Project:Requests/User rights/Tisane
User:Tisane
[edit]- Requested user-rights: Transwiki importer.
I am a MediaWiki extensions developer (proof) and am requesting transwiki rights because I would like to help transwiki documentation pertaining to MediaWiki installations in general (as opposed to pertaining just to Wikimedia projects) from Meta Wiki to MediaWiki.org. Thanks, — Tisane 06:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think we need more crap transwiki'd from Meta to here. Not a comment on you personally, just that I'm getting tired of useless stuff being transferred here simply because Meta doesn't want it. Most of the stuff in that category of "stuff to be transferred to mediawiki.org" can probably be deleted. ^demon 00:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Aren't there procedures in place for dealing with useless content that gets imported? E.g., Template:Delete can be applied and we can delete it after a week. On the other hand, if a page's useless nature is obvious from the beginning, then I think it should be submitted to m:Meta:Requests for deletion without transwiki'ing it; and if meta doesn't want to delete it, we can just remove the m:Template:MoveToMediaWiki tag, and thereby lessen the chance that someone else will transwiki it. Perhaps for extensive imports (i.e. many subpages), it would be better to poll on MediaWiki.org first before importing. That's one of the reasons I tested for support on the pywikipediabot import. Maybe a page like Project:Proposed imports can be used to debate such questions. Whenever the community rejects the import, then we should remove the m:Template:MoveToMediaWiki tag on that page, and perhaps note on the meta talk page that transwiki was proposed but rejected. Tisane 01:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with ^demon about the meta imports. Pretty much all of the remaining mediawiki stuff on meta is years out of date, useless, and/or redundant to content that's already here. Are there any specific pages you think might be useful? Mr.Z-man 02:37, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I didn't realize it was going to be such a big deal. If it were up to me, I would just transwiki all that stuff, but that's because I'm kind of a hyper-inclusionist guy. There not seeming to be any procedure for the MediaWiki.org community to decide what should be imported and what shouldn't, other than by selectively giving out transwiki rights to those who aren't very inclusionistic, maybe I should withdraw this nom. (If, on the other hand, a different procedure were to be developed in the future, in which the community would decide what to import, I would be happy to abide by its decisions and help with the transwiki'ing.) It does look kinda shabby for meta to have so many of those "move to mediawiki.org" templates plastered everywhere, but perhaps that's their problem. Maybe I should just go over there and start removing such templates that have been in place for more than a year with no action taken?
- I agree with ^demon about the meta imports. Pretty much all of the remaining mediawiki stuff on meta is years out of date, useless, and/or redundant to content that's already here. Are there any specific pages you think might be useful? Mr.Z-man 02:37, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Aren't there procedures in place for dealing with useless content that gets imported? E.g., Template:Delete can be applied and we can delete it after a week. On the other hand, if a page's useless nature is obvious from the beginning, then I think it should be submitted to m:Meta:Requests for deletion without transwiki'ing it; and if meta doesn't want to delete it, we can just remove the m:Template:MoveToMediaWiki tag, and thereby lessen the chance that someone else will transwiki it. Perhaps for extensive imports (i.e. many subpages), it would be better to poll on MediaWiki.org first before importing. That's one of the reasons I tested for support on the pywikipediabot import. Maybe a page like Project:Proposed imports can be used to debate such questions. Whenever the community rejects the import, then we should remove the m:Template:MoveToMediaWiki tag on that page, and perhaps note on the meta talk page that transwiki was proposed but rejected. Tisane 01:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- No hard feelings or anything like that; I just thought this was going to be a straightforward, mechanical role of implementing community consensus, rather than exercising discretion. Tisane 04:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- The problem is that some of it is so old, its actually wrong now, or at least broken (some of it may never have been right in the first place). Its not a question of "inclusionism" - this isn't Wikipedia. Its a question of utility. Most of it appears to be unmaintained extensions in userspace. At the very least these should be verified that they still work with the current version of MW before they are moved. Mr.Z-man 16:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I went ahead and started a thread about this matter here. Tisane 22:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- The problem is that some of it is so old, its actually wrong now, or at least broken (some of it may never have been right in the first place). Its not a question of "inclusionism" - this isn't Wikipedia. Its a question of utility. Most of it appears to be unmaintained extensions in userspace. At the very least these should be verified that they still work with the current version of MW before they are moved. Mr.Z-man 16:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- No hard feelings or anything like that; I just thought this was going to be a straightforward, mechanical role of implementing community consensus, rather than exercising discretion. Tisane 04:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I agree that we don't want to dredge up all the archaic crap that's still left at meta just because it happens to pertain to MediaWiki. I think more useful than jus removing the MoveToMediawiki tags would be a {{MoveToMediaWikiRejected}}: a statement that we have clearly indicated we don't want the page. Whether meta chooses to then delete it is up to them, but it should stop people running the debate round in circles. Happy‑melon 11:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- An excellent point. Tisane 21:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)