Wikimedia Forum

← Discussion pages

Wikimedia Forums

Archives →

The Wikimedia Forum is a central place for questions, announcements and other discussions about the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. (For discussion about the Meta wiki, see Meta:Babel.) This is not the place to make technical queries regarding the MediaWiki software; please ask such questions at the MediaWiki support desk; technical questions about Wikimedia wikis, however, can be placed on Tech page. You can reply to a topic by clicking the "[edit]" link beside that section, or you can start a new discussion.

Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

• About Meta
• Discussion pages
• Request pages
• Policies and guidelines
• Information and statistics
• Categories
• Help pages

Participate:

• How to edit a page
• Meta-Wiki discussion page
• Meta-l mailing list

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

Initiative to end anti-LGBT+ content on Wikimedia

Potential logo

As discussed at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help_Forum#Bigoted_content_on_Wikipedias_you_don%E2%80%99t_speak_the_language_of, users of non-English projects are getting away with spreading anti-LGBT+ rhetoric in direct opposition to both Wikimedia’s UCOC and LGBT+ inclusivity initiative. I propose the creation of a project similar to Climate change portal/climate denial review to work on systematically removing this inappropriate and bigoted content. Dronebogus (talk) 10:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I think there are different point of views to the topic and after my understanding it is allowed that people say what they mean as long as it is not unfriedly and it hurts other people. After my understanding a encyclopedia article should offer a neutral persceptive and tell what different sources write about the topic. If a user has a infobox with a message about the own view to LGBT+ on the user page this is from my point of view not a problem. Maybe you can try to start such a project by talking to other members of the LGBT+ User Group. I am interested in understanding better what reasons are there that lead to anti-LGBT+ rhetoric.--Hogü-456 (talk) 17:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Hogü-456: Someone stating they view LGBT+ people as in some way “less than” heterosexual cisgender people is inherently unfriendly and hurtful, but in any case I’m more concerned about non-English articles potentially featuring inaccurate or biased negative coverage of LGBT+M particularly in regions with strong anti-LGBT sentiment like Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Dronebogus (talk) 19:50, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

how a person may live their private life is their choice & of no concern to me. when i come to work i am focused on the job that's all that matters. at the end of the day i go home, shut the door or watch a movie on T.V. for more information on the business of human secrets & privacy see: electronic privacy information center EPIC. in the end we are all partners working for the same company. i have found that gossip is a waste of time which is unrelated to work. Davidche123 (talk) 02:49, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Everyone is allowed to their own views as long as it doesn't affect the edits. Żyrafał (talk) 16:59, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Y Such a coordinating initiative I think could be helpful in dealing with this problem.The fact that homophobia is a problem and is unacceptable in any project is due to Universal_Code_of_Conduct#3.1_–_Harassment . Everyone is allowed to have their own views, beliefs etc. but they must not express them in a way that constitutes harassment, using insults, stereotypes or attacks based on personal characteristic "like intelligence, appearance, ethnicity, race, religion (or lack thereof), culture, caste, sexual orientation, gender, sex, disability, age, nationality, political affiliation, or other characteristics." Grudzio240 (talk) 18:39, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

•  Oppose The climate denial case is about whether or not there is a global warming. This case can be proved scientifically with a high degree of certainity. However, the legal system is not a science like physics and we cannot prove gay marriages should be equal to hetero ones. This is a philosophical issue. And it may turn out that there is no right answer.

Not always is there a right or wrong world view. It may just be different than others'. The world view of a user should be their private matter. And they should be able to write on any topic they want or on no topic at all (equality - otherwise it's going to be like censorship). Where is the borderline between accepted and unaccepted behavior? Is "I'm against selling alcohol to minors" okay? Or "I'm against advertising drugs"? Wikimedia community is a global one. This means that users may come from a completely different places where there are different traditions and world views common. And it's impossible to guarantee that our opinions will not clash. They will but we don't have to remember about it when talking to others.

Let's take the marriage: in the Western culture these are pairs of two people and adding anyone more is usually considered cheating (at least traditionally). On the other hand, there are cultures like Arabic where it's perfectly okay to have two or more wifes. Everyone of us have certain opinions. They do not have to be universally nice. I can be against my girlfriend sleeping with one more 'best friend' but that doesn't mean I won't talk to a person who is willing to live in such a complex relation.

This particular user states he is against gay marriage. This doesn't mean he believes LGBT+ people are worse than others (maybe he does so, but that's not written there). Marriage is an construct of a civil law and not a treat of Wikimedia user. Moreover, this case is very boolean: you can be for or against LGBT marriages (not diving into reasons here, but there are certainly for both options). If you are forbidden to say "i'm against" but you may say "i'm for" (hey, inclusivity), that's censorship.

Suppose I wrote "Eating meat should be forbidden". I do not disapprove of people who eat meat but I do say that they should not do so. Is this considered to be vegetarian terrorism and against inclusivity of meat-eaters?

We should not hurt people by saying something but also we cannot hurt people by preventing them to be themselves. Msz2001 (talk) 18:45, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

• • While your argument is fair on the surface, I think it’s broadly scientific accepted that sexual orientation and gender identity are not behaviors (like alcohol selling or eating meat) but rather innate traits. So if joe wikipedian says gay people can’t marry, he isn’t really saying he’s opposed to the action itself but saying that either gay people can stop being gay so they can get a straight marriage (which is scientifically false) or that gay people exist but don’t deserve to marry (which is clearly discriminatory). Dronebogus (talk) 18:54, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

  I disagree with the conclusions you make. Infoboxes expressing opposition to gay marriage rights are just as inappropriate as other hypotheticals supporting discrimination userbox texes:

  "This user opposes interracial marriage the adoption of children by such couples." - racism , "This user opposes voting rights for women." - Sexism , "This user supports whites-only beaches" - racism etc. Grudzio240 (talk) 22:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

  I support a policy of Zero Censorship. My view is that half of us are sub-par in some aspects and above par in other aspects. Regardless, all points of view should be acknowledged if not acceded to.

  I do contend that an editorial standard be maintained.

  That is; for any discrete point of view; one entry/page/document becomes established with relevant links to associated pages. Such a document to which any who find themselves in support, may be contributed to upon passing editorial review of a moderator aligned with that point of view.

  Contribution to the aligned document is deemed acceptable considering over-arching standards of community civility and a basic standard of grammatical composition.

  Thereby contributing but not creating another document with a congruent point of view; that is, in no sense should this become a plebiscite or tally of supporters for any point of view, merely the exploration of all supported points of view regardless of the number of those in support.

  I recognize that there will be a need for some point-of-view specific overhead regarding processor time, mental labor and moderator management of each diverging point of view and an over-all supervision of things like composition and translation.

  I do not agree that any point of view be discarded regardless of the degree to which it is benighted, unreasoned, neurotic, or potentially sociopathic.

  The more each of us reads the better each one becomes at recognizing the product ( wheat ) from the dross ( chaff ). HHabilisPanoptes (talk) 04:45, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

• Not thatsuch userboxes or user statements should be ignored, but is there any evidence this is affecting article content? DGG (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
  • No but they create a hostile environment for the user groups they disparage. Dronebogus (talk) 19:21, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
    • Wouldn't users still be able to express same text on their user page through text even if userboxes are removed? C933103 (talk) 10:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
• Strong oppose seriously it’s just a userbox on a user page. Don’t you folks have better things to do in life? For example worrying about the quality of content pages. -📜GIFNK📖DLM💻MMXX🏰 (TALK🎙 | CONTRIBS) 11:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Folklore is extended till 15th March

Please help translate to your language

Greetings from Wiki Loves Folklore International Team,

We are pleased to inform you that Wiki Loves Folklore an international photographic contest on Wikimedia Commons has been extended till the 15th of March 2022. The scope of the contest is focused on folk culture of different regions on categories, such as, but not limited to, folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, folk activities, etc.

We would like to have your immense participation in the photographic contest to document your local Folk culture on Wikipedia. You can also help with the translation of project pages and share a word in your local language.

Best wishes,

International Team
Wiki Loves Folklore

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:50, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Arrest of Hossein Ronaghi

I have already written here about the plan to cut off the Internet in Iran (Special:diff/21811108) as well as on the Jimbo Wells discussion page about the close cooperation of one of the WM stewards with the technical agents of this action, which unfortunately did not result in anything but my indefinite blocking of the English Wikipedia.

Today, I was informed that Hossein Ronaghi has been abducted by the agents of the Islamic regime due to his open opposition to this plan. User:Hosseinronaghi is not only a prominent wikimedian, but also a staunch opponent of Internet censorship and has spent more than 10 years in prison for it. --IamMM (talk) 16:24, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

@IamMM Not everyone who wears necktie is a Liberal. There are many similarities between FaWiki and the "Islamic regime". Ruwaym (talk) 15:51, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I condemn any outlaw arrest but I'm sorry I can't feel sympathy with Hossein as a Wikimedian. I don't concider him a liberal, looks like a supportor of another ideology for Iran. Not advocate of Freedom for All. Ruwaym (talk) 15:54, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Coming soon

Several improvements around templates

Hello, from March 9, several improvements around templates will become available on your wiki:

• Fundamental improvements of the VisualEditor template dialog (1, 2),
• Improvements to make it easier to put a template on a page (3) (for the template dialogs in VisualEditor, 2010 Wikitext and New Wikitext Mode),
• and improvements in the syntax highlighting extension CodeMirror (4, 5) (which is available on wikis with writing direction left-to-right).

All these changes are part of the “Templates” project by WMDE Technical Wishes. We hope they will help you in your work, and we would love to hear your feedback on the talk pages of these projects.

- Johanna Strodt (WMDE) 12:38, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Some proposed projects receiving huge support yet not created

I don't get it. The Abstract Wikipedia (Wikistructure) was accepted within one year of discussion and has been developed. NonFreeWiki (2), Wikidirectory, and Wikijournal have huge support ratio, but they're not yet accepted. Have the interests in those projects waned a lot, or how else to explain the contradictions? George Ho (talk) 19:13, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@George Ho: I had a similar criticism/question myself and it turns out that there were some fairly obscure discussions about Abstract Wikipedia ongoing for several years, around 2012/the launch of Wikidata. I'm not sure that is a very reassuring answer, but it's evidently true. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:49, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Enough about Abstract Wikipedia. I still think a few other proposed projects are also worth deserving. George Ho (talk) 22:09, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Sure, I only mentioned it because it was in your first message. Wikijournal is a proposal that I was opposed to because I wanted it to stay in Wikiversity, but there is a clear consensus for it. The WMF have been very conservative about making new projects and I think that is in part due to the failures of several projects to really take off (Wikinews, Wikiversity, etc.), but clearly I'm speculating. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:05, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Yet trying to close those local wikis were rarely successful. I wonder why. George Ho (talk) 03:22, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Even in situation where WMF feel hesitate, I personally think that it should clarify its position and hesitation so that communities do not wait endlessly over a proposal. In contrast with projects successfully launched, it give out a feeling to the wider public that there are some "closed circle" which one need to be in to successfully get their project discussed and accepted by WMF and be launched, and make editors feel like their voices aren't being listened. C933103 (talk) 02:26, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Editing Wikipedias during trying times

Hello, WMF,

I was reading over the Ukrainian and Russian Wikipedias (as well as I could using Google Translation tools) and I think it would be an interesting blog article to feature how challenging it is to write well-referenced articles about a political struggle while it is going on. Reading over the article talk pages and the policy pages like disputes over page protection and proposals for article deletion, has been illuminating. I understand that these are language Wikipedias, not national Wikipedias, so they don't represent countries but language speakers. But just seeing how experienced editors and administrators work to uphold Wikipedia values for verifiability and NPOV in the face of pressure, internal and external, as well as indirect threat to block the website, has been admirable to me and I think would be valuable to highlight for the entire Wikimedia community. I know that these international disputes are occurring all of the time in different places but this is just one that I happened to look into that might have relevance for other Wikipedia projects where editors find themselves under pressure to present a particular point of view that might conflict with the content of reliable sources. I didn't know where to go with this suggestion but I found this forum page and so I'm posting it here where I hope someone at WMF communications might see it. Thank you. Liz (talk) 19:40, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Global deleted image review (2)

When I wandering around translatable pages on Meta-Wiki today, I happened to found a proposed (but not implemented) global user group, called "Global deleted image review" on page Global groups. According to a relevant RfC closed 7 years ago, there seems to be a consensus of "creating the group, however not automatically granting it". The description Global deleted image review said "this proposal is currently awaiting implementation", I wonder what is the current status of this proposal, or should we mark it as rejected. Thanks a lot. Stang 19:20, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it's rejected. Maybe stalled. If someone wants to move it forward, even after 7 years, I don't see why not. The next steps (in no particular order) would be: 1) Someone needs to lay out a global request-for-permission process for the user group. This is a community matter. 2) Someone needs to implement the global permission as part of MediaWiki or an extension, including a mechanism of local opt-out. This is a software development matter. Personally, I commented on why the user group would be useful in 2014, and I still stand by my comment. One thing I didn't think about is how to ensure transparency and make inactivity visible. For that, we might want to record read/view actions performed using this user rights, which might be something not straightforward to implement in MediaWiki. whym (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Comment It would seem that there would need to be a phabricator ticket and involvement prior to any implementation. Maybe follow up there.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:06, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

There is no need to fill a ticket, as the management of global groups could be done by stewards (no need to submit patches). Opt-out could be easily done just like global sysop. Some bad thing is personally I thought "log view deleted images action" is not that easy to be implemented. Something I am not pretty sure: is a new RfC needed for this changes (as the previous one is pretty old and may not reflect community's thought at present). Stang 21:03, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Global deleted image review already exists, and is technically possible since 2014. See gerrit:162546 & phab:T16801. The viewdeletedfile permission also exists in the GlobalGroupPermissions special page. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:20, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Happy Women's Day

Hello Lady Wikimedians! I wish you a very happy women's day! Today, we celebrate your political, social, cultural and economic achievements around the world. Cheers! :-) --Haoreima (talk) 08:11, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Ukraine/Russia crisis: put a banner on CentralNotice on the opportunity to access Wikipedia even without Internet

Facing the events in Ukraine through the resources of our projects could be considered naive and unrealistic. Nonetheless, our commitment is to sharing knowledge, merely by let everyone have access to it. There is a recent news from Russia, according to which the local authorities are intending to disconnect the country from the global Internet in a few days (supposedly, March 11). Limited to Wiki*edia, the effect will be impeding millions of citizen to have access to any page of our projects, including the ones not at all related to the current war events: maths, literature, first aid, psychology, hygiene. We can only imagine the negative impact this could have, not only in terms of knowledge and quality of life, but primarily in terms of life in itself.

Therefore, I have imagined to put a banner in CentralNotice to make people aware on the opportunity to use apps (for instance, Kiwix) so as to store Wikipedia, and maybe other projects, entirely offline in order to get access even without Internet connection. I am sure there are different ways to get the same result, but this is not a matter of "how", rather a matter of "what". And now promptness is key.

I firmly believe this could partially relieve the discomfort and pains of Russian people hindered to benefit from knowledge in Wikimedia projects as long as this authoritarian initiative will have effect. To be honest, I despair it will be matter of few weeks. --Nicolabel (talk) 09:02, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

 Strong support--Pierpao (talk) 11:04, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

There's already a CentralNotice banner being shown in Russia. It links to a page (in Russian) explaining ways to access Wikipedia in case it is blocked by the government. Kiwix is included: it should probably have more prominence on that page in my opinion, but my Russian knowledge is zero so I don't feel comfortable editing it. the wub "?!" 11:28, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

OK, I'm happy to know that the idea of a banner has been already implemented. This can be no more than a drop in the ocean, but the whole Wikipedia is made of single drops :) --Nicolabel (talk) 11:40, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Pitching in from Kiwix: the banner has been up and running for more than a week, our traffic has nearly tripled increased fifty-fold as Russia now accounts for about 40% of new downloads. We generate updates on a monthly basis, could do more if need be - taking into account than compressing the whole Russian dump takes anywhere between 4 to 8 days (depending on server capacity).

We are discussing the opportunity of generating more nimble updates (e.g. only conflict-related articles, as a mini-digest) but haven't moved forward on it (yet). The other Kiwix guy (talk) 12:27, 8 March 2022 (UTC) edited to clarify that global traffic tripled but Russia-based downloads increased fifty-fold

@The other Kiwix guy Firstly, that's really interesting to know, thanks for noting it. I don't know if we're in a formal grant phase at the moment, but if a request can be dropped in the right ear in the WMF side, I feel like the communities will hammer on top as much as you might wish. En-wiki, for example, is definitely looking for a way to help that doesn't require formally taking a wiki position on a war. Kiwix support would be a great example Nosebagbear (talk) 15:40, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

 Support Is there any resource on hosting a mirror? I think Russia will be amenable towards having a sovereign Wikipedia mirrors hosted on their premises (which they may already have.) It is not just the content they take issue with,but the fact that the US (through wikimedia mostly) has too much power over the content. This should solve that part of the issue, although the content will still have been developed under US control.--TZubiri (talk) 15:19, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

• {{oppose}} This should've run as the RfC discussion. Furthermore, we've already seen almost the whole media rallying support for Ukraine. I'm unsure how displaying WMF's support for Ukraine would make any difference to anyone or any project other than pushing everyone to favor Ukraine... which may be what the media has already been doing. George Ho (talk) 10:52, 9 March 2022 (UTC); edited, 01:09, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

  Dear friend, spreading among Russians how to access Wikipedia during the Internet rescrictions IMHO cannot be considered favouring the Ukrainian PoV, unless you believe that the Wiki*edia content is partisan in itself. Should it be the case, improving entries is perhaps more compliant with the 5 Pillars than merely helping Mr. Putin in depriving his citizens from access to knowledge. By the way, question solved as the banner already exists. --Nicolabel (talk) 14:42, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

  You misunderstand, this is not about virtue signalling, nor about the war necessarily, it's about Wikipedia going down in a region, and about providing a backup plan to users who might want to still access it in the future. TZubiri (talk) 09:10, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

  Oh, I must have misread, so I'm rescinding my vote. However, I worry that it's editor-bait. From what I read, one was arrested in Russia for editing such articles. Furthermore, I wonder how effective the campaign is. The government would likely censor Wikipedia, campaign or no campaign. George Ho (talk) 01:09, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@TZubiri: You can use kiwix-serve to host a read-only mirror of any ZIM content you want. Legoktm (talk) 20:43, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I'll take a look at that project, but I think an editable wikimedia server would be more appropriate, there will be a lot of forking, but those are the rules of the game. TZubiri (talk) 09:11, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

As requested, I've written a short blog post on how to use kiwix-serve to set up a read-only mirror. Legoktm (talk) 01:52, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

• I believe the most successful previous campaign to promote Kiwix from a CentralNotice was on the Arabic Wikipedia several years ago. Now we don't want to get in the way of the Russian Wikipedia banner, but promoting Kiwix elsewhere is a good idea. Kiwix helps users protect themselves from censorship (in many countries; Italy for instance Project Gutenberg was blocked). Kiwix promotions don't need to get too specific about the detailed issues in each territory, although specific news can help get a sense of urgency. There can also be more targeted campaigns, for instance if the Kiwix mirrors become overloaded we could ask active users to help reseed the busiest ZIM files' torrents. Nemo 21:12, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines ratification voting open from 7 to 21 March 2022

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

More languages • Please help translate to your language

Hello everyone,

The ratification voting process for the revised enforcement guidelines of the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) is now open! Voting commenced on SecurePoll on 7 March 2022 and will conclude on 21 March 2022. Please read more on the voter information and eligibility details.

The Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) provides a baseline of acceptable behavior for the entire movement. The revised enforcement guidelines were published 24 January 2022 as a proposed way to apply the policy across the movement. You can read more about the UCoC project.

You can also comment on Meta-wiki talk pages in any language. You may also contact the team by email: ucocprojectwikimedia.org

Sincerely,

Movement Strategy and Governance

Wikimedia Foundation

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

The Call for Feedback: Board of Trustees elections is now closed

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

More languages • Please help translate to your language

The Call for Feedback: Board of Trustees elections is now closed. This Call ran from 10 January and closed on 16 February 2022. The Call focused on three key questions and received broad discussion on Meta-wiki, during meetings with affiliates, and in various community conversations. The community and affiliates provided many proposals and discussion points. The reports are on Meta-wiki.

This information will be shared with the Board of Trustees and Elections Committee so they can make informed decisions about the upcoming Board of Trustees election. The Board of Trustees will then follow with an announcement after they have discussed the information.

Thank you to everyone who participated in the Call for Feedback to help improve Board election processes.

Best,

Movement Strategy and Governance
--SOyeyele (WMF) (talk) 12:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Cult of personality in the Wikimedia projects

I want to warn you about cult of personality that clearly can be seen in the Wikimedia projects based on user access levels. Locally, there are many violations that go unnoticed globally. Looks like there in no executive guarantee for Wikimedia Foundation policies. --Ruwaym (talk) 15:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

@Ruwaym: Communities are self-managing. There is neither executive guarantee nor executive participation. An expectation of such is unreasonable. The community holds the community and advanced rights holders accountable.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:01, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

CentralNotice with information about protecting your identity targeting editors in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus

Given the current events in general and the recent arrest of an editor in Belarus (The Verge article) in particular I feel like it may be appropriate to create a geotargeted CentralNotice with information about protecting your identity to editors in the region. I am personally not qualified for writing such a notice but I hope this message may help someone qualified to see this proposal. Trialpears (talk) 01:26, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

 It is doubtful We should be cautious. Russian police authorities would also see the same warning. We would risk exacerbating the climate of distrust towards users and we would risk sabotaging any attempts done by WMF to intercede for Bernstein--Pierpao (talk) 11:43, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 ends tomorrow

International photographic contest Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 ends on 15th March 2022 23:59:59 UTC. This is the last chance of the year to upload images about local folk culture, festival, cuisine, costume, folklore etc on Wikimedia Commons. Watch out our social media handles for regular updates and declaration of Winners.

(Facebook , Twitter , Instagram)

The writing competition Feminism and Folklore will run till 31st of March 2022 23:59:59 UTC. Write about your local folk tradition, women, folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, folk activities, folk games, folk cuisine, folk wear, folklore, and tradition, including ballads, folktales, fairy tales, legends, traditional song and dance, folk plays, games, seasonal events, calendar customs, folk arts, folk religion, mythology etc. on your local Wikipedia. Check if your local Wikipedia is participating

A special competition called Wiki Loves Falles is organised in Spain and the world during 15th March 2022 till 15th April 2022 to document local folk culture and Falles in Valencia, Spain. Learn more about it on Catalan Wikipedia project page.

We look forward for your immense co-operation.

Thanks Wiki Loves Folklore international Team MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:40, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Brainstorming a new NonFreeWiki (3), or what else

Seems that neither NonFreeWiki nor NonFreeWiki (2) has garnered enough support from the whole community. I don't think notifying communities about the latest (or recent) proposal would garner more votes. I'm thinking about creating the third proposal of "NonFreeWiki" but with less and less necessities, like the " 'traffic light' system" one. The issue is where to discuss a file nominated for deletion: NonFreeWiki or a local wiki? Furthermore, I wonder whether this would produce more admins in NonFreeWiki than in Commons. I'm almost out of ideas of a central repository project storing non-free content. George Ho (talk) 22:30, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Join the Community Resilience and Sustainability Conversation Hour with Maggie Dennis

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

More languages • Please help translate to your language

The Community Resilience and Sustainability team at the Wikimedia Foundation is hosting a conversation hour led by its Vice President Maggie Dennis.

Topics within scope for this call include Movement Strategy, Board Governance, Trust and Safety, the Universal Code of Conduct, Community Development, and Human Rights. Come with your questions and feedback, and let's talk! You can also send us your questions in advance.

The meeting will be on 24 March 2022 at 15:00 UTC (check your local time).

You can read details on Meta-wiki. Xeno (WMF) (talk) 02:47, 18 March 2022 (UTC)