]] is roughly the idea, I support it. ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
  
−
In the turn of attempting to create new entries and to fill the structured data and in connection with the above I found that it would help to have an account on the new Wiki, because many of them are not [[:Category:OpenEdit]]. Often one can not communicate with any person on that wiki without opening an account, because most do not fill 'About', 'Impressum' or so. But on the other hand nobody wants to create hundreds of personal accounts all over the [[wikisphere]]. So I thought it may be a solution to open formal, impersonal accounts like 'WikiIndex.org'. What Do You think? Of course they should all have the same password ;-) And who will get to know this? And what kind of eMail might get connected to this and how to manage an email account collectively for purpose of email-verification mails? [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 22:46, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
+
==Timezone - change to UTC==
−
: Interesting idea, can using one of the throw away email systems work? ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
Being as WikiIndex is a multilingual, and therefore multinational wiki, is there any reason why PST is enforced upon all of us?  I am aware of manually overriding timezone in [[Special:Preferences|user preferences]], but it doesn't want to work for me, and I don't see any evidence that manual override works for others.  Can I therefore suggest we change our default time to UTC?  Comments of support or not please.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 07:09, 6 December 2017 (PST)
 +
:For me the setting to my time zone has worked without problem. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 07:12, 6 December 2017 (PST)
 +
*'''Agree''' I am all for standardizing and internationalizing this site. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 11:32, 6 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
: I expect, that over time, means 5 years or so, it would result in thousand accounts. therefore I do not think one should throw away the connected email account. Why would one want to do so? Ad it would require another marker in our entry of the Wiki where an WikiIndex account was set up, like [[:Category:OurAccount]] So that, in any case one has need to change something like connectes eMail address, one would find most of this accounts. BTW this creation of accounts with the Name WikiIndex.org or similar would increase the awareness of WikiIndex as an institution.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 10:39, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
+
::Manor - what timezone suffix is displaying for you on this page?  For me - even though I have set my user prefs to London, talk pages are still displayed as PST.  Don't forget that many 'functions' on this wiki are broken!  :-(  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 15:30, 7 December 2017 (PST)
 +
:::Obviously, the personal setting regarding time zone is to set time in the output of lists like RC so that it fits Your local time. It would be quite a hotchpotch if on talk pages every one would sign with their individual time zone. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 15:55, 7 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
: This proposal seams to be connected: http://wikiindex.org/Proposal:WikiIndex_Pages_on_indexed_Wikis[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 21:40, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
+
:::Regarding the time zone to be used for general purpose I think it is best to use the time of the actual server of the wiki. Every wiki has its actual location, the server. To deviate from server time should be justified by a specific reason like when the actual server is in USA but the group using the (German language) wiki would be in Germany. But this wiki is founded by Americans and hosted in USA. I think it's perfectly OK to let this be reflected by using some American time zone for general purposes. BTW isn't the spelling time zone in two words? [[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 15:55, 7 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
::Most people I index know about it, so yeah. [[User:Sweetie Belle|Sweetie Belle]] ([[User talk:Sweetie Belle|talk]]) 02:19, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
+
::::Wikipedia use UTC, and their servers are in the US, same for Wikia.  UTC is about reaching out, being global, not being centric to one particular country.
  
−
:: I appreciate 'that' (informing WikiPeople about their pages here). I find that more necessary in case of people than in case of Wikis. With Wikis it is rather a tactical draw which is to benefit the quantitative and qualitative growth of WikiIndex. With People it got to do more with personality rights [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 22:03, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
+
::::'Timezone' is one word in American English, but two separate words in British and Commonwealth English. There are many quirks between American and British English - gotta love what our US friends call a 'bumbag'!! [https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage/british-and-american-terms]  :-O  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 16:57, 7 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
==Criteria for Wiki People pages==
+
:::::Danish and German Wikipedia use CEST & CET, Arabic uses EET. UTC is accidentally the same time as England. So the English Wikipedia is England centric ;-) I don't know where the servers for German Wikipedia stand, but I guess in Germany. Tell me if you got specific information about that which are different. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 18:05, 7 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
===Consolidation===
+
::::::Do you really think that the different language editions of Wikipedia are hosted all over the world? As tho there are servers in Lichtenstein, Austria, etc. for German speakers and then some in Peru and Equatorial Guinea for Hispanics...? No, they are all in the United States. For a long time, Florida but I believe Virginia now. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 19:48, 7 December 2017 (PST)
−
I shall move this discussion here: [[WikiIndex talk:Peoples Pages]] but keep the pointer so that this discussion may be 'endless' but not forgotten like most others.
+
  
−
-> Ongoing discussion on the wrong place:
+
:::::::IT is not a belief system. [https://www.wikimedia.de/wiki/Deutschland_ist_für_Wikipedia_sehr_wichtg._Lesen_Sie_weiter_und_erfahren_Sie_warum! "Wir betreiben eigene Server"]. Since the content of the German language version of Wikipedia is mostly read and written from users located in Germany and surrounding German speaking regions, it is reasonable, not to send the data back and forth to Florida. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 00:41, 8 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
Should we have a criteria for [[:Category:Wiki People|wiki people]] pages, and if so, what should it be? [[User:Sweetie Belle|Sweetie Belle]] ([[User talk:Sweetie Belle|talk]]) 23:26, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
+
:::::::See the page about the [https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Esams_cluster Esams cluster] in Amsterdam. There is another cluster in Singapore. Maybe Your point of view is a bit American centrically? --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 00:54, 8 December 2017 (PST)
−
:I remember a discussion on this very issue a little while ago. I think there are two basic criteria.  1./ any person whom has made edits here on WikiIndex can have a page in this category, and 2./ any other person in the wiki-sphere who is either notable or interesting. So basically, we don't really want to be listing every single editor of every single wiki - as that will be a sure-fire way of <u>readers</u> of this WikiIndex category loosing interest in 'sifting the wheat from the chaff'.  HTH :)  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 12:37, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
::Besides Your excellent memory, is there any link to the then discussion or a help page where the result of that discussion was formulated?[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 13:33, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
+
::::::::Of course there are some back-up servers across the world--the goal is to spread the encyclopedia. But they don't host all of the content for different language editions in the places around the world where they speak it. Do you think that the servers for the Portuguese edition are in Brazil and Mozambique and Portugal and Macau? It's one of the most absurd things I've ever read. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 10:28, 8 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
: I saw that some discussion about that was going on here: http://wikiindex.org/User_talk:Abd [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 21:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
+
<reset indent>
−
::'''Criteria''' I agree that there need to be ''some'' guidelines and "interesting" is a good start. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 06:57, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
::Istn't interesting a totally subjective judgement? If interesting should become a criteria it needs criteria that define when somebody becomes interesting. So, it does not help, not even for a start. Otherwise the criteria was: "I found that person interesting, so I created the page." [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 08:48, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
+
Manor - get your facts correct, UTC is <u>not</u> the timezone for England - GMT and BST are the correct zones for the UK (which consists of four constituent countries) ''and'' the Republic of Ireland. Requesting UTC has nothing to do with trying to somehow 'claim' centricity in favour of the UK.  UTC is merely a 'Universal' timezone which is used around the world - for a vast array of industries - aviation, shipping, military, meteorology, communications, satellite technology (the US-owned and operated Global Positioning System [GPS] uses UTC), and international IT infrastructure all work from UTC.
  
−
:::We have discussed it before, although I don't have the link handy. At the time, my objection to creating pages for Wiki People other than oneself was that it is prone to abuse. As I recall, not everyone else felt the same way. I still have reservations about it, and indeed, there have been potentially libelous things written about Wiki People earlier this year. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 20:17, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
+
As for server location - that is a complete red herring. As you have discovered, Wikimedia Foundation have central servers located in the US, but they also have relay and redundancy servers in Europe and Asia - and they will ALL use UTC.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 09:47, 8 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
::::It is not whether or not to create peoples pages. We got peoples pages already and since long. The question is, what kind of people should get pages here. It is also not, what should be written on the page. That too is another discussion.  [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 22:10, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
+
:Speaking of red herrings, UTC, GMT and WET are all the same time: UTC +0 ;-) --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 10:32, 8 December 2017 (PST)
 +
::Once again, Manor, you are wrong. UTC is an international timezone, GMT is not - it's a local timezone. UTC is a fixed constant year-round timezone, GMT is a transient half-yearly timezone.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 05:40, 10 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
:::: That said, I'm still missing ANY criteria here at all. Notability is similarly vague as 'interesting' is. For example: If we would set a criteria 'Any person who founded a Wiki which got at least 1.000 content pages and lasted at least a year' that would be 'criteria' not opinion. Verifiable facts, You know? And I did not mean to suggest this very criteria. It is only an example. I also did not mean to say it should be only one criteria or how many criteria any given candidate had to meet. I'm writing this only to demonstrate what criteria is in contradiction to opinion. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 22:10, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
+
'''Cosmetic''': I do not really care if You change the time zone of this wiki. Just do not delude Yourself about its importance. Changing the time zone here will go unnoticed by 99.999 999 % of wikisphere. Topics of real importance are mentioned here: [[WikiIndex:Site statistics information]] [[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 10:50, 8 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
:::::Wiki People pages were originally generated by the people themselves. I think it should stay that way. That's my criteria. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 21:15, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
::Who mentioned anything about "my importance"?  You are a deluded fantasist!  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 05:40, 10 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
::::: [[CoreyShields]] just asked me to delete his page, which he obviously did not create himself. So, it wasn't that way earlier either. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 14:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
+
:::You can insult me, because You are the one with the admin buttons. If I had called You names like that You would have blocked me. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 05:54, 10 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
::::::That at least would be a criteria, one criteria amongst many possible and certainly not usable as the only one. For example, if I conclude for me, that [http://vimeo.com/53254044 Lydia Pintscher] should have a page here, because of her fascinating work for Wikidata, I would not wait until she has time or interest to dig into WikiIndex and finds out how to use Sweeties latest-user-info template. On the other hand, it if becomes a hype, that every user of [[Wookieepedia]] finds it funny to have a page here, I would not think that will be helpful to our purpose. So I call Your criteria a supporting argument but not a sufficient one. And Your supporting 'argument' in the fashion of 'it was always like that' I do not consider an argument at all. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 23:05, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
==Logos of wikimedia wikis missing==
 +
I saw that the logos of the entries of wikipedia, wiktionary and so on are missing. What happens? --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 16:00, 7 December 2017 (PST)
 +
:Can you please show some examples?  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 05:41, 10 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
The statement on [[Alonzo Jackson]]'s page was requested by Alonzo herself during my interview with her on [[IRC]] as a joke. <u>I could add a footnote if possible but I don't know how the reference markup works here.</u> [[User:Sweetie Belle|Sweetie Belle]] ([[User talk:Sweetie Belle|talk]]) 21:42, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
==Permanent block of Manorainjan==
−
:Just add a URL inside single square brackets, without any spaces or url page names. And I sort of agree we need to ease off on the creation of wiki people pages. If someone is significant in say Uncyc or Wookiepedia, but are unknown elsewhere in the wikisphere, then they should not be included here - unless there are other over-riding reasons for their inclusion. [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 21:34, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
+
What are you waiting for? He seems not to be learning his lessons and is continuing his rude behaviour. He should really be blocked - he caused problems to many users. --[[Special:Contributions/67.207.90.236|67.207.90.236]] 10:27, 11 December 2017 (PST)
 +
:The problem is that his edits are helpful as well as off-putting. This would be simpler if he were ''only'' a troll or engaged in something which is clear vandalism but as it stands, he is just intermittently obnoxious and when that spills over into an actual confrontation, it requires intervention. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 10:48, 11 December 2017 (PST)
 +
::Well, then you can warn him with a temporary block... --[[Special:Contributions/104.236.168.56|104.236.168.56]] 10:57, 11 December 2017 (PST)
 +
:::He has been blocked before. Do you have in mind some particular incident that demands blocking him now? [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 11:11, 11 December 2017 (PST)
 +
::::[http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk:Community_portal&diff=next&oldid=201243 Here] - the edit summary is an attack to Hoof Hearted ("''go ahead, make Your seconds ;-)''") --[[Special:Contributions/107.191.56.63|107.191.56.63]] 12:24, 11 December 2017 (PST)
 +
:::::This is a perfect example of him being an ass--even somewhat hostile--but I really don't think it warrants a permanent block. At some point, enough of that with nothing constructive would definitely warrant that person being blocked but I just don't think this is enough. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 15:08, 11 December 2017 (PST)
 +
::::::[http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Ray_King&curid=4230&diff=201359&oldid=201358 Here] - editing other users' talk pages and intruding into other people's business. He changed a title to a subtitle without giving a proper reason. --[[Special:Contributions/192.241.201.193|192.241.201.193]] 11:20, 14 December 2017 (PST)
 +
:::::::Dang, the way Manor just barged in and changed the formatting like that, shoving his two bytes where they weren't invited and certainly don't belong, shows we're dealing with a real Genghis Khan who doesn't mind invading everywhere and everything he possibly can. Somebody do something, the guy's out of control! If you let him keep conquering one user talk page after another like this, eventually it'll become too late to oppose him as he will have become so powerful as to be ... '''UNSTOPPABLE'''. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 14:32, 14 December 2017 (PST)
 +
::::::::If adding two '''=''' to a conversation makes me 'Genghis Khan', than maybe I should add six = next time, in order to become 'Master of the Universe' ;-) [[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 14:41, 14 December 2017 (PST)
 +
::::::::And what about [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=User:Manorainjan/sandbox&curid=43431&diff=201366&oldid=199829 this]? It is abuse and defamatory content. Accusing users of being sockpuppets. --[[Special:Contributions/138.197.192.137|138.197.192.137]] 14:39, 14 December 2017 (PST)
 +
:::::::::Manor, can't you see how intimidated people are by your behavior, to the point that they're afraid to even register an account on this wiki before participating in ban discussions concerning you? This #MeToo movement is really gaining steam; now we have not one, not two, not three, nor four, but '''FIVE''' separate IP address accusers coming forward to report your wiki-assaults. That many anons can't be lying; you must have done '''SOMETHING'''. Confess now, and clear your conscience while there's still time. Take responsibility and show contrition, and maybe there will be lenience. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 15:02, 14 December 2017 (PST)
 +
::::::::::You may be right in the assumption that those IP-edits are done by somebody who has or had an account here. But all conclusions You are drawing from there I disagree with. To discuss sockpuppetry and cowardice is not my business. I leave all this slandering to others. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 15:09, 14 December 2017 (PST)
 +
::::That's just a minor annoyance at most and somewhat helpful at best. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 16:30, 14 December 2017 (PST)
 +
:::::[http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=User:Manorainjan/sandbox&curid=43431&diff=201429&oldid=201407 I don't think Manorainjan deserves a ban. And You were all so focused in this conversation that You didn't realise that a vandal returned here with a sockpuppet. Manorainjan, with Your help, he confessed everything ;-)] --[[Special:Contributions/104.236.168.56|104.236.168.56]] 06:56, 15 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
Still 'significant' is no practical criteria. It is totally POV just like 'notable' or 'interesting'. 'Operates a wiki farm' is an objective criteria.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 21:56, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
+
==Checkuser request==
 +
I request a [[check user]] on [[User:Usa11|Usa11]], a suspect sockpuppet of HAL-9000. --[[Special:Contributions/45.76.123.109|45.76.123.109]] 11:58, 15 December 2017 (PST)
 +
:That user hasn't edited. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 17:53, 15 December 2017 (PST)
 +
::As of 27 December 2017, {{u|Usa11}} still has not made any edits.  Their [[IP address]] originates from Russia, and that is all I am prepare to divulge.  [[Special:Contributions/45.76.123.109|45.76.123.109]] – do you have any specific information which demonstrates sock activity?  Best, [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 23:28, 26 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
:[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] - what is your purpose of editing here on WikiIndex?  You seem to be constantly criticising our methods and policies (or lack of policies) here on WikiIndex!  Whilst I agree there are one or two issues which are in need of being updated; you seem to be questioning every aspect of the way WikiIndex is being operated.
+
==Fix WikiIndex's copyright footer==
−
:Or am I misunderstanding you?  I accept and respect that English is not your first language, and maybe you arn't as proficient as your mother tongue in expressing certain issues – which we all must make allowances for. [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 12:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
+
Go, and scroll down, ''right now''. You'll see this:
  
−
:: For that, if at all, You better open a separate 'discussion' in another place and shift it there because it is not at all about criteria for Wiki peoples pages [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 13:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
+
:{{int:copyright|<span class=plainlinks>[https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ <nowiki>[[:Category:Wiki Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike|Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0]]. Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners.</nowiki>]</span>}}
  
−
:Perhaps you'd like to state exactly what criteria you would like for creating new pages for wiki people. [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 12:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
+
While it does work on the copyright warning (the warning that shows up when you're editing below either "☐ Watch this page" or "☑️ Watch this page"):
  
−
:I did not yet make up my mind for a set of relevant criteria. What I', doing by now is, to parse the stream of contributions here and sort out criteria and opinions. By now on the criteria side there did not come much. Most people here had deeper and longer involvement in the [[Wikisphere]] than I had. But I'm trained so see what real criteria are. So that's the division of labour at the moment.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 13:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
+
:{{int:copyrightwarning|[[WikiIndex:Copyrights]]|[[:Category:Wiki Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike|Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0]]. Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners.}}
  
−
I say, Sweetie Belle has the right idea, insofar as something (even if unethically defamatory) is usually better than nothing. We should strive to have articles on all wiki people who are of enough interest that someone bothered to create a page about them. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:03, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
+
Wiki markup doesn't work on the footer though, thus, it results in broken markup and looks ugly. To fix this, I propose the changes to two pages and two variables I can't edit:
−
:Sweetie Belle created many pages that were defamatory, pages that gave real names and birth dates, including for one user who is, from the date, about 13 years old, and, as well, highly subjective and unsourced and unattributed opinions about people. This is not a complaint about Sweetie Belle, who was provided no guidance.
+
−
:The idea that something is better than nothing is based on an "inclusionist Wikipedian" concept. The goal expressed here treats the overriding purpose of the wiki as "articles."  On people. Which is about the most hazardous undertaking imaginable. Wikipedia has enormous difficulty with it, in spite of massive resources.
+
−
:In other current editing, what is being shown is a usage of the wiki to vent grievances about other wikis. Wikis may be founded for that, which has long been done, and it's ordinary. However, it is *not* ordinary to use WikiIndex for this. This kind of activity creates a need for maintenance and supervision. Normally, wikis allow individual activity, and clear guidelines allow users to understand what is acceptable and what is not. Ultimately, allowing WikiIndex to stray from its clear primary purpose could destroy that purpose. Over this kind of activity, it already seems we lost Sean. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 21:40, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
+
−
::'''Deletions''' For what it's worth, I've deleted some of these blanked biographies. We need to establish some criteria for inclusion, which shouldn't be identical to any on Wikipedia. One thing we definitely can't do is make hit pages or dox someone. I also don't have a beef with what Sweetie Belle is doing as such--I think she's trying to be helpful and document the Wikisphere but there has to be some kind of limitation on who is and isn't included and how we write about others. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 04:00, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:::Sweetie Belle, after all, ''asked'' the question here, and was not given clear guidance.
+
  
−
:::WikiIndex as an index of wikis has a clear mission. As a compendium of criticism of wikis, not so clear. As a collection of biographies of "wiki people," with no clear definition of that, and no biography guidelines, it's a setup for problems and conflict. What you say we "definitely can't do" was never made clear, and it was done.
+
(At the top is what I assume to be the original, and at the right is what I think would look better)
  
−
:::I blanked those pages as the first ones I looked at that seemed to have relatively serious problems. They may also have had good content, but the problem is, then, that determining what is "good content" can be quite a bit of work. When the goal is improving articles, that's normal for wikis, but is that the goal? The existence of birth dates made pages into revelations of personal information. If the person themselves reveals this with an intention of publicising it, not necessary a problem, but I don't think they were referenced. On Wikiversity, as a custodian, I'd have considered keeping what was okay and revision-deleting the rest. I'd also provide wikitext to the creator of the page on request. People hate having their work deleted, I know I do! There were many more pages created by Sweetie Belle, I haven't completed looking. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 01:31, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
+
On <code>LocalSettings.php</code>:<br/><source lang="php">
−
::::'''Blanking''' I wrote to Sweetie Belle on her talk and e-mailed her directly. If anyone requests they be undeleted or userfied or whatever else, I'll do it (or any other admin). [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 01:35, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
+
$wgRightsText = "[[:Category:Wiki Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike|Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0]]. Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners.";
−
:::::Thanks, Koavf. Starting to look around, [[Brony Denza]] was another Sweetie Belle creation. I found Brony Denza by looking at the contributions of [[User:Llwy-ar-lawr ‎]]. It is clear that conflicts at other wikis are being brought here, and gossipy articles will encourage that. Basically, is WikiIndex a site for gossip about Wikis and especially Wikipeople? Very tempting. I could write volumes about, say Wikipedia, ArbCom shenanigans, administrators who blatantly violate policy and nothing is done, users who do the same and who are protected because they are doing the dirty work for certain administrators, and on and on. With diffs, evidence, yatta yatta yatta. I won't, because I don't think WikiIndex is the place for that -- if, indeed, it belongs anywhere. I generally write about WMF wikis on WMF wikis, as on [[Wikimedia Meta-Wiki]] and [[Wikiversity]], hopefully appropriately. If I were completely banned, I'd write on my own wiki, not inflict the drama on users here. I'm tagging pages for deletion.... --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 01:55, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
+
$wgRightsText = "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License";
 +
</source>
  
−
'''Gossip''' One nice thing about this venue versus a WMF wiki is that you can have commentary and asides but we should probably strive for some fairness or parity. If a wiki is awful, it's not necessarily a problem to say that but making an entry only for the purpose of denigrating it seems a little much. And especially so when making one for a wiki user. There's a point where it becomes too much but I'm definitely interested in hearing what others think about appropriate and inappropriate commentary... Thoughts, anyone? [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 06:01, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
+
(To the left is the original, to the right is what the code I'd like to be put on the pages)
−
:We can either look at those pages as partly-built, poorly-constructed houses that need to be fixed and completed, or as houses that need to be condemned and demolished to make way for an entirely new house. Usually there's something that can be salvaged, even if it's just a substub.
+
  
−
:Do we want to have some kind of BLP policy that says we shouldn't say negative stuff about users? Even Wikipedia says it's okay to tell the facts, as long as the page is balanced and the facts are verifiable. I just don't think poorly-written BLPs matter nearly as much as people think; even Seigenthaler didn't suffer any harm, that we know of, from his inaccurate Wikipedia bio, other that his own psychological distress once he stumbled upon it. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 23:40, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
+
{|class=wikitable style="margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; width:95%"
−
 
+
−
::The issue that is often not considered is efficiency, and maintainability. Wikipedia has a mission, and that mission aims for a high level of completeness, within certain standards of neutrality and verifiability. Wikipedia has a huge user base, with many hundreds of active administrators, and still has massive problems with reliability. Content may violate policies for years before being noticed. WikiIndex has a far simpler mission, in concept. However, the WikiIndex mission was never carefully defined, such that different users have used the wiki differently. Sweetie Belle came here and began adding lots of "information," which included personal data ("doxxing") and gossip and opinion. Again, ''this is not a criticism of Sweetie Belle.'' Leucosticte added tons of personal material about himself, his wife, their plans, their drama, etc. How much of this was appropriate for WikiIndex? Koavf has deleted some of the pages on his wikis. What was the basis for that?
+
−
::There are no standards, so there is no basis either way, and that is a formula for senseless dispute and waste of time. This is, in my view, one of the biggest problems with wikis, as the reality of wiki process has become clear over the years. Without some mechanism for stop-loss, maintaining wikis can become a massive waste of time. I started looking at Sweetie Belle's work, and realized very quickly that this was a huge can of worms. I could make up my own standards, Leucosticte can make up his, and they all could be radically different.
+
−
::Small example. [[Darthipedia]] has a section titled "Current administration." It had [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Darthipedia&oldid=186530 10 persons listed]. However, there are, shall we say, some discrepancies. Current bureaucrats: http://darthipedia.com/w/index.php?title=Special%3AListUsers&username=&group=bureaucrat. Right now, there are two. Gonk is not a bureaucrat, and Gonk has not edited the wiki since [http://darthipedia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Gonk 2009]. But the account was created in 2011, like most of  the accounts, perhaps in a move away from Wikia. Gonk, in fact, has no permissions at all (not even "User.") Darthipedia provides false information in their own compiled lists, it's part of the game. So does WikiIndex repeat the false information?
+
−
::I edited the index page to show links to the Special pages displaying user rights. Otherwise there is maintenance to be done. And for every wiki there can be decisions like this. What information is to be on a WikiIndex page? And how is all this to be maintained? If pages are so designed, there will be little to maintain. Or if pages are full of the latest news, they can become obsolete quickly.
+
−
::What may have been missed is that there is a place to talk about the topic of a page. On Wikipedia, Talk pages are restricted to development or decision-making about *content*. However, if people want to gossip about a site, if it is to be done on WikiIndex, it could be done on the talk page, and *signed*. And then there would be simple behavioral guidelines, but, generally, one could place an opinion there that a wiki sucks, or that the administration is fascist, or whatever. And WikiIndex can also decide if it wants to allow anonymous criticism like that. My recommendation is not. It leads to a complete lack of responsibility.
+
−
::My suggestion would be to develop standards for wiki listings, common standards. If users create listings following those standards, they should be able to count on their work not being wasted. Sweetie Belle put a lot of work into compiling birth dates, if I assume she did not just make them up. Who knows, though? In any case, I dislike that anyone put so much work into pages that are then whacked because they are privacy violations. If there is policy, then, okay, the user violates a clear policy, easy to find, it's fair that their work is lost.
+
−
::If someone really wants to write a screed on Bad Administration somewhere, it can be written in their user space here -- as long as policy permits it. That could be referenced from the Talk page for the wiki involved. Within the WMF, we allow a great deal in user space on Wikiversity, even studies of possibly problematic administrative practices. As long as these don't become personal attacks, they are permitted. So far, anyway!
+
−
::Of course, WikiIndex can continue as it has, a typical wiki, consuming far more labor than needed for the task, burning out administrators and users, with periodic flame wars and drama, and then long periods where Anything Goes, until someone notices. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 04:55, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:::"if pages are full of the latest news, they can become obsolete quickly." That's why it can be good to preface stuff with "As of 2014..." Talk pages are usually for discussion of proposed improvements to the article, not general discussion of the article's subject. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 05:28, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:::Why even bother with "as of 2014"? Why not show the links to up-to-date lists? Set and forget. What Leucosticte says is "usually" so is so for Wikipedia, where the article is the whole purpose of the wiki and article subject discussion is fundamentally off-topic. What actually happens in article-focused wikis is that the article is unattributed and thus is presented as "fact." Sure, you can look at history, but is the editor presenting neutral information or their own opinion? On Wikipedia, then, policy requires verifiability, and having a large user base, the wiki can move toward verified information. Those are not WikiIndex conditions.
+
−
:::What Wikiversity has demonstrated and continues to demonstrate is that it is possible for a wiki to actually study and discuss topics, neutrally. This is largely my design, though following general ideas found in Wikiversity from its foundation. As a result of procedures we have developed, conflict is very low on Wikiversity, for such an active wiki covering a very wide range of topics.
+
−
:::Most conflict that remains is personality-based, we had some drama this year from ... Leucosticte and a rogue sysop. We dropped the sysop, and Leucosticte went elsewhere, finding that the community resisted hosting extremely hot topics -- the kind that people go ballistic over, readily, as on RationalWiki, which became seriously emotional over Leucosticte. ''He could have created educational resources on his favorite topics,'' but the community, mostly me and the most active sysop -- required ethical guidelines be in place first. So, here on WikiIndex, it is possible to create "discussions of wikis," and guidelines can be developed. The discussion should not be in top-level mainspace, which should be reserved for *wiki information,* and, I'm suggesting more standardization of what WikiIndex presents there. Subpages and Talk pages and Talk subpages can be used for other material.
+
−
:::Much of the original wiki community loves drama. Besides the characters who love to fight, there is another contingent that can sit back and judge them, while, all the time, maintaining structures that create conflict. As wiki people mature, they leave. It's a setup. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 14:03, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
===Who cares what rules Wikipedia supposedly follows?===
+
−
Please remember, we are NOT [[:Category:Wikipedia|Wikipedia]], and we do NOT have to follow or comply with their policies.  In essance, that means we have NO requirement for verifiability, nor any of the other restrictive policies which Wikipedia is supposedly complying with.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 12:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
:I did not refer to Wikipedia here. When it is told one (the one who did ;-) should not make 'potentially libellous edits' on Wiki peoples pages, that is also not a Wikipedia derived policy but common sense. And so is if I adhere to the need of real criteria. We do not need real criteria in order to follow the example of Wikipedia. We need that in order to see this discussion trough and have useful results. Even if Wikipedia would be non existent, we still would need real criteria. For any decision that should lead to progress You need real criteria. That is called science. The other thing is called babble. Does anybody here have a wikipediaphobie? Are things bad as soon as they smell like Wikipedia? Is being like on Wikipedia an valid argument against anything here? should useful or needed things be avoided because it looks like on Wikipedia? I hope we got not Wikipedia-traumatised People here who's condition would be aggravated by the introduction of any Wikipedia like aspect to WikiIndex. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) ;-)
+
−
 
+
−
::You are correct in that you didn't refer directly to Wikipedia - and I apologise to you for making such a direct statment.  However, I believe you did refer to verifiabilty – which ''is'' one of their 'core' principles, and I assumed (wrongly in this instance) you were referring to Wikipedia by using them as guidance on their verifiability policy.
+
−
::I also apologise if the tone of my previous reply was a little harsh.  You just seem to be bombarding us all with a plethora of policy discussions, and I personally feel a little overwhealmed by your requests.  I <u>do</u> agree with most of your concerns regading wiki people, and I also agree with some of your other concerns.  However, can I please ask you to respect that WikiIndex folks have [[RealLives]], and as someone (can't remember who) pertinently coined – [[WikiIsSlow]] – so we often fail to achieve resolutions as swiftly as is desired.
+
−
::Might I suggest that you raise just one or two policy concerns for us to deal with at a time, and put any other concerns on your 'back burner' – ideally on your own ToDo page at [[User:Manorainjan/ToDo]].  You could then prioritise them, and also try to research any previous discussions we might have had.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 17:52, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
# You may suggest whatever You like. So did I.
+
−
# I wasn't asking You to create me a [[:Category:ToDo lists|ToDoList.]] and I do not want any. But I take it as a friendly hint on how to create sub-pages.
+
−
# Where those lists are leading to one can see [[User:Jayvdb|here]], [[User:Nightingale/WorkInProgress|here]] and [[User:Peu/todo|here]].
+
−
# The discussion we just finished, about funny logo-links, resulted from my work on another global [[Special:UncategorizedFiles|'ToDoList']] which contained a heap of nearly 3.000 entries which I could not work on properly because of the collateral damage of queer* linking. *An Idea originally welcomed by Ray.
+
−
# I rigorously dismiss any talk about so called RealLife, because there is only one life and it is always real. And if You ever dream Your live away, than You really did it. And we are all real people except the bots. And I f You didn't get the time, than You will simply not show up here. Did I call Your home and asked You why You din't sit at Your pc and do WikiIndexWork?
+
−
# "Don't kill the messenger!" It wasn't me who ran the SeanBot to break the logoLinks. It wasn't me who forgot the Category on 3.000 files. I was not inventing alternate templates for Wiki pages and continuously using them which creates the sense of urgency in certain discussion. When I saw, that the as well silly [[:template:inactive]] caused the WikiLogo files to appear abandoned I immediately stopped pasting delete templates on them. (and opened the needed discussion ;-)
+
−
# Let's be straight and place global tasks on a global ToDoList. I keep my little personal tasks to myself.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 18:58, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
+
−
## If you think the Inactive Template is silly, make something that does the same thing (unlink all categories) and keeps the logo. And, ok, so do the ToDoList. :-) ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
−
 
+
−
I agree with Sean here (see [[Meatball:ForestFire]]). [[MarkDilley]]
+
−
 
+
−
: We do not have a forest fire here. What we got is an ugly heap of undone stuff. If anything burns, than the urgency to finally do something about it. Where are the statistics about the real use of this Wiki? Where can we see if we dream away or really others than SPAMers are visiting here and make use of it? Is there a road map, targets, a strategy? There lots of Wikis out there which are mere dreams of a Wiki, like 90% of the [http://meta.orain.org/wiki/Special:SiteMatrix list of 157 Wikis on Orian]. Are we the Wiki of Wikis or the dream of dreams?  [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]])
+
−
 
+
−
How does "It wasn't me who forgot the Category on 3.000 files" hurt this project?  We, the community of WikiIndex are just as important as the "product" of WikiIndex.  I appreciate all work done here and note that we have been plodding along for 8.5 years - I look forward to plodding along for another 8.5 years while keeping the community as equal as the "product" - that is where I am a wikipediaphobe. Best, [[MarkDilley]]
+
−
=== email functionality ===
+
−
All chat about e-mail now collected here -> [[Help talk:E-mail]]
+
−
 
+
−
== Endless discussions // useful work ==
+
−
=== template inactive ===
+
−
: That discussion does not speak clearly to a decision being made to use or not use this template. ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
−
 
+
−
:: I know that. That discussion would prompt any sensible person not to use this template until end of discussion, which is OK for me, because here no discussion ever ends in a final decision unless it is something petty like renaming a file or mending a template. When was the last major taken? 2006? [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 18:24, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
We mostly do work here.  Policies and endless discussion are usually sporadic.  ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
−
 
+
−
Oh, yeah! Lets make this more long winded ;-) Discussion is also work, unless only for argumentations sake, not completed and hanging in the air for years. Even then it is work, only without result. Naturally it is easier to do little edits here and there and consider that as work with results rather than coming to a conclusion in a debate since the later requires more staying power. At which page shall we start a discussion about the use of discussions? Who was that guy who frequently admonishes on other peoples talk pages that he was not included in any discussion? [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 20:34, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
=== Criteria for Wiki People pages ===
+
−
Lets not confuse the topic. ... If one mixes or shifts topics in a discussion, it comes to 'endless' discussions and no results for any of the raised topics. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 22:10, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
Let's not dictate what I choose to talk about. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 21:15, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
I do not intent to dictate whatever. I do not even aspire for sysop status. So, dictation would be quite impossible from my position. What I wrote was not, that You should choose certain topic to talk or choose not to talk about certain topic. I did not say sat. I said not to confuse topics. Sweetie choose to open the topic 'Criteria for Wiki People pages' and if anybody chooses to take part in that it is only common sense to speak to the chosen topic. I do not dictate that, but I expect that people stay with the topic. And what I wrote was an explanation of the consequences it has if one mixes other topics in and confuses them. If You speak at topic A and support Your view about topic B with an argument valid for topic C, what will come out of that? I referred to 'endless' discussions on account of a remark from [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Msnhinet8&diff=prev&oldid=180664 Mark] which alerted me, that discussions here might have the tendency not to conclude in a useful result and therefore, because of lack of the fruit of work, may look like no work. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 23:20, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
==Moderator==
+
−
Can anybody make a help page that tells what in Wiki-terms a [[Moderator]] is?[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 00:57, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:A moderator is not a default [[:Category:MediaWiki|MediaWiki]] usergroup.  It ''might'' be created on a few MW installations which like to modify core details such as usergroup names (I guess Uncyc are the obvious in that regard).  'Moderator' is more commonly used on internet forums, and might be found on those wiki which are attached to internet forums.  So, in reality, this isn't a wide-spread wiki term.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 21:29, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
::They use it on RationalWiki. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:ListGroupRights [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 01:36, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:::Looks like it's a user group with some [[bureaucrat]] + and some [[oversight]] ability. RationalWiki have no bureaucrats for some reason. [http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:ListUsers/bureaucrat] --[[YiFei]] | <small>[[User talk:Zhuyifei1999|talk]]</small> 03:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
==auto-stats?==
+
−
Can anybody tell me how this works?  <nowiki>{{Size
+
−
|pages = {{JurisPedia/NumberOfArticles|en}} .... </nowiki>
+
−
:It's not auto. Someone [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Template:JurisPedia/NumberOfArticles&action=history invented] it. --[[YiFei]] | <small>[[User talk:Zhuyifei1999|talk]]</small> 04:17, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
::[[YiFei]] is correct, it is an [[IP editor]] from Germany who has specific interests in a couple of multilingual wiki projects (one other being [[WikiMANNia]]), and created a couple of [[:Category:Shortcut templates|shortcut templates]] which would enable all related articles to be updated on a monthly (or-so) basis from editing just two templates.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 21:40, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
Thanks, in the meantime I understood what it was about. --[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) {{done}}
+
−
 
+
−
== Style // Talents ==
+
−
 
+
−
===Style===
+
−
Who's the man (or woman ;-) here when it comes to good English style? It's not me ;-) Anybody who can check my latest [[Wikisphere|effusion]]?
+
−
 
+
−
 
+
−
===confusion===
+
−
:<cough> . . . was that me????  :?  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 21:41, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
I would very much appreciate if people would NOT use the undefined place-holder 'that' in their answers. 'That' more often than not causes confusion and require repeated queries. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 21:50, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:Huh - now I ''am'' confused.  It's late, I'm tired . . . I'm off to bed - nighty-night. :-zzzz  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 22:19, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
OK, I'l split that for clarity.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]])
+
−
 
+
−
===Talents===
+
−
I'm missing some table or so where people write their topic of interest, permissions or talent so that we can know to whom to turn in a case we can't do it ourself. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 14:10, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
==Alternative [[:Category:Infobox templates|infoboxes]]==
+
−
I took it for granted that all wikis on this index should use the same infobox, for consistency's sake. However, I see that [[User:Sweetie Belle]] has created an alternative one — [[Template:Wiki infobox‎]].
+
−
 
+
−
In addition to some different stylistic choices, it includes a parameter for showing the Admins of the wiki. However, it does not have all of the parameters of the original.
+
−
 
+
−
While I'm not opposed to adding the Admins parameter or changing the look, or for that matter having an alternative infobox (though that could be problematic to manage), I do feel strongly that we should not omit the other information which is part of [[Template:Wiki]].
+
−
 
+
−
Perhaps it is time to set a standard? --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 19:28, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
* I think (I do not feel about that) that only one template should be used not many. And this one Template will evolve.
+
−
* If anybody wants to make functional changes to this core tool of Wikiindex it should be discussed first.
+
−
* Wikipages are not [[sandbox]]es. So experiments on Wikipages should not be made. But maybe we can declare ONE specific Wiki to be an experimental case (create one more silly Wiki on Wikia? Who cares?) and try new templates with this one.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 19:40, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
::One single infobox is sufficient. Adding more than that makes things look messy and unorganized. If a consensus is reached that further data should be added to the main template, that's fine. Creating new ones is not. [[User:TeraS|TeraS]] ([[User talk:TeraS|talk]]) 19:45, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
So far, I believe the new infobox template is only in place at [[SpongeBob Fan Wiki]]. Also, I'd like to add that, as suggested, [[Template:Wiki]] has evolved over time. And one would hope that it continues to evolve. So, perhaps the goals of the new infobox can be achieved by modifying the existing template (preferably by experimenting in a sandbox first.) --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 19:59, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
: I would support modifying the existing template to meet new needs as opposed to creating something entirely new if possible. [[User:Arcane|Arcane]] ([[User talk:Arcane|talk]]) 20:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
: I like the stylistic changes.  Think experimenting with those on the original template is the path forward.  I think WikiPages are fine places to experiment with, it is wiki and [[revert]]ing is easy. :-) ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
−
:: Experimenting with 'live' templates (templates which are widely used by the vast majority of pages on a wiki) is a very BAD idea.  And whilst the revert function may work OK with edits done on article pages on a standard [[:Category:MediaWiki|MediaWiki]] install, it can NOT 'undo' incorrect edits to a template when [[:Category:Semantic MediaWiki|Semantic MediaWiki]] is also used!<br>As others have stated, copy the content of the template and paste it into a sandbox (either a sub-page of your own userspace or of the actual template), do your test edits on that, then apply that sandboxed test template to an existing article entry - but use only the 'Show preview' function - and do NOT save the edit.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 22:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:: Please link me to information that would talk about why it is a bad idea.  I would like to understand why the semantic nature of the wiki makes it less wiki like. Best, [[MarkDilley]]
+
−
 
+
−
: IMO Too many styles look a bit messy :( & Testing => [[Template:Wiki/sandbox]] [[Template:Wiki/testcases]] so they won't just break most of our pages with a single edit. --[[YiFei]] | <small>[[User talk:Zhuyifei1999|talk]]</small> 04:09, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
 
+
−
: The [[Template:Wiki]] can easily be modified, and there are already some optional attributes in it. ... So I suggest to copy the template contents first into a mew template and modify this copy. Then test it with some real wiki pages (using the preview function). If the changes evaluate positively, they can be applied to the original template (then the copy should be deleted). --[[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] | <small>[[User talk:Peu|talk]]</small> 05:54, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
::Wolf, I agree that the template can be easily modified - but one should exercise real caution.  'Incorrect' edits (irrespective of wether they are in 'good faith' or otherwise) can cause mayhem with Semantic Data, especially Semantic Properties.  So in reality, any template which calls on Semantic Data/Properties should not be edited by anyone unless they have some reasonable level of proficiency of the cause and effect of modifying templates using Semantic functions.  Hope you are well, and I miss your input here!  Warmest regards  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 22:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
If Hoof or Mark will briefly unprotect Template:Wiki so I can make some adjustments to it, then I'm okay with this. [[User:Sweetie Belle|Sweetie Belle]] ([[User talk:Sweetie Belle|talk]]) 21:37, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:Use a sandbox, and do NOT modify any Semantic Data fields, unless you are sure of your actions on said Semantic functions. :)  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 22:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
==Server load==
+
−
[[Template:Wiki]] '''Just a technical hint:''' any change to this template will appear slowly, because so many wiki pages have to be rendered again. --[[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] | <small>[[User talk:Peu|talk]]</small> 05:54, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
:Why would a change in the template appear slowly? AFAIK any page called will cause a call to all templates used in that page and be rendered accordingly. So, if You modify a template, all pages called after saving the modification will show the new design. So, how often the change will show depends on how many pages will be called thereafter. Which brings me to the question of statistics about page calls here?? I mean calls within a given time frame. That would show how many visitors would get to see strange pages if the main template would be experimented on.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 09:41, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
::Ok, maybe I'm not up-to-date concerning the running [[Special:Version|Version]]. I only remember a significantly increased server load after template edits (some years ago). Now also semantic MediaWiki extensions are in use... --[[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] | <small>[[User talk:Peu|talk]]</small> 12:48, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
I would not suspect that this is a question of version. It is a principal thing, how it works.
+
−
# First of all there might be not really a causal connection between a change in that template and an increase in server load around that time. Temporal coincidence is at best an arbitrary indication not a prove of causal relationship.
+
−
# Secondly, in case of a change of the template, it will not affect the work of rendering any page unless a page is called by a user. And it will sure not cause the machine to 'update' all 20.000 Wiki pages and 'render' them right away.
+
−
# A BOT may cause such an rise in workload, because if any bot is sent to change a little thing on all Wiki pages, that may take some time and indeed affect the content on all pages. That would be executed straight after the invocation of the BOT which would run until done with the last page.
+
−
# Another thing that may be executed right away and take load would be the rebuild of an index or the formation of a new one. I suppose that would rather be caused by the creation of a category. But for a real increase in workload the category markers would have to be many. So, if first a BOT (on would not have time and patience to to that by hand) would go through all Wiki pages and turn some criteria into category markers and thereafter that category would be created, those both runs would probably be seen as increased server load for a noticeable time.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 23:58, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
:My opinion re any change to [[template:Wiki]] will not affect any server loading, as changes in rendered displays will only be called upon for individual aricle pages as they are loaded (or reloaded, edited, previewed, etc).  However, should any Semantic properties be altered, then this ''will'' have an instant effect on server loading.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 22:14, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
::Then that's a bug :( It should go through the job queue and *slowly* refreshing unless there's some *giant* backend like wmf. --[[YiFei]] | <small>[[User talk:Zhuyifei1999|talk]]</small> 03:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
== Discussion with results AKA work ;-) ==
+
−
 
+
−
I would appreciate if decision finding would go on in a far more structured way here than it does.
+
−
What I'm missing is:
+
−
* A category for pages about or discussions, the process of decision finding and the results.
+
−
* A way to inform interested users (AKA people ;-) about the start of a discussion,
+
−
* about the start of voting
+
−
* and about the result of voting.
+
−
* Pages where results are documented so that it is really clear what the current policy is and not just "I remember a discussion years ago ..."
+
−
 
+
−
Suggestions? [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 11:30, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
: I had always envisioned the [[CommunityPortal]] to be a place for notification.  I am not a fan of voting, more of a community consensus person on big decisions.  And I am not a fan of policy creep.  Look forward to where this goes. ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
+
−
 
+
−
Looks like You see consensus and voting as opposites. But I see avoiding the voting as means of never arriving at a consensus and the main cause of 'endless' discussions. there are many ways to vote. there are was to manipulate votes and to manufacture fake consensus. To vote and decide does not mean to cut it in stone for eternity. It means to get clarity for now.
+
−
 
+
−
Describe as precise as possible how You envision that consensus are reached! It is not enough to wish it. One has to know how to create it step by step. As for the [[CommunityPortal]] to be useful I see that the last [[WikiIndex:Completed Tasks]] was on 19 February 2006. That tells me very clearly that it does not work. An if I see what task was competed, than I say: Mayhem. And where is the documentation of what that task was and why it was decided to do it? It may be within the Gordian Knot of talk page in the archives somewhere, but not documented in any useful manner than one can build upon it. That's no way to do 'work'.
+
−
 
+
−
The start of [[CommunityPortal]] goes like this at the moment:
+
−
 
+
−
28 July 2014
+
−
From RayKing: Ben shut off that extension because it was somehow being abused
+
−
and we were seeing problems on ICANNWiki which shares the same server
+
−
(these are the only 2 sites on this server).
+
−
I'm cc'ing Jonah (ICANNWiki) and Ben now,
+
−
having just read the thread in your e-mail to see if there's a resolution to both issues. ~~ MarkDilley
+
−
 
+
−
And that puts me off to read any further or think this portal is good for anything. Looks totally like a chunk of private communication between two insiders. That does not inform or involve. Expressions like 'that extension' on a top page? Not explaining anything, only causing ???!. And it sits there since month. No tidying with brackets around ICANNWiki or 'that'. I'm getting extra brackets on my own talk page uninvited but nobody cares for one of the front pages? there You can see the real importance of this portal page for <b>all</b> people of this community, because not even You cared since month.
+
−
 
+
−
When I say notify, than I mean a system that actively sends a ping to all concerned and not a page that obviously nobody reads and does not change for month.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 13:37, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
== About ==
+
−
 
+
−
What about redirecting [[WikiIndex:About]] to [[WikiIndex]]?
+
−
* Work only on one page rather than two
+
−
* Freeze the about page and have one top level page more protected against SPAM.
+
−
* Have our 'about' in exactly the way we would like other Wikis have them, so that we could easyly copy to their Wiki page here. ;-)
+
−
[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 11:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:To protect against spam, semi-protection would probably suffice. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 16:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
== Blockage of the user Manorainjan ==
+
−
Hello, I am creating this section to discuss the (if not just from my perspective) somewhat controversial blockage of WikiIndex user Manorainjan.
+
−
 
+
−
Although I believe he can be nice sometimes, Manor has also proven to be a bit "fixated" on what ''he'' wants specifically, even going so far as to argue with or insult admins, constantly posting messages on their talk pages even after they're reverted.
+
−
 
+
−
I'm leaning to support his ban, but could one of you (preferably Hoof) tell me what led to Manor's ban in the first place, please? :) [[User:Sweetie Belle|Sweetie Belle]] ([[User talk:Sweetie Belle|talk]]) 15:01, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:Thank you for the well-reasoned and level-headed question on this issue.  Now that someone has asked me nicely, I shall do my best in explaining why I banned [[User:Manorainjan]] – and there are many reasons!  I'll hopefully give a detailed answer tomorrow when I have more time and less distractions. :)  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 21:52, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:: I'm also interested in a detailed explanation. --[[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] | <small>[[User talk:Peu|talk]]</small> 09:31, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
+
−
:Oh, is he actually banned (not just blocked)? It seems like the behavior he got blocked for mostly consisted of intellectual property violations (which might have been kinda controversial, since they related to a copylefted image, right?), some edit warring, and having an abrasive, confrontational, even sometimes accusatory style of interaction. However, he made some good points and did some good work too. Also, as a general principle, I wouldn't want to see a user banned for more than six months, since people can change. [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Standard_offer Here] are some arguments with regard to that.
+
−
 
+
−
:Can he be given an opportunity to defend himself in this thread? If he behaves badly in how he defends himself, that will merely add more fuel to the fire of his banning, so I don't think we have much to worry about with regard to that. It seems fair to let someone rebut his accusers before he gets jettisoned from the project. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 15:20, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
+
−
 
+
−
This I imported from my TalkPage:
+
−
{| class="wikitable"
+
−
|
+
−
== WARNING over your conduct here on WikiIndex ==
+
−
 
+
−
Please take this message very seriously:
+
−
#Do NOT post malicious messages on mine or others [[user talk]] pages.
+
−
#Do NOT repeatedly [[revert]] other peoples' edits - that is called an [[edit war]], and is highly disruptive to the WikiIndex community.
+
−
#Do NOT <u>demand</u> that other pages (which have been on here for over eight years) are deleted.
+
−
#Do NOT question actions of the actions of either the sites' [[administrator]]s, [[bureaucrat]]s, or even other long-standing community members; with the aloof attitude that you are somehow some higher authority, and the expectation that you have an absolute right to be answered.
+
−
#Do NOT question the authority or motives of administrators or crats.
+
−
#Do NOT think you have the authority to seek out current or former members on social media sites, asking them if they want to keep their pages, or have them deleted.
+
−
 
+
−
I don't give second warnings - I will block any account and/or [[IP address]] which causes disruption to WikiIndex.
+
−
 
+
−
You clearly have a lot of time and energy to give, and it would be appreciated by all if you were to use your time here on WikiIndex in a constructive, harmonious and respectful manner; respecting its traditions, and if you wish, help mold its' future by gentle evolution - rather than your seemingly agressive and forceful attempts of 'revolution'.  By all means, if you are unsure of something, please <u>ask</u> (giving full detail of your concerns, with supporting examples where necessary), and we will try to answer your questions.  But you seem to 'demand' answers - on your terms, and you have irritated more than just myself.  If others wish to delete your comments from their own personal talk pages, then let it be.
+
−
 
+
−
In light of the above comments, I hope that you can continue your efforts here, and become an established and valued member of WikiIndex, and I reaffirm my original welcome of 'wiki friendship'.  If you are unsure of your motives, or unsure of your ability to integrate harmoniously within our community - then you might like to consider if WikiIndex for you.  Warmest regards. :)  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 22:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
+
 
|-
 
|-
−
|  
+
!colspan=2|[[MediaWiki:Copyright]]
−
== You are not blocked this time ==
+
|-
−
 
+
|style=width:50%|<code><nowiki>{{SITENAME}}'s content is available under $1.</nowiki></code>
−
...I hope. Please be respectful to the community, refrain personal attacks on them, concentrate on being constructive. Thanks! --[[Wolf Peuker|Wolf]] | <small>[[User talk:Peu|talk]]</small> 07:46, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
+
|style=width:50%|<code><nowiki>{{SITENAME}}'s content is available under the $1. Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners.</nowiki></code>
−
 
+
|-
−
:That sounds like I did attack others personally. Can You give an example of when and whom and how and why it looks like a personal attack in Your eyes? [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 09:49, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
+
!colspan=2|[[MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning]]
 +
|-
 +
|style=width:50%|<code><nowiki>All contributions to {{SITENAME}} are considered to be released under the $2 (see $1 for details).  Anything you write here may be changed by others, and redistributed.  You are promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. '''Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!'''{{clear}}<big>'''This is [[WikiIndex:About#What WikiIndex is not|not]] a free [[wiki]] hosting site – this is an [[:Category:All|index]] of [[WhatIsWiki|wiki]], [[:Category:Wiki People|wiki people]], [[:Category:Wiki Engine|wiki software]], [[:Category:WikiFarm|wiki farms]] and [[:Category:WikiIdea|wiki ideas]].<br> Contributions outside of that scope will be treated as test edits and be [[WikiIndex:Deleting pages|removed]].'''</big></nowiki></code>
 +
|style=width:50%|<code><nowiki>All contributions to {{SITENAME}} are considered to be released under the $2 (see $1 for details). Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners.  Anything you write here may be changed by others, and redistributed. You are promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.  '''Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!'''{{clear}}<big>'''This is [[WikiIndex:About#What WikiIndex is not|not]] a free [[wiki]] hosting site – this is an [[:Category:All|index]] of [[WhatIsWiki|wiki]], [[:Category:Wiki People|wiki people]], [[:Category:Wiki Engine|wiki software]], [[:Category:WikiFarm|wiki farms]] and [[:Category:WikiIdea|wiki ideas]].<br> Contributions outside of that scope will be treated as test edits and be [[WikiIndex:Deleting pages|removed]].'''</big></nowiki></code>
 
|}
 
|}
−
--[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 01:06, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
== Cleaning up the User list ==
 
−
 
−
Now, after solving the email-verification problem, I think the next logical step is, to clean up the users list. I assume, that many users-to-be were waiting endlessly for the confirmation mail of the account verification. And since nothing happened, they might have given up or simply forgot about the requested account. So there will be unused accounts with emails attached to them, but the address was never verified.
 
−
 
−
When cleaning up the user list in search for accounts that can be activated - meaning wiki people to be activated to take part here - there will be several little obstacles. The email address supplied may turn out to
 
−
* be false
 
−
* wrong typing
 
−
* outdated
 
−
 
−
So, bounce mails and other returns are to be expected for an unknown number of reasons. Where would such mails end up? All in [[MarkDilley]]s personal mailbox? That does not sound reasonable to me. I suggest to configure it in such a way, that a number of people (and Mark, if he wishes) can tend on the returns.
 
−
 
−
'''How to implement that?''' I'm thinking about a construct like the Yahoo!Groups. If the server configuration can be made to '''forward''' the returns to a specific Yahoo!Group '''and''' this servers address is member of the Yahoo!Group, than everybody who is registered on that Y!Group can go through the mails in the archive of the Y!Group. In that way the work could be shared and the average response time could be below one day.
 
−
 
−
I'm expecting Your suggestions. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 00:20, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
:I don't agree with above. If there is an account a person own (and not blocked), whether or not the account is verified by email doesn't matter. Requesting account is a different matter; not yet created accounts should not be in the user list. And yes, a lot of those are one-edit spamming accounts, but I see no benefit to clean up the users list.
 
−
 
−
:Why would there be return emails? Verification emails have nothing that needs to be replied. (In fact, IMO the sender should be a no reply address.) Even if there is a need for a construct, I don't trust third-party providers like Yahoo!Groups (one reason is that they keep getting blocked by GFW). It would be better is there is a mailing list to sort out the return mails. --[[YiFei]] | <small>[[User talk:Zhuyifei1999|talk]]</small> 08:37, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
'''On why would there be returns'''
 
−
* The address supplied could be wrong for an unknown number of incidental and accidental reasons. In a crucial process like 'account creation' or 'email verification' it would be rather reckless to ignore the returns. Those returns would most likely not be send by the account requester but by the mail host where the submitted email address is seemingly hosted. If our own mail server configuration would have been not that much messed up, that the returns - which where '''[[wp:Bounce message|bounce messages]]''' - got lost together with the verification request mails, than we would not have taken several month on trying to solve the problem and several years for trying to ignore the problem (where, in the last case I exclude me from the we!). Only if we think that new accounts are a drag, we should ignore the bounce mails.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 10:31, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
: Even if we actually get those bounce mails, what can we do about it? Only the backend people have access to change other's emails and passwords. --[[YiFei]] | <small>[[User talk:Zhuyifei1999|talk]]</small> 04:57, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
Whoever has the capacity to do whatever about it is not my main question. Bounce mails are not there in order to be ignored but in order to act upon. Ignoring them is simply no feasible option. And to dump them all in Marks inbox seems also not to be ideal. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 10:57, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
== Discussion about Nathania/Nathan Larson/[[User:Leucosticte]] ==
 
−
 
−
'''Spamming and content''' I have spoken off-wiki with one or two editors about the content he has posted here. It almost all involves self-promotion and includes links to and information about potentially illegal and dangerous information (discussion of child pornography, suicide methods, and personally identifying information of children). I don't feel comfortable with this being on this wiki. As much as I value discussing the entire wikisphere, I don't want this to become a haven for his promotion of this material. The fact that we've allowed this is [http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/WikiIndex already noted] on other sites and I don't want our reputation here to be dominated by this user's fly-by-night personal wikis about potentially illegal and dangerous topics. Admins and bureaucrats can take a look at the deleted material from my log. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 06:01, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
:As can be seen here [[WikiIndex:ServerMove]] a backup of our wiki is been made at the 14.11-2014. Now the question arised, if any further work on this wiki or any discussion would be part of the new incarnation of this wiki or only that which is already in the backup. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 11:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
Koavf's actions/deletions seem appropriate to me. -[[User:Jason|Jason]] ([[User talk:Jason|talk]]) 17:02, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
:We are still missing valid policy for deletions. But as far as I know, deletions should be requested by one and done by another user. Exceptions would be urgent cases. None of these case can be said to be urgent, because none of there entries where new. Also, repeating myself: We are in process of movement. It is the higher priority. There is no space for the discussion about those wikis right now. That would certainly be not any short discussion! It has time until the move is completed. And, repeating myself again: We do no even know if what we do here will be in the new incarnation or only that what was here before the backup.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 17:59, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
With regard to self-promotion, aren't wiki owners invited to create pages about their sites? Since when was that considered spamming? In the case of a bliki, the wiki will inevitably be about the owner's own life, opinions, etc. because that is the point of a bliki.
 
−
 
−
"discussion of child pornography, suicide methods" is not illegal. There was no "personally identifying information of children"; at one time, there was some info on some teenagers, perhaps (although nothing beyond what you might see in a newspaper article), but not children. The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act only protects minors under 13.
 
−
 
−
RationalWiki criticizes any wiki that doesn't share its left-wing bias. Most of those wikis simply ignore them and carry on with their business. It's a snark site, and I don't think they affect any wiki's reputation, including this one, all that much.
 
−
 
−
We already have a wiki of wikis that discriminates against the smaller, less notable wikis. It's called Wikipedia. WikiIndex was supposed to be an all-inclusive wiki of wikis, the only one on the Internet.
 
−
 
−
There doesn't seem to be any policy calling for the deletion of pages on wikis based on the content of the wikis, and this sort of action seems unprecedented here. The link to the log is [[Special:Logs/delete]]; I suggest undeletion. Also, it seems like bad practice to delete pages without listing a deletion reason in the log summary. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 17:51, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
:I have to second Birdy in his last argument. Why to complain about self-promotion and vanity? Your own [[User:Koavf|user page]] is a vanity page listing all the pages You have "created", even though many of these pages are nothing but small chunks of data dumped in the Main space without any structure, ignoring the established procedures like the template. And our wiki itself is a vanity project without any real significance [[WikiIndex:SiteStats]] [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 14:12, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
::'''Self-promotion''' The problem is not just self-promotion of the sites but the content. WikiIndex has gained a reputation in some small corners of the Internet for allowing his editing and promotion of his sites to flourish. Plus, many of the sites are created and then go offline after a few days or weeks. We don't have any policy stating that we have to have an article on every wiki: we could just as easily mention them in passing in one article, for instance. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 17:36, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:::"some small corners of the Internet" meaning a RationalWiki talk page? Why do we care what such sites say about WikiIndex?
 
−
 
−
:::WikiIndex has lots of listings of defunct wikis; we've never had a policy of deleting them, because WikiIndex is partly an archive of wiki history. We still have an article on [[RationalWikiWiki]], even though it's no longer around, because of its cultural importance. Also, some of the pages that were deleted, such as [[BoyWiki]] and [[Newgon Wiki]], are not my wikis, and have a long history of stability because they have organizations behind them (Free Spirits and Newgon, respectively).
 
−
 
−
:::Koavf, would you like to propose inclusion and deletion criteria that can be applied as general rules, rather than ad hoc? [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 19:45, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
Again I have to second Birdy. That is no good sign. When he can debunk Your arguments so easily they are really of no quality. We certainly have no policy to listen to what is whispered in some remote corners of the Wikisphere. That You feel the need to employ such rumours for Your argumentation it would have been better to keep silent all together. Why don't You cite any of our existing policies if You know of some?[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 19:56, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:'''Policies''' I agree that there should be inclusion policies and we've had community discussions on keeping or removing defunct wikis. What others think of this project and whether or not it becomes a vanity press for pedophilia actually are important. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 20:55, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
::Is linking to, and briefly describing, wikis that cover pedophilia the same as being a vanity press for pedophilia? Manorainjan has a good point that your own page is, by that logic, kind of a vanity press for wikis you're interested in. Not that I think the solution is to get rid of your page. Rather, tolerance would be a good idea.
 
−
 
−
::The main page of this wiki says "add yourself to the listing below here after adding your wiki to WikiIndex here". Is everyone who accepts that invitation to be regarded as a spammer trying to use WikiIndex as a vanity press? Or only people with viewpoints the sysops find offensive? On the other hand, if we're going to start censoring offensive viewpoints, what about [[Metapedia]], [[Encyclopedia Dramatica]], etc.? Homosexuals might also find some of the content at [[Conservapedia]] offensive, since it condemns them as evil and destined for hell unless they repent ("pray away the gay" or whatever).
 
−
 
−
::Once a wiki goes down the road of banning offensive content, usually the next step is to ban people who post offensive content off-wiki. That's what happened on both enwiki (whose [[wp:Wikipedia:Child protection|child protection policy]] bans people to express certain views off-wiki) and RationalWiki, which made its temporary ban of me permanent based on off-wiki behavior. The pattern of how it's done is usually the same as what we've seen here, too: first content and/or people are banned, and ''then'' policy is created to authorize those types of bans. People get blindsided when someone decides that what's been going on for years is now suddenly an emergency requiring immediate, drastic action. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 21:27, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:::'''Okay''' Things are different when it comes to pedophilia. We shouldn't link to sites that provide stolen credit cards either, even if it's a wiki. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 01:10, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
We are not the internet police or the supreme internet court or whatever to rule or investigate or regulate or whatever. Actually we just got the capacity to register less than 4% of existing wikis [[WikiIndex:SiteStats]]. And even that work we do quite poorly. Our wiki pages are most of all incomplete and outdated and badly organised. We shall leave it to the discretion and judgement of our visitors which kind of information they like to make use of. I call for neutrality.
 
−
 
−
Just as an example for what it may be good: '''If''' there is a wiki that promotes child abuse and it is listed here, than every person, organisation or institution in the whole wide world can find it, investigate it and cause trouble to it. If we do not list it, than only insiders know about it. Would that be better? [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 01:26, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:'''Supreme Internet Court?''' We shouldn't link to sites providing information promoting child abuse. '''If''' someone made ManorainjanWiki and posted your credit card number, where your children go to school, and pictures of your wife sleeping, I would delete references to it. We don't have to have an exhaustive directory of every wiki simply because it's a wiki: some may have content that is inappropriate. Plus, if you find a wiki about child abuse and you think that the best way to handle that is to post links to it here, you and I have very different priorities about how to protect children. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 01:45, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
::I disagree, I think such a wiki (ManorainjanWiki) would be appropriate to list here. WikiIndex has up to now been for ''every'' public wiki. So, that long precedent now changes at the say-so of two sysops? [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 02:30, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:::'''Say-so''' Hence the discussion. I am soliciting input. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 02:33, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
===BoyWiki/Newgon Wiki proposal===
 
−
I want to split off the discussion on two of those deleted pages from the larger discussion. Can we reach a consensus to undelete the [[BoyWiki]] and [[Newgon Wiki]] pages? I don't think there is any argument to be made that those are vanity wikis. Each of those wikis has over a thousand pages of content that they have independently generated (rather than importing from other wikis), and each has had numerous active users forming bona fide editing communities over the years. Those sites promote some views that are currently not mainstream in the U.S., but I don't see that as a reason to not document objective information about those sites and to describe what they do in a neutral way. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 16:56, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:'''Split''' I think that's fair but I don't want to go too far down the rabbit hold when it comes to vanity projects. It's one thing to point out work that you have done on this wiki on your own page (that's fine) or to post your own wiki (also fine). The problem is the content. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 01:45, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
::Can you explain the causal link between censoring information about a wiki concerning child abuse, and protecting children? Can you rebut Manorainjan's argument that suppressing the info could be counterproductive to that goal? There was [http://www.drlynepiche.com/uploads/photos/criminological%20review%20Beech.pdf an article] that noted "Roles within the detractor category include reactionary individuals who respond aggressively and repugnantly against pedophilic content and register propagators who post personal details about known pedophiles in a bid to eradicate their anonymity. Paradoxically, although detractors oppose pedophile activity, they may actually accentuate cohesiveness and support within a targeted group and consequently may encourage and develop pedophile activity rather than prevent it". [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 02:37, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:::'''Report''' Lots of things say lots of things. I have no reason to suspect that this report is credible and I don't think it's relevant since I'm not outing any pedophiles or forcing them underground: I'm just not giving them an outlet to link to their discussion fora here. Those are two very different things. I never claimed that censoring information here would protect children. You're just making up stuff, Nathan. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 02:43, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
::::Well, you wrote above "Plus, if you find a wiki about child abuse and you think that the best way to handle that is to post links to it here, you and I have very different priorities about how to protect children." So your concern is more the wiki's reputation, I guess. But to borrow a phrase from ''[http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/25/harriet-harman-daily-mail The Guardian]'', the way sites like RationalWiki get people to take down such content is "nasty, ominous, calculating, anti-intellectual and could happen to anyone. [RationalWiki] is like a blackmailer – if you give in to it, it just wants more." Today, it's BoyWiki/NewgonWiki; tomorrow, who knows. With regard to prohibition of such things, the [http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/and-so-the-campaign-for-polygamy-begins/ typical leftist tactic] is that "Stage one is to tolerate it [i.e. the prohibition]. Stage two is to legislate it. Stage three is to make opposition to it intolerable. Wash, rinse, repeat." So now opposition to current public policy has been made intolerable here.
 
−
 
−
::::By the way, it shouldn't be surprising that sites with controversial content go down sooner than other sites. They're like 19th-century Mormons, always getting persecuted and driven out of places. E.g., they have to change webhosts or go down when the owner feels pressured to cease operations. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 03:08, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:'''Reputation''' Yes, I am concerned about WikiIndex's reputation. No, pedophiles and pederasts are not like religious and political minorities who are caught up in overwhelming waves of oppression, purges, and war. Histrionics and bombast won't make me want to agree with you: what is even your point? [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 03:16, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
::They're a sexual minority, like gays and other persecuted groups were before them. In fact, pederasty has sometimes been described as a gay rights or gender discrimination issue since a subtle form of discrimination against gays is when there is selective prosecution of, say, men who have sex with teenage boys while a relatively blind eye is turned to, say, men who have sex with teenage girls or women who have sex with teenage boys. We especially don't often hear about women getting busted for having sex with teenage girls, although that may be because they're more discreet about it. Who knows, maybe these days the government is eager to crack down on age-of-consent violators equally. Harris Mirkin wrote in ''[https://www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/mirkin_text.htm The Pattern of Sexual Politics]'' that pedophilia is just the latest battle for freedom, after feminism and gay rights.
 
−
 
−
::The point is that it's kinda like what Brandeis wrote in ''{{w|Whitney v. California}}'', "Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly. Men feared witches and burnt women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears. To justify suppression of free speech there must be reasonable ground to fear that serious evil will result if free speech is practiced. There must be reasonable ground to believe that the danger apprehended is imminent. There must be reasonable ground to believe that the evil to be prevented is a serious one. Every denunciation of existing law tends in some measure to increase the probability that there will be violation of it. Condonation of a breach enhances the probability. Expressions of approval add to the probability. Propagation of the criminal state of mind by teaching syndicalism increases it. Advocacy of lawbreaking heightens it still further. But even advocacy of violation, however reprehensible morally, is not a justification for denying free speech where the advocacy falls short of incitement and there is nothing to indicate that the advocacy would be immediately acted on. The wide difference between advocacy and incitement, between preparation and attempt, between assembling and conspiracy, must be borne in mind." These sites may denounce, condone, teach, prepare, advocate, and assemble, but they don't incite, attempt, or conspire. So, why suppress them?
 
−
 
−
::If you get criticized by RationalWiki, that can be a ''good'' sign. Kinda like what Lew Rockwell [https://bastiat.mises.org/library/we-win-ny-times-prize wrote] about another smear, by the ''New York Times'': "We are attacked because we are doing our job. The Times's smear is a medal on our chest." [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 04:47, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:::'''Comparisons''' Lots of things have been compared to lots of things. If your claim is that adults who want to have sex with children are in any substantial and genuine way comparable to gay men getting lynched, then you're wrong. Your point about free speech is irrelevant as WikiIndex is not the federal government: no one is denying you a First Amendment right to say some truly repugnant and miserable things, so you're playing a victim again. No one is buying it, so I have to ask again: what is your point? [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 05:06, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
::::"If your claim is that adults who want to have sex with children are in any substantial and genuine way comparable to gay men getting lynched, then you're wrong." Sounds like an ''{{w|argumentum ad lapidem}}'', as no supporting arguments are presented. Anyway, principles of good governance that apply to how countries should be run can also sometimes be useful for wikis to look at. Suppose this were a 17th-century WikiIndex and someone created a listing for a WitchWiki, linking to a site that said stuff about how maybe witches aren't that bad and shouldn't be burned. Should that listing be deleted because popular opinion says that witches are dangerous, and we don't want to link to sites promoting witchcraft lest our reputation suffer? That makes it impossible to free men from the bondage of irrational fears, because people don't know where to find the arguments saying witches are okay. Or at any rate, they're unlikely to come in contact with that information unless they actively go looking for it. I heard of Newgon Wiki by word of mouth, for example, because it's not listed many places. I had been looking for such a wiki but couldn't find it, and eventually assumed it didn't exist, until someone informed me otherwise. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 16:26, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
'''Arguments''' No, your argument is ridiculous. If two things are similar in some sense, they are not similar in all senses. If one source makes a claim, it doesn't mean that it's true. If you cry foul that some group is victimized because they can't use every means possible to promote their cause, then you are not being rational yourself. Statements like, "principles of good governance that apply to how countries should be run can also sometimes be useful for wikis to look at" are probably true. Adults who try to have sex with children are probably in some way similar to adults who want to have sex with adults of the same sex. So what? I'm not sure if you're deliberately misconstruing my position or if I'm not being clear but my point is not that popular opinion says don't have sex with kids, therefore WikiIndex should follow the crowd. My point is that you shouldn't have sex with kids and we shouldn't provide a platform to linking to resources about how having sex with kids is okay. I'm even willing to allow that we can (should?) ''discuss'' those wikis but actually linking to them or creating articles which are just repetitions of their own copy about themselves is not something that we should do. In fact, the last few sentences of your above post basically prove my point. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 06:45, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:Democratic republics usually have a principle of "minority rights and majority rule". The majority rule can't be allowed to eclipse minority rights too much or else it becomes impossible for the minority opinion to ever become the majority opinion, since the minority can't make itself heard to the majority and persuade them to change their minds. There are a lot of WikiIndex "articles which are just repetitions of their own copy about themselves" because wiki owners create the articles, or people do a copy and paste from the wiki's [[about page]] because it's an easy and quick way to create an article. It's probably unavoidable that a lot of articles here will start that way, but they can be edited to be more neutral. Policy on [[neutral point of view]] is a separate issue from inclusion policy. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 22:11, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
===ChildPorn.info proposal===
 
−
I propose undeletion of [[ChildPorn.info]]. This site does not promote child abuse in any way. It presents research concerning public policy issues surrounding production, distribution, and possession of child pornography. "Production" as used there refers to the holding of a camera and other non-violent acts rather than to the inducement of children to engage in sexually explicit conduct.
 
−
 
−
As the site notes, the prohibition of child pornography is relatively new; the first U.S. federal laws regulating child pornography were not passed until 1977, and the U.S. Supreme Court did not uphold bans on the production and distribution, and the possession, of child pornography until 1982 and 1990, respectively (the decisions were ''{{w|New York v. Ferber}}'' and ''{{w|Osborne v. Ohio}}'', respectively). In 1990, only 19 states had laws against possession of child porn.
 
−
 
−
So the current public opinion and public policy about child porn is relatively new, and who knows if it will change in the future, if there is a liberalization; already there has been a backlash by federal judges against sentencing guidelines imposed by the U.S. Congress concerning child pornography. I see nothing wrong with linking to a wiki that covers these ongoing debates and the history leading up to them. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 02:28, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
:I do not think it makes sense to argue about single wikis right now. The general policy needs to be established first. You both could use Your high emotions in this case to drive Yourselves for the creation of a policy that serves most. This personal fight is of no use. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 14:30, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
::I did attempt to create [[WikiIndex:Inclusion policy|a policy]], but it got torpedoed. Arguably, we are creating policy right now because however this decision goes will set a precedent that might be codified as policy afterward. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 16:11, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
:::'''Policy pages''' I deleted that because we're in the middle of having that inclusion policy here and now: there's no point in creating a policy page elsewhere and then trying to discuss it ''there''. If I wasn't clear about that (and I thought I was), then I hope this is sufficient. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 06:47, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 
−
 
−
===Abd comment===
 
−
Is this "the 'wiki index' of all wikis, wiki people, wiki software, wiki farms and wiki ideas" as it says on the home page banner displayed to non-logged in site viewers.
 
−
 
−
That's a pretty simple mission, easy to understand. Has it changed? Above there is discussion indicating that it ''should'' change, and there is a sysop making it change. I see that he is unilaterally deleting pages. I'd seen his name before. He was the first Wikipedian to make a million edits, [http://gizmodo.com/5903743/seven-years-one-million-edits-zero-dollars-wikipedias-flat-broke-superstar-editor April 19, 2012]. He is not an administrator there. Looking at his block log, he probably wouldn't make it if he was nominated. What I saw, right off, in the block log, was a block in 2006 for "mass adding of db-bio tags to articles on pornographic actors." Now, one of the ways one can rack up lots of edits is adding tags to lots of pages. It can take a few seconds per page. Looking at his August 2006 edits, the first thing that hit me was the huge numbers. He was running on the order of 15 edits per minute or so. Lots of little fixes. It's called wikignoming. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20060823154955&limit=500&tagfilter=&contribs=user&target=Koavf&namespace=] for a sample of correcting space in page titles. Page after page of low-lying fruit. I see a fairly large number of deletion requests issued in a short time. Given that if a page is deleted, it doesn't show up in contributions, there very likely were many more. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Printakid Here is one]. That original AfD closed with delete, though consensus for delete did not seem to be there (there was weak participation, such AfDs would more normally be relisted); it was recreated later the same year (apparently by the same user) and stands.
 
−
Koavf is only an admin on Outreach wiki in the WMF family.
 
−
 
−
On Wikiversity, a quite active wiki, we avoid unilateral deletions except for totally obvious deletions, blatant spam or vandalism. Anything that could be controversial, the routine practice is that an administrator, like anyone else, will tag the page and then another administrator will delete if nobody removes the tag. We will also undelete on request, unless there is some strong reason, and if someone still wants it deleted, then there is a formal discussion. There are very few such.
 
−
 
−
Leucosticte has long tended to get involved with highly controversial subjects, he often becomes far better informed about them than, say, the average Wikipedian. On RationalWiki, he attempted to create a resource on pedophilia, as I recall. In spite of RationalWiki having a general policy of total tolerance, he was very much not tolerated, and in spite of stopping any disruptive activity, he was still banned. For pointing out some simple facts about what he had *actually done* -- as distinct from what had been claimed about him -- I was told [http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hipocrite&diff=prev&oldid=1101699 what I won't repeat here] and [http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=RationalWiki:Saloon_bar&diff=prev&oldid=1101769] That user who wrote that is a "Wikipedian in good standing." RationalWiki explicitly tolerated that, the wiki brings out the worst in users. Leucosticte was threatened with gross physical violence. That was tolerated. But pointing out what is actually well-known in academia, published in peer-reviewed journals, etc., no, that's unforgiveable. WikiIndex was attacked by a set of IP trolls working with a RationalWiki moderator, almost a year ago I think it was. their target was Leucosticte.
 
−
 
−
On WikiMedia Foundation wikis, accusing another user of being a pedophile is grounds for immediate block of the accuser. Any such charges must be made privately to high-level administrators (stewards globally or to ArbCom locally on enwiki.) Leucosticte is not a pedophile, but is a radical libertarian, arguing for civil rights.
 
−
 
−
I do not agree with his positions, often; however, there is a basic issue here.
 
−
 
−
Is WikiIndex a list of all wikis? Deleting the WikiIndex pages without discussion makes it be other than that. Is it a list of WikiPeople? Now, I argued almost a year ago, here, that there should be inclusion standards for articles on wikipeople, particularly if they don't want the article to be here. I felt that Leucosticte went into too much detail on his wikis. However, those are about content, not about inclusion.
 
−
 
−
My personal rule is that I avoid contributing to wikis where there is arbitrary deletion without warning. My home wiki is Wikiversity, where we delete very little. (We *organize* content, and some content gets organized into the creating user's user space. Anonymously created content may get tagged for proposed deletion and if nobody removes the tag, it's gone in three months. Formal deletion discussion has become rare. And Wikiversity works, it is serving its purpose, content is steadily and gradually improving.
 
−
 
−
WikiIndex, though, explicitly declares it is an index of "all wikis." If it is not going to be that, to not be misrepresenting itself to the public, it should change this and specify inclusion standards. Content standards are ordinary editorial decisions, but ad hoc deletion of content placed in good faith is colossally rude.
 
−
 
−
I am not personally requesting the restoration of those pages. However, as a policy matter, if Leucosticte or anyone else requests it, and if the page content is not itself illegal, they should be undeleted. Allowing ad hoc deletion by an administrator with a clear personal bias is losing the wiki.
 
−
 
−
With [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk:Community_portal&diff=186268&oldid=186267 this edit] Koavf at the same time denies that he's "outing any pedophiles," but then says that he is "not giving them an outlet to link to their discussion fora here." The only one linking to those fora here was Leucosticte.
 
−
 
−
It is clear that Koavf has set himself up to decide about "appropriate content" for wikis.[http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk:Community_portal&diff=186262&oldid=186250] He is explicitly denying the mission of WikiIndex. I see that there are pages in [[:Category:Pornography]], including [[Encyclopedia Dramatica]] which hosts ''highly offensive'' material.
 
−
 
−
I also see that Koavf deleted an attempt to create policy or stimulate a focused policy discussion.[http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=&page=WikiIndex%3AInclusion+policy&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=]. His deletion reason called it a "vanity page." Koavf certainly had the right to edit the page to make it clear that this was not policy, but to delete, instead, with a spurious reason is highly offensive. Were he an administrator on Wikipedia, he could lose the privilege over an action like that (unless it was a banned user).
 
−
 
−
If WikiIndex chooses to tolerate this behavior in an administrator, it's a lost cause. [[User:Abd|Abd]]
 
−
:'''Low-hanging fruit''' Speaking of low-hanging fruit, I find it bizarre that you choose edits from a decade ago when I was first starting out on en.wp to prove some point about how I'm... bad at wikis? Irrelevant? I don't know where you're going with that honestly but I've made a lot of substantial contributions to a lot of wikis: adding a WikiNode to Wikilivres, deleting thousands of pages of spam from Wikitravel, making front page or featured content on Wikipedia and Wikinews, updating and connecting records at Rodovid, acting as a Campus and Online Ambassador for Wikipedia for years, curating translations of software for TranslateWiki, and also moderating here (even if my administration here is poor). I have a lot of userrights on en.wp and there's a good reason why: I do lot of constructive things with them. I'll grant that admins on most wikis probably shouldn't have unilateral powers or write policy (although there are many contexts where that is appropriate): this is why in addition to making a possibly contentious edit, I also initiated a conversation about that edit and whether or not we want to have a set of standards sanctioning such edits in the future. I haven't made any claims about Nathan's personal sexuality: I don't know anything about it nor do I care to know. If he's advocating for having sex with minors as some purely academic exercise or because he's convinced that he's somehow making society a better place or because he lost a bet, all of it's irrelevant to me in terms of how we link and to what we link and how we discuss wikis on this wiki. I don't know how I could be considered outing him when I haven't made any claims about him and he's pretty explicit about assigning his actual name to these accounts...
 
−
 
−
:"I am not personally requesting the restoration of those pages. However, as a policy matter, if Leucosticte or anyone else requests it, and if the page content is not itself illegal, they should be undeleted. Allowing ad hoc deletion by an administrator with a clear personal bias is losing the wiki."
 
−
 
−
:This part confuses me. Illegal... where? And why? If the entire point of his wikis is to try to subvert or challenge or change the law (and evidently it is, from what I have seen on this wiki about those wikis) then why would we be concerned about whether or not it's legal in the first place?
 
−
 
−
:"I also see that Koavf deleted an attempt to create policy or stimulate a focused policy discussion.[http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=&page=WikiIndex%3AInclusion+policy&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=]. His deletion reason called it a "vanity page." Koavf certainly had the right to edit the page to make it clear that this was not policy, but to delete, instead, with a spurious reason is highly offensive. Were he an administrator on Wikipedia, he could lose the privilege over an action like that (unless it was a banned user)."
 
−
 
−
:On en.wp, if someone made a page entitled "Wikipedia:Guidelines for inclusion" and it was essentially targeted at including the content ''he'' had added to Wikipedia that had been deleted ''and'' there was already a community-wide discussion about that content and whether or not it should be deleted, then yes, ''that'' proposed policy page would be deleted as well. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 07:03, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 
  
−
:::Thanks, Koavf. Yes, one of the observations I noted was from eight years ago. You have 1.3 million edits to Wikipedia, and I would in no way claim that a small set of edits from eight years ago accurately represented your views and practices. In general, when I report observations like that, I'm not "going somewhere" with them other than to share them. That small set of edits from 2006 showed several things: it *could* indicate some disapproval of pages on porn stars, and the deletion requests could indicate a deletionist agenda. Those are speculative and rebuttable. But they also could be relevant to the recent events.
+
For those who don't understand, I just moved the "Logos are fair use, with copyrights for them" thing from the <code>$wgRightsText</code> variable, which [[MediaWiki]] didn't intend to have, to the right place, which is [[MediaWiki:Copyright]].
−
:::You may say that you have not made claims about Nathan's sexuality, but you did make a statement that referred to him as if he were one of "them." I linked to the diff, but here it is again: [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk:Community_portal&diff=186268&oldid=186267 this edit]. You began the discussion here with a mention that you had discussed Nathan and his edits here off-wiki. I know what rumors and ideas exist about him. A sysop on Wikiversity lost his privileges because he formed opinions about Leucosticte and acted on them without prior consultation with the community. However, Leucosticte is still a user in good standing on WikiMedia Foundation wikis, only being blocked on en.wikipedia. He is not doing what you ''implied'' at the same time as you claimed you were not "outing him," "advocating for having sex with minors." The reality of what he has done is much more complex, and to cover it would require raising topics that are highly inflammatory and that probably should not be raised here. An academic raised the issues in a peer-reviewed publication and there was a firestorm of anger over that and the state legislature removed $50,000 from the university budget over it. The issues are very, very hot.
+
−
:::Rather, the real question, besides the propriety of your action -- I consider it improper, there was no emergency justifying the use of tools like that -- is whether or not WikiIndex will judge wiki content. It's a huge can of worms, and I don't see that WikiIndex has the community structures in place to allow it. As a pure index, inclusion policy is very simple. If inclusion becomes a complex judgment, if inclusion is thought to somehow "reflect on WikiIndex," WikiIndex, my opinion, would become unsustainable. Is there a Ku Klux Klan wiki? If there is, would hosting a listing here reflect badly on WikiIndex? How about a Zionist wiki that demonizes Palestinians and Muslims? And then [[Encyclopedia Dramatica]]. It's a slippery slope.
+
−
:::As evidence that it was reflecting badly on WikiIndex, you cited the so-called RationalWiki, and it was actually something mostly written by me. RationalWiki is highly offensive, obscene, mostly juvenile, and completely unreliable. (You linked to the wrong page, the mention of WikiIndex is on the Talk page, [http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:WikiIndex&oldid=1337410#Ugh]) That began with a complaint by our own [[Special:Contributions/Sophie Wilder]], who is indef blocked here. She was a moderator on RatWiki then and still is. Her behavior here, and being a moderator there, is a pretty good indication of how crazy that place is.
+
−
:::"Illegal content" is content that is, in itself, a violation of law (or a civil tort) in a jurisdiction covering WikiIndex. Willful copyright violation or libel would be examples. I am *not* proposing total, mindless inclusion. We don't do that on Wikiversity, and we don't expect it. The key is that deletion would ordinarily follow community consensus, but in an emergency can anticipate it. And so, on Wikiversity, if admins speedy delete a page (and normal practice is that they do not do this on their own initiative except for blatant spam and vandalism) and any registered user requests undeletion, ''they undelete it.'' Unless the content is actually illegal, not merely, say, spam or nonsense. Then there may be a discussion.
+
−
:::Your comments about Wikipedia practice regarding policy pages are, for whatever reason, misinformed. An understanding of policy and policy creation in the presence of conflict is not something that you would gain with 1.3 million edits of the kind that I've seen. I've been *very* involved with Wikipedia policy, and what Leucosticte says below is the norm. If a policy page is created and is considered "wrong" in some way, it is not deleted, it is marked as not accepted. Leucosticte and I know well what happens, because he created a WP space page and it was marked as not successful, but there was a faction that really wanted it gone, and there was a highly contentious MfD, the first finding was Keep, there was a DRV and a claim of improper closure, it was re-opened and then closed, the same.[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Delegable_proxy]
+
−
:::In this case, the policy page created by L. simply stated the obvious, or close enough, from the message that is given to all unregistered users. ''Welcome to WikiIndex – the 'wiki index' of all wikis, wiki people, wiki software, wiki farms and wiki ideas. Please add your wiki, and join our community. Note: WikiIndex is not a wiki hosting service.''
+
−
:::The page had: [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex:Inclusion_policy&oldid=186118]: ''WikiIndex's inclusion policy is that any website that either (1) is a wiki, or (2) calls itself a wiki is eligible for inclusion.''
+
−
:::That inclusion was being discussed here does not preclude working on a policy page. You had many options other than deletion, but because of the opinion you formed about L., you did not see or did not choose those options. This is precisely why wikis discourage administrators from acting when involved, i.e., when their personal opinions have become strong. Instead of deleting, you could have moved that content to the talk page with a note. You could have modified it to reflect *your view* about inclusion, and then some compromise might be worked out. You could have marked the page as "proposed policy." Instead you simply deleted it. Much less work, and "less work" is what I'd expect might motivate you from seeing that 1.3 million edits. To do that, you had to be very efficient. And so, in deleting, you did not really explain what you were doing, you gave the reason of "vanity page." That was far from a vanity page!
+
−
:::And never would a Wikipedia administrator delete a Wikipedia space proposed policy page on their own initiative, unless they wanted to risk their admin bit, the only exception I know being a page that is created by a sock of a banned user, or that is blatantly inappropriate, such as a page attacking individuals, etc.
+
−
:::I suggest, Koavf, that you back off. Your arguments are convincing me you are unqualified to serve WikiIndex as an administrator. The decision won't be mine. I've watched other administrators operating here, and while I did not necessarily agree with some details, none of it seemed outside of ordinary administrative discretion. Your actions stand out.
+
−
:::In your favor, you started this discussion. However, if you don't listen to it, if you essentially keep proclaiming you were right, that's useless. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 22:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
+
  
−
::Last I knew (it may have changed since then), they didn't delete proposed policy pages under such circumstances. They simply marked them as rejected. I guess in extreme cases they might userfy them or propose deletion, but I don't think they would be deleted over the author's objections. Anyway, good to see it was restored. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
+
;The results
 +
The copyright notice on the footer would look better:<br/>
 +
(Old one at the top, new one at the bottom)
  
−
== "Very nice site" vandal ==
+
:WikiIndex's content is available under <span class=plainlinks>[https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ <nowiki>[[:Category:Wiki Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike|Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0]]. Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners.</nowiki>]</span>.
 +
:WikiIndex's content is available under the <span class=plainlinks>[https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License]</span>. Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners.
  
−
People who run third party wikis may have noticed, there are some vandals that show up and add comments to random pages saying "Very nice site!" and the like. It was even added to the Meta-Wiki [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/91 abuse filter]. I forget what people called these vandals, or the motives people speculated they might have. Any ideas? Thanks, [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 23:47, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
+
The copyright warning at <span class=plainlinks>[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}|action=edit}} the editing screen]</span> would look almost exactly the same:
 +
:All contributions to {{SITENAME}} are considered to be released under the [[:Category:Wiki Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike|Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0]]. Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners. (see [[WikiIndex:Copyrights]] for details).  Anything you write here may be changed by others, and redistributed.  You are promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.  '''Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!'''{{clear}}<big>'''This is [[WikiIndex:About#What WikiIndex is not|not]] a free [[wiki]] hosting site – this is an [[:Category:All|index]] of [[WhatIsWiki|wiki]], [[:Category:Wiki People|wiki people]], [[:Category:Wiki Engine|wiki software]], [[:Category:WikiFarm|wiki farms]] and [[:Category:WikiIdea|wiki ideas]].<br> Contributions outside of that scope will be treated as test edits and be [[WikiIndex:Deleting pages|removed]].'''</big>
 +
:All contributions to {{SITENAME}} are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (see [[WikiIndex:Copyrights]] for details). Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners. Anything you write here may be changed by others, and redistributed. You are promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.  '''Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!'''{{clear}}<big>'''This is [[WikiIndex:About#What WikiIndex is not|not]] a free [[wiki]] hosting site – this is an [[:Category:All|index]] of [[WhatIsWiki|wiki]], [[:Category:Wiki People|wiki people]], [[:Category:Wiki Engine|wiki software]], [[:Category:WikiFarm|wiki farms]] and [[:Category:WikiIdea|wiki ideas]].<br> Contributions outside of that scope will be treated as test edits and be [[WikiIndex:Deleting pages|removed]].'''</big>
  
−
: [[AssumeGoodFaith]] and ask them. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 23:59, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
+
;Conclusion
−
::I think it's a bot. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 00:06, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
+
Merry Christmas. And what do you think about it? {{#ifeq:{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}|December|<span style="color: red;">Merry Christmas from</span>}} [[User:Luis Anton Imperial|Luis]] ([[User talk:Luis Anton Imperial|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Luis Anton Imperial|contribs]] • [[wikipedia:User:Stranger195/Guestbook|guest]][[wikia:c:guestbook:User:AStranger195/Guestbook|book]]) 03:45, 23 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
== language translation ==
+
::I think it's good. The problem is: who does have backend access on this wiki? --[[User:Usa11|Usa11]] ([[User talk:Usa11|talk]]) 12:39, 23 December 2017 (PST)
  
−
Both
+
:::Let me know if there's something I can help with [[Raymond King]] | <small>[[User talk:Rathbone|talk]]</small>
−
[[WikiIndex:FrequentlyAskedQuestions#Languages]] and
+
−
[[:Category:Wiki Language]]
+
−
recommend that articles have a description in both the native language used at that wiki,
+
−
and also in English.
+
  
−
Is there something we could change in the {{tl|Translate}} template to
+
;Actioned
−
encourage people to translate text, without deleting all the text in the original language?
+
{{u|Usa11}} — I now have limited backend access, restricted to what is available through the MediaWiki interface.  Server-side access needs to be addressed to [[Raymond King]].
  
−
Is there some way to detect when
+
{{U|Luis Anton Imperial|Luis}} — many thanks for your fantastic help.  I have now actioned all three of your suggestions; I would appreciate your feedback.  From my perspective, I have noticed the following:
−
well-meaning people delete all the German-language text from a WikiIndex page about a German-language wiki?[http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Rezepte-Wiki&diff=186427&oldid=139537]
+
#The change to <code>LocalSettings.php</code> has been successful in fixing the 'double-double' square brackets problem.
 +
#The change to [[MediaWiki:Copyright]] appears to have been successful
 +
#The change to [[MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning]] is less than successful. The standard size text (including bold) appears as per your suggested result, however, the two lines of large bold text refuse to display. I have subsequently removed {{template|clear}}, in the hope that was the cause of the problem, and replaced with a couple of html breaks - but still no joy.  Do you have suggestions?
  
−
I suspect that many pages have suffered such damage,
+
I shall be archiving the 2017 elements of this talk page, so if there are any new comments or suggestions to this particular section, please start a new section on our current Commnunity portal talk page, and link back to this section in the archived page.  If anyone is unsure how to link back to archives, please let me know and I shall gladly create any required links for you. Regards to all.  [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 09:14, 3 January 2018 (PST)
−
because "translate all the text on the page to English, and delete all the German text"
+
−
is the normal way of doing translation on the English Wikipedia,
+
−
and well-meaning people may not realize that's not how we do things at WikiIndex.
+
  
−
What is a good way of undoing such damage,
+
==Spam==
−
such that the latest versions of such pages includes both
+
Why is noone deleting all the spam? --[[Special:Contributions/95.195.148.235|95.195.148.235]] 15:22, 29 December 2017 (PST)
−
the English-language translation that well-meaning person added to the page,
+
−
and also the original German-language text that well-meaning person deleted from the page?
+
  
−
I.e., I want such "translated" pages to be more like
+
:Which SPAM? Care to set a wiki link? --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 15:28, 29 December 2017 (PST)
−
[[ZUM-Wiki]], [[Zoids Wikia (es)]], [[Kotava Kotapedia]],
+
−
and many other pages on WikIndex,
+
−
each of which have descriptions in two or more languages.
+
  
−
--[[User:DavidCary|DavidCary]] ([[User talk:DavidCary|talk]]) 07:38, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
+
==Server move 2017==
−
:'''Templates and tracking categories''' The only thing that immediately comes to mind is using templates like <nowiki>{{de|TEXT IN GERMAN}}</nowiki> and <nowiki>{{es|TEXT IN SPANISH}}</nowiki> or possibly <nowiki>{{original language|TEXT IN NON-ENGLISH}}</nowiki> and then have hidden categories that contain these articles. But that would still require ''some'' monitoring. [[User:Koavf|Koavf]] ([[User talk:Koavf|talk]]) 07:46, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
+
Until now now data under [[WikiIndex:Server move 2017]].  The popularPages-Extension is not installed. --[[User talk:Manorainjan|'''<span style="color: orange;">Manorainjan</span>''']] 16:42, 31 December 2017 (PST)

Revision as of 01:57, 5 January 2018

for talk amongst or to sysops / admins and bureaucrats,
please go to: category talk: Active administrators of this wiki
WikiIndex talk: Community portal
archives of older talk pages:

1 (2006), 2 (2007–13), 3 (2014–16), 4 (2017)

NOTE: this 'WikiIndex talk:Community portal/Archive 4' page is an archive of older discussions.

Please place new comments on the
currently active talk page of this archive, thanks!

— * 2017 * —

Happy New Year!

WikiIndex wishlist What would you like to see happen here in 2017? How would you like to see the site change and grow? Koavf (talk) 09:19, 31 December 2016 (PST)

Semantic MediaWiki

Do folks have any ideas on how to show off our Semantic MediaWiki? ~~ MarkDilley

I did not know that we are here to show of. --Manorainjan 07:53, 25 January 2017 (PST)
Showing off What do you have in mind, Mark? From what I've seen, the use of SMW is pretty "under-the-hood" rather than on display as such... Do you want to have tools to query our site like at Wikidata? Koavf (talk) 08:58, 25 January 2017 (PST)

Where are the tools for Semantic wiki here? It has been a while and I have forgotten. Best, MarkDilley25 January 2017

Namespaces Mark, you can find them from Special:AllPages starting here. Namespaces such as "Form" and "Type" (unused) are all SMW namespaces. Koavf (talk) 22:31, 24 January 2017 (PST)

Manorainjan

It's time to stop this once and for all. Said user has a track record of pestering and at times even insulting other users, in fact an admin left for a while because of him. It seems to me like Manor acts as though he's some sort of "mini-admin" most of the time, and frankly I think he needs to be blocked. What do you guys think? --This is MY book, and I'm gonna READ IT!!! 09:44, 25 January 2017 (PST)

Guidelines I have always argued that a large part of the problem is that we don't have many guidelines. I don't like rules generally but if we don't have any kind of documentation to appeal to, someone can always say, "But I didn't know I couldn't do this". (Even if the infraction is pretty obvious social etiquette.) I think that we should be more explicit about what is expected and then when it's transgressed, it's easier to point out how and why there would be some consequence. Koavf (talk) 11:06, 25 January 2017 (PST)
I am a known wiki person, but I will not reveal my name to avoid problems with the aforementioned user. I have had several problems with him and came to the conclusion that he is a stupid provocateur. He should be blocked from the whole internet. --46.166.148.154 10:33, 26 January 2017 (PST)
Says someone who is globally blocked over all WikiMedia-projects ;-) --Manorainjan 12:06, 26 January 2017 (PST)
You know that I am using open proxies (which is blocked on Wikimedia for obvious reasons) to avoid you to come and stalk me under my house. ;)

Manorainjan - do you really think it is appropriate to accuse people of behaving like Nazis - as you did in your edit summary of this edit - http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk:Community_portal&oldid=194882. Frankly, that is truly despicable behaviour, and you, as a German should know better.

As to lack of 'policy' here on WikiIndex - I think this is a red herring. Let us be very clear here. Manor has had multiple, repeated WARNINGS over his conduct and behaviour. When Manor refuses to comply with very specific requests from not only long-term and highly valued editors - and then has the utter arrogance to refuse when told buy Admins and Crats - that, to me, and I would guess the whole of the wikisphere is ABSOLUTE grounds for banning. The fact that he was so belligerently arrogant to effectively force a Crat to step away from WikiIndex - that just shows his fundamental character! And that type of character is NOT helpful in building a wiki community. And since I took my lengthy sabbatical, I have discovered MANY subsequent editors to ask that Manor be blocked for his repeated abusive behaviour.

Quite frankly, if Manor is allowed to continue here on WikiIndex, then WikiIndex will eventually self-destruct. I am again frankly shocked over the very real STAGNATION which WikiIndex has succumbed to since Manors arrival. Sure, there are a few dedicated editors here who try to do their bit - but are overwhelmed by constant fire-fighting caused by Manor. But I have looked at many of arguably the most important entries here on WikiIndex - and I was shocked to find they had NOT been updated for nigh-on THREE YEARS!

In light of the above - and particularly the blatant racist comment by Manor - I will be blocking Manor for a period of 7 days. Manor needs to use these 7 days to honestly consider if he wishes to comply with the views and requests of the remainder of the WikiIndex community. If Manor tries to bypass his 7 day block - I will DOUBLE the duration of his block - and will concurrently double his block for each and every attempt he may use to bypass the block.

To the rest of the WikiIndex community, and especially MarkDilley - I expect you to support my action to block Manor for a short period of time. It would be nice if we put the interests of WikiIndex first, rather than letting someone stay who not only has destroyed the friendly community we once had here, but who has also failed to grasp the fundamental ethos of WikiIndex.

Comments, please.  :-) Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 09:53, 27 January 2017 (PST)

 Support ~~ MarkDilley

 Support I'll be honest, I'm shocked Manor was unblocked the first time Hoof tried to ban him. He is truly pugnacious, as evidenced by the aforementioned racist comment and his post on my talk page. --This is MY book, and I'm gonna READ IT!!! 15:34, 27 January 2017 (PST)

 Support Obviously. And I will definitely support any further action you take on this. Maybe I'm too naive or too much of a nice guy but I've experienced this on another wiki as well where someone makes what are definitely constructive and useful edits (and so is not solely a troll or vandal) but additionally is so consistently rude and off-putting that he has to go. Simply put, wikis are built around communities and if we have to lose one prolific and generally knowledgeable user because he pushes away everyone else through a combination of logical fallacies, abrasiveness, and martyrdom syndrome, then it's clear which one is preferable. I honestly don't want to lose him as an editor nor did I want to lose the valuable contributions of the other person at the other wiki I mentioned but for the well-being of the community even at the risk of a small set-back in the creation of content, it has to happen. I have been too rosy-eyed in the past and I still am--I sincerely hope that Manorainjan just cools off and looks at this objectively to see that his behavior is (willfully) off-putting and that others are not ganging up on him. Too many olive branches and too much pleading--please grow up and just be a decent person. Koavf (talk) 22:49, 27 January 2017 (PST)

 Support --TheTVFan (talk) 00:40, 28 January 2017 (PST)

 Strong support I've had issues with this user while I was editing as an IP. I'll point to just a few out of a whole string of examples. The user refused to allow me to change the Wiki.Wiki article to "inactive" after no wiki requests had been answered for over three months, and, even after I explained my reasoning, did the same thing again. In addition, he also refused to let me blank and request deletion of my own static IP talk page not once, not twice, but three times. He also reverted my edits to the WikiBridge article that classified the wiki "dead" - my reason being that despite technically still existing, a message was left on the Main page saying "This wiki no longer exists" and the supposed replacement site archived in the page history also has been closed. I could probably find more examples, but I think I've made my point. Users like this should not be allowed to contribute to any community-based environment, especially when they don't explain half of their edit reverts! I do agree though that more policy documentation is needed. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:41, 2 February 2017 (PST)

Give him a warning and see if that suffices. If not, revisit the issue later. He might not play well with others, but he puts in a lot of work on the project. With regard to racist remarks that may or may not have been made, bear in mind that with the election of Donald Trump, the era of political correctness is over. Leucosticte (talk) 22:44, 2 February 2017 (PST)

Comment According to the users above, he has already had multiple warnings and temporary blocks, yet has refused to listen. Also, please keep politics out of community discussions. Many people, myself included, will disagree with your point of view. Thank you. OhNoitsJamie Talk 04:19, 3 February 2017 (PST)
Was he given an official warning, or was it just a bunch of people coming up to him at various times and saying, "I find your behavior objectionable; cut that out" which led to him saying, "Who are YOU to tell me what to do" or "I did nothing wrong" or whatever? I don't recall there being a situation where MarkDilley told him, "Hey, knock it off or I'm gonna block you." Had that happened a long time ago, maybe Sean wouldn't have gone on his hiatus.
Anyway, if someone got offended by a racist remark, that means politics already got injected into the discussion, because racism is very political (what with all the white nationalist movements coming out of the shadows these days). I'm not saying we have any people like that around here, but entryist SJWs have been known to go around the Internet trying to get codes of conduct enacted (formally or informally) banning racist remarks, so that they can censor their opponents. To the extent this is an opinion poll of the users, I'm registering my dissent with norms of political correctness.
Having said that, if someone called me a honky, I'd be offended, but no more than if he called me an idiot or some other insult. Leucosticte (talk) 06:50, 3 February 2017 (PST)
It was an official warning - from a crat, no less - and he was blocked after refusing to listen and then he socked over said block. --This is MY book, and I'm gonna READ IT!!! 08:35, 3 February 2017 (PST)
Official warnings Yes, I have warned him on multiple instances in the time that I have been an admin/bureaucrat/staff member. There isn't a process for "official" warnings but it's also clear that if you're harassing and annoying multiple users over the course of years and driving them away from the project, then something has to give: either you get blocked or everyone else concedes defeat and makes this your personal playground. Not having many official rules is nice in a way but it also ends up being a problem at times. Lacking that, common sense is a decent rule of thumb (which is also imperfect). We also don't have a particular rule about offensive speech and I generally think that's a good thing as well but there is also speech that serves no purpose other than to irritate or harass and the community stands nothing to gain by having someone be provocative without repercussions. Koavf (talk) 08:55, 3 February 2017 (PST)
I consider any warning from a sysop to be an official warning. Leucosticte (talk) 17:57, 3 February 2017 (PST)

Comment I do note that the user being discussed is currently blocked, which I don't think is very fair. Assuming that I am not mistaken, I believe what is being discussed here is an indefinite block or even a permanent ban from WikiIndex. In either case, the user in question should be allowed to defend themselves or otherwise comment before the discussion is closed. If the user makes disruptive comments to the discussion, then they should be blocked. But not before they'd had a chance to defend their actions. Just my personal opinion, but I think that it is important to consider. OhNoitsJamie Talk 09:04, 3 February 2017 (PST)

As other users stated, he has been warned multiple times. When his block expires, he will be able to explain and defend his actions. --TheTVFan (talk) 09:12, 3 February 2017 (PST)
Ban You are mistaken, Jamie--he is blocked for seven days (expiring soon) and I am certainly willing to let him contribute if all he wants to do is contribute. Someone who is simply trolling will be blocked indefinitely, no problem. Someone who has many demonstrably constructive edits but who is also abrasive is a lot trickier and that's why I hope that he can come back and play nice. He's had plenty of opportunities to defend himself which mainly amount to tu quoque fallacies and mind-games ("yeah but you did [x]" or "how can you prove that I intended [y]"). It's inarguable that his behavior is inappropriate and lacking a clear policy, the repeated warnings over the course of years should be sufficient. I sincerely hope that it's onwards and upwards once his block expires if he chooses to return. Koavf (talk) 09:17, 3 February 2017 (PST)

Request for Comments

User:HAL-9000 This user emailed me personally asking for an unblock. I explained in email and via his talk that I will be holding him to extra scrutiny and may have to consult IP logs due to the nature of prior disruption. His unblock was adjusted from "indefinite" to a few days from now to solicit community feedback. I'm a believer in second chances and I remember him being a productive member of the community. Thoughts? Koavf (talk) 13:24, 4 February 2017 (PST)

As I saw from his profile that he made some productive edits,  Support, but the community should keep in mind that I didn't know him before, so I'm not aware of his previous actions. TheTVFan (talk) 13:37, 4 February 2017 (PST)
Also, I received a private e-mail from him asking to remove his personal information on Community Portal. For the admin team: I have removed it, please revert my edit if you think it's not okay. I have unblocked him assuming good faith, but will be monitoring his edits. --TheTVFan (talk) 04:49, 5 February 2017 (PST)

Lift infinite blocks for IP-spammers?

I think that IP-spammers should not be blocked for infinite, because they use proxies or dynamic IPs. I think a 1-year block is enough. Comment with your ideas below :-) --TheTVFan (talk) 04:34, 5 February 2017 (PST)

  •  Support — Indefinitely blocking IP's is never a good thing except in the most serious circumstances, and it is not allowed on WMF unless deemed absolutely necessary (and any indefinitely blocked IP's are subject to review). Regardless of the reason, I'd say 365 days should be the maximum block for any IP address. OhNoitsJamie Talk 09:15, 5 February 2017 (PST)
  •  Support — A long block on an IP is frequently unnecessary as someone is likely to just move on after [x] days/weeks. There are about 700 IPs which are indefinitely blocked and I'm removing them for the ones that are a decade old--very unlikely they will cause any problems. And if they do, we have several active admins here. Koavf (talk) 10:50, 5 February 2017 (PST)
  •  Support — I agree about the one-year maximum. Leucosticte (talk) 20:41, 5 February 2017 (PST)
  •  Support — I fundamentally agree with the one-year maximum block for spammers from a single IP address, but with the added proviso that should the IP user return to spam again after the expiry of their previous block, they will be blocked indefinitely. Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 06:45, 6 December 2017 (PST)

Category:Inactive

The Inactive category is deprecated and has been replaced by Dormant. Using the "inactive" entry returns an error message saying that it's not in the list of possible values, even before I deleted it from the wiki status comparison table just now. I would propose removing all entries from the category and updating them with a different status, but the issue is that there are 777 pages in the category. This would take forever to orphan. Advice? OhNoitsJamie Talk 09:51, 6 February 2017 (PST)

Those kind of of edits should be done by a bot. --Manorainjan 10:06, 6 February 2017 (PST)
Botwork I am doing them with AWB and I have tagged my account as a bot at the moment. There is also Category:Pages that use Template:Inactive from Template:Inactive which should be emptied and all instances of Template:Inactive should be converted to Template:Wiki with status=Dormant but in the meantime, this will fix all of the error thrown up by the invalid status. Thanks, Jamie. Koavf (talk) 10:14, 6 February 2017 (PST)
Deprecation It looks like User:MarkDilley had some reservations about deprecating the template. Mark, if you're viewing this, can you explain more? Koavf (talk) 10:29, 6 February 2017 (PST)
It's true that the Inactive category can be considered deprecated, but there wasn't an official community consensus about it. I also agree that the edits should be done with a bot, to avoid obstructing RecentChanges. --TheTVFan (talk) 10:56, 6 February 2017 (PST)
Bot flag I amended my user rights so that it would pass through the bot filter but it evidently didn't work--not sure why. Sorry for clogging up the Recent Changes but it's a done deal now. Koavf (talk) 11:14, 6 February 2017 (PST)
Not a problem. I wanted to remove "Inactive" status from WikiStatus template, as we don't use it anymore, but I see it was alredy done. Good work. :-)--TheTVFan (talk) 11:38, 6 February 2017 (PST)


The change is incomplete. It is not sufficient, to change the status. One has to rework the template intro: "Inactive|" must be replaced by "Wiki/n|", 3 SPACE removed, may be more. --Manorainjan 12:15, 6 February 2017 (PST)

 Support. This should be done, manually or with a bot. --TheTVFan (talk) 12:17, 6 February 2017 (PST)
Change Manorainjan, which template needs to be changed...? Koavf (talk) 12:28, 6 February 2017 (PST)
The change towards inactive caused the logos to be disconnected from the wiki page. Therefore we got loads of orphaned logos. We would see their destination only after this rework. Some logos got deleted in the meantime, because someone thought they are not needed. --Manorainjan 12:20, 6 February 2017 (PST)
Logos Can you give an example of one? I can undelete or re-add as necessary. Koavf (talk) 12:28, 6 February 2017 (PST)

I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that, because HAL has flooded RC with vandal-edits. --Manorainjan 12:35, 6 February 2017 (PST)

He was just blocked. Thank you for warning us about this user. --TheTVFan (talk) 12:39, 6 February 2017 (PST)

User HAL-9000: what about his new edit?

I blocked him because of this vandalism edit. I think we need a strong community support to unblock him. Please reply with  Support or  Oppose.--TheTVFan (talk) 11:45, 6 February 2017 (PST)

 Oppose: seems to be a blanking vandal --TheTVFan (talk) 11:45, 6 February 2017 (PST)
Blanking Page blanking can be unintentional. You've allowed the user the ability to edit his talk page so he can explain himself there. Not sure if you're seeing this, HAL but what happened here? Koavf (talk) 11:51, 6 February 2017 (PST)
I have intentionally done it, to have a response from him. However, I have temporarily unblocked his account to let him answer here. --TheTVFan (talk) 11:52, 6 February 2017 (PST)

I have undone almost all his vandalism. Please see if I forgot some pages, and rollback them. Best, --TheTVFan (talk) 13:10, 6 February 2017 (PST)

 Weak oppose As this does seem to be a vandalism-only account, I would typically oppose an unblock. However, one thing I would like to mention is the possibility of a malicious bot. The page blankings seem to be happening all at once, so I would wonder if either the user is running a bot and is not performing the actions themselves, or, at the worst, their account has been compromised by malicious software. I would recommend a CheckUser to check for spambot IP's before going any further. Depending on the CU results, my opinion may change later. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:37, 6 February 2017 (PST)

This was to be expected. I did not say anything, because actually everybody had been warned: dif. The claim, that the account had been hacked is old ... who believes such claims? --Manorainjan 14:19, 6 February 2017 (PST)
I don't rule anything out until there is evidence either confirming it or discrediting it. Therefore, I will not identify the claim of a hacked account as false unless CU data or other sufficient evidence prove it to be so (in summary: I believe everything in situations like this until evidence discredits options). OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:59, 6 February 2017 (PST)
 Support Give the benefit of the doubt; if he's a vandal, he'll mess up again soon enough, and you can reblock him. Leucosticte (talk) 15:35, 6 February 2017 (PST)

Check User If the actual person running the account and doing constructive things wants a new account, he can request one. In the meantime, there are long blocks put on IPs associated with this account and an indefinite one for this user. I generally don't like (implicitly) publishing IPs but the user was warned that this would be possible and his IPs have been published here before, so c'est la vie. If his machines are compromised, then he really needs to scrub his hard drives. Koavf (talk) 18:46, 6 February 2017 (PST)

I am TheTVFan. The vandal probably shares my IPs because he is my brother and we live in the same house. Please unblock me as I still want to edit here. 103.10.197.194 06:24, 7 February 2017 (PST)

Language conventions

I noticed that some WMF entires have varying language titles. For example, the French Wikipedia has the word "French" written in English. However, others have the English title redirecting to the title in the respective language (Spanish Wikipedia redirects to Español Wikipedia). I don't think we should have two different styles of language in page titles. Which one is technically correct? I'm fine with either, as long as it's consistent. OhNoitsJamie Talk 07:59, 8 February 2017 (PST)

Agreed Do we need to even break these up by language? In the case of Wikipedia that may be helpful just because of how large that particular project is but these are really all the same wiki, just in different editions. Koavf (talk) 09:07, 8 February 2017 (PST)
I think it's okay to have separate entries, but I just feel that they all need to follow the same naming conventions. We shouldn't have some of them titled in the language of the project they discuss, and then have some others titled in English. What we have with Wikipedia at least is the opposite. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:00, 8 February 2017 (PST)

Freenode IRC

Hi, I just wanted to make an announcement that I have created a Freenode IRC channel for WikiIndex. The channel is #wiki-index (note the hyphen!) Please feel free to join and hang out. OhNoitsJamie Talk 08:08, 9 February 2017 (PST)

Have you registered the channel? --This is MY book, and I'm gonna READ IT!!! 08:36, 9 February 2017 (PST)
Indeed I have, I'm just not there right now. I'll log on now. I'm not just going to idle in an empty channel. I'll be around if the channel ever gets active. OhNoitsJamie Talk 08:49, 9 February 2017 (PST)
Former channel For several years, we had an IRC channel at irc://irc.freenode.net/wikiindex but it was removed in 2012 by User:Elassint. Koavf (talk) 09:26, 9 February 2017 (PST)

What about the Etherpad? Manorainjan 09:41, 9 February 2017 (PST)

I like IRC better. I saw the former channel and it appears that the Freenode administration locked it due to inactivity. That's why I created the new channel. OhNoitsJamie Talk 09:51, 9 February 2017 (PST)

WikiIndex Twitter account

See here. Does anyone think that it would be useful to publish with this? Possibly highlight entries that here that are particularly interesting or fleshed out? Does anyone have any other ideas about social media platforms that would work well with our site? Koavf (talk) 02:31, 11 February 2017 (PST)

To whom is the account administered by? Of its total of three tweets, two of them are spam! Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 10:18, 10 May 2017 (PDT)
 Agreed This is clearly not an offical Twitter account created by staff, or even if it was, it has clearly been compromised. Seems like an impersonation to me, but either way, it's not a legitimate account (anymore). Therefore, it should not be used for official publications and I'd consider reporting it to Twitter sysadmins for review. I think that they can delete impersonations and ban compromised accounts. -- Amanda (talk) 13:35, 24 May 2017 (PDT)
It is an official account, the "spam" were tweets that were meant for another account at that time, the Twitter mobile app isn't the best at delineating accounts. I have credentials for the account if this community wants to work with Twitter in growing. And as far as staff, there really isn't staff per say. There are people who are sometimes paid to do backend work, at least that was the last thing I knew about the site. Best, MarkDilley
Mark, In which way could a twitter account help WikiIndex growing in quality or quantity? Please outline a scenario. Please share Your vision with us. --Manorainjan 03:08, 30 May 2017 (PDT)

Code of Conduct

We've talked around this several times and for the time being, this is our provisional 'Code of Conduct'. The language may be modified before it's published here and the community may have ways to adapt it but this is the policy as it stands now. If you find users who are transgressing it, please refer them to this document: http://citizencodeofconduct.org/ This shouldn't be particularly surprising info but I'd recommend that everyone take a look at it to familiarize yourself with how it may work for us. Koavf (talk) 15:07, 13 February 2017 (PST)

 Support --This is MY book, and I'm gonna READ IT!!! 10:40, 14 February 2017 (PST)

A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software.

As per subject heading, I have been getting intermittent glitches here on WikiIndex displaying the above error message. If anyone else experiences the same, can you please log it here, thanks. Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 05:51, 25 April 2017 (PDT)

Mass creation of user pages for accounts unused - why?

I have discovered a huge mass creation of otherwise absent user pages. They are usually totally devoid of content, and were clearly NOT created by their respective user. So what is their purpose? The long established wiki convention is that only the user themselves create their own user page. The other long established wiki convention is that blank pages should be red links.

Can someone point me to the consensus of where this drastic change was agreed upon please? Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 10:38, 10 May 2017 (PDT)

I don't think that such a consensus exists, at least from what I can tell. However, I would  Oppose these pages being nuked. I personally like created blank user pages for inactive users rather than dozens of redlinks in the user list. Just looks better in terms of interface IMHO. -- Amanda (talk) 13:32, 24 May 2017 (PDT)
If no consensus existed, the action should not have been carried out! WikiIndex is about documenting wikis, the software which makes a wiki, the companies who create and host wikis, and the people who are significant within the wiki-world. We categorically do not create user pages for every prospective spammer who registers a user account here, who then makes zero edits (because their intended spam is blocked by our abuse filters). This has to stop. By all means, Template:Tl them on their talk page once they have made a few constructive edits - once they have engaged in our community here on WikiIndex.
It has been stated many times previously -- WikiIndex is not Wikipedia, and to clarify further, WikiIndex is not Wikia either. We do not have the 1,500 sysops that they have on the English Wikipedia! And I guess Wikia has sysops and other staff which run into four figures. WikiIndex is lucky if it can count on TWO sysops on 'duty' -- much of the time, there no sysops online at WikiIndex. We quite simply do not have the workforce here to fix such major, unwanted changes. Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 16:59, 24 May 2017 (PDT)

AbuseFilters with redundant actions

There are several abuse filters configured on this project that are currently enabled with redundant actions (there could be more deleted/disabled ones, I didn't check). Out of the ones that are enabled, filter 3 has both "disallow" and "block autopromote" enabled. The disallow is redundant, as block autopromote also disallows the edit. Filters 6 and 8 are set to "disallow" and "tag". The tag in this case is redundant, since the disallow would be processed first a tag would never be added. Filters 19, 21, 26, and 28 have both "disallow" and "block" enabled. Disallow is redundant since block also disallows. This isn't anything urgent, but removing redundant actions could clean up the abuse filter list display a little bit (i.e. make the table of filters take less room on the page). -- Amanda (talk) 13:21, 24 May 2017 (PDT)

Why is there a need to trim down the Abuse Filter log? Anyway, I am working through your concerns, as follows:
Filter3 has tested ok, and not returned any errors (nor any hits!). Filter3 is an extremely robust anti-spam filter, which should be hidden. How are you able to view it?
Filter6 tests ok. The tag warning adds a custom message to the bottom of the existing MW Abuse filter warning message. Users can over-ride this filter, hence when they trigger the warning message. This filter could be triggered accidentally by anyone - even your cat walking across your keyboard!
Filter8 similar to 6.
Looking at these three, they have been developed, tested, and refined by the geeks at MediaWiki.org. I'm not too comfortable about undoing their work. Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 17:54, 24 May 2017 (PDT)
I wasn't able to view them. The consequences thar occur when the filter is hit are publicly visible at Special:AbuseFilter, regardless of privacy. -- Amanda (talk) 04:56, 25 May 2017 (PDT)

Gibberish accounts

Would it be possible to suppress the usernames and/or delete the twenty or so usernames that are just long strings of 0's, 1's, or other numbers? I've noticed the same types of accounts in the ShoutWiki global users list and they all appear to be one or two spambots just making a mess. Suppression of the usernames via Oversight is probably easier, but deleting the accounts altogether would work too. (the latter requires a db change without UserMerge.) -- Amanda (talk) 14:07, 24 May 2017 (PDT)

Timezone - change to UTC

Being as WikiIndex is a multilingual, and therefore multinational wiki, is there any reason why PST is enforced upon all of us? I am aware of manually overriding timezone in user preferences, but it doesn't want to work for me, and I don't see any evidence that manual override works for others. Can I therefore suggest we change our default time to UTC? Comments of support or not please. Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 07:09, 6 December 2017 (PST)

For me the setting to my time zone has worked without problem. --Manorainjan 07:12, 6 December 2017 (PST)
  • Agree I am all for standardizing and internationalizing this site. Koavf (talk) 11:32, 6 December 2017 (PST)
Manor - what timezone suffix is displaying for you on this page? For me - even though I have set my user prefs to London, talk pages are still displayed as PST. Don't forget that many 'functions' on this wiki are broken!  :-( Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 15:30, 7 December 2017 (PST)
Obviously, the personal setting regarding time zone is to set time in the output of lists like RC so that it fits Your local time. It would be quite a hotchpotch if on talk pages every one would sign with their individual time zone. --Manorainjan 15:55, 7 December 2017 (PST)
Regarding the time zone to be used for general purpose I think it is best to use the time of the actual server of the wiki. Every wiki has its actual location, the server. To deviate from server time should be justified by a specific reason like when the actual server is in USA but the group using the (German language) wiki would be in Germany. But this wiki is founded by Americans and hosted in USA. I think it's perfectly OK to let this be reflected by using some American time zone for general purposes. BTW isn't the spelling time zone in two words? Manorainjan 15:55, 7 December 2017 (PST)
Wikipedia use UTC, and their servers are in the US, same for Wikia. UTC is about reaching out, being global, not being centric to one particular country.
'Timezone' is one word in American English, but two separate words in British and Commonwealth English. There are many quirks between American and British English - gotta love what our US friends call a 'bumbag'!! [1]  :-O Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 16:57, 7 December 2017 (PST)
Danish and German Wikipedia use CEST & CET, Arabic uses EET. UTC is accidentally the same time as England. So the English Wikipedia is England centric ;-) I don't know where the servers for German Wikipedia stand, but I guess in Germany. Tell me if you got specific information about that which are different. --Manorainjan 18:05, 7 December 2017 (PST)
Do you really think that the different language editions of Wikipedia are hosted all over the world? As tho there are servers in Lichtenstein, Austria, etc. for German speakers and then some in Peru and Equatorial Guinea for Hispanics...? No, they are all in the United States. For a long time, Florida but I believe Virginia now. Koavf (talk) 19:48, 7 December 2017 (PST)
IT is not a belief system. "Wir betreiben eigene Server". Since the content of the German language version of Wikipedia is mostly read and written from users located in Germany and surrounding German speaking regions, it is reasonable, not to send the data back and forth to Florida. --Manorainjan 00:41, 8 December 2017 (PST)
See the page about the Esams cluster in Amsterdam. There is another cluster in Singapore. Maybe Your point of view is a bit American centrically? --Manorainjan 00:54, 8 December 2017 (PST)
Of course there are some back-up servers across the world--the goal is to spread the encyclopedia. But they don't host all of the content for different language editions in the places around the world where they speak it. Do you think that the servers for the Portuguese edition are in Brazil and Mozambique and Portugal and Macau? It's one of the most absurd things I've ever read. Koavf (talk) 10:28, 8 December 2017 (PST)

<reset indent>

Manor - get your facts correct, UTC is not the timezone for England - GMT and BST are the correct zones for the UK (which consists of four constituent countries) and the Republic of Ireland. Requesting UTC has nothing to do with trying to somehow 'claim' centricity in favour of the UK. UTC is merely a 'Universal' timezone which is used around the world - for a vast array of industries - aviation, shipping, military, meteorology, communications, satellite technology (the US-owned and operated Global Positioning System [GPS] uses UTC), and international IT infrastructure all work from UTC.

As for server location - that is a complete red herring. As you have discovered, Wikimedia Foundation have central servers located in the US, but they also have relay and redundancy servers in Europe and Asia - and they will ALL use UTC. Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 09:47, 8 December 2017 (PST)

Speaking of red herrings, UTC, GMT and WET are all the same time: UTC +0 ;-) --Manorainjan 10:32, 8 December 2017 (PST)
Once again, Manor, you are wrong. UTC is an international timezone, GMT is not - it's a local timezone. UTC is a fixed constant year-round timezone, GMT is a transient half-yearly timezone. Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 05:40, 10 December 2017 (PST)

Cosmetic: I do not really care if You change the time zone of this wiki. Just do not delude Yourself about its importance. Changing the time zone here will go unnoticed by 99.999 999 % of wikisphere. Topics of real importance are mentioned here: WikiIndex:Site statistics information Manorainjan 10:50, 8 December 2017 (PST)

Who mentioned anything about "my importance"? You are a deluded fantasist! Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 05:40, 10 December 2017 (PST)
You can insult me, because You are the one with the admin buttons. If I had called You names like that You would have blocked me. --Manorainjan 05:54, 10 December 2017 (PST)

Logos of wikimedia wikis missing

I saw that the logos of the entries of wikipedia, wiktionary and so on are missing. What happens? --Manorainjan 16:00, 7 December 2017 (PST)

Can you please show some examples? Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 05:41, 10 December 2017 (PST)

Permanent block of Manorainjan

What are you waiting for? He seems not to be learning his lessons and is continuing his rude behaviour. He should really be blocked - he caused problems to many users. --67.207.90.236 10:27, 11 December 2017 (PST)

The problem is that his edits are helpful as well as off-putting. This would be simpler if he were only a troll or engaged in something which is clear vandalism but as it stands, he is just intermittently obnoxious and when that spills over into an actual confrontation, it requires intervention. Koavf (talk) 10:48, 11 December 2017 (PST)
Well, then you can warn him with a temporary block... --104.236.168.56 10:57, 11 December 2017 (PST)
He has been blocked before. Do you have in mind some particular incident that demands blocking him now? Koavf (talk) 11:11, 11 December 2017 (PST)
Here - the edit summary is an attack to Hoof Hearted ("go ahead, make Your seconds ;-)") --107.191.56.63 12:24, 11 December 2017 (PST)
This is a perfect example of him being an ass--even somewhat hostile--but I really don't think it warrants a permanent block. At some point, enough of that with nothing constructive would definitely warrant that person being blocked but I just don't think this is enough. Koavf (talk) 15:08, 11 December 2017 (PST)
Here - editing other users' talk pages and intruding into other people's business. He changed a title to a subtitle without giving a proper reason. --192.241.201.193 11:20, 14 December 2017 (PST)
Dang, the way Manor just barged in and changed the formatting like that, shoving his two bytes where they weren't invited and certainly don't belong, shows we're dealing with a real Genghis Khan who doesn't mind invading everywhere and everything he possibly can. Somebody do something, the guy's out of control! If you let him keep conquering one user talk page after another like this, eventually it'll become too late to oppose him as he will have become so powerful as to be ... UNSTOPPABLE. Leucosticte (talk) 14:32, 14 December 2017 (PST)
If adding two = to a conversation makes me 'Genghis Khan', than maybe I should add six = next time, in order to become 'Master of the Universe' ;-) Manorainjan 14:41, 14 December 2017 (PST)
And what about this? It is abuse and defamatory content. Accusing users of being sockpuppets. --138.197.192.137 14:39, 14 December 2017 (PST)
Manor, can't you see how intimidated people are by your behavior, to the point that they're afraid to even register an account on this wiki before participating in ban discussions concerning you? This #MeToo movement is really gaining steam; now we have not one, not two, not three, nor four, but FIVE separate IP address accusers coming forward to report your wiki-assaults. That many anons can't be lying; you must have done SOMETHING. Confess now, and clear your conscience while there's still time. Take responsibility and show contrition, and maybe there will be lenience. Leucosticte (talk) 15:02, 14 December 2017 (PST)
You may be right in the assumption that those IP-edits are done by somebody who has or had an account here. But all conclusions You are drawing from there I disagree with. To discuss sockpuppetry and cowardice is not my business. I leave all this slandering to others. --Manorainjan 15:09, 14 December 2017 (PST)
That's just a minor annoyance at most and somewhat helpful at best. Koavf (talk) 16:30, 14 December 2017 (PST)
I don't think Manorainjan deserves a ban. And You were all so focused in this conversation that You didn't realise that a vandal returned here with a sockpuppet. Manorainjan, with Your help, he confessed everything ;-) --104.236.168.56 06:56, 15 December 2017 (PST)

Checkuser request

I request a check user on Usa11, a suspect sockpuppet of HAL-9000. --45.76.123.109 11:58, 15 December 2017 (PST)

That user hasn't edited. Koavf (talk) 17:53, 15 December 2017 (PST)
As of 27 December 2017, Usa11 still has not made any edits. Their IP address originates from Russia, and that is all I am prepare to divulge. 45.76.123.109 – do you have any specific information which demonstrates sock activity? Best, Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 23:28, 26 December 2017 (PST)

Fix WikiIndex's copyright footer

Go, and scroll down, right now. You'll see this:

WikiIndex's content is available under the [[:Category:Wiki Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike|Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0]]. Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners.. Logos are displayed here as 'fair use', with copyrights retained by their owners.

While it does work on the copyright warning (the warning that shows up when you're editing below either "☐ Watch this page" or "☑️ Watch this page"):

Please note that all contributions to this WikiIndex wiki are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0. Logos are displayed here as 'fair use', with copyrights retained by their owners. (see WikiIndex:Copyrights for details). Logos are displayed here as 'fair use', with copyrights retained by their owners. Anything you write here may be changed by others, and redistributed. You are promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

This is not a free wiki hosting site – this is a wiki 'index' of all wiki, wiki people, wiki software, wiki farms, and wiki ideas.
Contributions outside of that scope may be treated as test edits and likely to be removed.

Wiki markup doesn't work on the footer though, thus, it results in broken markup and looks ugly. To fix this, I propose the changes to two pages and two variables I can't edit:

(At the top is what I assume to be the original, and at the right is what I think would look better)

On LocalSettings.php:
$wgRightsText = "[[:Category:Wiki Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike|Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0]]. Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners.";
$wgRightsText = "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License";

(To the left is the original, to the right is what the code I'd like to be put on the pages)

MediaWiki:Copyright
{{SITENAME}}'s content is available under $1. {{SITENAME}}'s content is available under the $1. Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners.
MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning
All contributions to {{SITENAME}} are considered to be released under the $2 (see $1 for details). Anything you write here may be changed by others, and redistributed. You are promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. '''Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!'''{{clear}}<big>'''This is [[WikiIndex:About#What WikiIndex is not|not]] a free [[wiki]] hosting site – this is an [[:Category:All|index]] of [[WhatIsWiki|wiki]], [[:Category:Wiki People|wiki people]], [[:Category:Wiki Engine|wiki software]], [[:Category:WikiFarm|wiki farms]] and [[:Category:WikiIdea|wiki ideas]].<br> Contributions outside of that scope will be treated as test edits and be [[WikiIndex:Deleting pages|removed]].'''</big> All contributions to {{SITENAME}} are considered to be released under the $2 (see $1 for details). Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners. Anything you write here may be changed by others, and redistributed. You are promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. '''Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!'''{{clear}}<big>'''This is [[WikiIndex:About#What WikiIndex is not|not]] a free [[wiki]] hosting site – this is an [[:Category:All|index]] of [[WhatIsWiki|wiki]], [[:Category:Wiki People|wiki people]], [[:Category:Wiki Engine|wiki software]], [[:Category:WikiFarm|wiki farms]] and [[:Category:WikiIdea|wiki ideas]].<br> Contributions outside of that scope will be treated as test edits and be [[WikiIndex:Deleting pages|removed]].'''</big>

For those who don't understand, I just moved the "Logos are fair use, with copyrights for them" thing from the $wgRightsText variable, which MediaWiki didn't intend to have, to the right place, which is MediaWiki:Copyright.

The results

The copyright notice on the footer would look better:
(Old one at the top, new one at the bottom)

WikiIndex's content is available under [[:Category:Wiki Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike|Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0]]. Logos are displayed here as '[[WikiIndex:Fair Use|fair use]]', with copyrights retained by their owners..
WikiIndex's content is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Logos are displayed here as 'fair use', with copyrights retained by their owners.

The copyright warning at the editing screen would look almost exactly the same:

All contributions to WikiIndex are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0. Logos are displayed here as 'fair use', with copyrights retained by their owners. (see WikiIndex:Copyrights for details). Anything you write here may be changed by others, and redistributed. You are promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
This is not a free wiki hosting site – this is an index of wiki, wiki people, wiki software, wiki farms and wiki ideas.
Contributions outside of that scope will be treated as test edits and be removed.
All contributions to WikiIndex are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (see WikiIndex:Copyrights for details). Logos are displayed here as 'fair use', with copyrights retained by their owners. Anything you write here may be changed by others, and redistributed. You are promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
This is not a free wiki hosting site – this is an index of wiki, wiki people, wiki software, wiki farms and wiki ideas.
Contributions outside of that scope will be treated as test edits and be removed.
Conclusion

Merry Christmas. And what do you think about it? Luis (talk • contribs • guestbook) 03:45, 23 December 2017 (PST)

I think it's good. The problem is: who does have backend access on this wiki? --Usa11 (talk) 12:39, 23 December 2017 (PST)
Let me know if there's something I can help with Raymond King | talk
Actioned

Usa11 — I now have limited backend access, restricted to what is available through the MediaWiki interface. Server-side access needs to be addressed to Raymond King.

Luis Anton Imperial — many thanks for your fantastic help. I have now actioned all three of your suggestions; I would appreciate your feedback. From my perspective, I have noticed the following:

  1. The change to LocalSettings.php has been successful in fixing the 'double-double' square brackets problem.
  2. The change to MediaWiki:Copyright appears to have been successful
  3. The change to MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning is less than successful. The standard size text (including bold) appears as per your suggested result, however, the two lines of large bold text refuse to display. I have subsequently removed {{clear}}, in the hope that was the cause of the problem, and replaced with a couple of html breaks - but still no joy. Do you have suggestions?

I shall be archiving the 2017 elements of this talk page, so if there are any new comments or suggestions to this particular section, please start a new section on our current Commnunity portal talk page, and link back to this section in the archived page. If anyone is unsure how to link back to archives, please let me know and I shall gladly create any required links for you. Regards to all. Sean, aka Hoof Hearted • Admin / 'Crat • talk2HH 09:14, 3 January 2018 (PST)

Spam

Why is noone deleting all the spam? --95.195.148.235 15:22, 29 December 2017 (PST)

Which SPAM? Care to set a wiki link? --Manorainjan 15:28, 29 December 2017 (PST)

Server move 2017

Until now now data under WikiIndex:Server move 2017. The popularPages-Extension is not installed. --Manorainjan 16:42, 31 December 2017 (PST)

Retrieved from "https://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk:Community_portal/Archive_4&oldid=202644"