Project:Forum

Category:Manual vs Category:MediaWiki Manual
I propose we use Category:Manual instead of Category:MediaWiki Manual to categorize all the Manual pages. Nothing on the site is about anything except MediaWiki. So "MediaWiki" is redundant in any category name and complicates things unnecessarily. Using Category:Manual keeps it easier for people to type it the same every time. If no one objects, I will make this change next week. --Rogerhc 05:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I decided not to do it. It feel it is redundant to use prefix "MediaWiki " on navigational labels on this site, even on pagenames and category names, I feel. However, I will defer to the preference of Bdk and HappyDog who I think created the category and subcategories prefixed with "MediaWiki " because I sense the consensus among the three of us is (two to one) to use it. I can adapt to it. Thanks for all the work everyone is doing. :-) Rogerhc 22:29, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I am in favor of removal of "MediaWiki" in the cat name. But would like to here why it is there. After 3 month nobody showed up, it maybe should just be done. Tobias Conradi 23:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree but I am too burned out to do it, myself. I'm pleased to see how this wiki has developed while I've been gone however. --Rogerhc 05:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

New template "languages"
See Template:Languages for use on this site.

Transwiki from meta.wikimedia.org
I'm interested in helping with moving the mediawiki specific help/FAQ etc. pages from http://meta.wikimedia.org/ but couldn't find much along the lines of a guide to the process. Project:Help wasn't much help. Anyone have pointers? --Swift 09:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Movement will be done by server admins. But you may ask HappyDog or me for details. Help is welcomed, but there are still some tricky issues ... but read meta:Meta:MetaProject to transfer content to MediaWiki.org and join the discussion there :-) -- :Bdk: 03:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I've enabled transwiki imports from meta via Special:Import. Any admin here can now slurp a page over from meta, with history intact, via Special:Import. Please replace the page there with so there's a link from the old location to the new one. --Brion VIBBER 14:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Cheers Brion - do you think it's worth creating a special transwiki namespace to handle this, or just to import the pages directly and move them afterwards? I'm assuming that pages retain their name when transferring across (the interface allows you to change the namespace). --HappyDog 03:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I would like to help during the transfer of pages by being an admin and importing + fixing up the new pages, I have done a lot of work tagging pages that need to be moved on meta-wiki and would like to see the project through. Also (I have already posted this on meta) I think it would be a good idea to, rather than create a special import namespace, import pages in small batches - or indivdually - and sort them out, then do some more. That method would allow us to see what is changing and not be overwhelmed by the incoming pages. Lcarsdata (Talk) 19:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * ...hm, this is not very likely to happen. -- :Bdk: 22:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Which idea? Lcarsdata (Talk) 18:50, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Project:Current issues
I created Project:Current issues to deal with 'current issues' regarding MW.org. I'm sure there are more issues that I haven't thought of. I look forward to your input. --HappyDog 23:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * That is similar in purpose to Project:Forum. So I put a link to both pages at the very top of both. Leadership and action are needed so that MW.org can become an effective MW documentation wiki. Thanks for your help! --Rogerhc 22:43, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * What exactly is the difference between the two? --Swift 19:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * None; I suggest they be merged into one page. However, leadership in resolving the matters discussed on both pages (or a merged page) is needed so that they do not turn into a hope drain. Who will lead? Please step forward. :-) Rogerhc 01:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree. Let's merge them if there are no objections within a week.
 * I don't think lack of leadership will be a detrimental factor. Anarchy will work as long as people don't abandon pages. Pick what you want to work on and stick with it &mdash; we can then coordinate on the interfaces. --Swift 01:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi - sorry about the lack of response. Have been away for the last couple of weeks.  Hopefully I'll be able to make up for my absence now by littering the wiki with responses to recent dialog (which I was so keen to open up before I vanished into thin air!).  The main reason for starting a new page was that the issues I raised there were things I considered fundamental issues that are holding up a lot of our other work, in particular the organisation of the site and transferral of content from meta.  I considered this page to be more for the day-to-day running of the wiki and didn't want this important content to be lost.  I'm sorry that wasn't spelled out more clearly.
 * I agree with Swift, in that leadership is not the issue here, but whilst anarchy normally works there are some big issues that cannot be handled in this manner, namely those that relate to the PD/GFDL split (as we must not break the PD license, and we do not want to create GFDL material that we later find out should have been PD) and the moving of material from meta (as it is a large and technical job that we can't afford to mess up). Most other stuff, e.g. navigation, would be good to reach a concensus on so that we don't waste or duplicate effort, but can equally be handled by people being bold. --HappyDog 01:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Thick blue border
MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning, Project:Copyrights and possibly other pages refer to a thick blue border for pages in the Help namespace. This border isn’t visible with the Skins Classic, Nostalgia, and Cologne Blue. Someone might want to fix that. – Schnargel 12:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Good point - I hadn't noticed this. Upon investigation, it appears that this is due to a bug in MW which means namespace specific CSS customisations do not work in these skins.  I have logged the bug at 6976 --HappyDog 00:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * This bug has been fixed, and these pages now have the blue border - what do you think? I'm not sure they are particularly elegant... --HappyDog 01:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Template:Languages
Just wanted to bring a comment I made to Template talk:Languages to the attention of the community in request for comments. If I get none, I'll probably go on a mass edit spree... --Swift 01:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Category:Help
Category:Help is for MediaWiki generic site user help. See Project:PD Help for discussion of this and or the Help front door: Help:Contents

Category:PD Help was also created by somebody. Category:Help however (no "PD ") is simpler, more maintainable and keep this wiki navigable. Furthermore, other sites using MediaWiki who will want to import the "Help:" namespace probably wont license it public domain. Therefor Category:PD Help is an undesirable label on those pages. So let's use Category:Help.

To fix this I propose to re-categorize all Category:PD Help pages to Category:Help next week by manually delete the "PD " from the category labels of respective pages to update them to Category:Help --Rogerhc 00:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

_Please comment_


 * I admire your enthusiasm to kick some order into the wiki, but I think there are some important things that need sorting out first, which are the items being discussed on Project:Current issues. I would recommend holding back slightly until we have established how the content will be organised, otherwise you may find you need to do it all twice! --HappyDog 01:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Licensing
Would there be any specific reason for using GFDL rather than PD on the rest of the site (as opposed to just on the PD help)? I understand the reason for wanting attribution in the case of the Wikimedia projects, but here I doupt we have to worry about anyone giving Mediawiki documentation without referencing MW.org as the source.

I know there will hardly be a change in licensing without a great incentive given the hassle involved in reissuing the content, but being more of a BSD than a GPL type guy, I'm interested in the reasoning (if ther is any). --Swift 05:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You're talking about all contents in general (including images, talk and user pages)? -- :Bdk: 07:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes. Only one site license: anything posted would be in the public domain unless otherwise specified. Images on Commons are sometimes multi-licensed, that isn't a feature of the GFDL, right? --Swift 08:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The main problem is that a lot of content will (and to a certain extent, already is) from GDFL sources, for example meta or the docs included with the MediaWiki code.  Also, any contributions already made to the wiki would need relicensing or rewriting.  In my view, a less-restricitve CC license (though not a PD license) would be the best bet, but I think it is too late to change to that too.  Bear in mind that there is a lot of content on meta that will ultimately end up here.  If we license as anything other than GFDL then we will have to rewrite that from scratch too.  Finally, extension writers are posting their extension code here, and I'm not sure they would be particularly happy to release this under a PD license. --HappyDog 12:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I was aware of the problems with importing content from Meta and that changing the license is definately a little late. I was just interested seeing if there was some licensing issues that made GFDL more appropriate than something else (I find the restriction that derivative work must have the same licese too overly strict &mdash; and the source of some of our problems now). It's a good point that the extensions authors would like different licenses.
 * Thanks for your comments. --Swift 16:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Searching the site
Currently searching MW.org does not give the search result we would ultimatly want. Ultimatly we should be able to search using the search box in the nav bar for any $wg, any hook, etc, and see the page on that $wg or hook. Currently searching for $wgAntiLockFlags gives zero results, because all $wg's are in Manual:, and the search defaults to only searching Main:. Confusingly enough, even searching in the manual namespace results in zero results (Strangly, a search including the Help: namespace does give a result of Help:$wgAntiLockFlags, which has no text). I suggest we should investigate defaulting searches to include the Manual, Help (and project?) namespace, and obviously make it so it does actually search those namespaces. --Rick 22:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Just a quick answer: This is mainly because of sloooooow indexing. You may have experienced this for new or moved pages on other Wikimedia projects ... (the config files were moved from help to manual recently).
 * To include the help and manual namespaces into the default search should be possible. -- :Bdk: 23:05, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I think we need to pester a developer for this. I suggest we do it at the same time as we ask for the 'extension' namespace, and to rename 'project' to 'site'.  I don't think the second of these options has been agreed between us yet (see Project:Current issues), so perhaps we can get a concensus on that?  Oh yeah, and Bdk is right about the indexing.  I don't know if there's a way we can force a refresh - perhaps another thing to ask the devs? --HappyDog 23:52, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * A possible fix for setting the default search namespaces; I was just looking through my Special:Prefences Misc and noticed a user can choose which namespaces to search by default :-), IIRC when creating a user we can set default preferences, we'd still need to do something for current users. (And yes searching for $wg's in Manual: does work now) --Rick 17:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes - that is the setting we would need to change. You're right - it may not affect existing users.  I will raise these points when we speak to the devs. --HappyDog 12:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * $wgNamespacesToBeSearchedDefault in LocalSettings.php Lcarsdata (Talk) 12:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

This issue is now fixed. New users have search enabled for the main, help:, manual: and extension: namespaces by default. Unfortunately there is no easy way to update this setting for existing users, so you will have to modify your preferences manually if you registered before this was switched on (some time last month). --HappyDog 02:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Extension demo wiki
There are lots of the extensions that don't have links to an example wiki where you can see it working. a mate told me about awardspace and it gives anyone 200mb and 5gig bandwidth free. Maybe we could set up an "extensions demo wiki" there, and since its free, and that account won't be used for anything else, we don't have to worry about 1)dodgy extensions accidently screwing it up 2)dodgy extensions deliberatly screwing it up. There would be some admining involved in installing the extensions and reinstalling when it buggers up, I'd be willing to help. (I'm sure other extensible OSS organisations have faced the same situation of an extension demo platform, I don't know what they're solution was, but it would be relevent if anyone knows)

Comments?

PS. Just thought, it could also demo skins anyone has added to User_Styles

--Rick 02:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I was going to suggest 100webspace.com which IMO is better than awardspace but both 100WS and awardspace only run PHP 4.?.? which will not run most extensions. Lcarsdata (Talk) 12:41, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I am setting up a personal web server with various different mediawiki installations on it. Coming soon to http://82.7.33.28 . Because it is a personal web server it will not be able to be on constantly - but will most of the time - and may have a few outages. But hopefully it will be good enough. Lcarsdata (Talk) 17:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * http://www.wikitest.co.uk/ has been established by me and will be online 24/7. Read below for more information. Lcarsdata (Talk) 18:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Error on MediaWiki main page and I can't fix it!
Moved from Project:Current issues

The front page for the MediaWiki project says:

"Download MediaWiki right away, or use the navigation on the right side to explore the basic site contents. You'll find the fundamental introduction translated into some other languages, but the reference language on the whole site is English. Please read more about this site."

The navigation bar is on the left side. Can someone with access fix this? It's terribly frustrating. Severnjc 19:21, 15 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Fixed. --HappyDog 01:03, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Categorizing dated information
Because MediaWiki is released on a quarterly schedule, the version number tends to get bumped up quite fast: in one year, the version has jumped from 1.4 to 1.8. It's often difficult to gauge exactly how much backwards compatibility is broken from each release: 1.5 saw massive database restructuring, 1.7 saw PHP 4 support removed, 1.8 only made minor database changes, but an extensive list of bugfixes. Future versions will have major backend architectural changes implemented.

Combine this with a penchant for customization and you've got a crash course for incompatibility. I actively maintain a hacky extension of my own, and upgrading to a new branch always makes me nervous. There are scores of information on this wiki as well as Meta that have text like "For MediaWiki 1.5.2" tacked on hastily, users browsing by these pages can only think: "Hmm... that looks outdated. Does it work on the latest version?"

Referencing English Wikipedia's method of updating outdated information, I'd like to propose similar infrastructure for the MediaWiki wiki, using version numbers rather than dates. This way, MediaWiki hackers who have time to test out methods can quickly find out what statements have not been tested for later versions.

Comments? &mdash; Edward Z. Yang (Talk) 01:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmmm.... I'm not sure whether this wiki is large enough yet to warrant this extra burden of administration. I think that a simpler set of rules could cover this situation:
 * If a reference is made to an old version of MediaWiki, it is either an obsolete feature or it is still available in the latest version.
 * If it is obsolete then mark it with the (where version is the version of MW in which it was deprecated).
 * If it is not obsolete then update the version number(s) in the article.
 * If you see an old version no. without an tag then it is out-of-date information.
 * If you can fix it, please do so.
 * If you can't or don't want to then don't, but treat the information with a pinch of salt.
 * --HappyDog 01:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The trouble with the simpler set of rules is there's no way to aggregate a list of all pages that need updating. Furthermore, some notes aren't as cut-and-dry as extant or obsolete: behavior can change subtly over versions.
 * Personally, I like simplicity and detest the abuse of templates with overly complex logic, but I think the functionality offered by "Updating information" is applicable to our situation. 02:59, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I do not think that we currently have enough active editors to make such categorisation worthwhile. If someone wants to go ahead and implement it I won't object, but I also wouldn't be surprised to find a lot of 'needs updating' tags scattered across the wiki which never get fixed.  Bear in mind, that fixing requires testing the appropriate feature/setting/extension on the new version - it is not a trivial task! --HappyDog 19:30, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, which we should make it as easy as possible for people who want to do so to do it. I'll go off and implement it. &mdash; Edward Z. Yang (Talk) 01:57, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


 * You can probably use any of the templates, which I copied over from meta. I tagged  to the right, so you see how it works... Titoxd (?!?) 09:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

AuthPlugin.php
Moved from AuthPlugin.php (which has now been deleted)

http://wiki.blitzed.org/Blitzed_MediaWiki_modifications

Seems to be pretty helpful, will someone please supply an example?


 * I wouldn't use it because: 1. It's on an ancient version of MediaWiki and 2. It modifies core files. &mdash; Edward Z. Yang (Talk) 22:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Manual categorisation
Taking a look at the list of pages in the Manual namespace, I notice an overwhelming amount of titles commencing with $wg. I suspect these configuration setting pages would be better off in their own subcategory; perhaps Category:Configuration settings, which could then be subcategorised.

Thoughts? robchurch | talk 01:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Good morning, Rob. Hm, this is the expected behaviour of Special:Allpages. And all these pages are already in Category:MediaWiki configuration settings and subcategories. But anyway, categorization does not change the general alphabetical listing in Allpages, Prefixindex or such ... (sorry to point that out so clearly, I assume you know that quite well normally ... maybe a lack of coffee, or being awake too long? *eeek* Please just remove this section, if you think it's better). -- :Bdk:  10:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Quite right, I shall have to do the blatant idiot dance again. robchurch | talk 10:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

My Userpage
Please could someone delete my userpage. Lcarsdata (Talk) 06:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * For what reason? Is there something confidential in the history that I need to duplicate across the Internet? robchurch | talk 10:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I've deleted it now as it was a user page (we don't really need a reason for such requests imo). Anyway, whatever the reason is, good luck on your way, Lcarsdata, and thanks for your help, especially on Meta. -- :Bdk: 12:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed - see Project:Deletion. --HappyDog 13:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Main page reprogramming
I have modified MediaWiki to make it completely template based. The base template is Template:Main page which takes one (optional) argument: the name of the language, and spits out the page in that language. This requires creation of a number of pages in the appropriate language (see Project:Main page templates) but makes it a lot easier to keep styling, etc. up to date. If a particular translation does not exist for the current language then the page gracefully falls back on the English translation, so feel free to do partial translations. I would suggest that the minimum amount to translate before using the template is 'welcome' and 'intro'. --HappyDog 01:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * btw - I have done the French translation (by copying from the existing version) as a test. All other languages still need doing. --HappyDog 01:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Help pages
I can't see any problem with having the help-pages under GFDL, could anyone please define the (for me non-existing) problem with that and the need to have them under PD. AzaToth 15:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Please have a look at Project:PD help. -- :Bdk: 20:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * +1 -- :Bdk: 21:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The GFDL is a disgusting, shit and downright viral licence. The conditions for reuse require laborious reproduction of the licence text. If end-users importing the pages into their wiki want to use a more or less restrictive licence, then they may have difficulty doing so. robchurch | talk 12:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * To expand on what Rob said, it would mean that the help pages could not be reasonably used on a private wiki. It would also mean a commitment to all users of the help content to make any of their local modifications available to the public - an unreasonable requirement, particularly as the public won't be interested. It would also require the inclusion of the full page history, or at least a list of all prior contributors. --HappyDog 13:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Bug in Template:Languages in categories
See Category:MediaWiki Introduction/es. – rotemliss – Talk 19:30, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes - this is due to a bug in ParserFunctions. See 8199 and meta:Talk:ParserFunctions. Any suggestions for fixing this would be welcome! --HappyDog 19:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I have put the links inside, that seems to work.--Patrick 00:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Well done Patrick - your fix seems to work a treat! --HappyDog 00:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Proposal for new Sidebar structure
Following a request on the mailing list to add a link to Download from SVN to the navigation bar, I did so; however, I ended up cramming it into the resources section. This isn't really an appropriate place for it to my mind, but in fact, there isn't an appropriate place for it.

I'm proposing a new structure for the sidebar at User:Robchurch/Sidebar which separates resources into "navigation", "get MediaWiki", "get support", "development" and "communicate", and would like to solicit feedback before anything actually changes on the site. I don't mind where discussion takes place, as long as it all happens in the same place - it might not be a bad idea to hold it on the proposal page itself. robchurch | talk 10:50, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

&larr; This is now live --HappyDog 03:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposal for new Hooks
I have installed the [|NamespacePermissions] extension, and added a small extension (as yet unpublished, written on the clock, seeking permission, long process) to allow categories within these protected namespaces to be protected as well. The purpose for this on the intranet wiki it is installed on is to limit access to highly sensitive information on the wiki. Works well!

There are some images that I need to likewise protect. This isn't going to be as easy. I am going to have to modify ImagePage.php directly to hide the images. It would be nice to have some hooks in ImagePage::view like in CategoryPage::view. --Genidiot 20:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)


 * This is the wrong place to ask. Please try http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/.  --HappyDog 02:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

http://www.wikitest.co.uk/
I have just created a mediawiki testing resource with versions 1.2.? to 1.9.3 unfortunately I am unable to host it constantly but it will be online 16:00 - 22:00 most weekdays, off line all of some weekends and online all of some weekends - all times in GMT. So my step father will allow me to keep it on all the time I will need to generate enough money from it to balance the power and hardware costs (low however). I also soon hope to purchase a domain name. Versions 1.2 - 1.5 may have accounts restricted and only available on request and later deleted, as robchurch says they have massive vulnerabilities. SVN releases may come soon too. Lcarsdata (Talk) 22:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I have been given permission to keep the PC on 24/7 and have also been allowed to purchase a domain. Visit http://www.wikitest.co.uk/ for more information! Hopefully I will be able to shift it over to a dedicated Linux computer (from the Windows it is currently on) when I get a new wireless receiver or manage to set up a proxy. Lcarsdata (Talk) 18:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Apparently a computer uses 1 unit of electricity every hour and a half while a TV uses one only every six. Therefore the site will now be replaced with a message and be able to use 1.2 through 1.6 when it is not 'switched on'. Lcarsdata 17:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Dynamic (automatic) extension list
Who would need to be asked to install the Extension:DynamicPageList?

We could do some nice things: automatic extension list. --GunterS 23:33, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Short answer from Brion: We could get DPL installed on this site maybe. As such questions already came up a couple of times before, I've also asked for DPL2 and DPLforum. Regarding these extensions, his definite answer was "no". So if we want a sort of dynamic page listing, then we're talking about DPL.
 * Further discussion would be neat, of course. What would be reasonable and possible use of DPL on MediaWiki.org? Advantages/disadvantages? Any opinions? -- :Bdk: 18:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, I've found that DPL tends to make pages load much slower than without it. My Firefox status bar must flash at least 10 times when rendering any page on my wiki (and the DPL page listed above). :/ I thought it was Extension:Semantic MediaWiki but the above wiki doesn't have that installed, yet the pages still take longer to load and the status bar flashes just as much (way too many calls to the server, or whatever). Also, using DPL is very annoying and needs to be made much more user-friendly for non-programmers. -Eep² 00:37, 24 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Note that we have the bot-maintained Extension:Matrix now, so perhaps this is no longer relevant? --HappyDog 13:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Help with documentation of BOINC Authentication extension
I wonder if someone with the appropriate rights here could help me import some documentation for an authentication extension I've written to facilitate logging in to the wiki based on previous authentication to a co-located BOINC project. The page in question is on my test site at http://pirates.spy-hill.net/glossary/index.php?title=BOINC_Authentication I could just copy what is there via cut and paste, but it seems better to preserve the editing history via export/import. I've already started a page here in the Extension: namespace with a template, but if that gets overwritten I can put in a new one once it's here. Thanks.

--Eric Myers 20:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Eric, thanks for pointing to this option. Currently, import on MediaWiki.org is restricted to Wikimedia's Meta Wiki, see *g* But I'll try to get this changed, hopefully soon. Regards -- :Bdk:  05:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for trying. Cheers --Eric Myers 12:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Templates, more templates
Hello, do we really need stuff like Template:Reqphoto on this site? See also … well, Template:Reqscreenshot could make sense, but I'm unsure, if dropping random templates like "image needed", "please translate", "help to extend", or whatever, all over the pages on MediaWiki.org really helps. Any opinions? -- :Bdk: 05:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * No. I am deleting them.  Reqscreenshot might one day be useful, but for the moment people seem quite capable of adding them themselves, when necessary. --HappyDog 17:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * OK - Deleted. In my opinion there is absolutely no point at all creating templates 'that might be required sometime in the future', and in particular the bulk importing of templates used on other wikis.  If you need a template, by all means create it, but they shouldn't just be added for the sake of it.  I would also like to avoid the horrible templates within templates within templates approach of other projects (says he who designed Template:Main page...) because these are often copied for use on other sites.  If they are too complicated we will be inundated with support questions like "why doesn't template X work properly when I put it on my wiki?".  Just my 2 cents --HappyDog 18:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Manual:Administration transwikied
I copied Manual:Administration from Meta; however, a lot of that page seems way out of date. I was thinking of this page as a hub for commonly-used sysadmin tasks (similar to the way Manual:LocalSettings.php contains frequently-used configuration settings), to fill out some of the requested pages in Manual:Contents/To do. Any help pruning it would be much appreciated. Titoxd (?!?) 06:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Manual:Before installing
Well, I've made the first draft of this page, as requested on Manual:Contents/To do. Adding more stuff so it is less of my POV would be much appreciated. :) Titoxd (?!?) 03:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

exec has been disabled for security reasons
The following error Warning: exec has been disabled for security reasons in /home/gpspda/public_html/wiki/includes/GlobalFunctions.php on line 1772 occurs during creating a thumbnail of an image. My hoster answered me that exec function really disabled due to security reasons; however, as far as I know in another scripts (e.g. Coppermine) a thumbnail has been made successfully without call to exec. How I can to make a thumbnail without calling the exec function? Thank you in advance. bigwig 08:29, 08 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I guess you'll have to set . This should stop server-side thumbnailing and instead tell the browser (client-side) to resize it. It might give uglier images this way though. Also, you use Project:Support desk for help on your own MediaWiki installation, the forum is for this site only. ;) — color probe  — Talk  — Contribs  ☼  10:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

What to do with the support desk
Cross-posting another discussion for visibility: Project:Current issues. Please comment. Tito<font color="#008000">xd (?!?) 04:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Reporting problem users?
Just wondering where you do that here on MediaWiki? Case in point is Special:Contributions/125.62.79.252 --Dr DBW 07:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this hint. The easiest option is to directly contact an admin or to report it here :-) -- :Bdk: 13:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd like to suggest that User:Eep be blocked from this wiki, he's an absolute time waster, disrespectful and generally lowers the quality of work with all his dealings. I've put a lot of time into trying to help him with his technical problems, but he has responded very badly. He's been hassling developers on the DPL wiki too and has also been banned indefinately from Wikipedia. Please see Extension talk:Simple Forms for example, thanks. --Nad 03:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Um, I've contributed plenty to MediaWiki, Nad. The only reason you consider me an "absolute time waster" is because I continue to point out bugs/flaws in your extensions. You treat people badly (by ignoring their requests for help) and they will treat you badly, Nad (or shall I call you Bad?)--it's a 2-way street, you know (perhaps you don't). Yes, it's all at the above link, but don't forget to see Extension talk:Simple Forms where, after asking my MW version and whether or not it was viewable, you completely ignored me. 5 days later I posted on your user page--quite politely, in fact--and what did you do? Why you blew me off, of course. Then you moved the discussion back to the extension's talk page and then you started quoting esoteric code and acted like I should know exactly what you're talking about and how to implement it in order to test the extension. By then I was already upset with you for treating me how you did, so my patience was already wearing thin, and your delayed responses didn't help. Then you didn't want to deal with me after I rejected creating an account for you on my wiki and/or giving you shell access (which even I don't have). I suggested you working with me to figure out the problem but you denied. Then you logged in anonymously and expected me to know it was you. It's all right there in that section and anyone can plainly see I was trying to work with you but you kept blowing me off.


 * I'm not hassling developers; I'm simply trying to get extensions to do what I want to do. Unfortunately, many extension developers seem short-sighted and unwilling to improve their extensions--and resist any attempt to make them better by blowing me off (ignoring me). Sad, really. This is hardly a reason to ban me from this wiki. And regarding my Wikipedia ban, I don't feel that was justified and I've tried appealing my Wikipedia ban to no avail either, unfortunately--but that's a separate issue so you bringing it up is seen as a desperate ploy to me.


 * As I said on the extension talk page, I don't appreciate being blow off and/or ignored as you and Gero have done to me. Give respect to others if you want them to respect you. You lost more and more of my respect each time you blew me off after you not working with me to solve Simple Forms' glaringly basic bugs (which I've pointed out at http://www.organicdesign.co.nz/Talk:Extension:SimpleForms.php#Bugs ). I would like to see Simple Forms improved but you just don't seem willing to even investigate the bugs, let alone actually fix them. And for "calling you out" you want me banned? That's rich! —Eep² 05:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I have pointed out that User:Nad was away during some of the discussion at the thread where the conversation degenerated. The time period was between the 11-Aug-07 to about the 24-Aug-07 as evidenced in the users audit trails where no code development took place (but alot of Sudoku). During this time he had access to someone elses computer (probably on dialup when the anonomous login that I pointed out was him occured) and would have responded to some simple questions that he might have had a quick answer to. I have asked that things be kept civil, lets keep the the issue objective, not personal. --Zven 23:07, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Zven, Nad began with the incivility as soon as he referred to me as a "time waster"--even banning me from his wiki because of it (where he claims I was irritating him, yet he failed/fails to realize his craptacular coding has been irritating me ever since I first encountered it! Which I, of course, have let him know...). If "wasting time" means reporting glaringly obvious bugs that should not exist in the first place, Nad obviously can't handle the slightest bit of criticism... And if he's going to reply to some people, while on vacation, he should at least have the decency and common courtesy (especially when he replies to someone else on the same page!) to inform the other user(s) that he does not have a solution/answer to their problem at the time, but will refer it to someone else--like you, Zven--who may be able to help (or simply state he's on vacation at the time). But, no, he decided to play the ignore(amus) game instead as usual. Not cool (or civil)! —Eep² 23:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Eep², please stop making personal remarks, I have illustrated that the version of this extension was 0.3.4, yes, it will have lot of problems as it not even release 1.0.0, with a version like that it is basically use at your peril. The conversation deteriorated quite early on as I have already mentioned well before he blocked you from his wiki. The way in which you interact with other people determines whether or not they want to interact with you. The reason I picked up on this thread was that all his extensions are on my watchlist, not by any contact from the author while he was away, so lets stop jumping to conclusions. --Zven 02:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Uh, what personal remarks? Just because an extension is beta doesn't give the author an excuse to ignore bug reports. It doesn't take a theoretical physicist to say that one won't be available for a week or 2 (whatever) when on vacation--but for the same author to then reply to some people but not others, would not show this to be the case that he is on vacation--hence my negative reaction towards Nad. I am completely justified in calling him out on this. Why are you acting like his personal secretary then if you have no outside contact with Nad? You sure seem a lot more affiliated with him than by simple watchlist monitoring! —Eep² 04:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Eep², in your previous response for example, Nad (or shall I call you Bad?). You were asked by User:Voice of All to cool it a bit. The extension is not only beta, it is version 0.3.4, which means it is pretty flacky. He gave you replies and was away during the time period in question. You allowed the conversation to degenerate to such a level that the User:Nad does not wish to correspond with you any further. Your last accusation is getting rediculous, I have made it clear to you that I know User:Nad as I had a meeting with him that was cancelled, however I have not had contact with him since my last meeting with him on 10-Aug-07. He certainly made no mention to me about any possible problems with you or anyone else when I saw him, we have other things to talk about. I saw the degeneration developing myself from my watchlist of Extension:Simple_Forms and the replys to the information I gave to the discussion. --Zven 07:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Uh, why do you bring up past remarks before I was asked to "cool it a bit"? That's pretty (and petty) low of you, Zven. The extension's release status is irrelevant and not an excuse for how Nad treated me as I've explained many times now (yet some, apparently, just don't seem to get it). I didn't allow the conversation to degenerate; he did that all by himself by refusing to work with me in solving the basic bug of even the damn extension having to be in its own directory in order to even work! That is such a basic coding 101 bug it's pathetic it even exists and is just one of many examples of Simple Forms bugs that show just how badly coded that extension truly is--and those aren't personal remarks against Nad but the simple, cold, hard factual truth of his extension. Whether or not that translates to him personally is up to you to decide--but he's already made that decision quite apparent to me anyway... So get over it already, Zven. Until Nad changes his attitude towards me and can accept the simple basic truthful criticism of his coding, he won't have my respect--and you're quickly losing mine by persisting with this incessant defense of his quite incivil behavior towards me. —Eep² 08:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Please do not continue this conversation any further. Eep - you need to be aware that no-one is under any obligation to fix bugs or add features, either to extensions or to the MediaWiki code itself. (Nearly) all code is being written by volunteers who do this in their own time for no money. Similarly, there is no 'customer support' provided except what the authors choose to provide. People may not reply to user's questions due to absence, or because the questioner has not asked the question in an adequate way (where 'adequate' varies wildly from person to person), or maybe (as appears to be the case here) because they have taken a dislike to the questioner for some reason. I am not interested in who is in the wrong here, except to say that if Nad chooses to ignore you for whatever reason (right or wrong) then it is his perogative to do so.

Having said that, Nad's call to ban Eep from the wiki can only, due to it's wording, be treated as a personal attack (again, regardless of whether his view's are right or wrong). Eep has made valuable contributions to the wiki and will not be banned by me for any of the reasons stated above.

As far as I am concerned this issue is closed, however if the bickering continues (here or elsewhere on the wiki) I will investigate in more detail, and if necessary ban problem users (from either side). Hopefully this will not be necessary. If anyone still has a genuine grievance then please leave a message on my talk page, but I would suggest a couple of weeks 'cooling off' first. --HappyDog 16:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Pretty much agree with the above (as an admin). Aaron 20:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Now Nad is reverting my Simple Forms bug reports and acting like they don't even exist. I tire of his antics--these are legitimate bugs! Just because he wants to be a snot and "take his ball elsewhere" doesn't mean he can mindlessly delete valid bug reports (which he already did from his wiki, despite lying and saying he would move them to thiswiki). For thinking software should not have owners he sure is acting like a hipocrite by "owning" Simple Forms... —Eep² 09:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * As promised, I have blocked User:Eep for 3 days, which will hopefully act as a bit of a cooling off period. --HappyDog 21:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Please keep in mind that he is banned from the English Wikipedia for similar behavior, if he continues in this type of behavior, he may be blocked indef here as well. I am hesitant to increase the block so quickly (I'll give him a chance) because he seems to make good contributions some of the time.  Cbrown1023  <font color="#002bb8">talk  21:15, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * No, I'm banned from Wikipedia for the most stupidest reason of trying to improve its craptacular disambiguation system. 11:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * All the reasons for the ban on wikipedia are outlined here, and here for a suspected sock puppet. --Zven 03:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, yes, the lynch mob reasons (and sockpuppets came after getting nowhere with the appeal committee, which is an oxymoron since they barely even reply, let alone actually appeal anything). —Eep² 04:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the pointers. What has happened to our users on other wikis shouldn't affect how we treat them here, but in this case it seems that Eep is exhibiting a subset of the behaviour that caused him to be banned on Wikipedia.  Hopefully we will be able to sort this out as he has also been making some good edits, but having read those reports I am a little less hopeful.  The most recent discussion that I have been involved with is here - I will wait and see how Eep reacts to this. However, it should be noted that the only problem that I am aware with is this dispute with Nad, and the way Eep has been handling it.  Currently this is causing more disruption and taking up far too much of other people's time, so if that continues a longer block may be the only solution, and if not... well, who knows.  We might be able to get back to some the work we've all come here to do... ;-) --HappyDog 04:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Update: I got an edit conflict between my above comment and Eep's. Eep - you should know that you are not helping yourself with comments like that.  Treat that as a second warning. --HappyDog 04:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Comments like what, "lynch mob"? So, what, now I can't even label a group of users who I feel unjustly ganged up on me (which is what a lynch mob is) and contributed to my ban? That's a tad bit ridiculous and oppressive, eh? There's no reason this wiki needs to be anywhere near as anal as Wikipedia. Wait, lemme guess: you now consider me calling Wikipedia "anal" as "bad" too? <eyeroll> Attempt to not be so oppressive, Happydog; it's not very becoming of you or of Wikimedia wikis in general. I don't come here for drama, soap operas, and politics but, unfortunately, I seem to encounter them everywhere I go. I am here to learn about, use, and improve MediaWiki--that's it. Keep the mind games to yourselves, people; I want nothing of them! —Eep² 06:39, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Sidebar link should be updated
Could an admin please update the sidebar link MediaWiki:Portal-url to fix the current redirect? Also, is there an equivalent here to en:Template:Editprotected? Thanks SCEhardt 17:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Updated (after a bit of hassle). I don't think MediaWiki.org has such a template or equivalent. Thanks for the notice, good catch. :) -- Sayuri 17:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

PRE overflow
Could we have  in MediaWiki:Common.css - that would prevent ugly (horizontal) page expansion on pages containing a lot of code... -- FND 08:47, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Done, added to MediaWiki:Common.css. -- Sayuri 10:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I've installed the TiynMCE but still can't see the new WYSIWYG. Can smeone give a help?

Namespaces used
Hi, is there any page that explains which namespaces are available at MW.org and what each one of them is used for? --Flominator 10:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Namespace will give you descriptions for most of them. The others (which you can see at Special:Search (enter any search string and look at the namespace checkboxes) are fairly self-explanatory... -Eep² 11:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * What's the difference between main, manual, project and help? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Flominator (talk • contribs) 00:42, August 2, 2007. Please sign your posts!


 * The difference is in what their contents are. See namespace for more information on what namespaces are but, basically, namespaces are just another way of categorizing/sectioning/classifying/segmenting various articles on a wiki. Other ways include categories, subpages, and extensions like Semantic MediaWiki (which, essentially, just uses namespaces to create "relationships", "attributes", and "types" between pages), while Semantic Forms creates a "forms" namespace for, you guessed it, forms. -Eep² 09:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I know what namespaces are for. I just want to know how they're used on mw.org! --Flominator 05:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The easiest way to find that out is to browse various articles within those namespaces, which makes it pretty obvious to me what the namespaces are used for so I'm not sure why you're having such a hard time figuring it out either... Perhaps looking up the meanings of main, manual, project, and help would, er, help? &lt;shrug> You already have their descriptions from namespace so, beyond that, dunno what else to tell you... -Eep² 06:10, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Hope this sheds some light. robchurch | talk 05:41, 11 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm, see Project:Namespaces :-) -- :Bdk: 11:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Infobox -- help in positioning it on a page
My Wiki is being used for a basketball site for college coaches. I'd like to use the Infobox template as a means to convey personal information about players, and I'd like for it to be positioned on the right hand side of the page. I have gotten the Infobox over the to right, using CSS codes, but I can't get it so the text and sections wrap around it. Instead, the more I add the more it moves the Infobox down the page.

I'm using Wiki 1.10 and MySQL.

Thanks, Jim R.


 * Post your question here: Project:Support desk, as this page (as noted at the top) deals with MediWiki.org, not the software and it's usage. --Dr DBW 00:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Moving Manual:Skinning to Manual:Skins
Could an admin please move Manual:Skinning to Manual:Skins? The Skinning page is much more relevant to developers and there isn't really much content on Skins. I already moved Skins to Manual:Skins FAQ to make room but I need an admin to delete the redirect before the new page can be moved over. Thanks. --Cneubauer 16:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Cancel that. User:HappyDog and I are discussing it.  --Cneubauer 16:17, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Warning: Cannot modify header information
I am trying to use the SpecialDeleteOldRevisions function but encountered the following error:


 * Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/ekomrinf/public_html/ekompute/LocalSettings.php:149) in /home/ekomrinf/public_html/ekompute/includes/WebResponse.php on line 10

When I tried to install Adsense in my LocalSettings.php, I too encounter a similar error.


 * Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/ekomrinf/public_html/ekompute/adsense.php:4) in /home/ekomrinf/public_html/ekompute/includes/WebResponse.php on line 10

What could be the possible cause or causes? &mdash; PM Poon 22:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Licensing for Image:Flickrpotato.png
I`m confused about licesning for this image. I tagged it as lacking copyright info. The uploader left a message on my talk, stating that the image was licensing under the LGPL, because because it came from the CrystalSVG icon package under that license. However, there appears to be no template for that license. Is that a license accepted on this site? If so, it seems to me there should be template for it. Thanks in advance. --Brian 09:29, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, the image is unused and should probably be deleted. --HappyDog 00:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oops, missed that it was now unused. If I remember correctlly, it was used before, on an extension page, I think. But since it isn`t now, the uploader hasen`t been active since, and there`s a copyright question, I agree with deleting it at this point. There`s  a few other images using the non-existant LGPL template, though (and which are being used on pages). Any ideas as to what should be done with those?--Brian 07:37, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Have deleted that image. In general, I don't think there is a problem with LGPL images on this site (so far as I know...) so I guess the answer is to just create the necessary template.  --HappyDog 14:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Oops - was confused because the original link had a typo. It looks like the template has been created already.  Problem solved, I guess! --HappyDog 14:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks solved to me. Thank you, HappyDog- and thanks to Garrett for creating the template with the proper legal language dispite my misspelling!--Brian 04:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Help Configuring MediWiki
I need some proper "help the n00b" type help. I can't run any extensions!!! I am running XAMPP on a Windows PC, as an Intranet box, I have MediaWiki installed into the HTDOCS folder, everything configured AS IS out of the box, but everytime I try to add an extension, I get Permission Denied errors, forward slashes turning to back slashes halfway through a URL and so on.

I believe this to be a configuration error, but I can't figure it out and have tried reading the manual for MediaWiki, but it doesn't give any Windows based examples...

Could someone please help me out?? Regards

Darren


 * Sounds like an issue with file permissions. Make sure Apache/PHP has the permission to read the extension files (and directories!). But then, I havn't tried this on windows either. -- Duesentrieb ⇌ 14:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Bot requests
I have set up this page, Project:Bot requests, as a place to log requests for bot activity, as well as the details about any active bots. Please feel free to tidy it up or add further requests. Also, please bring it to the attention of any known bot-writers/operators. Cheers. --HappyDog 19:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

SALTed titles
Hi, I have created this page so that particularly troublesome, recreated pages may be protected from recreation. Thanks. -- Anon  Diss  04:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, good idea, but this seems a lot like Project:Protected titles/list, and we might not need two pages listing deleted pages we don`t want re-created -or am I missing something? --Brian 05:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * You aren't - I was ;). Thanks for telling me. -- Anon  Diss  23:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Problem with deletion template
Hi, there appears to ba problem with the delete template. Category:Candidates for deletion is empty, even though the template is trancluded on pages. I don`t know if this is the unintended result of recent edits to the template page, or something else. Any ideas? --Brian 00:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


 * My mistake. You're right - my recent edit contained an error which I have now fixed.  Hopefully everything is back to normal now - let me know if there are any other problems. --HappyDog 00:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks normal now, after I cleared the cache on the pages in the category. Thanks for your quick response! --Brian 01:43, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Welcoming template made; please mod and translate
Welcome. Regards, -- Anon  Diss  07:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Could Manual:Short_URL be a model way for setting up Help pages?
Here are the instructions for Manual:Short_URL:

The incredible advantage to the way Manual:Short_URL is set up is:
 * 1) By splitting up the solutions to problems to individual pages, we have been able to shorten the amount of clutter on the main page.
 * 2) By allowing users to rate each solution with a [[Image:Smiley.svg|20px]] or [[Image:Face-sad.svg|20px]], everyone quickly learns which help solutions are successful, and which solutions don't work and have bugs in there coding.
 * 3) The text is easy to understand, originally written by a newbies, who still don't understand how to the Short URL coding works.
 * 4) All complex and in-depth information is in the footnotes, under "Technical notes".
 * 5) Technical words are minimized, but when necessary, such terms as hosting provider, shared host, query string and runtime environment have links to their explanations.


 * What does everyone think? Any other suggestions?
 * Could Manual:Short_URL be a model for other help pages? Odessaukrain 12:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * No. Ultimately this page should consist of a small set of pages that give concise instructions on how to solve this problem in the most common situations, plus a 'troubleshooting' page that is presented as a FAQ to solve specific issues that people might encounter.  Currently there are dozens of bespoke solutions, and although the smiley idea is cute, there is no useful way of getting any information from them.  For example, are the frownies there because the user was not experienced enough to get it working, because their system was incompatible, because the instructions are not written well enough or because the instructions are actually wrong?  The current page is a useful (temporary) method of gathering information so that we can write up proper instructions that are based on fact and not just opinions, but should not be considered a permanent solution. --HappyDog 00:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)