User talk:Werdna

Jump to: navigation, search

About this board

Hello

Is it me you're looking for? 216.38.130.168 20:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
Yet more barnstars all around to those on the Echo team. Genius. TortoiseWrath (talk) 04:16, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
By clicking "Add topic", you agree to our Terms of Use and agree to irrevocably release your text under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and GFDL
زكريا (talkcontribs)

Hello. I want to know if, by reaching community consensus and of course a bug report, there's a possibility to enable LQ in the Arabic Wikipedia, since there is no fixed date for the redesign, and the extension is already in use in the Hungarian Wikipedia but put on hold for the Chinese Wikipedia.

Werdna (talkcontribs)

Further deployments of LiquidThreads are indefinitely on hold because we don't have the resources to support it.

Reply to "Yet Another LiquidThreads Request"
90.218.199.164 (talkcontribs)

Hi could you make this Extension:GlobalBlocking extension available for global blocking of a user account please

LlamaAl (talkcontribs)

Hi. I'm not a developer, can't do that. Best regards.

Werdna (talkcontribs)

The standard way to do this is to use Special:CentralAuth to lock the account.

Reply to "Extension:GlobalBlocking"

An important message about renaming users

1
MediaWiki message delivery (talkcontribs)

Dear User talk:Werdna/An important message about renaming users,

I am cross-posting this message to many places to make sure everyone who is a Wikimedia Foundation project bureaucrat receives a copy. If you are a bureaucrat on more than one wiki, you will receive this message on each wiki where you are a bureaucrat.

As you may have seen, work to perform the Wikimedia cluster-wide single-user login finalisation (SUL finalisation) is taking place. This may potentially effect your work as a local bureaucrat, so please read this message carefully.

Why is this happening? As currently stated at the global rename policy, a global account is a name linked to a single user across all Wikimedia wikis, with local accounts unified into a global collection. Previously, the only way to rename a unified user was to individually rename every local account. This was an extremely difficult and time-consuming task, both for stewards and for the users who had to initiate discussions with local bureaucrats (who perform local renames to date) on every wiki with available bureaucrats. The process took a very long time, since it's difficult to coordinate crosswiki renames among the projects and bureaucrats involved in individual projects.

The SUL finalisation will be taking place in stages, and one of the first stages will be to turn off Special:RenameUser locally. This needs to be done as soon as possible, on advice and input from Stewards and engineers for the project, so that no more accounts that are unified globally are broken by a local rename to usurp the global account name. Once this is done, the process of global name unification can begin. The date that has been chosen to turn off local renaming and shift over to entirely global renaming is 15 September 2014, or three weeks time from now. In place of local renames is a new tool, hosted on Meta, that allows for global renames on all wikis where the name is not registered will be deployed.

Your help is greatly needed during this process and going forward in the future if, as a bureaucrat, renaming users is something that you do or have an interest in participating in. The Wikimedia Stewards have set up, and are in charge of, a new community usergroup on Meta in order to share knowledge and work together on renaming accounts globally, called Global renamers. Stewards are in the process of creating documentation to help global renamers to get used to and learn more about global accounts and tools and Meta in general as well as the application format. As transparency is a valuable thing in our movement, the Stewards would like to have at least a brief public application period. If you are an experienced renamer as a local bureaucrat, the process of becoming a part of this group could take as little as 24 hours to complete. You, as a bureaucrat, should be able to apply for the global renamer right on Meta by the requests for global permissions page on 1 September, a week from now.

In the meantime please update your local page where users request renames to reflect this move to global renaming, and if there is a rename request and the user has edited more than one wiki with the name, please send them to the request page for a global rename.

Stewards greatly appreciate the trust local communities have in you and want to make this transition as easy as possible so that the two groups can start working together to ensure everyone has a unique login identity across Wikimedia projects. Completing this project will allow for long-desired universal tools like a global watchlist, global notifications and many, many more features to make work easier.

If you have any questions, comments or concerns about the SUL finalisation, read over the Help:Unified login page on Meta and leave a note on the talk page there, or on the talk page for global renamers. You can also contact me on my talk page on meta if you would like. I'm working as a bridge between Wikimedia Foundation Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Stewards, and you to assure that SUL finalisation goes as smoothly as possible; this is a community-driven process and I encourage you to work with the Stewards for our communities.

Thank you for your time. -- Keegan (WMF) talk 18:24, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

--This message was sent using MassMessage. Was there an error? Report it!

Reply to "An important message about renaming users"

int unsigned vs. bigint unsigned for primary keys

1
Leucosticte (talkcontribs)

Hi Andrew, I notice that git blame abusefilter.tables.sql says that you made abuse_filter.af_user a bigint unsigned. Was that in anticipation that user.user_id might one day become a bigint unsigned? I recently filed bug 61111, "Change log_id, page_id, rc_id, rev_id, and user_id to bigint unsigned" to do just that. However, it will require dozens, if not hundreds, of changes to the core, since there are lines of code all over the place saying, e.g., $this->mId = intval( $this->mId ); Intval maxes out at 2147483647. Do you think it's a good idea to make this change? Thanks.

Reply to "int unsigned vs. bigint unsigned for primary keys"
PiRSquared17 (talkcontribs)

Hi. What do you think about this request?

Reply to "bugzilla:58954"
Qgil-WMF (talkcontribs)

Hi, Requests for comment/Configuration database is being considered as one of the RFCs to be discussed at the RFC review on 2013-11-06 via IRC. You are receiving this notification because you edited or discussed this RFC. We hope to see you there.

Reply to "Requests for comment/Configuration database"
90.212.81.76 (talkcontribs)

Hi could you please restart the develemont of LiquidThreads 3.0 this please because since you last stop developing LiquidThreads 3.0 more resources have been avalible due to updates Mediawiki such as Mediawiki 1.20 and Mediawiki 1.21 and Mediawiki 1.22 so please restart the develemont

Werdna (talkcontribs)

LiquidThreads will be replaced by Flow. There will be a migration path available.

Reply to "LiquidThreads 3.0"
213.55.73.35 (talkcontribs)

find serves my talk werdna-metawiki

  Nurhusien
Reply to "contributions 213.55.73.35"

AbuseFilter Extension page update Version by MW Version

1
Hutchy68 (talkcontribs)

Hi Andrew, just a suggestion for the AbuseFilter page. Make it a little clearer on what version to download for specific MW versions. I downloaded and used master with a 1.19 MW install. Everything seemed fine untill I went to delete a page created by a spammer and then it threw a Fatal Exception error:

Warning: Missing argument 5 for AbuseFilterHooks::onArticleDelete() in ...extensions/AbuseFilter/AbuseFilter.hooks.php on line 271
Notice: Undefined variable: status in ...extensions/AbuseFilter/AbuseFilter.hooks.php on line 282
Fatal error: Call to a member function merge() on a non-object in ...extensions/AbuseFilter/AbuseFilter.hooks.php on line 282

After going back, with some looking I found the head for the REL1_19 and downloaded it. Installed this version and AbuseFilter is now working, page deletions aren't throwing the Fatal Exception error. I think what is confusing, the Extension page shows MW 1.13+, but doesn't distinguish working versions for specific MW versions. Tags page is empty at git too.

Extension is really cool, thanks for making it! Take care--

Reply to "AbuseFilter Extension page update Version by MW Version"
67.173.237.149 (talkcontribs)

Is there any way AbuseFilter could instead prevent anonymous edits from showing up until an admin approves them? Much like how the AbuseFilter can "tag" bad edits, instead this system would make it so the edits are blocked until approved by someone?

Reply to "AbuseFilter Request?"