Template talk:OnWikia

misleading

I think this template is misleading. Wikia apparently does not check their extensions at all. Extension:Tabber has an obvious XSS and is enabled on all wikia wikis, Extension:DynamicPageList (third-party) also has an XSS (and possibly an sql injection issue, but then again maybe not, I can't remember of the top of my head, but definitely had the XSS) which was enabled on some (but not all) wikia wikis. Bawolff 21:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

We could remove the "It means that the extension is stable and works well enough to be used by such high-traffic websites." part. We could also simply delete the template. It's generally reasonable to take for granted that any extension used on Wikimedia will be secure and stable (Template:OnWikimedia), but perhaps it's not safe to make the same assumption for Wikia. —Emufarmers^(T|C) 05:32, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Removed. Max Semenik 06:37, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm still tempted to delete the template altogether. Objections? —Emufarmers^(T|C) 21:50, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

No objections from me. Personally I don't even see the point of Template:OnWikimedia, since Special:Version exists and is automatically more up-to-date than any extension page here. --Jack Phoenix _(Contact) 00:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

OnWikimedia actually makes some sense, because not every extension is enabled on every project, so this template along with its category helps with tracking. Oh, and no objections against deletion of OnWikia. Max Semenik 06:47, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

On Wikimedia is good as a general quality marker, since crap extensions don't get enabled on wikimedia, so it allows people who are starting their own wiki to find "good" extensions. Bawolff 00:04, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. —Emufarmers^(T|C) 23:28, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikia extensions are extremely stable and used by thousands of editors.

The concern here seems to be that editors will download these extensions thinking that they are stable and meet a security guideline when they do not. We have extremely unstable and risky extensions on this site and we let editors decide. Lets please let the editors decide what is a quality extension and what is not a quality extension.

These concerns can be addressed in several ways.

We have already removed the: "It means that the extension is stable and works well enough to be used by such high-traffic websites."

We could even add a warning. Adamtheclown 18:30, 14 January 2011 (UTC)