Correct: mul.ws is now supported thanks to the hard work of the fine developers here. Thanks for clarifying.

Redundant to T378318

Redundant to T378318

Redundant to T378318

In T54971#10259809, @MGA73 wrote:

Okay I understand that there are some concerns about the content of beta.wikisource. So if sitelinks are allowed then at some point someone will add links to content on beta.

But sitelinks are also used for templates like GFDL and for that reason I see benefits of allowing beta.wikisource to use sitelinks on wikidata.

So who wins? The yes or the no? Or is there a way to allow one and not the other? No clue. But now I said it and perhaps that can inspire someone to find a solution. :-)

Courtesy link: https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Colloquium&oldid=2666876#'Edit_to_my_talk_page'_notification_bug?

Wow, weird. Thanks.

In T376438#10201443, @Pppery wrote:

Koavf's link works for me.

And I cannot download the PDF.

I just downloaded https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Colloquium&direction=prev&oldid=2661311 as a PDF and it worked just fine.

This is not the venue to lobby for your own wiki. If you have something that could be related to the mission of the Wikimedia Foundation, please see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects

The videos are too large, usually 3 GB+. I really don't know why it sometimes fails on the server side or gets stuck at <var>X</var>% for days, or sometimes uploads lightning fast.

Great. I'll take a look at my other tickets and edit them accordingly.

@Peachey88 , why did you remove these tags? If this is something that should be done every time, the Video2Commons tool should probably be changed.

Phabricator does not exist to list tasks related to vanity projects.

Phabricator does not exist to list tasks related to vanity projects.

No more discussion, so tacitly, the community is still in favor.

If you use your Wikimedia credentials via OAuth, just see here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_rename_policy

Yeah, there are definitely different calendars in use around the world, often in tandem with Gregorian, but we don't use any of those for timing when things enter the public domain due to the WMF and its servers being based in the United States.

Pardon me for being so dumb here, but are you talking about words or just the number like "1929"?

This is not a forum for proposing new projects. If you have a new proposal, go to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects

For what it's worth, this would be valuable to projects like Wikidata and Wikifunctions, where the page model of the vast majority of content is not wikitext, thus making many SpecialPages unusable (e.g. UncategorizedPages on Wikidata).

I'm inclined to say that "more pretty pictures with less text" is superior to "a couple of pretty pictures with some text-dense boxes" so I am inclined to keep the front page more like how it is currently. But that's a weak preference, not a clear must-have. It would be nice if we had some kind of UX testing to confirm "Users can get the information that they need with [Design X] faster than with [Design Y]" or somesuch, but I realize that takes time and money. Maybe a microgrant from the WMF is in order?

Came here from the post on en.wp's Signpost and I have looked over comments here. Is there a way to make an HTTP redirect from "https://mastodon.wikimedia.org/" to "https://wikimedia.social/"? Furthermore, it seems like "https://wikimedia.social/" should be some kind of landing page for any and all social media profiles and a Mastodon instance would be best at "https://mastodon.wikimedia.social/", but I suspect that ship has sailed.

This is not the place to propose a new project: this is the place where we could assign responsibilities once there is a consensus to make a new project. See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects to propose a new project.

Both should be closed. Funwormguy1245, this is not a bug.

Both should be closed. Funwormguy1245, this is not a bug.

If you'll see above c. 2020-03-03, this is mostly a matter of doing things like storing interwiki links and making Wikidata-powered infoboxes, not having locally stored databases at Wikispore.

Was this project approved on Meta?

Is this a proposal for a new project? If so, that goes on Meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects

Made the following because this hasn't been resolved yet: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T298406

Just noting that I had a lot of trouble uploading a large file: y2commons didn't work, ChunkedUpload didn't work, publishing from my stash didn't work (a half-dozen times), and one last try at ChunkedUpload/stash failed so badly that the special page for my stash wouldn't load. I have no clue what is up. Another user helped me by uploading the file to en.wp but it needs to be ported over to Commons and overwrite the malformed version there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:David_Pakman_talks_to_Rebel_Wisdom_about_politics_and_media.webm

In T274495#6822572, @Aklapper wrote:

This conversation reminds me of discussing the "Export to Excel" button in upstream Phab code in the past - basically https://secure.phabricator.com/T5908#72402.

In T274495#6822569, @Xover wrote:

In T274495#6822475, @Koavf wrote:

In T274495#6822466, @Xover wrote:

Absent specific proposals for better wording

I gave a proposal.

Indeed. But it was [not] specific